Shareholderism Around the World: Corporate Purpose, Culture, and Law

References

• Adams RB (2017) Boards, and the directors who sit on them. Hermalin BE, Weisbach MS, eds. Handbook of the Economics of Corporate Governance, vol. 1 (Elsevier, Amsterdam), 292–368.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Adams RB, Kirchmaier T (2015) Barriers to boardrooms. ECGI Finance Working Paper No. 347/2013, European Corporate Governance Institute, Brussels.Google Scholar
• Adams RB, Almeida H, Ferreira D (2009) Understanding the relationship between founder–CEOs and firm performance. J. Empirical Finance 16(1):136–150.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Adams RB, Licht AN, Sagiv L (2011) Shareholders and stakeholders: How do directors decide? Strategic Management J. 32(12):1331–1355.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Agle BR, Mitchell RK, Sonnenfeld JA (1999) Who matters to CEOs? An investigation of stakeholder attributes and salience, corporate performance, and CEO values. Acad. Management J. 42:507–525.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aguilera RV, Desender KA, Bednar MK, Lee JH (2015) Connecting the dots: Bringing external corporate governance into the corporate governance puzzle. Acad. Management Ann. 9(1):483–573.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aminadav G, Papaioannou E (2020) Corporate control around the world. J. Finance 75:1191–1246.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anderson JE (2011) The gravity model. Ann. Rev. Econom. 3(1):133–160.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anderson ME, Jones MA, Marshall SD, Mitchell RJ, Ramsay I (2007) Evaluating the shareholder primacy theory: Evidence from a survey of Australian directors. Legal Studies Research Paper No. 302, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.Google Scholar
• Andrews I, Stock JH, Sun L (2019) Weak instruments in instrumental variables regression: Theory and practice. Ann. Rev. Econom. 11:727–753.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bandiera O, Prat A, Hansen S, Sadun R (2020) CEO behavior and firm performance. J. Political Econom. 128(4):1325–1369.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barrios JM, Bianchi PA, Isidro H, Nanda D (2022) Boards of a feather: Homophily in foreign director appointments around the world. J. Accounting Res. 60:1293–1335.Crossref, Google Scholar
• BCE Inc v. 1976 Debentureholders, 2008 SCC 69 (2008).Google Scholar
• Beierlein C, Davidov E, Schmidt P, Schwartz SH, Rammstedt B (2012) Testing the discriminant validity of Schwartz’ Portrait Value Questionnaire items: A replication end extension of Knoppen and Saris (2009). Survey Res. Methods 6(1):25–36.Google Scholar
• Bliese PD (2000) Within-group agreement, nonindependence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. Klein KJ, Kozlowski SWJ, eds. Multi-Level Theory, Research and Methods in Organizations: Foundations, Extensions, and New Directions (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco), 349–381.Google Scholar
• Bloom N, van Reenen J (2007) Measuring and explaining management practices across firms and countries. Quart. J. Econom. 122(4):1351–1408.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bloom N, van Reenen J (2010) Why do management practices differ across firms and countries? J. Econom. Perspectives 24(1):203–224.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bradley M, Schipani CA, Sundaram AK, Walsh AP (1999) The purposes and accountability of the corporation in contemporary society: Corporate governance at a crossroads. Law Contemporary Problems 62(3):9–86.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Byron K, Post C (2016) Women on boards of directors and corporate social performance: A meta-analysis. Corporate Governance: Internat. Rev. 24:428–442.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chin MK, Hambrick DC, Treviño LK (2013) Political ideologies of CEOs: The influence of executives’ values on corporate social responsibility. Admin. Sci. Quart. 58(2):197–232.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cialdini RB, Trost MR (1998) Social influence: Social norms, conformity and compliance. Gilbert D, Fiske S, Lindzey G, eds. The Handbook of Social Psychology, 4th ed. (McGraw-Hill, New York), 151–192.Google Scholar
• Coffee J Jr (2020) EC Corporate Governance Initiative Series: The European Commission considers ‘short-termism’ (and ‘what do you mean by that?’). Accessed August 27, 2025, https://blogs.law.ox.ac.uk/business-law-blog/blog/2020/11/ec-corporate-governance-initiative-series-european-commission.Google Scholar
• Conte M, Cotterlaz P, Mayer T (2022) The CEPII gravity database. http://www.cepii.fr/DATA_DOWNLOAD/gravity/doc/Gravity_documentation.pdf.Google Scholar
• Crilly D, Schneider SG, Zollo M (2008) The psychological antecedents to socially responsible behavior. Eur. Management Rev. 5:175–190.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Crossland C (2007) National institutions and managerial discretion: A taxonomy of 24 countries. Acad. Management Proc. 2007(1):1–6.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Crossland C (2009) Why do CEOs matter more in some countries than others? Managerial discretion at the national level. Acad. Management Proc. 2009(1):1–6.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Crossland C, Hambrick DC (2011) Differences in managerial discretion across countries: How nation-level institutions affect the degree to which CEOs matter. Strategic Management J. 32(8):797–819.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Demirtaş G, Strenger C, Tröger TH (2024) Sustainability skills disclosure for boards: An essential prerequisite for assessing sustainability competence. Working Paper No. 427, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, Frankfurt.Google Scholar
• Desender KA, Epure M (2015) Corporate governance and corporate social performance: The influence of ownership, boards and institutions. Working paper, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain.Google Scholar
• Djankov S, La Porta R, Lopez-de-Silanes F, Shleifer A (2002) The regulation of entry. Quart. J. Econom. 117:1–37.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Djankov S, La Porta R, Lopez-de-Silanes F, Shleifer A (2008) The law and economics of self-dealing. J. Financial Econom. 88:430–465.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dodge v. Ford Motor Co., 170 NW 668 (Mich. 1919).Google Scholar
• Duelmer H, Schwartz SH, Cieciuch J, Davidov E, Schmidt P (2023) Testing Schwartz’s model of cultural value orientations in Europe with the European Social Survey: An empirical comparison of additive indexes with factor scores. Survey Res. Methods 17(4):447–463.Google Scholar
• El Ghoul S, Guedhami O, Kim Y (2017) Country-level institutions, firm value, and the role of corporate social responsibility initiatives. J. Internat. Bus. Stud. 48(3):360–385.Crossref, Google Scholar
• European Commission (2020) Study on Directors’ Duties and Sustainable Corporate Governance: Final Report (European Commission, Brussels).Google Scholar
• Fernández R (2011) Does culture matter? Benhabib J, Jackson MO, Bisen A, eds. Handbook of Social Economics, vol. 1A (North-Holland), 481–510.Google Scholar
• Flammer C, Kacperczyk AJ (2016) The impact of stakeholder orientation on innovation: Evidence from a natural experiment. Management Sci. 62(7):1982–2001.Link, Google Scholar
• Frijns B, Dodd O, Cimerova H (2016) The impact of cultural diversity in corporate boards on firm performance. J. Corporate Finance 41:521–541.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gartenberg CM, Zenger T (2023) The firm as a subsociety: Purpose, justice, and the theory of the firm. Organ. Sci. 34(5):1965–1980.Link, Google Scholar
• Giannetti M, Zhao M (2019) Board ancestral diversity and firm-performance volatility. J. Financial Quant. Anal. 54(3):1117–1155.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Giorgi S, Maoret M, Zajac EJ (2019) On the relationship between firms and their legal environment: The role of cultural consonance. Organ. Sci. 30(4):803–830.Link, Google Scholar
• Giuliano P, Nunn N (2021) Understanding cultural persistence and change. Rev. Econom. Stud. 88(4):1541–1581.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gorton GB, Zentefis AK (2023) Corporate culture as a theory of the firm. Working paper, Yale School of Management, New Haven, CT.Google Scholar
• Gow ID, Kaplan SN, Larcker DF, Zakolyukina AA (2016) CEO personality and firm policies. NBER Working Paper No. 22435, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Graham JR, Harvey CR, Puri M (2013) Managerial attitudes and corporate actions. J. Financial Econom. 109(1):103–121.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Griffin D, Guedhami O, Kwok C, Li K, Shao L (2017) National culture: The missing country-level determinant of corporate governance. J. Internat. Bus. Stud. 48:740–762.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guiso L, Sapienza P, Zingales L (2016) Long-term persistence. J. Eur. Econom. Assoc. 14(6):1401–1436.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gupta A, Nadkarni S, Mariam M (2019) Dispositional sources of managerial discretion: CEO ideology, CEO personality, and firm strategies. Admin. Sci. Quart. 64(4):855–893.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hambrick DC (2007) Upper echelons theory: An update. Acad. Management Rev. 32(2):334–343.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hambrick DC, Finkelstein S (1987) Managerial discretion: A bridge between polar views of organizational outcomes. Cummings LL, Staw B eds. Research in Organizational Behavior (JAI Press, Greenwich, CT), 369–406.Google Scholar
• Hambrick DC, Mason PA (1984) Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Acad. Management Rev. 9(2):193–206.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harjoto M, Laksmana I, Lee R (2015) Board diversity and corporate social responsibility. J. Bus. Ethics 132:641–660.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hart O, Zingales L (2017) Companies should maximize shareholder welfare not market value. J. Law Finance Accounting 2:247–274.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Holderness CG (2016) Law and ownership reexamined. Critical Finance Rev. 5(1):41–83.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Holderness CG (2017) Culture and the ownership concentration of public corporations around the world. J. Corporate Finance 44:469–486.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Inglehart R (1997) Modernization and Postmodernization: Cultural, Economic and Political Change in 43 Societies (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kaufmann D, Kraay A, Mastruzzi M (2007) Growth and governance: A reply. J. Politics 69:555–562.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kirzner I (1973) Competition and Entrepreneurship (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Google Scholar
• Liang H, Renneboog L (2017) On the foundations of corporate social responsibility. J. Finance 72(2):853–910.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Licht AN (2004) The maximands of corporate governance: A theory of values and cognitive style. Delaware J. Corporate Law 29:649–746.Google Scholar
• Licht AN (2012) State intervention in corporate governance: National interest and board composition. Theoretical Inquiries Law 13:597–622.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Licht AN (2015) Culture and law in corporate governance. Gordon J, Ringe G eds. Oxford Handbook of Law and Corporate Governance (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Google Scholar
• Liñán F, Fernandez-Serrano J (2014) National culture, entrepreneurship and economic development: Different patterns across the European Union. Small Bus. Econom. 42(4):685–701.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liñán F, Jaén I, Martín D (2022) Does entrepreneurship fit her? Women entrepreneurs, gender-role orientation, and entrepreneurial culture. Small Bus. Econom. 58(2):1051–1071.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liñán F, Jaén I, Ortega FJ (2015) Understanding the role of culture and economic conditions in entrepreneurship. Peris-Ortiz M, Merigó-Lindahl JM eds. Entrepreneurship, Regional Development and Culture: An Institutional Perspective (Springer, Heidelberg), 53–73.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liu C (2018) Are women greener? Corporate gender diversity and environmental violations. J. Corporate Finance 52(C):118–142.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Masulis RW, Wang C, Xie F (2012) Globalizing the boardroom—The effects of foreign directors on corporate governance and firm performance. J. Accounting Econom. 53(3):527–554.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Matten D, Moon J (2008) “Implicit” and “explicit” CSR: A conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility. Acad. Management Rev. 33(2):404–424.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mayer C (2019) Prosperity: Better Business Makes the Greater Good (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Google Scholar
• Mayer C (2023) The purpose of corporate purpose statements: A response to ‘Shareholder voice and corporate purpose: The purposeless of mandatory corporate purpose statements’ by Paul Davies. Working Paper No. 694/2023, ECGI Law, University of Oxford, Saïd Business School and Blavatnik School of Government Park End Street, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
• Miletkov M, Poulsen A, Wintoki MB (2017) Foreign independent directors and the quality of legal institutions. J. Internat. Bus. Stud. 48(2):267–292.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nili Y, Shapira R (2024) Specialist directors. Yale J. Regulation 41:652–716.Google Scholar
• Osborne JW (2015) What is rotating in exploratory factor analysis? Practical Assessment Res. Evaluation Assessment 20(2):1–8.Google Scholar
• Pan Y, Siegel S, Wang TY (2017) Corporate risk culture. J. Financial Quant. Anal. (Oxford) 52(6):2327–2367.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Park SS, Zhang Y (2020) Cultural entrepreneurship in corporate governance practice diffusion: Framing of “independent directors” by U.S.-listed Chinese companies. Organ. Sci. 31:1313–1620.Link, Google Scholar
• Parke v. Daily News Ltd., Ch 927 (1962).Google Scholar
• Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Podsakoff NP (2012) Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Ann. Rev. Psych. 63(1):539–569.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Robinson W (1950) Ecological correlations and the behavior of individuals. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 3:351–357.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Roccas S, Sagiv L (2010) Personal values and behavior: Taking the cultural context into account. Soc. Personality Psych. Compass 4:30–34.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rudnev M, Magun V, Schwartz SH (2018) Relations among higher order values around the world. J. Cross-Cultural Psych. 49:1165–1182.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sagiv L, Schwartz SH (2022) Personal values across cultures. Ann. Rev. Psych. 73:517–546.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schnyder G, Siems M, Aguilera R (2018) Twenty years of ‘Law & Finance’: Time to take law seriously. Working paper, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
• Schumpeter JA (1934) The Theory of Economic Development (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Schwartz SH (1992) Universals in the content and structure of values: Theory and empirical tests in 20 countries. Zanna M, ed. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Academic Press, New York), 1–65.Google Scholar
• Schwartz SH (2014) National culture as value orientations: Consequences of value differences and cultural distance. Ginsburgh V, Throsby D, eds. Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture, 2nd ed. (Elsevier, North Holland), 547–586.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schwartz SH (2016) Basic individual values: Sources and consequences. Brosch T, Sander D eds. Handbook of Value: Perspectives from Economics, Neuroscience, Philosophy, Psychology and Sociology (Oxford University Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Shafer WE, Fukukawa K, Lee GM (2007) Values and the perceived importance of ethics and social responsibility: The U.S. versus China. J. Bus. Ethics 70:256–284.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shlensky v. Wrigley, 237 NE 2d 776 (Ill. App (1968)).Google Scholar
• Siegel JI, Licht AN, Schwartz SH (2013) Egalitarianism, cultural distance, and FDI: A new approach. Organ. Sci. 24:174–1194.Link, Google Scholar
• Siems M (2024) “Corporate purpose” as a false friend: A bibliometric analysis. Working Paper No. 815/2024, European Corporate Governance Institute, Brussels, Belgium.Google Scholar
• Smith PB, Bond MH, Kagitcibasi C (2006) Understanding Social Psychology Across Cultures (Sage, London).Google Scholar
• Strine LE Jr (2015) The dangers of denial: The need for a clear-eyed understanding of the power and accountability structure established by the Delaware general corporation law. Wake Forest Law Rev. 50:761–801.Google Scholar
• Tetley W (2000) Mixed jurisdictions: Common law v. civil law (codified and uncodified). Louisiana Law Rev. 60:677–738.Google Scholar
• Tetlock PE (2000) Cognitive biases and organizational correctives: Do both disease and cure depend on the ideological beholder? Admin. Sci. Quart. 45:293–326.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wangrow DB, Schepker DJ, Barker VL (2015) Managerial discretion: An empirical review and focus on future research directions. J. Management 41(1):99–135.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Westphal JD, Zajac EJ (2013) A behavioral theory of corporate governance. Acad. Management Ann. 7(1):605–659.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Williamson OE (2000) The new institutional economics: Taking stock, looking ahead. J. Econom. Literature 38:595–613.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wooldridge JM (2002) Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar