Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Politics of Shareholder Activism in Nigeria

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Shareholder activism has become a force for good in the extant corporate governance literature. In this article, we present a case study of Nigeria to show how shareholder activism, as a corporate governance mechanism, can constitute a space for unhealthy politics and turbulent politicking, which is a reflection of the country’s brand of politics. As a result, we point out some translational challenges, and suggest more caution, in the diffusion of corporate governance practices across different institutional environments. We contribute to the literature on corporate governance in Africa, whilst creating an understanding of the political embeddedness of shareholder activism in different institutional contexts—i.e. a step closer to a political theorising of shareholder activism.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abdel, S., & Shahira, F. (2002). Corporate governance is becoming a global pursuit: What could be done in Egypt? International Journal of Finance, 14(1), 2138–2172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adegbite, E. ( 2010). The determinants of good corporate governance: The case of Nigeria. Doctoral thesis, Cass Business School, City University, London.

  • Adegbite, E. (2012). Corporate governance regulation in Nigeria. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, Forthcoming.

  • Adegbite, E., & Nakajima, C. (2011). Corporate governance and responsibility in Nigeria. International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, 0(0), 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aguilera, R. V. (2005). Corporate governance and director accountability: An institutional comparative perspective. British Journal of Management, 16, S39–S53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aguilera, R. V., Filatotchev, I., Gospel, H., & Jackson, G. (2008). An organizational approach to comparative corporate governance: Costs, contingencies, and complementarities. Organization Science, 19(3), 475–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aguilera, R. V., & Jackson, G. (2003). The cross-national diversity of corporate governance: Dimensions and determinants. Academy of Management Review, 28(3), 447–465.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahunwan, B. (2002). Corporate governance in Nigeria. Journal of Business Ethics, 37, 269–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akanki, E. O. (1994). Company directors’ responsibility. In Ahunwan, B. (2002). Corporate governance in Nigeria. Journal of Business Ethics, 37, 269–287.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akpotaire, V. (2005). The Nigerian indigenization laws as disincentives to foreign investments: The end of an era. Business Law Review, 3, 62–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amaeshi, K. M., Adi, B. C., Ogbechie, C., & Amao, O. O. (2006). Corporate social responsibility in Nigeria: Western mimicry or indigenous influences? Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 24(Winter), 83–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amao, O., & Amaeshi, K. (2008). Galvanising shareholder activism: A prerequisite for effective corporate governance and accountability in Nigeria. Journal of Business Ethics, 82(1), 119–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, K., Ramsay, I., Marshall, S., & Mitchell, R. (2007). Union shareholder activism in the context of declining labour law protection: Four Australian case studies. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 15(1), 45–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aoki, M. (2001). Towards a comparative institutional analysis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bainbridge, S. M. (1995). The politics of corporate governance. Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, 18(3), 671–735.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartunek, J. M., Bobko, P., & Venkatraman, N. (1993). Toward innovation and diversity in management research methods. Academy of Management Journal, 36(6), 1362–1373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becht, M., Franks, J., Mayer, C., & Rossi, S. (2009). Returns to shareholder activism: Evidence from a clinical study of the Hermes U.K. focus fund. The Review of Financial Studies, 22(8), 3093–3129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belloc, M., & Pagano, U. (2009). Co-evolution of politics and corporate governance. International Review of Law and Economics, 29(2), 106–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, B. S. (1992). Agents watching agents: The promise of institutional investor voice. In Becht, M., Franks, J., Mayer, C., & Rossi, S. (2009). Returns to shareholder activism: Evidence from a clinical study of the Hermes U.K. focus fund. The Review of Financial Studies, 22(8), 3093–3129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradley, M., Schipani, C., Sundaram, A., & Walsh, J. (2000). The purposes and accountability of the corporation in contemporary society: Corporate governance at cross roads. Law and Contemporary Problems, 62(3), 9–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charkham, J. P. (1994). Keeping good company: A study of corporate governance in five countries. In Okike, E. N. M. (2007). Corporate governance in Nigeria: The status quo. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 15(2), 173–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Child, J. (2002). A configuration analysis of international joint ventures. Organisation Studies, 23(5), 781–815.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choi, W., & Cho, S. (2003). Shareholder activism in Korea: An analysis of PSPD’s activities. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 11(3), 349–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coglianese, C. (2007). Legitimacy and corporate governance. Delaware Journal of Corporate Law, 32(1), 159–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crespi, R., & Renneboog, L. (2010). Is (institutional) shareholder activism new? Evidence from UK shareholder coalitions in the pre-Cadbury era. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 18(4), 274–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ewings, P., Powell, R., Barton, A., & Pritchard, C. (2008). Qualitative research methods. Plymouth: Peninsula Research and Development Support Unit.

