If the debate over climate change is closed, why is John Coleman, the founder of the Weather Channel, still trying to prove it’s all a scam?

Well over a quarter-million weathercasts-that’s the ballpark figure the 74-year-old founding father of the Weather Channel guesses he’s probably performed in his 55 years in the business. Today, as for the past 15 years, he’s chalked up another weathercast like it’s his job, because it is. This, he tells me, is the best time of his career.Which seems odd, because in the past few years, he’s admittedly become mad as hell. Coleman is angry because he believes we have been brainwashed into thinking we’re ruining our own planet. He wants to let us off the hook, and give us some good news for a change, because, you see, John Coleman says that climate change is a scam.If you consume mainstream media, odds are you’re not hearing much debate about climate change these days. We’re told the debate is effectively over. Scientists say so, too. It’s our consumption that continues to ruin our planet’s environmental health, so there’s no longer time to debate-it’s time to act. Every time we do anything, like flip on a light switch or charge an iPod or turn on the A/C, we’re contributing to the release of greenhouse gases, and so the oceans rise and that’s a problem for the polar bears and, well, you know-something like that. It may be difficult to explain, but we know the state of the environment is bad. Most recently, in fact, we were told that the effects of man-made climate change are all but irreversible.

John Coleman has dedicated his life to studying weather and the science that creates it-so shouldn’t we at least hear him out?

So, yes, the debate is over. And yet for some reason, somewhere outside the fray, the weather sage John Coleman decided it shouldn’t be. That we’d been hoodwinked. That it was still worth talking about. So a year and a half ago, determined he’d heard enough of the noise and the Al Gore and the polar bears, he threw his voice into the conversation.When Coleman posted his first climate change brief online, he was surprised by the attention it got. “I thought I was the only one,” he says. “I started finding that there were plenty of people out there, it’s just that the media was ignoring them and the place to find them was on these little corners of the internet.” In May, 2008, an organization called the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine released a petition at the National Press Club, with the signatures of 31,000 scientists rejecting the U.N. consensus of man-made climate change. Nine thousand of the names reportedly belong to Ph.Ds.Encouraged, he delivered a speech last March at the International Conference on Climate Change in New York where he said that Al Gore and others selling carbon credits should be sued for fraud. His hope, he said, was that the publicity from such a suit would potentially debunk climate change in a court room instead of waiting for the media to do its supposed due diligence.So is he a crank-Willard Scott with an agenda that goes beyond hooky old-school weatherman shtick? Coleman’s life has been dedicated to studying and presenting weather and the science that creates it-so shouldn’t we at least hear him out? He thinks we should, and he has supporters. He says the science we’ve digested is erroneous.


Coleman’s still got a steady gig, and he doesn’t feel he personally has much to lose in allowing himself to be one of the most prominent climate-change naysayers. He’s already lost his baby-the Weather Channel-and, he says, TWC is a perpetrator of the scam along with all the other mainstream media organizations. Coleman doesn’t like what his baby has grown into. When I ask him about the current product, he doesn’t skip a beat. “Everything. The Weather Channel is terrible. Pathetic.”Long estranged from the Weather Channel, Coleman has been living out his golden years and serving up sunny local weather for KUSI in San Diego, California, what he refers to as his “retirement job,” since 1994. San Diego wasn’t on Coleman’s radar after his ousting from TWC. First, he tried New York for about a year, then back to Chicago for a few years. Then, when things dried up in Chicago, in 1993, he looked around and, he says, nobody wanted him, so he wound up in the desert–Palm Springs. “No station in the world wants an old, has-been weatherman in his fifties,” he says. Coleman was 56 at the time. “Old’s a curse.” Coleman spent less than a year in Palm Springs–he’s been getting older in San Diego ever since.Coleman says being in San Diego is “like living in heaven without dying.” In San Diego you’ve got your occasional Santa Anas, a little El Niño and La Niña, some night and morning low cloud patterns, but most of the time you’ve just got sunshine and the breeze. The weather in San Diego itself is why Coleman’s KUSI website bio begins with the quote: “Being a TV weatherman in San Diego is an outrageous scam.” The bio, incidentally, was written well before John Coleman made a few headlines, calling climate change warming a scam.

Coleman saw An Inconvenient Truth on DVD and he says he made it all the way through, but “not without screaming.”

Among other things, it took drowning polar bears and the internet to get John Coleman firing on all cylinders. “Gradually there’s this build-up, this hysteria about global warming,” he says. “The Al Gore book comes out. The Al Gore movie comes out and starts winning awards. The U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change gets headline news status and starts issuing its predictions. The media is clamoring aboard and the next thing I know, it’s headline news every day, everywhere. And I’ve been studying it, reading stuff, and looking at it, and can’t figure out what the heck they’re talking about.”What “they” are talking about, and we have heard much about is that climate change is one of greatest challenges we face in our lifetime and that humankind is generally fucking up everything imaginable involving air, water, and land. John Coleman says it’s perpetrated by the media who loves it some Gore. “You’ve got Al Gore. You’ve got the environmentalists. And then all the networks come aboard, because they love gloom and doom, the-end-is-near,” he says. “From Y2K to killer bees-God, give us something to tell people their lives are coming to an end-cancer scare, HIV, whatever we’ve got-let’s go, Man, scare the hell out of people,” he says. “This is awful. Shame on them, scaring people. That’s deplorable.”According to Coleman, the media is biased and sloppy and perpetuates the climate change myth. “Has Larry King called me? Oh no. Has 60 Minutes been interested in our side of the story? Oh no. 20/20? Oh no.” Coleman continues: “I’ve been totally ignored by ABC, NBC, CBS-put down by CNN.” He has been interviewed by FOX News and also by Glenn Beck, who, he says, “used me as part of his rant.”Coleman saw An Inconvenient Truth on DVD and he says he made it all the way through, but “not without screaming.” Gore’s film won two Oscars-one for best documentary-and in October, 2007, Gore and the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change won the Nobel Peace Prize. (“I have a friend who calls the Nobel Peace Prize the Liberal of the Year Award,” Coleman tells me.) Coleman seethed. Soon thereafter, he posted a missive on KUSI.com’s “Coleman’s Corner.””So I get indignant and I write that blog and throw it on the website,” he says. “That’s kind of totally absorbed my life since.”Sitting at our table overlooking Montgomery Field, a regional airport, just a few miles north of downtown San Diego late last spring. With the distant whir of single-engine props in the background, John Coleman tells me that all anyone really needs to know about the climate change scam is carbon dioxide.”Environmentalists, they think CO2 is a pollutant,” he says, and then makes an act of exhaling. “There’s a little pollution for you,” he says, and then points in the general vicinity of vegetation that isn’t looking all that vibrant (unless brown is vibrant). “See that bush beside you there? It’d be dead without CO2.” Without CO2, he says, “We wouldn’t have any food. Humans couldn’t exist. CO2 is vital to life.” He pauses for a moment and then raises his voice an octave. “My God! Calling that a pollutant? Ridiculous.”Coleman acknowledges that carbon dioxide continues to build up in the atmosphere. In 1958, he says, the CO2 atmospheric level was 315 parts per million. Today CO2 is 385 parts per million-more than a 20 percent increase. If you’re making a case for a direct correlation between increased atmospheric CO2 levels and climate change, you’re saying the increased CO2 is causing changes in ocean chemistry, which in turn is changing the entire climate equation.”It’s a trace. How does that destroy the planet?” says Coleman. “And they publish their papers and scream and the media says, Oh God, the end is near! And it’s all baloney; there isn’t anything to it. It turns out to be sheer folly. But it all comes back to CO2-they haven’t got anything else.””Have temperatures gone up? No. Is global warming sweeping the planet? No. Is the ice melting at the poles? No. Is there any proof that it’s creating significant impact? No. Can you produce a computer model that predicts that it will? Oh yeah, anyone can manipulate a computer model, and they have.”Of course, the prevailing wisdom is that yes, temperatures have gone up, that ice is melting, and that the scientists assessing climate data aren’t doing so with malicious intent. Attempting to debunk those who are attempting to debunk climate change, as it turns out, is complicated.To get some sort of definitive explanation, I talked to Kerry Emmanuel, who is a professor of Atmospheric Science at M.I.T. He agrees with Al Gore that the debate is over (although he does think the movie has some “scientific flaws”). “I would not take anything that John Coleman says too seriously,” Emmanuel tells me. Emmanuel says he could relatively quickly give me a “good feeling for the evidence.” But, he says, to bring me up to speed on the physics behind the greenhouse effect, “you’d have to take a semester class.” On top of that, he says, “The models are even difficult for the professionals to understand.” So the problem, as Emmanuel presents it, is that scientists often expect the general public to accept conclusion “as an article of faith” because the explanation can be so intricate and difficult to communicate. “Therein lies a problem,” says Emmanuel. “You have to take my word for that.”John Coleman has had a thing about being heard for a long time. “I was the fifth of five children,” he tells me. He grew up in south Texas during the Depression and says, “My parents hardly had any time for me, or any interest. Life was busy and hard. Who needed another kid?”Coleman observed that his parents did pay attention to the radio. “So I decided I better get on the radio,” he says. As an eighth grader, he spent a lot of time reading in front of the mirror, developing The Voice. He started hanging around WCIL radio in Carbondale, Illinois, and even as a high school freshman, was pretty close to being a full-time employee-on-air from the beginning. “Sure enough, my parents listened,” he recalls. “Pretty cool.”Coleman’s father was a college professor who had a habit of going on evening walks. On these walks Claude Coleman would look at the sky and predict the next day’s weather. Sometimes John tagged along. “So I learned something about predicting the weather by looking at the sky with my dad.” In college, John parlayed his radio experience into doing weather on TV, a new medium he was determined to conquer.At 18, John Coleman was a local celebrity. “I was brash and pretty much a jerk,” Coleman recalls, with a deep laugh.The ride to the top for Coleman had some stops. Bloomington to Peoria. Then to Omaha, where he once worked through 30 days straight of tornado warnings. Then came Milwaukee. When Coleman arrived in Chicago, he became a member of the first-ever local Eyewitness News team. He’d hit the weather big time. “Chicago is the Broadway of weather,” he says.Forecasting Chicago weather with Eyewitness news led to a big-time national gig in 1975. Being the first-ever weatherman on Good Morning America was certainly a big darn deal-national weather on a national stage. “I was getting up at 3:30 in the morning, busting my tail to predict all 50 states.”

