Corporate Governance,Ethics, and the Backdating of Stock Options

Backdating of stock options is an example of an agency problem. It has emerged despite all the measures (i.e., new regulations and additional corporate governance mechanisms) aimed at addressing such problems? Beyond such negative controlling measures, a more positive empowering approach based on ethics may also be necessary. What ethical measures need to be taken to address the agency problem? What values and norms should guide the board of directors in protecting the shareholders’ interests? To examine these issues, we first discuss the role values and norms can play with respect to underlying corporate governance and the proper role of directors, such as transparency, accountability, integrity (which is reflected in proper mechanisms of checks and balances), and public responsibility. Second, we discuss various stakeholder approaches (e.g., government, directors, managers, and shareholders) by which conflicts of interest (i.e., the agency problem) can be addressed. Third, we assess the practice of backdating stock options, as an illustration of the agency problem, in terms of whether the practice is legally acceptable or ethically justifiable. Fourth, we proceed to an analysis of good corporate governance practice involving backdating options based on a series of ethical standards including: (1) trustworthiness; (2) utilitarianism; (3) justice; and (4) Kantianism. We conclude that while executive compensation schemes (e.g., stock options) were originally intended to help remedy the agency problem by tying together the interests of the executives and shareholders, these schemes may have actually become “part of the problem,” and that the solution ultimately depends upon whether directors and executives accept that all of their actions must be based on a set of core ethical values.     

Corporate Governance, Ethics, and the Backdating of Stock Options

Backdating of stock options is an example of an agency problem. It has emerged despite all the measures (i.e., new regulations and additional corporate governance mechanisms) aimed at addressing such problems? Beyond such negative controlling measures, a more positive empowering approach based on ethics may also be necessary. What ethical measures need to be taken to address the agency problem? What values and norms should guide the board of directors in protecting the shareholders’ interests? To examine these issues, we first discuss the role values and norms can play with respect to underlying corporate governance and the proper role of directors, such as transparency, accountability, integrity (which is reflected in proper mechanisms of checks and balances), and public responsibility. Second, we discuss various stakeholder approaches (e.g., government, directors, managers, and shareholders) by which conflicts of interest (i.e., the agency problem) can be addressed. Third, we assess the practice of backdating stock options, as an illustration of the agency problem, in terms of whether the practice is legally acceptable or ethically justifiable. Fourth, we proceed to an analysis of good corporate governance practice involving backdating options based on a series of ethical standards including: (1) trustworthiness; (2) utilitarianism; (3) justice; and (4) Kantianism. We conclude that while executive compensation schemes (e.g., stock options) were originally intended to help remedy the agency problem by tying together the interests of the executives and shareholders, these schemes may have actually become “part of the problem,” and that the solution ultimately depends upon whether directors and executives accept that all of their actions must be based on a set of core ethical values.     

Stock options,restricted stock,salary, or bonus? Managing CEO compensation to maximize organizational performance

CEO pay has gone through remarkable changes over the past two decades. The most striking new features have been the increased use of stock options in the early 2000s, and of restricted stock since then. Both forms of stock-based compensation are intended to resolve the agency problem that occurs when CEOs do not act in the best interests of stockholders, but each has its advantages and limitations. In this instalment of Organizational Performance, we discuss the history of their use and similarities and differences between the two, and argue that both are often overused. Bonuses based on strategic goals, on the other hand, may be underused. We conclude with a contextual approach to guide boards of directors in making choices among the forms of CEO compensation—stock options, restricted stock, salary, and bonus—to incentivize CEOs to work toward maximizing organizational performance. Briefly, stock options are most appropriate for growth firms, and restricted stock for stable firms. Both forms of stock-based compensation are more appropriate for new than for long-tenured CEOs.     

