Financial Review· 2026Q2
Does Board Gender Diversity at Target Firms Influence Acquisition Outcomes? Us Evidence
- 0citations
- Q2SCImago
- 2026year
Short summary
Gender-diverse boards at target firms in US public-to-public M&A deals (1999-2022) receive higher acquisition premiums and take longer to complete, benefiting target shareholders at the expense of acquirer shareholders.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- Firms with gender-diverse boards are less likely to be acquired, receive higher premiums, and experience longer deal completion times.
- Target shareholders gain in percentage and dollar terms, while acquirer shareholders lose.
- The premium effect is concentrated among boards with three or more female directors and is linked to their committee assignments, multiple board seats, and network positions.
- The findings reframe positive target and negative acquirer returns from value destruction to bargaining-driven redistribution.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
ABSTRACT Using US public‐to‐public mergers and acquisitions from 1999 to 2022, we examine how board gender diversity at target firms influences acquisition outcomes. Firms with gender‐diverse boards are less likely to receive acquisition bids; when they do, they command higher premiums and take longer to complete the acquisition. Target shareholders gain in both percentage and dollar terms while acquirer shareholders lose, consistent with a bargaining‐driven transfer of merger gains. The combined target–acquirer return is statistically indistinguishable from zero; therefore, we do not interpret the results as evidence of value creation or destruction. The premium effect is concentrated among boards with three or more female directors. It operates specifically through female directors with substantive committee assignments, multiple outside board seats, and central network positions. Parallel interactions using male‐director quality measures yield no comparable effect. The premium effect is amplified by target‐side advisory and legal counsel engagement, with no comparable effect on the acquirer side or at the deal level. The bid‐premium effect remains robust to propensity score matching and entropy balancing on predetermined firm characteristics. Our results reframe the joint pattern of positive target and negative acquirer returns from a value‐destruction interpretation to bargaining‐driven redistribution.
The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Financial Review, 2026 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Field: Gender Studies
Gender StudiesSocial Sciences