“I would not take anything that John Coleman says too seriously,” says Kerry Emmanuel, professor of Atmospheric Science at M.I.T.

Coleman says his GMA job was ultimately made untenable by conflict with co-host David Hartman. “So now what am I gonna do?” he recalls thinking. “I wanted to do weather on television and I wanted to do it right.” John Coleman wanted more weather and less teasing segments. Coleman figured his viewers might want more weather too. Coleman had a big idea.While hanging in at GMA, Coleman began his push in 1977 to get financial backing for the first-ever 24-hour weather cable channel. HBO was newly minted and Ted Turner had recently launched 24-hour news with CNN. Coleman figured his network would be so good that local stations would give up doing weather. “I assumed it would be a huge success,” he tells me. “So I made a business plan and went out to find $14 million to start it up,” he says, then pauses for a moment. “And I got laughed at coast-to-coast.”Joe D’Aleo, a prominent climate change dissenter who Coleman calls “the greatest meteorologist alive” and who was the first Director of Meteorology for the Weather Channel, can attest to Coleman’s fire in the early days. While working under him as a forecaster at GMA, D’Aleo says, “John, often after the show, would fly from Chicago to New York or Denver to talk to venture capitalists or potential financial backers about the Weather Channel. He would fly back in the evening, go home, grab a different suit and drive back in at midnight and then work with us overnight getting ready for the morning,” he says.Coleman’s tirelessness finally paid off when he convinced media and newspaper giant Landmark Communications to come on as an investor. The deal was, they’d put up the money and Coleman would get almost complete control of the network. He’d receive no salary, but he’d get a 20 percent stake in the company.While he was in Atlanta starting the Weather Channel, Coleman continued to appear on GMA via satellite feed. Hartman and the expense of the satellite hookup apparently sealed the end for Coleman at GMA in January, 1983, when his contract with ABC expired. This, Coleman tells me, is when things began to go wrong. Six months later, he got bounced from the Weather Channel.”Sure enough, I got screwed,” he says. “They kicked me out and that was the end of that.” The network had been on-air for just over a year and was reportedly running $7 million in the red. Landmark exercised a contract option that allowed them to oust Coleman-the chairman, president, and founder of the network-after a year on-air. Coleman had a month to scramble to find investors, this time for $4 million, and he couldn’t find any takers.Turns out, it would have been a good investment. The Weather Channel began turning profit in 1985 and was sold in 2008 to a consortium, headlined by NBC Universal, for $3.5 billion. Twenty percent of $3.5 billion, even after taxes, would be enough for Coleman to trade his Mercury Grand Marquis in for a pimped-out brand new Grand Marquis (miles per gallon: 16 city/24 highway).Rolling in the Coleman Grand Marquis back to KUSI, A/C on, the Weather Grand Marquis himself turns up the volume on a CD he’s got in the player. It’s the artistry of fellow KUSI weather colleague, who moonlights as a jazz composer. In the backseat there are small plastic bottles of red Gatorade and a case of Diet Coke. A box of Kleenex was riding shotgun before I displaced it.Back in the heart of KUSI, a warehouse-like facility north of downtown San Diego, Coleman introduces me to Dave Scott, jazz musician. Scott is having a difficult time getting a temperature reading for Tijuana up onto his computer weather map.”Working with John is like working with the Walter Cronkite of weather,” Scott says to me, in front of Coleman.”He’s alive, isn’t he?” Coleman asks.The on-air John Coleman is different from off-air John Coleman. “You have to be a personality that people want to tune into,” he explains. “You gotta have pizzazz. People laugh at my shtick, but it gets noticed. And it works and it grows on people.”Coleman is green screening like it’s 1981, but he’s doing it backed by the latest weather forecasting technology, because he’s determined to do the weather right. And, he doesn’t want to freak his audience out.

“I got screwed. The Weather Channel kicked me out and that was the end of that,” says Coleman.

“The newscast producers and news directors love to put me on at the beginning of the broadcast when a storm is coming, to tell people that we’re going to flood and have mudslides and we’re all going to lose our homes and we’re all going to die,” he says. “And I come on and say, ‘We’ll have a pretty decent storm, but we’ve had storms like this before and nobody died and I suspect nobody will die this time. But you should know it’s going to rain an inch-and-a-half and the wind’s going to blow 60 miles-an-hour, there’s going to be some trees coming down, there’ll be a few mudslides. So be careful out there. That’s it.”Climate change hysteria, from Coleman’s perspective, is an extension of today’s amped-up weathercasts-it gets ratings, but does it in the end deliver?John Coleman lives in a 55-plus community with Linda, his wife of nine years. Life is good. He spends time with friends-plays poker, goes out to dinner-and goes to plays, concerts, and some movies. At the time we met, Coleman was about halfway through Michael Crichton’s State of Fear (which takes on climate change). Coleman doesn’t watch much television, he says. “I get all my news online.” He says he spends time everyday online doing climate change research.Coleman gives speaking engagements he says are well received, but won’t accept invitations from the petroleum industry. “They all invite me, because they are so tired of being the bad boys of global warming. So they want to have me come tell them they’re not bad boys,” he says. “And they want to give me money.” Coleman says he’s pro-alternative energy, because it’s a natural progression-not because of climate change, he says.When I ask him whether he talks climate change with his grandkids (he has five), who are college-aged, he says, “They don’t care about the topic one way or another, seems like. Their lives are off doing other stuff.” And what about his two children? “I’ve talked to them about it, but they kind of glaze over,” he says.Being a climate change dissenter isn’t sexy. Climate change has Hollywood, says Coleman. Climate change has Al Gore and Barack Obama and most of the other politicians. This is a star-driven society, Coleman says. “I can’t be a star, I’m too old,” he says. “We need somebody young, dynamic. Where are they? Hello, I’m looking for you. I wish I could be the star, but I see all the guys who could be the star climbing aboard the bus with Al Gore.”For now, John Coleman is the guy who started the Weather Channel who says climate change is a scam. “I want to have the last laugh. Which means I’ll have lived another twenty years,” he says-a deep laugh pushing a bit more CO2 into the atmosphere.Photos by Brian Paumier

  • Licensed therapist shares 6 signs you’re doing a lot better than you think you are
    Photo credit: CanvaA woman in quiet contemplation.

