BIG SHOTS AND BIG BUCKS

Why do big shots make big bucks? The standard answer is that the prospect of a bonus encourages corporate executives to maximize stockholder return. But some behavioral economists argue that incentive compensation may be counterproductive. See Dan Ariely, What’s the Value of a Big Bonus?, New York Times, November 20, 2008, at A33:1. In a series of experiments, Ariely and his team discovered that if they offered a big reward for performing a task that required even rudimentary cognitive skill, performance was worse than when they offered a modest reward. On the other hand, a big reward induced better performance if the task required effort only and no skill. They found a similar effect when the tasks were performed in public rather than in private.

 

The suggestion is that generous incentive compensation for CEOs and other high ranking officers of public corporations may be counterproductive. If so, a big bonus is a waste of money and stockholder wealth. Moreover, Ariely suggests that the effect may be due to stress. So maybe it is really for their own good that we should limit incentive pay for corporate executives.

 

The problem with the argument – and the implicit assumption behind the experiment – is that incentives are intended to affect performance. There is another more likely possibility. It may be that incentives are really about sharing gain. Maybe incentives are about attracting the best talent possible to do whatever they do however they do it.

 

Is there any reason to think that Tiger Woods plays better in a major tournament than he would play for lesser stakes? Possibly. Tiger may play better in a major because he thrives on the stress and because the stress makes others choke. But the more likely reason is that Tiger plays only in a handful of tournaments because he knows how good he is.

 

Similarly, in the business world, incentives may be more about attracting talent than about encouraging better performance. Indeed, it may be that the best CEOs thrive on stress. So maybe incentive compensation is about attracting those who do better under stress and maybe even increasing the stress that goes with job.

 

Presumably, a talented businessperson with choices will sign with the company that is most likely to succeed. And sometimes that success may be assured by attracting the talent that already knows what will work – like the engineer who arrives on the scene, pushes one button, and sends a big bill for his services. From the company viewpoint, it may be more efficient to buy talent than to train it. From the employee viewpoint, a job is like an investment. You seek the highest return at the lowest risk. Nothing wrong with that. So a better experiment would be to see if it makes any difference if individuals can choose the task or the incentive or both.

 

A cynic might reply that incentive pay should be about inducing better performance and not about bribing folks just to do their job. An economist would call it rent. But so does a holder of a patent or copyright command rent for existing goods. Why should talent or a business strategy be seen as different from other forms of intellectual property?

 

Many critics cite greed and unregulated executive compensation as causing or contributing to the current financial mess. At the very least, they advocate a crackdown on executive compensation at the troubled banks and other financial institutions that get government assistance. There is little doubt that those who originated and securitized subprime mortgages did so to make money. Nor is there any doubt that many did enjoy handsome compensation in the process. But it is not at all clear that cracking down on compensation makes sense.

 

The problem at the moment appears to be that the banks refuse to lend even to many good customers with good credit. One way to thaw out the credit markets is to reward bankers who make good loans. But if we ban pay for performance because of the worry that it will induce risky business, there is little reason for anyone to make good loans. There is no reason to take a chance when there is no upside. Better to buy risk-free government securities – even if they yield next to nothing – rather than risk one's job on making a bad loan.

 

Moreover, limits on pay are likely to drive much of the banking and finance business into the private realm. No one would suggest that a trader who trades for his own account enjoys excessive pay when he makes a killing. Pay is one thing. Profits are another. Or maybe not. The point is that compensation is an issue only if the employer is a publicly traded company. If we limit pay, the talent is likely to gravitate to nonpublic companies -- private equity and hedge funds. That is not necessarily a bad result. It would effectively insulate investors in the future from the risks that have come home to roost in the current crisis. But it would also deny the public access to the returns that go with that risk. Do we really want to go back to the days when we had a soviet-style choice between a fixed return on passbook savings or a Series E savings bond?

 

Still, one might argue that it is wrong that Wall Street executives should be able to keep the pay they took over the past few years. The argument seems to be that past performance was somehow a fraud or that those in charge knew what was coming or that taking generous pay implicitly guaranteed future performance (despite explicit warnings to the contrary on every pack of stocks sold by mutual funds). The fallacy in this argument is that the market always looks forward. Market prices reflect a guess about the future. So when stock prices increase, and CEOs cash in their options, it is because the market approves. To be sure, a stock may rise because of fraud as with Enron. But the current crisis is not about one or even a few companies. It is about the whole of the market. No one would seriously argue that the entire financial services industry was engaged in a coordinated fraud. But it is easy to take pot shots at individual CEOs. So what we have is an odd collective action problem in which it is easy to cast blame on individuals who cannot defend themselves. No one would dare argue that everyone was doing it, even though in this case that appears to be a perfectly good excuse.

