Shareholder activism has undergone a striking transformation over the past four decades. What began in the 1980s as a brash and often combative movement led by so-called corporate raiders has matured into a sophisticated, globally attuned, and strategically agile phenomenon. In a new paper, I explore how activism has evolved in both form and function – becoming an essential feature of modern corporate governance, especially in times of economic uncertainty and regulatory flux.

Today’s activists – particularly hedge funds – are a far cry from their swashbuckling predecessors. These funds operate with remarkable precision, carefully analyzing regulatory frameworks and ownership structures to identify where and how pressure can be most effectively applied. Their playbook includes not only public proxy battles, but also quieter forms of engagement: closed-door negotiations with management, calculated media campaigns, and strategic alliances with institutional investors. In a world where influence is often about credibility and cooperation rather than confrontation, coalition-building has emerged as a key strategy. These alliances not only lend activists added legitimacy but also allow them to frame their campaigns in terms of long-term value creation rather than short-term financial engineering.

The paper takes a comparative perspective, analyzing how activism plays out in jurisdictions with different corporate governance environments. For example, in the United States and the United Kingdom, where dispersed ownership structures dominate , activists have considerable room to maneuver. In continental Europe and other parts of the world, however, the presence of controlling shareholders complicates such efforts, forcing activists to adopt more indirect and collaborative tactics.

One of the most compelling developments in recent years has been activist hedge funds’ remarkable capacity to adapt to shifting economic and political currents. Far from being derailed by the 2008 global financial crisis, they emerged stronger and more versatile. Since then, they have shown a keen ability to ride new waves, pivoting toward environmental, social, and governance (ESG) themes when it became clear that sustainable investing could serve both moral and financial imperatives. This pragmatism was on full display again during the Covid-19 pandemic and the energy market disruptions following the war in Ukraine. Each time, activists recalibrated their strategies, taking advantage of volatility while navigating public scrutiny.

Now, as we enter a new era marked by rising protectionism, regulatory rollback, and geopolitical uncertainty, activists are adapting once again. The paper suggests that their continued success hinges on this very adaptability – not just in spotting underperforming companies, but in reading the room politically, culturally, and economically.

Activism is no longer just about unlocking shareholder value; it is increasingly about navigating and shaping the broader governance landscape. As my paper argues, the future of shareholder activism will be defined by those who can build credible coalitions, balance short-term pressures with long-term goals, and move fluidly across borders and business cultures.

This post comes to us from Wolf-Georg Ringe, a  professor of law and finance and director of the Institute of Law & Economics at the University of Hamburg and visiting professor at the University of Oxford. It is based on his new paper, “Adaptive Advocacy: The Reinvention of Shareholder Activism,” forthcoming as a chapter in the second edition of the Oxford Handbook of Corporate Law and Governance and available here. A version of this post appeared on the Oxford Business Law Blog.