<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance</title>
	<atom:link href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2015/03/20/a-few-observations-on-shareholders-in-2015/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu</link>
	<description>The leading online blog in the fields of corporate governance and financial regulation.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2026 20:59:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.5.8</generator>

 
	<item>
		<title>A Few Observations on Shareholders in 2015</title>
		<link>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2015/03/20/a-few-observations-on-shareholders-in-2015/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=a-few-observations-on-shareholders-in-2015</link>
		<comments>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2015/03/20/a-few-observations-on-shareholders-in-2015/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2015 13:03:42 +0000</pubDate>
<!-- 		<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator> -->
				<category><![CDATA[Accounting & Disclosure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Practitioner Publications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulators Materials]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities Regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Speeches & Testimony]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Charter & bylaws]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disclosure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Engagement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[No-action letters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Proxy access]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Proxy fights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Proxy season]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rule 14a-8]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SEC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Shareholder activism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Shareholder proposals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Solicitation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/corpgov/?p=68985?d=20150324094625EDT</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<div style="background: #F8F8F8;padding: 10px;margin-top: 5px;margin-bottom: 10px"><strong>Editor's Note:</strong> <a href="http://www.sec.gov/about/commissioner/white.htm" target="_blank">Mary Jo White</a> is Chair of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. This post is based on Chair White’s recent address at Tulane’s 27th Annual Corporate Law Institute; the full text, including footnotes, is available <a href="http://www.sec.gov/news/speech/observations-on-shareholders-2015.html" target="_blank">here</a>. The views expressed in this post are those of Chair White and do not necessarily reflect those of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the other Commissioners, or the Staff.</div>

<p>Today [March 19, 2015], I will share a few observations on three specific areas: the current state of shareholder activism; the shareholder proposal process; and fee-shifting bylaws. I know your next two panels take up aspects of these important topics, but I think the space is lively and big enough for all of us to comment.</p>

<p><strong>The Current Activism Landscape</strong></p>

<p>There are different views on what is meant by “shareholder activism,” but just the word “activism” triggers an adverse reaction from many companies. Reflexively painting all activism negatively is, in my view, using too broad a brush and indeed is counterproductive. To me, the term activism captures the range of efforts by investors to influence a company’s management or decision-making. Some of it is constructive. In certain situations, activism seeks to bring about important changes at companies that can increase shareholder value. Now, some of you may find the juxtaposition of the word “activism” with “shareholder value” does not comport with your sense of reality. Some of you also believe that activists are not interested in increasing long-term value for shareholders and other stakeholders. Still others will assert that activists are simply short-term traders looking to make a quick dollar. I did say this was a lively topic with many different views.</p>

<p><a href="http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/corpgov/2015/03/20/a-few-observations-on-shareholders-in-2015/#more-68985" target="_blank">Click here to read the complete post...</a></p>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<hgroup><em>Posted by Mary Jo White, Chair, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, on Friday, March 20, 2015 </em><div class='e_n' style='background:#F8F8F8;padding:10px;margin-top:5px;margin-bottom:10px;text-indent:2.5em;'><strong style='margin-left:-2.5em;'>Editor's Note: </strong> <p style="margin:0; display:inline;"><a href="http://www.sec.gov/about/commissioner/white.htm" target="_blank">Mary Jo White</a> is Chair of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. This post is based on Chair White’s recent address at Tulane’s 27th Annual Corporate Law Institute; the full text, including footnotes, is available <a href="http://www.sec.gov/news/speech/observations-on-shareholders-2015.html" target="_blank">here</a>. The views expressed in this post are those of Chair White and do not necessarily reflect those of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the other Commissioners, or the Staff.</p>
</div></hgroup><p>Today [March 19, 2015], I will share a few observations on three specific areas: the current state of shareholder activism; the shareholder proposal process; and fee-shifting bylaws. I know your next two panels take up aspects of these important topics, but I think the space is lively and big enough for all of us to comment.</p>
<p><strong>The Current Activism Landscape</strong></p>
<p>There are different views on what is meant by “shareholder activism,” but just the word “activism” triggers an adverse reaction from many companies. Reflexively painting all activism negatively is, in my view, using too broad a brush and indeed is counterproductive. To me, the term activism captures the range of efforts by investors to influence a company’s management or decision-making. Some of it is constructive. In certain situations, activism seeks to bring about important changes at companies that can increase shareholder value. Now, some of you may find the juxtaposition of the word “activism” with “shareholder value” does not comport with your sense of reality. Some of you also believe that activists are not interested in increasing long-term value for shareholders and other stakeholders. Still others will assert that activists are simply short-term traders looking to make a quick dollar. I did say this was a lively topic with many different views.</p>
<p> <a href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2015/03/20/a-few-observations-on-shareholders-in-2015/#more-68985" class="more-link"><span aria-label="Continue reading A Few Observations on Shareholders in 2015">(more&hellip;)</span></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2015/03/20/a-few-observations-on-shareholders-in-2015/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
