Top

Journal of Business Ethics

Published in:

01-03-2015

Enlightened Shareholder Maximization: Is this Strategy Achievable?

Author: Pamela E. Queen

Published in: Journal of Business Ethics | Issue 3/2015

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

The role of a corporation is often debated as a mutually exclusive choice between economic responsibility to shareholders and social responsibility to society. An evolving viewpoint embraces an integrated approach focused on long-term value creation for shareholders which benefits other stakeholders. Maximizing long-term shareholder value as a corporate objective can be compatible with stakeholder theory when an enlightened shareholder maximization strategy is embraced. Firms implementing an enlightened shareholder maximization strategy are expected to make decisions and use resources which achieve long-term value-creating outcomes. However, critics of enlightened shareholder maximization as a corporate goal contend this strategy conflicts with maximizing shareholder value. This study explores whether firms which embrace a balanced enlightened shareholder maximization strategy indeed create long-term value which does not sacrifice shareholder wealth.

previous article Evaluation of Sustainability Practices in the United States and Large Corporations

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Despite evidence that corporate legitimacy is strengthened when businesses solve social problems (Phillips 2003; Palazzo and Scherer 2006), opponents of stakeholder theory, as a business objective, contend that maximizing shareholder value must be the unambiguous corporate objective (Sundaram and Inkpen 2004).

When efforts to maximize shareholders’ wealth reflect fairness, open and free competition in which no market participants are harmed, these efforts are aligned with stakeholder management views in which no harm is done to the environment, people, or society.

The measures used to rank these firms include factors related to the triple bottom line (people, profit, and planet).

The CR magazine’s methodology committee ranks companies in the Russell 1000 index based upon over 290 data elements in seven categories: environment, climate change, employee relations, human rights, governance, finance, and philanthropy. The methodology committee defines the relative weights for these categories. For example, the environment category may have a weight of 20 % as compared to a 12 % weight for the finance category.

Both the P/E and M/B ratios are based upon accounting measures (earnings for the P/E ratio and book value for the M/B ratio) which are susceptible to manipulation. A key drawback of the P/E ratio is firms often manage earnings with accounting wizardry to make them look better than they actually are. For the M/B ratio, problems with manipulation are sometimes cited, but not as often as with the P/E ratio. However, both measures should be avoided as the sole basis for decision making.

Meta-analysis of the relationship between firm performance and social measures finds various results from negative, neutral, or positive correlation with studies using intangible measures such as reputation and non-financial measures yielding stronger explanatory results (Margolis and Walsh 2001; Aguinis and Glavas 2012).

Aguinis, H., & Glavas, A. (2012). What we know and don’t know about corporate social responsibility: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 38(4), 932–968.CrossRef

Ahmed, P., Nanda, S., & Schnusenberg, O. (2010). Can firms do well while doing good? Applied Financial Economics, 20(11), 845–860.CrossRef

Andreadakis, S. (2012). Enlightened shareholder value: Is it the new modus operandi for modern companies? In Corporate governance (pp. 415–432). Berlin: Springer.

Bakan, J. (2004). The corporation: The pathological pursuit of profit and power. New York: Free Press.

Barnea, A., & Rubin, A. (2010). Corporate social responsibility as a conflict between shareholders. Journal of Business Ethics, 97, 71–86.CrossRef

Benson, B. W., Davidson, W. N., I. I. I., Wang, H., & Worrell, D. L. (2011). Deviations from expected stakeholder management. Firm Value, and Corporate Governance, Financial Management, 40(1), 39–81.

Bird, R., Hall, A. D., Momentè, F., & Reggiani, F. (2007). What corporate social responsibility activities are valued by the market? Journal of Business Ethics, 76(2), 189–206.CrossRef

Blattberg, C. (2013). Welfare: Towards the patriotic corporation. SSRN 2250348.

Bolton, P., & Faure-Grimaud, A. (2010). Satisficing contracts. The Review of Economic Studies, 77(3), 937–971.CrossRef

Carroll, A. B., & Shabana, K. M. (2010). The business case for corporate social responsibility: A review of concepts, research and practice. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1), 85–105.CrossRef

Cespa, G., & Cestone, G. (2007). Corporate social responsibility and managerial entrenchment. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 16, 741–771.CrossRef

Copeland, T. E., Koller, T., & Murrin, J. (1994). Valuation: Measuring and managing the value of companies. New York: Wiley.

Crews, D. E. (2010). Strategies for implementing sustainability: five leadership challenges. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 75(2), 15.

Cross, K. F., & Lynch, R. L. (1992). For good measure. CMA magazine, 66(3), 20–23.

Danielson, M., Heck, J., & Shaffer, D. (2008). Shareholder theory—how opponents and proponents both get it wrong. SSRN 1309066.

de Lange, D. E., Busch, T., & Delgado-Ceballos, J. (2012). Sustaining sustainability in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 110(2), 151–156.CrossRef

Dodd, E. (1932). For whom are corporate managers trustee? Harvard Law Review, 45(7), 1145–1163.CrossRef

Enderle, G. (2009). A rich concept of wealth creation beyond profit maximization and adding value. Journal of Business Ethics, 84(3), 281–295.CrossRef

Figueroa-Armijos, M., Dabson, B., & Johnson, T. G. (2012). Rural entrepreneurship in a time of recession. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 2(1), Article 3.

