Yes / Drawing on collective contributions and group performance perspectives, this paper examines the role of board diversity in firms’ R&D investment decisions. Building on a fault-line argument about a team’s demographic attributes, this study also decomposes the impact of demographic and cognitive diversity on R&D spending. The study sample contains UK data of non-financial companies covering the period between 2005 and 2018. We employ panel data analysis techniques and control for potential endogeneity issues through the application of the two-step system Generalised Method of Moments (GMM) estimations. The findings demonstrate a positive and significant relationship between board diversity and level of corporate R&D spending. The findings also show cognitive diversity as significantly positively associated with corporate R&D investments. Demographic diversity, however, has an insignificant relationship with corporate spending on R&D. The results further show that demographic diversity negatively moderates the relationship between cognitive diversity and spending on R&D. Our main findings document that the board’s attributes as a group significantly influence decisions of strategic importance such as, investment in R&D projects. The findings on sub-dimensions of board diversity imply that as compared to demographic diversity, functional/cognitive diversity is more relevant to strategic decisions and related outcomes. The study has practical implications for shareholders in documenting the importance of board diversity, and policy implications for regulators in highlighting the separate roles of behavioural and cognitive diversity in shaping firms’ strategic investment decisions.

Drawing on the notion of faultlines – a hypothetical dividing line that splits a group into two or more subgroups based on the alignment of one or more individual attributes – this thesis proposes a new approach to the measurement and assessment of board diversity to understand how high(er) performing boards can be built i.e., the multi-dimensional diversity index (MDI). The proposed MDI captures the joint effect of differences in director attributes at four diversity levels for 26,743 directors, namely: (i) surface (or baseline); (ii) identity; (iii) demographic; and (iv) meso-level. The current study uses three-stage least squares (3SLS) with a panel of 3,357 FTSE All-Share index non-financial companies from 2005 to 2018. To this end, a key implication of this study – and by extension, the proposed MDI – is that it challenges the conventional notion that boards are improved ‘enough’ by focusing on the micro-dimension and increasing stand-alone diversity attributes, such as gender. Collectively, this study’s results suggest that a well-diversified board incentivises managers to disclose more information on social and environmental activities in contrast to firms with an extreme faultline score. The results show that highly effective boards with a moderate faultline score at meso-level diversity (e.g., identity, information, and non-demographic attributes) lead to better accounting profitability, corporate value, and market-based performance. Remarkably, the present study finds that nationality diversity per se positively impacts corporate performance; in contrast, the dominance of male directors hinders firm performance significantly.