Skip to content

22 May, 2025

  • Saved Articles
  • My Account
  • Subscribe
  • Log In
  • Log Out

Board Agenda

  • Governance
  • Strategy
  • Risk
  • Ethics
  • News
  • Insight
    • Categories

      • View all
      • Governance
      • Strategy
      • Risk
      • Ethics
      • Board Expertise
      • finance
      • Technology
    • UK Corporate Governance Code

      Board meetings ‘are not up to scratch’

      Nearly three-quarters of board members believe the board’s performance in meetings needs improvement, an expert...

    • gender pay gap

      Act now to close the gender pay gap

      This month, it is 55 years since the Equal Pay Act, yet pay inequality persists....

    • monitor sustainability

      How to equip the auditco to monitor sustainability

      The board’s expanding remit to oversee non-financial reporting calls for significant reforms, with stakeholder trust...

  • Comment
      • View all
    • gender pay gap

      Act now to close the gender pay gap

      This month, it is 55 years since the Equal Pay Act, yet pay inequality persists....

    • leadership on AI How to get ahead on AI leadership

      The question isn’t how AI will change business—it’s whether leaders can harness it to drive...

    • canada tariffs Corporate governance to the fore in Canada

      As Canada responds to the tariff conditions set by the US, companies need to take...

  • Interviews
      • View All Interviews
      • Podcasts
      • Webinars
    • UK Corporate Governance Code Board meetings ‘are not up to scratch’

      Nearly three-quarters of board members believe the board’s performance in meetings needs improvement, an expert...

    • financial sanctions Tariffs chaos drives boardroom focus on resilience

      Business leaders will prioritise the resilience of their organisations in the face of economic upheaval...

    • ai boards Corporate world has a ‘huge appetite’ for artificial intelligence

      AI could change boardrooms to the extent that directors’ duties would change too, a panel...

  • Board Careers
  • Resource Centre
      • White Paper Downloads
      • Book Reviews
      • Board Advisory & Corporate Services
    • Route to the top 2025

      Route to the Top 2025

      Heidrick & Struggles’ report draws on an analysis of the profiles of the 1,232 CEOs...

    • Director Reference Guide: Fostering the board-CEO relationship

      This Board Agenda Director Reference Guide on fostering the board-CEO relationship provides practical advice to...

    • Forvis Mazars AI 2025

      Performance Pulse: Are UK businesses prepared for AI?

      Forvis Mazars measured the AI preparedness of more than 300 UK businesses: 97% say they're...

  • Events
  • Search by topic
    • Governance
    • Strategy
    • Risk
    • Ethics
    • Regulation
    • ESG
    • Investor Relations
    • Careers
    • Board Expertise
    • finance
    • Technology

Threat to stakeholder governance from Twitter sale ‘overstated’

by Gavin Hinks on January 27, 2023

Academics and experts argue stakeholder governance will always come second while the law puts the interests of shareholders first.

stakeholder governance

Image: MichaelVi/Shutterstock.com

Last year, one of the most renowned US business academics and his team argued that the sale of Twitter sounded a death knell for “stakeholder governance”. Experts from around the world have now considered the claim, concluding that the sale of the world’s most influential social media companies “overstates” the implications for a concept that has come to dominate governance debate.

In a 24-page paper posted this week, Lucian Bebchuk, a Harvard professor, and his team repeated their claim that the sale of Twitter “pushed stakeholders under the bus”. Many Twitter staff were quickly made redundant, some with very little severance pay.

“Our analysis supports the view that the stakeholder rhetoric of corporate leaders, including in corporate mission and purpose statements, is mostly for show and is not matched by their actual decisions and conduct,” writes the Bebchuk group.

They add that corporates can also not be trusted to “safeguard” the interests of stakeholders in the event of a takeover.

The stakeholder message is one that Bebchuk has pursued since 2018, when the Business Roundtable, a club for leaders of the largest US companies, shocked the corporate world by publishing a statement claiming its members were now all “stakeholder companies”.

Despite his record, Bebchuk and co’s claims for Twitter have fallen flat in many circles.

According to Suren Gomtsian, a business law professor at Leeds University, the Twitter sale is limited evidence for a problem with stakeholder governance.

“Examples like Twitter do not tell us anything about the effectiveness of pro-stakeholder rhetoric and mission, and purpose, statements during normal times.

“All that such examples show is that the pro-stakeholder rhetoric gets overlooked during corporate acquisitions.”

A going concern

Gomtsian argues there are two structural reasons why stakeholders may be forgotten by boards at takeover time. Firstly, it’s the end of the road for boards; if they sell, then stakeholder concerns are “the problem of the new owner, not selling managers”.

Second, and perhaps more significantly, legal structures may not compel a board to consider stakeholders—the Twitter board had no option but to consider only shareholders once they were clear that their only option was to sell.

Richard Leblanc, governance professor at York University in Toronto, and author of The Handbook of Board Governance, echoes the point. He notes the Twitter board faced no “constituency statute” under Californian law that mandated consideration of stakeholder interests.

That said, Leblanc adds that investors in many jurisdictions are, nevertheless, placing boards under pressure to consider stakeholders as they come to accept that “customers, employees, suppliers, communities” are the “engines for shareholder value”.

