SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • Acharya, V., Myers, S., & Rajan, R. 2011. The internal governance of firms. Journal of Finance, 66: 689720.
  • Aguilera, R. & Jackson, G. 2003. The cross-national diversity of corporate governance: Dimensions and determinants. Academy of Management Review, 28: 447465.
  • Aguilera, R. & Jackson, G. 2010. Comparative and international corporate governance. Academy of Management Annals, 4: 485556.
  • Ahmadjian, C. L. 2003. Changing Japanese corporate governance. In U. Schaede & W. Grimes (Eds.), Japan's managed globalization: Adapting to the twenty-first century: 215246. New York: M.E. Sharpe.
  • Ahmadjian, C. L. 2007. Corporate governance in Japan: Institutional change and organizational diversity. In M. Aoki, G. Jackson, & H. Miyajima (Eds.), Foreign investors and corporate governance in Japan: 125150. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • AIMA 2008. AIMA's roadmap to hedge funds. London: The Alternative Investment Management Association.
  • American Bar Association 2009. Report of the Task Force of the ABA Section of Business Law Corporate Governance Committee on delineation of governance roles & responsibilities (http://www.americanbar.org, last accessed 15 July 2013).
  • Aoki, M. 2001. Toward a comparative institutional analysis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Aoki, M. 2007. Conclusion: Whither Japan's corporate governance? In M. Aoki, G. Jackson, & H. Miyajima (Eds.), Corporate governance in Japan: Institutional change and organizational diversity: 427448. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Aoki, M. 2010. Corporations in evolving diversity: Cognition, governance and institutions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Aoki, M. & Jackson, G. 2008. Understanding an emergent diversity of corporate governance and organizational architecture: An essentiality-based analysis. Industrial and Corporate Change, 17: 127.
  • Aoki, M., Jackson, G., & Miyajima, H. (Eds.) 2007. Corporate governance in Japan: Institutional change and organizational diversity. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Armour, J., Deakin, S., Sarkar, P., Siems, M., & Singh, A. 2009. Shareholder protection and stock market development: An empirical test of the legal origins hypothesis. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 6: 343381.
  • Asahi Shimbun 2008. Bid tactics: The right balance of emotion and the law, April 16 (in Japanese).
  • Bansal, P. 2013. Commentary: Inducing frame-breaking insights through qualitative research. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 21: 127130.
  • Bebchuk, L. 2005. The case for increasing shareholder power. Harvard Law Review, 118: 833914.
  • Bebchuk, L., Brav, A., & Jiang, W. 2013. The long-term effects of hedge fund activism. Columbia Business School Research Paper No. 13-66. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2291577.
  • Becht, M., Franks, J., & Grant, J. 2010. Hedge fund activism in Europe. Working paper no. 283/2010. European Corporate Governance Institute.
  • Blair, M. 1995. Ownership and control: Rethinking corporate governance for the twenty-first century. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
  • Bratton, W. 2007. Hedge funds and governance targets. Georgetown Law Journal, 95: 13751433.
  • Brav, A., Jiang, W., & Kim, H. 2013. The real effects of hedge fund activism: Productivity, asset allocation, and product market concentration. Available at SSRN: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2022904.
  • Brav, A., Jiang, W., Partnoy, F., & Thomas, R. 2008. Hedge fund activism, corporate governance and firm performance. Journal of Finance, 63: 17291775.
  • Buchanan, J. 2007. Japanese corporate governance and the principle of “internalism”. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 15: 2735.
  • Buchanan, J., Chai, D. H., & Deakin, S. 2012. Hedge fund activism in Japan: The limits of shareholder primacy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Buchanan, J., Chai, D. H., & Deakin, S. 2013. Empirical analysis of institutions and institutional change: Multiple methods approaches and their application to corporate governance research. Journal of Institutional Economics. doi: 10.1017/S1744137413000349. Forthcoming.
  • Buchanan, J. & Deakin, S. 2008. Japan's paradoxical response to the new “global standard” in corporate governance. Zeitschrift für Japanisches Recht, 13: 5984.
