Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 103, Issue 2, pp 255–274

Who Should Control a Corporation? Toward a Contingency Stakeholder Model for Allocating Ownership Rights

Article

Abstract

A number of companies allocate ownership rights to stakeholders different from shareholders, despite the fact that the law attributes these rights to the equity holders. This article contributes to an understanding of this evidence by developing a contingency model for the allocation of ownership rights. The model sheds light on why companies, despite pressures from the law, vary in their allocation of ownership rights. The model is based on the assumption that corporations increase their chance to survive and prosper if the stakeholders supplying “critical contributions” receive the ownership rights. According to the model, “critical” contributions involve (1) contractual problems due to specific investments, long-term relationships, and low measurability; (2) the assumption of the uncertainty resting on the company; and (3) the supply of scarce and valuable resources. The model is dynamic because it also provides a basis for understanding why the allocation of ownership rights changes with time. Finally, the article presents the strategies companies can use to realize an efficient distribution of ownership rights among their stakeholders.

Keywords

corporate governance ownership rights shareholder theory stakeholder theory 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alchian, A. and H. Demsetz: 1972, ‘Production, Information Costs, and Economic Organizations’, American Economic Review 62, 777-795.Google Scholar
  2. Alchian, A. and S. Woodward: 1987, ‘Reflections on the Theory of the Firm’, Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics 143, 110-136.Google Scholar
  3. Aoki, M.: 1984, The Cooperative Game Theory of the Firm, (Oxford University Press, Oxford).Google Scholar
  4. Aoki, M.: 1988, Information, Incentives, and Bargaining in the Japanese Economy, (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Arrow, K.J.: 1985, ‘The Economics of Agency’, in J.W. Pratt and R.J. Zeckhauser (eds.), Principals and Agents: The Structure of Business (Harvard Business School Press, Boston), 37-51.Google Scholar
  6. Axelrod, R.: 1984, The Evolution of Cooperation, (Basic Books, New York).Google Scholar
  7. Barnard, C.: 1938, The Functions of the Executive, (Harvard University Press, Boston).Google Scholar
  8. Barney, J.: 1991, ‘Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage’, Journal of Management 1, 99-120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barzel, Y.: 1997, Economic Analysis of Property Rights, (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge).Google Scholar
  10. Bebchuk, L.A. and M.J. Roe: 1999, ‘A Theory of Path Dependence in Corporate Ownership and Governance’, Stanford Law Review 52(1), 127-170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Blair, M.M.: 1995, Ownership and Control - Rethinking Corporate Governance for the Twenty-first Century, (The Brookings Institution, Washington).Google Scholar
  12. Blair, M.M.: 1996, Wealth Creation and Wealth Sharing, (The Brookings Institution, Washington).Google Scholar
  13. Blair, M.M.: 2003, ‘Shareholder Value, Corporate Governance, and Corporate Performance - A Post-Enron Reassessment of the Conventional Wisdom’, in P.K. Cornelius and B. Kogut (eds.), Corporate Governance and Capital Flows in a Global Economy, (Oxford University Press, Oxford), 53-82.Google Scholar
  14. Blair, M.M. and L.A. Stout: 1999, ‘A team production theory of corporate law’, Virginia Law Review 85, 247-328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Blair, MM. and L.A. Stout: 2006, ‘Specific Investment and Corporate Law: Explaining anomalies in corporate law’, European Business Organization Law Review 7(2), 473-500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Blasi J., Kruse D., Sesil J. and M. Kroumova: 2003, ‘An assessment of employee ownership in the United States with implications for the EU’, International Journal of Human Resource Management 14(6), 893-919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Brink, A.: 2010, ‘Enlightened Corporate Governance: Specific Investments by Employees as Legitimation for Residual Claims’, Journal of Business Ethics 93(4), 641-651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Carroll, A.B.: 1979, ‘A Three-Dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Social Performance’, Academy of Management Review 4, 497-505.Google Scholar
