The separation of ownership and control has always been central in corporate governance debates. A large body of literature has sought to show that control-enhancing arrangements can deter investors. However, the experience of the last few years has suggested that companies with widely dispersed ownership can suffer from their own issues ? not least short-termism.
So, is ownership structure really the dividing line between ?good? and ?bad? governance that many commentators suggest? This short essay suggests that policymakers, academics and practitioners should be careful in deriving conclusions about the most effective ownership and control structures. Ownership is firm-specific and varies across life cycle stages, sectors, regions, countries and cultures. Ownership structures are also dynamic in that they (should) change over time according to evolving markets and shifting business strategies and practices.
We find that ownership changes much less over time in private firms than in public firms. The average largest shareholder in private (public) Norwegian firms keeps the same stake in 82% (14%) of two consecutive years. This evidence suggests that...Read more
The digital transformation is disrupting the financial sector. Venture capital, private equity and hedge funds are also affected. We see more and more firms implement emerging technologies in their investment process. There are several common...Read more
One of the most contentious debates in corporate law today, the common ownership debate. It focuses on the situation where large financial institutions with widely diversified portfolios own shares in competing companies within a particular...Read more
In 2015, as part of a program to reform China’s state-owned enterprises (SOEs), Guiding Opinions were issued by the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the State Council requiring SOEs to amend their corporate charters to...Read more