TY - UNPB
T1 - United we stand
T2 - Corporate Monitoring by Shareholder Coalitions in the UK
AU - Crespi, R.
AU - Renneboog, L.D.R.
N1 - Subsequently published in Corporate Governance: An International Review, 2010 (rt)
Pagination: 42
PY - 2000
Y1 - 2000
N2 - This paper investigates whether voting coalitions are formed by shareholders in order to discipline incumbent management. Shapley values capturing the relative power of shareholder coalitions by category of owner, outperform models with percentage ownership stakes and models measuring the relative voting power of individual owners. There is evidence of successful executive director resistance to board restructuring if these executive directors can combine their ownership stakes to a substantial block of voting power. Non-executive directors seem to support incumbent management, but poor performance is penalised by industrial and commercial companies with large relative voting power. The voting power of insurance companies is positively related to executive director turnover, but this voting power is used for remove management for reasons of other than performance, which may be of strategic nature. Investment/pension funds and funds managed by banks do not play a role in the management substitution process. A large number of share blocks change hands, and new shareholders-industrial companies, individuals and families-are related to increased executive director turnover. Still, these changes in share stakes do not constitute a market in (partial) control since there is no systematic evidence that these changes are triggered by poor performance with the notable exception of industrial companies. There is little evidence that adjusting the board composition to allow for more independence for non-executive directors leads to higher managerial removal. In contrast, high gearing facilitates substitution of executive directors, especially if the company needs to be refinanced.
AB - This paper investigates whether voting coalitions are formed by shareholders in order to discipline incumbent management. Shapley values capturing the relative power of shareholder coalitions by category of owner, outperform models with percentage ownership stakes and models measuring the relative voting power of individual owners. There is evidence of successful executive director resistance to board restructuring if these executive directors can combine their ownership stakes to a substantial block of voting power. Non-executive directors seem to support incumbent management, but poor performance is penalised by industrial and commercial companies with large relative voting power. The voting power of insurance companies is positively related to executive director turnover, but this voting power is used for remove management for reasons of other than performance, which may be of strategic nature. Investment/pension funds and funds managed by banks do not play a role in the management substitution process. A large number of share blocks change hands, and new shareholders-industrial companies, individuals and families-are related to increased executive director turnover. Still, these changes in share stakes do not constitute a market in (partial) control since there is no systematic evidence that these changes are triggered by poor performance with the notable exception of industrial companies. There is little evidence that adjusting the board composition to allow for more independence for non-executive directors leads to higher managerial removal. In contrast, high gearing facilitates substitution of executive directors, especially if the company needs to be refinanced.
KW - Corporate Finance
KW - Corporate Control
KW - Ownership structures
KW - Government Regulation
M3 - Discussion paper
VL - 2000-18
T3 - CentER Discussion Paper
BT - United we stand
PB - Finance
CY - Tilburg
ER -