Filbeck, G., & Preece, D. (2003). Fortune’s best 100 companies to work for in America: Do they work for shareholders? Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 30(5–6), 771–797.CrossRef

Freeman, R. E. (1984). Stakeholder management: Framework and philosophy. Mansfield, MA: Pitman.

Freeman, R. E., Wicks, A. C., & Parmar, B. (2004). Stakeholder theory and “the corporate objective revisited”. Organization Science, 15(3), 364–369.CrossRef

Friedman, M. (1970, September 13). The social responsibility of business is to create profits. New York Times Magazine, pp. 122–126.

Gray, R., Owen, D. L., & Adams, C. (1996). Accounting and accountability: Social and environmental accounting in a changing world. Hemel Hempstead: Prentice Hall.

Hakkio, C. S., & Keeton, W. R. (2009). Financial stress: What is it, how can it be measured, and why does it matter? Economic Review, 94(2), 5–50.

Harrison, J., & Combs, J. (2012). The moderating effects from corporate governance characteristics on the relationship between available slack and community-based firm performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 107, 409–422.CrossRef

Holmes, S. L. (1976). Executive perceptions of corporate social responsibility. Business Horizons, 19, 34–40.CrossRef

Ittner, C. D., & Larcker, D. F. (2001). Assessing empirical research in managerial accounting: A value-based management perspective. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 32(1), 349–410.CrossRef

Ittner, C. D., & Larcker, D. F. (2003). Coming up short on nonfinancial performance measurement. Harvard Business Review, 81(11), 88–95.

Jensen, M. C. (2002). Value maximization, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function. Business Ethics Quarterly, 12(2), 235–256.CrossRef

Jordi, C. (2010). Rethinking the firm’s mission and purpose. European Management Review, 7, 195–204.CrossRef

Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1992). The balanced scorecard œ measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, January–February, 71–79.

Kok, P., Weile, T. V. D., McKenna, R., & Brown, A. (2001). A corporate social responsibility audit within a quality management framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 31, 285–297.CrossRef

Kolstad, I. (2007). Why firms should not always maximize profits. Journal of Business Ethics, 76(2), 137–145.CrossRef

Koslowski, P. (2000). The limits of shareholder value. Journal of Business Ethics, 27(1–2), 137–148.CrossRef

Lewis, W. A. (2013). Theory of economic growth. London: Routledge.

Lougee, B., & Wallace, J. (2008). The corporate social responsibility (CSR) trend. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 20(1), 96–108.CrossRef

Malgharni, A., Soomasundaram, N., & Muthaiyah, S. (2010). Non- financial performance for firm’s evaluation. European Journal of Economics, Finance, and Administrative Sciences, 23, 123–138.

Margolis, J., & Walsh, J. (2001). People and profits? The search for a link between a company’s social and financial performance. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Martin, J., Petty, W., & Wallace, J. (2009). Shareholder value maximization—is there a role for corporate social responsibility? Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 21(2), 110–118.CrossRef

Mizruchi, M. S. (2004). Berle and Means revisited: The governance and power of large US corporations. Theory and Society, 33(5), 579–617.CrossRef

Ndlovu, S. (2010). Non-financial performance measures within public companies—a literature review. Advances in Accounting, Finance and Economics, 3(1), 1–12.

O’Sullivan, K. (2006, October). Virtue rewarded: Companies are suddenly discovering the profit potential of social responsibility, CFO, 47–52.

Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization studies, 24(3), 403–441.CrossRef

Palazzo, G., & Scherer, A. (2006). Corporate legitimacy as deliberation: A communicative framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 66, 71–88.CrossRef

Phillips, R. (2003). Stakeholder legitimacy. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(1), 25–41.CrossRef

Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy and society. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 78–92.

Simnett, R., Vanstraelen, A., & Chua, W. F. (2009). Assurance on sustainability reports: An international comparison. The Accounting Review, 84(3), 937–967.CrossRef

Simon, H. A. (1955). A behavioral model of rational choice. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69(1), 99–118.CrossRef

Smith, H. L. (2003). Lessons executives failed to learn from their mother: Integrating earth-centered values within corporate core ideologies. Business and Society Review, 108(3), 389–404.CrossRef

Sundaram, A. K., & Inkpen, A. C. (2004). The corporate objective revisited. Organization Science, 15(3), 350–363.CrossRef

Sundin, H., Granlund, M., & Brown, D. A. (2010). Balancing multiple competing objectives with a balanced scorecard. European Accounting Review, 19(2), 203–246.CrossRef

Wood, D. J. (1991). Corporate social performance revisited. Academy of Management Review, 16(4), 691–718.

Title: Enlightened Shareholder Maximization: Is this Strategy Achievable?
Author: Pamela E. Queen
Publication date: 01-03-2015
Publisher: Springer Netherlands
Published in: Journal of Business Ethics / Issue 3/2015
Print ISSN: 0167-4544
Electronic ISSN: 1573-0697
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2070-6

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Other articles of this Issue 3/2015

Resources and Capabilities of Triple Bottom Line Firms: Going Over Old or Breaking New Ground?

Towards a Research Agenda on the Sustainable and Socially Responsible Management of Agency Workers Through a Flexicurity Model of HRM

On Responsibility in China: Understanding and Practice

Peoples’ Views About the Acceptability of Executive Bonuses and Compensation Policies

Evaluation of Sustainability Practices in the United States and Large Corporations

Establishing How Natural Environmental Competency, Organizational Social Consciousness, and Innovativeness Relate

Premium Partner