房间里的大象:帮助特拉华州法院制定法律,以结束公司决策中的系统性短期偏见

K. Mcneil, Keith Johnson
{"title":"房间里的大象:帮助特拉华州法院制定法律,以结束公司决策中的系统性短期偏见","authors":"K. Mcneil, Keith Johnson","doi":"10.36639/mbelr.8.1.elephant","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Short-termism in corporate decision-making is as problematic for long-term investors as relying on a three-mile radar on a supertanker. It is totally inadequate for handling the long-term risks and opportunities faced by the modern corporation. Yet recent empirical research shows that up to 85% of the S&P 1500 have no long-term planning. This is costing pension funds and other long-term investors dearly. For instance, the small minority of companies that do long-term planning and risk management had a long-term profitability that was 81% higher than their peers during the 2001–2014 period—with less stock volatility that costs investors dearly as well. This corporate short-termism mindset is even more troubling given that at least half of the value of the companies in the S&P 1500 is generated by expectations for realization of future value. Long-term investors therefore face a long-term expectations pipeline of hoped-for returns without a plan by corporations to back it up. The tragic result: this short-termism mindset appears to have a substantial depressing impact on long-term market returns while increasing long-term risk exposure. Both have contributed to the significantly underfunded status of many pension funds today.\n\nDelaware courts, the primary referees of corporate director fiduciary duties in the United States, are so frustrated with the persistent effects of short-term pressures—including corporate fraud and compliance breaches—that they are actively encouraging investors to bring the right cases to help change the rules. This Article examines the effects of short-termism and the Delaware judiciary’s responses to it. It then shows how existing Delaware law could be extended to address the underlying causes of corporate short-term bias, rather than merely imposing punishment on the symptoms.","PeriodicalId":177599,"journal":{"name":"Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Elephant in the Room: Helping Delaware Courts Develop Law to End Systemic Short-Term Bias in Corporate Decision-Making\",\"authors\":\"K. Mcneil, Keith Johnson\",\"doi\":\"10.36639/mbelr.8.1.elephant\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Short-termism in corporate decision-making is as problematic for long-term investors as relying on a three-mile radar on a supertanker. It is totally inadequate for handling the long-term risks and opportunities faced by the modern corporation. Yet recent empirical research shows that up to 85% of the S&P 1500 have no long-term planning. This is costing pension funds and other long-term investors dearly. For instance, the small minority of companies that do long-term planning and risk management had a long-term profitability that was 81% higher than their peers during the 2001–2014 period—with less stock volatility that costs investors dearly as well. This corporate short-termism mindset is even more troubling given that at least half of the value of the companies in the S&P 1500 is generated by expectations for realization of future value. Long-term investors therefore face a long-term expectations pipeline of hoped-for returns without a plan by corporations to back it up. The tragic result: this short-termism mindset appears to have a substantial depressing impact on long-term market returns while increasing long-term risk exposure. Both have contributed to the significantly underfunded status of many pension funds today.\\n\\nDelaware courts, the primary referees of corporate director fiduciary duties in the United States, are so frustrated with the persistent effects of short-term pressures—including corporate fraud and compliance breaches—that they are actively encouraging investors to bring the right cases to help change the rules. This Article examines the effects of short-termism and the Delaware judiciary’s responses to it. It then shows how existing Delaware law could be extended to address the underlying causes of corporate short-term bias, rather than merely imposing punishment on the symptoms.\",\"PeriodicalId\":177599,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.36639/mbelr.8.1.elephant\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36639/mbelr.8.1.elephant","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对于长期投资者来说,企业决策中的短视主义就像依赖一艘超级油轮上的三英里雷达一样有问题。这对于处理现代企业面临的长期风险和机遇是完全不够的。然而,最近的实证研究表明,标准普尔1500指数中高达85%的公司没有长期规划。这让养老基金和其他长期投资者付出了沉重的代价。例如,在2001年至2014年期间,少数进行长期规划和风险管理的公司的长期盈利能力比同行高出81%,而且股价波动更小,这也让投资者付出了高昂的代价。考虑到标准普尔1500指数成份股公司至少有一半的价值是由对未来价值实现的预期产生的,这种企业的短期主义心态就更令人不安了。因此,长期投资者面临的是一个长期的预期回报管道,而没有企业的支持计划。悲剧性的结果是:这种短视心态似乎对长期市场回报产生了实质性的压抑影响,同时增加了长期风险敞口。这两个因素都导致了如今许多养老基金资金严重不足的状况。特拉华州法院是美国公司董事受托责任的主要裁判,短期压力的持续影响——包括公司欺诈和违规行为——让他们非常沮丧,因此他们积极鼓励投资者提起正确的案件来帮助改变规则。本文考察了短期主义的影响以及特拉华州司法部门对此的反应。然后,它展示了特拉华州现有的法律可以如何扩展,以解决企业短期偏见的根本原因,而不仅仅是对症状施加惩罚。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Elephant in the Room: Helping Delaware Courts Develop Law to End Systemic Short-Term Bias in Corporate Decision-Making
Short-termism in corporate decision-making is as problematic for long-term investors as relying on a three-mile radar on a supertanker. It is totally inadequate for handling the long-term risks and opportunities faced by the modern corporation. Yet recent empirical research shows that up to 85% of the S&P 1500 have no long-term planning. This is costing pension funds and other long-term investors dearly. For instance, the small minority of companies that do long-term planning and risk management had a long-term profitability that was 81% higher than their peers during the 2001–2014 period—with less stock volatility that costs investors dearly as well. This corporate short-termism mindset is even more troubling given that at least half of the value of the companies in the S&P 1500 is generated by expectations for realization of future value. Long-term investors therefore face a long-term expectations pipeline of hoped-for returns without a plan by corporations to back it up. The tragic result: this short-termism mindset appears to have a substantial depressing impact on long-term market returns while increasing long-term risk exposure. Both have contributed to the significantly underfunded status of many pension funds today. Delaware courts, the primary referees of corporate director fiduciary duties in the United States, are so frustrated with the persistent effects of short-term pressures—including corporate fraud and compliance breaches—that they are actively encouraging investors to bring the right cases to help change the rules. This Article examines the effects of short-termism and the Delaware judiciary’s responses to it. It then shows how existing Delaware law could be extended to address the underlying causes of corporate short-term bias, rather than merely imposing punishment on the symptoms.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信