“We will see where Twitter ends up,” says Leblanc. “It is a work in progress—a grand experiment—and we should exercise care in extrapolating any premature lessons.”

Better by design

Companies can choose to embrace stakeholders. Marco Meyer, a corporate ethics expert at the University of Hamburg and a director at Principia Advisory, an ethics consultancy, says both outdoor clothing brand Patagonia and OpenAI, a San Francisco-based artificial intelligence company, have set up governance structures to “explicitly” protect stakeholder interests. “Corporate governance needs to be designed with the ethical purpose of corporates in mind,” Meyer says.

In the UK, a campaign is under way to reform the law—the Companies Act—to ensure directors’ duties reflect stakeholders’ interests.

According to Roger Barker, policy director at the Institute of Directors and a supporter of reform: “A more balanced stakeholder approach will only move from rhetoric to reality when the privileged position of shareholders in company law is addressed.

“That’s the thinking behind the Better Business Act campaign in the UK—to change the underlying nature of directors’ fiduciary duties so that shareholders aren’t prioritised at the expense of everyone else.”

There are those, however, who believe the shareholder versus stakeholder row is redundant. Mark Goyder, co-author of the book Entrusted: Stewardship for Responsible Wealth Creation, argues that directors owe a duty to neither group, but to the company.

Takeovers raise a special question about directors’ duties. He cites the Kraft acquisition of Cadbury in 2010 as an example of where a board could have turned its back on an offer because the “decision was not exclusively about maximising the price they might get”.

Likewise the Twitter sale, because its “duty was to the company and through that to those with whom the company had long-term relationships, especially the employees”, adds Goyder.

Whatever the situation at Twitter, the stakeholder debate and what it means in practice will rumble on. In many jurisdictions, the concept is already well entrenched in governance thinking and that means the discourse on governance may well have changed for good. Stakeholderism may have taken a blow, but it’s far from dead.

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • LinkedIn
  • Mail

Related Posts

  • Twitter's sale to Elon Musk leaves stakeholder governance high and dry
    November 16, 2022
    Twitter stakeholders

    The company’s failure to consider in advance those affected by the deal does not bode well for stakeholder governance, write academics.

  • Sustainability governance is on the rise
    November 28, 2023
    sustainability governance

    But despite greater corporate attention being paid to ESG, directors’ engagement with it is losing momentum, global report finds.

  • Activism campaigns rise worldwide
    February 17, 2023
    US activism

    But research shows a reduction in campaigns in Europe last year, contrasting with the pronounced increase in the US and Asia.

  • M&As are damaged by ‘ESG amnesia’ in the US
    October 10, 2023
    M&As esg

    Researchers find ESG policies get conveniently forgotten when the stakes are high, citing the sale of Twitter as a case in point.

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

Business Roundtable, Cadbury, Companies Act, corporate governance, Elon Musk, ESG, ethics, Institute of Directors, investors, Kraft, Lucian Bebchuk, M&As, Marco Meyer, Mark Goyder, news, OpenAI, Patagonia, Regulation, Richard Leblanc, Roger Barker, shareholder value, shareholders, stakeholder governance, stakeholders, Suren Gomtsian, Twitter

Search


Follow Us

Register Free

Stay in the know! Register to access our latest governance news; plus receive updates about our events and podcasts – Sign up here

 

Most Popular

Featured Resources

wef global risks 2025

The Global Risks Report 2025

The 20th edition of the Global Risks Report reveals an increasingly fractured global...
Supply chain management cover

Strategic Oversight in Supply Chain Management: A Guide for Corporate Boards 2025

Supply chains have become complex, interdependent and opaque and—according to research...
OB-Cyber-Security

Cyber Security: What Boards Need to Know

Maintaining firewalls, protecting servers and filtering malicious emails rarely make...

The IA’S Principles Of Remuneration 2024 2025

This guidance from the Investment Association is aimed at assisting remuneration...
Diligent 2024 leadership tech cover

Leadership, decision-making & the role of technology: Business survey 2024

This research report by Board Agenda and Diligent sheds light on how board directors...

Director Reference Guide: Navigating Conflict in the Boardroom

The 'Director Reference Guide' on navigating conflict in the boardroom provides practical...
Nasdaq 2024 governance report cover

Nasdaq 2024 Global Governance Pulse

This Nasdaq survey gathered data from more than 870 board members, executives, and...

Becoming a non-executive director (4th edition)

Board composition is the subject of much debate, while the role of the non-executive...
art & science brainloop new cover

The Art & Science of Creating an Effective Board

Boards are coming under more scrutiny and pressure than ever before from regulators,...
SAA First time NED guide

First Time Guide for Non-Executive Directors

The role of the non-executive director has never been more vital: to advise, support,...

Register Free

Stay in the know! Register to access our latest governance news; plus receive updates about our events and podcasts. Register


  • Editors & Contributors
  • Editorial Advisory Board
  • Board Advisory & Corporate Services
  • Media Marketing Solutions
  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Board Director Network
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookies
|

Copyright © 2025 Questor Media Group Ltd.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Sitemap