Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 3

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  shareholder activism
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
The aim of this paper is to contribute to the understanding of the relationship between activist hedge funds and other institutional investors. Hedge funds are more likely to target firms with high levels of institutional ownership and demonstrate a preference for short-term focused institutional investors. Hedge fund activism generates short run and long run abnormal returns without increasing stock return volatility. Regardless of the investment horizon, volatility is inversely related to prior period institutional ownership. The trading behavior of institutional owners with different investment horizons is consistent with hedge fund activism creating value. These findings hold regardless of whether investment horizon is based on portfolio churn rate or type of institution. Overall the results suggest a mutually beneficial relationship between activist hedge funds and other institutional investors.
EN
The purpose of this study is to examine whether pension funds in Poland, as a significant shareholder of listed companies, usually a minority, engage in corporate governance using the right to vote at general meetings. In particular, it examines whether pension funds refrain from voting or voted against the resolutions on matters which violate their rights of minority shareholders. Also, the study makes an attempt to assess whether the recent legal changes have altered the nature of the pension funds’ voting behavior. The analysis is based on data from the reports on general meetings of portfolio companies published by Aviva OFE for 2007 and for 2012, when the fund took the vote on the 980 and the 1822 respectively. The research results show that Aviva OFE was involved in corporate governance through voting at the general meeting being against resolutions, which clearly violated the interests of the shareholder, such as related to the executive remuneration and property issues. It is interesting that in most cases the fund voted with management on personnel matters or financial matters such as distribution of profit or coverage starts, even though their Corporate Governance Standards declare their willingness to participate effectively in the nomination and appointment of supervisory boards members. There was almost none of the resolutions relating to transactions with related parties, which may indicate a violation of the rights of minority shareholders, who should be able to express an opinion on this subject especially in highly concentrated ownership structure of listed companies in Poland.
PL
Artykuł dotyczy problemu aktywizmu inwestorskiego, podejmowanego przez inwestorów instytucjonalnych i zakresu ich obowiązków powierniczych względem powierzających im swoje oszczędności uczestników podmiotów zbiorowego inwestowania. Jak argumentuję, ze względu na swoją unikalną pozycję w strukturze korporacyjnego procesu decyzyjnego i zobowiązania wobec uczestników funduszy z jednej strony oraz wobec spółek portfelowych – z drugiej, zarządzający aktywami powinni aktywnie wykorzystywać swoje prawo głosu w procesie podejmowania decyzji w spółkach, uwzględniając przy jego wykonywaniu interes społeczny. Roz- poczynam od omówienia zmian w strukturze własnościowej spółek publicznych w XX wieku, które doprowadziły do bez- precedensowego wzrostu znaczenia inwestorów instytucjonalnych na współczesnym rynku kapitałowym. Następnie omawiam inicjatywy regulacyjne zmierzające do nałożenia na akcjonariuszy instytucjonalnych obowiązku zaangażowania w życie spółek. Rekonstruuję trzy główne, występujące w debacie publicznej podstawy nałożenia na inwestorów instytucjonalnych obowiązków związanych z ich zaangażowaniem w spółki publiczne: ich pozycję właścicielską; powierniczą relację wobec spółek portfelowych oraz własnych inwestorów, a także pogląd, dla którego proponuję nazwę doktryna Spidermana, głoszący konieczność proporcjonalności między posiadaną siłą oddziaływania a odpowiedzialnością.
XX
This paper deals with shareholder activism by institutional investors and the scope of their duties to people who commit their savings to undertakings for collective investments. It argues, that due to their unique position within the structure of the corporate decision- making process and their fiduciary duties to funds’ participants on one hand and their portfolio companies on the other, asset managers should actively use their voice in corporate affairs, and do so taking the public interest into account. The article sets out with description of changes in ownership structure of public corporations, which led to the unprecedented rise in the influence of asset managers on contemporary capital markets. Then, it discusses recent regulatory initiatives to impose a duty to engage in corporate matters on institutional investors. Next part reconstructs three arguments, most commonly deployed in the public debate, in favor of imposing the duties related to institutional investors’ engagement: them being the „owners” of the companies; the fiduciary nature of their relationship to both their portfolio companies and their investors; as well the belief – for which I propose the name of the Spiderman doctrine – that one’s responsibility should be proportionate to one’s power.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.