Contenido principal del artículo

Rolando Roncancio Rachid
Diógenes Lagos Cortés
Sebastián Cortés Mejía

El objetivo de este trabajo es reflexionar acerca de si las benefit corporations (BC) conducen a una nueva primacía basada en la búsqueda del bienestar de todos los grupos de interés. Para ello, se comparan las BC con la norma de la primacía del accionista desde tres aspectos: propiedad y el control, priorización de intereses y deberes fiduciarios. Se concluye que en las BC: a) la propiedad y el control se mantiene en los accionistas; (b) la maximización del valor considera el bienestar de todos los grupos de interés; y (c) los deberes fiduciarios se amplían para considerar los posibles efectos en los demás grupos de interés, no obstante, esto no genera ninguna obligación hacia ellos.

 

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.
Roncancio Rachid, R., Lagos Cortés, D., & Cortés Mejía, S. (2018). Benefit Corporations: ¿Hacia una primacía renovada del accionista?. Revista Universidad Y Empresa, 20(35), 143-168. https://doi.org/10.12804/revistas.urosario.edu.co/empresa/a.5834

Rolando Roncancio Rachid, Inalde Business School, Universidad de La Sabana.

Ph.D. y magister en gobierno y cultura de las organizaciones, Instituto de Empresa y Humanismo,
Universidad de Navarra (España). Magíster en dirección de empresas, Inalde Business School,
Universidad de La Sabana (Colombia).

Sebastián Cortés Mejía, Universidad de La Sabana (Colombia).

Estudiante de doctorado en management, Iowa State University (Estados Unidos). Administrador
de negocios internacionales, Universidad de La Sabana (Colombia). Ingeniero Industrial, Universidad
de La Sabana (Colombia).

Adams, R. B., Hermalin, B. E., & Weisbach, M. S. (2010). The role of boards of directors in corporate governance: A conceptual framework and survey. Journal of Economic Literature, 48(1), 58–107.

Allen, W. T. (1992). Our schizophrenic conception of the business corporation. Cardozo Law Review, 14, 261–281.

André, R. (2015). Benefit corporations at a crossroads: As lawyers weigh in, companies weigh their options. Business Horizons, 58(3), 243–252. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2014.12.002

Argandoña, A. (2007). Responsabilidad social y creación de valor para el accionista: objetivos contrapuestos o complementarios. IESE Occasional Paper, 3(7), 1–13.

Bainbridge, S. M. (2003). Director primacy: The means and ends of corporate governance. Northwestern University Law Review, 97, 547–606.

B Lab. (2016). Model Benefit Corporation Legislation. Retrieved from http://benefitcorp.net/sites/default/files/Model Benefit Corp Legislation_4_16.pdf

Berle, A. A. (1932). For whom corporate managers are trustees: A note. Harvard Law Review, 45(8), 1365–1372.

Blount, J., & Offei-Danso, K. (2013). Benefit Corporation: A Questionable Solution to a Non-Existent Problem, The. St. Mary’s Law Journal, 44(1), 617–670.

Boatright, J. R. (2006). What’s wrong—and what’s right—with stakeholder management. Journal of Private Enterprise, 22(2), 106–130.

Brakman, R. D. (2011). Benefit Corporations-A Sustainable Form of Organization. Wake Forest L. Rev., 46, 591.

Brudney, V., & Ferrell, A. (2002). Corporate charitable giving. The University of Chicago Law Review, 1191–1218.

Bulter, H. N., & McChesney, F. S. (1999). Why they give at the office: Shareholder welfare and corporate philanthropy in the contractual theory of the corporation. Cornell Law Review, 84(5), 1195–1226.

Castro de Cifuentes, M. (1986). La responsabilidad de los administradores de las sociedades comerciales: enfoques del derecho angloamericano y del derecho colombiano. Revista de Derecho Privado, (1), 123–141.

Chen, R., & Hanson, J. (2004). The Illusion of Law: The Legitimating Schemas of Modern Policy and Corporate Law. Michigan Law Review, 103(1), 1–149.

Clark, W. H., & Babson, E. K. (2012). How benefit corporations are redefining the purpose of business corporations. William Mitchell Law Review, 38(2), 817–851.

Clark, W. H., & Vranka, L. (2013). The need and rationale for the benefit corporation: Why it is the legal form that best addresses the needs of social entrepreneurs, investors, and, ultimately, the public. Retrieved from http://benefitcorp.net/sites/default/files/Benefit_Corporation_White_Paper.pdf

Corte Constitucional. (2008). Sentencia C-1194/08. Retrieved from http://www.corteconstitucional.gov.co/relatoria/2008/c-1194-08.htm

Dodd, E. M. (1932). For whom are corporate managers trustees? Harvard Law Review, 45(7), 1145–1163.

Dodge v. Ford Motor Co. (1919). Dodge v. For

d Motor Co., 170 N.W. 668 (Mich. 1919).

