Feb
11
2010

Q&A With Nell Minow – Financial Regulatory Reform

As financial regulatory reform remains in limbo in the U.S. Senate, shareholders and corporate watchdogs are becoming more vociferous and taking more action. One such organization taking the lead in this area is The Corporate Library and its founder Nell Minow.

Nell Minow, Editor and Founder of The Corporate Library

Nell Minow, Editor and Founder of The Corporate Library

When Nell isn’t being quoted in the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Corporate Board Member or Directorship on such issues as executive compensation or corporate governance, she is testifying before Congress, writing books and articles on these topics.

Recently, she has taken on the topic of financial regulatory reform [See this article on CNN’s Web site, “Wall Street bonuses are outrageous.”] Below are some excerpts from that CNN article:

“I believe in the market,” she wrote. “But executives and their boards of directors have hijacked the market to externalize costs and it is doing critical damage to capitalism. The key is always persuading providers of capital that managers will use the funds to create shareholder value and not to enrich themselves. This compensation mess calls that into question.

“…I also support banking of bonuses, which is preferable to clawbacks and amounts to a kind of escrow to ensure that any adjustments to the financial reports will result in adjustments to the bonus. No proof of bad intent should be necessary. If they are paid a bonus based on numbers that turn out to be wrong, it was never theirs in the first place.” Read the rest of this entry »

- Gary Larkin


Jan
25
2010

Best to Keep Eyes Peeled on SEC Agenda

As President Obama continues to propose more stringent bank regulations in light of the financial crisis – a hefty tax on 50 of the largest banks and a plan to allow regulators to limit the size and scope of those banks’ risk-taking activities (Read press release, Jan. 21) –  it’s hard to imagine those gaining in any traction based on what has happened in the Senate.

The election of Scott Brown to the late Sen. Ted Kennedy’s seat gives the Republicans the power to filibuster since the Democrats will have only 59 votes, one vote short of what they need. With that said, many on the Hill believe it will be difficult, if not impossible, to approve such legislation as the financial reform package. And when you consider the proponent of the companion Senate bill, Sen. Chris Dodd, is now a lame duck, prospects for passage wane.

The uncertainty of any Obama proposal that needs Congressional approval leaves the SEC as the major corporate regulatory rule-maker for at least this year. So that is why I think it is prudent for directors and corporate management to keep an eye on the body’s rule-making and regulatory decisions over the next six-to-nine months.

Here are the most important SEC proposed and final rules I think many of you should be concerned with in 2010: Read the rest of this entry »

- Gary Larkin


Jan
12
2010

FDIC Takes Page Out of G-20, Executive Compensation Task Force Playbooks

The FDIC’s decision Tuesday on a new insurance premium model for banks falls in line with what many are saying about executive compensation: It makes sense to tie executive compensation to risk alignment.

Specifically, the decision reflects some of the tenets of the G-20 and The Conference Board Task Force on Executive Compensation executive compensation principles.

The FDIC, led by Chairman Bair, voted 3-2 Tuesday during a contentious meeting  to require those banks that don’t align their compensation system with risk management to pay a higher insurance premium to the regulator. (Read Wall Street Journal blogger Damian Paletta’s coverage of that meeting.) “The FDIC is exploring whether the design of employee compensation programs should be considered as a factor in the risk-based pricing system,” according to a FDIC staff memo. The memo refers to Section 7 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, which requires the FDIC to establish a “risk-based” assessment system for depository institutions. (Read FDIC proposal, Incorporating Employee Compensation Criteria Into The Risk Assessment System.)

“The FDIC seeks to provide incentives for institutions to adopt compensation programs that align employees’ interests with those of the firm’s stakeholders, including the FDIC, and that reward employees for internalizing the focus on risk management,” the memo states.

As I said, not all five FDIC commissioners are on board with this measure, which is being pitched more as a way to replenish the bank insurance fund than a way to limit banker’s compensation. The vote itself calls for a 30-day comment period before the FDIC takes any action. Read the rest of this entry »

- Gary Larkin


Jan
08
2010

Top 10 Issues Facing Directors in 2010

As part of my required reading during the first full week of the New Year, I can’t help but notice how many Top 10 board issue lists there are. And when I think about how critical 2010 is to the future of U.S. businesses and the recovery from the current recession, I realize how important it is to pore over those lists and determine whose advice is the most appropriate.

That is exactly what I will attempt to do with this post. Consider this the best of the Top 10 corporate governance lists for 2010. While it is by no means exhaustive, it is pretty thorough. I focused on annual memos from Weil Gotshal (Ten Thoughts for Ordering Governance Relationships in 2010), Financial Executives International (CEO Marie N. Hollein’s Top Challenges for 2010) and KPMG’s Audit Committee Institute (Ten To-Do’s for Audit Committees in 2010).

