Connaissez-vous bien la situation de l’actionnariat dans les organisations publiques (cotées en bourses) ? Ce compte rendu de Mary Ann Cloyd, leader du Center for Board Governance à PricewaterhouseCoopers, est paru dans la dernière édition de *ProxyPulse™, une collaboration entre Broadridge Financial Solutions et PwC’s Center for Board Governance.
Je vous invite à prendre connaissance de ce bref rapport afin d’avoir une meilleure idée des réponses aux questions suivantes :
– What is the extent of our retail share ownership ?
– How does our company’s size impact the voting participation of our shareholders ?
– Does the company have an engagement program that allows for adequate communications with all shareholders ?
– Do we fully understand the impact of retail voting at our company ?
– Have we done sufficient cost/benefit analysis of our distribution method(s) for proxy materials and its effect on voting participation ?
– Does the company anticipate a close shareholder vote on a sensitive issue ?
– Are there situations where additional outreach to retail shareholders might make the difference on a close or sensitive voting issue? Are we leaving any opportunities to enhance a favorable voting outcome on the table ?
– Do we understand the concerns of any shareholders who may decide to organize a “vote no” campaign against one or more of our directors and what have we done to address them ?
– How do the results of our director elections compare to our peers ?
Voici un extrait de la réponse à la première question. Les deux tiers (67 %) des actions sont détenues par des institutions et le tiers (33 %) par divers autres actionnaires. Les institutions votent à 90 % tandis que les autres actionnaires ne votent qu’à 30 %.
Il est donc important de bien connaître la base actionnariale de l’entreprise afin de mettre en place la stratégie de communication susceptible de favoriser la participation du plus grand nombre d’actionnaires au vote annuel.
OWNERSHIP AND VOTING BY SHAREHOLDER SEGMENT
The company may have a higher level of retail ownership than you think; but few retail shareholders are voting. On average, institutions owned approximately 67% of public company shares and retail owned 33%. On average, 70% of the street name shares were voted: 60 percentage points by institutions and 10 percentage points by retail. With low rates of retail participation that leave 70% of retail shares un-voted, companies should reconsider strategies to encourage voting by all shareholders.
In particular, retail shareholders support management’s voting recommendations at high rates. Simply stated, an objective of engaging with this important group is to get them to vote. Newer communication channels make it more efficient for companies to engage with retail shareholders – and, more convenient than ever for them to access proxy materials and vote. In contrast, because institutional shareholders vote at very high rates, the objective is to ensure ongoing dialogue throughout the year and to eliminate the potential for “surprises” at the annual meeting.
– What is the extent of our retail share ownership ?Rates of voting vary substantially between institutional and retail voting segments.
*Mary Ann Cloyd is leader of the Center for Board Governance at PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. This post is based on an edition of ProxyPulse™, a collaboration between Broadridge Financial Solutions and PwC’s Center for Board Governance; the full report, including additional figures, is available here.
*ProxyPulse™ provides data and analysis on voting trends as the proxy season progresses. This first edition for the 2013 season covers the 549 annual meetings held between January 1, and April 23, 2013 and subsequent editions will incorporate May and June meetings. These reports are part of an ongoing commitment to provide valuable benchmarking data to the industry.