-
Supported By:


Subscribe or Follow
HLS Faculty & Senior Fellows
Program on Corporate Governance Advisory Board
- Peter Atkins
- David Bell
- Kerry E. Berchem
- Richard Brand
- Daniel Burch
- Paul Choi
- Jesse Cohn
- Arthur B. Crozier
- Renata J. Ferrari
- Andrew Freedman
- Ray Garcia
- Joseph Hall
- Jason M. Halper William P. Mills
- David Millstone
- Theodore Mirvis
- Philip Richter
- Elina Tetelbaum
- Sebastian Tiller
- Marc Trevino
- Steven J. Williams
Author Archives: Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance and Financial Regulation
The JOBS Act: An Investor Protection Disaster Waiting to Happen
Congress and the White House are turning a blind eye to the unintended consequences of the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act (H.R. 3606) by insisting on placing election-year politics over protecting the needs of both small businesses and “Main Street” investors. The so-called JOBS Act is another example in a long history of good legislative […]
Click here to read the complete postPrivate Interaction Between Firm Management and Sell-Side Analysts
In the paper, Private Interaction Between Firm Management and Sell-Side Analysts, which was recently made publicly available on SSRN, I investigate private interaction between sell‐side analysts and senior management by examining a set of internal records compiled by a large‐cap NYSE traded firm. Thousands of hours of senior management time are consumed speaking with sell‐side […]
Click here to read the complete post
Posted in Academic Research, Boards of Directors, Empirical Research, Securities Regulation
Tagged Analyst communication, Analysts, Management
Comments Off on Private Interaction Between Firm Management and Sell-Side Analysts
Investor Protection is Needed for True Capital Formation
Editor’s Note: Luis A. Aguilar is a Commissioner at the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. This post is based on a speech by Commissioner Aguilar; the full speech, including footnotes, is available here. The views expressed in the post are those of Commissioner Aguilar and do not necessarily reflect those of the Securities and Exchange […]
Click here to read the complete postHarvard’s Shareholder Rights Project is Wrong
The Harvard Law School Shareholders Rights Project (SRP) recently issued joint press releases with five institutional investors, principally state and municipal pension funds, trumpeting SRP’s representation of and advice to these investors during the 2012 proxy season in submitting proposals to more than 80 S&P 500 companies with staggered boards, urging that their boards be […]
Click here to read the complete postRepealing Classified Boards in S&P 500 Companies
The Harvard Law School Shareholder Rights Project (SRP) is a clinical program at Harvard Law School through which faculty, staff and students assist public pension funds and charitable organizations to improve corporate governance at publicly traded companies in which they are shareowners. Below are links to joint press releases issued earlier this week by the […]
Click here to read the complete post
Posted in Corporate Elections & Voting, Institutional Investors, Practitioner Publications
Tagged Los Angeles County Employees Retirement Association, North Carolina State Treasurer, Ohio Public Employees Retirement System, Shareholder proposals, Shareholder Rights Project, Staggered boards
Comments Off on Repealing Classified Boards in S&P 500 Companies
Detecting Deceptive Discussions in Conference Calls
Considerable accounting and finance research has attempted to identify whether reported financial statements have been manipulated by executives. Most of these classification models are developed using accounting and financial market explanatory variables. Despite extensive prior work, the ability of these models to identify accounting manipulations is modest. In the paper, Detecting Deceptive Discussions in Conference […]
Click here to read the complete postDelaware Court Reaffirms Revlon Duties and Fiduciary Duty of Disclosure
In its recent Micromet [1] preliminary injunction decision, the Delaware Chancery Court reaffirmed that (i) Revlon’s enhanced scrutiny is a reasonableness standard based on the particular circumstances of the target company and (ii) Delaware’s fiduciary duty of disclosure only requires that the information provided to shareholders for purposes of their vote on a merger be […]
Click here to read the complete post
Posted in Accounting & Disclosure, Boards of Directors, Court Cases, Practitioner Publications
Tagged Delaware cases, Delaware law, Disclosure, Fiduciary duties, In re Micromet, In re Revlon
Comments Off on Delaware Court Reaffirms Revlon Duties and Fiduciary Duty of Disclosure