Does Ex Ante Severance Pay Affect the Timeliness of Bad News Disclosure? The Role of Managerial Exit Costs

Extant literature documents a positive association between ex ante severance pay and timeliness of bad news disclosure, suggesting that the provision of severance pay is consistent with efficient contracting. Relying on an empirically unexplored theory, we investigate whether and how managerial exit costs (i.e., financial and nonfinancial losses triggered by employment termination) affect the effectiveness of severance pay in curbing bad news withholding. We find that managerial exit costs attenuate the positive association between severance pay and timely disclosure of bad news. Moreover, we document that severance pay does not prompt managers to reveal bad news when their exit costs are sufficiently high (i.e., in the top quartile). This result suggests that exit costs erode the efficacy of ex ante severance pay in curtailing bad news withholding. Overall, our findings support the notion that a “one-size-fits-all” approach to structuring severance agreements undermines the potential of severance pay to benefit investors.

CEO Gender-Based Termination Concerns: Evidence From Initial Severance Agreements

We theorize that female candidates considering CEO roles will perceive greater termination vulnerability in such roles than their male counterparts. We further theorize that indicators of recent organizational distress will exacerbate female CEO candidates’ perceptions of termination vulnerability, while the presence of female leaders will mitigate these concerns. To test our arguments, we examine the initial values of newly appointed female and male CEOs’ severance agreements from 2007 to 2014. Results support our arguments and begin to shed light on the factors that influence female executives’ concerns about CEO roles and ultimately firms’ ability to appoint female CEOs.

Executive Severance Agreements: Making Sense of an Emerging, Yet Fragmented, Research Field

Scholars have devoted significant attention to understanding the determinants and consequences of executive compensation. Yet, one form of compensation, executive severance agreements, has flown under the radar. Severance agreements specify the expected payments and benefits promised executives, upon voluntary or involuntary termination. Although these agreements are popular among executives, critics continually question their worth. Yet severance agreements potentially offer three important (but less readily recognized) strategic benefits. First, severance agreements are viewed as a means of mitigating the potential risks associated with job changes; thus, they can serve as a recruitment tool to attract top executive talent. Second, because severance agreements guarantee executives previously specified compensation in the event of termination, they can help limit the downside risk naturally risk-averse executives face, facilitating executive-shareholder interest alignment. Third, severance agreements can aid in firm exit, as executives and directors are likely to be more open to termination, in the presence of adequate protection against the downside. Severance agreements can contain provisions for ten possible termination events. Three events refer to change in control (CIC), which occurs under a change in ownership. These are (1) CIC without termination, (2) CIC with termination without cause, and (3) CIC with termination for cause. Cause is generally defined by events such as felony, fraud, embezzlement, neglect of duties, or violation of noncompete provisions. Additional events include (4) voluntary retirement, (5) resignation without good reason, (6) voluntary termination for good reason, (7) involuntary termination without cause, (8) involuntary termination with cause, (9) death, and (10) disability. Voluntary retirement and resignation without good reason occurs when CEOs either retire or leave under their own volition, and voluntary termination with good reason occurs in response to changes in employment terms (e.g., relocation of headquarters). Involuntary termination refers to termination due to any reason not listed above and is often triggered by unsatisfactory performance. Although some prior work has addressed the antecedents, consequences, and moderators of severance, the findings from this literature remain unclear, as many of the results are mixed. Future severance scholars have the opportunity to further clarify these relationships by addressing how severance agreements can help firms attract, align the interests of, and facilitate the exit of executives.