Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-x4r87 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T18:54:41.631Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A study of CEO power, pay structure, and firm performance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 January 2014

Chengli Tien ,
Chien-Nan Chen  and
Cheng-Min Chuang
Chengli Tien*
Affiliation:
Department of East Asian Studies, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC
Chien-Nan Chen
Affiliation:
Department of Business Administration, National Dong Hwa University, Hualien, Taiwan, ROC
Cheng-Min Chuang
Affiliation:
Department of International Business, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC
*
Corresponding author: cltien@ntnu.edu.tw
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study has extended existing research on CEO power, pay structure, and firm performance, offering models based mainly on agency theory and managerial power theory, and testing hypotheses using data from 112 companies across a five-year span (2001–2005) in computer-related industry groups in the United States. The results indicated that power from executive directorship positively impacts a firm's return on assets and return on equity, and that CEO power from duality negatively impacts CEO long-term pay and total pay, while CEO power from tenure positively impacts CEO long-term pay and pay leverage, and composite power negatively impacts short-term pay. Evidence for CEO pay as a mediator between CEO power and firm performance revealed that CEO short-term pay positively impacts a firm's return on assets and international performance but negatively impacts its market value, regardless of which source of power is being controlled. CEO total pay positively impacts a firm's return on assets and international performance, with power from CEO duality, directorship, or composite power being controlled. Hence, and in general, CEO pay fails to significantly mediate the relationships between CEO power and firm performance. The contributions include a multiple-perspective study of CEO power, compensation, and firm performance to comprehensively discover each of their respective relationships. This study has further extended the debate over agency perspectives with stewardship perspectives to fill knowledge and theoretical gaps. Thus, evidence-based findings provide boards of directors with practical knowledge for sound governance with another avenue for future research in corporate governance.

Keywords

CEO powerdualitytenuredirectorshipCEO payfirm performance
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Management & Organization , Volume 19 , Issue 4 , July 2013 , pp. 424 - 453
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abor, J. (2007). Corporate governance and financing decisions of Ghanaian listed firms. Corporate Governance, 7(1), 83–92.Google Scholar
Adams, R. B., Almeida, H., Ferreira, D. (2005). Powerful CEOs and their impact on corporate performance. The Review of Financial Studies, 18(4), 1403–1432.Google Scholar
AFL-CIO (2009). 2009 Executive Paywatch. Retrieved from http://www.aflcio.org/corporatewatch/paywatch/Google Scholar
Balkin, D. B., Markman, G. D., Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (2000). Is CEO pay in high-technology firms related to innovation? Academy of Management Journal, 43(6), 1118–1129.Google Scholar
Baliga, R. R., Moyer, R. C., Rao, R. S. (1996). CEO duality and firm performance: What's the fuss? Strategic Management Journal, 17(1), 41–53.Google Scholar
Barkema, H., Gomez-Mejia, L. (1998). Managerial compensation and firm performance: A general research framework. Academy of Management Journal, 41(2), 135–145.Google Scholar
Bart, C. K. (1998). A comparison of mission statements and their rationales in innovative and non-innovative firms. International Journal of Technology Management, 16(1/2/3), 64–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bebchuk, L. A., Fried, J. M. (2006). Pay without performance: Overview of the issues. Academy of Management Perspectives, 20(1), 5–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bebchuk, L. A., Fried, J. M., Walker, D. I. (2002). Managerial power and rent extraction in the design of executive compensation. University of Chicago Law Review, 69, 751–846.Google Scholar
Bennington, L. (2010). Review of the corporate and healthcare governance literature. Journal of Management & Organization, 16, 314–333.Google Scholar
Bjorkman, I., Furu, P. (2000). Determinants of variable pay for top managers of foreign subsidiaries in Finland. International Journal of Human Resources Management, 11(4), 698–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonn, I., Pettigrew, A. (2009). Towards a dynamic theory of boards: An organizational life cycle approach. Journal of Management & Organization, 15, 2–16.Google Scholar
Boyd, B. (1995). CEO duality and firm performance: A contingency model. Strategic Management Journal, 16(4), 301–312.Google Scholar
Boyd, B., Salamin, A. (2001). Strategic reward systems: A contingency model of pay system design. Strategic Management Journal, 22(8), 777–792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradley, M., Schipani, C. A., Sundaram, A. K., Walsh, J. P. (1999). The purposes and accountability of the corporation in contemporary society: Corporate governance at a crossroads. Journal of Law and Contemporary Problems, 62(3), 69–86.Google Scholar
Braun, M. R., Latham, S. F. (2009). Rethinking value creation in leveraged buyouts: Board restructurings over the public-private-public cycle. Management Decision, 47(5), 702–729.Google Scholar