Some consequences of the early twentieth-century British divorce of ownership from control

Because ownership was already more divorced from control in the largest stock market of 1911 (London) than in the largest stock market of 1995 (New York), the consequences for the economy, for good or ill, could have been considerable. Using a large sample of quoted companies with capital of £1 million or more, this article shows that this separation did not generally operate against shareholders' interests, despite the very substantial potential for agency problems. More directors were apparently preferable to fewer over a considerable range, as far as their influence on company share price and return on equity was concerned: company directors were not simply ornamental. A greater number of shareholders was more in shareholders' interest than a smaller, despite the enhanced difficulties of coordinating shareholder ‘voice’. A larger share of votes controlled by the board combined with greater board share ownership was also on average consistent with a greater return on equity. Corporate governance thus appears to have been well adapted to the circumstances of the Edwardian company capital market. Hence the reduction in the cost of capital for such a large proportion of British business conferred a substantial advantage on the economy.     

Chinese Management Buyouts and Board Transformation

We assess the extent to which Chinese MBOs of listed corporations enable a balance to be achieved between facilitating growth and supporting the interests of minority shareholders other than the buyout organization. Using novel, hand-collected data from 19 MBOs of listed corporations in China, a matched sample of 19 non-MBOs and the population of listed corporations, we examine the extent to which boards of directors are changed to bring in executive and outside directors with the skills to grow as well as restructure a business. We also examine the extent to which outside directors become involved in actions to develop the business rather than actions related to fostering the interests of all shareholders. We find in fact little evidence that outside board members have the skills to add value to the MBO firms. Boards appear to focus mainly on related-party transactions with some more limited attention to growth strategies. Outside directors do not seem to openly disagree with incumbent managers on the disclosure of their actions but may express their views and exert pressure behind the scenes.     

CEO任期、董事会治理与绩效强制变更敏感性

本文以2010-2014年我国沪深A股主板上市公司以及在此期间的1341例CEO变更事件为初始研究样本,采用Logit模型和OLS模型研究CEO任期对公司绩效与CEO强制变更敏感性的影响,并从董事会治理视角,进一步说明敏感性发生变化的原因。研究发现,任期是识别CEO能力的重要标识,随着CEO任期逐渐延长,绩效与CEO强制变更的敏感性、以及董事会的监督力度均显著降低,董事会治理机制能够反映股东监督CEO并获取相关信息的需求。     

The Role of CEO’s Personal Incentives in Driving Corporate Social Responsibility

In this study, we explore the role of Chief Executive Officers’ (CEOs’) incentives, split between monetary (based on both bonus compensation and changes in the value of the CEO’s portfolio of stocks and options) and non-monetary (career concerns, incoming/departing CEOs, and power and entrenchment), in relation to corporate social responsibility (CSR). We base our analysis on a sample of 597 US firms over the period 2005–2009. We find that both monetary and non-monetary incentives have an effect on CSR decisions. Specifically, monetary incentives designed to align the CEO’s and shareholders’ interests have a negative effect on CSR and non-monetary incentives have a positive effect on CSR. The study has important implications for the design of executive remuneration (compensation) plans, as we show that there are many levers that can affect the CEO’s decisions with regard to CSR. Our evidence also confirms the prominent role of the CEO in relation to CSR decisions, while also recognizing the complexity of factors affecting CSR. Finally, we propose a research design that takes into account endogeneity issues arising when examining compensation variables.     

Large Shareholder Tunneling and Risk of Stock Price Crash： Evidence from China

Although several studies have examined the economic consequences of large shareholders＇ tunneling behavior, little attention has been paid to the negative effects of tunneling on firms＇ extreme events. In this article, we investigate how tunneling behavior affects firm-level stock price crashes. The findings indicate that the probability of stock price crashes is positively associated with the extent of tunneling behavior by large shareholders. The positive relationship is more pronounced after the split of share structure reform and is moderated by the firm＇s financial conditions. This study contributes to the emerging body of literature focusing on the economic consequences of tunneling and stock price crashes. The conclusions drawn from the study also provide a frame of reference for investor protection and investment portfolios based on large shareholders＇ tunneling behavior in China.     

