The gap between shareholder-primacy ideology as it is practiced today, and stakeholders and the public interest, is not only vast but much wider than it either must or should.
8, its time to reexamine the wisdom of shareholder value thinking.
Meanwhile, the Macondo well began vomiting tens of thousands of barrels of oil daily all player software for pc from beneath the sea floor into the Gulf waters.
I also believe, however, that one does not need to embrace either a stakeholder-oriented model of the firm, or a form of corporate social responsibility theory, to conclude that shareholder value thinking is destructive.Most economic interests in stocks are ultimately held by human beings, either directly or indirectly through pension funds and mutual funds.Indeed, if we think of shareholders as an interest group that persists over time, shareholder value thinking maybe contrary to shareholders own collective interests.(Between 19, the number of companies listed.S.The Commission concluded, BPs safety lapses have been chronic.Ira Millstein, Director, Columbia Law School and Columbia Business School Program on Global, Economic, and Regulatory Interdependence.Nevertheless, by the 1990s, the idea that corporations should serve only shareholder wealth as reflected in stock price came to dominate other theories of corporate purpose.Finally, many people are prosocial, meaning they are willing to sacrifice at least some profits to allow the company to act in an ethical and socially responsible fashion.
Written by one of the most respected theorists in corporate governance, it takes aim at the smug profit-only' complacency found in business schools and boardrooms.
Rather than recognize and account for differences in shareholders interests and values, shareholder value dogma simply privileges the interests of the most myopic, opportunistic, self-destructive, and psychopathically asocial subset of shareholders.
In particular, its time to consider how the endless quest to raise share price hurts not only non-shareholder stakeholders and society but alsoand especially shareholders themselves.Deepwater Horizon, oil Spill and Offshore Drilling concluded the Macondo blowout could be traced to multiple decisions by BP employees and contractors to ignore standard safety procedures in the attempt to cut costs.In the process, it offers a more sophisticated and more useful understandings of the role of the public corporations and of good corporate governance that can help business leaders, lawmakers, and investors alike ensure that public corporations reach their full economic potential.Put simply, shareholder value ideology is based on wishful thinking, not reality.The philosophical case for shareholder value maximization similarly rests on incorrect factual claims about the economic structure of corporations, including the mistaken claims that shareholders own corporations, that they have the only residual claim on the firms profits, and that they are principals who hire.Corporate law does not impose any enforceable legal duty on corporate directors or executives of public corporations to maximize profits or share price.Revisiting the Idea of Shareholder Value.This book shows how the project of reexamining shareholder value thinking is already underway.As ucla law professor Iman Anabtawi has noted, this approach allows shareholder-primacy theorists to characterize shareholders as having interests that are fundamentally in harmony with one another.It should be noted that a handful of scholars and activists continued to argue for stakeholder visions of corporate purpose that gave corporate managers breathing room to consider the interests of employees, creditors, and customers.
Within minutes the, deepwater Horizon was transformed into a column of fire that burned for nearly two days before collapsing into the depths of the Gulf of Mexico.
This book does not advance a theory of how, exactly, directors should mediate among different shareholders demands.