Home    About Us    Services    Workshops    Books    Links   

                    Contact Us         Ethical Investing & CSR Studies        Free Newsletter

Easily apply your values to investing with our
DIY Ethical-Sustainable Investing Pays Tutorial


      & Analyst

Follow ron_robins on Twitter


Media Coverage of
Investing for the Soul


  • Wall Street Journal
  • MarketWatch
  • BNN (Business News Network)
  • The Financial Post
  • Rogers Television's Money Line
  • CBC One's Metro Morning
  • 680 News Radio
  • Environmental News Network
  • The Catholic Register
  • More...

The Web This Site



Shareholder Values

"Almost three-quarters of investors (74 percent) would be more likely to work with an advisor who could give them competitive investment returns from investments that also made a positive impact on society and 65 percent of investors would be more likely to stay with an advisor who could discuss responsible investing with them."
TIAA Global Asset
    May 2016

"The vast majority of Canadian investors are interested in responsible investments (RI) that incorporate environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues, and they would be more likely to choose responsible investments if their financial advisor suggested suitable RI options for them."
    Association (RIA)
    June 2017

"70% of people [in UK] want to invest ethically but the financial services industry is failing to respond." Referencing research by Abundance.
(UK) June 2015

This article appeared in ABCNEWS.com on July 8, 2004
Flexing Their Muscle

Shareholders Hold Increased Influence in Post-Enron America

July 8, 2004  —  Question: What single force can get Tyco International to strive for cleaner emissions, inspire PepsiCo to study the impact of AIDS in developing nations, and even get Merck & Co. to declare its intentions to not manufacture an abortion pill?
Answer: shareholders.

Motivated to be heard in the post-Enron age, shareholders are flexing their muscles, demanding responsible policies and practices in unprecedented ways. And though some still feel like second-class citizens behind executive elites, shareholder activists are reporting new receptivity to their causes — thanks, they say, to a scandal-charged atmosphere that has management humbled and listening.

"The embarrassment of the scandals is leading companies to talk," says Daniel Rosan, director of public health for the long-time shareholder activist network, Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility. "Savvy companies have realized that shareholder concerns are a kind of feedback they need."

The chief barometers of shareholder activism indicate the movement has reached new heights since the wave of corporate scandals began in 2002. In that year, shareholders brought 802 proposals to a vote at company annual meetings, according to tracking data from the Investor Responsibility Research Center. In 2003, that number jumped to 1,082. So far this year, a record 1,147 proposals have been made as the five-month proxy season winds down this month.

What's more, shareholder proposals — once regarded as voices crying in the wilderness — are now receiving more votes. A record 161 proposals won majority support from shareholders in 2003. That record could be broken this year.

What shareholders want ranges from limits on chief executive officer pay (the most common proposal) to nondiscrimination policies that include sexual orientation. Although they are nonbinding, resolutions commonly work by bringing unwelcome public attention or even shame upon a corporation.

Influencing Corporate Policy

Beyond resolutions, however, lies an array of other tools in the shareholder activist's toolbox. And what activists find most inspiring about the current climate is the potential for influencing corporate policy without going the resolution route.

"I don't like to use shareholder proposals because you're starting out in a combative position," says Frank Rauscher, president of Aquinas Funds, a mutual fund for advancing Roman Catholic social causes. "We've been very successful, especially in the past few years, through dialogue alone." For example, the fund company sent a letter to Merck & Co. management outlining the liabilities potentially associated with the manufacture of the RU-486 "day after" abortion pill. That was all it took to obtain a statement that the company would not manufacture it, Rauscher says.

Since shareholders own portions of public companies, each has a right to vote on nominations for boards of directors and other proposals presented at annual meeting. Proxy forms sent in the mail enable shareholders to vote without attending in person. What's more, anyone who owns $2,000 or more in stock can, according to the Securities and Exchange Commission, draft and present a proposal for consideration by all shareholders.

In general, proposals aimed at social or corporate governance issues come from attorneys or specialized firms hired by major institutional investors, such as universities, unions, or state pension funds. But individual investors are making their voices heard as well by teaming up with coalitions of like-minded investors and using collective clout to advance their agendas.

It often works like this: An individual investor brings personal concerns about board-member independence or a firm's political contributions, for instance, to an investor networking organization, such as the Advocacy and Public Policy Program (www.shareholderaction.org). There, he or she learns how others — such as mutual funds or Calpers, the giant California pension program with $165 billion invested — plan to vote at a particular company's annual meeting. They can also learn who, if anyone, is leading the charge. If a campaign has already begun, the investor might become a signatory to a petition, a proxy voter, or possibly even a participant in meetings with management. Out of such steps or other creative means to reach the right corporate decision makers, an activist is made.