  • Chizema, A. & Shinozawa, Y. 2012. The “company with committees”: Change or continuity in Japanese corporate governance? Journal of Management Studies, 49: 77101.
  • Clifford, C. 2008. Value creation or destruction? Hedge funds as shareholder activists. Journal of Corporate Finance, 14: 323336.
  • Donaldson, L. & Davis, J. 1991. Stewardship theory or agency theory: CEO or shareholder returns. Australian Journal of Management, 16: 4964.
  • Dore, R. 1973. British factory-Japanese factory: The origins of national diversity in industrial relations. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
  • Dore, R. 2000. Stock market capitalism: Welfare capitalism. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Dore, R. 2005. Deviant or different? Corporate governance in Japan and Germany. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 13 (3): 437446.
  • Easterbrook, F. & Fischel, D. 1991. The economic structure of corporate law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Fama, E. & Jensen, M. 1983. Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics, 26: 301325.
  • FINalternatives 2013. TCI loses Japanese activist battle, June 24 (http://www.finalternatives.com/node/23998, last accessed July 15, 2013).
  • Financial Times 2008a. J-Power investors reject TCI proposals, June 27.
  • Financial Times 2008b. TCI high and dry, June 27.
  • Financial Times 2008c. TCI sells out of J-Power at a loss, October 31.
  • Greenwood, R. & Schor, M. 2009. Investor activism and takeovers. Journal of Financial Economics, 92: 362375.
  • Hansmann, H. 1996. The ownership of enterprise. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.
  • Hansmann, H. & Kraakman, R. 2001. The end of history for corporate law. Georgetown Law Journal, 89: 439468.
  • Hayakawa, M. & Whittaker, D. H. 2009. Takeovers and corporate governance: Three years of tensions. In D. H. Whittaker & S. Deakin (Eds.), Corporate governance and managerial reform in Japan: 7092. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Inagami, T. & Whittaker, D. H. 2005. The new community firm: Employment, governance and management reform in Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Jackson, G. & Miyajima, H. 2007. The diversity and change of corporate governance in Japan. In M. Aoki, G. Jackson, & H. Miyajima (Eds.), Corporate governance in Japan: Institutional change and organizational diversity: 147. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Jacoby, S. 2007a. Principles and agents: CalPERS and corporate governance in Japan. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 15: 515.
  • Jacoby, S. 2007b. Convergence by design: The case of CalPERS in Japan. American Journal of Comparative Law, 55: 239293.
  • Jensen, M. & Meckling, W. 1976. Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and capital structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3: 305360.
  • Judge, W. Q., Gaur, A., & Muller-Kahle, M. I. 2010. Antecedents of shareholder activism in target firms: Evidence from a multi-country study. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 18: 258273.
  • Kahan, M. & Rock, E. 2007. Hedge funds in corporate governance and corporate control. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 155: 10211093.
  • Katelouzou, D. 2013. Myths and realities of hedge-fund activism: Some empirical evidence. Virginia Law and Business Review, 7: 459511.
  • Klein, A. & Zur, E. 2009. Entrepreneurial shareholder activism: Hedge funds and other private investors. Journal of Finance, 64: 187229.
  • Klein, A. & Zur, E. 2011. The impact of hedge fund activism on the target firm's existing bondholders. Review of Financial Studies, 24: 17351771.
  • Kruse, T. A. & Suzuki, K. 2012. Steel Partners activism efforts at United Industrial, Ronson, and BKF Capital: The good, the bad, and the ugly. Managerial Finance, 38: 587605.
  • Macey, J. 2008. Corporate governance: Promises kept, promises broken. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  • Maezawa, H. 2005. Investment funds target cash rich firms. JCER Researcher Report, no.6. Tokyo: Japan Center for Economic Research.
  • McNulty, T., Zattoni, A., & Douglas, T. 2013. Developing corporate governance research through qualitative methods: A review of previous studies. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 21: 183198.