Another good source of advice, which I already featured in a recent post on good corporate governance, is the annual client memo from Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz (Some Thoughts for Boards of Directors in 2010) by partners Steven A. Rosenblum and Marty Lipton and associate Karessa L. Cain. Among many issues facing boards in 2010, Wachtell, Lipton believes succession planning is key as shareholder pressure builds. The memo reads: “CEOs and senior management have been under tremendous pressure from shareholders, employees, customers and other constituencies to manage difficult market conditions, and not surprisingly, continuity of executive leadership throughout the economic crisis has increasingly been the exception rather than the norm.”

Here are the best of the Top 10 lists for 2010 (OK, the FEI list only listed nine items, but you get the idea) in order of importance:

10.) Global Convergence of U.S. GAAP and IFRS: While it is true the United States is the last of the industrialized countries to embrace IFRS, that doesn’t mean boards shouldn’t be concerned about mandatory adoption in the near future. The SEC, whose IFRS roadmap hit a roadblock in 2009 in the midst of the financial crisis, seems ready to move ahead with setting a definitive date for adoption possibly by 2014. (FEI 2010 Top Challenges for Financial Executives) Read the rest of this entry »

- Gary Larkin


Jan
07
2010

The Latest on Executive Compensation Research

There have been some developments on the executive compensation research front at The Conference Board. First, we have updated our Task Force on Executive Compensation Web site to include information about endorsing the Guiding Principles and secondly we have just this week released our Key Findings for the 2009 Top Executive Compensation Report.

The Top Executive Compensation Report found, among many things, that the median CEO of the largest companies made $11.3 million in total compensation, more than 10 times that of the median CEO of the smallest companies. It also found that on average bonuses and stock options were down significantly in all but two industries. (The average share of compensation received in incentive pay increased in Energy and Food and Tobacco.) The Conference Board Governance Center members can access the Key Findings for free by clicking here. Non-Center members can purchase a copy here. The full report is also available for purchase by clicking here.

As for the executive compensation task force Web site, in addition to pages on endorsing the Guiding Principles, we have included a list of endorsing organizations, a list of Task Force members, how to request a briefing on the Task Force report and endorsement process and media coverage. Of course, there is a link to the report itself.  The home page for the executive compensation task force is www.conference-board.org/knowledge/govern/executivetask.cfm. Read the rest of this entry »

- Gary Larkin


Dec
18
2009

SEC Wants More Concise Disclosure That is Material

The SEC has three messages for public boards and management next proxy season when it comes to disclosing policies and practices regarding executive compensation, risk and corporate governance: the Compensation Discussion and Analysis (CD&A) should be used to tell their story, all disclosures should take risks into account and should have a threshold for materiality.

In so many words, SEC Chair Mary Schapiro and a majority of commissioners want disclosures, especially the CD&A, to be less voluminous, easier to read and full of content the investors can truly use. The commission is trying to instill in public companies the idea that disclosures should be treated like a “memo” to investors and not just another compliance document.

That is what I believe directors and management should take away from the SEC’s 4-1 approval Wednesday of new rules for disclosures in proxy and information statements. The proxy disclosure enhancements, which go into effect Feb. 28, 2010, would require disclosures in the proxy and financial statements on:

•    The relationship of a company’s compensation policies and practices to risk management.
•    The background and qualifications of directors and nominees.
•    Legal actions involving a company’s executive officers, directors and nominees.
•    The consideration of diversity in the process by which candidates for director are considered for nomination.
•    Board leadership structure and the board’s role in risk oversight.
•    Stock and option awards to company executives and directors.
•    Potential conflicts of interests of compensation consultants as well as the fees paid to consultants and their affiliates.

Read the rest of this entry »

- Gary Larkin


Dec
15
2009

Executive Compensation Reform Taking Some Baby Steps

The Obama Administration is using good old-fashioned peer pressure and more targeted disclosure to change the way executive compensation policies are carried out by public companies in the U.S. (How else can you explain that only days after the House narrowly approved an historic financial reform package (NYT, Dec. 12)  that the SEC is meeting to approve new compensation disclosure rules?)

As part of his peer pressure campaign, the President met with 12 of the CEOs from the largest U.S. financial institutions Monday morning to drive home the message that after these banks received help from the taxpayers, it’s time for them to give back. (Thanks to the tip from Pete Davis of Pete Davis Capital Investment Ideas)

“Now, I should note that around the table all the financial industry executives said they supported financial regulatory reform,” the President said in an official statement following the meeting. “The problem is there’s a big gap between what I’m hearing here in the White House and the activities of lobbyists on behalf of these institutions or associations of which they’re a member up on Capitol Hill.  I urged them to close that gap, and they assured me that they would make every effort to do so.”

