Cette question de la disponibilité des administrateurs est soulevée par un article de Financial Week du 28 mars sur Bear Stearns : "Bear's board was busy elsewhere".
"According to 2007 proxy data compiled by Financial Week and the Corporate Library, a research firm, Bear Stearns is one of only two publicly traded U.S. companies to have as many as three of its directors sitting on at least five public company boards. (The other company is Acuity Brands, which makes lighting fixtures).That three directors of Bear’s 12-member board have such loaded schedules raises a key question among governance experts and others: Were they too stretched to devote the necessary time and attention to Bear, as the biggest underwriter of U.S. mortgage bonds was collapsing over the past year, culminating in a run on the bank and a fire sale to J.P. Morgan earlier this month?
Les études académiques qui ont été réalisées sur cette question aboutissent à des conclusions diverses. Par exemple, Pritchard, Adam C., Ferris, Stephen P. and Jagannathan, Murali, dans "Too Busy to Mind the Business? Monitoring by Directors with Multiple Board Appointments" paru dans le Journal of Finance (Vol. 58, p. 1087, 2003) écrivent :
"We find no evidence that multiple directors shirk their responsibilities to serve on board committees. We also do not find that multiple directors are associated with a greater likelihood of securities fraud litigation. We conclude that the evidence does not support calls for limits on directorships held by an individual".
On trouvera dans cet article des références bibliographiques sur les différentes études qui ont traité de ce sujet (une version antérieure de l'article est disponible gratuitement ICI).