|
||||
|
||||
Seven Myths of Executive CompensationDavid F. LarckerStanford University - Graduate School of Business Brian TayanStanford University - Graduate School of Business June 21, 2011 Rock Center for Corporate Governance at Stanford University Closer Look Series: Topics, Issues and Controversies in Corporate Governance No. CGRP-17 Abstract: Executive compensation has become one of the most contentious topics in corporate governance. However, public perception about executive pay suffers from many misconceptions. These include the notions that: 1. The ratio of CEO-to-average-worker pay is a useful statistic: 2. Compensation consultants cause pay to be too high: 3. It is easy to tell whether a compensation package encourages “excessive” risk taking: 4. Performance metrics and targets tie directly to the corporate strategy: 5. Discretionary bonuses should be eliminated: 6. Proxy advisory firms know how to evaluation compensation contracts: 7. The numbers in the financial statements for executive options accurately capture their cost and value: We examine these myths in close detail and explain why they are false. Problems of excessive compensation and poorly structured contracts will not be remedied by artificial changes and congressional mandates. Why don’t experts rely on the research to arrive at informed and fact-based solutions?
Number of Pages in PDF File: 7 Keywords: corporate governance research, executive compensation, pay for performance, incentives, equity pay JEL Classification: G3, G30, I20, K20, K22, L20 Accepted Paper SeriesDate posted: June 22, 2011 ; Last revised: February 24, 2013Suggested CitationContact Information
|
|
||||||||||||||
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
FAQ
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Copyright
This page was processed by apollo5 in 0.453 seconds