University of Economics, Prague Faculty of Business Administration
Master's thesis evaluation by the supervisor
Title of the Master's thesis:
Author of the Master's thesis:
Objectives of the Master's thesis:
Criteria (max. 10 points per category) Points awarded
1. The objectives of the thesis are evident and accomplished 7
2. Demands on the acquisition of additional knowledge or skills 7
3. Adequacy and the way of the methods used 6
4. Depth and relevance of the analysis in relation to objectives 5
5. Making use of literature/other resources, citing 7
6. The thesis is a well-organised logical whole 7
7. Linguistic and terminological level 6
8. Formal layout and requirements, extent 4
9. Originality, i.e. it is produced by the student 6
10. Practical/theoretical relevance/applicability 5
Total score in points (max 100) 60
Final grading Good (3)
Overall evaluation and questions to be answered in the course of the defense:
Name of the Master's thesis supervisor:
Occupation of the Master's thesis supervisor:
January 26, 2022
Signature of the Master's thesis supervisor
First of all, I must reiterate that the author again failed to communicate and submitted the thesis without my prior knowledge. However, the author has improved the second version in several aspects. He added 24 pages of text to mainly supplement the originally very weak teoretical part. He changed the strong tone of the theoretical part, which now emphasises different perspectives on the impact of gender quotas. It involved rewriting a significant part of the literature review. The empirical part is of a decent standard considering that the student did not consult with the supervisor about the methodology. In this version, the author has elaborated on the data collection and variables. On the other hand, there may be concerns about the analysis robustness (e.g. logarithmization of variables in the current version and inadequate descriptive information, conclusions about the statistical significance of the female-male ratio on ROA in the construction industry).
The length of the thesis is short (50 standard pages without references), but I have to say that this tends to be more common in quantitative studies than in other types. On the other hand, more than 150 references is close to a doctoral thesis. Formal aspect has occasional shortcomings. In conclusion, the thesis is borderline defensible. As part of the defence, the author should clearly explain the improvement over the original work and answer the following questions
Q: 1) Since the author examines a board of directors, I would expect the theoretical part to build on corporate governance theories. Could the author argue an alternative view of agency vs stewardship theories on the impact of women's
involvement? 2) It is not clear in the data collection whether the same 300 companies are involved in both years. What would be the implications of such a case? 3) Could the author explain the discrepancy in Table 10 between CI and p-value for FeRatio? 4) How does the author explain the reduction in average board size?
Aleš Kubíček, PhD.
Prague University of Economics and Business
How Gender Equality Mandatory and Non-mandatory regulations affect financial performance of firms?
Vu Tuan Phan
To test the effect of female’s ratio on board on financial performance of French companies before and after the gender quota.
E V A L U A T I O N O F T H E M A S T E R ' S T H E S I S
