题目：Gender-related Institutional Environments and Prosocial Behaviors：A Cross National Meta-analysis
时间：2021年5月26日（周三）上午10:00
地点：浙江大学紫金港校区管理学院A423
主讲人：李骥教授，香港浸会大学
主持人：王文明研究员，云开平台
主讲人简介：
李骥教授是香港浸会大学管理学系荣休教授，加拿大多倫多大學管理学博士，曾任教於新加坡國立大學和香港中文大學。李教授的研究集中于戰略管理，戰略人力資源管理，以及企業社會責任。他曾以第一作者身份，發表了40多篇SSCI期刊論文，包括Strategic Management Journal，Journal of International Business Studies, Journal of Management Studies, Journal of Business Ethics, Long Range Planning, Human Resource Management, Journal of World Business, British Journal of Management, Management International Review, and International Journal of Human Resource Management等国际顶级/权威期刊。
讲座摘要：
In this paper, we adopt a meta-analytic approach to study the relationship between gender-related institutional environments at both organizational level and societal level on the one hand and gender heterogeneities in individual prosocial behaviors on the other. Our reference to prosocial behaviors includespro-environmental behaviors, philanthropy-related ones, and anti-corruption ones.Analyzing data from 138 empirical studies covering 35 countries, we obtain evidence of gender heterogeneity in prosocial behaviors under different gender-related institutional environments. On the hand, at societal level, females in the institutional environments with lower gender egalitarianism show much less philanthropy-related behaviors than do their male counterparts, while the same difference is not significant under the environments with higher gender egalitarianism. Moreover, the females under the same environments also show significantly more anti-corruption behaviors than do their male counterparts, while this difference is much smaller (i.e., with smaller effect size) in the environment with high gender egalitarianism. On the other hand, females in the institutional environments at organizational level with gender pay gap against women show significantly less philanthropy-related behaviors and more anti-corruption behaviors than do their male counterparts, while the same gender heterogeneities in the behaviors are either not significant or smaller in terms of effect size in the environments without this pay gap. We conclude with a discussion on the implications of the findings for academic research and managerial practice.
