IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v68y2022i8p5557-5568.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Wolf Pack Activism

Author

Listed:
  • Alon Brav

    (Duke University, Fuqua School of Business, Durham, North Carolina 27708; National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138; European Corporate Governance Institute, 1000 Brussels, Belgium)

  • Amil Dasgupta

    (European Corporate Governance Institute, 1000 Brussels, Belgium; Department of Finance, London School of Economics, London WC2A 2AE, United Kingdom)

  • Richmond Mathews

    (Robert H. Smith School of Business, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland 20742)

Abstract

Blockholder monitoring is central to corporate governance, but blockholders large enough to exercise significant unilateral influence are rare. Mechanisms that enable moderately sized blockholders to exert collective influence are therefore important. Existing theory suggests that engagement by moderately sized blockholders is unlikely, especially when the blocks are held by delegated asset managers who have limited skin in the game. We present a model in which multiple delegated blockholders engage target management in parallel, that is, “wolf pack activism.” Delegation reduces skin in the game, which decreases incentives for engagement. However, it also induces competition over investor capital (i.e., competition for flow). We show that this increases engagement incentives and helps ameliorate the problem of insufficient engagement, although it can also foster excess engagement. Under competition for flow, the total amount of capital seeking skilled activist managers is relevant to engagement incentives, which helps to predict when and where wolf packs arise. Flow incentives are particularly valuable in incentivizing engagement by packs with smaller members.

Suggested Citation

  • Alon Brav & Amil Dasgupta & Richmond Mathews, 2022. "Wolf Pack Activism," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(8), pages 5557-5568, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:68:y:2022:i:8:p:5557-5568
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.2021.4131
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2021.4131
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.2021.4131?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simi Kedia & Laura T. Starks & Xianjue Wang, 2021. "Institutional Investors and Hedge Fund Activism," The Review of Corporate Finance Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 10(1), pages 1-43.
    2. Jongha Lim & Berk A. Sensoy & Michael S. Weisbach, 2016. "Indirect Incentives of Hedge Fund Managers," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 71(2), pages 871-918, April.
    3. Lucian A. Bebchuk & Alon Brav & Wei Jiang & Thomas Keusch, 2019. "Dancing With Activists," NBER Working Papers 26171, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W, 1986. "Large Shareholders and Corporate Control," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(3), pages 461-488, June.
    5. Marco Becht & Julian Franks & Jeremy Grant & Hannes F. Wagner, 2017. "Returns to Hedge Fund Activism: An International Study," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 30(9), pages 2933-2971.
    6. Jeffrey Zwiebel, 1995. "Block Investment and Partial Benefits of Corporate Control," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 62(2), pages 161-185.
    7. Antoine Faure-Grimaud, 2004. "Public Trading and Private Incentives," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 17(4), pages 985-1014.
    8. Thomas H. Noe, 2002. "Investor Activism and Financial Market Structure," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 15(1), pages 289-318, March.
    9. Winton, Andrew, 1993. "Limitation of Liability and the Ownership Structure of the Firm," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 48(2), pages 487-512, June.
    10. Franklin Allen, 2001. "Do Financial Institutions Matter?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 56(4), pages 1165-1175, August.
    11. Francesca Cornelli & David D. Li, 2002. "Risk Arbitrage in Takeovers," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 15(3), pages 837-868.
    12. Alex Edmans & Gustavo Manso, 2011. "Governance Through Trading and Intervention: A Theory of Multiple Blockholders," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 24(7), pages 2395-2428.
    13. Dasgupta, Amil & Piacentino, Giorgia, 2015. "The Wall Street walk when blockholders compete for flows," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 63144, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    14. Clifford G. Holderness, 2009. "The Myth of Diffuse Ownership in the United States," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 22(4), pages 1377-1408, April.
    15. Amil Dasgupta & Giorgia Piacentino, 2015. "The Wall Street Walk when Blockholders Compete for Flows," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 70(6), pages 2853-2896, December.
    16. Sanford J. Grossman & Oliver D. Hart, 1980. "Takeover Bids, the Free-Rider Problem, and the Theory of the Corporation," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 11(1), pages 42-64, Spring.
    17. Ernst Maug, 1998. "Large Shareholders as Monitors: Is There a Trade-Off between Liquidity and Control?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 53(1), pages 65-98, February.
    18. Mark Bagnoli, Barton L. Lipman, 1988. "Successful Takeovers without Exclusion," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 1(1), pages 89-110.
    19. Wei Jiang & Kai Li & Wei Wang, 2012. "Hedge Funds and Chapter 11," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 67(2), pages 513-560, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Brav, Alon & Dasgupta, Amil & Mathews, Richmond D., 2022. "Wolf pack activism," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 112118, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. 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.
    3. Edmans, Alex & Holderness, Clifford, 2016. "Blockholders: A Survey of Theory and Evidence," CEPR Discussion Papers 11442, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    4. Dasgupta, Amil & Brav, Alon & Mathews, Richmond, 2016. "Wolf Pack Activism," CEPR Discussion Papers 11507, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    5. Burkart, Mike & Lee, Samuel, 2018. "Activism and Takeovers," CEPR Discussion Papers 12616, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. Mike Burkart & Amil Dasgupta, 2014. "Activist Funds, Leverage, and Procyclicality," FMG Discussion Papers dp733, Financial Markets Group.
    7. Mike Burkart & Samuel Lee, 2022. "Activism and Takeovers," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 35(4), pages 1868-1896.
    8. Alex Edmans, 2014. "Blockholders and Corporate Governance," Annual Review of Financial Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 6(1), pages 23-50, December.
    9. Burkart, Mike & Lee, Samuel, 2022. "Activism and takeovers," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 111564, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    10. Dasgupta, Amil & Piacentino, Giorgia, 2015. "The Wall Street walk when blockholders compete for flows," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 63144, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    11. Alex Edmans & Gustavo Manso, 2011. "Governance Through Trading and Intervention: A Theory of Multiple Blockholders," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 24(7), pages 2395-2428.
    12. Jing Huang & Steven R. Matsunaga & Z. Jay Wang, 2020. "The Role of Pension Business Benefits in Institutional Block Ownership and Corporate Governance," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(4), pages 1959-1989, December.
    13. Luc Laeven & Ross Levine, 2008. "Complex Ownership Structures and Corporate Valuations," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 21(2), pages 579-604, April.
    14. Kerry Back & Pierre Collin‐Dufresne & Vyacheslav Fos & Tao Li & Alexander Ljungqvist, 2018. "Activism, Strategic Trading, and Liquidity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(4), pages 1431-1463, July.
    15. Pombo, Carlos & Taborda, Rodrigo, 2017. "Stock liquidity and second blockholder as drivers of corporate value: Evidence from Latin America," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 214-234.
    16. Corum, Adrian Aycan, 2021. "Fighting Fire with Fire: Optimality of Value Destruction to Mitigate Short-Termism," OSF Preprints xhwmg, Center for Open Science.
    17. Konijn, Sander J.J. & Kräussl, Roman & Lucas, Andre, 2011. "Blockholder dispersion and firm value," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 17(5), pages 1330-1339.
    18. Francesca Cornelli & David D. Li, 2002. "Risk Arbitrage in Takeovers," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 15(3), pages 837-868.
    19. Sabri Boubaker & Pascal Nguyen & Wael Rouatbi, 2016. "Multiple Large Shareholders and Corporate Risk†taking: Evidence from French Family Firms," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 22(4), pages 697-745, September.
    20. Ferreira, Daniel & Li, Jin & Nikolowa, Radoslawa, 2019. "Corporate Capture of Blockchain Governance," CEPR Discussion Papers 13493, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:68:y:2022:i:8:p:5557-5568. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.