Figure 1.
PRISMA flow diagram for systematic review.
Table 1.
Selected papers
| Year | Lead Author | Country | Career area | Method | Quantitative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | Alhalwachi | Bahrain | Banking | Interviews | 0 |
| 2021 | Downar | Germany | Audit partner | Archival data records | 1 |
| 2023 | Galizzi | Italy | Accounting academics | In-depth interviews | 0 |
| 2013 | Gammie | UK | Accountants | Mixed method: Survey and in-depth interview | 1 |
| 1998 | Grey | UK | Audit firms | Documents and semi-structured interviews | 0 |
| 2021 | Kobus-Olawale | South Africa | Banking | Semi-structured interviews | 0 |
| 2024 | Langinier | Luxembourg | Auditors | Semi-structured interviews | 0 |
| 2004 | McNicholas | NZ | Accountancy | Semi-structured interviews | 0 |
| 2013 | Pryce | UK | Banking | Semi-structured interviews | 0 |
| 2019 | Rath | India | Banking | Narratives and focus group discussions | 0 |
| 2023 | Sian | Malaysia | Accounting | Documents, semi-structured interviews, and participatory observation | 0 |
| 2020 | Sian | Saudi Arabia | Auditors | In-depth interviews | 0 |
| 2018 | Single | USA and Canada | Accounting | Survey | 1 |
| 2023 | Storm | Denmark | Accounting service | Interviews | 0 |
| 2021 | Zarei | Iran | Accounting profession | Mixed-method study, cross-sectional design and in-depth interviews | 1 |
| 2006 | Ogden | UK | Financial services | Interviews | 0 |
| 2020 | Richards | Australia and NZ | Financial advising industry | In-depth interviews | 0 |
| 2012 | Almer | USA | Accounting | Survey | 1 |
| 2022 | Coetzee | South Africa | Financial services | Semi-structured interviews | 0 |
| 2016 | Becker | South Africa | Chartered accountants | Survey | 1 |
Table 2.
Quality assessment
| Criteria | All (%) | Quantitative (%) | Qualitative (%) | Mixed (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Explicit theoretical framework | 90.0% | 88.9% | 88.2% | 77.78% |
| 2 | Statement of aims/objectives in main body of report | 96.7% | 100.0% | 96.1% | 100.0% |
| 3 | Clear description of research setting | 98.3% | 94.4% | 98.0% | 88.9% |
| 4 | Evidence of sample size considered in terms of analysis | 90.0% | 88.9% | 90.2% | 88.9% |
| 5 | Representative sample of target group of a reasonable size | 98.3% | 100.0% | 98.0% | 100.0% |
| 6 | Description of procedure for data collection | 95.0% | 94.4% | 94.1% | 88.9% |
| 7 | Rationale for choice of data collection tool(s) | 86.7% | 100.0% | 84.3% | 100.0% |
| 8 | Detailed recruitment data | 80.0% | 94.4% | 76.5% | 88.9% |
| 9 | Statistical assessment of reliability and validity of measurement tool(s) (Quant only) | 50.0% | 50.0% | - | 33.3% |
| 10 | Fit between stated research question and method of data collection (Quant only) | 94.4% | 94.4% | - | 88.9% |
| 11 | Fit between stated research question and format and content of data collection tool e.g. interview schedule (Qual only) | 77.8% | - | 82.4% | 88.9% |
| 12 | Fit between research question and method of analysis (Quant only) | 77.8% | 77.8% | - | 55.6% |
| 13 | Good justification for analytic method selected | 76.7% | 61.1% | 80.4% | 66.7% |
| 14 | Assessment of reliability of analytic process (Qual only) | 58.8% | - | 58.8% | 11.1% |
| 15 | Evidence that the research stakeholders have been considered in research design or conduct | 5.0% | 16.7% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| 16 | Strengths and limitations critically discussed | 66.7% | 72.2% | 64.7% | 66.7% |
| Total score | 642 | 213 | 532 | 103 | |
| Maximum score | 816 | 270 | 690 | 144 | |
| % of max score | 78.68% | 78.89% | 77.10% | 71.53% |
Table 3a.
Themes by papers
| 1. Personal characteristics | 2. Network | 3. Family Context | 4. Diversity | 5. Inclusion | 6. Equity | N | % | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year | Lead Author | Skills, performance, professionalism | Confidence, motivation | Formal, informal | Career break, motherhood | Family, other | Culture | Organisation | Organisation | Mentoring | Work-life | Remune-ration | ||
| 2021 | Alhalwachi | V | V | 2 | 16.7% | |||||||||
| 2021 | Downar | V | V | V | V | 4 | 33.3% | |||||||
| 2023 | Galizzi | V | V | V | V | V | 5 | 41.7% | ||||||
| 2013 | Gammie | V | V | V | 3 | 25.0% | ||||||||
| 1998 | Grey | V | V | 2 | 16.7% | |||||||||
| 2021 | Kobus-Olawale | V | V | V | V | V | V | V | 7 | 58.3% | ||||
| 2024 | Langinier | V | V | V | 3 | 25.0% | ||||||||
| 2004 | McNicholas | V | V | V | V | V | 5 | 41.7% | ||||||
| 2013 | Pryce | V | V | V | V | V | V | V | V | 8 | 66.7% | |||
| 2019 | Rath | V | V | V | 3 | 25.0% | ||||||||
| 2023 | Sian | V | V | V | V | V | V | 6 | 50.0% | |||||
| 2020 | Sian | V | V | V | V | 4 | 33.3% | |||||||
| 2018 | Single | V | 1 | 8.3% | ||||||||||
| 2023 | Storm | V | V | V | 3 | 25.0% | ||||||||
| 2021 | Zarei | V | V | V | V | 4 | 33.3% | |||||||
| 2006 | Ogden | V | V | V | V | V | 5 | 41.7% | ||||||
| 2020 | Richards | V | V | V | V | V | 5 | 41.7% | ||||||
| 2012 | Almer | V | V | V | V | 4 | 33.3% | |||||||
| 2022 | Hammond and Coetzee | V | V | V | V | 4 | 33.3% | |||||||
| 2016 | Ribeiro; Bosch; Becker | V | V | V | V | V | 5 | 41.7% | ||||||
| 8 | 5 | 8 | 8 | 5 | 15 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 13 | 4 | ||||
| 40% | 25% | 40% | 40% | 25% | 75% | 25% | 30% | 30% | 65% | 20% | ||||