Executive Compensation and Corporate Acquisition Decisions

By examining how executive compensation structure determines corporate acquisition decisions, we document a strong positive relation between acquiring managers' equity-based compensation (EBC) and stock price performance around and following acquisition announcements. This relation is highly robust when we control for acquisition mode (mergers), means of payment, managerial ownership, and previous option grants. Compared to low EBC managers, high EBC managers pay lower acquisition premiums, acquire targets with higher growth opportunities, and make acquisitions engendering larger increases in firm risk. EBC significantly explains postacquisition stock price performance even after controlling for acquisition mode, means of payment, and "glamour" versus "value" acquirers.     

Board compensation practices and agency costs of debt

Extant theory and empirical evidence indicate that equity-based compensation can align the interests of managers with those of shareholders, but it has a side effect of aggravating bondholder-shareholder conflicts by increasing managers' risk-shifting incentives. Recent evidence confirms that extending equity-based compensation to outside directors also is effective in aligning their interests with those of shareholders, but its adverse effects on the debt-related agency problems are unknown. In this paper, we examine how stock and stock option compensation for outside directors affects corporate bond yields in the secondary market. Our results show that the greater the ratio of outside directors' stock and option compensation to total compensation, the lower the average yield spreads on the firms' outstanding bonds, with stock compensation having a larger impact than option compensation. Further, the effect of equity-based compensation on yield spreads is stronger for firms with lower-rated debt.     

Director Compensation and the Reliability of Accounting Information

This paper studies the effect of incentive-based compensation on directors' monitoring of management. Using total accruals to measure the level of earnings management, I find that director stock option compensation is associated with higher levels of total accruals. I interpret this result to suggest that director stock options are more likely to align interests of directors with those of managers and that this convergence of interest manifests in lower transparency and reliability of financial information. The results suggest that director stock option compensation provides incentive for directors to compromise their task in the financial reporting process.     

Outside directors' equity incentives and strategic alliance decisions

This study examines whether the proportion of equity-based compensation in outside director compensation is associated with corporate strategic alliances. We hypothesize that equity incentives provided to outside directors mitigate potential agency conflicts between outside directors and shareholders that arise from the strategic alliance decision-making process, thus resulting in more alliance activities. Our empirical evidence indicates that the percentage of equity in outside director compensation is positively associated with the incidence and the number of strategic alliance activities. Additionally, when the proportion of outside directors' equity in total compensation is higher, firms with strategic alliances generate better future stock returns. Overall, our findings suggest that providing equity incentives in outside director compensation mitigates the agency problems inherent in corporate strategic alliance decisions and enhances the quality of alliance activities.     

Additional Evidence on the Association Between Director Stock Ownership and Incentive Compensation

Governance scholars argue that outside directors have little incentive to monitor managers when their equity stake in the firm is not significant. A sample with a substantial level of outside director shareholdings is examined and a negative relationship between incentive compensation and outside director stock ownership is found. While firms pay higher incentive compensation when they have greater investment opportunities, the compensation contains excess pay due to ineffective corporate governance. Overall, the results suggest more effective corporate governance and lower incentive compensation when outside director stock ownership is higher.     

In Defense of Incentive Compensation: Its Effect on Corporate Acquisition Policy

Financial economists have long recognized that compensation design, particularly the use of equity-based compensation, can provide strong motivation for corporate managers to make value-maximizing decisions. But the perception of excesses in equity-based pay for U.S. executives has become pervasive and has led many to question its efficacy. The fundamental problem is one of measurement–while it is relatively easy to measure the cost of equity-based compensation, it is difficult to determine the extent to which equitybased compensation actually causes managers to direct corporate resources into value-maximizing ventures.
The authors of this article focus on corporate acquisition policy and argue that if equity-based pay is an effective motivator, it should limit management's inclination to overpay for acquisitions and to make unwise acquisitions. In their study of 1,719 mergers and tender offers over the period 1993–1998, the authors found that bidding companies with higher proportions of equity-based pay paid lower takeover premiums, acquired targets with stronger growth opportunities, and undertook acquisitions that were received more favorably by the market both upon announcement and over time.     

Directors' and officers' liability insurance and acquisition outcomes

We examine the effect of directors' and officers' liability insurance (D&O insurance) on the outcomes of merger and acquisition (M&A) decisions. We find that acquirers whose executives have a higher level of D&O insurance coverage experience significantly lower announcement-period abnormal stock returns. Further analyses suggest that acquirers with a higher level of D&O insurance protection tend to pay higher acquisition premiums and their acquisitions appear to exhibit lower synergies. The evidence provides support for the notion that the provision of D&O insurance can induce unintended moral hazard by shielding directors and officers from the discipline of shareholder litigation.     