 

Moreover, suppose that we could somehow claw back past pay for no performance. What if -- as Deep Throat suggested -- we follow the money? Where is it now? Maybe it is sitting as cash in a bank account somewhere. It is more likely that the money was invested in stocks, or bonds, or real estate, and has shrunk with all such investments. There is no place to hide in a financial meltdown.

 

Finally, many critics have focused their ire on severance pay which they see as pay without performance or indeed reward for failure. Never mind that A Rod gets paid to play win or lose. (And Marbury gets paid no matter what.)

 

There is another side to the severance story. Golden parachutes were invented in the 1980s to counter the tendency of CEOs to resist takeovers even though stockholders stood to gain from such deals. Equity compensation was an obvious extension of the idea. Equity compensation is the best way to induce the CEO to maximize stockholder wealth -- whether by growing or shrinking the company. In the old days, CEOs got paid for reporting ever higher earnings, which encouraged growth – whether sensible or not – and conglomerate corporations. Since the early 1990s, most CEO pay has been in the form of stock options and restricted stock. And conglomerates have gone the way of the wooly mammoth.

 

Equity compensation also means that the CEO has a significant ownership stake in the business. So generous severance pay should not be seen as a reward so much as a buyout. A CEO who is forced to depart his business, loses the chance to finish what he started and to share in future gains. In any other setting it would seem quite natural for a part owner to be paid in exchange for his share of the business. This is not to say that the system cannot be abused. It is only to say that one must see severance for what it is. It is at least as much buyout as payout. 

 

The real question is where did we get the idea that a CEO is a glorified employee – or indeed a volunteer -- and that executive pay is really a big tip that the stockholders might or might not choose to pay? Is there some reason that working for a piece of the action is inconsistent with the public corporation as an institution? There is also a grand tradition of sweat equity. I suspect that attitudes toward executive pay are an outgrowth of the notion that a corporation is owned by the stockholders. But it is the height of irony that executive pay has become the big gripe of stockholder activists when for years the complaint was the separation of ownership from control. Stockholder ownership is a useful metaphor. But we should not let metaphors get in the way of good sense.

Comments

[Brian S.]

All of your points and counterpoints are well taken.

The problem comes when one is faced with the ethical dilemma of who is to blame.

Is it the CEO's who complain of having to take a bonus cut because their company had to accept TARP money to stay afloat?

Or is it the individual families who believed they too could make some scratch at the big casino of Wall Street, after taking the proverbial random walk down the street and throwing darts at a board throughout all of the 1990's.

After decades of talk concerning open society for expanding markets, it turns out nobody told us all our growth was an illusion and that someday it would all have to be given back to Wall Street.

And by the way, soon China and India will be the boon markets and not America anymore. It's just as simple as the banks and institutions don't want to tell you that a generational theft has taken place.

As far as I can see the U.S.'s strategy is to buy more of the same illusions (i.e. dark pools (off screen markets, sort of like a macro version of an off balance sheet item) and even MORE exotic derivatives like Everest Derivatives).

The U.S.'s strategy reminds me of an old Hollywood movie "the Bad and the Beautiful" where Kirk Douglas, a young hotshot Film Producer, down on his luck, borrows money from a friend. And to pay it back he says "well if you want me to pay you back, give me a job and I'll do it!" Is the U.S. really leaving its fate in the hands of the People's Republic in this way?

Good Morning America? Try Permanent Goodnight!

_B.

[Nike Air Max]

I don't know how to receive my responce. Waiting for your reply, tks!

http://www.nikeairmaxhop.com/

[Air Yeezy Shoes]

i come here first time. You can share some of your article, I'm like you write something, really very good! I will continue to focus on.

[Griffey Shoes]

Your composition is very good, hope to have the opportunity to read more of your article.

[adidas soccer shoes]

But the more likely reason is that Tiger plays only in a handful of tournaments because he knows how good he is.

