Key Principles of Corporate Governance

Why This Matters

Corporate governance isn't just about organizational charts and board meetings—it's the architecture that determines whether businesses serve their stakeholders or exploit them. You're being tested on how these governance mechanisms create accountability, transparency, and alignment of interests between those who own companies and those who run them. Every major corporate scandal—from Enron to WeWork—traces back to governance failures, which is why regulators and policymakers obsess over these structures.

The principles here connect directly to broader themes in public policy: agency problems, information asymmetry, stakeholder theory, and regulatory design. When you see an FRQ about corporate accountability or ethical business practices, you need to understand not just what governance mechanisms exist, but why they exist and how they interact. Don't just memorize that boards have audit committees—know what problem that committee solves and what happens when it fails.

---

Oversight and Accountability Structures

These mechanisms exist to solve the fundamental agency problem—the reality that managers (agents) don't always act in the best interests of owners (principals). Strong oversight structures create checks on executive power and ensure someone is watching the watchers.

Board of Directors

• Primary fiduciary body—legally obligated to act in shareholders' best interests while overseeing management decisions and company strategy
• Hires, evaluates, and fires the CEO—this single power makes the board the ultimate check on executive authority
• Sets the tone at the top for ethical standards and compliance, serving as the bridge between shareholders and day-to-day operations

Independent Directors

• No material relationship with the company—this independence is what allows them to challenge management without fear of retaliation
• Chair critical committees including audit, compensation, and nominating committees where conflicts of interest are most dangerous
• Signal credibility to investors—their presence indicates the board isn't just a rubber stamp for the CEO's agenda

Separation of CEO and Chairman Roles

• Prevents concentration of power—when one person holds both roles, they essentially oversee themselves
• Enhances board independence by ensuring the person running meetings isn't the same person being evaluated
• Considered a governance best practice by institutional investors and proxy advisory firms like ISS and Glass Lewis

---

Financial Integrity Mechanisms

Information asymmetry between insiders and outsiders creates opportunities for fraud and manipulation. These mechanisms ensure that financial information is accurate, complete, and trustworthy.

Audit Committees

• Composed entirely of independent directors—required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act for public companies to prevent management influence over financial reporting
• Hires and oversees external auditors to ensure objectivity in financial statement verification
• Reviews internal controls designed to prevent fraud, catch errors, and ensure regulatory compliance

Disclosure and Transparency Practices

• Mandatory reporting requirements under SEC regulations ensure shareholders receive material information to make informed decisions
• Reduces information asymmetry—the gap between what insiders know and what the market knows
• Failure triggers consequences including SEC enforcement actions, shareholder lawsuits, and devastating reputational damage

Risk Management and Internal Controls

• Systematic frameworks for identifying threats—from operational risks to cybersecurity to reputational hazards
• Internal controls ensure accuracy of financial reporting and compliance with laws and regulations
• Board-level oversight required—directors must understand and approve the company's risk appetite and mitigation strategies

---

Alignment of Interests

The principal-agent problem means executives might prioritize their own wealth, job security, or empire-building over shareholder value. These mechanisms attempt to align incentives so that what's good for managers is also good for owners.

Executive Compensation

• Designed to align incentives—stock options, performance bonuses, and restricted stock tie executive wealth to company performance
• Compensation committees set pay and must justify packages to shareholders through "say-on-pay" votes
• Excessive pay creates backlash—regulatory scrutiny, shareholder activism, and public relations crises when packages seem disconnected from performance

Shareholder Rights

• Voting power on major decisions including director elections, mergers, and executive compensation packages
• Shareholder proposals allow investors to put governance reforms directly before all owners for a vote
• Minority shareholder protections prevent controlling shareholders from extracting value at others' expense

---

Foundational Governance Documents

These legal instruments establish the rules of the game—who has what rights, how decisions get made, and what happens when disputes arise.

Corporate Bylaws and Articles of Incorporation

• Define governance architecture including board size, voting procedures, and shareholder meeting requirements
• Must comply with state corporate law—Delaware law dominates because most large companies incorporate there
• Amendments require shareholder approval for significant changes, protecting owners from management unilaterally rewriting the rules

---

Stakeholder Considerations

Modern governance increasingly recognizes that shareholder primacy isn't the only model. These principles address the broader ecosystem of relationships that affect long-term corporate success.

Stakeholder Management

• Balances competing interests of employees, customers, suppliers, communities, and the environment alongside shareholder returns
• ESG considerations (environmental, social, governance) now factor into institutional investor decisions and regulatory frameworks
• Long-term value creation often requires investing in stakeholder relationships even when short-term profits suffer

---

Quick Reference Table

---

Self-Check Questions

1. Which two governance mechanisms most directly address the concentration of power problem, and how do their approaches differ?

2. If a company experienced an accounting fraud that went undetected for years, which governance mechanisms likely failed, and what reforms would you recommend?

3. Compare and contrast how executive compensation and shareholder voting rights attempt to solve the principal-agent problem. Which is more effective for aligning long-term interests?

4. An FRQ describes a company where the CEO also serves as chairman, most directors are former executives, and the audit committee includes a director with consulting contracts with the firm. Identify three specific governance failures and explain what principles each violates.

5. How does stakeholder management theory challenge traditional shareholder primacy, and what governance mechanisms support each approach?