Pay Slice Research Articles

How do powerful CEOs view corporate social responsibility (CSR)? An empirical note

We explore how powerful CEOs view investments in corporate social responsibility (CSR). The agency view suggests that CEOs invest in CSR to enhance their own private benefits. On the contrary, the conflict resolution view argues that CSR investments are made to resolve the conflicts among various stakeholders. Using Bebchuk et al. (2011) CEO Pay Slice (CPS) to measure CEO power, we show that the association between CEO power and CSR is non-monotonic. When the CEO is relatively less powerful, an increase in CEO power leads to more CSR engagement. However, as the CEO becomes substantially more powerful, he is more entrenched and no longer invests more in CSR. In fact, when CEO power goes beyond a certain threshold, more powerful CEOs significantly reduce CSR investments.

Say on Pay Laws, Executive Compensation, CEO Pay Slice, and Firm Value around the World

Say on Pay Laws, Executive Compensation, CEO Pay Slice, and Firm Value around the World

How Do Powerful CEOs View Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)? An Empirical Note

We explore how powerful CEOs view investments in corporate social responsibility (CSR). The agency view suggests that CEOs invest in CSR to enhance their own private benefits. On the contrary, the conflict resolution view argues that CSR investments are made to resolve the conflicts among various stakeholders. Using Bebchuk, Cremers, and Peyer’s (2011) CEO Pay Slice (CPS) to measure CEO power, we show that the association between CEO power and CSR is non-monotonic. When the CEO is relatively less powerful, an increase in CEO power leads to more CSR engagement. However, as the CEO becomes substantially more powerful, he is more entrenched and no longer invests more in CSR. In fact, when CEO power goes beyond a certain threshold, more powerful CEOs significantly reduce CSR investments.

Say on Pay Laws, Executive Compensation, CEO Pay Slice, and Firm Value Around the World

Say on Pay Laws, Executive Compensation, CEO Pay Slice, and Firm Value Around the World

The CEO pay slice

We investigate the relation between the CEO Pay Slice (CPS)—the fraction of the aggregate compensation of the top-five executive team captured by the Chief Executive Officer—and the value, performance, and behavior of public firms. The CPS could reflect the relative importance of the CEO as well as the extent to which the CEO is able to extracts rents. We find that, controlling for all standard controls, CPS is negatively associated with firm value as measured by industry-adjusted Tobin's q. CPS also has a rich set of relations with firms' behavior and performance. In particular, CPS is correlated with lower (industry-adjusted) accounting profitability, lower stock returns accompanying acquisitions announced by the firm and higher likelihood of a negative stock return accompanying such announcements, higher odds of the CEO receiving a lucky option grant at the lowest price of the month, lower performance sensitivity of CEO turnover, and lower stock market returns accompanying the filing of proxy statements for periods when CPS increases. Taken together, our results are consistent with the hypothesis that higher CPS is associated with agency problems and indicate that CPS can provide a useful tool for studying the performance and behavior of firms.

CEO Centrality

We investigate the relation between the CEO Pay Slice (CPS)—the fraction of the aggregate compensation of the top-five executive team captured by the Chief Executive Officer—and the value, performance, and behavior of public firms. The CPS could reflect the relative importance of the CEO as well as the extent to which the CEO is able to extracts rents. We find that, controlling for all standard controls, CPS is negatively associated with firm value as measured by industry-adjusted Tobin’s q. CPS also has a rich set of relations with firms’ behavior and performance. In particular, CPS is correlated with lower (industry-adjusted) accounting profitability, lower stock returns accompanying acquisitions announced by the firm and higher likelihood of a negative stock return accompanying such announcements, higher odds of the CEO receiving a lucky option grant at the lowest price of the month, lower performance sensitivity of CEO turnover, and lower stock market returns accompanying the filing of proxy statements for periods when CPS increases. Taken together, our results are consistent with the hypothesis that higher CPS is associated with agency problems and indicate that CPS can provide a useful tool for studying the performance and behavior of firms.