Determination of Executive Compensation in an Emerging Economy. Evidence from India

Most studies of the determination of executive compensation are based on the experience of developed countries, and mainly focus on Chief Executive Officer (CEO) compensation. Determination of board compensation is relatively ignored in the literature. This paper examines the effect of corporate governance, firm performance, and corporate diversification on the board, as well as CEO compensation and its components, in the context of an emerging economy-India-where a managerial market has yet to develop. Data for 462 firms for 1997-2002 in the Indian manufacturing sector have been used. This paper finds that board compensation largely depends on current- and past-year performance and diversification of the firm, whereas CEO compensation depends on current-year firm performance only. Among the personal attributes of the CEO, only in-firm experience has significant influence on CEO compensation. This finding contradicts the existing studies, where current- and past-year firm performance, as well as age, experience, and education of the CEO are important factors in determining CEO compensation.     

The Effect of the Mandatory Adoption of Corporate Governance Mechanisms on Executive Compensation

This study investigates empirically the effect of corporate governance principles on executive compensation and firm performance prior to and after the adoption of the first Greek Law on corporate governance. Prior to the adoption of the law, managers were not compensated in line with their performance. Since its introduction, a significant link has been observed between executive compensation and company performance as measured by accounting measures of performance. Following the adoption of corporate governance principles by law, the main mechanism that controls executive compensation is the election of independent non-executive board members. The results are robust to alternative accounting measures of performance.     

Governance and Climate Change: A Success Story in Mobilizing Investor Support for Corporate Responses to Climate Change

Until fairly recently, the main approach to getting business to respond to climate change has been top‐down efforts to regulate emissions and enact various forms of “carbon pricing.” The aim of such efforts has been to make businesses “internalize” the costs associated with greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Governments are expected to set the environmental protection rules for companies in their respective countries, and markets are expected to adjust to the new regulations and carbon prices. But this classical approach to economic policy does not work when applied to a global “public goods” challenge like trying to limit the extent and effects of climate change. Instead of a top‐down approach, in which economic actors are forced to respond to regulations imposed on them, the Paris climate agreement of 2015 was reached using a bottom‐up approach centered on the concept of Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs)—along with a process that ended up encouraging the participation of all economic actors, not just governments. The authors provide an account of how the Paris agreement was reached, and why the “Portfolio Decarbonization Coalition” under the auspices of the United Nations is the most important of several private‐sector initiatives that are changing the way corporations operate. Thanks in large part to the PDC, investors can now undertake meaningful corporate governance action on climate change. With GHG emissions from a particular companies’ operations now much easier to measure, objective performance metrics on GHG emissions can now be set by boards and verified by shareholders. And current decarbonized indexes can be used as performance benchmarks for asset managers’ compensation, which can be tied to return outperformance relative to a “decarbonized” index.     

Voluntary disclosure,greenhouse gas emissions and business performance: Assessing the first decade of reporting

This study explores the empirical relationships between GHG emissions and an extensive range of business performance measures for UK FTSE-350 listed firms over the first decade or so of such reporting. Despite the popular and policy generated environmental imperatives over this period—along with growing evidence of the corporate added-value of having an ‘environmental conscience’, voluntary disclosure of emissions has been slow to adopt by firms. The leading contribution is to present clear evidence of a non-linear relationship, initially increasing with firm performance and then decreasing. An extensive pattern of non-reporting of emissions is also observed over time, and prior literature has introduced questions of endogeneity existing between firm performance and emissions. Steps are taken to ensure confidence/robustness of the results to these concerns. Accordingly, a two-stage (Heckman-type) selection model is used to analyse the emissions-performance nexus conditional upon the firm choosing to report (i.e. treating the choice to report as being endogenously determined with firm performance). From this—in addition to confirming the robustness of the non-linear relationship—it can be observed that the decision to report emissions is not directly influenced by wider social/governance disclosure attitudes of a firm, thus suggesting that firms disassociate environmental responsibility from social responsibility.     