    Google Scholar 

  • Filatotchev, I., Jackson, G., Gospel, H., & Allcock, D. (2007). Key drivers of ‘good’ corporate governance and the appropriateness of UK policy responses. London: The Department of Trade and Industry.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flick, U. (1992). Triangulation revisited: Strategy of validation or alternative? Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 22(2), 175–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frynas, J. G., Beck, M. P., & Mellahi, K. (2000). Maintaining corporate dominance after decolonization: The “first mover advantage” of shell-BP in Nigeria. Review of African Political Economy, 27(85), 407–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillan, S. L., & Starks, L. T. (1998). A survey of shareholder activism: Motivation and empirical evidence. In Gillan, S. L. (2006). Recent developments in corporate governance: An overview. Journal of Corporate Finance, 12(3), 381–402.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillan, S. L., & Starks, L. T. (2000). Corporate governance proposals and shareholder activism: The role of institutional investors. Journal of Financial Economics, 57(2), 275–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillan, S. L., & Starks, L. T. (2007). The evolution of shareholder activism in the United States. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 19(1), 55–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. In Ratcliff, D. E. (1994). Analytic induction as a qualitative research method of analysis. The University of Georgia.

  • Gourevitch, P., & Shinn, J. (2005). Political power and corporate control: The new global politics of corporate governance. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grienenberger, W. F. (1995). Institutional shareholders and corporate governance. In Brossman, M. E., & Cinque, J. F. (1996). Proxy voting and shareholder activism: The emerging issues. Employee Benefits Journal, 21(2), 5–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrington, B. (2002). Obtrusiveness as strategy in ethnographic research. Qualitative Sociology, 25(1), 49–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hendry, J., Sanderson, P., Barker, R., & Roberts, J. (2006). Owners or traders? Conceptualizations of institutional investors and their relationship with corporate managers. Human Relations, 59, 1101–1132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hendry, J., Sanderson, P., Barker, R., & Roberts, J. (2007). Responsible ownership, shareholder value and the new shareholder activism. Competition and Change, 11(3), 223–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behaviour, agency costs and ownership structure? Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Judge, W. Q., Douglas, T. J., & Kutan, A. M. (2008). Institutional antecedents of corporate governance legitimacy. Journal of Management, 34, 765–785.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., & Mastruzzi, M. (2008). Governance matters VII: Aggregate and individual governance indicators for 1996–2007. World Bank Policy research working paper no. 4654, from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Papers.cfm?abstract_id=1148386.

  • Lubatkin, M., Lane, P. J., Collin, S., & Very, P. (2007). An embeddedness framing of governance and opportunism: Towards a cross-nationally accommodating theory of agency. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 28, 43–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynn, P., Turner, R., & Smith, P. (1998). Assessing the effects of an advance letter for a personal interview survey. Journal of the Market Research Society, 40(3), 265–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Okara, K. (2003). Shareholder activism—How feasible? from http://www.geplaw.com/corp_gov.htm.

  • Okike, E. N. M. (2007). Corporate governance in Nigeria: The status quo. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 15(2), 173–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M. Q. (1980). Qualitative evaluation methods. In Das, T. H. (1983). Qualitative research in organisational behaviour. Journal of Management Studies, 20(3), 301–314.

    Google Scholar 

  • Punch. (2010). I’m ready to return—Akingbola. Punch. Accessed November 11, 2010 from http://www.punchng.com/Articl.aspx?theartic=Art20091207694745.

  • Roe, M. J. (1994). Strong managers, weak owners: The political roots of American Corporate Finance. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roe, M. J. (2003). Political determinants of corporate governance: Political context, corporate impact. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ROSC. (2004). Report on the observance of standards and codes—Nigeria. Accessed November 14, 2010, from http://www.worldbank.org/ifa/rosc_aa_nga.pdf.

  • Rossouw, G. J. (2005). Business ethics and corporate governance in Africa. Business and Society, 44(1), 94–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubach, M. J., & Sebora, T. C. (2009). Determinants of institutional investor activism: A test of the Ryan-Schneider Model (2002). Journal of Managerial Issues, 21(2), 245–261.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sahara Reporters. (2010). The Nigerian disaster called Obasanjo. Sahara Reporters. Accessed November 11, 2010, from http://www.saharareporters.com/report/nigerian-disaster-called-obasanjo-0.

