Toward a “We”-Mode Team Production Theory of the Firm

2021 ◽  
pp. 151-183
Author(s):  
Alan Strudler ◽  
Matthew Caulfield ◽  
Tae Wan Kim
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian R. Cheffins ◽  
Richard Williams

2017 ◽  
pp. 169-250 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret M. Blair ◽  
Lynn A. Stout

2021 ◽  
Vol 2020 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Clare Curran

In August 2019, the Business Roundtable issued a new Statement on the Purpose of a Corporation. The statement, signed by 181 CEOs, including Doug McMillon of Walmart, declared that corporations should seek to serve the interests of all stakeholders—a marked departure from the Roundtable’s prior embrace of shareholder primacy. This shift in position reinvigorated debate among business and legal scholars about the proper purpose of a corporation. Using Walmart as a case study, this Note argues that corporations are indeed adopting a more flexible and responsive conception of corporate purpose. This Note begins with a discussion of corporate governance theories, detailing four distinct visions of corporate purpose and control. It then examines Walmart’s decisionmaking process regarding ammunition and firearm sales in the wake of a tragic mass shooting at one of its stores. Finally, it concludes by reconciling Walmart’s conduct with the prevailing theories of corporate governance, ultimately finding team production theory— which calls for the balancing stakeholder interests—to be most applicable.


2015 ◽  
pp. 299 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephanie Ben-Ishai

The article applies the Team Production Theorydeveloped by American corporate law scholars, Margaret Blair and Lynn Stout, to argue that Canadian corporate law's understanding of public corporations that are not controlled by a single shareholder or group of shareholders reflects a director primacy norm rather than a shareholder primacy norm. Canadian corporate law provides that directors of such public corporations with widely-held share ownership and voting rights are free from direct control by any corporate stakeholders. A potential departing point for Canadian corporate law. the oppression remedy, continues to develop to deal with extra-legal advantages rooted primarily in unequal power relations among corporate stakeholders.  However, in its current and predicted future applications, the oppression remedy does not provide any given stakeholder group with an ability to dominate the boards of public corporations and obviate the director primacy norm. The article suggests that because the director primacy norm accurately describes Canadian corporate law, further consideration needs to be given to corporate law's relative relevance in dictating how Canadian corporations currently operate.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document