  19. Carroll, A.B.: 1991, ‘The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility: Toward the Moral Management of Organizational Stakeholders’, Business Horizons 34, 39-48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Carroll, A.B.: 1993, Business and Society; Ethics and Stakeholder Management, 2nd edition, (South-Western Publishing, Cincinnati).Google Scholar
  21. Chandler, A.D.: 1962, Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the history of the Industrial Enterprise, (MIT Press, Cambridge).Google Scholar
  22. Charkham, J: 2005, Keeping Better Company, (Oxford University Press, Oxford).Google Scholar
  23. Clark, J.M.: 1916, ‘The Changing Basis of Economic Responsibility’, Journal of Political Economy 24(3), 209-229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Clarkson, M.B.E.: 1995, ‘A Stakeholder Framework for Analysing and Evaluating Corporate Social Performance’, Academy of Management Review 20(1), 92-117.Google Scholar
  25. Coase, R.: 1960, ‘The Problem of Social Cost’, Journal of Law and Economics, 1, pp. 1-44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Coff R.W.: 1999, ‘When competitive advantage doesn’t lead to performance: The resource-based view and stakeholder bargaining power’, Organization Science 10(2), 119-133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Cyert, R.M. and J.G. March: 1963, A Behavioural Theory of the Firm, (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs).Google Scholar
  28. Dodd, E.M.: 1932, ‘For Whom Are Corporate Managers Trustees?’, Harvard Law Review 45 (7), 1145-1163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Donaldson, T. and L.E. Preston: 1995, ‘The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence and Implications’, Academy of Management Review 20(1), 65-91.Google Scholar
  30. Dore, R.: 1983, ‘Goodwill and the Spirit of Capitalism’, British Journal of Sociology XXXIV(4), 459–482.Google Scholar
  31. Dyer, J.H. and K. Nobeoka: 2000, ‘Creating and managing a high-performance knowledge-sharing network: The Toyota case’, Strategic Management Journal 21(3), 345-367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Dyer, J. and W. Ouchi: 1993, ‘Japanese-Style Partnerships: Giving Companies a Competitive Edge’, Sloan Management Review 35(1), 51-63.Google Scholar
  33. Eisenhardt, K.: 1989, ‘Agency Theory: an Assessment and Review’, Academy of Management Review 14, 57-74.Google Scholar
  34. Fama, E. and M. Jensen: 1983a, ‘Agency problems and Residual Claims’, Journal of Law and Economics 26, 327-349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Fama, E. and M. Jensen: 1983b, ‘Separation of Ownership and Control’, Journal of Law and Economics 26, 301-325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Fehr, E., Kremhelmer, S. and K.M. Schmidt: 2008, ‘Fairness and the Optimal Allocation of Ownership Rights’, The Economic Journal, 118, 1262-1284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Freeman, R.E.: 1984, Strategic Management - A Stakeholder Approach, (Pitman Publishing, Boston).Google Scholar
  38. Freeman, R.E.: 1994, ‘A Stakeholder Theory of the Modern Corporation’, in T.L. Beauchamp and N.E. Bowie (eds.), Ethical Theory and Business, (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliff), 66-76.Google Scholar
  39. Furubotn, E.G. and R. Richter: 1991, ‘The New Institutional Economics: An Assessment’, in E.G. Furubotn and R. Ricther (eds.), The New Institutional Economics, (J.C.B. Mohr, Tubingen).Google Scholar
  40. Gilson, R. and M. Roe: 1993: ‘Understanding the Japanese Keiretsu: Overlaps between Corporate Governance and Industrial Organizations’, Yale Law Journal 102(4), 871-906.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Goldberg, V.: 1976, ‘Regulation and Administered Contracts’, Bell Journal of Economics 7, 426-452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Goldberg, V.: 1980, ‘Relational Exchange: Economics and Complex Contracts’, American Behavioral Scientist 23, 337-352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Goodpaster, K.E.: 1991, ‘Business Ethics and Stakeholder Analysis’, Business Ethics Quarterly 1(1), 53-73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Greenwood, R. and L. Empson: 2003, ‘The professional partnership: Relic or exemplary form of governance?’, Organization Studies 24(6), 909-933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Gross, B.: 1998, ‘The New Math of Ownership’, Harvard Business Review 76(6), 68-74.Google Scholar
  46. Grossman, S. and O. Hart: 1986, ‘The Costs and Benefits of Ownership: A Theory of Vertical and Lateral Integration’, Journal of Political Economy 94(4), 691-719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Hansmann, H.: 1988, ‘The Ownership of the Firm’, Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 4(2), 267-304.Google Scholar
  48. Hansmann, H.: 1996, The Ownership of Enterprise, (Harvard University Press, Cambridge).Google Scholar
  49. Hart, O.: 1995, Firms, Contracts, and Financial Structure, (Clarendon Press, Oxford).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Hart, O. and J. Moore: 1990, ‘Property Rights and the Nature of the Firm’, Journal of Political Economy 98(6), 1119-1158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Hill, C.: 1990, ‘Cooperation, Opportunism, and the Invisible Hand: Implications for Transaction Cost Theory’, Academy of Management Review 15(3), 500-513.Google Scholar
  52. Holmstrom, B.: 1979, ‘Moral Hazard and Observability’, Bell Journal of Economics 10, 74-91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Husted, B.W.: 2000, ‘A Contingency Theory of Corporate Social Performance’, Business and Society, 19(1), 24-48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Jansson, E.: 2005, ‘The Stakeholder Model: The Influence of the Ownership and Governance Structures’, Journal of Business Ethics 56(1), 1-13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Jawahar, I.M. and G.L. Mclaughlin: 2001, ‘Toward a Descriptive Stakeholder Theory: An Organizational Life Cycle Approach’, Academy of Management Review 26(3), 397-414.Google Scholar
  56. Jensen, M.C.: 2001, ‘Introduction’, in M.C. Jensen, Foundations of Organizational Strategy, (Harvard University Press, Cambridge).Google Scholar
  57. Jensen, M.C.: 2002, ‘Value Maximization, Stakeholder Theory, and the Corporate Objective Function’, Business Ethics Quarterly 12(2), 235-256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Jensen, M.C. and W. Meckling: 1976, ‘Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs, and Capital Structure’, Journal of Financial Economics 3, 305-360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Jones, T.M.: 1995, ‘Instrumental Stakeholder Theory: A Synthesis of Ethics and Economics’, Academy of Management Review 20(1), 404-437.Google Scholar
  60. Kahneman, D. and A. Tversky: 1979, ‘Prospect Theory: an Analysis of Decision under Risk’, Econometrica 47, 263-292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Kaufman A. and E. Englander: 2005, A team production model of corporate governance, Academy of Management Executive 19(3), 9-22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Kester, W.C.: 1992: ‘Industrial Groups as Systems of Contractual Governance’, Oxford Review of Economic Policy 8(3), 24-44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Klein, B., Crawford, R.A. and A. Alchian: 1978, ‘Vertical Integration, Appropriable Rents, and the Competitive Contracting Process’, Journal of Law and Economics 21(2), 297-326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Knight, F.H.: 1921, Uncertainty and Profit, (London School of Economics, London).Google Scholar
  65. Kochan, T.A. and S.A. Rubinstein: 2000, ‘Toward a Stakeholder Theory of the Firm: The Saturn Partnership’, Organization Science 11(4), 367-386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Kreps, D.: 1990, ‘Corporate Culture and Economic Theory’, in J. Alt and K. Shepsle (eds.), Perspectives on Positive Political Economy (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge).Google Scholar
  67. Lawler, E.E.: 2000, Rewarding Excellence, (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco).Google Scholar
  68. Macaulay, S.: 1963, ‘Non-Contractual Relations in Business: A Preliminary Study’, American Sociological Review 28, 55-68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Macneil, I.R.: 1978, ‘Contracts: Adjustments of Long-term Economic Relations under Classical, Neoclassical, and Relational Contract Law’, Northwestern University Law Review 72, 854-906.Google Scholar
  70. March, C.G. and H.A. Simon: 1958, Organizations, (Wiley and Sons, New York).Google Scholar
  71. Miles, R.E. and C.C. Snow: 1978, Organizational strategy, structure, and process, (McGraw-Hill, New York).Google Scholar
  72. Milgrom, P. and J. Roberts: 1992, Economics, Organization and Management, (Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs).Google Scholar
  73. Mitchell, R.K., Agle, B.R. and D.J. Wood: 1997, ‘Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of Who and What Really Counts’, Academy of Management Review 22(4), 853-886.Google Scholar
  74. North, D.C.: 1990, Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance, (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge).Google Scholar
  75. Ouchi, W.G.: 1979, ‘A Conceptual Framework for the Design of Organizational Control Mechanisms’, Management Science 25, 833-848.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Pfeffer, J. and G. Salancik: 1978, The External Control of Organizations - A Resource Dependence Perspective, (Harper and Row: New York).Google Scholar
  77. Rappaport, A.: 1986, Creating Shareholders’ Value: The New Standard for Business Performance, (The Free Press, New York).Google Scholar
  78. Sacconi, L.: 1999, ‘Codes of Ethics as Contractarian Constraints on the Abuse of Authority Within Hierarchies: A Perspective from the Theory of the Firm’, Journal of Business Ethics 21(2/3), 189-202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Sacconi, L.: 2000, The Social Contract of the Firm: Economics, Ethics and Organisation, (Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg).Google Scholar
  80. Sacconi, L.: 2006, ‘A Social Contract Account for CSR as an Extended Model of Corporate Governance (I): Rational Bargaining and Justification’, Journal of Business Ethics 68 (3), 259-281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Sacconi, L.: 2007, ‘A Social Contract Account for CSR as an Extended Model of Corporate Governance (II): Compliance, Reputation and Reciprocity’, Journal of Business Ethics 75 (1), 77-96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Shleifer, A. and L. Summers: 1988, ‘Breach of Trust in Hostile Takeovers’, in A. Auerbach (ed.), Corporate Takeovers: Causes and Consequences, (University of Chicago Press, Chicago), 33-67.Google Scholar
  83. Shleifer, A. and R.W. Vishny: 1989, ‘Management Entrenchment – The case of Manager-Specific Investments’, Journal of Financial Economics 25, 123-140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Shleifer, A. and R.W. Vishny: 1997, ‘A survey of corporate governance’, Journal of Finance 52(2), 737-783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Simon, H.A.: 1947, Administrative Behavior, (The Free Press, New York).Google Scholar
  86. Turnbull, S.: 1995, ‘Innovations in Corporate Governance: The Mondragon Experience’, Corporate Governance: An International Review 3(3), 167-180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Weeden, R., Carberry, E. and S. Rodrick: 2000, Current Practices in Stock Option Plan Design, (NCEO, Oakland).Google Scholar
  88. Williamson, O.E.: 1975, Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications, (The Free Press, New York).Google Scholar
  89. Williamson, O.E.: 1985, The Economic Institutions of Capitalism: Firms, Markets, Relational Contracting, (The Free Press, New York).Google Scholar
  90. Womack, J., Jones, D. and D. Roos: 1990, The Machine that changed the World, (Harper Perennial, New York).Google Scholar
  91. Zattoni, A: 2007, ‘Stock incentive plans in Europe: empirical evidence and design implications’, Corporate Ownership and Control 4(4), 56-64.Google Scholar
  92. Zingales, L.: 1998, ‘Corporate Governance’, in P. Newman (ed.), The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics and the Law, (Macmillan, New York).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Management DepartmentParthenope UniversityNaplesItaly
  2. 2.Strategic and Entrepreneurial Management DepartmentSDA Bocconi School of ManagementMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations