Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Determinants and effects of sustainable CEO compensation: a structured literature review of empirical evidence

  • Published:
Management Review Quarterly Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Sustainability-oriented CEO compensation is being widely discussed among policy makers, corporate practice, and academia. To date, management literature has yielded a growing body of empirical results on the determinants and effects of sustainable CEO compensation. Primarily, empirical studies analyze whether and to what extent sustainability-related issues determine the design of sustainable CEO compensation and how sustainability-oriented CEO compensation impacts corporate performance. However, the scattered nature of this research field has impeded an overarching empirical substantiation of the arguments in favor or against a sustainable CEO compensation. This structured literature review addresses this gap by analyzing 37 empirical studies on the key determinants and effects of sustainable CEO compensation. Using a multi-level analysis, we contribute to the discussion on sustainable CEO compensation by systematically identifying the central empirical insights and methodological and content-related foci within this research area. In summary, this review provides regulators, boards, management, investors, and other stakeholders with academic evidence on the determinants and effects of sustainability-oriented CEO compensation design. In addition to critically reflecting on the current state of research, we recommend paths for future research on sustainable CEO compensation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abdelmotaal H, Abdel-Kader M (2016) The use of sustainability incentives in executives remuneration contracts. J Appl Account Res 17(3):311–330

    Google Scholar 

  • Adhikari HP, Bulmash SB, Krolikowski MW, Sah NB (2015) Dynamics of CEO compensation: old is gold. Q Rev Econ Finance 57:191–206

    Google Scholar 

  • Aggarwal RK, Samwick AA (2006) Empire-builders and shirkers: investment, firm performance, and managerial incentives. J Corp Finance 12(3):489–515

    Google Scholar 

  • Albuquerque R, Koskinen Y, Zhang C (2018) Corporate social responsibility and firm risk: theory and empirical evidence. Manag Sci. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2018.3043

    Google Scholar 

  • Al-Shaer H, Zaman M (2017) CEO compensation and sustainability reporting assurance: evidence from the UK. J Bus Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3735-8

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvesson M, Deetz S (2000) Doing critical management research. Sage, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Amel-Zadeh A (2018) Social responsibility in capital markets: a review and framework of theory and empirical evidence. Working Paper

  • Anthony RN (1965) Planning and control systems: a framework for analysis. Harvard Business School Press, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Arjaliès D-L, Mundy J (2013) The use of management control systems to manage CSR strategy: a levers of control perspective. Manag Account Res 24(4):284–300

    Google Scholar 

  • Arora A, Alam P (2005) CEO compensation and stakeholders’ claims. Contemp Account Res 22(3):519–547

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumgartner RJ (2014) Managing corporate sustainability and CSR: a conceptual framework combining values, strategies and instruments contributing to sustainable development. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 21(5):258–271

    Google Scholar 

  • Bednar MK (2012) Watchdog or lapdog? A behavioral view of the media as a corporate governance mechanism. Acad Manag J 55(1):131–150

    Google Scholar 

  • Bénabou R, Tirole J (2010) Individual and corporate social responsibility. Economica 77(305):1–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Berle AA, Means GC (1932) The modern corporation and private property. The Macmillan Company, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Berrone P, Gomez-Mejia LR (2009) Environmental performance and executive compensation: an integrated agency-institutional perspective. Acad Manag J 52(1):103–126

    Google Scholar 

  • Brennan NM, Solomon J (2008) Corporate governance, accountability and mechanisms of accountability: an overview. Account Audit Account 21(7):885–906

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown R, Sarma N (2007) CEO overconfidence, CEO dominance and corporate acquisitions. J Econ Bus 59(5):358–379

    Google Scholar 

  • Busenbark JR, Krause R, Boivie S, Graffin SD (2016) Toward a configurational perspective on the CEO: a review and synthesis of the management literature. J Manag 42(1):234–268

    Google Scholar 

  • Byron K, Post C (2016) Women on boards of directors and corporate social performance: a meta-analysis. Corp Gov 24(4):428–442

    Google Scholar 

  • Cai Y, Jo H, Pan C (2011) Vice or virtue? The impact of corporate social responsibility on executive compensation. J Bus Ethics 104(2):159–173

    Google Scholar 

  • Callan SJ, Thomas JM (2011) Executive compensation, corporate social responsibility, and corporate financial performance: a multi-equation framework. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 18(6):332–351

    Google Scholar 

  • Callan SJ, Thomas JM (2014) Relating CEO compensation to social performance and financial performance: Does the measure of compensation matter? Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 21(4):202–227

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll AB, Shabana KM (2010) The business case for corporate social responsibility: a review of concepts, research and practice. Int J Manag Rev 12(1):85–105

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan RYK, Ma KHY (2017) Impact of executive compensation on the execution of IT-based environmental strategies under competition. Eur J Inf Syst 26(5):489–508

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang H, Choy HL, Wan K-M (2012) Effect of the Sarbanes-Oxley act on CEOs’ stock ownership and pay-performance sensitivity. Rev Quant Finance Account 38(2):177–210