  • Sarkar, J., & Sarkar, S. (2000). Large shareholder activism in corporate governance in developing countries: Evidence from India. International Review of Finance, 1(3), 161–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schacht, K. N. (1995). Institutional investors and shareholder activism: Dealing with demanding shareholders. Directorship, 21(5), 8–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seki, T. (2005). Legal reform and shareholder activism by institutional investors in Japan. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 13(3), 377–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sewell, M. (2008). The use of qualitative interviews in evaluation. Tucson, AZ: The University of Arizona.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1997). A survey of corporate governance. Journal of Finance, 52(2), 737–783.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. P. (1996). Shareholder activism by institutional investors: Evidence from CalPERS. Journal of Finance, 51(1), 227–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun News. (2007). Behave yourselves at AGMs, SEC Warns Shareholders’ Associations. Daily Sun. Accessed November 14, 2010 from http://www.sunnewsonline.com/webpages/news/businessnews/2007/dec/18/business-18-12-2007-003.htm.

  • Sun News. (2008). Festus Odimegwu and the third term Booze. Accessed November 14, 2010, from http://www.sunnewsonline.com/webpages/columnists/flipside/2006/flipside-march-29-2006.htm.

  • Thompson, T., & Davis, G. (1997). The politics of corporate control and the future of shareholder activism in the United States. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 5(3), 152–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Transparency International. (2010). Corruption perceptions index 2010 results. Transparency International. Accessed June 4, 2011, from http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/cpi/2010/results.

  • Van Maanen, J. (1979). Reclaiming qualitative methods for organisational research: A preface. In Das, T. H. (1983). Qualitative research in organisational behaviour. Journal of Management Studies, 20(3), 301–314.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vanguard, N. (2007). How Nigeria lost 75 banks to poor corporate governance. Accessed November 14, 2010, from http://allafrica.com/stories/200711190560.html.

  • Wang, Y. (2006). Methodologies for impact evaluation: Quantitative vs qualitative methods. Paper presented the conference for evaluating the impact of projects and programmes, Beijing, China, April 10–14.

  • Wärneryd, K. (2005). Special issue on the politics of corporate governance: Introduction. Economics of Governance, 6(2), 91–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wells, W. D., & Lo Sciuto, L. A. (1966). Direct observation of purchasing behaviour. Journal of Marketing Research, 3(3), 227–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • West, A. (2009). The ethics of corporate governance: A (South) African perspective. International Journal of Law and Management, 51(1), 10–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • William, M. K. (2006). Social research methods. Trochim, UK.

  • Yakasai, G. A. (2001). Corporate governance in a third world country with particular reference to Nigeria. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 9(3), 239–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yerokun, O. (1992). The changing investment climate through law and policy in Nigeria. In Ahunwan, B. (2002). Corporate governance in Nigeria. Journal of Business Ethics, 37, 269–287.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank Professor Richard Slack and the anonymous reviewers who provided useful feedback on earlier versions of the article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Newcastle Business School, Northumbria University, City Campus East: Room 206, New Bridge Street, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE1 8ST, UK

    Emmanuel Adegbite

  2. University of Edinburgh Business School, University of Edinburgh, 29 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh, EH8 9JS, UK

    Kenneth Amaeshi

  3. Brunel Law School, Brunel University, West London Uxbridge, Middlesex, UB8 3PH, UK

    Olufemi Amao

Authors
  1. Emmanuel Adegbite
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kenneth Amaeshi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Olufemi Amao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Emmanuel Adegbite.

Additional information

This article majorly constitutes a part in Adegbite, E. (2010). The determinants of good corporate governance: The case of Nigeria. Doctoral thesis, Cass Business school, City University, London.

Appendix: Experts’ Interviews and Focus Groups ‘Guide/Areas for Discussions’

Appendix: Experts’ Interviews and Focus Groups ‘Guide/Areas for Discussions’

  1. 1.

    How would you describe the Nigerian polity?

  2. 2.

    How important is the Political environment in terms of promoting ‘good corporate governance’ in Nigeria?

  3. 3.

    How do you regard the efficiency of the Federal Government in promoting/ensuring good corporate governance regulation in Nigeria?

  4. 4.

    How do you regard the role/policies of the Federal Government in corporate governance, in terms of its effects on corporate independence and flexibility?

  5. 5.

    How effective is shareholder activism in promoting good corporate governance in Nigeria?

  6. 6.

    What are the problems facing effective shareholder activism in Nigeria. How can they be solved?

  7. 7.

    How does the political environment affect shareholder activism in Nigeria?

  8. 8.

    To what extent does the shareholder activism practice in Nigeria mirrors the country’s brand of politics?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Adegbite, E., Amaeshi, K. & Amao, O. The Politics of Shareholder Activism in Nigeria. J Bus Ethics 105, 389–402 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0974-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0974-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation