Subject category:
Ethics and Social Responsibility
Published by:
IBS Center for Management Research
Length: 12 pages
Data source: Published sources
Share a link:
https://casecent.re/p/20525
Write a review
|
No reviews for this item
This product has not been used yet
Abstract
The case discusses the governance problems at Disney. In late 2003, Roy Disney and Stanley Gold, both of whom were directors at the company resigned from the board in protest against the bad governance practices at Disney. They alleged that CEO Michael Eisner ran the company like a 'personal fiefdom' and that the board was only a rubber stamp to his decisions. The case looks into this allegation and studies a few instances which support the fact that Disney did not conform to the principles of good corporate governance. It also discusses the future of Disney in the context of the allegations of bad governance and the bid by Roy and Gold to oust Eisner from the company and install a new board.
Teaching and learning
This item is suitable for postgraduate courses.About
Abstract
The case discusses the governance problems at Disney. In late 2003, Roy Disney and Stanley Gold, both of whom were directors at the company resigned from the board in protest against the bad governance practices at Disney. They alleged that CEO Michael Eisner ran the company like a 'personal fiefdom' and that the board was only a rubber stamp to his decisions. The case looks into this allegation and studies a few instances which support the fact that Disney did not conform to the principles of good corporate governance. It also discusses the future of Disney in the context of the allegations of bad governance and the bid by Roy and Gold to oust Eisner from the company and install a new board.

