European Business Organization Law Review

, Volume 4, Issue 2, pp 273–299 | Cite as

Setting Standards of Corporate Governance: The Polish Experience of Drafting Governance Codes

  • Maciej Dzierżanowski
  • Piotr Tamowicz


Corporate governance codes have recently been adopted by most of the European markets. Stock markets in Eastern Central Europe, with their weak governance mechanisms and practices, are trying to follow suit. However, drafting such codes may be a much more challenging task in this part of Europe than elsewhere, due to the existence of powerful interest groups and an underdeveloped corporate environment (immature institutional investors, ineffective shareholder activism and a lack of government interest in corporate governance).

This paper provides some insights into various governance problems related to the drafting of a ‘private’ corporate governance code for Polish listed corporations. In particular, it focuses on supervisory boards and explains how they should be structured to gain credibility without clashing with blockholder interests. This paper argues that the soft proposition (i.e. independent members should account for less than half the members of supervisory boards) can bring about more far-reaching results, as it takes account of real market conditions. Regrettably, the strong proposition, which is employed in the official code of the Warsaw Stock Exchange, may produce fewer benefits or even fail under the criticism of blockholders.

Polish corporate governance dilemmas are common to most of Eastern Central Europe. The solutions presented in this paper may therefore also be useful to code drafters in other countries. This paper strongly advocates that there should be the establishment of an open market for codes that allows companies to choose the best and most suitable governance arrangements. NGOs could play an important role in such a market by stimulating competition, establishing benchmarks and enforcing mechanisms like ratings.


Corporate Governance Minority Shareholder Supervisory Board Shareholder Activism Corporate Governance Code 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aguilera, R.V. and A. Cuervo-Cazurra. 2002. ‘Codes of Good Governance Worldwide: What Is the Trigger’. Mimeo.Google Scholar
  2. Barca, F. and M. Becht (eds.). 2001. The Control of Corporate Europe. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Becht, M., P. Bolton and A. Roell. 2002. ‘Corporate Governance and Control’. ECGI Finance Working Paper No. 02/2002.Google Scholar
  4. Berglof, E. and A. Pajuste. 2002. ‘Emerging Owners, Eclipsing Markets? Corporate Governance in Central and Eastern Europe’. Working Paper, SITE, Stockholm School of Economics, to be published in: Corporate Governance and Capital Flows in a Global Economy, edited by Peter K. Cornelius and Bruce Kogut (Oxford University Press, forthcoming).Google Scholar
  5. Claessens, S., D. Klingebiel and M. Lubrano. 2002. ‘Capital Market Development and Corporate Governance in Poland: The Way Forward’. Paper prepared for a conference on corporate governance held in Warsaw in June 2002.Google Scholar
  6. Dzier?anowski, M. 2002. ‘Ewolucja struktury wlasnosci i kontroli polskich korporacji — obraz modelu polskiego rynku kapitalowego i systemu corporate governance’. IbnGR. Mimeo.Google Scholar
  7. Dzier?anowski, M. and P. Tamowicz. 2002. Corporate Governance Code for Polish Listed Companies. Gdansk (available at: <>).
  8. Ewing, A., J. Mukherjee, M. Mejstrik and S. Rahuja. 1997. Mass Privatization in Central and Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union: A Comparative Analysis. World Bank.Google Scholar
  9. Frydman, R.and A.Rapaczyžski. 1994.Privatization in Eastern Europe: Is the State Withering Away? Central European University.Google Scholar
  10. Gregory, H.J. and R.T. Simmelkjaer. 2002. Comparative Study of Corporate Governance Codes Relevant to the European Union and Its Member States. Final Report and Annexes I-III. Report commissioned by the Internal Market Directorate General of the European Union.Google Scholar
  11. Grosfeld, I. and T. Tressel. 2001. ‘Competition and Corporate Governance. Substitutes or Complements? Evidence from the Warsaw Stock Exchange’. Mimeo.Google Scholar
  12. Jarosz, M. (ed.). 2000. The Years of Direct Privatization. Warsaw: ISP PAN.Google Scholar
  13. Johnson, S. and A. Shleifer. 2001. ‘Coase v. the Coasians’. Quarterly Journal of Economics 116(3): 853.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jordan, C., and M. Lubrano. 2002. ‘How Effective are Capital Markets in Exerting Governance on Corporates? Lessons of Recent Experience with Private and Public Legal Rules in Emerging Markets’. Paper presented at the Fourth Annual Financial Markets and Development Conference: Building the Pillars of Financial Sector Governance — The Roles of the Public and Private Sectors. New York: World Bank. Mimeo.Google Scholar
  15. Kozarzewski, P. 1999. ‘Elity kierownicze spólek pracowniczych’. Warsaw: ISP PAN.Google Scholar
  16. La Porta, R., F. Lopez-de-Silanes, A. Shleifer and R. Vishny. 1998. ‘Law and Finance’. Journal of Political Economy 106(6): 1113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Megginson, W.L. and J.M. Netter. 2001. ‘From State to Market: A Survey of Empirical Studies on Privatization’. Journal of Economic Literature 39(2): 321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Pagano, M., F. Panetta and L. Zingales. 1995. ‘Why Do Companies Go Public? An Empirical Analysis’. NBER Working Paper No. 5367.Google Scholar
  19. Pajuste, A. 2002 ‘Corporate Governance and Stock Market Performance in Central and Eastern Europe. A Study of Nine Countries: 1994–2001’. SSEES and University College London: Centre for the Study of Economic and Social Change in Europe. Working Paper No. 22.Google Scholar
  20. Postrach, K. 1999. Problemy nadzoru w spólkach z dominuj?cym inwestorem. Gdansk University of Technology.Google Scholar
  21. Ryan, A. 2001. Polish Corporate Governance Review — Not a Pretty Sight. UBS Warburg.Google Scholar
  22. Shleifer, A. and R. Vishny. 1996. ‘A Survey of Corporate Governance’. NBER Working Paper No. 5554.Google Scholar
  23. Sprenger, C. 2002. ‘Ownership and Corporate Governance in Russian Industry: A Survey’. EBRD Working Paper No. 70.Google Scholar
  24. Tamowicz, P. and M. Dzierżanowski. 2001. ‘Ownership and Control of Polish Corporations’. Gdansk Institute for Market Economics. Working Paper (available at: <>).
  25. Trojanowski, G. 2002. ‘Equity Block Transfers in Transition Economies: Evidence from Poland’. CEPR Discussion Paper No. 3280. Tilburg University.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© T.M.C. Asser Press 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maciej Dzierżanowski
    • 1
  • Piotr Tamowicz
    • 1
  1. 1.Instytut Badan nad Gospodarką RynkowąPoland

Personalised recommendations