Actually, stockholders have LOTS of say. The problem is that they are often the shadow force behind the CEOs. It is often the major stockholders who will engage in “creative accounting” to make the company appear to be in better financial condition than they actually are. Then, they get caught up in their own BS and start believing the earnings reports.
An example, if you will. Decades ago, a Madison Avenue advertising exec named Jerry Della Femina,who founded a small agency, found himself being sabotaged by phony “information” about his agency being planted in the trade journal “Ad Week”, which was a known charactersitic of the periodical. Blocked from attracting new advertising clients by the false information, he soon found himself down to his last $1100.00 in the world and on the verge of having to close his own agency.
He did the opposite of what everyone assumed he would do. He spent the money on a lavish party that gave everyone the opinion that his agency was wildly successful and had lots and lots of business.
Because he did that, he signed several new accounts that night, salvaged his agency and went on to become one of Madison Avenues more influential ad agencies.
Stockholders tend to be a broad mix of people from many walks of life. Often, they are the force behind bad business decisions or they fail to recognize that a particular course of action may fall under the Law of Unintended Consequence. When the business sinks, it is the CEO who is the face of the business and who gets the blame.
The stockholders simply slink off deeper into the shadows to find another business to control.
Interesting...however, I do think that the fact that so much of stock is held in mutual funds has reduced the influence of stockholders...except for the big guys...if Wall Street does not address these problems...they will be regulated-not a good thing either.