Ethics Programs, Board Involvement, and Potential Conflicts of Interest in Corporate Governance

Board composition, insider participation on compensation committees, and director compensation practices can potentially cause conflicts of interest between directors and shareholders. If these corporate governance structures result in situations where actions beneficial to directors do not also benefit shareholders, then shareholders may suffer.Corporate ethics programs usually address conflicts of interest that may arise in the firm's activities. Some boards of directors take active roles in their firms' ethics programs by actively overseeing the programs. This paper empirically examines the relationship between ethics programs and potential conflicts of interest and the relationship between board involvement in a firm's ethics program and potential conflicts of interest.Evidence in this paper shows that firms with ethics programs have a lower percentage of inside directors on their compensation committees than do firms without ethics programs. Firms in which boards are actively involved in the programs have more independent boards (higher percentage of independent directors and lower percentage of inside directors) and are more likely to compensate outside directors with equity than are firms in which boards are not actively involved in the programs. Supplemental analyses show that the incidence of potential conflicts of interest is not significantly different between firms without ethics programs and firms in which boards are not actively involved in the programs. Taken together, the evidence in this paper indicates that a board actively involved in an ethics program, and not the simple existence of an ethics program, is related to the incidence of potential conflicts of interest.     

公司治理与企业业绩关系研究文献综述

在美国金融危机的冲击下,公司治理机制问题已成为目前国内外学术界共同面对的课题。总体上看,国际性的研究表明,当大股东的控制权高于他对现金流所拥有的权利时,公司的价值会减少,即大股东在取得控制权后,更多的是以牺牲公司利益的方式获得私人利益。我国学者研究发现,多元化股东、外部董事比例和高管激励是公司治理最重要的三个因素,是影响公司绩效最为显著的变量。但也有研究认为,我国上市公司的董事会行为是低效率的。从国内国外两个方面的文献综述可以看出,对公司治理与企业业绩的研究主要集中在公司的内部治理结构方面,由于研究的角度与变量选取的不同,其研究结果差异较大。但是,就其研究过程来讲,对于我国这样的新兴市场的建设与发展是具有重大影响意义的。     

Gender diversity on boards for organizational impression management: An empirical study of Japanese firms

The literature on gender diversity on corporate boards is growing, yet firms' motivation for achieving such diversity remains underexplored. This study examines the potential objective behind appointing female directors that could be driven by organizational impression management based on the hypothesis that firms strategically propose to nominate female directors when they need to form a favorable impression to their stakeholders, especially in relation to executive compensation. This study analyzed annual shareholders meeting agendas for 3585 listed Japanese firms between 2011 and 2020 and found that firms placed female director appointments on the meeting agenda when they needed approval for the revision of executive compensation. This tendency was strengthened for firms with more outside directors. This study's approach and findings contribute to the literature on corporate board gender diversity by suggesting organizational impression management as a potential strategic motivation behind the appointment of female directors.     

美国银行股东、董事之特殊责任探究

美国银行法施加于包括银行股东、董事在内的机构关联方特殊的法律责任,是其监管者在监管实践中所创制的监管措施,其目的是保护存款人及公共利益,防范金融风险。就美国银行股东及董事的特殊责任、其产生的历史原因及价值等问题进行深入思考,会对中国相关金融监管立法有所裨益。     

Should Independent Board Members with Social Ties to Management Disqualify Themselves from Serving on the Board?

This paper examines whether independent directors who have social ties to management (inside directors) can effectively perform their fiduciary duty to monitor management on behalf of shareholders. Ex ante, it is not clear whether social ties will enhance or obstruct the quality of board performance. Theory suggests that directors who are socially tied to management are ineffective and would make decisions favoring management. However, social ties can increase trust and information sharing between management and independent directors, improving directors’ ability and effectiveness in governing the company (Westphal, J.D.: 1999, The Academy of Management Journal 42(1), 7–24). To examine these contradicting predictions I use social network analysis and construct proxies for social ties between management and independent board members. Using these proxies, I first demonstrate that social ties are associated with higher managerial compensation. Further analyses reveal that these results are driven by social ties that include members of the compensation committee. Conversely, I demonstrate that financial reporting quality is improved when social ties exist. Specifically, I find that the likelihood of material weaknesses in internal controls and the likelihood of financial restatements are lower in companies with social ties. I further observe that this improved quality of financial reporting holds only when social ties include members of the audit committee. I conclude that ethically, socially tied independent directors should disqualify themselves from serving on compensation committees where social independence is essential. However, in tasks where collaboration with management is essential, directors with social links to each other can be of added value to shareholders.     

