Half of the time some leading asset managers used by the charity sector such as Jupiter and Janus Henderson are not willing to vote against company management.

However, more “rebellious” managers such as Aviva, AQR, CCLA and Liontrust voted against management 60 percent of the time.

The report that looked in to this matter was produced by responsible investment charity ShareAction for the Charities Responsible Investment Network. A group of charitable foundations managing £6 billion which seek to connect their charitable aims with their investment decisions.

Lily Tomson, who manages ShareAction’s network of charity investors, said: “When it comes to stewarding charitable endowments – or even voting shares in general – too many asset managers have a habit of siding with company management. Voting to keep a company’s governance in check is an essential prerequisite to financial outcomes in the long term, but only an exemplary few are exercising this right.

“Members of the Charities Responsible Investment Network will use these findings to take their asset managers to task and push for greater transparency and accountability by the UK investment industry. We encourage other asset owners to do the same.”

The report examined 20 controversial corporate governance resolutions on remuneration, board structure, and auditors, voted on by 19 fund managers.

ShareAction’s vision is a world where ordinary savers and institutional investors work together to ensure both communities and environment are safe and sustainable for all. Their mission is to unleash the positive potential of the mainstream investment system.