Increased Proxy Voting

Many shareholders who never bothered to vote their proxies and instead by default affirmed management's plans have seized a new role since the collapse of Enron. In Maine, for instance, State Treasurer Dale McCormick promptly instituted proxy voting guidelines for companies owned through the state's $7 billion pension fund. And for the ordinary Maine investor outraged by corporate fraud, McCormick has answered a call for lessons in activism by writing how-to articles for the general public.

"The annual shareholder meeting is the one time of the year when shareholders get access to the board of directors and management," she says. "We have a big role to play in cleaning up the corporate scandals, and you're either part of the solution or part of the problem. You're part of the problem if you're letting someone else vote your proxy."

Still, the $64,000 question persists: Does it work? Do shareholder voices actually lead to new corporate policies? On that question, the jury is still out, since management sometimes takes years to respond to shareholder concerns. But signs do suggest more movement than five or 10 years ago.

On one hand, management has yet to respond to certain new pressures. In notable examples from the current proxy season, 37 percent of shareholders of the oil exploration firm Apache Corp. demanded a report on the company's efforts to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions. At the Fifth Third Bancorp annual meeting in May, 63 percent of shareholders called for a nondiscrimination policy toward gay and lesbian employees, despite management's silence on the issue. Whether executives will act on these shareholder directives remains to be seen.

Claiming Victory

But in some cases, shareholders are already claiming victories. American Electric Power Co., for instance, apparently heard the voice of investors, led by Connecticut Treasurer Denise Nappier, who demanded in 2003 more disclosure about the company's impact on global warming. This year, under pressure from another pending shareholder resolution, the company agreed to let an independent committee oversee a report. Satisfied shareholders withdrew their proposal.

"Typically the annual meeting has been a 'rah-rah' event for the company and for management," says Tracey Rembert, advocacy director for the Social Investment Forum. "Some [firms] don't take shareholders very seriously, but more and more are finding they need to."

With shareholder activism still in its infancy as a movement, investors are discovering by trial and error what works most effectively. Shareholders with a light touch, Rembert says, find that handwritten letters have at times prompted six or eight-page responses from executives. And for those who prefer the stick to the carrot, Rauscher says shareholders are beginning to discover the potential for lawsuits against management when those in charge convey "misleading information" on social issues or other matters.

Whether the gentle approach ultimately gets further than the tough one is not yet clear. But in the meantime, Rauscher expects investors to keep seeing encouraging signs. "Social activists are realizing the big institutional investor might vote for a CEO pay limit and take the rest of the little guy's proposal [with social concerns attached] along with it," he says. "You just might find it gets approved."

By G. Jeffrey MacDonald, The Christian Science Monitor 
Courtesy of:
Social Investment Organization
184 Pearl Street 2nd floor
Toronto, ON M5H 1L5
 tel  (416)  461-6042   fax (416)  461-2481

Ethical Investing News & Commentary | Archives | Books | Important Links | Events | Ron Robins

Ethical Investing Workshops | Services For Investors & Investment Professionals

Who Should Invest My Money? | Press Kit | Editorials | Spiritual Quotes Related to Money

Privacy Policy | Contact Us | Free Newsletter/Unsubscribe| Sitemap



Disclaimer: This website does not make investment recommendations. Nothing in this site should be interpreted as a recommendation or solicitation to buy/sell any securities or investments. Investing for the Soul is a source of general information and resources for ethical investing and socially responsible investing (SRI). Investors should consider their actions thoroughly and consult their financial advisers and other professionals, prior to taking any investment action. This website does not necessarily agree with the opinions expressed in articles on its pages or offered on the web pages to which it might be linked. Such opinions are the responsibility of the writers themselves. Furthermore, this site does not offer or provide any warranties, representations, guarantees, implied or otherwise, as to the accuracy, legality, copyright compliance, timeliness or usefulness of the information, materials or services on this, or other sites, to which it is linked. Also, Mr. Ron Robins is not an investment advisor, nor is he licensed with any professional investment related body, and thus is not able to, nor does he make, any investment recommendations.


Investing for the Soul is a registered business name in the Province of Ontario, Canada.

Sunburst image in logo complements of http//:freeimages.co.uk             Copyright © 2002-2017 Ron Robins. All rights reserved.