Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Mutuality and Corporate Governance

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Mutuality and Corporate Governance: The Evolution of UK Building Societies Following Deregulation

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Mutuality and Corporate Governance: The Evolution of UK Building Societies Following Deregulation. / Cook, Jacqueline; Deakin, Simon; Hughes, Alan.
In: Journal of Corporate Law Studies, Vol. 2, No. 1, 01.07.2002, p. 110-138.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Cook J, Deakin S, Hughes A. Mutuality and Corporate Governance: The Evolution of UK Building Societies Following Deregulation. Journal of Corporate Law Studies. 2002 Jul 1;2(1):110-138. doi: 10.1080/14735970.2002.11419878

Author

Cook, Jacqueline ; Deakin, Simon ; Hughes, Alan. / Mutuality and Corporate Governance : The Evolution of UK Building Societies Following Deregulation. In: Journal of Corporate Law Studies. 2002 ; Vol. 2, No. 1. pp. 110-138.

Bibtex

@article{b1c2cd6f1a9b4f49ab0c030b8e13d3c2,
title = "Mutuality and Corporate Governance: The Evolution of UK Building Societies Following Deregulation",
abstract = "This article is a case study in the evolution of corporate governance forms. It focuses on the UK Building Societies Act 1986, which opened the way for competition between building societies and commercial banks and introduced a procedure for the demutualisation of a building society. We show that the Act brought about a rearrangement of property rights which destabilised the building society form. A wave of demutualisations followed in the 1990s. The main beneficiaries of change were corporate managers who used conversion to boost their earnings and status, and speculative investors (“carpetbaggers”) who profited from windfall gains. In return, there were losses to borrowers, in the form of higher costs of loans, and to communities, in the form of the closure of local branches. Far from exhibiting “evolution to efficiency”, the recent trajectory of the sector illustrates the welfare losses which can ensue when established corporate governance forms are undermined by “deregulatory” interventions.",
author = "Jacqueline Cook and Simon Deakin and Alan Hughes",
year = "2002",
month = jul,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/14735970.2002.11419878",
language = "English",
volume = "2",
pages = "110--138",
journal = "Journal of Corporate Law Studies",
issn = "1473-5970",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Mutuality and Corporate Governance

T2 - The Evolution of UK Building Societies Following Deregulation

AU - Cook, Jacqueline

AU - Deakin, Simon

AU - Hughes, Alan

PY - 2002/7/1

Y1 - 2002/7/1

N2 - This article is a case study in the evolution of corporate governance forms. It focuses on the UK Building Societies Act 1986, which opened the way for competition between building societies and commercial banks and introduced a procedure for the demutualisation of a building society. We show that the Act brought about a rearrangement of property rights which destabilised the building society form. A wave of demutualisations followed in the 1990s. The main beneficiaries of change were corporate managers who used conversion to boost their earnings and status, and speculative investors (“carpetbaggers”) who profited from windfall gains. In return, there were losses to borrowers, in the form of higher costs of loans, and to communities, in the form of the closure of local branches. Far from exhibiting “evolution to efficiency”, the recent trajectory of the sector illustrates the welfare losses which can ensue when established corporate governance forms are undermined by “deregulatory” interventions.

AB - This article is a case study in the evolution of corporate governance forms. It focuses on the UK Building Societies Act 1986, which opened the way for competition between building societies and commercial banks and introduced a procedure for the demutualisation of a building society. We show that the Act brought about a rearrangement of property rights which destabilised the building society form. A wave of demutualisations followed in the 1990s. The main beneficiaries of change were corporate managers who used conversion to boost their earnings and status, and speculative investors (“carpetbaggers”) who profited from windfall gains. In return, there were losses to borrowers, in the form of higher costs of loans, and to communities, in the form of the closure of local branches. Far from exhibiting “evolution to efficiency”, the recent trajectory of the sector illustrates the welfare losses which can ensue when established corporate governance forms are undermined by “deregulatory” interventions.

U2 - 10.1080/14735970.2002.11419878

DO - 10.1080/14735970.2002.11419878

M3 - Journal article

VL - 2

SP - 110

EP - 138

JO - Journal of Corporate Law Studies

JF - Journal of Corporate Law Studies

SN - 1473-5970

IS - 1

ER -