Independent Directors and Controlling Shareholders

L. Bebchuk, Assaf Hamdani
{"title":"Independent Directors and Controlling Shareholders","authors":"L. Bebchuk, Assaf Hamdani","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2741738","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Independent directors are an important feature of modern corporate law. Courts and lawmakers around the world increasingly rely on these directors to protect investors from controlling shareholder opportunism. In this Article, we argue that the existing director-election regime significantly undermines the ability of independent directors to effectively perform their oversight role. Both the election and retention of independent directors normally depend on the controlling shareholders. As a result, these directors have incentives to go along with controllers’ wishes, or, at least, inadequate incentives to protect public investors. \nTo induce independent directors to perform their oversight role, we argue, some independent directors should be accountable to public investors. This can be achieved by empowering investors to determine or at least substantially influence the election or retention of these directors. These “enhanced-independence” directors should play a key role in vetting “conflicted decisions,” where the interests of the controller and public investors substantially diverge, but not have a special role with respect to other corporate issues. Enhancing the independence of some directors would substantially improve the protection of public investors without undermining the ability of the controller to set the firm’s strategy. \nWe explain how the Delaware courts, as well as other lawmakers in the United States and around the world, can introduce or encourage enhanced-independence arrangements. Our analysis offers a framework of director election rules that allows policymakers to produce the precise balance of power between controlling shareholders and public investors that they find appropriate. We also analyze the proper role of enhanced-independence directors as well as respond to objections to their use. Overall, we show that relying on enhanced-independence directors, rather than independent directors whose election fully depend on the controller, can provide a better foundation for investor protection in controlled companies.","PeriodicalId":409712,"journal":{"name":"ERPN: Entrepreneurs (Finance) (Topic)","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"74","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERPN: Entrepreneurs (Finance) (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2741738","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 74

Abstract

Independent directors are an important feature of modern corporate law. Courts and lawmakers around the world increasingly rely on these directors to protect investors from controlling shareholder opportunism. In this Article, we argue that the existing director-election regime significantly undermines the ability of independent directors to effectively perform their oversight role. Both the election and retention of independent directors normally depend on the controlling shareholders. As a result, these directors have incentives to go along with controllers’ wishes, or, at least, inadequate incentives to protect public investors. To induce independent directors to perform their oversight role, we argue, some independent directors should be accountable to public investors. This can be achieved by empowering investors to determine or at least substantially influence the election or retention of these directors. These “enhanced-independence” directors should play a key role in vetting “conflicted decisions,” where the interests of the controller and public investors substantially diverge, but not have a special role with respect to other corporate issues. Enhancing the independence of some directors would substantially improve the protection of public investors without undermining the ability of the controller to set the firm’s strategy. We explain how the Delaware courts, as well as other lawmakers in the United States and around the world, can introduce or encourage enhanced-independence arrangements. Our analysis offers a framework of director election rules that allows policymakers to produce the precise balance of power between controlling shareholders and public investors that they find appropriate. We also analyze the proper role of enhanced-independence directors as well as respond to objections to their use. Overall, we show that relying on enhanced-independence directors, rather than independent directors whose election fully depend on the controller, can provide a better foundation for investor protection in controlled companies.
独立董事和控股股东
独立董事是现代公司法的一个重要特征。世界各地的法院和立法者越来越依赖这些董事来保护投资者免受控股股东机会主义的侵害。在本文中,我们认为现有的董事选举制度严重削弱了独立董事有效履行其监督职能的能力。独立董事的选举和留任通常取决于控股股东。因此,这些董事有动机去遵从控制人的意愿,或者至少没有足够的动机去保护公众投资者。为了促使独立董事发挥其监督作用,我们认为,一些独立董事应该对公众投资者负责。这可以通过授权投资者决定或至少在很大程度上影响这些董事的选举或留任来实现。这些“增强独立性”的董事应该在审查“冲突决策”方面发挥关键作用,即控制人与公众投资者的利益存在重大分歧,但在其他公司问题上不应发挥特殊作用。加强部分董事的独立性将大大改善对公众投资者的保护,同时又不会削弱控制人制定公司战略的能力。我们解释了特拉华州法院以及美国和世界各地的其他立法者如何引入或鼓励增强的独立性安排。我们的分析提供了一个董事选举规则框架,使政策制定者能够在他们认为合适的情况下,在控股股东和公众投资者之间实现精确的权力平衡。我们还分析了增强独立董事的适当作用以及对其使用的反对意见的回应。总体而言,我们表明依靠增强独立董事,而不是完全依赖控制人的独立董事的选举,可以为受控公司的投资者保护提供更好的基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信