Bobby interviews Jane G. Meyer and Megan Elizabeth Gilbert, the author and illustrator, respectively, behind the new AFP children’s book When God Made You.

Bobby Maddex interviews Joseph Letendre, the author of the new AFP book When You Pray: A Practical Guide to an Orthodox Life of Prayer.

The world watched in disbelief as the Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris burned. But why should it matter? Fr. Andrew Damick has an answer.

By considering the ancestors of Jesus found in Matthew 1, we can discern qualities of the Divine Initiative in our lives. Fr. Pat looks at three of these.

A meditation on Thanksgiving from Fr. Pat, given in 2008.

Being a Christian and living the Gospel isn't always easy; in fact, it's usually challenging. Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., experienced that as he fought for justice. So did Archbishop Iakovos when, despite opposition, he chose to stand with Reverend King in Selma. Fifty years after the Selma marches, let's look ahead to how we can live with the same spirit of courage and love.

Kevin Allen's guest is Fr. Barnabas Powell, a former Pentecostal pastor and now an Orthodox priest. On this show, they take questions on doubts and struggles in our faith. What do we do when our faith wavers?

When the Lord calls you—respond quickly and fully—He might not ask you again! Live the faith to the full, attach yourself to Christ and become a fisher of men.

Twenty years since he became the US Open boys' champion, Andy Murray is giving New York a miss and beginning retired life with a holiday in Spain.

There are 3 things you need to accomplish your goals: (1) a clear goal; (2) a winning action plan; and (3) consistency. For things where you are just getting started, you may not yet know what your winning action plan is. When this is the case you need the right blend of iteration and feedback […]

★

Ahead of Friday's autumn Test, former Ireland wing Andrew Trimble looks back on the team's historic win over the All Blacks in Chicago in 2016.

Watch Viktor Gyokeres score the only goal of his loan spell at Swansea City in a 2-0 FA Cup win against Stevenage in January 2021.

Its hands haven't moved for several months.

I’ve been researching the distributor space lately and watching with interest as more pop up and margins get squeezed. It’s got to a place now where you can actually distribute music for free. But what else should you be looking for other than a pipeline? I’ve spoken to a lot of artists and record labels...

Read More

Spruce up on your arboreal knowhow.

By now, you may already be aware of Ashton Kutcher's campaign against the Village Voice, sparked by an article critical of the substance and message of his anti-trafficking adverts. The Voice has form on this one: their earlier article about dodgy stats that get bandied about in the trafficking discussion is a must-read.

The usual disclaimer... I am (as indeed all of Kutcher's critics are) opposed to trafficking in any form, including child sex trafficking. But we must not let emotion exclusively carry the day; it achieves nothing. The Voice hits the nail on the head when they sum up anti-trafficking efforts: "an emotional reaction, based on good intentions, but grounded in bogus information."

The problem of bogus information is this - campaigns such as Kutcher's conflate all sex work with child sex trafficking, and child sex trafficking with all trafficking. Approaches that do so not only encourage criminalisation legislation that harms consenting adults, but also obscures the real victims. How? By using vastly inflated numbers for one kind of trafficking, and pretty much ignoring everything else. Actual children being actually trafficked for actual sex are rarely, if ever, found by the kind of scatterhsot brothel raids and streetwalker crackdowns so many seem to consider "succeses" in the anti-trafficking effort.

Please, please stop kidding yourselves. The raids you hear about are not successes. They are vast wastes of time, money, and manpower. And many groups receiving funding meant to help victims of trafficking seem instead to be lining their own pockets. There is undoubtedly work to be done eliminating trafficking of men and women for any kind of labour. It almost certainly isn't the approach anti-traffickers think will work.