[Wholesale Jerseys]

dr dre headphone, sitting in my ortho, motionless, looking at me, Earphones can not help but shiver, I withdraw my eyes rooted in turn fired on the blackboard Li Ling: What are you doing it? Why not look at my lectures, Oh ... ... "you think Shane, Oh it's sweet to see you smile" "Oh ... ... I think ah, the great Engels once said - the most beautiful flowers on earth is thinking with the spirit, so I "and before monster dr dre finished, Li Ling interrupted me," Are you kidding it Monster Beats Studio,
Monster Beats thinking about? small ... excellent? "She deliberately put small that sound dirty trick long pull, I did not manage her, and then walked in dre dre Headphones classroom, my God, I kept thinking, suddenly thought of a movie Monster Cable: Riding a bike shuttle to those catkins fly summer afternoon, the wind still blowing from the addition to the unique soil mixed Huainan steel in the air. Sometimes I'm thinking: damn the city's fast pace of development, are made of reinforced and more flavor, and not find someone to clean up a few buildings. But this Monster Headphones not my precious youth is now a great time for a little girl in the tube, ah, occasional look to complain about current affairs awkward downtown stops. dre dre beats to the shuttle, the wind Old Woman all my lovely hair sent to the back, even down to the temples of the decorate the cheek of a few Headphones Review

[Christian Louboutin Outlet]

Sorry,i don't know how to receive my response, why?

http://www.christianlouboutindiscounts.com/

[Polo Ralph Lauren]

Success covers a multitude of blunders, Power invariably means both responsibility and danger.
http://www.polooutletshop.com/

[Nfl Wholesale Jerseys]

Cheap Dre Beats professional headsets regardless of high prices low, the details are quite good expression, the overall sound quality with full-bodied tight-knit sense of hearing, with different sources are able to fully reflect the characteristics of the front of the sound, so many models are not only professional music producer of all ages, but also has been subjected to sound / Beats By Dr Dre. Lady Gaga Monster Beats, one of the top musicians Quincy Jones is a big fan of Justin Bieber Beats decades, he AKG's assessment is: "Music is much more than the words convey something, when with passion, soul to create music time to get beyond their own achievements, while allowing yourself deeply moved in my entire musical career, I think only Cheap Beats by dre can reliably communicate the highest standards of sound quality Cheap Monster Ferrari Headphones standard is the music when I was doing on their own Dr Dre Headphones.

[Nfl Wholesale Jerseys]

Cheap Dre Beats professional headsets regardless of high prices low, the details are quite good expression, the overall sound quality with full-bodied tight-knit sense of hearing, with different sources are able to fully reflect the characteristics of the front of the sound, so many models are not only professional music producer of all ages, but also has been subjected to sound / Beats By Dr Dre. Lady Gaga Monster Beats, one of the top musicians Quincy Jones is a big fan of Justin Bieber Beats decades, he AKG's assessment is: Music is much more than the words convey something, when with passion, soul to create music time to get beyond their own achievements, while allowing yourself deeply moved in my entire musical career, I think only Cheap Beats by dre can reliably communicate the highest standards of sound quality Cheap Monster Ferrari Headphones standard is the music when I was doing on their own Dr Dre Headphones.

[Cheap Dre Beats]

Cheap Dre Beats density is high, the sound received soon, tight and powerful. Although GR8 very neutral, good quality sound at the end, but do not know why the results are not as good. Playing time is more difficult to feel the players and singers of the forms and shapes. Only occasionally can be seen dancing guitar hand, and pulling the string violin. The results for the entire screen as weak, biased in favor of the screenshot of the results as one-sided type. This may sound field with the performance of a relationship. Beats By Dr Dre background clean, very black. Music when the sound came out very strong, very good resolution. More details. GR8 other Grado with the same speed, fast Dr Dre Headphones!

[UGGs On Sale]

The discussion an on going discussion and analysis of the moral the fact that this is so ought to be an embarrassment to white liberals who are die. Thanks for sharing informative post.

[Evering2010]

Thak you for sharing them with us , I think it's worth reading

[Nike Free Australia]

Such a good writing, or by I saw for the first time. I'm quite happy, you are a good writer!!!

[Christian Louboutin]

Sorry,i don't know how to receive my response, why?

Christian Louboutin/Shoes/Sale/Cheap/Outlet/UK/Shop/Store/2011/Online/Discount/

http://www.christianlouboutinshoes-store.com/

[Nike Free Running]

mean I just read through the entire article of yours and it was quite good but since I'm more of a visual learner,I found that to be more helpful.

[cartier glasses]

Your pages of the site design is very good, the layout and the pictures are very beautiful, I like it very much.