Abstract
We study the implications of a recent governance practice promoted by proxy advisors, namely an anti-pledging policy, which limits managers' ability to unwind their equity-based compensation. Using a sample of S&P 1500 firms, we find that CEOs' pay-for-performance sensitivity (i.e., delta) and risk-taking incentives (i.e., vega) as well as firms' investment growth and investment-Q sensitivity decrease after the adoption of an anti-pledging policy. Meanwhile, adoption mitigates opposition from proxy advisors. Taken together, our findings suggest that limiting compensation flexibility to cater to proxy advisors may produce unfavorable outcomes for firms, which calls into question a one-size-fits-all approach to governance policies.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