Kutcher’s response against the Village Voice has included tweeting advertisers on Backpage.com, accusing them of supporting slavery. So far, so "concerned". And then this tweet:

Like a lot of people, Ashton Kutcher seems to have some pretty confused ideas about sex work. To be in a position of wanting to help people, yet still falling back on ridicule and stereotype when talking about them, is inexcusable. Someone who says,

"I’ve spent the last 2 years meeting with every expert on the issue of Human Trafficking that I can find, reading countless books, meeting with victims and former traffickers, and studying effective international models to combat trafficking."

Maybe Ashton should have made time for a little bit of victim sensitivity training in there somewhere? (Not that he's known for politically correct tweeting, mind. He seems to channel the spirit of Littlejohn every now and again.)

Kutcher's response has been strongly supported by the Family Research Council who are regarded by many as a hate group. The FRC is one of the main contributors to the Witherspoon Institute’s “research” on pornography that conflates the adult industry with trafficking. That report contained significant input from Patrick Fagan of The Heritage Foundation – you know, those people whose work inspired Reagan’s covert Cold War military actions.

The Witherspoon report encourages celebrities to “use the bully pulpit” and abuses suspiciously similar dodgy statistics as Kutcher’s campaign. And while it doesn't name particular celebrities to be promoted as faces of such bullying, a similar document from Abt Associates does - it specifically names Kutcher's wife, Demi Moore.

I know a little about what it's like to be asked to comment on issues you don't necessarily have expertise in. Sometimes, journalists and television shows approach people like me to provide commentary rather than, say, academics in the relevant fields. It's unfortunate but it's a fact of media life. And I do try, by following academic discussions and talking with friends who are professionals in, say, sex education or the porn industry, to at least not come off as too much of an ignorant tit. I would shudder in horror, though, to ever be described as a "leading player" in the debate around trafficking or related issues. Something that Kutcher and his wife Moore seem to have no problem with. The strategy clearly works, with significant numbers of Kutcher's followers joining in his Twitter tirade, and the man himself being promoted as somehow more of an expert on the issues than, ya know, actual experts.

Not bad for a guy whose credentials, according to his Twitter profile, are: "I make stuff up."

The Voice article pointed out that it's not known how many of the millions, if any, raised by Demi Moore and Ashton Kutcher's campaign have actually gone to helping victims directly. With their charity having only been launched 5 months ago, and apparently no financial reports as yet available, it's hard to know when that pointed question will be resolved. I'd like to add another dimension to that question: how many of the millions raised by Demi Moore and Ashton Kutcher could be coming from groups such as the Family Research Council?

The well-meaning Twitter fans following Kutcher's lead probably don't realise they're being taken for a ride on the facts front. It can actually be very hard to sort the real from the fake when people keep repeating made-up stuff as true. So I guess my question now is, why are Kutcher’s millions of fans seemingly totally okay with this movement's possible links to the far-right hawkish Christian lobbyists? And when will the likes of Kutcher and Moore realise they're the ones being used, not by evil evil sex traffickers, but by conservative groups with a frightening agenda?

You may already be aware of the recent prostitution consultation in Ireland, which closed at the end of August. At the forefront of campaigning was 'prostitution and trafficking NGO' Ruhama, which produced their own submission to the process (a submission that was, incidentally, highly reliant on numbers created by Melissa Farley, whose testimony on similar issues has already been deemed not good enough for Canadian court).

Data aside, however, it is worth asking the question of who Ruhama actually are. It would seem they have form on wanting to "save" fallen women, for according to the Irish Times Ruhama is run by two of the orders involved in running the infamous Magdalene Laundries. (Here is their list of trustees and directors.) The Magdalene Laundries were institutions where women and girls were separated from their families, subjected to slave labour, mentally and physically tortured. Some even died unrecorded in their care.

Even decades after the worst of the Magdalene abuses, the scandal is still ongoing: a recent submission to the committee investigating the laundries includes some shocking facts.

JFM describes from testimony how the women suffered abuse of various kinds — their hair was forcibly cut, they were beaten with belts until they bled and once the door to the outside world was shut on them, they were referred to by number not by name ...

...the State used the laundries as a way of dealing with births outside marriage, poverty, homelessness, promiscuity, domestic and sexual abuse as well as youth crime and infanticide. It chose to enslave women with the nuns rather than develop a female borstal.

"It repeatedly sought to funnel diverse populations of women and girls to the Magdalene Laundries and in return, the religious orders obtained an entirely unpaid and literally captive workforce for their commercial laundry enterprises," they wrote.

Survivors and witnesses told JFM how the women washed, ironed and sewed from dawn to dusk, were regularly beaten, not allowed to talk to one another and punished if they laughed. There was no regard whatsoever for their health or medical needs. If they stepped out of line, they were "put down the hole".

"This was a four by four room… There was nothing in it, only a bench — no windows. You were put in there; your hair was cut, more or less off completely. Your hair was cut, and you were there all day without anything to eat," one woman recalled.

Before you start imagining this is a tale from some sepia-tinted past, know that the last Magdalene laundry did not close until 1996. I have heard from people by email and Twitter about women being institutionalised in the 1970s. It is also interesting to read the Wikipedia talk page on the subject. The fallout from the fates of the estimated 30,000 women in Ireland subjected to this "help" is still a real wound. This all continued to happen well into living memory.

Now I do not doubt there will be people who say, well yes, but this was a different generation and things have changed. Have they? Have they really? Who has been held to account for the systematic abuse of thousands of women and girls with the tacit approval of the Church and the government?

Jane Fae over at Huffington Post makes an excellent point that in the Hillsborough tragedy, when we consider the scale of denial and coverup, simply saying 'it was a different generation' is not good enough.

Well the Magdalene Laundries were scandal on a scale far greater than the HIllsborough tragedy, for many more years. So I think the same arguments hold. The people who did this should not be in any way involved with women and young people, ever. Could you imagine if the South Yorkshire police branched out and started a private security firm specifically for football matches? They'd be laughed and shamed out of town. Carry that thinking through: we should be laughing and shaming Ruhama far, far away from anything to do with the welfare of vulnerable women and children.

We still do not know the truth about what happened in the Laundries, nor who exactly was responsible, how many families it affected. To even consider letting Ruhama be involved with the prostitution consultation, much less any policymaking or aid, should be scandalous.

And yet it somehow is not. Anyone wish to explain exactly why?

 

(mega hat tip to Wendy Lyon and FeministIre for bringing this to my attention in 2010.)

TW for graphic description of violence against women inside.
 
You may already be aware of the recent prostitution consultation in Ireland, which closed at the end of August, and the Justice Committee hearings which are going on now. At the forefront of campaigning was 'prostitution and trafficking NGO' Ruhama, which produced their own submission to the process (a submission that was, incidentally, highly reliant on numbers created by Melissa Farley, whose testimony on similar issues has already been deemed not good enough for Canadian court).

Data aside, however, it is worth asking the question of who Ruhama actually are. It would seem they have form on wanting to "save" fallen women, for according to the Irish Times Ruhama is run by two of the orders involved in running the infamous Magdalene Laundries. (Here is their list of trustees and directors.) The Magdalene Laundries were institutions where women and girls were separated from their families, subjected to slave labour, mentally and physically tortured. Many women died there.


A mass grave in Limerick - victims of the Good Shepherd Sisters, one of the orders that co-founded Ruhama. Photo via and copyright Bocktherobber.com

Even decades after the worst of the Magdalene abuses, the scandal is still ongoing: a recent submission to the committee investigating the laundries includes some shocking facts.

JFM describes from testimony how the women suffered abuse of various kinds — their hair was forcibly cut, they were beaten with belts until they bled and once the door to the outside world was shut on them, they were referred to by number not by name ...
...the State used the laundries as a way of dealing with births outside marriage, poverty, homelessness, promiscuity, domestic and sexual abuse as well as youth crime and infanticide. It chose to enslave women with the nuns rather than develop a female borstal. 