    For many people, it’s easy to overlook progress because it often lacks clear milestones. There can be increased anxiety and stress from feeling like they’re still catching up or even falling farther behind.

    In a recent Instagram post, licensed therapist Jeffrey Meltzer points out six signs that people are doing better than they think. He breaks down a pattern of achievements that tend to be easily missed. How individuals interpret their past, how they presently handle their relationships, and even asking simple questions, reveal a very different story about where they’re at in their lives and where they’re going.

    Surviving the unsurvivable

    Meltzer begins, “You’ve survived everything that once felt unsurvivable. Every hard season, every moment you thought you wouldn’t get through. You did. That is no small feat. Your brain forgets those victories the moment they pass, but they still count.”

    Learning how to cope with life isn’t just about “toughness.” Resilience is a measurable, multi-layered process tied to effective coping strategies. A 2025 study in Psychology Today points out that rising above adversity isn’t the simple solution. Having support systems that function well enough means you don’t have to.

    Becoming what we desperately want

    “You’ve changed in ways you once desperately wanted. Think back to who you were three or five years ago. Some of the growth you desperately wanted back then, you’re living it now.” Meltzer adds, “However, your brain likes to move the goal post without telling you.”

    People constantly face an adjustment to satisfaction because expectations rise over time. A 2024 study in Springer Nature Link explored the hedonic treadmill. Even after massive achievements, the boost of happiness doesn’t last as long as people expect.

    personal preference, dislikes, self-awareness, secure attachment
    She doesn’t like it.
    Photo credit Canva

    Knowing what we don’t like

    “You know what you don’t want.” Meltzer continues, “That might sound like a consolation prize, but it’s actually hard-earned clarity. A lot of people waste years chasing the wrong things. But knowing what drains you, what doesn’t serve you, what you won’t settle for anymore, that’s actual progress.”

    Psychology emphasizes that self-awareness leads to better behavior and stronger emotional regulation. A 2023 review in the Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior found that this process brings a clearer sense of who we are and who we are becoming.

    An easy relationship to navigate

    “You have at least one relationship that feels easy. You’re at least one person that doesn’t require a performance from you. Someone who you can be a little bit of a mess around. You don’t need to be perfect around them, and it feels easy.” Meltzer explains the value, saying, “That kind of connection is rarer than people like to admit.”

    Strong interpersonal relationships are key predictors of mental health and well-being. A 2024 study in the National Library of Medicine found that secure attachment helps people experience fewer of the symptoms associated with anxiety and depression. Even one stable, supportive relationship is linked to long-term well-being.

    neuroplasticity, achievement, growth mindset, motivation
    Feelings of achievement.
    Photo credit Canva

    Learning something new

    “You’ve learned something in the last year.” Meltzer explains, “Whether it’s a skill, a perspective, a hard lesson, all of it counts. Remember, a brain that’s still learning is a brain that’s still growing.”

    The human brain remains capable of learning and adapting throughout a person’s life. A 2025 study published in MDPI found that brain neuroplasticity allows traits such as emotional regulation and awareness to be reorganized and improved over time.

    Asking better questions

    Lastly, Meltzer offers, “You’re asking the right questions. The fact that you’re reflecting and trying to see your life more clearly, that’s a sign of someone who hasn’t given up.”

    Believing that change is possible shapes emotional recovery and motivation. A 2025 study in Springer Nature Link showed that a growth mindset leads to better psychological outcomes and improves a person’s ability to adapt to new situations.

    appreciation, gratitude, reflection, mental health
    A woman enjoys the sunlight on her face.
    Photo credit Canva

    People are doing better than they think

    These six signs shared by Meltzer helped viewers understand that they’re doing better than they think. As people flooded the comment section, some seemed to struggle with #4, having that one reliable friend. Still, most were just appreciative.

