Suchergebnisse

PurposeAnnual general meetings (AGMs) are an essential aspect of corporate governance in the UK, although there is little attempt to monitor the process of accountability evident on the part of the directors. This paper aims to provide an analysis of AGMs and suggest ways of making the event more effective from a stakeholder viewpoint.Design/methodology/approachBy referring to the original principles of corporate governance laid down by the Cadbury Report onwards, past observation and evaluation have been used to pick out the best and worst practices of over 40 AGMs attended in order to build up a picture of a successful AGM for shareholders and directors alike. Companies are assessed for aspects of best practice relating to their AGMs and the essential elements are discussed.FindingsA successful AGM should include: a well balanced and independent range of skills and backgrounds on the board, accompanied by fair remuneration and reward schemes for the directors; awareness of long‐term social, community and environmental issues incorporated in corporate social responsibility, alongside the more immediate matters of financial performance; and a real appreciation of the concerns of all stakeholders.Originality/valueThe paper suggests how an AGM might be run to achieve optimal benefit for the parties involved, and is aimed mainly at boards of directors and event organizers to ensure awareness of the key issues.

This paper explores the role of the annual general meeting (AGM) in the mediation of tensions between the board of directors of a company and its shareholders. An evaluative framework is developed for assessing whether directors at any particular AGM appear to be making the meeting inclusive for the shareholders. Consideration is made at first of the place of the AGM as a corporate governance device, concluding that in recent times shareholder voting on resolutions and questioning of the board exhibit important features of self‐governance as opposed to external regulation. A scoring system is then developed for assessing whether an AGM favours the company or the shareholders, using twelve criteria to rank them. The results of observations of 22 AGMs over recent years in five industrial sectors are then analysed and assessed, with reasons for high and low scores being suggested.