Resume or curriculum vitae?

Summary and commentary by Ian Mondrow

Throughout my career, I have met people of different backgrounds. Some people have doctorates, others have been working for fifth-teen years and some people are just entering the job market. It was not until I applied for my friend's former position, that I realized some people use a curriculum vitae (CV) instead of a resume. I decided to investigate this methodology further by asking my HR and recruiter friends. 


A survey was developed using Google docs and participants were obtained via LinkedIn and LinkedIn. In total, 12 participants completed the survey. Of these participants, 4 of them were human resources professionals, 4 worked in the recruitment industry, 3 were company owners and 1 person identified themselves as other. All participants were asked to rank a collection of statements based on a 5-point likert scale of agreement (1 = disagree and 5 = agree). Below are the following statements that were assessed:

1. A resume should only be one page.
2. A curriculum vitae works just as well as a resume.
3. A curriculum vitae is best suitable for a PhD or PhD ABD.
4. An individual with a graduate degree can have a resume that is more than one page.
5. A resume can be more than one page if a candidate has enough job experience.
6. A curriculum vitae is only applicable for jobs in academics.
7. A curriculum vitae is only applicable for jobs in research.
8. Bachelor graduates should not use a curriculum vitae.
9. A resume is far more effective than a curriculum vitae.
10. Recent graduates should apply for jobs with a curriculum vitae.

RESULTS

Figure 1: A resume should only be one page

Questions 1, 4, and 5 questioned respondents on the lengths of resumes and their preferences. Contrary to the teachings of many career centers, 10 out of 12 respondents disagreed that resumes should only be one page. Furthermore, no respondents agreed with that statement. Figure one demonstrates these results in a bar graph. Questions 4 and 5 continue by asking if there are exceptions to the 1 page standard. 9 out of 12 respondents agreed that it is more acceptable for individuals with advanced degrees (i.e. Masters, PhD, etc.). Moreover, all participants agreed that it is acceptable to have more than one page if an individual has enough job experience. Figure 2 demonstrates their agreement in a bar graph. 




Items 2,3 and 6-10 focused on the usage of a CV instead of a resume. As expected, most participants agreed that a CV is best for candidates with a PhD, at least according to 10 participants. It was expected that CVs would be preferred for academic or research jobs but there was no consistent pattern between participants. Please refer to figure 2 and 3 for a representation of these results. Surprisingly, no one completely agreed with statements 6 and 7. The usage of the word "only" in these statements may have impacted the results.

Figure 2: A CV is only applicable for jobs in academics

Figure 3: A CV is only applicable for jobs in research

Results continued to shock as no participants showed any agreement to item 10, which states that graduates should use a CV. In general, there was no preference between a CV or a resume.

CONCLUSIONS

In general, one's job experience seems to be the determining factor of resume length. If an individual has enough experience to fill more than one page, it is more acceptable to include 2 pages if the content consumes at least half of the second page. One respondent mentioned that recruiters won't read 2 pages but all participants agreed that having a 2 page resume can be beneficial if it contains significant accomplishments and relevant information. 


The only exception to that rule is if an individual utilizes a CV. CVs are generally longer in length. Using a CV instead of a resume appears to be personal preference and hiring managers have their preference as well.  When participants were asked if they prefer a CV or a resume, most of them responded that it varied on the market and the job. Therefore, job applicants should conduct research to determine if a resume or CV would be more suitable. 

Figure 4: A CV is only applicable for jobs in academics

There are several limitations to this study. First and foremost, the participants are not a true representation of the population. This representation is difficult to achieve with only 12 people. Second, the size of the participant pool can drastically alter the results of a study. The fewer participants that participate, the more weight their market has. 


Thank you for all those who have participated!

Can Counterproductive Work Behaviors Be Productive?

Summary and Commentary by: Ian B. Mondrow , M.A.

Counterproductive work behaviors (CWB) are acts consciously conducted by employees that have the ability to negatively impact an organization and/or its members. Spector et al. (2006) has suggested that there are five categories of CWBs including: abuse towards others, sabotage, theft, production deviance (i.e. working slowly), and withdrawal (i.e. taking longer breaks). CWBs may be a result of emotional exhaustion, or the feeling of being worn down as a result; often the result of burnout.  Emotional exhaustion has been found to be  related with turnover, cardiovascular and sleep problems, decreased motivation, decreased task performance, and citizenship behaviors.

