由创始人控制的上市公司挑战公司伦理现象严重

    股东们在切萨皮克或许还能推动变革，但在沃尔玛、新闻集团、谷歌这样的公司，即使会出现变革，可能也会十分有限，而凯雷（Carlyle）和Facebook等公司的投资者还会面临一个风险，即股东在事实上无法对创始人问责。

    根据彭博社（Bloomberg）的数据，2006年，外界对沃尔玛的“司法麻烦”和“系统性违规”担忧愈演愈烈之际，挪威的全球养老基金以及瑞典的一家养老基金都抛售了这支股票。他们是作为受托人采取的行动，代人投资股票须审慎稳健。

    如果证交所不允许双重股权结构的公司或无实际投票权的股票上市，美国养老基金和投资管理公司的工作当然会简单些。但证交所没有动力采取这样的行动——除非事关资本市场体系。将这些股票纳入成分股的指数、以及承销这些股票的投资银行同样也没有动力这么做。但不管整个体系中的其他各方怎么做，审慎起见，代人投资者都不应投资那些他们不能有效实施控制权的公司。受托人有责任回避这样的股票，他们从委托人那里拿到了丰厚的管理费，必须保证这一点。

    不是说养老基金、共同基金和投资管理公司没有禁止投资股票黑名单（也就是他们从不投资的股票）。他们确实掌握着这样的名单。如今，受托人应该采取行动，在这份名单上加上无投票权的股票了。如果是在用别人的钱投资，当然可以慢慢来，不着急。但是，正如许多基金承认的那样，他们同时并没有足够的人手来监督手头持有的所有股票。

    本文作者埃莉诺•布洛克斯汉姆是董事会咨询机构价值联盟和企业管理管理联盟（The Value Alliance and Corporate Governance Alliance）的CEO。

    译者：老榆木

    While shareholders may be able to effect changes at Chesapeake, the ability to make change is severely limited if not impossible at firms like Wal-Mart, News Corp., and Google. Carlyle (CG) and Facebook investors will also face investment risks with practically no means to hold the founders accountable.

    In 2006, when concerns arose over Wal-Mart's "legal troubles" and "systematic violations," Norway's global pension fund and a Sweden-based pension fund sold their shares, according to Bloomberg. In so doing, they were acting as fiduciaries, concerned with the soundness and prudence of investing other people's money in the stock. 

    It would certainly make the job of pension funds and investment managers in the U.S. easier if exchanges refused to list dual class shares or shares with no effective voting privileges. But the exchanges have no incentive to do so -- other than concern for the capital markets system. So too with indices that include the stocks and investment banks that underwrite them. But no matter the actions of other parties in the system, as a matter of prudence, fiduciaries that invest other people's money should not be investing in companies where they cannot effectively exercise their rights of control. Fiduciaries are under an obligation not to invest in stocks like these, and they are paid well for ensuring they do not.

    It isn't as though pension funds, mutual funds, and investment managers don't have prohibited stock lists (i.e. stocks that they never invest in). They do. Now it's time fiduciaries stepped up to put shares without rights on their lists. It's easy to be patient if it's someone else's money. But, as many funds admit, they don't have the bandwidth to oversee all the stocks they own now anyway.

    Eleanor Bloxham is CEO of The Value Alliance and Corporate Governance Alliance (http://thevaluealliance.com), a board advisory firm.