Showing papers on "Corporate governance published in 1978"

Corporate Social Responsibility and Stock Market Performance

Abstract: The article examines the relationship between social responsibility and stock market performance of corporations in the U.S. for the period 1970-1974. Risk measures and differential returns of the ...

Defining Democracy: A Bid for Coherence and Consensus:

Abstract: For a short, definite, non-sectarian definition of democracy, I nominate Responsive Rule qua necessary correspondence between acts of governance and the desires with respect to those acts of the pe

The evaluation of corporate contributions

Abstract: This paper reviews the rationales expressed by businessmen for corporate philanthropy as an alternative to both individual charity and government provision of some types of charitable services. Three hypotheses explaining the aggregate level of corporate giving are then tested. The paper concludes with a list of potential hypotheses to be tested about corporate philanthropy when the data become available.

Corporate Planning Practices in Japanese Multinational

Abstract: Corporate planning practices in 19 Japanese multinationals are examined in terms of a set of theoretical premises for corporate planning. Deviations of the existing practices from the premises are ...

Corporate Liberalism in the American Business Community, 1920–1940

Abstract: (i.e., big business leaders who believed that intelligent collaboration between business, government, and organized labor was an attainable goal) from World War I through the prosperous 1920s, the despondent 1930s, and the busy and prosperous years of World War II. He concludes that corporate liberal opinion grew more influential in both corporate and governmental circles during and after the period. Throughout the twentieth century, relations between large corporations and the state have provided vast fields for academic conjecture. The national government grounds its legitimacy in doctrines of citizen sovereignty, natural rights of the individual, mass suffrage, majority rule, and the public accountability of elected officials. But big business, as a system of power, rests upon very different bases. Ascending hierarchies of technological expertise, financial and managerial skill, profitability, and power replace the relatively egalitarian assumptions of a republican political system. Direct mass participation in managerial decision-making is largely non-existent, the various paeans to "stockholder democracy" and "pension fund socialism" notwithstanding. Virtual representation of interests enables corporate leaders to make decisions for their respective clienteles and, presumably, in their best interests. Corporate social responsibility, when and where recognized, has generally assumed that simple profit maximization legitimizes industrial operations.'

Shared Authority, Triparity, Tripolarity: Cross National Patterns of University Government

Abstract: Although universities have become increasingly politicized in the 1960's and 1970's, the analysis of university government has remained a neglected subject in political science literature. Henry Mason describes and compares governance models in use in American, West German, and Dutch universities and reflects on their effect in the functioning of the university. His analysis is a valuable contribution to the relatively new subject of comparative university government.

Reconciling Shareholders’ Rights and Corporate Responsibility: New Guidelines for Management

Abstract: Several decades ago Professors Berle and Dodd began an interesting debate.' Among other things, it concerned the nature of the shareholders' relationship to large, publicly held corporations in which they had invested and the responsibility of these corporations to groups such as customers, employees, and persons residing in the communities in which they operate. The debate has continued, drawing in other participants and generating a diverse group of theories. After examining current legal formulations of the shareholders' relationship to large, publicly held corporations,2 and current concepts of corporate responsibility, this Article will discuss some of these theories in light of empirical research done by the authors with respect to shareholders' expectations. The Article will then present some of the authors' theories, which are based in part upon that research.

A portfolio—balance model of corporate working capital

Abstract: THIS PAPER IS PART of a larger project being conducted by the Cowles Foundation of Yale University. The objective of this project is to estimate general disequilibrium models of the various sub-sectors of the financial sector using Flow of Funds data. Two of these sub-sectors, namely mutual savings banks and savings and loan associations, have already been modeled by Smith and Brainard [10]. The research of this paper resulted in the estimation of another sub-sector, the nonfinancial corporate sub-sector. These financial sub-sector models are primarily motivated by a dissatisfaction with the single asset approach used to expand the financial sector of the major macro-econometric models of the U.S. economy.' The principal shortcoming of these models is that they do not properly specify important general equilibrium effects implied by portfolio wealth constraints and substitution effects. These "pitfalls" of financial model building were first pointed out in a seminal article by Brainard and Tobin [5]. The theme of their study was that because of portfolio wealth constraints, the coefficients of the demand equations of the assets and liabilities included in a sector's balance sheet had to obey certain portfolio-balance or adding-up constraints. A failure to recognize these constraints could lead to serious mis-specification errors. The following sections report the results of applying the portfolio-balance framework to an empirical study of the portfolio behavior of nonfinancial corporations. More specifically, the focus is on the management of the working capital portfolio by nonfinancial corporations. It is hoped that this study will yield some insights into the short-term decision-making process of corporate portfolio managers. In Section II, the fundamental theorems of the portfolio-balance model are briefly reviewed.2 Section III presents an overview of the corporate balance sheet and introduces the theoretical framework that underlies the empirical model. Section IV presents the estimates of the short-run (i.e. impact) and long-run (i.e. equilibrium) coefficients. In Section V the long-run coefficients are used to derive

Disarmament, Development and a Just World Order*

Abstract: The paper sees the arms race (set in motion and fuelled by the industrialized countries, whether of the West or the East) and the struggle for a just world order (waged principally by the developing countries) as two sides of the same fundamental question: Will the transformation, now unquestionably under way, lead to a world run through global corporate economic management and a framework of political governance operated from global and subsidiary power centres supported by military might? Or will it lead to a world characterized by political national independence, economic self-reliance, respect for diversity in both technology and culture, and end of exploitation? The first, merely a perpetuation of the dominance-dependency structure of the imperialist days, will provide neither justice nor security; and the second will ensure both equity and peace, for a structure of inequity and exploitation is the primary source of conflict and violence. That is why the paper discusses the question of disarmament in...