IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jfinec/v134y2019i3p669-688.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mutual fund board connections and proxy voting

Author

Listed:
  • Calluzzo, Paul
  • Kedia, Simi

Abstract

We study fund-firm connections that arise when firm executives and directors serve as fund directors. We find that connected funds are significantly more likely to vote with management in proposals with negative Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) recommendations or low shareholder support. As our data show that management support does not exist either before connection formation or after its termination, this result is unlikely to be caused by omitted factors. Rather, the connected fund's voting patterns show independence from ISS recommendations and successful connected voting is associated with positive announcement returns, suggesting that connected fund support for management reflects information advantages. Lastly, we find that a fund family and firm are more likely to connect when the fund family holds a large stake in the firm and is geographically proximate as well as when it has a record of voting independently from ISS.

Suggested Citation

  • Calluzzo, Paul & Kedia, Simi, 2019. "Mutual fund board connections and proxy voting," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(3), pages 669-688.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jfinec:v:134:y:2019:i:3:p:669-688
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jfineco.2019.04.012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304405X19301126
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jfineco.2019.04.012?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David F. Larcker & Allan L. McCall & Gaizka Ormazabal, 2015. "Outsourcing Shareholder Voting to Proxy Advisory Firms," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 58(1), pages 173-204.
    2. Peter Iliev & Michelle Lowry, 2015. "Are Mutual Funds Active Voters?," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 28(2), pages 446-485.
    3. Vicente Cuñat & Mireia Gine & Maria Guadalupe, 2012. "The Vote Is Cast: The Effect of Corporate Governance on Shareholder Value," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 67(5), pages 1943-1977, October.
    4. Anzhela Knyazeva & Diana Knyazeva & Ronald W. Masulis, 2013. "The Supply of Corporate Directors and Board Independence," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 26(6), pages 1561-1605.
    5. Matvos, Gregor & Ostrovsky, Michael, 2010. "Heterogeneity and peer effects in mutual fund proxy voting," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(1), pages 90-112, October.
    6. Brav, Alon & Jiang, Wei & Kim, Hyunseob, 2010. "Hedge Fund Activism: A Review," Foundations and Trends(R) in Finance, now publishers, vol. 4(3), pages 185-246, March.
    7. Nadya Malenko & Yao Shen, 2016. "The Role of Proxy Advisory Firms: Evidence from a Regression-Discontinuity Design," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 29(12), pages 3394-3427.
    8. Davis, Gerald F. & Kim, E. Han, 2007. "Business ties and proxy voting by mutual funds," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(2), pages 552-570, August.
    9. Brian J. Bushee, 2001. "Do Institutional Investors Prefer Near†Term Earnings over Long†Run Value?," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(2), pages 207-246, June.
    10. Dragana Cvijanović & Amil Dasgupta & Konstantinos E. Zachariadis, 2016. "Ties That Bind: How Business Connections Affect Mutual Fund Activism," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 71(6), pages 2933-2966, December.
    11. Ai, Chunrong & Norton, Edward C., 2003. "Interaction terms in logit and probit models," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 123-129, July.
    12. Cindy R. Alexander & Mark A. Chen & Duane J. Seppi & Chester S. Spatt, 2010. "Interim News and the Role of Proxy Voting Advice," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 23(12), pages 4419-4454, December.
    13. Bushee, BJ & Noe, CF, 2000. "Corporate disclosure practices, institutional investors, and stock return volatility," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38, pages 171-202.
    14. Alexander W. Butler & Umit G. Gurun, 2012. "Educational Networks, Mutual Fund Voting Patterns, and CEO Compensation," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 25(8), pages 2533-2562.
    15. Vyacheslav Fos & Kai Li & Margarita Tsoutsoura, 2018. "Do Director Elections Matter?," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 31(4), pages 1499-1531.
    16. Jennifer E. Bethel & Stuart L. Gillan, 2002. "The Impact of the Institutional and Regulatory Environment on Shareholder Voting," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 31(4), Winter.
    17. Ashraf, Rasha & Jayaraman, Narayanan & Ryan, Harley E., 2012. "Do Pension-Related Business Ties Influence Mutual Fund Proxy Voting? Evidence from Shareholder Proposals on Executive Compensation," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 47(3), pages 567-588, June.
    18. Aggarwal, Reena & Dahiya, Sandeep & Prabhala, Nagpurnanand R., 2019. "The power of shareholder votes: Evidence from uncontested director elections," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(1), pages 134-153.
    19. repec:oup:revfin:v:29:y:2016:i:12:p:3394-3427. is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Greene, William, 2010. "Testing hypotheses about interaction terms in nonlinear models," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 107(2), pages 291-296, May.
    21. Camelia M. Kuhnen, 2009. "Business Networks, Corporate Governance, and Contracting in the Mutual Fund Industry," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 64(5), pages 2185-2220, October.
    22. Joshua D. Coval & Tobias J. Moskowitz, 2001. "The Geography of Investment: Informed Trading and Asset Prices," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 109(4), pages 811-841, August.
    23. Ying Duan & Edith S. Hotchkiss & Yawen Jiao, 2018. "Business Ties and Information Advantage: Evidence from Mutual Fund Trading," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(2), pages 866-897, June.
