Executive director remuneration and company performance: panel evidence from South Africa for the years following King III

Abstract

PurposeIn the wake of certain corporate scandals, many stakeholders are questioning if current high levels of executive remuneration, world-wide, are in fact related to company performance. After the implementation of King III in 2010, there has been an expectation that governance has improved in South African companies. If so, empirical testing should find executive remuneration to be positively related to forms of performance that reflect an increase in company value, like Tobin's Q, or return on assets, rather than measures such as total revenue.Design/methodology/approachAgency theory predicts that if executive remuneration is not carefully designed to maximise the value of the company, executive directors will tend to maximise revenue instead. To test this prediction, hand-collected panel data from Johannesburg Stock Exchange company reports are linked to company performance data to test this prediction, across the years 2010–2017, post King III.FindingsResults challenge certain important assumptions. Generalised method of moments tests find total revenue, rather than value added measures of performance such as Tobin's Q or return on assets, to predict executive director remuneration. This is notwithstanding the significance of Tobin's Q in testing based on ordinary least squares. Implications of these findings for the field are derived and discussed.Originality/valueUnique findings suggest that complacency about the relationships between executive director compensation and company performance is unwarranted. In light of a decline in the country's international rankings on the quality of its corporate governance, a renewed focus on the effectiveness of human resource compensation strategy may be necessary in this context.