IITrueorFalse.WomenareworsethanmenatturningnetworkstotheiradvantageINTHErarefiedworldofthecorporateboard,agoodnetworkmatters.Recruitmentofteninvolvesword-of-mouthrecommendations:gettingonashortlistiseasierifyouhavetherightconnections.Newresearchsuggestsmenusecontactsbetterthanwomen.MarieLalanneandPaulSeabrightoftheToulouseSchoolofEconomicsmeasuretheeffectofanetworkonremunerationusingadatabaseofboardmembersinEuropeandAmerica.Theyfindthatifyouweretocomparetwoexecutivedirectors,identicalineverywayexceptthatonehad200ex-colleaguesnowsittingonboardsandtheother400,thelatter,onaverage,wouldbepaid6%more.Fornon-executivesthegapis14%.Thereallyjuicyfindingconcernsthedifferencebetweenthesexes.Amongexecutive-boardmembers,womenearn17%lessthantheirmalecounterparts.Thereareplentyofplausibleexplanationsforthisdisparity,frominterruptionstowomen’scareerstoold-fashioneddiscrimination.Buttheauthorsfindthatthispaygapcanbefullyexplainedbytheeffectofexecutives’networks.Mencanleveragealargenetworkintomoreseniorpositionsoraseatonamorelucrativeboard;womendon’tseemtobeableto.Womencouldjusthaveweakerconnectionswithmembersoftheirnetworks.“Womenseemmoreinclinedtobuildandrelyononlyafewstrongrelationships,”saysMrSeabright.Menarebetteratdevelopingpassingacquaintancesintoanetwork,andbetteratmaintainingahighpersonalprofilethroughthesecontacts.Womenmay,ofcourse,alsobehurtbytheexistingdominanceofmenonboardsandamalepreferenceforfillingexecutivepositionswithothermen.Butatendencytothinkofothermenfirstwillbeamplifiediftalentedwomendon’tstayontheradar.Interestingly,thereisonlyamarginalpaydifferencebetweenmenandwomenwhenitcomestonon-executivedirectors,andnodifferenceintheeffectivenessoftheirnetworks.Itispossiblethatthisreflectspressurefor“genderquotas”oncorporateboards.Womenareabletofindtheirwayontoshortlistsforlower-paid,non-executivepositions.Butthat’snotwheretherealpowerlies.1.Bystudyingtheimpactofsocialconnectionsonpay,theyfoundthatmenincomparablepositionswerepaid17%morethanwomeninnon-executives.