It has been suggested that CWBs  are a coping mechanism to reduce stress from a negative situation. Coping is a cognitive or behavior action that one takes in response to stress. CWBs provide individuals with a sense of control over stressful situations. This article focuses on withdrawal and production deviance. Withdrawal and production deviance reduce employee exhaustion by giving individuals the opportunity to return to their normal emotional state. Withdrawal behaviors include actions such as taking longer breaks or leaving early for the day. While outside of the work environment, an employee's frustration decreases and allows an him/her to return to a calm state of mind. Production deviance is when an individual intentionally works slowly, does work incorrectly [intentionally],  or ignores procedures. These actions allow the individuals to "even the score" when confronted with injustice and may reduce emotional exhaustion.


Organizational justice is the how an individual perceives the fairness between individuals and the organization. It is composed of distributive justice and procedural justice.  Distributive justice is the perceived fairness of reward and recognition, while procedural justice refers to the fairness of the process by which decisions are made. Organizational justice may have the ability to influence the occurrence of CWBs within an organization.

Krischer, Penney and Hunter (2010) utilized StudyResponse Project to recruit 522 participants; of which, 295 were examined. Although it was requested that participants be employed full-time, 20.8% of the respondents were employed part-time. After careful analysis, it was determined the two groups were not significantly different. Participants completed a self-evaluation of the following:

1. Price & Mueller's (1986) six-item scale to measure distributive justice (1 = very unfairly; 5 = very fairly)
2. Moorman's 12-item scale to measure procedural justice (1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree)
3. 3 items from the Counterproductive Work Behavior Checklist (Spector et. al, 2006) to measure production deviance (1 = never; 5 = everyday)
4. 4 items from the Counterproductive Work Behavior Checklist to measure withdrawal  (1 = never; 5 = everyday)
5. 6 items from the Job-Related Affective Well-Being (JAWS) Scale to measure emotional exhaustion (1 = never; 5 = always)

JAWS is not typically used to measure emotional exhaustion but 2 subject-matter experts identified items that closely relate to the definition of emotional exhaustion.

Results were collected by conducting intercorrelations and descriptive statistics. It was found that both distributive justice (rs = -.38, p < .01) and procedural justice (rs = -.41, p < .01) had a moderately negative correlation with emotional exhaustion. This suggests that if an individual perceives an organization to have low distributive justice or low procedural justice, he/she is more likely to be emotionally exhausted.

A hierarchical linear regression was also utilized to analyze the two types of justice, withdrawal, and production deviance. A strong interaction was found between distributive justice and withdrawal behaviors, R2 = .60, p < .01. It may be assumed that if an individual feels rewards are not fairly distributed, then he/she is more likely to withdraw. Distributive justice and production deviance also produced moderately significant results,R2 = .50, p<.05, suggesting that if distributive justice is perceived as high, one is less likely to conduct production deviance acts. Finally, procedural justice also had a moderate relationship with withdrawal, R2 = .42, p < .05, suggesting that withdrawal is less likely to occur when an individual feel procedural justice is served. No interaction was present between procedural justice and production deviance.

No significant findings were present when an individual admitted to high levels of production deviance. However, those who had low levels of production deviance had a negative relationship with between distributive justice and emotional exhaustion, r = -1.17, p < .01. Results continued to show that Individuals with low levels of withdrawal were more likely to be emotionally exhausted when they perceived procedural justice as low, r = -1.37 & -1.06, p <.01).

SUMMARY WITHOUT ALL THE STATS

Results show that if employee perceive their workplace to have higher levels of  justice, it will increase their well-being and reduce the need for coping behaviors. However, when justice is seen as low,  employees are more likely to exhibit CWBs as a coping mechanism . The researchers suggest that CWBs may be used to shape an employees emotional experiences at work, rather than a reaction to experiences.

Contrary to the researchers' hypothesis, the results showed that production deviance is not a coping mechanism for perceived procedural justice. Instead, it may be suggested that production deviance requires active engagement and therefore requires low levels of withdrawal to uphold, whereas withdrawal behaviors are far more passive.

IMPLICATIONS FOR HR PROFESSIONALS

The following study demonstrates the importance of organizational justice. Employees that perceive unfair organizational justice are more likely to withdrawal and be less interested or committed to their work. HR professionals can use their symptoms to their advantage. If employees  are observed exhibiting withdrawal behaviors (i.e. leaving early regularly, taking longer breaks, taking extra breaks, etc.), HR can begin to question both procedural and distributive justice within the organization. If this is an area of concern, surveys can be used to effectively measure personnel's perception of organizational justice. It is suggested to utilize a consultant with a background in industrial/organizational psychology or psychometrics to ensure that the survey is accurately measuring perceptions. 

HR can also use these findings to their advantage. CWBs can be prevented by ensuring employees are empowered. This can be succeeded through a fair grievance system or implementing a skip-level reporting system. Furthermore, emotional exhaustion can be prevented by providing employees with outlets for their stressors such as exercise programs or facilities. Organizations should also encourage employees to take break to ensure they can take time to restore their energy. 

The study also reveals scary findings. Employees that are likely to conduct production deviance are less likely to appear emotionally exhausted or withdrawn. This makes it far more difficult to identify employees that may be conducting counterproductive behaviors. In reality, it means that an engaged and supportive group of employees could contain an individual that exhibits negative behaviors. It is up to management to properly observe their employees and to measure performance on a regular basis. It is best to be proactive than reactive. Therefore, encourage employees to speak up when they observe deviant behaviors. 

Source: Krischer, M.M., Penney, L.M., & Hunt, E.M. (2010). Can counterproductive workbehaviors be productive? CWB as emotion-focused coping. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 15(2), 154-166.

Can heterosexism harm organizations? Predicting the perceived organizational citizenship behaviors of gay and lesbian employees

Summary and commentary by: Ian Mondrow

Employees who are open about their sexual identity have an increased chance of confronting workplace discrimination. Some instances can include: glass ceiling effect, loss of credibility and less positive regard from their peers. An organizational culture with a strong emphasis on heterosexism (the lack of concern for members of the GLBT community) has previously been found to predict the self-disclosure of sexual minority employees. Previous research has found that the stereotype of being gay instills a higher sense of self-focus, or monitoring one's actions. Stigmatization salience is defined as an individual's self-focus to the membership of a culturally stigmatized group (such as sexual orientation).

OCBs are positive work behaviors that increase the performance of an organization. Helping behaviors and organizational compliance are two OCBs that will be utilized in this study. Help behavior is the voluntary effort to help others. Organizational compliance is the following of organization policy.

Data was collected from an online national study of gay and lesbian individuals. Individuals that identified themselves as bisexual were excluded from the sample as their experiences may differ from gays and lesbians. A total of 606 employed individuals were included in the sample. The sample was split into two groups: 311 participants were in the testing group and 295 participants were placed in the validation sample.  Four vignettes from the Organizational Tolerance for Heterosexism (Waldo, 1999) was used to assess organizational climate for each participant. Workplace outness was measured using three items from Mohr and Fassinger's (2000) outness indicator. Stigmatization silence was measured by six items created by the authors of this article. Finally, seven items were utilized from the sub-scales of Smith et al. (1983).

A goodness of fit model (correlation) was utilized for the analysis. It was found that heterosexism within an organization's climate did impact one's ability to be out. Stigmatization salience was negatively related to both organizational climate and outness. Finally, workplace behaviors were positively predicted of being out. Findings were verified with similar results from the validation sample.

**Correlation statistics to be posted later today**


IMPLICATIONS FOR HR PROFESSIONALS
To put it shortly, the ability to be out and open has a positive impact on performance. A workplace culture that heterosexist focused is more likely to increase stigmatization salience and hinder one's ability to be out.

The study clearly demonstrates the toxicity of a heterosexist environment. Gay and lesbian individuals are continually monitoring their behavior and weary of any indicators that they may demonstrate. The truth is that organizations should embrace the differences between every individual. Since diversity increases innovation, what benefit does a heterosexist culture provide? Basically it is merely encouraging gender norms for both men and women, regardless of one's sexuality. Therefore, one could be heterosexual but still be cautious of their behaviors as they do not want their coworkers to think they are gay. Therefore, a heterosexist environment is not only harmful to gay and lesbian employees but any individual that is a member of the organization.










Source: Brenner, B.R., Lyons, H.Z. Fassinger, R.E. (2010). Can heterosexism harm organizations? Predicting the perceived organizational citizenship behaviors of gay and lesbian employees. The Career Development Quarterly. 58, 321 - 335.

Making Transfer Climate Visible: Utilizing Social Network Analysis to Facilitate the Transfer of Training

Summary & Commentary by Ian B. Mondrow, M.A.

The transfer of training is when current knowledge, skills and abilities have an impact on the learning of new skills or knowledge. There are three main players involved the in the transfer process, including: the learner, the manager and the trainer. The climate of transfer is influenced by the perceived support of managers/peers, the ability to utilize the new knowledge learned, and the perceived outcomes of applying the new training content.  Climate plays a key role in whether or not the transfer of training is successful, and the communication network determines the climate.