Corporate Governance and Firm Performance in Iran

This study uses data from companies listed in the Tehran Stock Exchange (TSE) for the years 2005–2006 to investigate the role of corporate governance indices on firm performance. We use board size, board independence, board leadership and institutional investors on the board as corporate governance indices and EPS, ROA and ROE as firm performance surrogates. Our regression results show that board size is negatively associated with firm performance. Moreover, the presence of outside directors strengthens the firms' performance. We find, however, no relationship between leadership structure and firm performance. Likewise, the presence of institutional investors on the board of directors is not positively associated with firm performance.     

Halo effect or fallen angel effect? Firm value consequences of greenhouse gas emissions and reputation for corporate social responsibility

Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are perceived to have negative consequences for society at large by contributing to potential climate change and represent a potential cash drain from firms from exposure to future regulatory, abatement, and compliance costs. Beginning in 2010, US companies are required to report their GHG emissions to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). We utilize these data for 2010–2014 to examine whether the possible adverse firm value impact of these GHG emissions is alleviated or exacerbated by the firm’s reputation for corporate social responsibility. Our findings suggest that there is no halo effect, i.e., a firm’s reputation for social responsibility (as reflected in its CSR score) does not protect the firm from the adverse firm value effects of GHG emissions. Rather, our findings suggest a fallen angel effect, i.e., for any given level of GHG emissions, the higher the firm’s CSR score, the greater the adverse impact on firm value. In other words, the decline in firm value due to the adverse impact of GHG emissions is compounded by the hit to the firm’s reputation for corporate social performance. Our paper contributes to the sparse prior US literature on the firm value effects of GHG emissions. Further, by providing scholarly evidence on the existence of a fallen angel effect, our findings suggest that boards and managers of firms that provide voluntary CSR disclosures cannot afford to be complacent about their GHG emissions.     

Corporate Governance and Agency Conflicts

I investigate whether corporate governance is associated with the level of agency conflicts in firms. I employ exploratory principal components analysis on 22 individual governance variables to obtain seven factors that represent the different dimensions of governance for a firm. I measure the level of agency conflicts in firms based on seven proxies for agency conflicts used in the literature. I find that firms with greater agency conflicts have better governance mechanisms in place, particularly those related to the board, audit committee, and auditor. I also find that the composition and functioning of the board, the independence of the auditor, and the equity‐based compensation of directors are significantly associated with firm performance, but primarily for firms with high agency conflicts. Overall, the results support the theory that the existence and role of various governance mechanisms in a firm are a function of the level of agency conflicts in the firm.     

Endogeneity and the dynamics of internal corporate governance

We use a well-developed dynamic panel generalized method of moments (GMM) estimator to alleviate endogeneity concerns in two aspects of corporate governance research: the effect of board structure on firm performance and the determinants of board structure. The estimator incorporates the dynamic nature of internal governance choices to provide valid and powerful instruments that address unobserved heterogeneity and simultaneity. We re-examine the relation between board structure and performance using the GMM estimator in a panel of 6,000 firms over a period from 1991 to 2003, and find no causal relation between board structure and current firm performance. We illustrate why other commonly used estimators that ignore the dynamic relationship between current governance and past firm performance may be biased. We discuss where it may be appropriate to consider the dynamic panel GMM estimator in corporate governance research, as well as caveats to its use.     

The Effects of Outside Directors and Board Shareholdings on the Relation Between Chief Executive Compensation and Firm Performance

Critics of corporate governance have suggested that improvements in board monitoring will arise from more independent boards consisting of outside directors and from increased stock ownership by directors. Presumably these changes should result in more rational, more defensible compensation decisions in which pay is clearly tied to results. In this paper, we test the premise that boards with a relatively higher proportion of outsiders and boards with significant shareholdings maintain a closer link between corporate performance and executive pay than do boards with fewer outsiders and boards holding little stock. The results of the study, based on a sample of 268 large corporations, are mixed. As expected, boards with significant shareholdings maintain a stronger linkage between compensation and firm-level performance. This finding persists even after controls are included for CEO and outsider shareholdings. Contrary to expectations, however, evidence was not found that firms with a higher proportion of outsiders on the board of directors relate compensation more strongly to firm results.     

Executive compensation and corporate governance in China

We investigate executive compensation and corporate governance in China's publicly traded firms. We also compare executive pay in China to the USA. Consistent with agency theory, we find that executive compensation is positively correlated to firm performance. The study shows that executive pay and CEO incentives are lower in State controlled firms and firms with concentrated ownership structures. Boardroom governance is important. We find that firms with more independent directors on the board have a higher pay-for-performance link. Non-State (private) controlled firms and firms with more independent directors on the board are more likely to replace the CEO for poor performance. Finally, we document that US executive pay (salary and bonus) is about seventeen times higher than in China. Significant differences in US-China pay persist even after controlling for economic and governance factors.     

Corporate governance and operating performance of Chinese listed firms

In this paper, we investigate the impact of corporate governance on firm performance and valuation in China. Our study introduces a composite measure of corporate governance to measure the association between corporate governance and Chinese firms’ performance and valuation. Because agency theory suggests that companies with better corporate governance standards perform better, we propose that better governed Chinese firms would have greater performance and higher valuation. We find that our composite measure of corporate governance is positively and significantly associated with firm performance and valuation. These findings have implications for policy makers, researchers, managers, and investors in general and those in emerging markets in particular.     

Corporate governance and pay-for-performance: The impact of earnings management

We ask whether the apparent impact of governance structure and incentive-based compensation on firm performance stands up when measured performance is adjusted for the effects of earnings management. Institutional ownership of shares, institutional investor representation on the board of directors, and the presence of independent outside directors on the board all reduce the use of discretionary accruals. These factors largely offset the impact of option compensation, which strongly encourages earnings management. Adjusting for the impact of earnings management substantially increases the measured importance of governance variables and dramatically decreases the impact of incentive-based compensation on corporate performance.     

An Examination of Multiple Governance Forces within Bank Holding Companies

This study explores multiple means of governance and monitoring in bank holding companies and their impact on performance and executive compensation. We exploit variables unique to the banking industry to aid in our understanding of this simultaneous relationship. Our primary finding is that after controlling for both regulatory oversight and capital market discipline, a strong board is associated with higher firm performance, lower levels of executive pay and lower growth rates of executive pay. The findings support the fundamental role of corporate governance in overseeing management and ultimately firm performance.     

公司绩效、公司治理与管理者报酬实证研究

本文以中国深、沪两市在2004年上市公司样本作为公司绩效、公司治理与管理者报酬研究对象,从公司绩效、股权结构的安排以及董事会治理三个方面,通过构建最小二乘模型进行多元线性回归,来研究公司内部治理机制对公司管理层报酬的影响。研究结果表明:公司绩效、国有股比例、董事会规模、两职兼任均对管理者报酬产生显著的影响。     

The impact of foreign board membership on firm value

This study examines the effect of foreign (Anglo-American) board membership on corporate performance measured in terms of firm value (Tobin’s Q). Using a sample of firms with headquarters in Norway or Sweden the study indicates a significantly higher value for firms that have outsider Anglo-American board member(s), after a variety of firm-specific and corporate governance related factors have been controlled for. We argue that this superior performance reflects the fact that these companies have successfully broken away from a partly segmented domestic capital market by “importing” an Anglo-American corporate governance system. Such an “import” signals a willingness on the part of the firm to expose itself to improved corporate governance and enhances its reputation in the financial market.     

Does the market value greenhouse gas emissions? Evidence from multi-country firm data

Despite increasing global attention on corporate carbon emissions, few studies have examined the value relevance of carbon emission information in the international context. This paper examines whether carbon emission information voluntarily disclosed by a firm affects its market value. After controlling for a firm's likelihood to provide voluntary carbon disclosures, we find that the level of carbon emissions is negatively related to firm value. This negative impact is more prominent for firms in countries that have a national carbon emission trading scheme and stringent environmental regulations. Furthermore, corporate governance is found to reduce the negative value effect of carbon emissions, indicating that shareholders have favorable perceptions regarding the carbon management ability of firms with good corporate governance. Cultural contexts such as uncertainty avoidance and long-term orientation also affect the value effect of risks and future liabilities associated with carbon emissions. We find that the value-decreasing effect of carbon emissions is weaker in countries characterized by high uncertainty avoidance and long-term orientations.     

Climate Change and Asset Prices: Are Corporate Carbon Disclosure and Performance Priced Appropriately?

This paper empirically assesses the relevance of information on corporate climate change disclosure and performance to asset prices, and discusses whether this information is priced appropriately. Findings indicate that corporate disclosures of quantitative greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and, to a lesser extent, carbon performance are value relevant. We use hand‐collected information on quantitative GHG emissions for 433 European companies and build portfolios based on GHG disclosure and performance. We regress portfolios on a standard four factor model extended for industry effects over the years 2005 to 2009. Results show that investors achieved abnormal risk‐adjusted returns of up to 13.05% annually by exploiting inefficiently priced positive effects of (complete) GHG emissions disclosure and good corporate climate change performance in terms of GHG efficiency. Results imply that, firstly, information costs involved in carbon disclosure and management do not present a burden on corporate financial resources. Secondly, investors should not neglect carbon disclosure and performance when making investment decisions. Thirdly, during the period analysed, financial markets were inefficient in pricing publicly available information on carbon disclosure and performance. Mandatory and standardised information on carbon performance would consequently not only increase market efficiency but result in better allocation of capital within the real economy.     

Corporate Social Responsibility,Corporate Performance,and Pay-Performance Sensitivity—Evidence from Shanghai Stock Exchange Social Responsibility Index

Based on annual data of listed companies on Shanghai Stock Exchange (SSE) through 2009–2013, this article examines three hypotheses: first, whether a firm’s taking corporate social responsibility (CSR) affects corporate performance; second, whether corporate governance and a firm’s age positively moderate the relationship between CSR and performance; and third, whether CSR positively moderates the magnitude/direction of linkage between a firm’s performance and top management/director compensation (pay-performance sensitivity, PPS). Three proxies for CSR engagement are constructed by a firm’s inclusion in the SSE Social Responsibility Index. Empirical evidence generally shows that firms engaging in CSR tend to obtain superior performance in terms of higher profitability. However, firm’s age and sound corporate governance have little additional benefit on the effect of a firm engaging in CSR on performance. Finally, greater CSR engagement is associated with larger PPS. Principal outcome does not shift under two-stage estimation and propensity score matching (PSM) to correct for sample self-selection of CSR engagement.     

CEO tenure,the risk of termination and firm value

We examine CEOs' risk of termination, its determinants and its effect on firm value. Using survival analysis, we find that the risk of termination increases for about thirteen years before decreasing slightly with CEO tenure; 82% of CEOs have tenure of less than thirteen years. We also find that tenure increases with performance and compensation and decreases with monitoring by the board. Changes in the risk of termination do not have a significant effect on firm value. Taken as a whole, our results are consistent with the view that corporate governance functions reasonably well for the vast majority of firms.     

On the relation between corporate governance compliance and operating performance

Better corporate performance has been cited as one of the main benefits of adopting good corporate governance structures within organisations. However, in contrast to theory, a prior European study (Bauer et al., 2004) reports evidence of a negative relationship between corporate governance and corporate performance. This study re‐examines this relationship, and reports evidence of a positive relationship between the extent of compliance with international best practices concerning board structure and functioning and operating performance when operating performance is measured by the return on assets (ROA). This result is robust to controlling for the firms’ compliance with best practices in other governance areas, and holds for some other governance dimensions, namely disclosure of corporate governance and the range of takeover defences. Further tests indicate that greater compliance with international best practices concerning board structure and functioning is significantly associated with reporting less income from asset disposals and that studying a performance measure that includes this item obscures the inherently positive relationship between operating performance and the extent of compliance with international best practices regarding board structure and functioning. The results provide some support for an oftencited motivation for the adoption of good governance practices, and provide explicit evidence that the measure of operating performance is crucial in examining firm‐level operating performance.