"It repeatedly sought to funnel diverse populations of women and girls to the Magdalene Laundries. In return, the religious orders ensured a captive workforce for their commercial laundry enterprises," they wrote.

Survivors and witnesses told JFM how the women washed, ironed and sewed from dawn to dusk, were regularly beaten, not allowed to talk to one another and punished if they laughed. There was no regard whatsoever for their health or medical needs. If they stepped out of line, they were "put down the hole".

"This was a four by four room… There was nothing in it, only a bench — no windows. You were put in there; your hair was cut, more or less off completely. Your hair was cut, and you were there all day without anything to eat," one woman recalled.

Before you start imagining this is a tale from some sepia-tinted past, know that the last Magdalene laundry did not close until 1996. I have heard from people by email and Twitter about women being institutionalised in the 1970s. It is also interesting to read the Wikipedia talk page on the subject. The fallout from the fates of the estimated 30,000 women in Ireland subjected to this "help" is still a real wound. This all continued to happen well into living memory.


Just one of the memorial stones commemorating the women from the mass grave in Limerick. Photo via and copyright Bocktherobber.com

Now I do not doubt there will be people who say, well yes, but this was a different generation and things have changed. Have they? Have they really? Who has been held to account for the systematic abuse of thousands of women and girls with the tacit approval of the Church and the government?

Jane Fae over at Huffington Post makes an excellent point that in the Hillsborough tragedy, when we consider the scale of denial and coverup, simply saying 'it was a different generation' is not good enough.

Well the Magdalene Laundries were scandal on a scale far greater than the Hillsborough tragedy, for many more years. So I think the same arguments hold. The people who did this should not be in any way involved with women and young people, ever. Could you imagine if the South Yorkshire police branched out and started a private security firm specifically for football matches? They'd be laughed and shamed out of town. Carry that thinking through: we should be laughing and shaming Ruhama far, far away from anything to do with the welfare of vulnerable women and children.

We still do not know the truth about what happened in the Laundries, nor who exactly was responsible, how many families it affected. To even consider letting Ruhama be involved with the prostitution consultation, much less any policymaking or aid, should be scandalous.

And yet it somehow is not. Anyone wish to explain exactly why?


(mega hat tip to Wendy Lyon and FeministIre for bringing this to my attention in 2010.)

Liam Lawson is unhappy the British national anthem is played when McLaren win. But would the New Zealand anthem really be more correct?

Alpine have officially announced they will use Mercedes power units when Formula 1 introduces its new engine regulations in 2026.

Michigan Rising Action’s Abby Mitch on holding elected officials accountable

Many dilemmas of style arise when translating legislation into English. This post looks at the most common ones and solutions to them. By legislation I mean any laws or rules set down by a governing body, be that of a country, company or university. So everything from a criminal code to a health and safety […]

Translating the legislation or regulations of a country, company or university into English requires certain skills and know-how. This post lists five things your translator should know when translating legislation into English. 1. How to apply English drafting conventions Conventions on headings, numbering, referencing and capitalisation differ from one legal language to another. For instance, […]

Aim/Purpose: The present study investigated and compared students’ attention in terms of time-on-task and number of distractors between using a touchscreen and a pen tablet in mathematical problem-solving activities with virtual manipulatives. Background: Although there is an increasing use of these input devices in educational practice, little research has focused on assessing student attention while using touchscreens or pen tablets in a mathematics classroom. Methodology: A qualitative exploration was conducted in a public elementary school in New Taipei, Taiwan. Six fifth-grade students participated in the activities. Video recordings of the activities and the students’ actions were analyzed. Findings: The results showed that students in the activity using touchscreens maintained greater attention and, thus, had more time-on-task and fewer distractors than those in the activity using pen tablets. Recommendations for Practitioners: School teachers could employ touchscreens in mathematics classrooms to support activities that focus on students’ manipulations in relation to the attention paid to the learning content. Recommendation for Researchers: The findings enhance our understanding of the input devices used in educational practice and provide a basis for further research. Impact on Society: The findings may also shed light on the human-technology interaction process involved in using pen and touch technology conditions. Future Research: Activities similar to those reported here should be conducted using more participants. In addition, it is important to understand how students with different levels of mathematics achievement use the devices in the activities.

