A new paper suggests that AIM rules should be revised to encourage activism and better protect the interests of minority shareholders.
Although not exactly an everyday event, it is anything but rare these days for boards to find themselves under attack from activist shareholders.
Following a period of corporate underperformance which becomes reflected in a weak or falling share price, shareholders may decide to act. They may progress from being merely actively engaged to direct activism and push a board to make radical change.
The activist might call for a change of strategy, the chief executive or other management. But if their initial approach is rebuffed by the board they might demand a change in one or more non-executives for failing to hold the executive to accoun
For thoughtful journalism, expert insights on corporate governance and an extensive library of reports, guides and tools to help boards and directors navigate the complexities of their roles, subscribe to Board Agenda