By Elizabeth G. Olson
FORTUNE -- J.P. Morgan's Jamie Dimon and Goldman Sachs's Lloyd Blankfein may have survived Wall Street's implosions and other financial debacles, but shareholder activists have hardly given up on knocking them off their imperial perches, or, at least, one of their perches.
A group of union retirement funds aims to split the dual roles that Dimon and other CEOs hold at their companies -- being the CEO and the company chairman. The activists are calling for corporations to appoint chairmen, who head the board of directors, from outside the company who can demonstrate financial independence and freedom from conflicts of interest.
While banking, and specifically Dimon, are receiving the most attention, shareholder activists say that execs wearing both the hats of CEO and chairman are far too numerous across the corporate landscape, especially in the "too big to fail" tier of major companies.
In Blankfein's case, a separate coalition of union pensions is trying to separate the twin CEO and chairman posts he has held at Goldman Sachs (GS) for six years. Last year, an activist push resulted in the company, which has weathered its own accusations of inappropriate business dealings, to choose a lead outside director. But this year, the company has tried to sideline any attack on Blankfein's control.
Governance groups say that the corporate coziness -- the CEO acts as his own boss because he reports to himself in his chairman role -- allows unchecked risk taking that may produce spectacular short-term results but winds up harming a company. A coalition of pension funds is proposing that some two dozen companies reshape their executive power structure when they hold their shareholder meetings this spring.
No easy change
Just how difficult such splits are to engineer was made clear last week as Walt Disney Co. (DIS) shareholders rejected an effort to separate CEO Robert Iger from his chair role. This defeat was particularly grating to corporate governance advocates because Disney separated the two roles in 2005, then restored them both to Iger last year.
"Walt Disney is the perfect case of poor dialogue between the board and its long-term shareholders, which creates a detriment to all," says Tim Goodman, a spokesman for Hermes Equity Ownership Services, which advises institutional clients.
Only one-third of shareholders voted for the measure, rejecting company arguments that Iger's leadership resulted in the company's recent strong financial performance. Iger, who earns some $40 million a year, is slated to retire in March 2015 but will retain the chairman job for an extra year beyond that.
Combining the CEO and chair roles flouts good governance principles, but Disney is not the only major corporation to reverse course on this issue. Sears Holdings (SHLD), which operates both Sears and Kmart stores and has been struggling to reenter the ranks of top U.S. retailers, announced last month that its chairman, Edward Lampert, would add the CEO portfolio to his duties.
Lampert, a hedge fund billionaire, explained at the time that, "the board feels it is important that there is continuity of leadership during this important period of transformation and improvement at Sears Holdings."
However, given the company's recent track record, shareholders may well question Sears's rationale in expanding Lampert's responsibilities. The company has had six straight years of losses at stores open more than one year.
As American as insider trading
Combining the two roles often seems a default for companies despite studies showing that the arrangement muddies clear lines of authority. The overlapping roles are part of a management structure that is almost uniquely American, and is not copied in other countries, say management experts.
"It is rooted in the longstanding tradition that the chairman and the CEO usually come from the same group of people, the circle of friends and acquaintances where people know each other, know what to expect, and there is an ease of communication," says Jason Schloetzer, an assistant professor at Georgetown's McDonough School of Business.
While the board's traditional role is to serve as an advisor, says Schloetzer, who specializes in management issues, "in the last decade, that has shifted dramatically to monitor as awareness has grown that shareholder capital was not always being deployed in the best ways."
Repeat efforts to split the dual roles "puts pressure on companies to explain why it is in the company's best interest," he says. "And that becomes more difficult year after year."
Even so, convincing shareholders to rock the corporate boat can be an uphill battle. Efforts to scuttle the dual relationship at J.P. Morgan have failed previously, including last year, where a proposal garnered only 40% of shareholder support. That vote, however, came before shareholders were aware of the full magnitude of the London whale trading losses.
"Unchecked risk taking and oversight failures have cost J.P. Morgan (JPM) more than $6 billion in losses," noted New York City Comptroller John C. Liu, the custodian and trustee of the NYC pension funds, in proposing this year's CEO-chair split effort.
Signs of change
Many prominent companies, across almost every industry, have the dual structure, according to data prepared for Fortune by Equilar, which follows executive compensation and other corporate issues. They include Archer Daniels Midland (ADM), Cisco (CSCO), Coca-Cola (KO), Dell (DELL), FedEx (FDX), Procter & Gamble (PG), Starbucks (SBUX), Visa (V), and others.
According to GMI Ratings, the percentage of S&P 500 companies which have the dual arrangement were found at 68% (342) of companies in 2005, but have since declined to 56.4% (281) of companies in 2012.
The number of companies that have an independent chairman of the board has risen from 8.5% (43 companies) in 2005 to 20.7% (103 companies) in 2012, according to GMI research.
A study in June 2012, also conducted by GMI Ratings, found shareholders at large-market-cap companies that had separated the two positions received a 28% higher five-year return. Such findings are cited by pension funds, which have been stung by the decline in investment returns, especially from companies in the financial sector.
The union federation is filing proposals specifically to require an independent board chairman at some well-known companies, including General Electric (GE), Johnson & Johnson (JNJ), Lockheed Martin (LMT), Target (TGT), and Wal-Mart (WMT).
But taking on a company chief executive is a lot harder than it may look. When corporate governance reformers first gained steam about a decade ago, Andrew Grove, the former chairman of Intel Corp. (INTC), underscored the importance of split control when he asked, in an interview, "Is a company a sandbox for the CEO, or is the CEO an employee? If he's an employee, he needs a boss and that boss is the board. The chairman runs the board."
An independent chair, says GMI's Gladman, "Is not a magic bullet. But it is becoming difficult for companies just to insist 'we have the wonderful, irreplaceable CEO."
Including yet another management member on the bank's board -- soon to be former CFO David Viniar -- brings the total to three, an unusual move for a large public company.
FORTUNE -- When Goldman Sachs announced that it was changing CFOs last week, it also announced that it would be adding yet another insider to its board, soon-to-be-former CFO David Viniar.
Including another management member on Goldman's (GS) board, bringing the MOREEleanor Bloxham, CEO of The Value Alliance - Sep 25, 2012 5:00 AM ET
The fine print of Goldman's agreement with shareholder AFSCME places weak independent board members even more under the thumb of CEO Lloyd Blankfein. By Eleanor BloxhamMar 29, 2012 11:39 AM ET
It's serious when your CEO and company's culture have been publicly called out by both a judge and an employee in a two-week timeframe. Is Goldman's board willing to step up? By Eleanor BloxhamMar 15, 2012 12:11 PM ET
If the largest banks want no action from regulators in the future, the best place to start is by showing regulators that they don't require their attention at all. By Eleanor BloxhamOct 18, 2011 5:00 AM ET
The Bronx. Brooklyn. Harvard. Hollywood. From selling peanuts at Yankee Stadium to displacing two heirs apparent at Goldman Sachs, isn't Lloyd Blankfein living the American Dream?
In this book excerpt from MONEY AND POWER: How Goldman Sachs Came to Rule the World, author William D. Cohan examines Lloyd Blankfein's up-from-nothing story, and finds out why Hank Paulson would've rather had no one else as Goldman Sachs's CEO.
By William D. Cohan, contributor
Lloyd Blankfein's path tothe MOREApr 21, 2011 5:00 AM ET
He has been CEO of the storied but bruised investment bank for a year. All he has to do is reduce risk and restore profits at the same time.
By Duff McDonald, contributor
FORTUNE -- On an April Friday last year, Morgan Stanley CEO James Gorman received a call while on vacation with his family in Anguilla: In just four days the Agricultural Bank of China was holding a "bake-off" for investment MOREMar 30, 2011 5:00 AM ET
No doubt Goldman Sachs was hoping for a better PR year in 2011, but a Facebook offering debacle and a widely-criticized business practice review set the bank off on a rocky start. So what good can come from the fumbles? Leadership lessons for us all.
By Eleanor Bloxham, contributor
The calendar pages have turned to a new year and already Goldman Sachs has found itself in hot water, again.
No doubt, Goldman (GS) MOREJan 21, 2011 11:24 AM ET
Our Republican brothers having fallen before the scythe of temporary public opinion, the debate in the Senate has at last been joined. Today we line up behind Team Lloyd and strap on our best pinstripe, wing-tips, and chrome domes. The future of irrational, unseemly wealth is at stake. We have partied hard in the past and awakened to some bad mornings after. But those cotton-mouthed sunrises have done nothing to dim our MOREBing - Apr 29, 2010 3:51 PM ET
It's amazing what expensive messaging can buy. The first wave of publicity surrounding the SEC case against Goldman was fierce and damning. Now what we're seeing is their Public Relations dollars at work. The conversation has shifted, have you noticed? What was huge, solid outrage against Goldman has moderated, and thoughtful (if bald) heads are prevailing.
Of course Goldman took short positions against its long bets on the real estate market. Wasn't MOREBing - Apr 26, 2010 2:05 PM ET
|Much faster Wi-Fi coming soon|
|J.D. Power ranks GM tops in quality for first time|
|Dow sinks 200 points after Fed hints at stimulus easing|
|Chinese billionaire buys 007's yacht maker|
|Fed sets road map for end of stimulus|