Bright Lights has a history of success, but is at a pivotal point, facing the pains of strategic change. One salesperson has found a way to maintain sales and increase profit margin, but it requires operating between the lines of ethical boundaries. Ethics provides a choice between right and right as opposed to moral temptation of right and wrong (Kidder, 1996). As the case unfolds, Jim receives a mandate of which customers he can call on, reducing sales, profit margin, and customer satisfaction. A top performer, Jim finds a solution within company policy and the law, but although not hidden, is not entirely transparent. This creates two ethical decisions: 1) Should he be reprimanded or praised? 2) Should the company update policies to ban his actions, or promote his actions among other salespeople? This case clearly strikes the dilemma found in navigating the boundaries of a questionable business strategy.

The transition from printed to electronic sources of information has resulted in a profound change to the way procurement officers seek information. Furthermore, in the past decade there have been additional technological revolutions that are expected to further affect the procurement process. In this paper, we conduct a survey among forty nine university procurement officers in Israel to examine to what extent procurement officers have adapted to smartphones and tablets by testing how frequently officers use notebooks, smartphones, and tablets for work-related and leisure purposes. We find that while officers prefer electronic sources of information over printed sources of information, officers have not yet adapted to the later technological advances (i.e., smartphones and tablets). Notebooks are more frequently used than either smartphones or tablets for work-related and leisure purposes. One explanation behind this result is that officers are not skilled in using smartphone and tablets applications. This implies that training officers in the use of these devices may improve their performance.

In recent years, schools (as well as universities) have added cyber security to their computer science curricula. This topic is still new for most of the current teachers, who would normally have a standard computer science background. Therefore the teachers are trained and then teaching their students what they have just learned. In order to explore differences in both populations’ learning, we compared measures of software quality and security between high-school teachers and students. We collected 109 source files, written in Python by 18 teachers and 31 students, and engineered 32 features, based on common standards for software quality (PEP 8) and security (derived from CERT Secure Coding Standards). We use a multi-view, data-driven approach, by (a) using hierarchical clustering to bottom-up partition the population into groups based on their code-related features and (b) building a decision tree model that predicts whether a student or a teacher wrote a given code (resulting with a LOOCV kappa of 0.751). Overall, our findings suggest that the teachers’ codes have a better quality than the students’ – with a sub-group of the teachers, mostly males, demonstrate better coding than their peers and the students – and that the students’ codes are slightly better secured than the teachers’ codes (although both populations show very low security levels). The findings imply that teachers might benefit from their prior knowledge and experience, but also emphasize the lack of continuous involvement of some of the teachers with code-writing. Therefore, findings shed light on computer science teachers as lifelong learners. Findings also highlight the difference between quality and security in today’s programming paradigms. Implications for these findings are discussed.

