Gender At The Helm: Examining The Relationship between The CEO ‎Gender and ESG Performance in S&P 500 Companies

  • Authors

    https://doi.org/10.14419/xeehav85

    Received date: July 13, 2025

    Accepted date: August 14, 2025

    Published date: September 1, 2025

  • CEO Gender; Corporate Governance; Environmental Social Governance; Female Leadership; ‎Sustainability Performance

  • Abstract

    Gender diversity in corporate leadership and ESG performance represents a critical research area in ‎accounting and economics. While organizations face mounting pressure to demonstrate sustainable ‎business practices, the persistent underrepresentation of women in executive positions presents a unique ‎opportunity to examine how leadership characteristics influence corporate sustainability outcomes. The ‎present study examines the relationship between chief executive officers (CEOs') gender and ESG ‎component performance among S&P 500 companies, specifically investigating whether female leadership ‎influences the environmental, social, and governance dimensions differently and testing hypotheses ‎derived from upper echelon theory, stakeholder theory, and agency theory. The analysis employs a ‎comprehensive dataset of 426 S&P 500 companies over 2022-2023, including 36 female-led and 390 ‎male-led companies. Multiple regression models are utilized to analyze the relationship between CEO ‎gender and ESG component scores while controlling for factors such as company size, profitability, ‎leverage, year effects, and industry fixed effects. Robustness checks encompass propensity score ‎matching and year-specific analyses. Female chief executive officers demonstrate a marked tendency to ‎outperform their male counterparts in terms of social ESG dimensions while concurrently demonstrating ‎underperformance in the environmental and governance dimensions. The net effect of these offsetting ‎factors is that there is no significant difference in overall ESG scores. The findings remain consistent across ‎robustness checks and suggest that female leadership prioritizes stakeholder-oriented social initiatives while ‎allocating relatively fewer resources to environmental and governance improvements. The study revealed ‎that the impact of CEO gender on ESG performance is not uniform across all components, but rather, it is ‎component-specific. This finding supports theoretical predictions about gender-differentiated leadership ‎styles and strategic priorities. The findings have important implications for corporate governance practices, ‎investor decision-making, and policy development in the evolving landscape of corporate sustainability‎.

