Innovators or Risk-Avoiders? The Role of Female Executives in Enterprise Innovation in China

The author examines the relationship between female executives and enterprise innovation in Chinese A-share listed companies. The subject of the study is the impact of female executive representation on research and development (R&D) investment and innovation output in firms. The purpose of the research is to determine whether female executives inhibit innovation performance and to explore the mediating role of R&D investment while also assessing the variation of effects between state-owned and non-state-owned enterprises. The relevance lies in the growing international interest in understanding how gender diversity in top management affects firm-level strategic outcomes, especially in emerging markets with distinct institutional and cultural contexts. The scientific novelty lies in the empirical identification of the mechanism through which female executives affect innovation, using a panel dataset of 3,920 Chinese listed companies over the period 2012 to 2021. As part of the study, the author used the methods of two-way fixed effects, mediation analysis to assess indirect effects through R&D investment, and heterogeneity analysis to compare state- versus non-state-owned enterprises. Based on the results, it was found that female executives are significantly associated with reduced innovation output, primarily due to lower R&D investment. The author concluded that gender-based differences in risk-taking behavior influence innovation outcomes and that these effects may also be shaped by institutional settings and ownership structures.

1. Doan T., Iskandar-Datta M. Are female top executives more risk-averse or more ethical? Evidence from corporate cash holdings policy. Journal of Empirical Finance. 2019;55:161–76. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jempfin.2019.11.005

2. Iqbal Z., O S., Baek H. Y. Are Female Executives More Risk-Averse than Male Executives? Atlantic Economic Journal. 2006;34:63–74. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11293–006–6123–9

3. Peni E., Vähämaa S. Female executives and earnings management. Managerial Finance. 2010;36:629–645. URL: https://doi.org/10.1108/03074351011050343

4. Hyun S., Kim J. M., Han J., Anderson M. Female executive leadership and corporate social responsibility. Accounting and Finance. 2021;62:3475–511. URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.12894

5. Pu T., Zulkafli A. H. Managerial ownership and corporate innovation: evidence of patenting activity from Chinese listed manufacturing firms. Cogent Business and Management. 2024;11. URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2289202

6. Kahn K. B. Understanding innovation. Business Horizons. 2018;61:453–60. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2018.01.011

7. Ho S. S.M., Li A. Y., Tam K., Zhang F. CEO Gender, ethical leadership, and accounting Conservatism. Journal of Business Ethics. 2014;127:351–70. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551–013–2044–0

8. Ragins B. R., Townsend B., Mattis M. Gender gap in the executive suite: CEOs and female executives report on breaking the glass ceiling. Academy of Management Perspectives. 1998;12:28–42. URL: https://doi.org/10.5465/ame.1998.254976

9. Jeong S.-H., Harrison D. A. Glass Breaking, Strategy Making, and Value Creating: Meta-Analytic Outcomes of Women as CEOs and TMT members. Academy of Management Journal. 2016;60:1219–52. URL: https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2014.0716

10. Pu T., Zulkafli A. H. State Ownership Heterogeneity and Corporate Innovation: New Evidence from a Hierarchical Perspective. Journal of Corporate Finance Research. 2024;18:20–36. URL: https://doi.org/10.17323/j.jcfr.2073–0438.18.1.2024.20–36

11. Van Lange P. A.M., Kruglanski A. W., Higgins E. T. Handbook of theories of social psychology. Choice Reviews Online. 2012;49:49–5135. URL: https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.49–5135

12. Franke G. R., Crown D. F., Spake D. F. Gender differences in ethical perceptions of business practices: A social role theory perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology. 1997;82:920–34. URL: https://doi.org/10.1037//0021-9010.82.6.920

13. Pu T., Zulkafli A. Global minds, local impact: Exploring the effect of foreign directors on corporate R&D expenditure. Strategic Management. 2024;75. URL: https://www.smjournal.rs/index.php/home/article/view/508

14. Eagly A. H., Wood W. Social Role Theory of Sex Differences. The Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia of Gender and Sexuality Studies. 2016;1–3. URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118663219.wbegss183

15. Biddle B. J. Recent developments in role theory. Annual Review of Sociology. 1986;12:67–92. URL: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.12.080186.000435

16. Faccio M., Marchica M.-T., Mura R. CEO gender, corporate risk-taking, and the efficiency of capital allocation. Journal of Corporate Finance. 2016;39:193–209. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2016.02.008

17. Pfeffer J., Salancik G. R. Organization design: The case for a coalitional model of organizations. Organizational Dynamics. 1977;6:15–29. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/0090–2616(77)90043–2

18. Hillman A. J., Withers M. C., Collins B. J. Resource Dependence Theory: A review. Journal of Management. 2009;35:1404–27. URL: https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206309343469

19. Drees J., Heugens P. Synthesizing and extending resource dependence theory: A meta-analysis. ERIM Top-Core Articles. 2012. URL: https://repub.eur.nl/pub/37922/. Free full text at SSRN

20. Jajja M. S.S., Kannan V. R., Brah S. A., Hassan S. Z. Linkages between firm innovation strategy, suppliers, product innovation, and business performance. International Journal of Operations and Production Management. 2017;37:1054–75. URL: https://doi.org/10.1108/ijopm-09–2014–0424