Aim/Purpose: This paper describes an empirical examination of how users’ willingness to disclose personal data is influenced by the amount of information provided on landing pages – standalone web pages created explicitly for marketing or advertising campaigns. Background: Provision of information is a central construct in the IS discipline. Content is a term commonly used to describe the information made available by a website or other electronic medium. A pertinent debate among scholars and practitioners relate to the behavioral impact of content volume: Specifically, does a greater amount of information elicit engagement and compliance, or the other way around? Methodology: A series of large-scale web experiments (n= 535 and n= 27,900) were conducted employing a between-subjects design and A/B testing. Two variants of landing pages, long and short, were created based on relevant behavioral theories. Both variants included an identical form to collect users’ information, but different amounts of provided content. User traffic was generated using Google AdWords and randomized between the page using Unbounce.com. Relevant usage metrics, such as response rate (called “conversion rate”), location, and visit time were recorded. Contribution: This research contributes to the body of knowledge on information provision and its effectiveness and carries practical and theoretical implications to practitioners and scholars in Information Systems, Informing Science, Communications, Digital Marketing, and related fields. Findings: Analyses of results show that the shorter landing pages had significantly higher conversion rates across all locations and times. Findings demonstrate a negative correlation between the content amount and consumer behavior, suggesting that users who had less information were more inclined to provide their data. Recommendations for Practitioners: At a practical level, results can empirically support business practices, design considerations, and content strategy by informing practitioners on the role of content in online commerce. Recommendation for Researchers: Findings suggest that the amount of content plays a significant role in online decision making and effective informing. They also contradict prior research on trust, persuasion, and security. This study advances research on the paradoxical relationship between the increased level of information and online decision-making and indicates that contrary to earlier work, not all persuasion theories‎ are ‎effective online. Impact on Society: Understanding how information drives behavior has implications in many domains (civic engagement, health, education, and more). This has relevance to system design and public communication in both online and offline contexts. Future Research: Using this research as a starting point, future research can examine the impact of content in other contexts, as well as other behavioral drivers (such as demographic data). This can lead to theoretical, methodological, and practical recommendations.

Aim/Purpose: Parasocial relationships are today established on social media between influencers and their followers. While marketing effects are well-researched, little is known about the meaning of such relationships and the psychological mechanisms behind them. This study, therefore, explores the questions: “How do followers on Instagram interpret explicit fiction cues from influencers?” and “What does this reveal about the meaning of parasocial attachment?” Background: With a billion-dollar advertising industry and leading in influencing opinion, Instagram is a significant societal and economic player. One factor for the effective influence of consumers is the relationship between influencer and follower. Research shows that disclosing advertisements surprisingly does not harm credibility, and sometimes even leads to greater trustworthiness and, in turn, willingness to purchase. While such reverse dynamics are measurable, the mechanisms behind them remain largely unexplored. Methodology: The study follows an explorative approach with in-depth interviews, which are analyzed with Mayring’s content analysis under a reconstructive paradigm. The findings are discussed through the lens of critical psychology. Contribution: Firstly, this study contributes to the understanding of the communicative dynamics of influencer-follower communication alongside the reality-fiction-gap model, and, secondly, it contributes empirical insights through the analysis of 22 explorative interviews. Findings: The findings show (a) how followers rationalize fiction cues and justify compulsive decision-making, (b) how followers are vulnerable to influences, and (c) how parasocial attachment formation overshadows rational logic and agency. The findings are discussed with regard to mechanisms, vulnerabilities, rationalizations and cognitive bias, and the social self, as well as the ethics of influencer marketing and politics. Recommendation for Researchers: The contribution is relevant to relationship research, group dynamics and societal organizing, well-being, identity, and health perspectives, within psychology, sociology, media studies, and pedagogy to management. Future Research: Future research might seek to understand more about (a) quantifiable vulnerabilities, such as attachment styles, dispositions, and demographics, (b) usage patterns and possible factors of prevention, (c) cognitive and emotional mechanisms involved with larger samples, (d) the impact on relationships and well-being, and (e) possible conditions for the potential of parasocial attachment.

