Suchergebnisse

We analyze Berle's overall corporate governance project in accordance with what we see as its four core sub-themes: (A) the limitations of external market forces as a constraint on managerial decision-making power; (B) the desirability of internal (corporate) over external (market) actors in allocating corporate capital; (C) civil society and the public consensus as a continuous informal check on managerial decision-making power; and (D) shareholder democracy (as opposed to shareholder primacy or shareholder wealth maximization) as a socially instrumental institution. We seek to debunk the popular misconception that Berle's early work was a defense of the orthodox shareholder primacy paradigm of corporate governance. This prefaces our analysis where we set out and, in turn, examine each of the above four sub-themes of Berle's overall thinking on corporate governance. A recurring theme in this part of our discussion is the over-simplicity of attempting to connect Berle's thinking to the later agency costs paradigm of corporate governance, which we believe fails to reflect the normative and institutional richness of Berle's overall social-scientific project. We build on these insights by assessing the effects of our reinterpretation of Berle's work on contemporary corporate governance debates. We suggest here that Berle's lifetime work on corporate governance, when considered in an integral and non-selective way, provides the basis for a realistic and dynamic understanding of the concept of shareholder democracy and its relationship with wider civil society processes of public and political opinion formation.

RésuméDans cette étude comparative sur la France et la Grande‐Bretagne, les auteurs analysent les liens entre relations professionnelles et ajustements (des effectifs et des salaires) face à la crise de 2007–2008, en s'appuyant sur deux enquêtes au niveau des établissements, fortement comparables, l'une britannique (WERS), l'autre française (REPONSE), collectées en 2010–2012. Malgré des contextes différents (composition du tissu productif, temporalité et impact de la crise), les liens entre relations sociales et stratégies d'ajustement semblent proches (la présence syndicale ne suffisant pas à empêcher les ajustements). La différenciation des systèmes de relations professionnelles ne permet donc pas d'expliquer les divergences de modes d'ajustement constatées au niveau macroéconomique.

ResumenEn este estudio comparativo, los autores analizan los vínculos entre las relaciones laborales y los ajustes salariales o de plantilla tras la crisis de 2007–2008, a partir de dos encuestas comparables sobre empresas de Gran Bretaña (WERS) y de Francia (REPONSE) en 2010–2012. Pese a las diferencias contextuales (composición del tejido productivo, circunstancias temporales e intensidad de la crisis), los vínculos entre las relaciones laborales y las estrategias de ajuste son parecidos (la presencia sindical no logra evitar los ajustes). Por lo tanto, la diferenciación de los sistemas de relaciones laborales no permite explicar las divergencias entre las modalidades de ajuste a nivel macroeconómico.

AbstractIn this comparative study, the authors analyse the relationships between industrial relations and workforce or wage adjustments in response to the 2007–08 crisis, using two highly comparable establishment‐level surveys conducted in Great Britain (WERS) and France (REPONSE) in 2010–12. Notwithstanding contextual differences in the countries' productive systems and the timing and impact of the crisis, the relationships between industrial relations and adjustment strategies appear to have been similar (trade union presence not preventing adjustments). Differences in industrial relations are therefore not found to provide an explanation for the different modes of adjustment observed at the macroeconomic level.