The social network theory is the study of how interpersonal relationships within a department or whole organization affect the beliefs and opinions of other individuals. Wasserman and Faust (1994) concluded several assumptions in regards to social networks: (1) actors and their actions within networks are influenced by the actions of others; (2) connections between individuals is can be a formal or informal route for information sharing; (3) network models can identify any barriers in the successful transmission of information. Social networks can be utilized to identify key contributors with an extensive outreach who may have drastic impact on a training transfer's success.

Social networks can be analyzed with either the ego network analysis or complete network analysis. An ego network analysis examines the communications exhibited by one individual. This type of analysis is useful in examining individuals participating in a training in isolation from the rest of the organization. The complete network analysis  examines a group of individuals (whether is a team, department or entire organization) and the communication streams within the group. Collecting information for either analysis can be achieved through observations, interviews, surveys or archival documents. Data can be measured in two ways: (1) Using the numbers 0 and 1 to show the existence of a relationship and (2) using a likert scale to show the degree in which two individuals interact with one another. Once this data is collected, data can be analyzed using UCINET 6 and the network maps can be developed using NetDraw. An example of a social network map is shown below.

The social network data can be extremely useful in the implementation of training. Key actors in the networks can be used to determine what/why training is needed, obtain feedback on training content, determine the best methodology to deliver training, how to increase the transfer of training and encouraging others to use the information learned in training. Additionally, the network results can be used to determine what groups are for or against the new training. Once identified, researchers can examine these groups to determine why the outliers are not supportive. 

IMPLICATIONS FOR HR PROFESSIONALS

Social Network Analysis is a new statistical analysis that has recently been introduced into the business sector. Therefore, its credibility may be questionable to high level executives, especially if only data is presented. Utilizing the visualization of the maps assists in overcoming resistance as it shows all connections and the magnitudes of each individual within a network. Explaining the network is only half the battle. One must be able to explain how these results will be used within the organization.

The results can prove to be especially useful in large organizational changes. The network can identify key individuals that communicate across the organization and have high credibility. Much like a change agent network, these individuals can be used to ensure that the correct messages are being communicated throughout the organization (i.e. killing inaccurate rumors before they begin). The support of these individuals can also assist in proving the value of the change to the rest of the organization. As mentioned earlier, these individuals are also valuable in providing feedback about training and how to improve the facilitation methods. 

This method can be costly and time lengthy therefore it would not be effective for small initiatives but rather large scale changes. In addition, HR professionals should not attempt to conduct the analysis themselves. Instead, it is suggested they hire someone with a background in industrial/organizational psychology or psychometrics. Although costly, the benefits of this analysis can be extremely beneficial in large scale changes. 

Source: Hatala, J.P. & Fleming, P.R. (2007). Making transfer climate visible: utilizing social network analysis to facilitate the transfer of training. Human Resource Development Review, 6 (1), 1-31.

How to (and how not to) assess the integrity of leaders

Summary & Commentary by Ian Mondrow, M.A. in Industrial / Organizational Psychology

Ethics and integrity are often used interchangeably but they are clearly differentiated. Ethics are the desirable behaviors established by society that establish “right” and “wrong” for its members (Pojman, 1995 as cited in Kaiser & Hogan, 2010). In contrast, integrity is the moral attribution we apply to one’s observed behavior (Kaiser & Hogan, 2010). Current assessments are unable to measure integrity directly and therefore it is indirectly measured through other constructs, such as the Five-Factor Model of personality. Unfortunately, Personality does not predict future behaviors.  It is suggested that measuring one’s personality results in skewed results and managers tend to be rated higher than they actually are. One’s previous experiences and reputation provide a more reliable source for measuring one’s integrity.

Kaiser & Hogan (2010) decide to research the use of integrity testing in more detail. Data was collected from 672 directors and vice-presidents from Fortune 500 companies and included ratings from approximately 5 subordinates for each individual. Using a 23 item questionnaire with a 5 point likert scale (0 = ineffective and 4 = extremely effective), leaders were assessed on 5 competencies: vision, execution, managerial courage, building talent and integrity. A t-test demonstrated that integrity scores were generally higher than any other construct. The smallest difference (which was statistically significant) occurred between integrity (M = 2.68, SD =.40) and execution ( M = 2.31, SD = .42) with a difference of .92 in standard deviation, t(671) = 22.88,  p < .001. Not one leader received a score of 1, which is considered minimally acceptable. A tukey’s post examination revealed no statistical significance for integrity. This demonstrates that this method does not effectively differentiate those with low integrity from those with high integrity. It continues to reveal that managers are always provided favorable scores when being assessed on integrity.

