Board diversity and strategic orientation: Evidence from India

This study leverages the upper echelons theory to investigate the effect of board diversity (gender, age, education, and tenure) on the strategic orientation of a firm in terms of its exploration- exploitation. It also investigates the moderating role of the technological intensity of the industry for analyzing the relationship between board diversity and exploration–exploitation of the firm. The technological intensity of the industry is classified as high-tech and low-tech. This study brings to light the role of the contingency factors in influencing the board's strategic choice. The study is based on panel data set of Indian Top-200 companies listed on the National Stock Exchange for the period between 2010 and 2015. The present study's findings indicate that an increase in board diversity leads to more exploration than exploitation. Further, the effect of board diversity is more pronounced in high-tech than the low-tech industries.     

Identifying and managing evaluator biases in parenting plan evaluations

Psychologists and other professionals are often appointed by the courts to assist families in resolving post-separation disputes and to assist judges in making orders on behalf of the best interests of the child(ren). Although these evaluations provide valuable information to the court, they require assessing areas of human behavior that are imprecisely defined or lacking professional consensus. As parents separate, their disputes may become more challenging, and they may act in uncharacteristic and unpredictable ways. Families that cannot solve their own challenges outside of court often show high levels of conflict and/or have issues that are extremely complex, including domestic violence allegations, resist-refuse family dynamics, and relocation requests. Evaluators and judges, being human, tend to oversimplify complex issues due to the limitations of the human brain. Evaluators are subject to cognitive biases that result from the use of mental heuristics, leading to shortcuts and errors in their reasoning and judgment. Other biases, such as implicit and explicit cultural biases, often influence evaluators' reasoning and conclusions. This article explores various biases that affect and potentially diminish the quality of an evaluator's work. We conclude by addressing “de-biasing” strategies that can reduce, but not negate, the risks associated with such biases.