Corporate Control and Balance of Powers
AbstractMost managers enjoy considerable discretion and protection from possible interventions which enables them to look after their own interests. This is often attributed to the dispersion of shareholders and regulations that deter effective outside interventions. This paper presents a model that has empire-building managers who have important effort choices. Because the manager is not the residual claimant of the relevant returns, in order to provide him with the opportunity to share some of the rents he creates. To achieve this, equilibrium organizational form separates control from ownership and tries to contain the manager's empire-building incentives using performance contracts and the capital structure rather than more direct methods of control. Nevertheless, owners will often be unable to commit to managerial discretion because ownership of the assets gives them the right to decide what use that asset will be put and thus a right to fire the manager. In this case, it will be necessary to choose a disperse ownership structure in order to create free-rider effects among shareholders and thus to commit them to be passive. Thus, the dispersion of ownership, rather than being the cause of the problem, may be a solution to a more serious one. Nevertheless, there will often be benefits to having large shareholders. In this case, the paper shows that an intermediate level of dispersion is the optimum.
Download InfoTo our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Centre for Economic Performance, LSE in its series CEP Discussion Papers with number dp0239.
Date of creation: May 1995
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://cep.lse.ac.uk/_new/publications/series.asp?prog=CEP
Other versions of this item:
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Arnoud W.A. Boot & Jonathan R. Macey, 1998. "Objectivity, Control and Adaptability in Corporate Governance," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 98-064/2, Tinbergen Institute.
- Arnoud W.A. Boot & Jonathan R. Macey, 1999.
"Objectivity, Proximity and Adaptability in Corporate Governance,"
William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series
266, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
- Boot, Arnoud W A & Macey, Jonathon, 1999. "Objectivity, Proximity and Adaptability in Corporate Governance," CEPR Discussion Papers 2257, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- repec:dgr:uvatin:1998064 is not listed on IDEAS
- Daron Acemoglu & Miles Gietzmann, 1998. "Auditor independence, incomplete contracts and the role of legal liability," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(3), pages 355-375.
- repec:dgr:uvatin:2098064 is not listed on IDEAS
- Cummins, Jason G. & Nyman, Ingmar, 2004.
"Optimal investment with fixed financing costs,"
Finance Research Letters,
Elsevier, vol. 1(4), pages 226-235, December.
- Ralph P. Heinrich, 1999. "A Model of Corporate Governance as a System," Kiel Working Papers 931, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ().
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.