Following the initial study, Kaiser & Hogan decided to try a new approach of assessing integrity. The approach does not ask evaluators to refer to observed behavior but asks the likelihood that a manager will engage in questionable behavior. 80 students from a southeastern university were recruited to participate in the following study. Participants were asked to rate their current managers using the Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire (LBD) – Form XII (Stogdill, 1963) and the shortened version of the Perceived Leader Integrity Scale (PLIS) [focusing on perceived integrity]. Unlike the LBD, higher scores on the PLIS are less desirable as a higher score demonstrates a greater probability of unethical behavior. Additional items were used to measure the perceived effectiveness of a supervisor and job satisfaction. The smallest difference occurred between initiating structure (M = 2.37, SD = .83) and  perceived integrity (M = 2.66, SD = .97), t(79) = 3.48, p < .001. Participants were more comfortable rating managers below the median (2), which did not even occur in the previous method, Therefore, the PLIS is three times less elevated than the previous methodology, which had a standard deviation of .90. The analysis also exposed that the PLIS correlated with job satisfaction and perceived effectiveness of a manager. It can be assumed that if managers are perceived as ethical, employees will generally have higher levels of job satisfaction.

There are several limitations to consider in this study. First off, the samples in both studies are entirely different. Students may rate managers differently as there is less of a chance that they work full-time. They may have also worked for different companies and therefore was a variance in organizational culture.

IMPLICATONS FOR HR PROFESSIONALS

It is important to mention that if ethical testing is used in any selection process, it must demonstrate validity. Therefore, a company must be able to demonstrate that the test predicts successful performance in case the test experiences adverse impact.

Organizations can now more effectively measure the integrity of their employees by utilizing a system similar to the PLIS. Instead of measuring personality, the assessment can focus on the likelihood that one will perform unethical behavior. There is no need to argue why as the study above provides statistical proof. To increase its creditability, upcoming studies should look at a variety of samples to ensure it is applicable to the real world. 

The study does provide significant findings that are applicable to performance appraisals. Since the perceived integrity is found to increase job satisfaction, which can reduce turnover and increase performance. It is better to be proactive than reactive when battling integrity. By instilling a culture that values ethical behavior, managers are less likely to participate in questionable behavior. Encouraging executives to communicate and model the ethical behaviors can reinforce the culture. Supervisors that are already demonstrating unethical behavior or low levels of integrity can be difficult to develop, especially since their creditability may already be shot.

Source: Kaiser, R.B., Hogan, R. (2010). How to (and how not to) assess the integrity of managers. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 62(4), Dec 2010, 216-234.

The Relationship between Pay and Job Satisfaction: A Meta-Analysis of the Literature

Summary & Commentary by: Ian B. Mondrow, M.A.

The common phrase "money can't buy you happiness" has been proven to be valid. However, does one's pay influence his/her perception of work? Judge, Piccolo, Podsakoff, Shaw and Rich (2010) set out on a mission to determine if salary has an impact on one's job satisfaction.

The researchers used a series of terms on the PsycINFO database to collect 1156 abstracts. Out of this collection of abstracts, it was determined that 86 studies were to be utilized in the analysis. A meta-analysis was conducted to provide estimated correlations between satisfaction and pay level.

Results revealed that pay-level was positively correlated with both job satisfaction ( r = .15, p < .05) and pay satisfaction (r = .24, p < .05). Since zero was not included in the confidence intervals, it can be assumed the mean correlations of job satisfaction and pay satisfaction were not zero. A population correlation showed a stronger relationship between pay level and satisfaction than the correlations with pay level and job satisfaction (Z = -4.01, p < .05). This suggests that pay level has a stronger relationship pay-satisfaction than job-satisfaction. Therefore, it is possible for an individual to be satisfied with his/her pay but not satisfied with his her job.

When analyzing moderators, the country being examined had no effect. The United States showed no difference in pay level and job satisfaction than Great Britain, India Australia and Thailand. In addition, Pay satisfaction did not differ based on the country.

IMPLICATIONS FOR HR PROFESSIONALS
While pay may help to determine if an applicant accepts a job offer, salary has little effect on one's job satisfaction. An individual can be satisfied with the amount of pay he/she is receiving but intrinsic rewards and culture-fit have been found to be better predictors of job satisfaction. Pay will not motivate employees and HR Managers need to ensure that managers comprehend this.

