Why was there little reason to focus on corporate governance in the late 1800s and early 1900s?

Abstract

The historical evolution of corporate governance is considered, highlighting the different eras of governance, the dominant theoretical and practical paradigms, the reformulation of paradigms and counter paradigms. Two alternative and sharply contrasting theorizations, one collective and collaborative (the work of Berle and Means), the other individualistic and contractual (agency theory and shareholder value) are focused upon. The explanatory potential of Blair and Stout's team production theory is elaborated, and its conception of the complexity of business enterprise, with a mediating hierarch (the board of directors) securing a balance between the interests of different stakeholders. The potential for reform of corporate purpose, corporate governance and directors’ duties is examined with reference to the UK Modern Company Law Review. The impact of the intensification of the financialization of corporations is analysed, with the increased emphasis upon short-termism. The origins of the global financial crisis in shareholder value orientations and the continuing reverberations of the crisis are explored. Finally, the imperative of the advance of sustainable enterprise is argued, and the critical changes necessitated in corporate purpose and directors’ duties.

References

Aglietta, M., Reberioux, A. (2005). Corporate governance adrift: A critique of shareholder value. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Akerlof, G., Shiller, R. J. (2009). Animal spirits: How human psychology drives the economy, and why it matters for global capitalism. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Alchian, A. A. (1987). Property rights. In J. Eatwell, M. Milgate & P. Newman (Eds.), The new Palgrave: A dictionary of economics (Reprints in, The new Palgrave. The visible hand, 1989) London and Basingstoke: The Macmillan Press.Google Scholar

Alchian, A. A., Demsetz, H. (1973). The property right paradigm. The Journal of Economic History, 33(1), 1627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Becker, J., Jager, J., Leubolt, B., Weissenbacher, R. (2010). Peripheral financialization and vulnerability to crisis: A regulationalist perspective. Competition & Change, 14, 225247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Berle, A. A. Jr. (1932). For whom corporate managers are trustees: A note. Harvard Law Review, 45(8), 13651372 (reproduced in T. Clarke (ed.), Corporate governance: Critical perspectives in business and management, vol. 1, The genesis of corporate governance (pp. 76–83). London: Routledge).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Berle, A. A. Jr., Means, G. (1932). The modern corporation and private property New edition, Brunswick, USA and London, UK: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar

Blair, M. M. (2005) Ownership and control. Washington DC: Brookings Institute.Google Scholar

Blair, M. M. (2012). In the best interests of the corporation: Directors duties in the wake of the global financial crisis. In T. Clarke & D. Branson (Eds.), The Sage handbook of corporate governance (pp. 6280). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Blair, M. M., Stout, L. (1999). A team production theory of corporate law. Virginia Law Review, 85, 247328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Blair, M. M., Stout, L. (2001). Director accountability and the mediating role of the corporate board. Washington University Law Quarterly, 79, 403449.Google Scholar

Bratton, W., Wachter, M. (2010). The case against shareholder empowerment. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 158, 653.Google Scholar

Chandler, A. D. Jr. (1977). The visible hand, managerial revolution in American business. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Havard University Press.Google Scholar

Cioffi, J. W. (2011). Fiduciaries, federalization, and finance capitalism: Berle's ambiguous legacy and the collapse of countervailing power. Seattle University Law Review, 34, 10811120.Google Scholar

Clarke, T. (1998). The stakeholder corporation: A business philosophy for the information age. Long Range Planning – International Journal of Strategic Management, 31(2), 182194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Clarke, T. (2009). European corporate governance. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Clarke, T. (2010). Recurring crises in Anglo-American corporate governance. Contributions to Political Economy, 29(1), 932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Clarke, T. (2014). The impact of financialisation on international corporate governance: The role of agency theory and maximising shareholder value. Law and Financial Markets Review March.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Clarke, T. (2015). International corporate governance 2nd ed. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Clarke, T., Branson, D. (2012). Sage handbook of corporate governance. London: Sage.Google Scholar

Clarke, T., Clegg, S. (2000). Changing paradigms: The transformation of management knowledge for the 21st century. London: Harper Collins.Google Scholar

Cohan, W. D. (2009). House of cards: How Wall Street gamblers broke capitalism. London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar

Corporations and Markets Advisory Board (CAMAC) (2006). The social responsibility of corporations report, Canberra: Australian Government, CAMAC.Google Scholar

Das, S. (2011). Extreme money: The masters of the universe and the cult of risk. London: Portfolio.Google Scholar

Davies, P. L. (2008). Gower and Davies' Principles of Company Law (8th ed., p. 740). London: Sweet and Maxwell.Google Scholar

Davis, G. F. (2009). Managed by the markets: How finance re-shaped America. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Dodd, E. M. Jr. (1932). For whom are corporate managers trustees? Harvard Law Review, 45(7), 11451163 (reproduced in T. Clarke (ed.), Corporate governance: Critical perspectives in business and management, vol. 1, The genesis of corporate governance (pp. 61–75). London: Routledge).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dore, R. (2008). Financialization of the global economy. Industrial and Corporate Change, 17, 10971112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dunbar, N. (2011). The devil's derivatives. Cambridge: Harvard Business Review Press.Google Scholar

Epstein, G. A. (2005). Financialization and the world economy. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar

Fligstein, N. (1990). The transformation of corporate control. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Fox, J., Lorsch, J. A. (2012). What good are shareholders? Harvard Business Review, 90, 4957.Google Scholar

Galbraith, J. K. (1952). American capitalism: The concept of countervailing power. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.Google Scholar

