US advisory firm Glass Lewis said it would stop issuing single voting positions on proxy issues and instead offer multiple perspectives to clients, after facing criticism from Republicans over diversity and environmental criteria.
Starting in 2027, Glass Lewis will offer recommendations based on views that are oriented towards management, governance, activism or sustainability.
“We recognise that a single perspective is no longer sufficient,” Glass Lewis said in a position paper. “Transitioning to a fully client-driven policy model will ultimately put all proxy voting control in the hands of shareholders, empowering them to vote in accordance with their specific beliefs and priorities.”
The firm’s move follows a similar decision by the other major proxy advisory business, Institutional Shareholder Services. Earlier this month, ISS introduced governance research services that do not include voting recommendations and provide customisable data, analysis and recommendations to its clients.
READ MORE
Glass Lewis said one of the primary drivers of the shift was the “growing divergence” between American and European institutional investors who have taken different approaches to fiduciary duty and sustainability. European clients already rely more on thematic policies rather than benchmark views.
Glass Lewis’s new voting practice comes as proxy advisers have become increasingly scrutinised by public companies and Republican officials over prioritising matters related to environmental, social and governance, and diversity, equity and inclusion. Glass Lewis and ISS are both suing Texas over a state law that limits the guidance that proxy advisers can give to shareholders on corporate governance, diversity and environmental practices.
The proxy adviser’s latest move could blunt some of the criticism that it provides “ideologically driven” recommendations as it moves to give clients more choice to vote in line with their own beliefs and priorities.
Glass Lewis already offers custom voting recommendations to clients but ending its benchmark guidance would push all of its customers under a custom framework.
“They seem to trying to transition clients to develop more specific policy guidelines, which not only takes Glass Lewis out of the line of fire but also makes more money for Glass Lewis,” said Ann Lipton, a law professor at the University of Colorado.
“I think their ultimate goal is transition to the more expensive and profitable business model.” – Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2025
