All Posts

McKinsey & Company—one of the world's most influential private partnerships—has undertaken a major governance overhaul. By separating the roles of Chair and Global Managing Partner, reducing its shareholder council from approximately 30 members to 12, and extending leadership terms, the firm is redesigning how power, oversight, and decision-making work at the top. The reforms offer important lessons for boards, CEOs, and governance professionals navigating the future of insti

GameStop’s attempt to acquire eBay is less a strategic move and more a test of corporate governance under pressure. At stake is not just whether the deal can work—but whether the board is enforcing the kind of discipline, risk control, and independent judgment that prevents ambition from becoming exposure.

For fifteen years, Comcast bet that owning both content and distribution would win. This week, it began unwinding that bet. The split of NBCUniversal doesn’t just reshape one company—it rewrites the logic of the entire media industry.

The next CEO of JPMorgan isn’t being chosen in a boardroom—it’s being tested in real time. The firm’s co‑president structure reveals how one of Wall Street’s most powerful institutions is managing succession, competition, and control at the highest level.

Tim McHugh’s $167 million compensation package reflects a growing shift toward equity-heavy executive pay. The idea is simple: tie leadership wealth to long-term shareholder returns. The reality is more complicated—because stock performance doesn’t always reflect management skill, and incentives at this scale can reshape behavior, valuation, and risk.

Allbirds’ dramatic shift from footwear to AI infrastructure sent its stock soaring—but the real story isn’t the pivot itself. It’s whether the company can execute in a highly competitive market, and whether gaps between narrative and reality could expose it to shareholder lawsuits.

Ericsson’s CEO exit isn’t a disruption story—it’s a control story. Börje Ekholm is stepping down after stabilizing the company, handing it to a successor built for execution in the AI era. In capital-intensive industries, timing like this is not accidental. It’s discipline.

The Supreme Court just closed a key door for activist investors—and most people didn’t notice. In FS Credit v. Saba Capital, the Court stripped private investors of the ability to sue under a major securities law provision, concentrating enforcement power in the hands of regulators.

Fox is buying Roku to do more than expand its streaming reach—it’s buying the system that decides what millions of people watch. That shift could reshape the balance of power in television.

Public companies are often described as being owned by many people and managed in a fair and independent way. But Alight shows something different. Many people may own shares, but real power is held by a small group of large investors. These investors have most of the voting power. In June 2026, Alight made an important change. Shareholders approved a new system where directors are elected every year. This change is important because it shows how decisions are really made.

The 2026 proxy season looked like a slowdown—but it wasn’t. Fewer proposals, declining ESG momentum, and a major SEC shift quietly reshaped how shareholder governance actually works.

For decades, you could build companies in America without saying who really owned them. That era is ending. The latest court ruling on the Corporate Transparency Act doesn’t just validate a law—it redefines accountability in modern markets.

Citigroup’s tokenized private shares platform uses blockchain and digital depositary receipts to expand access to private markets, offering a new model for investing in private companies before IPO.

Starbucks Japan’s IPO highlights important questions in corporate strategy, strategic options, and capital allocation. The case shows how boards and executives can evaluate growth, ownership structure, market positioning, and long-term value creation.

Glass Lewis recommends that Toho Holdings shareholders vote AGAINST its proposed poison pill, citing “substantial governance concerns” and questioning whether the measure is in shareholders’ best interests. This vote highlights a broader issue in corporate governance: the balance between board control and shareholder rights.

H.B. Fuller’s pursuit of Advanced Medical Solutions Group, or AMS, is not just an acquisition story. It is a corporate governance story about board oversight, leverage, and capital allocation discipline. Reuters reported that H.B. Fuller submitted an all-cash proposal on April 30, 2026, and had until June 18, 2026, under U.K. takeover rules to make a firm offer or walk away. Ancora says the move conflicts with a deleveraging-first posture. H.B. Fuller says disciplined M&A and

Yes—Heineken’s CEO search is best understood as a corporate governance decision, not just a management transition. The central issue is whether the board should preserve its tradition of promoting insiders or appoint an external CEO in response to investor pressure for change. That makes the story especially relevant for boards thinking about succession planning, leadership evaluation, and how governance should respond when long-standing company norms collide with shareholder