Kortetermijndenken bij vennootschapsbestuurders

Wat is kortetermijndenken bij vennootschappen? Is er empirisch bewijs dat kortetermijndenken een groot en systematisch probleem is bij bestuurders van beursgenoteerde vennootschappen? Leidt aandeelhoudersactivisme tot kortetermijndenken? En stimuleren loyauteitsstmerechten en controlerende aandeelhouders langetermijndenken?

Dit zijn vragen die reeds in eerdere blogposts op deze blog aan bod kwamen (zie bijvoorbeeld hier, hier, hier en hier).

In een recent webinar voor Instituut voor Filosofische en Sociaalwetenschappelijke Educatie (Ifese), probeerde ik een antwoord te geven op deze en gerelateerde vragen inzake kortetermijndenken bij vennootschapsbestuurders. Een opname van mijn presentatie is beschikbaar op YouTube.

Mijn presentatie was gebaseerd op een FWO-onderzoeksproject dat ik uitvoer samen met drs. Theo Monnens over “Short-termism in corporate governance: a continental European perspective” en op verschillende papers die ik over dit thema publiceerde met co-auteurs (bijvoorbeeld hier, hier en hier).

Een kort voorproefje van mijn conclusies vindt u hier:

  • Het probleem van kortetermijndenken moet onderscheiden worden van het probleem van externaliteiten veroorzaakt door vennootschappen;
  • Kortetermijndenken kan worden veroorzaakt door kortetemijngerichte investeerders (en te veel aandeelhoudersmacht) of kortetermijngerichte managers (en te weinig aandeelhoudersmacht);
  • Er is geen overtuigend bewijs van systematische macro-economische effecten van kortetermijndenken;
  • Er is geen overtuigend bewijs dat hedge fonds activisten gemiddeld genomen kortetermijngericht zijn;
  • Er is geen overtuigend bewijs dat loyauteitsstemrecht helpt bij het probleem van kortetermijndenken, behalve door het faciliteren van controlerende aandeelhouders;
  • Er zijn goede theoretische en empirische argumenten dat controlerende aandeelhouders zowel positief als negatief kunnen zijn voor langetermijndenken – het hangt af van het type van controlerende aandeelhouder;
  • “One size does not fit all” in corporate governance – ook niet om kortetermijndenken tegen te gaan;
  • Dwingende wetgeving om een zogenaamd probleem van kortetermijndenken aan te pakken is daarom op basis van het huidige bewijs niet gerechtvaardigd.

Voor de volledige redenering verwijs ik naar de YouTube opname of de hierboven genoemde papers.

Tom Vos
Assistant professor, Maastricht University
Visiting professor, Jean-Pierre Blumberg Chair at the University of Antwerp
Research fellow, KU Leuven
Attorney, Linklaters LLP

Recent trends in the remuneration of executives and directors

Conference organized by the Jean-Pierre Blumberg Chair on 23 May

Over the last few years, remuneration in public companies has received considerable attention in both academic and public discourse. Several national and international initiatives have reformed remuneration practices to achieve various objectives, including improving shareholder engagement, encouraging active monitoring by (independent) directors, achieving corporate sustainability, and incentivising long-term value creation. Although these trends have had a significant impact on practice, large differences in remuneration practices still exist.

On the afternoon of 23 May 2024, the Jean-Pierre Blumberg Chair organizes a conference on the topic of “Recent trends in the remuneration of executives and directors”. The conference aims to improve the understanding in Belgium and Europe of the dynamic topic of remuneration of executives and directors. The conference brings together theory and practice through academic presentations that contain empirical evidence on remuneration practices, and through a panel discussion of prominent practitioners (moderated by Charles-Antoine Leunen, Linklaters). 

More information and registration can be found via this link. Below follows a brief teaser of what conference participants may expect.

Continue reading “Recent trends in the remuneration of executives and directors”

The missing role of controlling shareholders in the short-termism debate

On 30 May 2023, the University of Antwerp, Harvard Law School and the European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI) organized a conference on “short-termism in European corporate governance”. The ECGI Blog has just dedicated a special issue to the conference, with several blogposts from speakers at the conference:

In addition, the recordings of the presentations have been made available on the ECGI website.

In the blogpost below, I summarize the argument that I made at the conference, based on a recent working paper, that controlling shareholders have an important but underappreciated impact on corporate short-termism.

Continue reading “The missing role of controlling shareholders in the short-termism debate”

Short-termism in European corporate governance

Conference organized by University of Antwerp, Harvard Law School and ECGI on 30 May

Short-termist behavior by corporations is often seen as a large societal problem. For example, Joe Biden wrote in a 2016 op-ed for the Wall Street Journal: “Short-termism […] is one of the greatest threats to America’s enduring prosperity”

However, the debate on short-termism has so far largely focused on possible short-termism in the US and the UK). Short-termism in European corporate governance has received much less attention. A notable exception is the 2020 EY study for the European Commission on “directors’ duties and sustainable corporate governance. This study is generally regarded as heavily flawed, however.

For this reason, the University of Antwerp, Harvard Law School and the European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI) have decided to organize a conference on “short-termism in European corporate governance” on 30 May in Antwerp. We believe that it is important to study short-termism in (continental) Europe, because corporate governance in continental Europe differs in important respects from corporate governance in the US and the UK, with potentially profound implications for the short-termism debate. 

Controlling shareholders in Europe

A first important difference is that corporations in continental European countries more often have a controlling shareholder than corporations in the US and the UK. For example, according to one paper, the percentage of shares held by the largest shareholder in the corporation is much higher in France (46.4%), Germany (45.3%), Belgium (38.6%) and the Netherlands (34.6%), than in the US (21.4%) and the UK (19.5%). 

Continue reading “Short-termism in European corporate governance”

Why Stock Market Short-Termism Is Not the Problem in the US (or the EU)

review of Mark Roe’s recent book

Mark Roe, one of the most prominent voices in the short-termism debate, recently wrote an excellent book on “Missing the Target. Why Stock Market Short-Termism Is Not the Problem”. Roe defines short-termism as “overvaluing current corporate results at the expense of future profits and well-being”. The key message of the book is that blaming stock-market short-termism for societal problems is a widely held and politically attractive view, but one that is not supported by the academic evidence. Roe argues that many of those who blame stock markets for being short-termist “miss the target”, as the societal problems they identify are caused by other factors than stock-market short-termism.

Below, I summarize the different chapters of the book and reflect on its contributions to the short-termism debate. Those who are triggered by the views of Mark Roe on the short-termism debate are welcome to attend the (free and hybrid in person/online) workshop of 18 May (6-8 pm), organized by the Jean-Pierre Blumberg Chair, where Mark Roe will discuss the role of external stakeholders in the short-termism debate.

Summary of the book

Continue readingWhy Stock Market Short-Termism Is Not the Problem in the US (or the EU)

Short-termism in Belgian corporate governance

A teaser of the opening lecture of Tom Vos on 21 February, 6-8 pm

“The finance world’s short-termism will destroy our communities, economies and the planet” (Sasja Beslik, World Economic Forum, 2017).

“Short-termism […] is one of the greatest threats to America’s enduring prosperity” (Joe Biden, Wall Street Journal, 2016)

These quotes illustrate that stock-market short-termism is considered a big problem. But is short-termism really a problem in Belgium? And what elements of corporate governance encourage or discourage short-termist behavior? If it is a problem, what governance reforms should we consider? 

I discuss these questions on 21 February (6-8 pm) during an opening lecture for a course at the University of Antwerp on short-termism in Belgian corporate governance. Below, I already offer a teaser of this lecture.

Continue reading “Short-termism in Belgian corporate governance”