normes de droit

Le choix de renforcer le pouvoir des actionnaires est-il « le » bon choix ? Au travers de l’exemple de la banque d’investissement Morgan, Jill Fisch aborde cette thématique dans une de ces dernières études intitulé : « The Mess at Morgan: Risk, Incentives and Shareholder Empowerment » (ECGI Law Working Paper No. 311/2016, mars 2016).

The financial crisis of 2008 focused increasing attention on corporate America and, in particular, the risk-taking behavior of large financial institutions. A growing appreciation of the “public” nature of the corporation resulted in a substantial number of high profile enforcement actions. In addition, demands for greater accountability led policymakers to attempt to harness the corporation’s internal decision-making structure, in the name of improved corporate governance, to further the interest of non-shareholder stakeholders. Dodd-Frank’s advisory vote on executive compensation is an example.

This essay argues that the effort to employ shareholders as agents of public values and, thereby, to inculcate corporate decisions with an increased public responsibility is misguided. The incorporation of publicness into corporate governance mistakenly assumes that shareholders’ interests are aligned with those of non-shareholder stakeholders. Because this alignment is imperfect, corporate governance is a poor tool for addressing the role of the corporation as a public actor.

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian