2016 Japan Proxy Season Review
The 2016 proxy season was widely expected to build on the notable improvements and encouraging trends prompted by Japan’s recent legislative and regulatory efforts to strengthen its corporate governance practice. This was broadly the case as we saw a range of positive developments such as increasing board independence, better disclosure practices, and more transparent oversight. While not the market norm, there were several cases of clear communication and engagement between companies and shareholders having a significant impact on governance issues. On the other hand, familiar problems relating to secrecy, entrenched management, and oversight structures continued to pop up during the season.
As more and more companies adjusted their boards under the new ‘one-tier with one committee’ structure, questions were raised as to whether this shift is truly in shareholders’ interests. While active and foreign investors demonstrated their influence through increased involvement in governance and increased voting opposition, controlling shareholders continued to cause headaches for boards and minority shareholders. Several major companies, and whole industries, were rocked by scandal, with the subsequent fall-out showing that how a board responds to such problems can be as important as the scandal itself – and that leadership structures can have a significant impact on how a board responds.
Our season review provides a handful of Case Studies that illustrate the issues that investors and companies faced within the Japanese market, and what both parties can learn from them, including:
- OPT Holding – A relatively high level of opposition to the company’s new ‘one-tier with one committee’ board structure suggests that shareholders’ appetite for dissent is rising, and that other companies intending to make the increasingly popular shift in board structure should consider preemptively engaging with their investors to explain the decision.
- Cookpad – Internal conflict between the founding director – and 44% beneficial owner – Mr. Sano and the other board members spilled out of the boardroom and into the press, damaging the company’s share price in the process. While an all-out war was averted, the situation highlights the precarious position of boards trying to placate a major shareholder, and questions linger on whether future flare-ups at Cookpad could impact the interests of minority shareholders.
- Seven & i Holdings – The combination of an active investor willing to publicize its concerns and a nomination committee with independent director representation played a critical role in making executive succession more transparent, and in preventing a hereditary transfer of power.
- Toshiba – Despite a complete overhaul of the board and establishment of revitalization plans, repeated revelations of accounting errors and what appears to be a largely cosmetic adjustment raised questions about whether the issues that led to the errors in the first place have truly been addressed.
- Toshiba TEC – Toshiba TEC’s decision to seek shareholder approval on management proposals without being able to release their proxy materials highlighted one of the difficulties minority shareholders face at controlled entities.
- Mitsubishi Motors – For a company with a history of scandalous accounting, the revelation of long standing data falsification was a devastating third strike. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries is out as controlling shareholder, replaced by Nissan Motor in a game changing deal that has shaken up the Japanese automotive industry.
- Suzuki Motor – Despite some prima facie similarities with Mitsubishi Motors’ scandal, Suzuki’s handling of its own data falsification has left a significantly better impression on their shareholders; the differences appear to reflect leadership, risk management, and internal controls.
Engage with Glass Lewis
The Glass Lewis research team has been busy engaging with a broad range of companies following the proxy season. If you are an issuer and would like to engage with our analysts, please send us an invitation from the Issuer section of our website.
Access Proxy Season Reviews
In addition to Japan, season reviews are available for the other markets we cover, including Australia, Brazil, East Asia, North America, and the United Kingdom, with Europe and Southeast Asia coming soon. Clients can receive a copy of any review at no charge by sending an email request to Client Services. Clients with access to glasslewis.net can log in and download the reports in the Previews/Reviews section.
Non-clients who are interested in a review can request a copy by clicking on the button below.
Glass Lewis’ season reviews provide market-specific overviews of the key developments in governance, shareholder activism and stewardship, executive compensation and ESG that defined the 2016 proxy season, along with in-depth case studies detailing how these issues played out in practice.
© 2020 Glass, Lewis & Co., and/or its affiliates. All Rights Reserved.
This blog is for informational purposes only and is updated periodically to keep Glass Lewis' clients and other interested parties informed of current corporate governance developments and regulatory trends. The information contained herein should not be construed as legal or investment advice. Glass Lewis analyzes issues it believes may be of interest to its subscribers and makes recommendations as to how Glass Lewis believes institutional shareholders should approach such issues. While Glass Lewis may mention certain companies in its blog postings, Glass Lewis never comments on the investment merits of the securities issued by the subject companies. Therefore, none of the information posted through this blog should be construed as a recommendation to invest in, purchase, or sell any securities or other property. All recommendations stated herein must be construed solely as statements of opinion, and not as statements of fact, and may be revised based on additional information or any other reason at any time.
The information contained in each blog posting is based on publicly available information. While Glass Lewis exercises reasonable care to ensure that all information included in this blog is accurate and is obtained from sources believed to be reliable, no representations or warranties express or implied, are made as to the accuracy or completeness of any information included herein. In addition, Glass Lewis shall not be liable for any losses or damages arising from or in connection with the information contained herein or the use or inability to use any such information.
Glass Lewis expects readers of its blog possess sufficient experience and knowledge to make their own decisions entirely independent of any information contained in Glass Lewis’ blog postings. Subscribers are ultimately and solely responsible for making their own decisions. This blog is intended to serve as a complementary source of information and analysis for subscribers in making their own decisions and therefore should not be relied on by subscribers as the sole determinant in making decisions.