  • References

    1. C. Flammer, Does corporate social responsibility lead to superior financial performance? A regression discontinuity approach, Management Science 61 (2015) 2549-2568. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2014.2038.
    2. Catalyst, Women CEOs of the S&P 500, 2024, available online: https://www.catalyst.org/research/women-ceos-of-the-sp-500/.
    3. F. Berg, J.F. Koelbel, R. Rigobon, Aggregate confusion: the divergence of ESG ratings, Review of Finance 26 (2022) 1315-1344. https://doi.org/10.1093/rof/rfac033.
    4. D.C. Hambrick, P.A. Mason, Upper echelons: the organization as a reflection of its top managers, Academy of Management Review 9 (1984) 193-206. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1984.4277628.
    5. R.E. Freeman, Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1984.
    6. M.C. Jensen, W.H. Meckling, Theory of the firm: managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure, Journal of Financial Economics 3 (1976) 305-360. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X.
    7. K. Byron, C. Post, Women on boards of directors and corporate social performance: a meta‐analysis, Corporate Governance: An International Review 24 (2016) 428-442. https://doi.org/10.1111/corg.12165.
    8. T. Aabo, I.C. Giorici, Do female CEOs matter for ESG scores?, Global Finance Journal 56 (2023) 100722. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAL-10-2023-0181.
    9. H. Al-Shaer, M. Zaman, K. Albitar, CEO gender, critical mass of board gender diversity and ESG performance: UK evidence, Journal of Accounting Literature (2024). https://doi.org/10.1108/JAL-10-2023-0181.
    10. H.B. Christensen, L. Hail, C. Leuz, Mandatory CSR and sustainability reporting: economic analysis and literature review, Review of Accounting Studies 26 (2021) 1176-1248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11142-021-09609-5.
    11. G. Dorfleitner, G. Halbritter, M. Nguyen, Measuring the level and risk of corporate responsibility–an empirical comparison of different ESG rating approaches, Journal of Asset Management 16 (2015) 450-466. https://doi.org/10.1057/jam.2015.31.
    12. P. Chollet, B.W. Sandwidi, CSR engagement and financial risk: a virtuous circle? International evidence, Global Finance Journal 38 (2018) 65-81, available online: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1044028318300847. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfj.2018.03.004.
    13. F. Gangi, A. Meles, S. Monferrà, M. Mustilli, Does corporate social responsibility help the survivorship of SMEs and large firms?, Global Finance Journal 43 (2020) 100402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfj.2018.01.006.
    14. C.J. Huang, W.N. Wan Ahmad, R.A.J. Saad, Can female CEOs improve corporate environmental, social and governance performance?, Gender in Management 40 (2025) 91-113. https://doi.org/10.1108/GM-11-2023-0450.
    15. A. Fatemi, M. Glaum, S. Kaiser, ESG performance and firm value: the moderating role of disclosure, Global Finance Journal 38 (2018) 45-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfj.2017.03.001.
    16. I.M. Herremans, J.A. Nazari, F. Mahmoudian, Stakeholder relationships, engagement, and sustainability reporting, Journal of Business Ethics 138 (2016) 417-435. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2634-0.
    17. D. Avramov, S. Cheng, A. Lioui, A. Tarelli, Sustainable investing with ESG rating uncertainty, Journal of Financial Economics 145 (2022) 642-664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2021.09.009.
    18. G. Serafeim, Social-impact efforts that create real value, Harvard Business Review 98 (2020) 38-48, available online: https://hbr.org/2020/09/social-impact-efforts-that-create-real-value.
    19. D.S. Dhaliwal, O.Z. Li, A. Tsang, Y.G. Yang, Voluntary nonfinancial disclosure and the cost of equity capital: the initiation of corporate social responsibility reporting, The Accounting Review 86 (2011) 59-100. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.00000005.
    20. R.G. Eccles, J.C. Stroehle, Exploring social origins in the construction of ESG measures, Available at SSRN 3212685 (2018). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3212685.
    21. S. El Ghoul, O. Guedhami, Y. Kim, Country-level institutions, firm value, and the role of corporate social responsibility initiatives, Journal of International Business Studies 48 (2017) 360-385. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2016.4.
    22. M. Bertrand, A. Schoar, Managing with style: the effect of managers on firm policies, The Quarterly Journal of Economics 118 (2003) 1169-1208. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355303322552775.
    23. R. Borghesi, J.F. Houston, A. Naranjo, Corporate socially responsible investments: CEO altruism, reputation, and shareholder interests, Journal of Corporate Finance 26 (2014) 164-181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2014.03.008.
    24. M.E. Clarkson, A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance, Academy of Management Review 20 (1995) 92-117. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9503271994.
    25. J. Zenger, J. Folkman, Research: women score higher than men in most leadership skills, Harvard Business Review (2019), available online: https://hbr.org/2019/06/research-women-score-higher-than-men-in-most-leadership-skills.
    26. S. Finkelstein, D.C. Hambrick, A.A. Cannella, Strategic Leadership: Theory and Research on Executives, Top Management Teams, and Boards, Oxford University Press, New York, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195162073.003.0005.
    27. A.H. Eagly, L.L. Carli, Through the Labyrinth: The Truth About How Women Become Leaders, Harvard Business Review Press, Boston, 2007.
    28. R.J. Ely, H. Ibarra, D.M. Kolb, Taking gender into account: theory and design for women's leadership development programs, Academy of Management Learning & Education 10 (2011) 474-493. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2010.0046.
