A 2003 law in Norway forced companies to have a gender quota on their boards (similar to the one California just passed). A subsequent study found that the quota lead to "less capable boards"

Badgerz92 · 2018-09-06T13:38:58+00:00

From the abstract:

In 2003, a new law required that 40 percent of Norwegian firms’ directors be women – at the time only nine percent of directors were women. We use the pre-quota cross-sectional variation in female board representation to instrument for exogenous changes to corporate boards following the quota. We find that the constraint imposed by the quota caused a significant drop in the stock price at the announcement of the law and a large decline in Tobin’s Q over the following years, consistent with the idea that firms choose boards to maximize value. The quota led to younger and less experienced boards, increases in leverage and acquisitions, and deterioration in operating performance, consistent with less capable boards.

I thought this was relevant given the law California just passed (although the governor still has to sign it)

foomberry · 2018-09-06T16:20:30+00:00

Let California sink itself into the ocean. I'm sure a-lot of companies will leave due to this.

2018-09-06T16:27:26+00:00

The funny thing is that men lost jobs. So their wives and daughters were harmed by this.

_pulsar · 2018-09-06T18:59:48+00:00

California has gone so far off the deep end it's scary.

2018-09-06T19:40:52+00:00

California will always take one straight to the chin in order to placate the feminists and the liberals. We are set-up to blow-up baby. California RIP.

Revorob · 2018-09-07T08:03:45+00:00

Not that anyone should be surprised by these findings. Any appointments to company board that are not based entirely on merit are unlikely to have any positive effect. Put simply, if a company wants the best results, they need to employ the best people.

Anyone who has worked in a diversity environment will know that non-merit based employment/promotions ultimately hurts the organisation. I formerly worked in the Australia Federal Public Service and you had better believe they practiced affirmative action to the max. Despite year after year of departmental failure, those in power refused to recognise that employing and promoting women to management/executive positions to make up the numbers was a bad idea. This same department wondered why they later became privatised with massive job losses.

Comments