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng B, Ioannou I, Serafeim G (2014) Corporate social responsibility and access to finance. Strateg Manag J 35(1):1–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Claassen D, Ricci C (2015) CEO compensation structure and corporate social performance—empirical evidence from Germany. Die Betriebswirtschaft 75(5):327–343

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarkson MBE (1995) A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Acad Manag Rev 20(1):92–117

    Google Scholar 

  • Coombs JE, Gilley KM (2005) Stakeholder management as a predictor of CEO compensation: main effect and interactions with financial performance. Strat Manag J 26(9):827–840

    Google Scholar 

  • Cordeiro JJ, Sarkis J (2008) Does explicit contracting effectively link CEO compensation to environmental performance. Bus Strat Environ 17(5):304–317

    Google Scholar 

  • Crossland C, Hambrick DC (2011) Differences in managerial discretion across countries: how nation-level institutions affect the degree to which CEOs matter. Strateg Manag J 32(8):797–819

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahlsrud A (2008) How corporate social responsibility is defined: an analysis of 37 definitions. Corp Responsib Environ Manag 15(1):1–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Daily CM, Dalton DR, Cannella AA (2003) Corporate governance: decades of dialogue and data. Acad Manag Rev 28(3):371–382

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis K (1973) The case for and against business assumption of social responsibilities. Acad Manag J 16(2):312–322

    Google Scholar 

  • Deckop JR, Merriman KK, Gupta S (2006) The effects of CEO pay structure on corporate social performance. J Manag 32(3):329–342

    Google Scholar 

  • DellaVigna S (2009) Psychology and economics: evidence from the field. J Econ Lit 47(2):315–372

    Google Scholar 

  • Denis DK (2001) Twenty-five years of corporate governance research … and counting. Rev Financ Econ 10(3):191–212

    Google Scholar 

  • Devers CE, Cannella AA, Reilly GP, Yoder ME (2007) Executive compensation: a multidisciplinary review of recent developments. J Manag 33(6):1016–1072

    Google Scholar 

  • Dumay J, Bernardi C, Guthrie J, Demartini P (2016) Integrated reporting: a structured literature review. Account Forum 40(3):166–185

    Google Scholar 

  • Eccles NS, Viviers S (2011) The origins and meanings of names describing investment practices that integrate a consideration of ESG issues in the academic literature. J Bus Ethics 104(3):389–402

    Google Scholar 

  • Eccles RG, Ioannou I, Serafeim G (2014) The impact of corporate sustainability on organizational processes and performance. Manag Sci 60(11):2835–2857

    Google Scholar 

  • Elkington J (1997) Cannibals with forks: the triple bottom line of 21st century business. Capstone, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2018) Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Central Bank, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Action Plan: Financing Sustainable Growth, COM/2018/097 final. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:52018DC0097. Accessed 30 Dec 2018

  • Evans S, Vladimirova D, Holgado M, van Fossen K, Yang M, Silva EA, Barlow CY (2017) Business model innovation for sustainability: towards a unified perspective for creation of sustainable business models. Bus Strategy Environ 26(5):597–608

    Google Scholar 

  • Fabrizi M, Mallin C, Michelon G (2014) The role of CEO’s personal incentives in driving corporate social responsibility. J Bus Ethics 124(2):311–326

    Google Scholar 

  • Fama EF, Jensen MC (1983a) Separation of ownership and control. J Law Econ 26(2):301–325

    Google Scholar 

  • Fama EF, Jensen MC (1983b) Agency problems and residual claims. J Law Econ 26(2):327–349

    Google Scholar 

  • Fong EA (2010) CEO pay fairness as a predictor of stakeholder management. J Bus Res 63(4):404–410

    Google Scholar 

  • Forbes DP, Milliken FJ (1999) Cognition and corporate governance: understanding boards of directors as strategic decision making groups. Acad Manag Rev 24(3):489–505

    Google Scholar 

  • Francoeur C, Melis A, Gaia S, Aresu S (2017) Green or greed? An alternative look at CEO compensation and corporate environmental commitment. J Bus Ethics 140(3):439–453

    Google Scholar 

  • Franklin CS, Cody PA, Ballan M (2010) Reliability and validity in qualitative research. In: Thyer B (ed) The handbook of social work research methods, 2nd edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, pp 355–374

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman M (1970) The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. New York Times Mag 13:32–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Frye MB, Nelling E, Webb E (2006) Executive compensation in socially responsible firms. Corp Gov 14(5):446–455

    Google Scholar 

  • Furnham A, Boo HC (2011) A literature review of the anchoring effect. J Socio Econ 40(1):35–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Garfield E (1989) Citation classics and citation behavior revisited. Curr Comments 12:3–8

    Google Scholar 

  • Goktan AB (2014) Impact of green management on CEO compensation: interplay of the agency theory and institutional perspectives. J Bus Econ Manag 15(1):96–110

    Google Scholar 

  • Gond JP, Grubnic S, Herzig C, Moon J (2012) Configuring management control systems: theorizing the integration of strategy and sustainability. Manag Account Res 23(3):205–223

