强生董事会信任危机升级

    每年，上市公司的股东都会投票决定董事会成员是否有资格连任。通常这只是走个过场。据股东顾问服务公司ISS的统计，标普500企业的董事一般都会获得股东96%的支持率。不过医疗巨头强生公司（Johnson & Johnson）的年度股东大会计划在本周四举行，届时董事会成员的选举可能充满变数。随着强生公司提名的候选人遭到越来越多股东的反对，投资人也已经开始和董事会唱反调了。

    2011年，强生董事平均只获得了88%的得票率，比2009年的94%有所下降。特拉瓦大学（University of Delaware）韦因伯格企业管理中心（John L. Weinberg Center for Corporate Governance）主任查尔斯•艾尔森认为，这虽然听起来并不是跌得很厉害，但88%的得票率对于一个大企业来说已经很低了。他说：“如果得票率跌到80%多，证明的确存在问题。”

    强生的两位董事——花旗集团（Citigroup）前CEO查尔斯•普林斯和艾默里大学（Emory University）校长迈克尔•琼斯只获得了股东80%左右的支持率，企业管理评级机构GMI高级研究员保罗•霍奇森认为，这个比例实实在在地处于“危险区”内。他说：“这证明有相当一部分的股东反对他们连任，这足以使一个董事会警觉起来。”

    强生公司的一位发言人在一封电子邮件中写道，年会结束后，董事会将像往年一样对投票结果进行分析。

财务状况令人失望，产品召回影响口碑

    强生股东对董事会不满的原因很好解释。近年来，该公司好几次被指控违反了法律，而且还遭遇了一系列貌似无休无止的产品召回，公司声誉因此大受影响。而在2009年强生的产品尚未遭遇“召回门”的时候，强生还排在《财富》杂志（Fortune）评选的“全球最受赞赏公司”排行榜的第4位。而2012年，强生的总体排名已滑落到了第12位。

    另外，强生近年来的财务业绩来也差强人意。过去两年里，标普500企业的平均收益率已经回升到17.5%，而强生股票的总体收益率只有5.3%。2009年和2011年，强生的净收入都出现下跌，部分原因就是由于强生生产的非处方药遭遇大范围召回，导致公司销售额损失超过10亿美元。

    投资者们一般不会因为个别失误就去惩罚董事会的成员，但强生的问题已经不属于这个范畴了：两年前，美国司法部（the Department of Justice）指控强生向护理公司Omnicare提供回扣；去年强生又因为涉嫌在海外行贿而被罚了7,000万美元的“和解费”。最近阿肯色州的一位法官又要求强生支付12亿美元的罚金，理由是它涉嫌非法市场操作。

    此外，由于强生下属的McNeil工厂生产的处方药存在一系列问题（有的药品存在明显霉味，有的含有过量活性成分），强生不得不召回了几百万瓶涉事药物。2009年第一轮召回风波后，强生关闭了McNeil工厂，并承诺将对质检规程进行整改，使产品质量回到正轨。但是此后关于强生召回药物的消息还是不时传出。比如直到2012年2月，强生还召回了50多万瓶泰诺（Tylenol）。现在强生表示直到2013年底前都不会再重新启用涉事工厂。

    Every year, shareholders at public companies vote on whether their board members deserve another term or not. It's typically a non-event; the average director of an S&P 500 company wins 96% of the vote, according to proxy advisory firm ISS. But the directors of healthcare giant Johnson & Johnson, which hosts its annual shareholders' meeting Thursday, may face a rockier path to reelection. Investors have begun to turn against the board, with a growing contingent of shareholders voting against J&J's nominees.

    In 2011, the average J&J (JNJ) director won approval from just 88% of shareholders, down from 94% in 2009. That may not sound like a steep decline, but it's actually quite low for a large corporation, according to Charles Elson, director of the John L. Weinberg Center for Corporate Governance at the University of Delaware. "When you get into the 80s, that's a real problem," he says.

    Two J&J directors -- Charles Prince, the former CEO of Citigroup (C), and Michael Johns, the chancellor of Emory University -- received support from about 80% of voters, which is well inside the "danger zone," according to Paul Hodgson, a senior research associate at GMI, a corporate governance ratings firm. "That's a very substantial proportion of shareholders," he says. "It should be enough to make a board sit up and take notice."

    A spokesperson for J&J wrote in an email that the board will analyze voting results after its annual meeting, as it does every year.

Red flags: Disappointing financials, recalls

    It's easy to see why J&J's shareholders are frustrated. In recent years, the company has been charged with several legal violations and endured a seemingly endless series of product recalls. Its reputation has taken a hit. Back in 2009, before the recalls began, J&J was ranked fifth on Fortune's World's Most Admired Companies list. In 2012, J&J's overall rank dropped to 12.

    The company's financial results have also been underwhelming. J&J's stock has delivered a total return of 5.3% over the last two years, while the S&P 500 has returned 17.5%. Its net income declined in both 2009 and 2011, in part because the company lost more than $1 billion in sales because of recalls of over the counter drugs.

    Investors are typically wary of punishing directors for individual missteps. But J&J's troubles have been widespread. Two years ago, the Department of Justice charged the company with paying kickbacks to Omnicare (OCR), the nursing home pharmacy operator. Last year, the company agreed to pay a $70 million settlement over allegations that it paid bribes overseas. An Arkansas judge recently ordered J&J to pay $1.2 billion in penalties for illegal marketing practices.

    J&J has had to recall millions of bottles of over the counter drugs made by its McNeil subsidiary, citing issues such as bad odors and an excessive amount of active ingredients. After the initial spurt of recalls in 2009, J&J shut down the McNeil plant, promising to revamp its quality assurance practices in order to get production back on track. But recalls keep popping up. As recently as February 2012, the company had to recall more than 500,000 bottles of Tylenol. J&J now says it won't reopen the plant until late 2013.