Does Corporate Governance Matter?

That begs the question, “Should U.S. boards even care about corporate governance reform, especially any change to executive compensation policies, in the near future?” The short answer, as I see it, is a resounding YES! Based on discussion at The Conference Board Governance Center Fall Investor Summit, which focused on The Conference Board Task Force on Executive Compensation report, some of the issues investors are concerned about for 2010 are compensation committee composition, executive long term incentive plans and how executive bonuses will be paid. Read the rest of this entry »

- Gary Larkin


Dec
07
2009

Worth Reading … Executive Compensation

With all the buzz on executive compensation coming out of The Conference Board Governance Center Fall Corporate/Investor Summit in New York City on Friday, I thought it would be a good idea to share some of the latest reading material on the subject.

In addition to the focus on The Conference Board Task Force on Executive Compensation report, some of the speakers and attendees cited other publications that might give you all some insight on compensation guidelines before the next proxy season starts. For instance, at the Investor Summit Anne Sheehan, director of corporate governance for the California State Teachers’ Retirement System (CalSTRS) made mention of her organization’s executive compensation model policy guidelines and Arthur Kohn, partner at Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP cited one of Lucian Bebchuk’s recent Harvard Law School working paper, The Wages of Failure: Executive Compensation at Bear Stearns and Lehman, 2000-2008. (See below.)

Executive compensation is an issue that will stay on the shareholder radar for some time to come as the Special Pay Master Kenneth Feinberg continues to oversee the pay of top executives at TARP companies and Congress considers several corporate governance measures over the next few months. With that said, here are some publications on the subject that are worth reading:

  • The Wages of Failure: Executive Compensation at Bear Stearns and Lehman 2000-2008, Lucian Bebchuk, Director of the Program on Corporate Governance, Harvard Law School; Alma Cohen, Harvard Law School professor; Holger Spamann, Executive Director of the Program on Corporate Governance, Harvard Law School. Nov. 22, 2009. http://www.law.harvard.edu/faculty/bebchuk/pdfs/BCS-Wages-of-Failure-Nov09.pdf. Key findings: This working paper finds that  according to the standard narrative, the meltdown of Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers largely wiped out the wealth of their top executives.
    Many in the media, academia and the financial sector have used  this account to dismiss the view that pay structures caused excessive risk-taking and that reforming such structures is important. That standard narrative, however, turns out to be incorrect.
    The authors discuss the implications of their analysis for understanding the possible role that pay arrangements have played in the run-up to the financial crisis and how they should be reformed going forward.

  • Executive Compensation and Earnings Management under Moral Hazard, Bo Sun, Economist, Board of Governors, Federal Reserve System. August 2009. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1477552. Key findings: The author creates a model that shows there is a positive association between earnings management and incentive compensation. She suggests that the model she developed may be useful for studying the issues of how incentives and pay vary across firms. It is natural to think that managerial manipulation of financial data incurs a larger personal cost in the firms with more effective internal corporate governance, she wrote.
  • Executive Compensation: Facts, Gian Luca Clementi, Professor, New York University; Thomas F. Cooley, Richard R. West Dean and Professor, New York University, and National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER). October 2009.  http://www.nber.org/tmp/18897-w15426.pdf. Key findings: This paper, which looks at the important features of U.S. executive compensation from 1993 to 2006 with an update for 2008, finds that the compensation distribution is highly skewed; each year, a sizeable fraction of chief executives lose money; the use of equity grants has increased; the income accruing to CEOs from the sale of stock has increased; measured as dollar changes in compensation, incentives have strengthened over time, measured as percentage changes in wealth, they have not changed in any appreciable way.
  • Schering-Plough Announces Results of Survey on Compensation, Susan Ellen Wolf, former corporate secretary, vice president of corporate governance and general counsel, Schering-Plough. Oct. 30, 2009.  http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9MTkwOTh8Q2hpbGRJRD0tMXxUeXBlPTM=&t=1. Key findings: This press release from Schering-Plough, which is now part of pharmaceutical giant Merck & Co., gives the results of a year-long survey of Schering-Plough shareholders. The eight-question survey was the first time the board reached out directly to shareholders on the issue of executive compensation. With the services of Richard Koppes, former general counsel of California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS), the compensation and nominating and corporate governance committees were able to gauge the sentiments of about holders of about 0.50 percent of outstanding shares. For the most part, those shareholders responded favorably to the board on such issues as retention, performance-based pay and proxy statement transparency.
  • Goldman Sachs Outlines Compensation Methods to Shareholders, Bloomberg News, Dec. 3, 2009. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aj5CUuYxfE2Q. Key findings: A news article that details how Goldman Sachs Chair and CEO Lloyd Blankfein has been meeting with shareholders since October to explain the investment bank’s executive compensation policies in light of the company paying out large bonuses a year after the financial crisis in which the company took federal bailout money. The article cites a 14-page memo from Blankfein in which he details the firm’s compensation practices, such as a prohibition on multi-year guaranteed pay contracts and a higher percentage of stock paid to the employees who earn the most.