Boards of Directors’ Self Interest: Expanding for Pay in Corporate Acquisitions?

Director compensation can potentially represent an ethical minefield. When faced with supporting strategic decisions that can lead to an increase in director pay, directors may consider their own interests and not solely those of the shareholders to whom they are legally bound to represent. In such cases, directors essentially become agents, rather than those installed to protect principals (shareholders) from agents. Using acquisitions as a study context, we employ a matched-pair design and find a statistically significant difference in outside director compensation between acquiring and control firms. Outside directors of acquiring firms earn more than twice as much as their counterparts in the matched-sample. S. Trevis Certo is an associate professor and Mays Research Fellow in the Mays Business School at Texas A&M University. He received his Ph.D. in Strategic Management from the Kelley School of Business at Indiana University. His research focuses on corporate governance (boards of directors, ownership structure, and CEO compensation), top management teams, initial public offerings (IPOs), and research methodology. Richard H. Lester is a clinical associate professor and Director of Academic Entrepreneurship Programs in the Mays Business School at Texas A&M University. He received his Ph.D. degree in Strategic Management from the Mays Business School at Texas A&M University. His current research interests focus on corporate governance, upper echelons and entrepreneurship. Catherine M. Dalton holds the David H. Jacobs Chair of Strategic Management in the Kelley School of Business, Indiana University. She also serves as Editor of Business Horizons, as Research Director of the Institute for Corporate Governance, and as a Fellow in the Randall L. Tobias Center for Leadership Excellence. She received her Ph.D. degree in Strategic Management from the Kelley School of Business, Indiana University. Professor Dalton's research is in corporate governance, with particular expertise in board composition, board leadership structure, executive and director compensation, and firms' ownership structures. Her research spans all types of organizations, including entrepreneurial firms, small businesses, large public corporations, and private organizations. Dan R. Dalton is the founding Director of the Institute for Corporate Governance, Dean Emeritus, and the Harold A. Poling Chair of Strategic Management in the Kelley School of Business, Indiana University. He is a Fellow of the Management in the Kelley School of Business, Indiana University. He is a fellow of the Academy of Management and an inaugural member of its Journals Hall of Fame. Professor Dalton is widely published, with over 280 articles in corporate governance, business strategy, law, and ethics. Additionally, his work has been frequently featured in the business and financial press including, Business Week, Wall Street Journal, Fortune, Economist, Financial Times, Boston Globe, Chicago Tribune, Los Angeles Times, New York Times, and the Washington Post. Professor Dalton regularly addresses public, corporate, and industry groups on corporate governance issues.     

The Effects of Current Income Attributes on Nonprofessional Investors’ Say-on-Pay Judgments: Does Fairness Still Matter?

The say-on-pay (SOP) regulation in the Dodd-Frank Act (Public L. no. 111–203, H.R. 4173 2010) requires publicly-traded U.S. firms to hold a nonbinding, advisory shareholder vote on executive compensation. Advocates claim that SOP voting gives shareholders a mechanism to hold managers and boards more accountable. Critics contend that SOP votes may simplistically reflect shareholders’ reactions to the overall value of CEO compensation or the firm’s net income. However, based on prior research, we contend that market participants’ SOP votes are likely to consider current income attributes. For example, the market punishes firms that do not meet or beat benchmarks such as analyst earnings expectations, and that shareholders scrutinize the quality of the income sources of firms that consistently meet/beat analyst expectations. We thus expect that more shareholders will provide ‘agree’ SOP votes for a firm that consistently meets/beats analyst forecasts and does so when net income does not include (rather than includes) nonrecurring gains. Further, we consider whether perceptions about the fairness of CEO compensation play a mediating role in the relationship between the interaction of these two current income attributes and SOP votes. Results from an experiment using evening MBA students as participants indicates that the two current income attributes significantly interact with respect to the percentage of agree SOP votes, and that compensation fairness perceptions fully mediate this relationship. Further, the mediating effect of compensation fairness perceptions is robust to including CEO-level and other determinants found in prior research. We conclude with a discussion of our findings and their implications for public policy and research.     

经理股票期权激励制度的理论基础

经理股票期权激励制度是激励机制的一种创新,通过授予股票期权使经营者的目标同股东的目标保持一致.在追求个人利益最大化的同时实现了股东利益的最大化.经理股票期权作为一种制度安排,背后有着深刻的理论依据,如委托代理理论、人力资本理论、激励理论和X(低)效率理论.     

Managerial Compensation and Firm Value in the Presence of Socially Responsible Investors

Shareholders with standard monetary preferences will give a manager incentives to increase firm profits, which can be achieved with equity grants. When shareholders are socially responsible, in the sense that they also value corporate social performance, it is not clear which incentives the manager should receive. Yet, in a standard principal–agent model, we show that the optimal contract is surprisingly simple: it consists in giving equity holdings to the manager. This is notably because the stock price will incorporate expected profits as well as the social performance of the firm, to the extent that it is valued by shareholders. Consequently, equity holdings give the manager incentives to jointly maximize the profits and the social performance of the firm according to shareholders’ preferences. To facilitate alignment of interests, more socially responsible firms will optimally hire more socially responsible managers. We conclude that neither the shareholder primacy model nor equity-based managerial compensation is necessarily inconsistent with the attainment of social objectives.     

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act Will Change the Governance of Non Profit Organizations

As a public director of a NASDAQ stock exchange listed public corporation, I have seen how quickly the reforms in corporate governance imposed by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act have changed procedures and policies in public corporations. In areas such as transparency of financial records and other financial matters including compensation of top executives and conflict of interest policies affecting both corporate boards of directors and employees of the corporation the reforms of this new federal law have quickly changed corporate practices in many corporations. Many persons who have studied this new law believe that these changes will benefit the public, shareholders, employees, and other stakeholders in the modern corporation by increasing the reputation of these organizations for integrity and transparency. Stock exchanges such as NASDAQ and the New York Stock Exchange now require all listed companies to have (after a transition time) a majority of independent directors on their boards of directors. Only independent directors may serve on the audit, nominating and compensation committees of boards in most cases. Some exceptions are made to these rules for foreign and domestic issues of companies where a majority of the voting power is held by one person. According to Morrison & Foster LLP, Corporate Board Advisory March , 2004, NASDAQ requires that the board of directors of a listed company determine that an independent director does not have a relationship that would “interfere with the exercise of independent judgment” in carrying out the responsibilities of a director. Donald Grunewald served as President of Mercy College from 1972 to 1984. He has served as a member of the board of trustees of several colleges and proprietary educational institutions and on the boards of other charitable institutions. Currently he is a member of the Board of Directors of EVCI Career Colleges, Inc., a NASDAQ listed corporation.     

Board Composition and Corporate Social Responsibility: An Empirical Investigation in the Post Sarbanes-Oxley Era

Although the composition of the board of directors has important implications for different aspects of firm performance, prior studies tend to focus on financial performance. The effects of board composition on corporate social responsibility (CSR) performance remain an under-researched area, particularly in the period following the enactment of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX). This article specifically examines two important aspects of board composition (i.e., the presence of outside directors and the presence of women directors) and their relationship with CSR performance in the Post-SOX era. With data covering over 500 of the largest companies listed on the U.S. stock exchanges and spanning 64 different industries, we find empirical evidence showing that greater presence of outside and women directors is linked to better CSR performance within a firm’s industry. Treating CSR performance as the reflection of a firm’s moral legitimacy, our study suggests that deliberate structuring of corporate boards may be an effective approach to enhance a firm’s moral legitimacy.     

Media Coverage and Firm Valuation: Evidence from China

Drawing on both a managerial discipline perspective and an information intermediary perspective, we explore how media coverage of a firm’s controlling shareholder influences firm valuation in corporate China. Using 366 listed family firms in China from 2003 to 2006, we find that firms in which controlling shareholders receive more neutral media reports enjoy higher valuation, whereas negative media reports on controlling shareholders impose adverse effects on firm valuation. Interestingly, favorable media coverage of the controlling shareholders does not enhance firm value. Further analyses reveal that ownership structure and audit quality moderate the relationship between media coverage and firm valuation. Our study complements the emerging literature on the monitoring role of the media on the stock markets.