Drawing on human capital theory, strategy scholars have emphasized firm-specific human capital as a source of sustained competitive advantage. In this study, we begin to unpack the micro-foundations of firm-specific human capital by theoretically and empirically exploring when employees perceive their skills to be firm-specific. We first develop theoretical arguments and hypotheses based on the extant strategy literature, which implicitly assumes information efficiency and unbiased perceptions of firm-specificity. We then relax these assumptions and develop alternative hypotheses rooted in the cognitive psychology literature, which highlights biases in human judgment. We test our hypotheses using two data sources from Korea and the United States. Surprisingly, our results support the hypotheses based on cognitive bias - a stark contrast to the expectations embedded within the strategy literature. Specifically, we find organizational commitment and, to some extent, tenure are negatively related to employee perceptions of the firm-specificity. We also find that employer provided on-the-job training was unrelated to perceived firm-specificity. These findings suggest that firm-specific human capital, as perceived by employees, may drive behavior in ways not anticipated by existing theory - for example, with respect to investments in skills or turnover decisions. This, in turn, may challenge the assumed relationship between firm-specific human capital and sustained competitive advantage. More broadly, our findings may suggest a need to reconsider other theories, such as transaction cost economics, that draw heavily on the notion of firm-specificity and implicitly assume widely shared and unbiased perceptions.

Accumulated knowledge on organizational justice leaves little reason to doubt the notion that organizational members benefit when leaders adhere to interpersonal justice rules. However, upon considering how justice behaviors influence subordinates' cognitive processes, we predict that interpersonal justice has a surprising, unintended negative consequence. Supervisors who violate interpersonal justice rules trigger subordinates to search for reasons why their supervisors are threatening them, causing subordinates to be more attuned to supervisors' individual characteristics and therefore unlikely to use stereotypes when evaluating them. In contrast, supervisors who adhere to interpersonal justice rules allow subordinates to divert attention away from them, leading subordinates' judgments of their supervisors to be influenced by stereotypes. Consistent with these predictions, in a survey we found that minority supervisors faced bias relative to Caucasian supervisors when supervisors adhered to—but not when they violated—interpersonal justice rules. We replicated this effect in an experiment and established that it is explained by an alternating pattern of stereotype activation and inhibition: participants viewed minority supervisors to be more deceitful than Caucasians when supervisors adhered to—but not when they violated—interpersonal justice rules. We then conducted exploratory analyses and identified one factor (unit size) that mitigates this troubling pattern.

How does the presence of domain experts on a corporate board—directors whose primary professional experience is within the focal firm's industry—affect organizational outcomes? We argue that under conditions of significant decision uncertainty, a higher proportion of domain experts on a board may detract from effective decision making and thus increase the probability of organizational failure. Building on exploratory interviews with board members and CEOs, we derive hypotheses from this argument in the context of local banks in the United States. We predict that the greater the level of decision uncertainty—due to rapid asset growth or operation in less predictable markets—the stronger the relationship between the proportion of banking expert directors and the probability of bank failure. Longitudinal analyses of 1,307 banks between 1996 and 2012 support this prediction, even after accounting for both the overall level of professional diversity among directors and banks' different propensities to have an expert-heavy board. We discuss implications for the key dimensions of board composition, the conditions under which the professional background of directors is more or less consequential, and the mechanisms whereby board composition affects organizational outcomes.

Agency theory-grounded research on boards of directors and firm legitimacy has historically viewed CEO power as de-legitimating, often taking this fact for granted in theorizing about external assessors' evaluations of a firm. With few exceptions, this literature has focused exclusively on capital market participants (e.g., investors, securities analysts) as the arbiters of a firm's legitimacy and has accordingly assumed that legitimate governance arrangements are those derived from the shareholder-oriented prescriptions of agency theory. We extend this line of research in new ways by arguing that customers also externally assess firm legitimacy, and that firms potentially adjust their governance characteristics to meet customers' norms and expectations. We argue that the cultural-cognitive institutions prevalent in customers' home countries influence their judgments regarding a firm's legitimacy, such that firms competing heavily in high-power distance cultures are more likely to have powerful CEOs, with CEO power a source of legitimacy—rather than illegitimacy—among customers. We also argue that the more dependent a firm is on its customers and the more salient cultural power distance is as a demand-side institutional norm, the greater this relationship will be. Data from 151 U.S. semiconductor and pharmaceutical firms over a 10-year period generally support our predictions.