Proxy advisory firms Glass Lewis announced plans to significantly change its delivery of research and voting recommendations, including no longer providing singular voting advice to clients, noting that investors in the U.S. and Europe are diverging on issues including sustainability and corporate engagement.
The move comes as the firm also faces increasing pressure from Republican politicians in the U.S., including a recently-announced investigation into Glass Lewis and peer company ISS by Texas’ Attorney General, alleging that the companies potentially misled investors by recommending they vote for companies implementing DEI and sustainability policies.
Glass Lewis cited “diverging investor priorities” as a key factor behind the changes, that the firm added “are driving differences in approaches to fiduciary duty, engagement strategies, and sustainability commitments across regions, particularly between Europe and the U.S.”
The firm also said that rapid technological advances, and in AI in particular are now enabling highly customized approaches to voting, allowing asset managers and pension funds to have greater control over their proxy voting decisions.
Key changes highlighted by Glass Lewis include helping all clients to move beyond standard policies, and guiding them in the creation of voting frameworks reflecting their individual investment philosophies and stewardship priorities, in order to allow them to vote in alignment with their own policies. The firm will also move away from singularly-focused research and vote recommendations based on its house policy, to instead provide multiple perspectives reflecting different clients’ viewpoints, such as perspectives based on management, or on different governance fundamentals.
Glass Lewis said that the changes will be implemented over the next two years, with clients able to access the various perspectives to inform their proxy voting decisions beginning in 2027.
Glass Lewis CEO, Bob Mann said:
“As institutional investors take increasingly different approaches to voting preferences, the traditional one-size-fits-all model of proxy advice no longer meets the needs of a diverse client base. Instead, investors want proxy voting frameworks and guidance that reflect their own unique investment strategies, stewardship goals and voting preferences.”
