|
||||
|
||||
Understanding Uncontested Director ElectionsYonca ErtimurUniversity of Colorado at Boulder - Department of Accounting Fabrizio FerriColumbia Business School - Accounting, Business Law & Taxation David OeschUniversity of Zurich November 20, 2015 Abstract: We examine the determinants and consequences of voting outcomes in uncontested director elections. Exploiting a unique hand-collected dataset of the rationale behind proxy advisors’ recommendations — the primary driver of voting outcomes —, we document the director and board characteristics that voting shareholders focus on (as well as those that they neglect), their evolution over time and their relative importance. Absent a negative recommendation, high votes withheld are infrequent, highlighting the agenda setting role of proxy advisors. While high votes withheld rarely result in director turnover, our analyses show that firms often respond to an adverse vote by explicitly addressing the underlying concern. Overall, it appears that shareholders use their votes in uncontested director elections to get directors to address specific problems, rather than to vote them on or off the board, but they do so only on matters highlighted by the proxy advisors.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 66 Keywords: director elections, shareholder votes, proxy advisors, board of directors, shareholder activism JEL Classification: G34, G30, M40 Date posted: June 10, 2014 ; Last revised: November 21, 2015Suggested CitationContact Information
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
© 2016 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
FAQ
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Copyright
Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo6 in 0.235 seconds