- 1Corporate governance can be quantified. The G-Index scores firms on 24 distinct governance provisions
- 2"Democracy" firms (strong shareholder rights) outperformed "Dictator" firms (weak shareholder rights) by 8.5% annually during the 1990s
- 3Dictator firms exhibit lower firm valuations (Tobin’s Q), lower profit margins, and destructive acquisition behavior
- 4Entrenched management systematically destroys shareholder value to preserve their own power
#Constructing the G-Index
The researchers leveraged data from the Investor Responsibility Research Center. They constructed the G-Index by adding 1 point for every provision a company adopted that reduced shareholder rights and concentrated power in the hands of management. They tracked 24 provisions, including:
- Poison Pills: Provisions that dilute shares massively if a hostile bidder attempts a takeover.
- Staggered Boards: Only a fraction of the board goes up for election each year, making it impossible to vote out a failing board all at once.
- Golden Parachutes: Outrageous severance packages guaranteed to executives if they are fired or the firm is acquired.
- Supermajority Rules: Requiring 75% or 80% shareholder approval to enact basic changes.
A company with a high G-Index score (e.g., 14+) was classified as a "Dictator". A company with a low G-Index score (e.g., 5 or lower) was classified as a "Democracy".
#The Cost of Dictatorship: The Results
1. Stock Returns A trading strategy that bought the Democracy portfolio and shorted the Dictator portfolio generated an abnormal return (alpha) of **8.5% per year**. The market consistently mispriced the destruction of value caused by entrenched management.
2. Firm Valuation (Tobin’s Q) Dictator firms traded at significantly lower valuations. A 1-point increase in the G-Index was associated with a 2.4% drop in Tobin's Q.
3. Operating Performance Why do Dictators underperform? The data showed that entrenched management teams have lower net profit margins, exhibit slower sales growth, and make highly destructive, value-destroying capital expenditures and corporate acquisitions.
#Legacy and Modern Application
The G-Index sparked a massive wave of research into the "G" in ESG. Today, institutional quantitative models monitor capital allocation, buyback yields, and insider activity to proxy for shareholder alignment. When our models assess the "Investment" factor (rewarding conservative asset growth) and "Profitability," they are implicitly filtering out the empire-building Dictators that Gompers, Ishii, and Metrick warned us about over twenty years ago.
Last updated: April 1, 2026