IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cambje/v50y2026i1p95-142..html

Challenging the short-termist thesis in financialization studies: Evidence from US non-financial corporations, 1998–2018

Author

Listed:
  • Niall Reddy
  • Joel Rabinovich

Abstract

It is widely argued that shareholder value orientation (SVO) causes firms to adopt a financialized business model, in which short-run share prices are prioritized over the firm’s long-run growth. Financialized business models entail a ‘downsizing and distributing’ allocation regime—the channelling of resources to shareholder payouts over reinvestment—and other changes that undermine the firm’s ability to innovate, reduce costs and retain market share, harming its competitiveness. We test this theory by examining how increased shareholder power and realigned managerial preferences—two underlying ‘mechanisms’ of SVO—affect two sets of outcomes: allocation regime (fixed investment, R&D expenditure and payouts) and real performance (productivity, market share and profitability). We allow for the fact that institutional shareholders likely vary in their preferences for governance, meaning that the broad objective of maximizing shareholder profit may conduce highly varying business strategies. Our findings suggest that short-termism is not an outcome common to shareholder primacy in general, but rather governance directed to certain kinds of shareholders—in particular low-turnover, non-passive institutional investors. Moreover, it is much more likely to occur when those investors are empowered within the firm rather than reliant solely on managerial re-incentivization. These findings suggest that short-termism is not a universal feature of non-financial corporation (NFC) financialization but arises under particular governance conditions.

Suggested Citation

  • Niall Reddy & Joel Rabinovich, 2026. "Challenging the short-termist thesis in financialization studies: Evidence from US non-financial corporations, 1998–2018," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 50(1), pages 95-142.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:50:y:2026:i:1:p:95-142.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/cje/beaf052
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:oup:cambje:v:50:y:2026:i:1:p:95-142.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/cje .

    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.