Search results

This paper aims to focus on the relationship between female leadership and the environmental, social and governance (ESG) performance of firms. Specifically, the study examines if firms with women as chief executive officers (CEOs) and/or board chairpersons have higher environmental and social scores.

The study uses data on publicly listed Nordic firms in a panel regression approach to establish the relationship between female leadership and the environmental and social performance of firms.

The result of this study shows that women have a leadership characteristic that increases the weighted average of environmental (E) and social (S) performance of a firm. In particular, pillar score results indicate a positive relationship between female CEOs and the social scores of a firm but no relationship between a female board chairperson and the environmental or social scores of a firm. This implies that gender-based differences affect the CEO’s success, especially in a firm’s social performance. Further analyses show a more significant impact on the E and S performance when a woman replaces a man as CEO of a firm.

While prior research has explored various aspects of gender diversity in corporate leadership and its potential impact, the focus on the Nordic context in this study provides a unique perspective, given the region’s distinct business environment and societal factors. In addition, by examining the collective influence of female leaders and both female CEOs and board chairpersons separately, this study provides a nuanced understanding of how different leadership roles may impact a firm’s ESG performance.

Several previous studies showed strong social stigma toward mental illness patients from the health-care providers (HCPs) in Saudi Arabia. This stigma affects the level of care provided by HCPs. Stigma is a major barrier in treating schizophrenia and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) patients. Thus, it is important to clarify the difference regarding the social stigma between both diagnoses. This study aimed to identify and compare the existence of social stigma among HCPs towards schizophrenia patients compared to OCD patients.

A total of 283 HCPs from King Abdullah Medical City (KAMC), Makkah, Saudi Arabia, were enrolled in this cross-sectional questionnaire-based study between middle and end of January 2021. The scale included a demographic questionnaire plus two vignette cases reflecting OCD and schizophrenia patients’ symptoms without mentioning diagnosis. Each case was followed with 18 questions, which measured some of the thoughts and attitudes of the social stigma of mental illnesses including negative stereotypes, discrimination, social distancing and emotional and cognitive prejudices against mental illness patients. The scale was validated by a pilot study (which included 15 other participants) with acceptable validity and reliability (Cronbach’s alpha: 81.4%).

Most participants’ responses were “low” in the total score of their stigma score for both diagnosis [OCD (84.1%), mean ± SD (1.15  ±  0.366) and schizophrenia (74.2%), mean ± SD (1.25  ±  0.438)]. However, those who responded “high” in their stigma score regarding the schizophrenia section were higher in their number than those who responded “high” in the OCD section (25.8% vs 15.9%). Most participants had “low” total stigma scores for both diagnoses [OCD (84.1%), mean ± SD (1.15  ±  0.366) and schizophrenia (74.2%), mean ± SD (1.25  ±  0.438)]. However, of those with “high” stigma score responses, more were for the schizophrenia section compared to the OCD section (25.8% vs 15.9%). Being flexible to recruit any of them was more related to promoting them if they deserve promotion. The sample that answered wrong regarding OCD vignette diagnosis and had “high” stigma score was higher (n = 40) than the sample that answered correctly and had “high” stigma score (n = 5). In contrast, the sample that answered wrong regarding the schizophrenia case diagnosis and had “high” stigma score (n = 41) was not significantly different in terms of its number compared to the one that answered correctly and had “high” stigma score (n = 32).

One aspect that reduces the strength of this study is that the target number of the participants could not be reached, meaning a 95% confidence level with a ±5% margin of error could not be reached. Another limitation is the lack of contact between HCPs at the KAMC in Makkah with mental illness patients owing to lack of psychiatric inpatient departments. However, this limitation may be a strength for this study, as we were able to primarily measure medical HCPs rather than psychiatric HCPs. Although the vignette methodology in stigma studies has many benefits, the participants do not respond to real patients, and therefore miss appearance and other nonverbal cues that are typically present in real interactions.

The social stigma level among HCPs against schizophrenia patients is higher than that against OCD patients. The factor of knowing the diagnosis of the case has a positive effect on decreasing stigma toward OCD patients but not toward schizophrenia patients. Educational awareness about stigma against mental illness patients to HCPs, rather than focusing on increasing literature knowledge, may decrease stigma among HCPs.