Accounting Performance Goals in CEO Compensation Contracts and Corporate Risk Taking

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clara Xiaoling Chen ◽  
Minjeong (MJ) Kim ◽  
Laura Yue Li ◽  
Wei Zhu

This study provides the first large-sample archival evidence on the impact of three commonly used accounting performance goals (thresholds, targets, and maximums) in CEO compensation contracts on corporate risk taking. Using proxy statement disclosure on performance goals for CEOs of U.S. public companies, we find that lower thresholds and higher maximums are associated with greater corporate risk taking, and these results are more pronounced when CEOs have greater incentives to achieve accounting performance goals or have lower innate risk aversion. In addition, we find that target difficulty is not significantly associated with corporate risk taking after controlling for thresholds and maximums. Finally, we find that CEO compensation contracts are more likely to have lower thresholds and higher maximums when risk taking is more value-enhancing or when R&D investment is more profitable, consistent with boards setting performance goals to induce an appropriate amount of corporate risk taking. Our study contributes to the accounting literature on target setting and corporate risk taking by identifying accounting performance goals as a tool in executive compensation contract design to influence risk taking. This paper was accepted by Suraj Srinivasan, accounting.

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 2-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zahid Irhsad Younas ◽  
Ameena Zafar

PurposeThis study aims to analyze the impact of corporate risk taking on the sustainability of firms in USA and Germany. As risk taking is an expensive phenomenon, the firm may shift the resources from stakeholder well-being to profit maximization of shareholders. Ultimately, risk taking results in the reduction of firm’s sustainability.Design/methodology/approachTo capture the impact of corporate risk taking, the corporate-governance variables, i.e. “independent board structure” and “board size,” were used as instrumental variables to control excessive corporate risk taking and restrict it at a healthy level. A sample of 3,387 unbalanced panel observations from USA and Germany, for the period 2004-2015, were assessed.FindingsThe results confirm that corporate risk taking has a negative and significant impact on the sustainability of firms.Research limitations/implicationsGovernment and policymakers in USA and Germany may introduce regulations to curb excessive corporate risk taking for sustainable corporations and sustainable society. This research suggests that corporate risk taking is not in the best interest of stakeholders.Originality/valuePrevious literature only finds the impact of sustainability on corporate risk taking and there is not a single study that examines the impact of corporate risk taking on the sustainability of a firm. Thus, this study contributes to existing literature on corporate risk taking and sustainability. The study further contributes by using the instrumental variable two stage least square.


2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 828-845
Author(s):  
Candra Chahyadi ◽  
Trang Doan ◽  
Junnatun Naym

This paper examines how the type of CEOs’ industry experience (whether a CEO has cross-industry or specific-industry experience) on firm performance, firm risk-taking behavior, and their own compensation. We find that CEOs with cross-industry experience tend to relatively lower the firm performance as well as invest less on R&D. On the other hand, CEOs with specific-industry experience lead firm to higher performance and invest more on R&D expenditures until it reaches a certain threshold, especially among high-growth firms. Total compensation paid to the CEO does not seem to be affected by the type of CEO industry experience. This paper contributes to the literature that examines the impact of CEO characteristics on firm outcomes and CEO compensation. One important business application of our paper is that to optimize firm performance, firms should hire CEOs with the length of specific-industry experience not beyond the threshold levels.


2017 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 74-98 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramachandran Natarajan ◽  
Kenneth Zheng

Section 304 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (hereafter, SOX), commonly known as the clawback provision, entitles the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to sue the CEO and CFO in an attempt to recover their incentive compensation based on misstated financial reports. Although a stream of literature investigates the effects of voluntary firm-initiated clawback provisions, this study explores the effects of the mandatory SOX clawback provision on the likelihood of financial misstatements and CEO compensation. We find a significant decrease in the association between CEO in-the-money option value and the likelihood of a financial misstatement surrounding SOX, suggesting the SOX clawback provision has been effective in reducing financial misstatements arising from CEO in-the-money stock options. To examine the effects of the SOX clawback provision on CEO compensation, we identify a set of misstatement firms with a high restatement likelihood where the CEOs are most likely concerned with the impact of the SOX clawback provision on their compensation. We find that compared with control firms, these misstatement firms with a high restatement likelihood where the CEO is the chair of the board exhibit an increase in CEO salaries between the pre- and post-SOX periods, suggesting that in the post-SOX period, powerful CEOs are able to receive higher salaries which are not subject to the SOX clawback provision.


