{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02097902097902098, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011655011655011656, 'mean_word_length': 5.162679425837321, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Beyond “twokenism”: Organizational factors enabling female directors to affect the appointment of a female CEO

In this article, I examine how a critical mass of female directors affects the likelihood that a firm will appoint a female CEO. Drawing on critical mass perspective, I argue that increasing the number of female directors beyond a certain threshold significantly increases the likelihood that firms will appoint female CEOs. Also, I argue that the positive effect of female board representation on the appointment of a female CEO is stronger when the firm is more open toward gender diversity. I test these arguments by analyzing 3669 CEO succession events in large US firms between 1997 and 2017. Results show that the likelihood of appointing a female CEO increases significantly when a board has at least three female directors. Also, I found that firms’ female-friendliness—which was measured by (1) male directors’ awareness of female CEOs at other firms, (2) gender gap in executive pay, and (3) the proportion of female executives—affects the relationship between female board representation and the likelihood of appointing a female CEO, helping female directors affect the likelihood of appointing a female CEO even when their number is lower than the critical mass.