Αντιγράφω επιστολή αναγνώστη με τίτλο “Here’s a better approach to shareholder capitalism”, που δημοσιεύθηκε στην Φαϊνάνσιαλ Τάιμς της 17 Ιανουαρίου 2025. Νομίζω πως το νόημα συνοψίζεται στην ακροτελεύτια πρόταση, η εμπειρική εγκυρότητα της οποίας, όμως, είναι μαχητή – αν μη τι άλλο, στις μέριμνες της διοίκησης περιλαμβάνεται και ο ‘καθησυχασμός’ των συμμετόχων.
“Shareholder capitalism has long been criticised for being overly focused on the needs of shareholders at the expense of other stakeholders of an organisation (Letters, December 14).
There have been many attempts to address this. One was the Six Capitals Model introduced by the International Integrated Reporting Council in 2013. This proposed that organisations report their performance in terms of the increase or decrease of each of the capitals used (financial, manufactured, intellectual, human, social and relationship and natural), rather than just financial or shareholder capital.
The intention was all stakeholders should be considered in the value creation process rather than just shareholders. While laudable, there are practical difficulties implementing such models. For example, when an organisation undertakes an activity that increases one capital but reduces another (for example, when money is spent to reduce pollution), how should the correct balance be struck?
Another difficulty is how the increase or decrease of each of the six capitals should be measured. Many companies get around this by equating money spent, for example, on employee training with an increase in human capital. But training is an input and its impact on the skill or competence of the employees receiving the training is not always clear.
A better approach would be to continue using financial or shareholder capital as the primary measure of corporate performance but to extend its measurement period and related compensation systems. The logic behind this is that no organisation will be able to produce superior shareholder value over the long term if it does not simultaneously create value for other stakeholders. Disgruntled employees, customers or the public at large would soon see to that.”
Jon Danielsson Financial institutions are rapidly embracing AI – but at what cost to financial stability? This column argues that AI introduces novel stability risks
Tyler Smith As climate change makes extreme temperatures more common, assessing the value people place on comfortable weather has become increasingly important for policymakers. But
Διοίκηση επιχειρήσεων, μέτοχοι και συμμέτοχοι
poleconomix.gr
Αντιγράφω επιστολή αναγνώστη με τίτλο “Here’s a better approach to shareholder capitalism”, που δημοσιεύθηκε στην Φαϊνάνσιαλ Τάιμς της 17 Ιανουαρίου 2025. Νομίζω πως το νόημα συνοψίζεται στην ακροτελεύτια πρόταση, η εμπειρική εγκυρότητα της οποίας, όμως, είναι μαχητή – αν μη τι άλλο, στις μέριμνες της διοίκησης περιλαμβάνεται και ο ‘καθησυχασμός’ των συμμετόχων.
“Shareholder capitalism has long been criticised for being overly focused on the needs of shareholders at the expense of other stakeholders of an organisation (Letters, December 14).
There have been many attempts to address this. One was the Six Capitals Model introduced by the International Integrated Reporting Council in 2013. This proposed that organisations report their performance in terms of the increase or decrease of each of the capitals used (financial, manufactured, intellectual, human, social and relationship and natural), rather than just financial or shareholder capital.
The intention was all stakeholders should be considered in the value creation process rather than just shareholders. While laudable, there are practical difficulties implementing such models. For example, when an organisation undertakes an activity that increases one capital but reduces another (for example, when money is spent to reduce pollution), how should the correct balance be struck?
Another difficulty is how the increase or decrease of each of the six capitals should be measured. Many companies get around this by equating money spent, for example, on employee training with an increase in human capital. But training is an input and its impact on the skill or competence of the employees receiving the training is not always clear.
A better approach would be to continue using financial or shareholder capital as the primary measure of corporate performance but to extend its measurement period and related compensation systems. The logic behind this is that no organisation will be able to produce superior shareholder value over the long term if it does not simultaneously create value for other stakeholders. Disgruntled employees, customers or the public at large would soon see to that.”
Tim Anderson
Johannesburg, South Africa
Για την αντιγραφή
νκ
Share:
σχετικά άρθρα
Trade Policy, Exchange Rates, and the Globalization Surge of the 1990s
Douglas A. Irwin The decision by developing countries to open up their economies to foreign trade and investment in the 1980s and 1990s was a
Artificial intelligence and stability
Jon Danielsson Financial institutions are rapidly embracing AI – but at what cost to financial stability? This column argues that AI introduces novel stability risks
Beating the heat
Tyler Smith As climate change makes extreme temperatures more common, assessing the value people place on comfortable weather has become increasingly important for policymakers. But