Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Incentive to corporate governance activism

By Dennis Leech

Abstract

This paper considers the incentives faced by investors (financial institutions) to become actively involved in the direction of their under-performing portfolio companies as proposed by recent policy reports on corporate governance. It proposes a metric by which to measure the returns to activism in terms of the size of holding, measures of risk and return to the company, the degree of under performance and the level of commission received by fiduciary fund managers. By comparing this with costs of activism it proposes a method by which 'significant shareholdings' may be estimated. A significant shareholding is the level above which a shareholding in a company may be said to have private incentives to activism. This approach is applied to two groups of companies listed on the London Stock Exchange, the top 250 and a ten percent random sample. The results indicate that there are very strong incentives for shareholders to be activist participants in corporate governance among the top 250 companies while there is much more diversity among the smaller companies. Results differ considerably between those where the shareholder is an own-account investor and a fund manager

Topics: HD
Publisher: University of Warwick, Department of Economics
Year: 2002
OAI identifier: oai:wrap.warwick.ac.uk:1558

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (1992). (Committee on the Financial Aspects of Corporate Governance), doi
  2. (1997). A Survey of Corporate Governance", doi
  3. (1957). An Economic Theory of Democracy, doi
  4. (1965). and 1971), The Logic of Collective Action, Cambridge: doi
  5. (2000). Capitalism for Tomorrow: Reuniting Ownership and Control,
  6. (2001). Corporate Governance", doi
  7. (1999). Fair Shares: the Future of Shareholder Power and Responsibility, doi
  8. (1995). Firms, Contracts and Financial Structure, doi
  9. (2001). Institutional Investment in the United Kingdom: a Review, (The Myners Report)
  10. (1996). Institutional Shareholders and Corporate Governance, doi
  11. (1997). Institutional Shareholders and Corporate Governance”, doi
  12. (1987). Ownership Concentration and the Theory of the Firm: a Simple Game Theoretic Approach”, doi
  13. (1991). Ownership Structure, Control Type Classifications, and the doi
  14. (2001). Shareholder Voting Power and Corporate Governance: a doi
  15. (1994). Strong Managers, Weak Owners, doi
  16. (2001). The Treatment of Investment Management Fees and Commission Payments: An Examination of the Recommendations Contained in the Myners Report, London: Fund Managers’ Association.

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.