2013 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 210-225
Author(s):  
Mohamed Sherif ◽  
Mahmoud Elsayed

Using a two-way panel regression analysis with fixed and random effects and the generalized method of moment(GMM), we investigate the impact of both firm-specific and external factors on the risk taking of Egyptian insurance companies. We use hand-collected data of Egyptian insurance companies over the period from 2006 to 2011 to estimate the relationship between total and systematic risks as risk measures and the independent variables. Following Eling and Mark (2011) the extent of risk taking is quantified through variations in stock prices and these are explained by firm-specific and external factors. We find that differences in company size, interest rate level and economic development affect variations in stock prices. The analysis also highlights differences between the life and non-life insurers, with the non-life insurers exhibiting a higher level of risk (market and premium) and board independence. The pattern of results are qualitatively the same for non-life insurers but different for life insurers when we use GMM method.


2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
Junaid Haider ◽  
Hong-Xing Fang

Purpose This paper aims to investigate whether a powerful chief executive officer (CEO) impacts corporate risk taking in the distinctive institutional and market setting of China? Second, in case such relationship exists, the paper further aims to investigate whether the presence of large shareholders affects it, and finally, whether this effect of large shareholders varies in state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and non-state-owned enterprises (NSOEs). Design/methodology/approach The authors have used a sample of 1,502 Chinese firms listed on Shanghai and Shenzhen stock exchanges. Sample period is 2008-2013. Besides conventional fixed-effect regression, dynamic panel data estimation (generalized method of moments) is applied to address the potential endogeneity. Findings The results show that CEO power is negatively related with corporate risk taking in two risk proxies, i.e. total risk and idiosyncratic risk. Second, the presence of large shareholders significantly affects this relationship, but does not change the primary negative relationship between CEO power and corporate risk taking. Finally, the results show that the relationship between CEO power and corporate risk taking is different in SOEs and NSOEs. The findings of this paper contend the organizational and behavioral theory viewpoint that individual decisions are more extreme. Practical implications This study provides useful implication for policymakers and suggests that while evaluating CEO’s performance, institutional and market settings should be considered. Originality/value This study provides new insights on the impact of CEO power on corporate risk taking under the two distinctive features in a developing country, i.e. presence of large shareholders and state-owned enterprises.


Economies ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 46
Author(s):  
Tran Thai Ha Nguyen ◽  
Massoud Moslehpour ◽  
Thi Thuy Van Vo ◽  
Wing-Keung Wong

Corporate risk-taking behavior and investment is a crucial factor in order to seek higher profits and a better trading strategy. Competitive advantage and innovation, while maintaining profitability and state ownership, are considered as crucial resources. Furthermore, it is essential to connect the short-term and long-term business and investment objectives plus stakeholder’s expectations to corporate sustainability and development. This connection is especially important in the context of transforming economies and getting better trading strategies. This study estimates the relationship between state ownership, profitability, corporate risk-taking behavior, and investment in Vietnam by using Generalized Method of Moments (GMM) methods. Using the data of 501 listed non-financial corporates during the period 2007–2015 from Ho Chi Minh City and Hanoi Stock Exchanges, we find that profitability is determined as a factor to reduce corporate risk-taking acceptance caused by the chances of entrenchment. Meanwhile, the impact of state ownership on the risk appetite of corporate has a non-linear effect. In particular, state ownership reduces corporate risk-taking behavior and investment but yet increases the risk-taking behavior and investment when the state ownership rate exceeds a threshold. One the one hand, this implies that the low level of state ownership not only prevents risk-taking behavior and investment but also results in more severe agency problems, causing unsustainability due to the imbalance of interests among various stakeholders. On the other hand, a dominant role of state ownership concentration causes a boost in corporate risk-taking decision-making in investment and trading strategy, leveraging the connection of significant external resources to deal with uncertain problems. The study contributes to existing theories of corporate governance in the context of a socialist-oriented market.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document