    24. Stuart L. Gillan & Laura T. Starks, 2007. "The Evolution of Shareholder Activism in the United States," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 19(1), pages 55-73, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lan, Ge & Li, Donghui & Yang, Shijie, 2023. "Costs of voting and firm performance: Evidence from RegTech adoption in Chinese listed firms," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    2. Duan, Ying & Jiao, Yawen & Tam, Kinsun, 2021. "Conflict of interest and proxy voting by institutional investors," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    3. Jiekun Huang, 2023. "Thy Neighbor’s Vote: Peer Effects in Proxy Voting," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(7), pages 4169-4189, July.
    4. Lu, Shuai & Li, Shouwei & Zhou, Wei & Yang, Wenke, 2022. "Network herding of energy funds in the post-Carbon-Peak Policy era: Does it benefit profitability and stability?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    5. Li, Xuan, 2023. "Home bias in shareholder voting," Discussion Papers 2023/21, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.
    6. Wang, Xianjue, 2022. "Disloyal managers and proxy voting," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    7. Liang Wang & Yuanfei Wang & Bixiao Li, 2023. "The influence of the social networks of fund managers on the herding behavior of SIFs in China," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-14, December.
    8. Farizo, Joseph D., 2022. "(Black)Rock the vote: Index funds and opposition to management," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    9. Flávia S. Maranho & Patrícia M. Bortolon & Ricardo P. C. Leal, 2020. "The firm–investor level characteristics of institutional investor engagement in Brazil," International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 17(4), pages 267-281, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Duan, Ying & Jiao, Yawen & Tam, Kinsun, 2021. "Conflict of interest and proxy voting by institutional investors," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    2. Wang, Xianjue, 2022. "Disloyal managers and proxy voting," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    3. Jiekun Huang, 2023. "Thy Neighbor’s Vote: Peer Effects in Proxy Voting," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(7), pages 4169-4189, July.
    4. Tao Li, 2018. "Outsourcing Corporate Governance: Conflicts of Interest Within the Proxy Advisory Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(6), pages 2951-2971, June.
    5. Dasgupta, Amil & Fos, Vyacheslav & Sautner, Zacharias, 2021. "Institutional investors and corporate governance," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 112114, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Bolton, Patrick & Li, Tao & Ravina, Enrichetta & Rosenthal, Howard, 2020. "Investor ideology," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 137(2), pages 320-352.
    7. Farizo, Joseph D., 2022. "(Black)Rock the vote: Index funds and opposition to management," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    8. Nadya Malenko & Yao Shen, 2016. "The Role of Proxy Advisory Firms: Evidence from a Regression-Discontinuity Design," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 29(12), pages 3394-3427.
    9. Wang, Xianjue, 2021. "Disclosure by firms under voting pressure," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    10. Dimmock, Stephen G. & Gerken, William C. & Ivković, Zoran & Weisbenner, Scott J., 2018. "Capital gains lock-in and governance choices," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(1), pages 113-135.
    11. He, Yazhou Ellen, 2021. "Communications in proxy contests," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    12. Efrat Dressler & Yevgeny Mugerman, 2023. "Doing the Right Thing? The Voting Power Effect and Institutional Shareholder Voting," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 183(4), pages 1089-1112, April.
    13. Peter Iliev & Jonathan Kalodimos & Michelle Lowry, 2021. "Investors’ Attention to Corporate Governance [The “Wall Street Walk” and shareholder activism: Exit as a form of voice]," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 34(12), pages 5581-5628.
    14. Dressler, Efrat, 2020. "Voice and power: Do institutional shareholders make use of their voting power?," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    15. Laurent Bouton & Aniol Llorente-Saguer & Antonin Macé & Dimitrios Xefteris, 2021. "Voting Rights, Agenda Control and Information Aggregation," NBER Working Papers 29005, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Crane, Alan D. & Koch, Andrew & Michenaud, Sébastien, 2019. "Institutional investor cliques and governance," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(1), pages 175-197.
    17. Bar-Isaac, Heski & Shapiro, Joel, 2020. "Blockholder voting," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(3), pages 695-717.
    18. Denes, Matthew R. & Karpoff, Jonathan M. & McWilliams, Victoria B., 2017. "Thirty years of shareholder activism: A survey of empirical research," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 405-424.
    19. Schwartz-Ziv, Miriam & Wermers, Russ, 2022. "Do institutional investors monitor their large-scale vs. small-scale investments differently? Evidence from the say-on-pay vote," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    20. Aneel Keswani & David Stolin & Anh L. Tran, 2017. "Frenemies: How Do Financial Firms Vote on Their Own Kind?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(3), pages 631-654, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Proxy voting; Board connections; Mutual funds;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • G23 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Non-bank Financial Institutions; Financial Instruments; Institutional Investors
    • G30 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - General
    • G34 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Mergers; Acquisitions; Restructuring; Corporate Governance

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jfinec:v:134:y:2019:i:3:p:669-688. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505576 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.