When considering job satisfaction, focus on the company culture and reward system. Take Google as an example. Previously, Google has offered employees lower wages but provided a vast amount of benefits. In addition, the culture within google was positively perceived and therefore individuals were more likely to accept the pay cut due to their high levels of job satisfaction (fostered by the culture). Employees should feel as though they are making an impact and their work is appreciated. An intrinsic reward provides one with greater satisfaction because it instills a sense of pride. An extrinsic rewards can be meaningless because it quickly loses its value once the novelty has wore off.

This does not mean that an organization can offer lower wages compared to their competitors. Wages have an impact on the war for talent and therefore, to be competitive, an organization must be able to match wages. It does ensure that an organization does not have to be a pay leader in order for their employees to be happy.




source: Judge, T.A., Piccolo, R.F., Podsakoff, J.C., Rich, B.L. (2010). The relationship between pay satisfaction and job satisfaction. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 77, 157-167.

Organizational Predictors of Women on Corporate Boards

Summary by: Ian B. Mondrow, M.A.

Diversity is crucial for organizational survival. Previous research has demonstrated that diverse teams often generate more alternative solutions to problems as a result of their increased information search and different perspectives. More specifically, gender diversity has been found to increase creativity within the groups. While the positives outweigh the negatives, diversity does have its downfalls. There is the risk of decreased communication, slow decision making, high levels of conflict and narrow-mindedness. Diversity's success thrives on the leaders of the organization and their ability to demonstrate an open mind.


Men have always have an advantage in the business sector and it is easier for men to grow to executive positions. It is not uncommon for men to ride the glass escalator while women encounter the glass ceiling, or the inability to grow past a certain position. In 2005, 37% of the managerial workforce was composed of women but only 14.7% held board seats in Fortune 500 companies (Catalyst, 2005 as cited by Hillman & Cannella, 2007). Due to this small distribution, Hillman & Cannella (2007) decide to examine the effects of having a female presence on corporate boards.

The researchers utilized public filings from 950 firms and 9,722 firm-wide observations from 1990 to 2003. The dependent variable for the study was the presense of women on a firm's board. If one or more women were on a company's board of directors, then it was coded as "1". Otherwise it was coded as "0".

Odds ratios were used to test a series of hypothesizes. This represents the degree of change that the likelihood of the dependent variable  as a result of a one-unit change in the independent variable. Odds ratios greater than 1.00 indicate a positive correlation between the variables. Anything below a 1.00 signifies there is no relationship.

44.21% of the firms did not have female representation on their board. In additional, the odds ratio analysis revealed significant results. An increase in annual sales is found to increase the likelihood of female representation on a directors board by 19.2%, odds ratio = 1.19, p < .001 (Hillman et. al., 2007). Industries with higher amounts of female employees had a relationship with the presence on boards as well, odds ratio = 1.01, p < .05. Diversity within an organization was found to not have an impact on female representation. Organizations that have females on their board of directors were likely to encourage related companies to include women on their boards as well, odds ratio = 1.09, p < .001. Organization age and number of directors were also found to be successful predictors but were not as statistically significant.

While the study findings are not 100% proven, it does demonstrate the presence of relationships between female representation on the board of directors and other factors. Annual sales, "woman-friendly" industries, and competing organizations with female directors may influence the gender composure of an organization's board of directors.

IMPLICATIONS FOR HR PROFESSIONALS
Times are changing and diversity is crucial for an organization's growth and competitive nature. This study shows that organizations are more likely to have a diversified board of directors based on their employee demographics. In addition, if their competition has female representation on their board, they are more likely to encourage the participation of women. I personally believe that an organization should strive to create a diverse board of directors so that a variety of demographics are represented. This gives each group of people representation and increases the likelihood that voices are heard.

Diversity on the board of directors is also crucial for talent management. People are more likely to join organizations where they share similarities with others. Board of directors are often advertised on company websites and therefore, it is easy for candidates to see what demographics are present. For instance, a woman may be discouraged to apply for a position at an organization if she notices there are no female officers. She may fear  sexual harassment, lacking a voice or the chance that she may be discriminated. This is not true for every individual but cases of this exist. Encouraging diversity within a board of directors can reduce the likelihood that this would occur.

It is best stated in one sentence: Diversity = Innovation = Success






Source: Hillman, A.J. & Cannella, A.A. (2007). Organizational predictors of women on corporate boards. Academy of Management Journal, 50 (4), 941-952.