Proxy statements are often unclear on major issues, notably executive pay questions such as the appropriateness of compensation size and structure, according to a new survey of major asset managers and owners. They also lack clarity on pay ratios, corporate political contributions, corporate social responsibility and sustainability and CEO succession planning.
A new survey from Stanford University’s Rock Center for Corporate Governance on how investors use information from corporate proxy statements reveals deep dissatisfaction with corporate disclosure about executive compensation. The survey, based on responses from 64 asset managers responsible for a combined $17 trillion — show that even the largest and most sophisticated investors find the information in the proxy statements unsatisfactory. The proxies, the respondents believe, do not clearly answer the questions in investors’ minds on this issue — questions such as whether the size and structure of compensation packages are appropriate, and exactly how the compensation is tied to performance.
According to the survey, conducted in collaboration with RR Donnelley and Equilar, only 39% of investors believe that the information in proxies about executive compensation is clear. In contrast, 65% say the proxies are “not at all” clear in explaining the relation between compensation and risk, while 48% say that the proxies are “not at all” clear in explaining how the size of the compensation is appropriate. Finally, 48% of respondents say the proxies are “not at all” clear on whether performance-based compensation is tied to clearly defined, rigorous goals. As a result 25% of respondents could not tell if there was any relation between compensation and performance, and 22% could not tell if the compensation package offered was aligned with their interests as shareholders.
Other results from the survey include the following:
Most corporations, it seems to many, disclose the information required under law, but go no further. They disclose without clarifying or explaining; that, according to the survey respondents, is not good enough.
At the root of the problem is a deep dissatisfaction with executive pay in general, and whether executives are being paid according to rigorous performance metrics. ‘Say on pay’ loses its power if investors don’t have the information they need to make the right decisions.
Corporations must improve their proxy statements and remember that the goal is not to meet legal guidelines, but to inform and empower their shareholders. Otherwise, investors will continue to become increasingly frustrated by both the executive compensation decisions in the firm, and their inability to meaningfully participate because of long, overwritten but sparse on clear information proxy statements.
Ideas for Leaders is a free-to-access site. If you enjoy our content and find it valuable, please consider subscribing to our Developing Leaders Quarterly publication, this presents academic, business and consultant perspectives on leadership issues in a beautifully produced, small volume delivered to your desk four times a year.
For the less than the price of a coffee a week you can read over 650 summaries of research that cost universities over $1 billion to produce.
Use our Ideas to:
Speak to us on how else you can leverage this content to benefit your organization. info@ideasforleaders.com