- Gary Larkin


Dec
02
2009

Q&A With Charles Elson: Top Corporate Governance Issues for 2010

Heading into the first full post-financial crisis proxy season that will most likely include a bevy of new corporate governance regulations,

Charles Elson, Chair of Weinberg Center for Corporate Governance, University of Delaware

Charles Elson, Chair of Weinberg Center for Corporate Governance, University of Delaware

I decided to chat with Charles Elson, the Edgar S. Woolard, Jr., chair of the John L. Weinberg Center for Corporate Governance at the University of Delaware. Our topic: the Top 5 corporate governance issues for 2010.

Elson, who is also a director on various boards, of counsel with Holland & Knight and a member of the Technical Advisory Group of The Conference Board Task Force on Executive Compensation, believes that before all is said and done politicians and regulators will dictate how corporate governance is carried out in the next year.

“Regulations and laws will affect all of the top corporate governance issues in 2010 substantially,” Elson said. “God knows it is a mess. This is one of the most volatile, mind-numbing points  in corporate governance that I have ever seen.”

For the most recent update on fiduciaries’ responsibilities with respect to these issues, as usual I direct you to The Conference Board Corporate Governance Handbook: Legal Standards and Board Practices (Third Edition). Below is his list of the Top 5 corporate governance issues for 2010 as well as some additional reference points on each issue: Read the rest of this entry »

- Gary Larkin


Nov
13
2009

Executive Compensation Task Force Job Not Done Yet

When The Conference Board Task Force on Executive Compensation first met back in March, Co-Chair Robert Denham said task force members agreed there are two primary questions boards need to answer when considering executive pay: What are they paying for? How much are they paying?

Five months after the task force’s first meeting, those two questions led to a 40-page report on executive compensation that includes a list of five guiding principles. By no means does the report complete the group’s mission, according to a RiskMetrics Webcast Thursday where Denham, Co-Chair Raj Gupta and task force member Lynn Paine announced the group’s next steps. (For a copy of slides from the Webcast, e-mail governanceexchange@riskmetrics.com.)

The task force, which includes 13 directors, is actively seeking endorsements from major U.S. public companies. In a Webcast moderated by Stephen Deane, a team leader ofprinciples2 RiskMetrics’ online Governance Exchange, Denham, Gupta and Paine made a point of saying the group’s work is not done.

“The principles are getting a lot of traction now but more needs to be done as companies decide if their compensation systems [performance vs. compensation] are already aligned,” Denham said. He pointed out how important it is for boards to realize that “what” they are paying for in terms of performance is just as important as “how much” they are paying executives.

The task force also plans on contributing to the public dialogue on executive compensation by taking part in similar events as the RiskMetrics Governance Exchange Webcast and being interviewed by business news outlets. There are also plans for a director education program.

Paine, who served on The Conference Board’s Commission on Public Trust and Private Enterprise in 2003, sees some similarities in the calls to action in this year’s executive compensation task force. But the difference with the task force is its involvement in garnering support.

“This is different than the 2003 Commission on Public Trust and Private Enterprise report because there is a movement to get a broad level of support and adoption of the principles,” Paine said. “This is not a static effort; it is ongoing. It is at the very beginning of an ongoing effort.”

She recalled how executive compensation was a big issue following the accounting scandals at Enron and WorldCom in the early 2000s. “At the time, we all thought that executive pay was a huge deal. But if you look at it now, that [Enron and WorldCom] was child’s play.”

So, why has executive pay continued to be a problem in the United States despite past reforms at the start of this decade? It’s really a matter of “follow the leader,” as is in the leaders in executive pay, Paine said. “The reason a lot of these controversial pay practices got embedded at companies is because of the negotiations of executive contracts over the years,” she said. “I think there are a lot of reasons these practices exist, but that is a main one.”

Of the five guiding principles, Paine said Principle Three on avoiding controversial pay practices was the most difficult for the group to reach a consensus. The sticking point was that many of the members didn’t think it made sense to make a blanket condemnation of such practices (i.e. golden parachutes, severance agreements, tax gross-ups). “We talked about cases where some of these practices made sense,” she said.

So in the end, the task force decided to take a “comply or explain” approach with the adoption of such controversial pay practices.

For any companies interested in learning more about the task force principles, click on this link. To find out more about endorsing the principles, send an e-mail to me at gary.larkin@conference-board.org.

- Gary Larkin