Understanding uncontested director elections

57Citations
Citations of this article
76Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

We examine the determinants and consequences of voting outcomes in uncontested director elections. Exploiting a unique hand-collected data set of the rationale behind proxy advisors' recommendations - The primary driver of voting outcomes-we document the director and board characteristics on which voting shareholders focus (as well as those that they neglect), their evolution over time, and their relative importance. Absent a negative recommendation, high votes withheld are infrequent, highlighting the agenda-setting role of proxy advisors. While high votes withheld rarely result in director turnover, our analyses show that firms often respond to an adverse vote by explicitly addressing the underlying concern. Overall, it appears that shareholders use their votes in uncontested director elections to get directors to address specific problems, rather than to vote them onto or off of the board, but they do so only on matters highlighted by the proxy advisors.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Ertimur, Y., Ferri, F., & Oesch, D. (2018). Understanding uncontested director elections. Management Science, 64(7), 3400–3420. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2017.2760

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free