{"id":43302,"date":"2024-01-16T11:43:11","date_gmt":"2024-01-16T16:43:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/allianceadvisors.com\/ensuring-effective-shareholder-engagement-2\/"},"modified":"2025-03-17T17:57:07","modified_gmt":"2025-03-17T21:57:07","slug":"ensuring-effective-shareholder-engagement-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/allianceadvisors.com\/zh-hans\/ensuring-effective-shareholder-engagement-2\/","title":{"rendered":"Ensuring effective Shareholder engagement"},"content":{"rendered":"
While bringing about change may take months or even years, the communication of this strategy must be sound.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Now that the dust has settled on the 2023 proxy season, companies are asking themselves what the 2024 season may hold in store for them. Some companies look at N-PX filing data, a Securities and
\nExchange Commission (SEC) form that details the proxy voting<\/a> records of registered funds, to give them insights into investor voting decisions, while investor voting policies are another avenue to aid issuer understanding of voting decisions. While investor policies are publicly available and updated on an annual\/bi-annual basis, understanding voting triggers requires a nuanced review.<\/p>\nStarting in September, companies also begin the practice of proactively engaging with their largest shareholders, rather than waiting for investors to contact them with concerns or disclosure requests. The companies taking this initiative are hoping to understand what compensation, governance, environmental and social (E&S) or sustainability risks an investor may perceive and ways to avoid a non-supportive voting decision. Regrettably, not all companies effectively engage with their shareholders. They believe that having calls with the investor portfolio managers is sufficient. Yet, by doing this, they are excluding the ESG, stewardship<\/a> or responsible investor teams, as they are known in different jurisdictions. It is these entities that end up making the proxy voting decisions and they are the ones that need to be engaged with. Depending on the level of vote support at the annual shareholder meeting<\/a>, investors and proxy advisors<\/a> may be expecting a company to make appropriate structural changes. Specifically, any resolution<\/a> receiving below 80% support from shareholders, be that elections or discharge of the boards, “say on pay<\/a>” resolutions, auditor ratification, all require a robust corporate response, including clear disclosure on engagement efforts. In addition, should a shareholder resolution receive upwards of 20% support, it would also behoove a company to determine why shareholders supported this resolution by such a wide margin. That being said, many companies unfortunately do not understand what responsiveness looks like for an investor.<\/p>\n