Skip to main content
Log in

The Challenges of Employee-Appointed Board Members for Corporate Governance: The Danish Evidence

  • Articles
  • Published:
European Business Organization Law Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article presents some evidence concerning the nature of co-determination using a sample of Danish employee-appointed board members. Even though Danish employee representatives only occupy one third of the seats and by design are always in a minority, they argue that they have a relatively high degree of influence on the decision-making process. This is especially profound in listed firms, where nearly 30 per cent state that they have much influence on the decision-making process, compared to 7 per cent who argue that they have no influence at all. For reasons that remain unclear, the results also document that male employee representatives claim a higher degree of influence than their female colleagues. It is shown that employee representatives have a dispersed educational background and that their occupations vary greatly in both listed and non-listed firms. The many different legal faces of European co-determination are also described. Finally, the article demonstrates that Danish employee representatives say that they care less about shareholder value compared to the supervisory board as a whole.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aoki, Masahiko (1980) ‘A Model of the Firm as a Stockholders-Employee Cooperative Game’, 70 American Economic Review 600–610.

    Google Scholar 

  • Armour, John and Simon Deakin (2003) ‘Insolvency and Employment Protection: The Mixed Effects of the Acquired Rights Directive’, 22 International Review of Law and Economics 443–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bainbridge, Stephen M. (1998) ‘Privately Ordered Participatory Management: An Organizational Failure Analysis’, 23 Delaware Journal of Corporate Law 979–1076.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bedrac, Janja (2006) What Makes a Good Company? Employee Interest Representation in European Company Law: Reflections and Legal Provisions (Brussels, European Trade Union Institute ETUI-REHS).

    Google Scholar 

  • Blair, Margaret (1995) Ownership and Control: Rethinking Corporate Governance for the Twenty-First Century (Washington D.C., The Brookings Institution).

    Google Scholar 

  • Blair, Margaret and Mark J. Roe (1999) Employees and Corporate Governance (Washington D.C., The Brookings Institution Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, Søren and Ann Westenholz (2000) Employee Representatives as Company Strategic Actors in an Enacted World, Working Paper No. 12 (Copenhagen Business School, Institut for organisation og arbejdssociologi).

  • Dinh, D. Viet (1999) Codetermination and Corporate Governance in a Multinational Corporation, Working Paper Series No. 169870 (Georgetown University Law Center).

  • Fama, Eugene F. and Michael C. Jensen (1983) ‘Agency Problems and Residual Claims’, 26 Journal of law and Economics 327–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furubotn, Eirik G. (1988) ‘Codetermination and the Modern Theory of the Firm: A Property Rights Approach’, 61 Journal of Business 165–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gamble, Andrew and Gavin Kelly (2001) ‘Stakeholder Value and the Stakeholder Debate in the UK’, 9 Corporate Governance: An International Perspective 110–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodijk, Rienk (2000) ‘Corporate Governance and Workers Participation’, 8 Corporate Governance: An International Review 303–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gorton, Gary and Frank Schmid (2000) Class Struggle Inside the Firm: A Study of German Codetermination, NBER Working Paper No. 7945.

  • Hart, Oliver (1993) ‘An Economists Perspective on Fiduciary Duty’, 43 University of Toronto Law Journal 299–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Havel, Bohumil (2005) ‘An Outline of Czech Company Law’, 6 European Business Organization Law Review 581–623.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hege, Adelheid and Christian Dufour (1995) ‘Decentralization and Legitimacy in Employee Representation: A Franco-German Comparison’, 1 European Journal of Industrial Relations 83–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoepner, Martin (2001) Corporate Governance in Transition: Ten Empirical Findings on Shareholder Value and Industrial Relations in Germany, Discussion Paper No. 5 (Max-Planck Institute for the Study of Societies).

  • Hopt, Klaus J. (1994) ‘Labor Representation on Corporate Boards: Impacts and Problems for Corporate Governance and Economic Integration in Europe’, 14 International Review of Law and Economics 203–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, Michael (2001) ‘Value Maximization, Stakeholder Theory, and the Corporate Objective Function’, 13 Journal of Applied Corporate Finance 8–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, Gavin, Dominic Kelly and Andrew Gamble (1997) Stakeholder Capitalism (MacMillan Press, Political Economy Research Centre, University of Sheffield).

  • Knudsen, Herman (1995) Employee Participation in Europe (London, Sage).

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, James E. (1985) ‘Employee Characteristics and Representation Election Outcomes’, 38 Industrial and Labor Relations Review 365–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monks, Robert A.G. and Nell Minow (2001) Corporate Governance, 2nd edn. (Malden, MA, Blackwell Business).

    Google Scholar 

  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2004) OECD Principles of Corporate Governance (Paris, OECD).

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, John and Eric van den Steen (2000) Shareholder Interests, Human Capital Investment and Corporate Governance, Stanford Graduate School of Business Working Paper No. 1631.

  • Roe, Mark (1999) ‘German Codetermination and German Securities Markets’, 5 Columbia Journal of European Law 199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, Caspar (2004) ‘Stakeholder Orientation vs. Shareholder Value — A Matter of Contractual Failures’, 18 European Journal of Law and Economics 77–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rose, Caspar (2005) ‘The Composition of Semi-Two Tier Danish Board and Firm Performance’, 13 Corporate Governance: An International Review 691–701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rose, Caspar and Carsten Mejer (2003), ‘The Danish Corporate Governance System: From Stakeholder Orientation Towards Shareholder Value’, 11 Corporate Governance: An International Review 335–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Royle, Tony (2003) ‘Worker Representation under Threat? The McDonalds ’ Corporation and the Effectiveness of Statutory Works Councils in Seven European Union Countries’, 22 Comparative Labor Law and Policy Journal 395.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shleifer, Andrei and Robert W. Vishny (1997) ‘A Survey of Corporate Governance’, 52 Journal of Finance 737–783.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, Elaine (1997) ‘The Defects of Stakeholder Theory’, 5 Corporate Governance: An International Perspective 3–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tiras, Samuel L., Bernadette M. Ruff and Robert M. Brown (1999), The Relation Between Stakeholders Implicit Claims and Firm Value, Working Paper (State University of New York at Buffalo, School of Management and Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Pamplin College of Business).

  • Tirole, Jean (2001) ‘Corporate Governance’, 69 Econometrica 1–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turnbull, Shann (1997) ‘Stakeholder Governance: A Cybernetic and Property Rights Approach’, 5 Corporate Governance: An International Perspective 11–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vinten, Gerald (2001), ‘Shareholder vs. Stakeholder — is there a Governance Dilemma?’, 9 Corporate Governance: An International Perspective 36–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Windbichler, Christine (2005) ‘Cheers and Boos for Employee Involvement: CoDetermination as Corporate Governance Conundrum’, 6 European Business Organization Law Review 507–537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rose, C. The Challenges of Employee-Appointed Board Members for Corporate Governance: The Danish Evidence. Eur Bus Org Law Rev 9, 215–235 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1017/S1566752908002152

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1566752908002152

Keywords

Navigation