Document Type


Publication Date

January 2010


In the literature two major hypotheses have been developed for Employee Stock Ownership Plans used as a takeover defense, the management entrenchment and shareholder interest hypotheses, with the existing research not finding conclusive evidence for either one. In this paper we provide evidence that the entrenchmenthypothesis is not supported by finding that Employee Stock Ownership Plan firms pay less to their managers than non-Employee Stock Ownership Plan firms. If managers were truly entrenched they would have been able to expropriate wealth from the existing shareholders, which appears not to be the case for Employee Stock Ownership Plan firms.


This article originally appeared in Mountain Plains Journal of Business and Economics in Volume 11 and can be found online at this link.