Law Commons^™

Toward A Fair And Sustainable Corporate Governance System: Reflections On Leo Strine, Jr.'S Writing On Institutional Investors, Dorothy S. Lund

Faculty Scholarship

It is a privilege to contribute to this Festschrift for my friend, mentor, and co-author, Leo Strine, Jr. It is also a pleasure to revisit his vast body of work and to re-experience the breadth and depth of his scholarship, as well as reflect on his unparalleled influence on the development of corporate law that he brought about while presiding over its most influential courts for twenty-one years.

In thinking about this essay, I recalled a conversation that I had with “CJS” when I was serving as his law clerk. In this conversation, he decried (with James Taylor blasting in …

Agents Of Inequality: Common Ownership And The Decline Of The American Worker, Zohar Goshen, Doron Levit

Faculty Scholarship

The last forty years have seen two major economic trends: wages have stalled despite rising productivity, and institutional investors have replaced retail shareholders as the predominant owners of the U.S. equity markets. A few powerful institutional investors — dubbed common owners — now hold large stakes in most U.S. corporations. And in no coincidence, when U.S. workers acquired this new set of bosses, their wages stopped growing while shareholder returns increased. This Article explains how common owners shift wealth from labor to capital, thereby exacerbating income inequality.

Powerful institutional investors pushing public corporations en masse to adopt strong corporate governance …

Systemic Stewardship, Jeffrey N. Gordon

Faculty Scholarship

This Article frames a normative theory of stewardship engagement by large institutional investors and asset managers that is congruent with their theory of investment management — “Modern Portfolio Theory” — which describes investors as attentive to both systematic risk as well as expected returns. Because investors want to maximize risk-adjusted returns, it will serve their interests for asset managers to support and sometimes advance shareholder initiatives that will reduce systematic risk. “Systematic stewardship” provides an approach to “ESG” matters that serves both investor welfare and social welfare and fits the business model of large, diversified funds, especially index funds. The …

The Case Against Passive Shareholder Voting, Dorothy S. Lund

Faculty Scholarship

American investors have begun to embrace the reality that academics have been championing for decades — that a broad-based, passive indexing strategy is superior to picking individual stocks or investing in actively managed funds. But there are several reasons to believe that the rise of passive investing will have harmful consequences for firm governance, shareholders, and the economy. First, because passive funds seek only to match the performance of an index — not outperform it — they lack a financial incentive to ensure that each of the companies in their very large portfolios are well-run. Second, passive funds face an …

Adapting Global Standards To A Changing World, Serdar Çelik, Mats Isaksson

Ira M. Millstein Center for Global Markets and Corporate Ownership

In 1996, Ira Millstein received a phone call from Paris. It came from the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) asking him to head a small international group of distinguished businesspeople, including Sir Adrian Cadbury. Their assignment would be to provide economists and policy makers with advice for future work in the area of corporate governance. At the time, the topic was little understood among policy makers and its wider economic implications were rarely discussed. But OECD, already well known for its analysis of both macroeconomics and structural policies, wanted to change that. They looked at corporate governance as …

The Wolf At The Door: The Impact Of Hedge Fund Activism On Corporate Governance, John C. Coffee Jr., Darius Palia

Faculty Scholarship

Hedge fund activism has recently spiked, almost hyperbolically. No one disputes this, and most view it as a significant change. But, their reasons differ. Some see activist hedge funds as the natural champions of dispersed and diversified shareholders, who are less capable of collective action in their own interest. A key fact about activist hedge funds is that they are undiversified and typically hold significant stakes in the companies that comprise their portfolios. Given their larger stakes and focused holdings, they are less subject to the “rational apathy” that characterizes more diversified and even indexed investors, such as pension and …

Codes Of Corporate Governance: A Review, Nolan Haskovec

Ira M. Millstein Center for Global Markets and Corporate Ownership

The U.S. was one of the first nations in the world to concern itself with the governance of its publicly-listed corporations. But it stopped well short of developing authoritative general standards of corporate governance. By contrast, many of the world’s other markets have by now agreed to some sort of ‘official’ principles for the governance of their quoted companies.

A key reason often cited for why the U.S. lacks a single, authoritative national code of corporate governance2 is the general resistance to centralized regulation of corporate law, which is subject to state rather than federal statutes. But several other major …

Are Institutional Investors Part Of The Problem Or Part Of The Solution?: Key Descriptive And Prescriptive Questions About Shareholders, Ben W. Heineman Jr., Stephen Davis

Ira M. Millstein Center for Global Markets and Corporate Ownership

Over the last twenty years, institutional investors have owned an increasing share of public equity markets — more than 70 percent of the largest 1,000 companies in the United States in 2009, for example. Over the past two years, in response to failures of some boards of directors and business leaders, shareholders, including institutional investors, have been given increased powers to participate in — or have disclosures about — discrete spheres of governance in publicly held corporations. Moreover, during this same period, and in multiple jurisdictions, there have been increasing calls from both the public and private sectors for institutional …

Agenda For Private Sector Reform: Omnibus Policy Recommendations For A Post-Crisis Market, Millstein Center For Corporate Governance And Performance

Ira M. Millstein Center for Global Markets and Corporate Ownership

The global financial crisis has exposed a raft of market weaknesses and failures The Center has concentrated on probing urgent, corporate governance-related issues where it identified apparent gaps in knowledge, insight and infrastructure. Policy Briefings have addressed the advisory vote on executive compensation; board-shareowner communications; proxy voting reform; independent board leadership; risk oversight; pay for performance; and shareowner stewardship. Using global perspectives, they address key concerns within the relevant subject areas and attempt to gather and present practical recommendations and ideas.