    “This made me feel so much better”

    “i don’t have number 4 unless my dog counts”

    “all I need now is the 4th one, I’m working towards it by socializing more it’s challenging but I’m learning”

    “I’m winning despite feeling defeated”

    “I needed this right now.”

    “Does Mom count for #4?”

    “I’ll give myself credit, it been rough recently, 5 out of 6 is better than I expected”

    “This made me remember how far I have become even tho I still work on things, it’s so good to get these reminders this genuinely made my day”

    Meltzer tries to help people reframe their perspectives. Often, things look like they’re “not enough” even though the actual evidence suggests otherwise. Psychology reveals growth is incremental and easy to miss. The fact that a person wants to do better is the clearest sign that personal growth is already underway.

  • Career expert shares polite but effective way to reclaim credit when someone steals your idea
    Photo credit: CanvaYou can get the credit you deserve without looking defensive.

    Having your ideas stolen or not getting proper credit for your work brings on a terrible and sadly common feeling. It puts you in an awkward spot because you deserve the recognition or reward, but don’t want to come off as weak, defensive, or needy when trying to correct and reclaim what was yours. It’s frustrating. Fortunately, a former lawyer and career expert has a great solution.

    On social media, former attorney and business professional Dr. Shadé Zahrai shared a way to reclaim your idea with poise. It’s a great option for those times when you share an idea with a group that gets mostly ignored…until someone else gets the credit for repeating it.

    @shadezahrai

    How to reclaim credit for your idea when it was initially ignored.

    ♬ original sound – Dr. Shadé Zahrai

    How to reclaim credit for your idea and work

    First, she recommends “building forward” in the conversation. This means you continue going with the flow of the conversation, building onto it and transitioning while re-anchoring the idea to you without sounding territorial. 

    Next, Zahrai recommends becoming curious. Simply asking the person who took your idea where they came up with it allows them the opportunity to naturally return credit to you without being confrontational. It also provides space for them to add input or ideas onto your own. As a bonus, asking these types of questions can help others who have been overshadowed reclaim credit.

    Examples of how it can work for you

    Let’s say that colleague or friend, whether intentionally or not, repeated your idea. Let’s call that person “Hank.” Examples of Zahrai’s technique could look something like:

    – “Hank, it’s great to see we’re aligned with what I shared earlier. Maybe in addition we could…”

    – “You know, Hank, that’s what I brought up before and I’m glad we’re thinking alike. How about this…”

    – “That’s like I was saying earlier, Hank, what drew you to the same conclusion? Perhaps we can..”

    – “Great suggestion, Hank! That’s what I was saying before. Where did you come around to that idea? Maybe a way to extend that is…”

    – “Thank you, Hank, this is what I was talking about last week. Since you’re down for that, maybe we should..”

    – “Good thought, Hank. It sounds like what Lilith was talking about earlier. We could add to her idea by…”

    It’s a good method to get the credit you deserve without causing conflict. After all, the “Hank” in your situation could have accidentally taken your idea or unintentionally left you out. Plus, the focus on the conversation is now on your idea rather than you having the idea.

    @graceforpersonalityhires

    Replying to @Kristel Parsons you absolutely do not call it out now or later. You take note of it and use it as information to guide your steps and what you want out of a career #careeradvice #softskills

    ♬ original sound – grace mccarrick

    Other things to consider

    It’s also important to take a step back to see if your idea is actually stolen. For example, if your boss is taking credit for an idea you had, it may be smarter to let it go, especially if the idea was formed during a think-tank session at work. There may also be a clause in your job contract stating that any idea made at work is the company’s anyway, so you wouldn’t be credited in the first place.

    That said, there are ways to make your mark on your idea and possibly avoid the awkward credit conversation entirely. If you had the idea before a meeting or any form of public announcement, document it in some way via an email, written presentation, or other work with your name on it. Another way is to lead with your idea in conversation, and follow it up with execution methods that include your colleagues or friends.

    This means an idea like “Let’s order pizza from Franco’s” could be “Here’s my idea. Let’s order pizza from Franco’s. I have a coupon we can use, it’s near Aaron’s apartment, and it has gluten-free options for Linda.” The more specific and detailed the idea, the more likely others will remember that the idea was yours.

