As the world continues to adapt to the shifting landscape shaped by the pandemic, one sector is facing growing unrest from its investors. Five years after the onset of COVID-19, which prompted banks to transition to fully online annual meetings, many shareholders are voicing frustration over the lack of in-person options. With virtual gatherings now the norm, some wonder if they will ever again find themselves in the same room as the board members and executives who oversee the companies in which they hold stakes.
While the digital shift initially provided a sense of continuity during the height of the pandemic, it has now raised questions about the long-term consequences of this new meeting format. In a world where personal connections and face-to-face communication are often considered vital to building trust and transparency, shareholders are increasingly concerned that the absence of in-person meetings may be undermining the very essence of corporate governance.
A Pandemic-Induced Shift
When the pandemic struck in 2020, the necessity of social distancing and restrictions on large gatherings forced companies across all industries to pivot to virtual meetings. For many banks, these online events provided a quick and efficient way to maintain shareholder engagement while adhering to health and safety guidelines. In fact, some banks reported increased attendance at their virtual meetings, with shareholders able to participate from anywhere without the need to travel.
The convenience of virtual meetings was a silver lining during an otherwise turbulent time. They allowed for real-time updates, streamlined presentations, and even greater participation from a wider range of investors. For those unable or unwilling to attend in-person gatherings due to geographic or mobility constraints, the shift seemed like a welcome development.
However, as the pandemic waned and restrictions eased, banks have largely stuck with virtual formats, with few offering an option for in-person participation. This has created a growing divide between shareholders who embraced the virtual transition and those who feel disconnected by the lack of a physical presence. The debate over whether banks should return to face-to-face annual meetings is becoming more pronounced.
The Case for In-Person Meetings
For many investors, attending an annual meeting is more than just a formality. It’s an opportunity to engage with key decision-makers in a way that virtual meetings cannot replicate. While technology has made significant strides in bridging the gap, there’s an undeniable difference between a screen and a handshake.
In-person meetings offer shareholders the chance to observe body language, ask more nuanced questions, and engage in conversations that go beyond the confines of a structured presentation. For those with significant investments, these face-to-face interactions are often seen as crucial for understanding the direction of the company and forging deeper connections with management teams.
Moreover, annual meetings have historically been a forum for accountability, where shareholders can voice concerns, challenge proposals, and provide feedback. Many investors argue that virtual formats can dilute this process, making it harder to gauge sentiment and creating a barrier for those who prefer a more personal touch in their interactions with the board.
“I miss the days when you could sit down with a board member after the meeting and ask follow-up questions,” said one long-time shareholder of a major bank. “The virtual format feels so impersonal. It’s harder to get a feel for the company’s culture and leadership when you’re just another face on a Zoom screen.”
The Challenges of Virtual Meetings
While online meetings have their advantages—such as convenience and the ability to reach a global audience—they also present challenges that have become more apparent as time has passed. For one, the sense of community and shared purpose that comes with being physically present in the same room is absent in the virtual world. Shareholders may log in from their living rooms or offices, but the atmosphere is far removed from the dynamic and often energized vibe of an in-person gathering.
Another concern is the lack of informal interaction. Much of the networking, information exchange, and real-time feedback that happens in person is hard to replicate in a digital environment. Shareholders who may have wanted to ask follow-up questions or engage in a casual conversation with executives or fellow investors are often left without that opportunity.
Moreover, there are concerns about the accessibility and inclusivity of virtual meetings. While they may seem more accessible in theory, technical issues, time zone differences, and internet connectivity problems can prevent some shareholders from fully participating. The feeling of being “left out” during a critical moment of corporate decision-making has only exacerbated frustrations for many investors.
The Regulatory Aspect
It’s important to note that virtual meetings are not inherently harmful to shareholder engagement, as long as transparency is maintained and all participants are given an equal opportunity to contribute. The SEC has loosened restrictions on virtual meetings during the pandemic, allowing companies to experiment with remote formats. However, some are pushing for regulatory changes to require that shareholders have the option to attend in person if they choose.
Several large banks have already begun to experiment with hybrid models that offer both virtual and in-person participation. These hybrid models are seen as a potential solution to the growing frustration of shareholders who want the flexibility of virtual attendance but still value the personal connection that an in-person meeting provides.
“We’re exploring ways to offer both options moving forward,” said a representative from one bank. “It’s important to balance accessibility with the need for meaningful, direct engagement.”
The Future of Annual Meetings
As the dust settles from the pandemic, it seems clear that the future of annual shareholder meetings will likely involve a blend of both virtual and in-person elements. While some investors will always prefer the convenience of logging in from home, others will continue to push for the return of face-to-face interactions.
For banks and other corporations, the challenge will be finding the right mix of both formats that satisfies all shareholders. It’s clear that while virtual meetings have their place in the modern business world, they cannot fully replace the value of personal connection, especially for those who are deeply invested in the future of the companies they support.
Ultimately, the shift back to in-person meetings—or a hybrid model—will depend on how banks and other organizations listen to their shareholders’ needs and prioritize a balance between convenience, engagement, and accountability. In the end, the goal should be to foster a meeting environment that supports open dialogue, transparency, and the shared interests of both companies and their investors.
