The Centre for Corporate Governance (CCG) holds a small number of high-quality events where leading academics, executives, investors, consultants and policymakers discuss topical corporate governance issues. These events are invite-only to ensure a high quality of discussion, interaction and networking.
This one-day, invitation only, event rigorously examined approaches to corporate decision making and the realities of corporate ownership. Issues addressed included: How should decision rights be allocated between shareholders and management? Is shareholder primacy still desirable and efficient? Should employees or other stakeholders have formal decision rights in companies? Through short introductory talks and panels, we will debate how effectively different ownership options confer primacy and balance the interests of different stakeholder constituencies. The event also reviewed the existing evidence concerning employee rights and how far these are appropriately addressed through current governance mechanisms in the UK and elsewhere.
The conference explored these questions and provided perspectives from both academic research and business experience. The programme included introductory remarks on academic evidence from Professors Diane Denis, Clifford Holderness and Ernst Maug, followed by panel discussions with business practitioners as following:
- Shareholder primacy (Academic introduction by Diane Denis, Katz Alumni Professor of Finance, University of Pittsburgh: In Defense of Shareholder Wealth Maximisation)
- Shareholder decision rights (Academic introduction by Clifford Holderness, Professor of Finance, Boston College: When Should Shareholders Be Able To Veto Managers?)
- Employee rights (Academic introduction by Ernst Maug, Chair of Corporate Finance, University of Mannheim: Board-Level Employee Representation)
It closed with a keynote address by Professor David Yermack, Albert Fingerhut Professor of Finance and Business Transformation, NYU Stern, followed by David Yermack in conversation with Andrew Palmer, Executive Editor, The Economist.
We gratefully acknowledge the generous support for this event provided by NBIM and thank Clifford Holderness for his contribution to creating the event.
- David Yermack: The case against the stakeholder capitalism model
- Diane Denis: In Defence of Shareholder Wealth Maximisation
- Ernst Maug: Board-Level Employee Representation
- Clifford Holderness: When Should Shareholders Be Able To Veto Managers?
Why managers should listen to shareholders, The Economist, 30 May 2019
The Economist reflects on academic evidence.
Workers on boards: Evidence doesn’t support compulsion, Tom Gosling, 15 May 2019
Download event report
This event aimed to debate the fundamental concepts behind the current drive to make business more responsible. What does responsibility imply beyond compliance with the law? Does it inevitably require a trade-off with shareholder value, and if so, how should such trade-offs be managed? How can responsibility be embedded within a company and throughout the investment chain, so that it moves from a policy to a practice? Are there dangers of a company pursuing responsibility to excess, and using it as a license to be unaccountable for profits?
The Centre for Corporate Governance hosted this one-day expert event to explore these questions and provide perspectives from both large-scale research and business experience. Introductory remarks from Professors Alex Edmans and Ioannis Ioannou were followed by discussions on the following topics:
- What is a responsible organisation?
- What is the case for and against responsibility?
- How do we make it real?
In 2017 the Government announced its intention to introduce a new corporate governance reporting requirement for large private companies. To complement this, the Government appointed James Wates CBE to lead a coalition, including the Financial Reporting Council, to develop corporate governance principles to enhance transparency and accountability in large private companies.
What are the distinctive governance challenges facing large private companies where there is typically limited separation of ownership and control? To what extent should family firms and entrepreneurs be expected to conform to public company practices on board composition, succession planning and executive remuneration? What are the implications for private domestic and international subsidiaries of public companies? Can this initiative improve reporting practice on good governance without imposing unnecessary standardization? To what extent should it be aiming to strengthen private company decision-making and performance?
The Centre for Corporate Governance and the Financial Reporting Council hosted an evening event, including introductory comments from James Wates CBE, followed by a panel discussion led by academics and expert practitioners, debating the issues with a range of experts in the audience.
How should shareholders engage more effectively with firms? Is more engagement even desirable or does it lead to short-termism? Are index funds undermining effective stewardship? How can regulators promote better engagement and the right kinds of engagement?
On 5 December the CCG hosted a full-day event on Investor Stewardship to explore these issues. The debate was led by some of the world’s leading academics and practitioners.
Why have executive pay practices created such public concern and led many institutional investors, professional bodies and commentators to voice their unease? Experts at this CCG event debated the way forward.
The Purposeful Company and the CCG hosted a Policy Forum to finalise policy recommendations initially set out in TPC’s Interim Report published in May 2016.
This event explored how the financial sector will be transformed by disruptive technologies and the relevant regulatory and policy responses to the effects on the industry. It was held in collaboration with the Bank of England and AQR Asset Management Institute.
LBS welcomed practitioners, policy makers and academics to explore the benefits and challenges of mutual and co-operative ownership and debate the relevant policy making and governance considerations.
Practitioner and academic thought leaders debated topics such as the consequences of fragmented versus block ownership and the oneshare, one-vote issue and the role and importance of market liquidity. This event was hosted together with the Financial Reporting Council.
This event presented and debated the academic report ‘Returns to Hedge Fund Activism: An International Study’ by Marco Becht, Julian Franks and Jeremy Grant.
In partnership with the Bank of England, the CCG invited 50 major international decision-makers and academics to debate global financial regulation. Keynote speeches covered the status quo global financial regulation and the key concerns that need to be addressed by policy makers, regulators and the regulated.
This event rigorously examined approaches to corporate decision making and the realities of corporate ownership. Issues addressed included: How should decision rights be allocated between shareholders and management? Is shareholder primacy still desirable and efficient? Should employees or other stakeholders have formal decision rights in companies? The event also reviewed the existing evidence concerning employee rights and how far these are appropriately addressed through current governance mechanisms in the UK and elsewhere.