Monthly Archives: March 2025

2025 Proxy Season Preview: A New Paradigm for Investment Stewardship

Ray Garcia is a Leader, Matt DiGuiseppe is a Managing Director, and Ariel Smilowitz is a Director at the PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) Governance Insights Center. This post is based on their PwC memorandum.

The flurry of activity coming out of the Trump Administration is ushering in a new paradigm for investment stewardship of environmental, social and governance (ESG) considerations. Over the course of a few weeks in February 2025, the SEC issued significant new guidance on topics ranging from shareholder proposals to investor engagement and communication. In some ways, this shift in approach raises questions about how business priorities and voting outcomes will be impacted during this year’s proxy season, while in other ways it may provide additional clarity.

As the market responds in real time, we anticipate that investors’ engagement and proxy voting strategies will evolve to address potential legal and regulatory risks. We foresee the return of “quiet diplomacy,” in which investors take less public credit for the impact of their stewardship activities and surreptitiously articulate their positions on governance issues related to specific companies. That said, investors will also seek to understand how boards are overseeing relevant business risks if company policies, practices or disclosures are modified. Here, we outline how these developments may unfold, along with steps boards and management teams can take to successfully navigate through proxy season.

READ MORE »

The Lessons of Michael C. Jensen

René M. Stulz is the Everett D. Reese Chair of Banking and Monetary Economics at the Fisher College of Business at The Ohio State University. This post is based on his recent paper.

From the 1950s to the middle of the 1970s, a few scholars built the foundations for a new field of scholarship, the field of financial economics. Michael C. Jensen, who died last April, is one of these scholars. He has the distinction of having written the most highly cited paper in financial economics. This paper has been hugely influential not only in financial economics, but in other business fields, in economics, and in corporate law. His most important lesson for corporate finance is that the productivity of firms depends directly on corporate finance, so that corporate financial policy is not a side-show but a critical factor in the success of corporations.

In my paper titled “The Lessons of Michael C. Jensen,” I assess how Jensen impacted the field of financial economics and academia more broadly, as well as the world outside academia. Jensen was controversial throughout his career. The New York Times published an article following his death that highlighted both his accomplishments and the controversy that followed him. The article was titled “Michael C. Jensen, 84, who helped reshape modern capitalism, dies.” The title captures his enormous influence, but then the article blames him for the “greed-is-good era.”

READ MORE »

Responding to Stealth Dual-Class Stock

James Crowe is the Research Manager at the Council of Institutional Investors. This post is based on his recent CII memorandum.

In August of last year, we published a post detailing examples of stealth-dual class structures. These structures can deliver substantially similar entrenchment mechanisms to traditional dual-class stock without creating multiple classes of common stock or adopting widely understood anti-takeover devices such as poison pills.

CII has adopted the following amendments to its policies on corporate governance at its Spring 2025 conference.

READ MORE »

Understanding and Managing Legal Risk in Corporate DEI

Matteo Tonello is the Head of Benchmarking and Analytics at The Conference Board, Inc. This post is based on a Conference Board memorandum by Camille A. Olson, Partner, Seyfarth Shaw LLP, and Allan Schweyer, Principal Research, Human Capital Center, The Conference Board.

Rapid legal developments in the US related to diversity, equity & inclusion (DEI) practices, programs, and policies require continuous monitoring to ensure companies have accurate, up-to-date information regarding compliance and evolving regulatory standards. As the legal landscape develops in this area, companies are identifying and evaluating the specifics of their existing programs to determine compliance with state and federal law, as well as overall program effectiveness. While “illegal DEI” remains undefined by the new administration, recent developments have provided some direction useful to the private sector.

This report compliments our February 2025 essay Navigating Legal Risk In Corporate DEI.

Key Insights

  • Companies should harmonize regulatory and legal compliance with their broader inclusive workplace culture objectives. The ability to swiftly adapt to legal changes, proactively manage risk, and engage in transparent communication will be critical to sustaining lawful workplace programs while reaffirming a commitment to equal opportunity, merit, and access.
  • Conduct scenario planning to ensure your leadership team is aware of developments and your communications strategy considers alternative outcomes. Engage with legal counsel and other resources to gain a broader perspective on applicable legal principles and evolving interpretations. Regular attorney–client privileged audits can strengthen organizational resilience against legal scrutiny.
  • Ensure that employees and other key stakeholders understand the organization’s commitment to creating and maintaining a culture of fairness and inclusion. Provide employees with timely updates on any changes to existing workplace policies.

READ MORE »

“Under Pressure”: Walking the Fine Line of Section 13(d) Passive Investor Status

Maia GezScott Levi, and Michelle Rutta are Partners at White & Case LLP. This post is based on a White & Case memorandum by Ms. Gez, Mr. Levi, Ms. Rutta, Erica Hogan, Greg Pryor, and Danielle Herrick.

On February 11, 2025, the staff of the Division of Corporation Finance (“Staff”) of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or the “Commission”) issued new and updated Compliance and Disclosure Interpretations on Regulation 13D-G (“C&DIs”) that address the circumstances under which a shareholder’s engagement with an issuer’s management would cause the shareholder to hold securities with the “purpose or effect of changing or influencing control of the issuer,” and therefore lose eligibility to report on Schedule 13G.[1]

Prior to this latest guidance, investors relied on the previous C&DI Question 103.11, which stated that engagement on particular topics (executive compensation, environmental issues and, in certain circumstances, corporate governance topics[2]) “without more” and without the “purpose or effect of changing or influencing control,” would not result in the loss of Schedule 13G status. This rather general standard, which emphasized the subject matter of the discussions, gave comfort to investors that rigorous discussion with management on these topics would not endanger 13G status, as long as there was no overt effort to influence or change control of the issuer. However, this prior C&DI did not provide guidance on specific actions that would constitute “changing or influencing control of an issuer,” and thereby put 13G status at risk. The new C&DI is aimed at providing such guidance.