21. Akram F., Haq M. A.U. Integrating agency and resource dependence theories to examine the impact of corporate governance and innovation on firm performance. Cogent Business and Management. 2022;9. URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2022.2152538

22. Woods S., Harris M., Rice S., Boquet A., Rice C., Rosales D., et al. Using social role theory to predict how gender and ethnicity of aviation job candidates affects perceived job classifications. Technology in Society. 2024;76:102481. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102481

23. Georgakakis D., Heyden M. L.M., Oehmichen J. D.R., Ekanayake U. I.K. Four decades of CEO–TMT interface research: A review inspired by role theory. The Leadership Quarterly. 2019;33:101354. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2019.101354

24. Singh S. K., Mazzucchelli A., Vessal S. R., Solidoro A. Knowledge-based HRM practices and innovation performance: Role of social capital and knowledge sharing. Journal of International Management. 2021;27:100830. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intman.2021.100830

25. Dahlin E., Ammons S. K., Rugh J. S., Sumsion R., Hebertson J. The social impacts of innovation: reproducing racial, gender and social class inequality. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy. 2022;43:586–606. URL: https://doi.org/10.1108/ijssp-06–2022–0145

26. Bahoo S., Cucculelli M., Qamar D. Artificial intelligence and corporate innovation: A review and research agenda. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2022;188:122264. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.122264

27. Expósito A., Sanchis-Llopis A., Sanchis-Llopis J.A. CEO gender and SMEs innovativeness: evidence for Spanish businesses. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal. 2021;19:1017–54. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365–021–00758–2

28. Chen W., Zhong X., Lan H. Innovation for survival: The scope of negative attainment discrepancy and enterprise R&D investment. Industrial Marketing Management. 2022;108:190–204. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2022.12.002

29. He M., Estébanez R. P. Exploring the Relationship between R&D Investment and Business Performance — An Empirical Analysis of Chinese ICT SMEs. Sustainability. 2023;15:5142. URL: https://doi.org/10.3390/su15065142

30. Elsaid E., Ursel N. D. CEO succession, gender and risk taking. Gender in Management an International Journal. 2011;26:499–512. URL: https://doi.org/10.1108/17542411111175478

31. Shropshire C., Peterson S., Bartels A. L., Amanatullah E. T., Lee P. M. Are female CEOs really more risk averse? Examining Economic Downturn and Other-Orientation. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies. 2021;28:185–206. URL: https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051821997404

32. Cao X., Wang Z., Li G., Zheng Y. The impact of chief executive officers’ (CEOs’) overseas experience on the corporate innovation performance of enterprises in China. Journal of Innovation and Knowledge. 2022;7:100268. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2022.100268

33. Czarnitzki D., Hottenrott H. R&D investment and financing constraints of small and medium-sized firms. Small Business Economics. 2009;36:65–83. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187–009–9189–3

34. Hillman A. J., Withers M. C., Collins B. J. Resource Dependence Theory: A review. Journal of Management. 2009;35:1404–27. URL: https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206309343469

35. Ozturk O. Bibliometric review of resource dependence theory literature: an overview. Management Review Quarterly. 2020;71:525–52. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301–020–00192–8

36. Li H., Tong X. When does a female leadership advantage exist? Evidence from SOEs in China. Corporate Governance an International Review. 2023;31:945–70. URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/corg.12510

37. Li Y., Liu Y., Ren F. Product innovation and process innovation in SOEs: evidence from the Chinese transition. The Journal of Technology Transfer. 2006;32:63–85. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961–006–9009–8

38. Pu T., Zulkafli A. H. (2024). How does digital transformation affect innovation quality? Economics and Management. 2024;27(4):16–32. URL: https://doi.org/10.15240/tul/001/2024–5–021

39. Ramos A., Latorre F., Tomás I., Ramos J. TOP WOMAN: Identifying barriers to women’s access to management. European Management Journal. 2021;40:45–55. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2021.06.005

40. Bröder A., Hohmann N. Variations in risk taking behavior over the menstrual cycle. Evolution and Human Behavior. 2003;24:391–8. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/s1090–5138(03)00055–2

41. Hadlock C. J., Pierce J. R. New evidence on measuring financial constraints: Moving beyond the KZ index. Review of Financial Studies. 2010;23:1909–40. URL: https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhq009

42. Hoegl M., Gibbert M., Mazursky D. Financial constraints in innovation projects: When is less more? Research Policy. 2008;37:1382–91. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.04.018

43. Adams R. B., Funk P. Beyond the glass ceiling: Does gender matter? Management Science. 2011;58:219–35. URL: https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1110.1452

44. Amore M. D., Garofalo O., Martin-Sanchez V. Failing to Learn from Failure: How Optimism Impedes Entrepreneurial Innovation. Organization Science. 2020;32:940–964. URL: https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2020.1359

45. Pu T. Does digital transformation propel innovation strategies? An empirical investigation based on machine learning and the dynamic GMM approach. Economics and Management. 2025; Vol. ahead-of-print (No. aheadof-print). URL: https://doi.org/10.15240/tul/001/2025–5–012