Easterbrook, F. H., & Fischel, D. R. (1983). Voting in corporate law. The Journal of Law & Economics, 26(2), 395–427.

Fairfax, L. (2006). The Rhetoric of Corporate Law: The Impact of Stakeholder Rhetoric on Corporate Norms. Journal of Corporation Law, 31(3), 675–718.

Friedman, M. (1953). The methodology of positive economics. In Essays in Positive Economics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York Times Magazine. Retrieved from http://umich.edu/~thecore/doc/Friedman.pdf

Hansmann, H. (1988). Ownership of the Firm. Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization, 4(2), 267–304.

Hansmann, H. (1996). The ownership of enterprise. Boston: Harvard University Press.

Ireland, P. (2005). Shareholder primacy and the distribution of wealth. The Modern Law Review, 68(1), 49–81.

Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360.

Kerr, J. E. (2007). Sustainability Meets Profitability: The Convenient Truth of How the Business Judgment Rule Protects a Board’s Decision to Engage in Social Entrepreneurship. Cardozo Law Review, 29(2), 623–669.

Kiarie, S. (2006). At Crossroads: Shareholder Value, Stakeholder Value and Enlightened Shareholder Value: Which Road Should the United Kingdom Take? International Company and Commercial Law Review, 17(11), 329–343.

Kraakman, R. H. (2009). The anatomy of corporate law: A comparative and functional approach (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

Lan, G. (2015). Benefit Corporations: A Persisting and Heightened Conflict for Directors. Journal of Law, Business & Ethics, 21, 113–117.

Matheson, J. H., & Olson, B. A. (1992). Corporate law and the longterm shareholder model of corporate governance. Minnesota Law Review, 76, 1313–1391.

McDonnell, B. H. (2014). Committing to Doing Good and Doing Well: Fiduciary Duty in Benefit Corporations. Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law, 20(1), 19–72.

Mickels, A. (2009). Beyond corporate social responsibility: Reconciling the ideals of a for-benefit corporation with director fiduciary duties in the US and Europe. Hastings International and Comparative Law Review, 32(1), 271–293.

Millon, D. (1993). Communitarians, contractarians, and the crisis in corporate law. Washington and Lee Law Review, 50(4), 1373–1393.

Munch, S. (2012). Improving the benefit corporation: How traditional governance mechanisms can enhance the innovative new business form. Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy, 7(1), 170–195.

Nass, M. (2013). Viability of Benefit Corporations: An Argument for Greater Transparency and Accountability. Journal of Corporation Law, 39(4), 875–893.

Njoya, W. (2007). Property in work: The employment relationship in the Anglo-American firm. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing.

Orts, E. W. (1992). Beyond shareholders: Interpreting corporate constituency statutes. The George Washington Law Review, 61(1), 14–135.

Oswald, L. J. (1998). Shareholders v. Stakeholders: Evaluating Corporate Constituency Statutes Under the Takings Clause. Journal of Corporate Law, 24(1), 1–29.

Palmiter, A. (1996). Deberes fiduciarios de administradores de empresas en los Estados Unidos. In El Derecho Societario Contemporáneo / Primer Congreso Iberoamericano de Derecho Empresarial (pp. 55–87). Bogotá: Departamento de Publicaciones, Cámara de Comercio de Bogotá.

Rawhouser, H., Cummings, M., & Crane, A. (2015). Benefit corporation legislation and the emergence of a social hybrid category. California Management Review, 57(3), 13–35. http://doi.org/10.1525/cmr.2015.57.3.13

Reyes, V. F. H. (1996). Sociedades comerciales en Estados Unidos: introducción comparativa. Bogotá: Editorial Doctrina y Ley.

Smith, D. G. (1998). Shareholder Primacy Norm, The. The Journal of Corporation Law, 23, 277–323.

Smith, N. C., & Rönnegard, D. (2016). Shareholder Primacy, Corporate Social Responsibility, and the Role of Business Schools. Journal of Business Ethics, 134(3), 463–478. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2427-x

Stout, L. A. (2002). Bad and not-so-bad arguments for shareholder primacy. Southern California Law Review, 75, 1189–1209.

Swanson, C. B. (1996). The Turn in Takeovers: A Study in Public Appeasement and Unstoppable Capitalism. Georgia Law Review, 30(4), 943–1004.

Wallman, S. (1991). The Proper Interpretation of Corporate Constituency Statues and Formulation of Directors’ Duties”. Stetson Law Review, 21, 163–167.

Wilburn, K., & Wilburn, R. (2014). The double bottom line: Profit and social benefit. Business Horizons, 57(1), 11–20. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2013.10.001

Wishnick, D. A. (2011). Corporate Purposes in a Free Enterprise System: A Comment on eBay v. Newmark. The Yale Law Journal, 121, 2405–2419.

Detalles del artículo