    29. S. Helgesen, The Female Advantage: Women's Ways of Leadership, Doubleday Currency, New York, 1990.
    30. R. Koenig, A. Eagly, A. Mitchell, T. Ristikari, Are leader stereotypes masculine? A meta-analysis of three research paradigms, Psychological Bulletin 137 (2011) 616-642. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023557.
    31. J.P. Doh, S.A. Stumpf, W.G. Tymon, Responsible leadership helps retain talent in India, Journal of Business Ethics 98 (2011) 85-100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-1018-3.
    32. K.M. Eisenhardt, Agency theory: an assessment and review, Academy of Management Review 14 (1989) 57-74. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1989.4279003.
    33. C.K. Croson, U. Gneezy, Gender differences in preferences, Journal of Economic Literature 47 (2009) 448-474. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.47.2.448.
    34. M.E. Porter, C. van der Linde, Toward a new conception of the environment-competitiveness relationship, Journal of Economic Perspectives 9 (1995) 97-118. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.9.4.97.
    35. A. Shleifer, R.W. Vishny, A survey of corporate governance, Journal of Finance 52 (1997) 737-783, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1997.tb04820.x.
    36. J. Barney, Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage, Journal of Management 17 (1991) 99-120. https://doi.org/10.2307/258963.
    37. S.L. Hart, A natural-resource-based view of the firm, Academy of Management Review 20 (1995) 986-1014. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9512280033.
    38. J.E. Delery, D.H. Doty, Modes of theorizing in strategic human resource management: tests of universalistic, contingency, and configurational performance predictions, Academy of Management Journal 39 (1996) 802-835. https://doi.org/10.2307/256713.
    39. B.E. Hermalin, M.S. Weisbach, Boards of directors as an endogenously determined institution: a survey of the economic literature, Economic Policy Review 9 (2003) 7-26, available online: https://www.newyorkfed.org/research/epr/03v09n1/0304herm.html.
    40. R.M. Kanter, Men and Women of the Corporation, Basic Books, New York, 1977.
    41. J.B. Rosener, Ways women lead, Harvard Business Review 68 (1990) 119-125, available online: https://hbr.org/1990/11/ways-women-lead.
    42. D.A. Carter, B.J. Simkins, W.G. Simpson, Corporate governance, board diversity, and firm value, Financial Review 38 (2003) 33-53. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6288.00034.
    43. B.M. Barber, T. Odean, Boys will be boys: gender, overconfidence, and common stock investment, Quarterly Journal of Economics 116 (2001) 261-292. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355301556400.
    44. L. Kassinis, A. Panayiotou, J. Dimou, A. Katsifaraki, Gender and environmental sustainability: a longitudinal analysis, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 23 (2016) 399-412. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1386.
    45. C. Catalyst, Women in S&P 500 Companies, Catalyst, New York, 2023, available online: https://www.catalyst.org/research/women-in-sp-500-companies/.
    46. L.L. Carli, A.H. Eagly, Gender, hierarchy, and leadership: an introduction, Journal of Social Issues 57 (2001) 629-636. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00232.
    47. L. Bebchuk, A. Cohen, The costs of entrenched boards, Journal of Financial Economics 78 (2005) 409-433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2004.12.006.
    48. R. Adams, D. Ferreira, Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and performance, Journal of Financial Economics 94 (2009) 291-309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2008.10.007.
    49. G. Friede, T. Busch, A. Bassen, ESG and financial performance: aggregated evidence from more than 2000 empirical studies, Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment 5 (2015) 210-233. https://doi.org/10.1080/20430795.2015.1118917.
    50. L. Lückerath-Rovers, Women on boards and firm performance, Journal of Management & Governance 17 (2013) 491-509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-011-9186-1.
    51. C. Post, K. Byron, Women on boards and firm financial performance: a meta-analysis, Academy of Management Journal 58 (2015) 1546-1571, https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2013.0319.
    52. T. Hahn, L. Preuss, J. Pinkse, F. Figge, Cognitive frames in corporate sustainability: managerial sensemaking with paradoxical and business case frames, Academy of Management Review 39 (2014) 463-487, https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2012.0341.
    53. A.C. Cameron, J.B. Gelbach, D.L. Miller, Robust inference with multiway clustering, Journal of Business & Economic Statistics 29 (2011) 238-249. https://doi.org/10.1198/jbes.2010.07136.
    54. A. Alkhawaja, F. Hu, S. Johl, and S. Nadarajah, Board gender diversity, quotas, and ESG disclosure: Global evidence, International Review of Financial Analysis 90 (2023) Art. no. 102823. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2023.102823.
    55. A. Słomka-Gołębiowska, S. De Masi, S. Zambelli, and A. Paci, Towards higher sustainability: If you want something done, ask a chairwoman, Finance Research Letters 58 (2023) Art. no. 104308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2023.104308.
    56. S. Ed‐Dafali, Z. Adardour, A. Derj, A. Bami, and K. Hussainey, A PRISMA‐Based Systematic Review on Economic, Social, and Governance Practices: Insights and Research Agenda, Business Strategy and the Environment 2 (2025) 1896-1916. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.4069.

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    Merter, A. K., Balcıoğlu, Y. S., & Karakaya, T. (2025). Gender At The Helm: Examining The Relationship between The CEO ‎Gender and ESG Performance in S&P 500 Companies. International Journal of Accounting and Economics Studies, 12(5), 77-89. https://doi.org/10.14419/xeehav85