Abstract
Shareholder supremacists argue that corporate management should be constrained by additional shareholder power to nominate directors, approve executive pay, or receive financial disclosures. Meanwhile, managerial and directorial apologists suggest that the way forward is to protect managerial prerogative. But, there is a third way: Managerial obligation could be increased without the obligation running solely to the holders of equity. This Article situates the current moment of intellectual churning in corporate law in a larger historical narrative and explains why we find ourselves in this moment. This Article then suggests what a third way might require in terms of conceptualization, process, and substance of corporate governance, before proposing some affirmative benefits we could achieve with these changes.
Recommended Citation
Kent Greenfield, The Third Way, 37 SEATTLE U. L. REV. 749 (2014).