READ MORE »

Statement by Commissioner Crenshaw Regarding Climate-Related Disclosures Rule Litigation

Caroline A. Crenshaw is a Commissioner at the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. This post is based on her recent remarks. The views expressed in this post are those of Commissioner Crenshaw and do not necessarily reflect those of the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff.

Today, the SEC purports to walk away from the Climate-Related Disclosures Rule.[1] In building the rule, we journeyed up a mountain. The Commission spent at least four years taking input – we issued requests for information, made a proposal, opened and reopened comment periods when stakeholders asked for more time or the ability to provide more input, reviewed thousands of comment letters, carefully balanced the interest of investors, markets and issuers, and dutifully tailored a final rule in-line with our mission and our statutory authority.[2] It was an arduous process that led to a sound and strong result.

READ MORE »

Weekly Roundup: March 21-27, 2025


More from:

This roundup contains a collection of the posts published on the Forum during the week of March 21-27, 2025

Shareholder Engagement on Compensation Matters: Special Time-Sensitive Complications for the 2025 Proxy Season


How DEI Shareholder Proposals Are Faring in 2025


The Future of Board Diversity Disclosures


Key Legal Considerations in Nonprofit Spinout Transactions


Does Mandatory Risk Disclosure Harm Corporate Innovation?


Navigating DEI Disclosure amid Regulatory Shifts


2024 Year End Activism Review


Signaling Long-Term Information Using Short-Term Forecasts


The Governance of Geopolitical Risk in 2025


SEC Priorities Regarding Cybersecurity Enforcement in the Second Trump Administration


Sanctioning Negligent Bankers


Remarks by Commissioner Crenshaw at the Investment Company Institute’s 2025 Investment Management Conference


2025 Environmental and Social Developments


Scope, Scale, and Concentration: A New Perspective on the 21st-Century Firm


Early Filers: Bonuses Up Amid Flat Financial Performance


Early Filers: Bonuses Up Amid Flat Financial Performance

Lauren Peek is a Partner and Joanna Czyzewski is a Principal at Compensation Advisory Partners. This post is based on their CAP memorandum.

Key Findings

Performance: 2024 median financial performance – as measured by revenue, earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT), and earnings per share (EPS) – was generally flat and consistent with 2023 performance. In 2024, median revenue grew slightly (+1.6%), EBIT grew modestly (+3.9%) and EPS was flat (0.0%). One-year total shareholder return (TSR) was up double digits year-over-year (+15.2%).

CEO Pay: Median CEO total direct compensation increased +9% year over year, driven by a +14% increase in actual bonus payout and a +7% increase in the grant-date value of long-term incentives (LTI).

Annual Incentive Payout: For the second year in a row, median bonus payouts for CEOs were around target (i.e., 104% of target). Although financial performance was generally flat and annual incentive achievement was around target, CEO bonus payouts were up significantly. This is because, in general, companies with significant increases in bonus payouts (on average, approximately +280% increase) either rebounded from low payouts in 2023 or had continued sustained performance in 2024 and these increases were larger than the percentage change for companies that saw a decline in bonus (approximately 45%, on average).

READ MORE »

Scope, Scale, and Concentration: A New Perspective on the 21st-Century Firm

Gerard Hoberg is a Professor of Finance and Business Economics at USC Marshall School of Business and Gordon Phillips is the Laurence F. Whittemore Professor of Business at Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth College. This post is based on their recent article published in The Journal of Finance.

The Evolution of Firm Scope and Measurement Challenges

Recent discussions on corporate concentration have relied on traditional industry classifications that often fail to capture the evolving nature of firm scope and competition. Historically, firm scope has been measured using Compustat segment data, which relies on broad industry classifications and managerial reporting discretion. However, this traditional method falls short in capturing the true breadth of modern firms, particularly as they expand into related product markets rather than diversifying into entirely new industries.

In our recent paper, “Scope, Scale, and Concentration: The 21st-Century Firm,” published in The Journal of Finance, Gerard Hoberg and I introduce a novel methodology to measure firm scope using natural language processing (NLP) techniques, specifically doc2vec. This advanced text analysis method allows us to extract rich textual information from firms’ annual reports, offering a more granular, data-driven approach to measuring firm scope. By analyzing firms’ 10-K filings, we can quantify the industries they truly operate in based on how they describe their businesses, providing a significantly more detailed and accurate measure than conventional business segment data.

READ MORE »

2025 Environmental and Social Developments

Amanda Urquiza is a Partner at Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati. This post is based on a Wilson Sonsini memorandum by Ms. Urquiza, Tamara Brightwell, Jindrich Kloub, Marina Tsatalis, and Greg Watts.

2025 is off to a fast start with several changes in the legal landscape of the environmental and social (E&S) categories of ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance). This alert highlights key E&S developments thus far in 2025, including executive actions, regulatory updates, state legislation, and proxy advisor and institutional investor guidance.

READ MORE »

Page 1 of 8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8