This report compiles summaries of the Center’s recommendations on these seven key areas from 2007 through mid-2009. The objective …

Pay, Risk And Stewardship: Private Sector Architecture For Future Capital Markets, Mariana Pargendler

Ira M. Millstein Center for Global Markets and Corporate Ownership

The recent financial crisis revealed a massive failure of institutions that populate the world’s capital markets. Banks, investors, ratings agencies, regulators and numerous other players demonstrated that confidence in market responses was misplaced. The loss of faith in capital market institutions has represented a significant hurdle to recovery as financial institutions continue to be wary of one another, and the public is wary of all of them.

Restoring trust in the system requires two distinct pillars of reform. The first pillar, reform of the financial regulatory system, both nationally and globally, has received most of the attention so far. Many …

Voting Integrity: Practices For Investors And The Global Proxy Advisory Industry, Meagan Thompson-Mann

Ira M. Millstein Center for Global Markets and Corporate Ownership

Accountability of corporate boards to shareowners rests in large part on the integrity of the system by which investors vote their proxy ballots. Shareowners rely on the vote to affect the governance of a company; corporate directors see the vote as a barometer of investor confidence in board stewardship. Outcomes determine the fate of director tenure, mergers, acquisitions, capital raising, remuneration plans and other critical decisions with sometimes profound consequences for stakeholders and the marketplace.

However, this briefing finds that the proxy voting system in the US and other markets is chronically subject to criticism that it is short on …

Talking Governance: Board-Shareowner Communications On Executive Compensation, Stephen Davis, Stephen Alogna

Ira M. Millstein Center for Global Markets and Corporate Ownership

Advantages stemming from board-shareowner communications on governance and executive pay outweigh the potential risks and costs of such dialogue. Regulation FD in the US should be seen as a caution rather than a barrier to such communication. Prompted by universal adoption of advisory ‘say on pay’ resolutions, UK companies have moved to integrate regular engagement with domestic investors into the annual process of framing corporate remuneration policies. Most US companies have not fully endeavored to engage their shareowners in the same manner, but some—motivated sometimes by crises—are experimenting with various models of dialogue. Companies can best manage effective engagement when …

Poison Pills And The European Case, Jeffrey N. Gordon

Faculty Scholarship

Professor Coates has given us a welcome opportunity to revisit the question of shareholder rights plans, or poison pills. It is interesting to evaluate a revisionist's view of an important empirical debate – but less because of the role that empirical evidence may have played in the evolution of U.S. corporate law doctrine and more because of the relevance of that debate to a world, especially Europe, that is waking up to the vigorous market in corporate control. If contested takeovers involving target firms such as Gucci, Telecom Italia, Paribas, and Mannesman are headline grabbing events in 1999 and 2000, …

The Future Of Corporate Governance In The United States, Ronald J. Gilson

Faculty Scholarship

This article is an interview of Professor Ronald J. Gilson, Charles J. Meyers Professor of Law and Business, Columbia University Law School. The interviewer is Cheryl L. Conner, a third year law student at the University of Richmond School of Law and the Managing Editor of the Richmond Journal of Law and Technology.

Institutions As Relational Investors: A New Look At Cumulative Voting, Jeffrey N. Gordon

Faculty Scholarship

The hostile takeover may have become a receding memory, but the problem that the market in corporate control purported to address nevertheless remains. In a world of imperfect competition, the product, capital, and managerial markets may temporarily indulge suboptimal performance by a firm's managers. As cases such as GM, Sears, American Express, and IBM illustrate, a firm with a substantial franchise and substantial financial reserves can sustain deteriorating economic performance over a significant period, resulting in a long slow slide of economic values. Shareholders and society generally will benefit from a mechanism that replaces the firm's incumbent managers well before …

Liquidity Versus Control: The Institutional Investor As Corporate Monitor, John C. Coffee Jr.

Faculty Scholarship

Within academia, paradigm shifts occur regularly, some more important than others. As the takeover wave of the 1980s ebbs, a significant shift now appears to be in progress in the way the public corporation is understood. Above all, the new thinking emphasizes that political forces shaped the modern corporation. While the old paradigm saw the structure of the corporation as the product of a Darwinian competition in which the most efficient design emerged victorious, this new perspective sees political forces as constraining that evolutionary process and possibly foreclosing the adoption of a superior organizational form. Thus, my colleague Professor Mark …

Reinventing The Outside Director: An Agenda For Institutional Investors, Ronald J. Gilson, Reinier Kraakman

Faculty Scholarship

Managerialist rhetoric puts the institutional investor between a rock and a hard place. The institutional investor is depicted as a paper colossus, alternatively greedy and mindless, but in all events a less important corporate constituency than that other kind of investor, the "real" shareholder. The unspoken corollary is that, regardless of the institution's investment strategy, its interests may appropriately be ignored.

An institution that trades stock frequently is considered a short-term shareholder without a stake in the future of the corporation. According to the familiar argument, the short-term shareholder has no more legitimate claim on management's attention than does a …

Unstable Coalitions: Corporate Governance As A Multi-Player Game, John C. Coffee Jr.

Faculty Scholarship

This is an article written in honor of Professor Donald Schwartz, a leading figure in academic corporate law for over two decades, but also a man nearly unique in his willingness to move beyond corporate law to the general study of corporate behavior. In this light, this article will not explore the latest wrinkle in the law – the most recent case, latest SEC ruling, or newest takeover defense tactic – but will instead ask if there are new ways in which we should try to talk about corporate law and corporate behavior. These were questions that Don Schwartz repeatedly …