Bulmash, S. B., Maherz, A. (1985). Sharing rule contracts between management and investors and their effect on the management's attitude towards risk. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 12(3), 399–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carpenter, M. A., Sanders, W. M. G. (2002). Top management team compensation: The missing link between CEO pay and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 23(4), 367–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chiang, M., Lin, J. (2007). The relationship between corporate governance and firm productivity: Evidence from Taiwan's manufacturing firms. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 15(5), 768–779.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chung, K., Pruitt, S. A. (1994). A simple approximation of Tobin's q. Financial Management, 23, 70–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coffee, J.C. Jr. (1988). Shareholders versus managers: The strain in the corporate web. In J. C. Coffee, Jr., L. Lowenstein, & S. Rose-Ackerman (Eds.), Knights, raiders and targets: The impact of the hostile takeover (pp. 77–134). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Daily, C. M., Dalton, D. R. (1994). Corporate governance and the bankrupt firm: An empirical assessment. Strategic Management Journal, 15(8), 643–654.Google Scholar
Daily, C. M., Dalton, D. R. (1997). CEO and board chair roles held jointly or separately: Much ado about nothing? Academy of Management Executive, 11(3), 11–20.Google Scholar
Dalton, D. R., Daily, C. M., Ellstrand, A. E., Johnson, J. L. (1998). Meta-analytic reviews of board composition, leadership structure, and financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 19(3), 269–290.Google Scholar
DeCarlo, S. (2005). The best and worst bosses. Forbes, 175(10), 109.Google Scholar
Fama, E. F., Jensen, M. C. (1983). Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics, 26(2), 301–325.Google Scholar
Fiegener, M. K., Brown, B. M., Druex, D. R. V., Dennis, W. J. J. (2000). CEO stakes and board composition in small private firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 24(4), 5–24.Google Scholar
Finkelstein, S., Boyd, B. (1998). How much does the CEO matter? The role of managerial discretion in the setting of CEO compensation. Academy of Management Journal, 41(2), 179–199.Google Scholar
Finkelstein, S., d'Aveni, R. A. (1994). CEO duality as a double-edged sword: How boards of directors balance entrenchment avoidance and unity of command. Academy of Management Journal, 37(5), 1079–1108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, C., Dowling, P. J. (1999). Support for an HR approach in Australia: The perspective of senior HR managers. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 37(1), 1–19.Google Scholar
Fosberg, R. H. (2001). CEO replacement and compensation around dividend omissions. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 9(1), 25–36.Google Scholar
Fox, M., Walker, G. (1998). Boards of directors and board committees in New Zealand: International comparisons. Bond Law Review, 10(2), 341–365.Google Scholar
Fredrickson, J. W., Hambrick, D. C., Baumrin, S. (1988). A model of CEO dismissal. Academy of Management Review, 13(2), 255–270.Google Scholar
Frye, M. B., Nelling, E., Webb, E. (2006). Executive compensation in socially responsible firms. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 14(5), 446–455.Google Scholar
Hambrick, D. C., Fukutomi, G. D. S. (1991). The seasons of a CEO's tenure. Academy of Management Review, 16(4), 719–742.Google Scholar
Hamori, M., Kakarika, M. (2009). External labor market strategy and career success: CEO careers in Europe and the United States. Human Resource Management, 48(3), 355–378.Google Scholar
Harris, J., Bromiley, P. (2007). Incentives to cheat: The influence of executive compensation and firm performance on financial misrepresentation. Organizational Science, 18(3), 350–369.Google Scholar
Henderson, A. D., Fredrickson, J. W. (1996). Information-processing demands as a determinant of CEO compensation. Academy of Management Journal, 39(3), 575–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ingley, C., Van der Walt, N. (2005). Do board processes influence director and board performance? Statutory and performance implications. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 13(5), 632–653.Google Scholar
Jensen, M. C., Murphy, K. J. (1990). Performance pay and top management incentives. Journal of Political Economy, 98(2), 225–264.Google Scholar
Kang, E., Zardkoohi, A. (2005). Board leadership structure and firm performance. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 13(6), 785–799.Google Scholar
Kanter, R. M. (1982). The middle manager as innovator. Harvard Business Review, 60(4), 95–105.Google Scholar
Kirkland, R. (2006). The real CEO pay problem. Fortune, 154(1), 78.Google Scholar
Kota, H. B., Tomar, S. (2010). Corporate governance practices in Indian firms. Journal of Management & Organization, 16, 266–279.Google Scholar
Laing, D., Weir, C. M. (1999). Governance structures, size and corporate performance in UK firms. Management Science, 37(5), 457–464.Google Scholar
Lam, L. W., White, L. P. (1998). Human resource orientation and corporate performance. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 9(4), 351–364.Google Scholar
Lambert, R. A., Larcker, D. F., Weigelt, K. (1993). The structure of organizational incentives. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(3), 438–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larcker, D. F. (1983). The association between performance plan adoption and corporate capital investment. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 5, 3–30.Google Scholar
Lavelle, L. (2005). A payday for performance. Business Week, 3929, 78.Google Scholar
Lippert, R. L., Porter, G. (1997). Understanding CEO pay: A test of two pay-to-performance sensitivity measures with alternative measures of alignment and influence. Journal of Business Research, 40(2), 127–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mehran, H. (1995). Executive compensation structure, ownership, and firm performance. Journal of Financial Economics, 38(2), 163–184.Google Scholar
Miller, D. (1991). Stale in the saddle: CEO tenure and the match between organization and environment. Management Science, 37(1), 34–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Navarro, M. S., Ansón, S. G. (2009). Do families shape corporate governance structure. Journal of Management & Organization, 15, 327–345.Google Scholar
Ocasio, W. (1994). Political dynamics and the circulation of power: CEO succession in US industries. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(2), 285–312.Google Scholar
O'Reilly, C. A. III., Main, B. G. M. (2010). Economic and psychological perspectives on CEO compensation: A review and synthesis. Industrial and Corporate Change, 19(3), 675–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Shannassy, T. (2010). Board and CEO practice in modern strategy-making: How is strategy developed, who is the boss and in what circumstances? Journal of Management & Organization, 16, 280–298.Google Scholar
O'Sullivan, N. (2009). Why do CEOs hold non-executive directorships: An analysis of the role of governance and ownership. Management Science, 47(5), 760–777.Google Scholar
O'Toole, T. (2006). Review of the potential and practice of professional roles and responsibilities of executive directors on boards. Irish Journal of Management, 26(2), 109–129.Google Scholar
Papadakis, V. M. (2006). Do CEOs shape the process of making strategic decisions? Evidence from Greece. Management Science, 44(3), 367–394.Google Scholar
Pass, C. (2004). Corporate governance and the role of non-executive directors in large UK companies: An empirical study. Corporate Governance, 4(2), 52–64.Google Scholar
Pfeffer, J. (1981). Power in organizations. Marshfield, MA: Pitman.Google Scholar
Plian, P. I., Lee, S. H. (1995). Human capital or social networks: What constrains CEO dismissals. Academy of Management Proceedings, 1995(1), 37–42.Google Scholar
Quinn, J. B. (1985). Managing innovation: Controlled chaos. Harvard Business Review, 63(3), 73–84.Google Scholar
Rechner, P. L., Dalton, D. R. (1991). CEO duality and organizational performance: A longitudinal analysis. Strategic Management Journal, 12(2), 155–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rhoades, D. L., Rechner, P. L., Sundaramurthy, C. (2000). Board composition and financial performance: A meta-analysis of the influence of outside directors. Journal of Managerial Issues, 12(1), 76–91.Google Scholar
Rhoades, D. L., Rechner, P. L., Sundaramurthy, C. (2001). A meta-analysis of board leadership structure and financial performance: Are ‘two heads better than one’? Corporate Governance: An International Review, 9(4), 311–319.Google Scholar
Rouzies, D., Coughlan, A. T., Anderson, E., Iacobucci, D. (2009). Determinants of pay levels and structures in sales organizations. Journal of Marketing, 73(6), 92–104.Google Scholar
Sanders, W. G. (2001). Incentive alignment, CEO pay level, and firm performance: A case of ‘Heads I Win. Tails You Lose’? Human Resource Management, 40(2), 159–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanders, W. G., Carpenter, M. A. (1998). Internationalization and firm governance: The roles of CEO compensation, top team composition, and board structure. Academy of Management Journal, 41(2), 158–178.Google Scholar
Schuler, R. S., Jackson, S. E. (1988). Linking remuneration practices to innovation as a competitive strategy. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 26(2), 6–20.Google Scholar
Shen, W. (2003). The dynamics of the CEO-board relationship: An evolutionary perspective. Academy of Management Review, 28(3), 466–476.Google Scholar
Tosi, H. L., Werner, S., Katz, J. P., Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (2000). How much does performance matter? A meta-analysis of CEO pay studies. Journal of Management, 26(2), 301–339.Google Scholar
Tremblay, M., Chenevert, D. (2005). The effectiveness of compensation strategies in international technology intensive firms. International Journal of Technology Management, 31(3/4), 222–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van der Laan, G. (2010). CEO pay as a reflection of power or performance: An empirical test for the Netherlands, 2002–2006. Journal of Strategy and Management, 3(2), 157–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Essen, M., Heugens, P. P., Otten, J., Van Oosterhout, J. (2012). An institution-based view of executive compensation: A multilevel meta-analytic test. Journal of International Business Studies, 43(4), 396–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Essen, M., Otten, J., Carberry, E. J. (2012). Assessing managerial power theory: A meta-analytic approach to understanding the determinants of CEO compensation. Journal of Management, published online, January 5, doi: 10.1177/0149206311429378.Google Scholar
Voordeckers, W., Gils, A. V., Heuvel, J. V. D. (2007). Board composition in small and medium-sized family firms. Journal of Small Business Management, 45(1), 137–156.Google Scholar
Weinberg, N. (2010). No more lapdogs. Forbes, May 10, 185(8), 34–36.Google Scholar