Skip to main content

Trust and Shareholder Voting

Theory as well as empirical studies suggest that voting at annual general shareholder meetings (AGMs) creates value. Indeed, voting gives shareholders a final say on major company decisions, such as appointments to the board of directors and the approval of takeover offers. It also enables shareholders to show their support the current management or to disagree with the latter. It is then somewhat surprising that, on average, voter turnout at AGMs is only about 60%. Still, the average voter turnout varies across the world with a minimum of 41% for New Zealand and a maximum of 100% for Cyprus. Moreover, the average approval rates for management-initiated proposals vary between 84% and 100%.

In a study with Peter Limbach and Simon Lesmeister, we propose the level of trust in others that prevails in a country has an effect on shareholder voting and explains differences in voting patterns across countries. The economics literature (see e.g. Zak and Knack 2001) finds that trust increases economic performance, as measured by GDP per capita growth. The argument is as follows: In high-trust countries economic agents do not have to expend as much time on monitoring each other. Hence, they have more time for productive tasks. Therefore, countries with high trust levels should have better economic performance. By examining whether trust affects the level of shareholder monitoring of management, as proxied by voter turnout at AGMs and support of management-initiated proposals, we perform a more direct test of this argument.

Trust has been shown to vary quite substantially across countries with only 3% of Filipinos trusting others while as 74% of Norwegians agree that others can be trusted. By studying the voting outcomes at ordinary and extraordinary AGMs of companies from more than 40 countries, we find empirical support of our main hypothesis: Shareholders in countries with high trust spend less time on monitoring the management of their companies.

In detail, we find that for high-trust countries voter turnout at AGMs is significantly lower while the approval rate for management-initiated proposals is significantly higher. We also find evidence that the lower levels of shareholder voting or monitoring in high-trust countries are not exploited by the firms’ managers. Although low voter turnout and high approval rates for management proposals have been shown to decrease future stock performance, this negative effect is neutralised in high-trust countries. Hence, in high-trust countries it might be optimal for shareholders to trust management and reduce monitoring.

This post was originally published on the webpages of the European Corporate Governance Institute.

The internet appendix for the paper entitled "Trust and Shareholder Voting" is available from here.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

DMGT Plc - Not your typical UK Plc

I haven't posted any of these corporate governance case studies for a while. As the updated version of my corporate governance textbook is about to be published on 11 March 2018, I thought it was a good time to investigate the corporate governance of another interesting company. The company I have chosen is the Daily Mail and General Trust Plc ( DMGT Plc ), a UK company. This is a media company which owns a.o. the tabloid The Daily Mail  and the free newspaper Metro . It also has a holding in Euromoney Institutional Plc and Zoopla . An example of a Daily Mail  front page An example of a Metro  front page I chose DMGT Plc as it is  not  your run-of-the-mill UK stock-market listed Plc. The typical example of a UK exchange-listed corporation would be a Plc with dispersed ownership and weak control (see Section 3.3 of my textbook  International Corporate Governance   or its updated version  Corporate Governance. A Global Perspective )....

CEO Political Ideology and Payout Policy

Ever wondered how a CEO's political ideology influences their company's payout policy? In my latest study with Ali Bayat, we find that conservative CEOs are not only more likely to pay dividends, but they also pay higher dividends and often combine them with share repurchases. Interestingly, these payouts are typically funded by drawing on cash reserves and cutting back on capital and R&D spending. Our full study will be published soon in the Journal of Banking and Finance. You can read it here . A podcast summarising the study is available from here .

How CEO Politics Shape Dividend Payouts

A CEO’s political beliefs can significantly influence corporate decisions, dividend policies, and workforce management. The personal political beliefs of CEOs can significantly influence corporate decisions, including dividend policies and workforce management. Research indicates that conservative CEOs, who are generally more risk-averse and prudent, tend to favor stable dividend payouts. In contrast, liberal CEOs, who are more open to change and innovation, may prefer to reinvest earnings into the company rather than distribute them as dividends. Please see my latest article for IE Insights for further details.