The role of investment banker directors in M&A

We examine how directors with investment banking experience affect firms? acquisition behavior. We find that firms with investment bankers on the board have a higher probability of making acquisitions. Furthermore, acquirers with investment banker directors experience higher announcement returns, pay lower takeover premiums and advisory fees, and exhibit superior long-run performance. Overall, our results suggest that directors with investment banking experience help firms make better acquisitions, both by identifying suitable targets and by reducing the cost of the deals.     

Director Compensation and CEO Bargaining Power in REITs

We analyze director compensation for Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) and investigate the relations between director compensation and other measures of the board independence and board monitoring. Using 136 REITs in 2001, we find that REITs that pay higher equity-based compensation to their board members are associated with higher financial performance. Our data indicate that board equity-based compensation is positively related to the existence of an independent nomination committee, however, it has no significant relationship with board size, proportion of outside directors, CEO duality and CEO tenure and ownership.

Stock liquidity and director compensation

This study investigates how stock liquidity affects the compensation incentives faced by the directors on the board. The results show that the proportion of cash-based compensation in the directors' compensation package increases when the firm's shares are less liquid: a one standard deviation increase in the bid-ask spread from the mean is associated with a 3% larger fraction of cash in the directors' compensation package. The effect is more pronounced for firms whose management does not issue Earnings Per Share (EPS) guidance and for firms whose Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) themselves have higher pay in cash and lower pay in the form of equity. These results suggest the compensation incentives offered to directors in firms with illiquid shares result in the interests of shareholders being less aligned with those of the directors compared with firms with liquid shares.     

Acquisitions driven by stock overvaluation: Are they good deals?

Theory and recent evidence suggest that overvalued firms can create value for shareholders if they exploit their overvaluation by using their stock as currency to purchase less overvalued firms. We challenge this idea and show that, in practice, overvalued acquirers significantly overpay for their targets. These acquisitions do not, in turn, lead to synergy gains. Moreover, these acquisitions seem to be concentrated among acquirers with the largest governance problems. CEO compensation, not shareholder value creation, appears to be the main motive behind acquisitions by overvalued acquirers.     

The power of control: the acquisition decisions of newly public dual-class firms

Many private firms that go public opt for a dual-class share structure which gives insiders stronger voting power, at the expense of shareholder democracy. We examine how the dual-class structure influences the merger decisions of newly public firms, which have a notable appetite for acquisitions. Specifically, we compare acquisition activity, method of payment choice, and the long-run value implications of acquisitions by newly public single-class and dual-class US companies. Our results show that dual-class IPO firms make relatively more acquisitions in innovative industries and are less likely to pay with stock as compared to single-class IPO firms. The reluctance of dual-class firms to pay with stock is positively related to the wedge between the insiders’ voting rights and cash-flow rights. We also find that newly-public dual-class acquirers perform better in the long-run than newly-public single-class acquirers, mainly due to dual-class acquisitions in innovative industries. Our multivariate analysis shows that these findings hold after controlling for relevant risk factors associated with industry, deal, and firm specific characteristics. These results suggest that the dual class structure may enable newly-public firms to make better M&A decisions after going public.     

Independent director cash compensation and earnings management

This study examines the impact of independent directors’ cash compensation on firms’ financial reporting quality using a sample of Chinese listed companies from 2002 to 2008. Unlike in the U.S. where most listed firms provide stock-related compensations to outside directors, Chinese listed companies compensate independent directors with cash only. This context offers a cleaner setting for examining the effects of independent director cash pay on earnings management. Our study documents a positive association between independent director cash compensation and the magnitude of earnings management. This suggests that compensating independent directors with higher cash pay compromises their independence and reduces their effectiveness in financial reporting oversight. Our results are robust to an array of sensitivity checks. These findings have important implications for both investors and policy makers by showing that independent directors’ cash compensation is also a significant determinant of financial reporting quality.     

