The Association Between U.S. Technology Company's Performance and Non-employee Director's Compensation Policy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54691/bcpbm.v28i.2231Keywords:
Quantitative research; Pattern; Net profit; Stock award; Cash retainer.Abstract
Directors’ compensation policies are one of the strategies that the firm's management team and shareholders have of great concern over. Some research shows that policies have a specific association with the individual company’s performance. However, this still lacks a unified explanation. Therefore, the research theme of this paper is the relationship between non-employee directors’ compensation policies and the firm’s performance. This study examined the data public by SEC and PayScale and focused on four U.S technology companies: Meta (Facebook), Twitter, Splunk, and Akamai. The study compares the impact of different compensation policies on these four companies operating capacity, revenue capacity, and stock price. After researched the performance of these four technology companies, the result showed that compensation policy for non-employee directors may have a particular impact on a firm's revenue and its stock price, but the study also showed the impact is not significant because the correlation is a failure in some years for these four companies.
Downloads
References
Almadi, M., & Lazic, P. (2016). CEO incentive compensation and earnings management: The implications of institutions and governance systems. Management Decision, 54(10), 2447-2461. doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-05-2016-0292 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-05-2016-0292
Pfeiffer, & Shields, T. W. (2015). Performance-based compensation and firm value - experimental evidence. Accounting Horizons, 29(4), 777–777. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2308/acch-51143
U.S. SEC (U.S. Securitirs and Exchange Commission). 1934. Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14 (a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Will Kenton. SEC Form DEF 14A. February 22, 2021.Retrieved on July 7, 2022. Retrieved from https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/sec-form-def-14a.asp.
Clinch, G. (1991). Employee Compensation and Firms’ Research and Development Activity. Journal of Accounting Research, 29(1), 59–78. https://doi.org/10.2307/2491028 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2491028
Jenter D, Matveyev E, Roth L. Good and Bad CEOs. pp:2-4, 2016.
Aabo, T., Hvistendahl, N.T. and Kring, J. (2021), "Corporate risk: CEO overconfidence and incentive compensation", Managerial Finance, Vol. 47 No. 2, pp. 244-265. https://doi.org/10.1108/ MF-05-2020-0278 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/MF-05-2020-0278
Basuroy, S., C. Gleason, K. and H. Kannan, Y. (2014), "CEO compensation, customer satisfaction, and firm value", Review of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 326-352. https://doi.org/10.1108/RAF-11-2012-0120 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/RAF-11-2012-0120
Yin, C., Li, D. & Salmador, M.P. Institutional change of compensation policy and its impact on CEO turnover and firm performance. Rev Manag Sci (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-021- 00507-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-021-00507-3
Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983). Separation of Ownership and Control. The Journal of Law & Economics, 26(2), 301–325. http://www.jstor.org/stable/725104 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/467037






