I spoke to Paul Hodgson, formerly of the Corporate Library/GMIRatings, about some examples of companies with very good corporate governance policies, as well as poor ones. I thought his answers were interesting:http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/01/17/an-expert-t...
I just came across this article on a study of Corporate Governance ratings done at Stanford University. The study essentially found no correlation between the ratings and the effectiveness at the rated corporations."But given the results of the Stanford study, the time and money spent by public companies on improving governance ratings does not appear to result in significant value for shareholders."http://www.gsb.stanford.edu/news/research/larker_corpgov.htm...
colleran,This is from 2009, and the years it examines were 2005-2007. This is likely one of the studies cited in "The Shareholder Value Myth," the book I panned recently. There are more recent studies that show very different results.Here's my review, which includes at least one study showing different results:http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/01/14/shareholder...I'm pretty sure that there are more and that I've covered them for Fool.com. I should go back through all my columns and collect them exhaustively.IMHO, this study's timeframe was a REALLY bad timeframe to look at. We were in the midst of a massive asset bubble as I recall. ;) One really long sucker's rally in the market, too. To paraphrase Warren Buffett, the tide hadn't gone out yet to show who was naked or not.Alyce
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data p