In a recent Wall Street Journal article, authors Clark Judge and Richard Torrenzano discuss anticipated changes to U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) rules which will allow more stockholder freedom of access to the process of corporate resolutions via the annual proxy.
Is this a new threat to corporate strategy?
Briefly for those of you unfamiliar with this process, annually corporations have their owners (stockholders) vote on various proposals, foremost of which is the selection of the members of the board of directors.
Per the article, these rule changes would allow various stockholders, or groups of stockholders, to nominate individuals for board seats. That nomination process would be at the expense of the corporation and would, again according to the article, create a campaign and election process much like that of any political election we see staged before us every November. It’s forecasted that this process will create more intense debates over various issues before society, offering groups with political agendas such as those of global warming and sustainability, the opportunity to place their candidate of choice on a corporate board. By definition, that candidate of choice would be a candidate who answers to a political constituency, instead of just a constituency of investors, i.e., owners.
A process such as that outlined above would give a clear advantage to activist groups for the placement of their own candidates on a targeted corporate board. This is an advantage which is not currently enjoyed by any activist group. And SEC rule changes such as those proposed above will go a long way to affording more power to activist groups.
But is this just another wrinkle in the everyday ebb and flow of activist vs. corporation? After all, activists and corporations have been wrestling for years. Well, yes, it’s possibly a new wrinkle. But I think this wrinkle is more wrinkly than most that have come before it. Why? Well, the article makes the point that, of course, corporations have always had to deal with multiple stakeholders, stakeholders which activists have traditionally claimed to represent. But the article points out something which is the theme of this blog. That theme is that the current environment in which corporations now need to deal with multiple stakeholders, led by activists, is very different. And one of those factors of difference is social media.
Another recent Wall Street Journal article amplifies this point about social media’s place in the new corporate activism. For example, in this article by Cari Tuna, it is pointed out that a new social networking site, MoxyVote.com, aggregates “advocates” and individual shareholders so that discussions about various proxy initiatives may be made. The effect of which helps activists to present their position to a group of selected shareholders in a socially-supporting environment.
In her article, Cari Tuna also mentions similar sites which allow advocates and individual investors to engage in political conversation regarding proxy initiatives. One such similar site is TransparentDemocracy.org. This site allows
Continue reading "Liberal" Access to the Proxy