Galbraith, J. K. (1967). The new industrial state. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Ghoshal, S. (2005). Bad management theories are destroying good management practices. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 4(1), 7591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Haldane, G. (2011) ‘The short long’, Speech at the 29th Société Universitaire Européene de Recherches Financières Colloquium ‘New Paradigms in Money and Finance?’, Brussels, May 2011.Google Scholar

Henwood, D. (1998). Wall Street. London and New York, NY: Verso.Google Scholar

Hilferding, R. ([1910]1981). In M. Watnick & S. Gordon (Eds.), Finance capital, a study of the latest phase of capitalist development. London: RKP.Google Scholar

Hilmer, F., Tricker, R. I. (1991). An effective board, company director's manual. Sydney: Athol Yeomans, Pearson/Prentice Hall.Google Scholar

Ireland, P. (2005). Shareholder primacy and the distribution of wealth. Modern Law Review, 68(1), 4981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ireland, P. (2008). Financialization and corporate governance. Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly, 60(1), 134.Google Scholar

Johnson, S., Kwak, J. (2010). 13 bankers: The Wall Street takeover and the next financial meltdown. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar

Kay, J. (2012) The Kay Review of UK equity markets and long-term decision making, Interim Report. UK Government.Google Scholar

Keay, A. R. (2011). Risk, shareholder pressure and short-termism in financial institutions. Does enlightened shareholder value offer a panacea? Law and Financial Markets Review, 5(6), 435448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Keeley, L., Walters, H., Pikkel, R., Quinn, B. (2013). Ten types of innovation: The discipline of building breakthroughs. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar

Krippner, G. R. (2005). The financialization of the American economy. Socio-Economic Review, 3(2), 173208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Krippner, G. (2012). Capitalizing on crisis: The political origins of the rise of finance. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Lan, L. L., Heracleous, L. (2010). Rethinking agency theory: The view from law. Academy of Management Review, 35, 2294314.Google Scholar

Langlois, R. (2004). Chandler in a larger frame: Market, transaction costs and organizational form in history. Enterprise and Society N°5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lazonick, W. (1991). Business organisation and the myth of the market economy. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Lazonick, W. (2009). Sustainable prosperity in the new economy? Business organisation and high-tech employment in the United States. Kalamazoo: Upjohn Institute.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lazonick, W. (2012). In the name of shareholder value: How executive pay and stock buy-backs are damaging the US economy. In T. Clarke & D. Branson (Eds.), The Sage handbook of corporate governance (pp. 476495). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Loughrey, J., Keay, A., Cerioni, L. (2008). Legal practitioners, enlightened shareholder value and the shaping of corporate governance. Journal of Corporate Law Studies, 8, 79111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Marshall, S., Ramsay, I. (2013). Stakeholders and directors duties: Law, theory and evidence. UNSW Law Journal Forum 18(1), 291316.Google Scholar

Mitchell, R., O'Donnell, A., Ramsay, I. (2005). Shareholder value and employee interests: Intersections of corporate governance, corporate law and labor law. Wisconsin International Law Journal, 23, 417476.Google Scholar

O'Brien, J. (2014). Culture wars: Rate manipulation, institutional corruption, and the lost normative foundations of market conduct regulation. Seattle University Law Review, 37, 375421.Google Scholar

Parkinson, J. (1993). Corporate power and responsibility: Issues in the theory of company law. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Paulson, H. (2014). We US conservatives need to recognise climate change and find market solutions. The Observer 29 June.Google Scholar

Phillips, K. (2009) Bad money: Reckless finance , failed politics and the global crisis of American capitalism. London: Penguin.Google Scholar

Porter, M. (1992). Capital disadvantage: America's failing capital investment system. Harvard Business Review, 70, 6582.Google ScholarPubMed

Pye, A., Pettigrew, A. (2005). Studying board context, process and dynamics: Some challenges for the future. British Journal of Management, 16, S27S38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rajan, R. R. (2010). Hidden fractures still threaten the world economy. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Redmond, P. (2013). Directors duties and corporate social responsiveness. UNSW Law Journal Forum, 18(1), 312340.Google Scholar

Salz, M. (2013). An independent review of Barclay's business practices. London: Salz.Google Scholar

Segrestin, B., Hatchuel, A. (2011). Beyond agency theory, a post-crisis view of corporate law. British Journal of Management, 22, 484499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sorkin, A. R. (2009). Too big to fail. London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar

Stout, L. (2012b). The shareholder value myth. San Francisco: Berrett–Koehler.Google Scholar

United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) (2014). Integrated governance: A new model of governance for sustainability, UNEP Financial Initiative. Geneva: UNEP, United Nations.Google Scholar

US Financial Stability Oversight Council (2013). Annual report 2013. Washington: US Department of Treasury.Google Scholar

van der Zwan, N. (2013). Making sense of financialization. Socio-Economic Review, 12, 99129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Why was there a little reason to focus on corporate governance in the late 1800s and early 1900s quizlet?

Why was there little reason to focus on corporate governance in the late 1800s and early 1900s? There were no social, safety, or environmental problems at this time, so governance mechanisms were unnecessary. In most companies, the owner made the strategic decisions about the business, so little governance was needed.

What is the history of corporate governance and how was it changed?

While the concept of corporate governance has existed for centuries, the name didn't come into vogue until the 1970s. It was a term that was only used in the United States. The balance of power and decision-making between board directors, executives and shareholders has been evolving for centuries.

What is the main reason for corporate governance?

The purpose of corporate governance is to facilitate effective, entrepreneurial and prudent management that can deliver the long-term success of the company. Corporate governance is the system by which companies are directed and controlled. Boards of directors are responsible for the governance of their companies.

When did corporate governance start?

Corporate governance is the system by which businesses are directed and controlled. Modern corporate governance in the UK started with the seminal Cadbury Report (1992).