  • Miyake, S. 2007. The market and the law: What is happening now? Tokyo: Nikkei BP-sha (in Japanese).
  • Nikkei (Nihon Keizai Shinbun) 2007. High Court categorises Steel as “abusive acquirer” – summary of High Court's decision on Bull-Dog's defence strategy, July 10 (in Japanese).
  • Nikkei (Nihon Keizai Shinbun) 2008. UK fund TCI moves to sell J-Power shares – abandons calls for increased dividend, November 1 (in Japanese).
  • Olcott, G. 2009. Whose company is it? Changing CEO ideology in Japan. In D. H. Whittaker & S. Deakin (Eds.), Corporate governance and managerial reform in Japan: 192221. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Pettigrew, A. 2013. The conduct of qualitative research in organizational settings. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 21: 123126.
  • Poteete, A., Janssen, M., & Ostrom, E. 2010. Working together: Collective action, the commons, and multiple methods in practice. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  • Priluck, J. 2013. The dark side of shareholder activism. Reuters, April 12 (http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/04/12/the-dark-side-of-shareholder-activism/, last accessed July 15, 2013).
  • Pye, A. 2002. Corporate directing: Governing, strategizing and leading in action. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 10: 153162.
  • Reuters 2013a. Third Point ups Sony stake, calls for independent board, June 18 (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/18/us-sony-thirdpoint-idUSBRE95H00820130618, last accessed July 15, 2013).
  • Reuters 2013b. Sony rejects Loeb's proposal to spin off entertainment unit, August 6 (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/06/us-sony-thirdpoint-idUSBRE97413120130806, last accessed August 9, 2013).
  • Robé, J. 2011. The legal structure of the firm. Accounting, Economics and Law, 1: Article 5.
  • Rosenstein, B. 2006. Activism is good for all shareholders. Financial Times (Letters), March 9.
  • Ross, S. 1973. The economic theory of agency: The principal's problem. American Economic Review, 63: 134139.
  • Sassard, S. & Cruise, S. 2013. Activist investors keep lower profile in Europe. Reuters, July 10 (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/10/uk-activist-investors-idUSLNE96900S20130710, last accessed December 12, 2013).
  • Seki, T. 2005. Legal reform and shareholder activism by institutional investors in Japan. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 13: 377385.
  • Siems, M. 2008. Shareholder protection around the world (“Leximetric II”). Delaware Journal of Corporate Law, 33: 111147.
  • Stout, L. 2012. The shareholder value myth: How putting shareholders first harms investors, corporations, and the public. San Francisco, CA: Barrett-Koehler.
  • Suddaby, R. 2010. Editor's comments: Construct clarity in theories of management and organization. Academy of Management Review, 35: 346357.
  • Tilba, A. & McNulty, T. 2013. Engaged versus disengaged ownership: The case of pension funds in the UK. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 21: 165182.
  • Tokyo High Court 2007. Appeal regarding dismissal decision on application for provisional disposition to prohibit decision of shareholders' meeting etc (Ref. 2007 (ra) no. 917). Tokyo: Tokyo High Court, July 9 (in Japanese).
  • Whittaker, D. H. & Deakin, S. (Eds.) 2009. Corporate governance and managerial reform in Japan. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Williamson, O. 1986. The economic institutions of capitalism. New York: Free Press.
  • Wiseman, R., Cuevas-Rodríguez, G., & Gomez-Mejia, L. 2012. Towards a social theory of agency. Journal of Management Studies, 49: 202222.
  • Xu, J. & Li, Y. 2010. Hedge fund activism and bank loan contracting. AFA 2011 Denver Meetings Paper, Available at SSRN: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1573217.
  • Xu, P. & Tanaka, W. 2009. Anti-takeover defences in the shadow of cross-shareholdings: An empirical study. Shōji Hōmu, 1885: 418 (in Japanese).
  • Yoshikawa, T. & McGuire, J. 2008. Change and continuity in Japanese corporate governance. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 25: 524.