Journal of Applied Corporate Finance最新文献

Introduction: Winging of the scapula occurs due to dysfunction of its stabilising muscles, most commonly serratus anterior and/or trapezius, for example in facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy. Resultant loss of scapular control and abnormal kinematics can decrease shoulder function due to glenohumeral joint instability, loss of range of motion and pain. Previously described treatment for cases resistant to physiotherapy includes scapulothoracic arthrodesis which involves risk of non-union and metalwork failure, as well as reduced respiratory function due to immobilisation of a segment of the adjacent chest wall.

Technique: We present a novel surgical approach to the management of problematic scapular winging by using hamstring graft to achieve a scapulothoracic tenodesis.

Discussion: We believe this technique provides an adequately stable scapula for improved shoulder movement and function, a sufficiently mobile chest wall for improved lung function and avoidance of complications specifically associated with arthrodesis.

Recent years have witnessed an explosion in the attention paid to the notion of corporate social responsibility (CSR), the idea that corporations have an obligation to consider the impact of their decisions on a broad set of stakeholders that extends well beyond their investors. Such social concerns are by no means new; they were matters for corporate boardroom and top management discussions long before Milton Friedman published his famous editorial on the social responsibility of business.1 Nonetheless, for at least the past decade and since the passing of the Global Financial Crisis, CSR advocates have more vigorously pursued their mission of incorporating social concerns within the purview of corporate decision-making.

But why so much corporate attention to social matters now? Three possibilities come to mind. First, the urgency of social concerns and the perceived ability of and expectation that corporations will do something about them have increased over time as public companies have become steadily larger and their reach more global. Climate change is the prototype of a social issue whose urgency and scope continue to grow over time. Second is the possibility that, although the social concerns themselves have not changed much over time, individual preferences have changed and various stakeholders have become more sensitive to those concerns than before. A third possibility is that, although social concerns tend to arise from negative “externalities” that most economists assume are best managed through government regulation, growing or widespread skepticism about the ability of government institutions to address these concerns in cost-effective ways could lead to increased demand for corporate investment in addressing social challenges.

Regardless of the reason for the increased attention to CSR, it is almost invariably accompanied by calls for rethinking the idea of shareholder primacy in the corporate objective function. In this article, I address the question of whether the increased focus on CSR requires a paradigm shift away from the traditional shareholder primacy model toward one that gives more voice to stakeholders. My short answer to this question is no, and for three main reasons:

First, the increased focus on CSR has virtually nothing to do with the factors that led to the establishment of shareholder primacy as the dominant paradigm. The theory of shareholder primacy which is a cornerstone of modern corporate finance arose as an efficient solution to “contracting” problems faced by corporations that have a diverse set of stakeholders, each of which often has different preferences about what and how certain corporate decisions get made.2 Such contracting problems—which have long been, and will always be, with us—are likely to become even more intractable with the rising demand for CSR. Which leads to the suggestion: if we thought that shareholder primacy was part of an efficient organizational structure befo