Do corporate governance mechanisms influence CEO compensation? An empirical investigation of UK companies

The aim of this paper is to empirically examine the influence of corporate governance mechanisms, that is, ownership and board structure of companies, on the level of CEO compensation for a sample of 414 large UK companies for the fiscal year 2003/2004. The results show that measures of board and ownership structures explain a significant amount of cross-sectional variation in the total CEO compensation, which is the sum of cash and equity-based compensation, after controlling other firm characteristics. We find that firms with larger board size and a higher proportion of non-executive directors on their boards pay their CEOs higher compensation, suggesting that non-executive directors are not more efficient in monitoring than executive directors. We also find that institutional ownership and block-holder ownership have a significant and negative impact on CEO compensation. Our results are consistent with the existence of active monitoring by block-holders and institutional shareholders. Finally, the results show that CEO compensation is lower when the directors’ ownership is higher.     

Length of Board Tenure and Outside Director Independence

I posit and test two competing views on the significance of outside director tenure lengths; the expertise hypothesis suggesting that extended board service time is a sign of director commitment, experience, and competence and the management‐friendliness hypothesis suggesting that extended board service time marks directors who befriend management at the expense of shareholders. I find evidence that Senior directors, defined as directors with twenty or more years of board service, are almost twice as likely to occupy a 'management‐affiliated' profession compared to the rest, and that they are also more likely to staff the firm's nominating and compensation committees. Senior director participation in the compensation committee is associated with higher pay for the CEO, especially when the CEO is more powerful in the firm. These results are consistent with the management‐friendliness hypothesis, and highlight a need for setting term limits for directors.     

Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and performance

We show that female directors have a significant impact on board inputs and firm outcomes. In a sample of US firms, we find that female directors have better attendance records than male directors, male directors have fewer attendance problems the more gender-diverse the board is, and women are more likely to join monitoring committees. These results suggest that gender-diverse boards allocate more effort to monitoring. Accordingly, we find that chief executive officer turnover is more sensitive to stock performance and directors receive more equity-based compensation in firms with more gender-diverse boards. However, the average effect of gender diversity on firm performance is negative. This negative effect is driven by companies with fewer takeover defenses. Our results suggest that mandating gender quotas for directors can reduce firm value for well-governed firms.     

Independent director compensation,corruption, and monitoring

We find that independent directors in more corrupt countries receive greater pay. This relation could reflect outside directors in corrupt countries expropriating firm value, or it could reflect higher compensation for the additional effort required to lessen the negative effects of corruption. Acquirer acquisition announcement returns are lower in more corrupt countries, and this relation is mitigated by higher director pay. Higher director pay is also associated with greater sensitivity of CEO turnover to firm performance and moderates the negative effects of country‐level corruption on firm value. This evidence is consistent with higher director pay in corrupt countries incentivizing effort.     

The influence of director stock ownership and board discussion transparency on financial reporting quality

Seventy-two active corporate directors participate in an experiment where management insists on aggressive recognition of revenue, but the chief audit executive proposes a more conservative approach. Results indicate interactive effects of director stock ownership and the transparency of director decisions. Stock-owning directors are more likely to oppose management’s attempts to manage earnings when transparency increases. For non-stock owning directors, however, increasing transparency does not affect the likelihood that directors oppose management’s attempts to manage earnings. The current study challenges suppositions that equate director stock ownership with improved financial reporting and higher corporate governance quality, and it provides evidence that increased transparency is beneficial when director compensation plans threaten director independence.     

Sources of value gains in minority equity investments by private equity funds: Evidence from block share acquisitions

Using block share acquisitions made by private equity (PE) funds, we examine the sources of value gains in PE minority equity investments. We find that compared with non-PE acquirers, PE acquirers are more likely to place representatives with finance experience or those with experience in the target's industry on the target's board when the need for target oversight and/or advice is higher. The targets in PE acquisitions, particularly poorly performing targets, targets with high R&D intensity, and targets with PE-appointed directors who have experience in the target's industry, realize both higher announcement returns and better post-acquisition operating performance than do targets in non-PE acquisitions. These findings suggest that the governance and operational engineering that PE acquirers apply to their targets constitutes important sources of value creation in PE minority equity investments.     

Does venture capital syndication affect mergers and acquisitions?

We find that venture capital (VC) syndicate-backed targets receive higher acquisition premiums and spend more time negotiating transaction terms. The acquirers of syndicate-backed targets receive lower cumulative abnormal returns surrounding the acquisition announcement, but they outperform the individual-backed targets in the long-term. We show that VC syndication creates value for entrepreneurial firms by leading to larger and more independent boards of directors prior to acquisition. It also leads to better incentive alignment between the CEO and the shareholders of the acquiring firm. In addition, syndicate-backed targets prefer stock as the method of payment in mergers and acquisitions. Collectively, we show that VC syndication creates value for both entrepreneurial firms and their acquirers in the long-term.