Affiliation:
1. University of Southern Denmark
2. Leuphana University
Abstract
Arising from the principal-agent consideration, Jensen and Murphy (1990b) studied the pay-performance sensitivity (including pay, options, stockholdings, and dismissal) for chief executive officers (CEOs) in the 1980s. They found that CEO wealth changes $3.25 for every $1,000 change in shareholder wealth. In this study, we revisit the issue of the linkage between CEO pay and performance but with the difference that we only include observable measures in the pay-performance sensitivity estimate. Our data on executive compensation stems from the ExecuComp database on S&P 1500 firms, and the performance data from the Center for Research in Security Prices (CRSP) database (total: 23,737 firm-year observations). We find that CEO wealth changes $5.34 for every $1,000 change in shareholder wealth. Almost all of this sensitivity is attributed to compensation through stock options and the CEO’s inside stockholdings. Today, the incentives generated by stock options have increased thirteen times, and the total pay-performance sensitivity has almost doubled in value, compared to when Jensen and Murphy (1990b) estimated the pay-performance sensitivity in the 1980s for the first time. Despite the increased pay performance sensitivity, we hypothesize that internal and external political forces negatively affect the CEO’s performance incentives. Compensation constraints reduce the pay performance sensitivity and hereby the incentives for the CEO to maximize shareholder wealth. Further research on how CEO wealth varies with absolute and relative corporate performance is required to determine if the CEO’s incentives are consistent with shareholder wealth maximization.
Subject
General Business, Management and Accounting
Reference42 articles.
1. Adkins, G. E., Jr. (2013). FAS 123(R) avoiding the unexpected. Retrieved from https://1library.net/document/z1d8xdrp-fas-r-avoiding-unexpected-edgar-adkins-jr-cpa.html
2. Agrawal, A., & Nasser, T. (2019). Blockholders on boards and CEO compensation, turnover, and firm valuation. Quarterly Journal of Finance, 9(3), 1950010. https://doi.org/10.1142/S2010139219500101
3. Bebchuk, L. A., & Fried, J. M. (2003). Executive compensation as an agency problem. Journal of Economics Perspectives, 17(3), 71–92. Retrieved from https://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/089533003769204362
4. Bettis, J. C., Bizjak, J., Coles, J. L., & Kalpathy, S. (2018). Performance-vesting provisions in executive compensation. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 66(1), 194–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2018.05.001
5. Borisov, B. G., & Lueg, R. (2016). The tournament phenomenon beyond agency theory: Behavioral economic experiment. Journal of Portfolio Management, 42(3), 124–139. https://doi.org/10.3905/jpm.2016.42.3.124
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献