Target’s annual shareholder meeting in June was a referendum on the company’s leadership, and the story is grim: Nearly 13% of shareholders opposed the re-election of chairman and former CEO Brian Cornell. Combined with nearly 40% support for a shareholder proposal calling for an independent chief executive, this opposition makes it clear that some shareholders are unhappy with the decision to keep Cornell on the board after he stepped down as CEO earlier this year.
At first glance, Cornell’s re-election margin may seem comfortable, but votes like this typically show approval ratings of 90% or higher. The average support for S&P 500 directors in the 2026 proxy season was 96.6%. Compare that to Cornell’s decline to 87.2% and it shows that shareholders like us have lost confidence in Cornell’s leadership and are demanding a change in Target’s leadership.
Cornell’s fortunes have plummeted. For almost a decade, his No vote never once rose above 6.3%. In 2025, after three consecutive years of declining sales, opposition to Cornell increased somewhat. But then he resigned as CEO in February, but the board retained him as chairman. At this year’s general meeting, opposition tripled compared to last year, from 4.2% in 2016 to 12.8% in June.
Those of us who follow the company understand how we got here: a steady erosion of the Target brand due to years of poor management decisions, including a series of operational missteps that have repeatedly put the company at odds with the public.
Target, once an industry leader in promoting inclusion, has succumbed to political pressure and cut its budget in recent years Pride Merchandise Collection in 2024, Roll back DEI initiatives in 2025 and most recently his muted response to it ICE after federal agents shot and killed Renee Good and Alex Pretti and arrested two of his employees in the company’s hometown of Minneapolis.
The backlash was intense. Black, Latino, LGBTQ+ and progressive shoppers — some of Target’s core customer base — have launched boycotts and nationwide protests. Twin Cities Pride kicked Target out of his hometown parade after 18 years as a sponsor. The daughters of Target co-founder Bruce Dayton called for the company’s withdrawal on the topic of inclusion “a betrayal.”
In recent years, Cornell has fundamentally misunderstood what sets Target apart from other major retailers and has undermined years of hard-won goodwill by moving away from the qualities that customers once trusted: a truly welcoming environment for all, a sense that the company balances profit and people, and a brand identity that reflects the values that many shoppers believed they shared with them.
Add to that the everyday concerns about the consumer experience: standards in stores have increased slide for years. Customers report messier aisles, out-of-stock products, longer checkout lines and less helpful employees – all of which mean family shopping trips take longer, shoppers can’t find what they need, and consumers who once viewed Tarjay as a chic shopping destination no longer feel the whimsy they once felt while walking through stores.
For the first time since 2001, Target fell off This year’s all-star list of Fortune Magazine’s Most Admired Companies in the World. And almost half of Target employees say they have no confidence in the retailer’s future. But instead of investing in stronger operational support, employee retention or product supply chains, Cornell for years engaged in stock buybacks that failed to create value for shareholders while neglecting the company’s serious problems. Recently, the company stopped buying back shares and increasing investments. However, it is unclear whether this is a temporary change or a recognition that a sustainable turnaround requires continued improvements to the in-store shopping experience.
Inflation and tariff pressures have exacerbated these challenges. But Target’s biggest competitors have shown that these headwinds don’t fully explain the company’s problems: Walmart continued to pull more Unlike Costco, customers were able to shop in-store even as e-commerce expanded win on the price without sacrificing long-term profit margins. Conversely, during Cornell’s tenure as CEO, Target’s U.S. store traffic declined significantly from 2022 to 2025, and net sales shrank year-over-year in seven of the last 12 fiscal quarters.
Since Fiddelke took the reins, Target’s turnaround is starting to show signs of taking hold: Traffic and comparable sales are rising, digital growth is strong, and management has raised its underlying outlook. However, the durability and quality of the yield recovery remains unproven, particularly in the apparel and home sectors and following the elimination of a large, one-off duty drawback.
That makes his latest cultural misstep particularly costly. Just as Target appears to be regaining traction with customers it had lost due to its self-inflicted reputational setbacks in the past, the company was forced to withdraw and apologize for a children’s Halloween costume that drew viral comparisons to blackface and minstrel imagery. Target acknowledged that the product was offensive and “should never have been part of our inventory.”
The board’s decision to retain Cornell as executive chairman rather than appoint an independent chairman undermines its claim to a true management shakeup – especially in light of the new CEO Michael Fiddelke has been a Target insider and former COO for over 20 years. We at SOC Investment Group wasn’t shy From our perspective: Retaining Cornell as chairman and special advisor preserves the influence of the executive most responsible for Target’s continued underperformance and undermines Fiddelke’s turnaround efforts.
It is time for board members to demonstrate that they understand the gravity of the issues facing the company. Greater oversight, greater transparency and a better governance structure are no longer suggestions – they are necessary next steps to restore accountability and enable sustainable, long-term growth within the company.
The results of Target’s annual meeting should send a clear message to the board that investors are looking for new leadership that can help the company regain lost ground. If the board is serious about restoring trust, the first step is obvious: the board should demand that Brian Cornell resign as chairman immediately.
The opinions expressed in Fortune.com comments are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Assets.