    A good idea is a good idea, and acknowledging your involvement matters.

  • Are women board members risk averse or agents of innovation? It’s complicated, new research shows
    Photo credit: Fang Xia Nuo/Getty ImagesThe number of women on S&P 500 boards has increased in recent years.
    ,

    Are women board members risk averse or agents of innovation? It’s complicated, new research shows

    Board diversity can fuel patents or temper risk, depending on the stakes.

    Do women board members make a company more innovative or risk averse? The answer is both, according to our recent study. It all depends on how the company performs relative to its goals.

    Professors Małgorzata SmulowitzDidier Cossin and I examined 524 S&P 1500 companies from 1999 to 2016, measuring innovation through patent activity. Patents reflect both creative output and risk-taking. They require significant investment in novel ideas that might fail, disclosure of proprietary information and substantial legal costs. In short, patents represent genuine bets on the future.

    Our findings revealed a striking pattern. When companies performed poorly in relation to their goals, they produced fewer patents after more women joined their boards.

    However, companies exceeding their performance targets saw increased patent output as their number of women directors grew. Similarly, when companies were financially flush, there were more patents generated when their boards had more women.

    The situation changed when we examined radical innovations, those patents in the top 10% of citations. For these high-risk, high-reward innovations, the risk-averse effect of women board members dominated.

    When a company’s performance fell below aspirations, there were fewer radical innovations as its board gained female members. We found no corresponding increase in radical innovations when performance exceeded goals.

    One finding surprised us. We predicted that boards with more women would reduce innovation when companies approached bankruptcy. Instead, it was the opposite: Boards with more women actually increased patent output as bankruptcy loomed. This suggests that women directors may fight harder for a company’s survival through innovation when facing existential threats.

    Why it matters

    Between 2000 and 2024, the number of women on S&P 500 boards increased from 27% to 34%. But previous research has painted conflicting pictures on the effect that women board members may have. Some studies showed that women reduce corporate risk-taking, while others demonstrated they increase innovation and creativity. Our work suggests both perspectives are correct under different circumstances.

    For companies and regulators pushing for greater board gender diversity, this research provides practical guidance. Companies performing well can expect increased innovation by adding women to their boards. These directors can bring diverse perspectives, improved decision-making and better resource allocation that translate into more patents.

    Conversely, poorly performing companies can expect boards with more women to focus on stability over risky innovation. This isn’t necessarily negative.

    Research shows that banks led by women were less likely to fail during the financial crisis, and companies with more women directors experience less financial distress. Reduced innovation during tough times may reflect prudent risk management rather than risk aversion.

    Traditional theories predict that poor performance triggers risky searches for solutions. But boards with more women appear to prioritize organizational survival over uncertain innovation when performance suffers. They may assess that failed innovation attempts could worsen an already precarious situation.

    This research also speaks to the “glass cliff” phenomenon, where women often join boards during crisis periods. Our findings suggest these directors may bring exactly what struggling companies need: careful risk assessment and focus on survival rather than potentially wasteful innovation spending.

    What still isn’t known

    We measured innovation through patents, but many innovations never become patents. How women directors affect other forms of innovation – such as copyrights, trade secrets and first-mover advantage – remains unclear.

    What are the mechanisms driving the differences? Do women directors actively advocate for different innovation strategies? Do they change board discussion dynamics? Do they influence CEO and management team decisions indirectly? Future research needs to open the “black box” of boardroom decision-making.

    Finally, the long-term consequences need examination. We measured patent output, but not whether the patents translated into commercial success or competitive advantage. Understanding whether the innovation patterns we documented ultimately benefit company performance would provide crucial insights for decision-makers.

    This article originally appeared on The Conversation. You can read it here.

Explore More Stories

Ideas

Seeing women govern encourages support for women in politics – with no apparent backlash among men

Well-being

‘Bouncing back’ is a myth – resilience means integrating hard experiences into your life story, not ignoring them

Health

Trauma patients recover faster when medical teams know each other well, new study finds

Music

Students go for a world record with group drumming rendition of “Beggin”