IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/dij/revfcs/v7y2004iq3p91-116.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

L’incidence de l’activisme actionnarial sur les mécanismes de gouvernance:le cas français

Author

Listed:
  • Carine Girard

    (Audencia Nantes)

Abstract

(VF)Afin d’apporter un nouvel éclairage aux études antérieures sur l’absence de réaction boursière à l’annonce publique d’un activisme actionnarial, cet article cherche à déterminer les aménagements organisationnels entrepris pour réduire la visibilité de la cause actionnariale. À partir d’un échantillon de 59 sociétés cotées sujettes au mécontentement d’actionnaires minoritaires de janvier 1989 à décembre 2000, nous cherchons à mesurer les effets de cette dissidence sur les mécanismes de gouvernance en fonction du degré d’influence exercé par la minorité d’actionnaires.(VA) Prior research shows that the absence of a significant market reaction at public announcement of shareholder activism is largely attributable to the weak visibility of conflict. For this reason we studied changes in corporate governance relevant to the visibility of conflict. From a sample of 59 listed companies with dissident shareholders between January 1989 and December 2000, we tried to measure the effects of shareholder activism on corporate governance according to the degree of influence of minority shareholders.

Suggested Citation

  • Carine Girard, 2004. "L’incidence de l’activisme actionnarial sur les mécanismes de gouvernance:le cas français," Revue Finance Contrôle Stratégie, revues.org, vol. 7(3), pages 91-116, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:dij:revfcs:v:7:y:2004:i:q3:p:91-116
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repec-crego.u-bourgogne.fr/images/stories/rev/073116.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mulherin, J. Harold & Poulsen, Annette B., 1998. "Proxy contests and corporate change: implications for shareholder wealth," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 279-313, March.
    2. Strickland, Deon & Wiles, Kenneth W. & Zenner, Marc, 1996. "A requiem for the USA Is small shareholder monitoring effective?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 319-338, February.
    3. John R. Nofsinger & Richard W. Sias, 1999. "Herding and Feedback Trading by Institutional and Individual Investors," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 54(6), pages 2263-2295, December.
    4. Van Nuys, Karen, 1993. "Corporate governance through the proxy process*1: Evidence from the 1989 Honeywell proxy solicitation," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 101-132, August.
    5. Wahal, Sunil, 1996. "Pension Fund Activism and Firm Performance," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 31(1), pages 1-23, March.
    6. Parrino, Robert & Sias, Richard W. & Starks, Laura T., 2003. "Voting with their feet: institutional ownership changes around forced CEO turnover," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 3-46, April.
    7. Guercio, Diane Del & Hawkins, Jennifer, 1999. "The motivation and impact of pension fund activism," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 293-340, June.
    8. Michael Useem & Constance Gager, 1996. "Employee Shareholders Or Institutional Investors? When Corporate Managers Replace Their Stockholders," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(5), pages 613-632, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Denes, Matthew R. & Karpoff, Jonathan M. & McWilliams, Victoria B., 2017. "Thirty years of shareholder activism: A survey of empirical research," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 405-424.
    2. Lily Qiu, 2004. "Which Institutional Investors Monitor? Evidence from Acquisition Activity," Yale School of Management Working Papers amz2497, Yale School of Management, revised 01 Jun 2006.
    3. Roberta Romano, 2002. "Does Confidential Proxy Voting Matter?," NBER Working Papers 9126, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Romano, Roberta, 2002. "Does Confidential Proxy Voting Matter?," Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series qt9z88z4th, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics.
    5. Roberta Romano, 2002. "Does Confidential Proxy Voting Matter?," Yale School of Management Working Papers ysm300, Yale School of Management, revised 01 Feb 2003.
    6. Szilagyi, P.G., 2007. "Corporate governance and the agency costs of debt and outside equity," Other publications TiSEM 9520d40a-224f-43a8-9bf9-b, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    7. Renneboog, L.D.R. & Szilagyi, P.G., 2009. "Shareholder Activism through the Proxy Process," Other publications TiSEM cc25d736-2965-4511-b100-1, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    8. Stuart L. Gillan & Laura T. Starks, 2002. "Institutional Investors, Corporate Ownership, and Corporate Governance: Global Perspectives," WIDER Working Paper Series DP2002-09, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    9. Erenburg, Grigori & Smith, Janet Kiholm & Smith, Richard, 2016. "Which institutional investors matter for firm survival and performance?," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 348-373.
    10. Chen, Xia & Harford, Jarrad & Li, Kai, 2007. "Monitoring: Which institutions matter?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(2), pages 279-305, November.
    11. Danny Yeung, 2012. "The Impact of Institutional Ownership: A Study of the Australian Equity Market," PhD Thesis, Finance Discipline Group, UTS Business School, University of Technology, Sydney, number 11, July-Dece.
    12. Matsusaka, John G. & Ozbas, Oguzhan & Yi, Irene, 2017. "Why Do Managers Fight Shareholder Proposals? Evidence from SEC No-Action Letter Decisions," Working Papers 262, The University of Chicago Booth School of Business, George J. Stigler Center for the Study of the Economy and the State.
    13. Bethel, Jennifer E. & Hu, Gang & Wang, Qinghai, 2009. "The market for shareholder voting rights around mergers and acquisitions: Evidence from institutional daily trading and voting," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 129-145, February.
    14. Erik Devos & Seow-Eng Ong & Andrew Spieler & Desmond Tsang, 2013. "REIT Institutional Ownership Dynamics and the Financial Crisis," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 266-288, August.
    15. Steiger, Max, 1998. "Institutionelle Investoren und Corporate Governance: Eine empirische Analyse," ZEW Dokumentationen 98-05, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    16. Abe Jong & Gerard Mertens & Peter Roosenboom, 2006. "Shareholders’ Voting at General Meetings: Evidence from the Netherlands," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 10(4), pages 353-380, November.
    17. Nicole Boyson & Robert Mooradian, 2011. "Corporate governance and hedge fund activism," Review of Derivatives Research, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 169-204, July.
    18. Clifford, Christopher P., 2008. "Value creation or destruction? Hedge funds as shareholder activists," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 323-336, September.
    19. Renneboog, Luc & Szilagyi, Peter G., 2011. "The role of shareholder proposals in corporate governance," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 167-188, February.
    20. Helwege, Jean & Intintoli, Vincent J. & Zhang, Andrew, 2012. "Voting with their feet or activism? Institutional investors’ impact on CEO turnover," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 22-37.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    gouvernement des entreprises; activisme actionnarial; bataille de procurations; corporate governance; shareholder activism; proxy contests.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • G32 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Financing Policy; Financial Risk and Risk Management; Capital and Ownership Structure; Value of Firms; Goodwill
    • G34 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Mergers; Acquisitions; Restructuring; Corporate Governance
    • K22 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Business and Securities Law

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:dij:revfcs:v:7:y:2004:i:q3:p:91-116. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Informatique Technique MSH Dijon (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.revues.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.