Corporate governance - Vigil

The language that signals conformity to a prevailing norm can contribute to the appearance of managerial competency and organizational legitimacy. We argue that top corporate managers’ use o

The Supreme Court yesterday [Dec. 6, 2016] issued its first opinion addressing the scope of insider trading liability in nearly twenty years. In a much anticipated decision, the Court in Salman v. United States addressed whether insider trading liability can arise where a tipper makes a “gift” of confidential information to a trading friend or relative but receives no financial or other tangible benefit in return. Relying on the 1983 seminal insider trading case, Dirks v. SEC, the Supreme Court answered that question in the affirmative.

Northern Trust (NASDAQ: NTRS) announced today it has received the Hedge Fund Administrator of the Year award from Custody Risk magazine.

This afternoon [December 1, 2016], I would like to talk with you about the history of sustainability disclosure, and about the fundamental principles that have long been central to the efficient functioning of our markets—concepts such as transparency, materiality, and, above all, the needs of investors. I believe it’s important for all of us to understand where those ideas came from, how they gained currency and what lies ahead. But before we talk about the past, and about the future, let’s consider where we are today.

Anti-takeover provisions are major governance mechanisms that affect firm value. It is often argued that they allow managers to bargain for a higher price in the event of a hostile takeover at the expense of reducing or delay the possibility of a takeover. However, there is little causal evidence on this trade-off.

Competition has been perceived with suspicion, and even suppressed for extended periods, in banking. After banking was liberalized, a process which started in the 1970s in the United States, it has become much more unstable, culminating with the 2007–2009 crisis which resembles the systemic banking problems of the 1930s.

McGill professor Karl Moore talks to Alain Bouchard, founder and executive chairman of Alimentation Couche-Tard Inc., one of the world’s largest convenience store chains

The evolution of corporate governance over the last three decades has produced meaningful changes in the expectations of shareholders and the business policies adopted to meet those expectations.

Who would you rather own a business with, Mahatma Ghandi or Ebenezer Scrooge? Behavioral economics research points to considerable benefits of co-ownership with Ghandi, as counterparties (like suppliers, customers, and potential employees) work harder and offer better contracting terms when dealing with philanthropic principals. [1] Understandably, these contracting parties feel better about not driving the hardest possible bargain, as the proceeds to a firm co-owned by Ghandi go at least partially towards noble causes.

In September 2009, Bank of America CEO Ken Lewis suddenly announced his intention to retire by the end of the year. The company’s board was taken by surprise as it scrambled to find a successor and was further embarrassed as multiple candidates rebuffed the company’s approach.

President-elect Trump and his supporters have publicly called for the overhaul of Dodd-Frank and related regulations enacted since the financial crisis, while Democrats have been steadfast in maintaining one of the major accomplishments of the Obama presidency. We have watched the incoming administration’s statements and actions with interest, along with the hardened views of congressional leaders in the context of the complex myriad of financial regulations that are in place or still to come. As a result, we have been cautious to publish our specific views or predictions—the safest prediction is obviously to say things are unpredictable.

More than two dozen chief executives of companies, including Bank of America, LinkedIn and Newmont Mining, have signed a pledge to speed women’s progress up the corporate ladder.