    Google Scholar 

  • Goranova M, Ryan LV (2014) Shareholder activism: a multidisciplinary review. J Manag 40(5):1230–1268

    Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter M (1985) Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness. Am J Sociol 91(3):481–510

    Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter M (1992) Economic institutions as social constructions: a framework for analysis. Acta Sociol 35(1):3–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Guenther E, Endrikat J, Guenther TW (2016) Environmental management control systems: a conceptualization and a review of the empirical evidence. J Clean Prod 136(Part A):147–171

    Google Scholar 

  • Haque F (2017) The effects of board characteristics and sustainable compensation policy on carbon performance of UK firms. Br Account Rev 49(3):347–364

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart SL, Milstein MB (2003) Creating sustainable value. Acad Manag Exec 17(2):56–69

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes AF, Krippendorff K (2007) Answering the call for a standard reliability measure for coding data. Commun Methods Meas 1(1):77–89

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill CWL, Jones TM (1992) Stakeholder-agency theory. J Manag Stud 29(2):131–154

    Google Scholar 

  • Hong B, Li Z, Minor D (2016) Corporate governance and executive compensation for corporate social responsibility. J Bus Ethics 136(1):199–213

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang SK (2013) The impact of CEO characteristics on corporate sustainable development. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 20(4):234–244

    Google Scholar 

  • Hussain N, Rigoni U, Orij RP (2018) Corporate governance and sustainability performance: analysis of triple bottom line performance. J Bus Ethics 149(2):411–432

    Google Scholar 

  • Ittner CD, Larcker DF, Rajan MV (1997) The choice of performance measures in annual bonus contracts. Account Rev 72(2):231–255

    Google Scholar 

  • Jain T, Jamali D (2016) Looking inside the black box: the effect of corporate governance on corporate social responsibility. Corp Gov 24(3):253–273

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen MC (1986) Agency costs of free cash flow, corporate finance, and takeovers. Am Econ Rev 76(2):323–329

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen MC (2001) A theory of the firm: governance, residual claims, and organizational forms. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen MC, Meckling WH (1976) Theory of the firm: managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. J Financ Econ 3(4):305–360

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen MC, Murphy KJ (1990) Performance pay and top-management incentives. J Polit Econ 98(2):225–264

    Google Scholar 

  • Jian M, Lee K-W (2015) CEO compensation and corporate social responsibility. J Multinatl Financ Manag 29:46–65

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnsen BD (2003) Socially responsible investing: a critical appraisal. J Bus Ethics 43(3):219–222

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman D (1992) Reference point, anchors, norms, and mixed feelings. Organ Behav Hum 51(2):296–312

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47(2):263–291

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman D, Tversky A (1983) Choices, values, and frames. Am Psychol 39(4):341–350

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanagaretnam K, Khokhar A-R, Mawani A (2018) Linking societal trust and CEO compensation. J Bus Ethics 151(2):295–317

    Google Scholar 

  • Kang J (2017) Unobservable CEO characteristics and CEO compensation as correlated determinants of CSP. Bus Soc 56(3):419–453

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanniainen V (2000) Empire building by corporate managers: the corporation as a savings instrument. J Econ Dyn Control 24(1):127–142

    Google Scholar 

  • Karim K, Lee E, Suh S (2018) Corporate social responsibility and CEO compensation structure. Adv Account 40:27–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim H, Park K, Ryu D (2017) Corporate environmental responsibility: a legal origins perspective. J Bus Ethics 140(3):381–402

    Google Scholar 

  • Kock CJ, Min B (2016) Legal origins, corporate governance and environmental outcomes. J Bus Ethics 138(3):507–524

    Google Scholar 

  • Kock CJ, Santaló J, Diestre L (2012) Corporate governance and the environment: What type of governance creates greener companies? J Manag Stud 49(3):492–514

    Google Scholar 

  • Krippendorff K (2013) Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology, 3rd edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Liang H, Renneboog L (2017) On the foundations of corporate social responsibility. J Finance 72(2):853–910

    Google Scholar 

  • Lozano R (2008) Envisioning sustainability three-dimensionally. J Clean Prod 16(17):1838–1846

    Google Scholar 

  • Lueg R, Radlach R (2016) Managing sustainable development with management control systems: a literature review. Eur Manag J 34(2):158–171

    Google Scholar 

  • Maas K (2018) Do corporate social performance targets in executive compensation contribute to corporate social performance? J Bus Ethics 148(3):573–585

    Google Scholar 

  • Maas K, Rosendaal S (2016) Sustainability targets in executive remuneration: targets, time frame, country and sector specification. Bus Strategy Environ 25(6):390–401

    Google Scholar 

  • Madsen PM, Bingham JB (2014) A stakeholder-human capital perspective on the link between social performance and executive compensation. Bus Ethics Q 24(1):1–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahoney LS, Thorn L (2006) An examination of the structure of executive compensation and corporate social responsibility: a Canadian investigation. J Bus Ethics 69(2):149–162

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahoney LS, Thorne L (2005) Corporate social responsibility and long-term compensation: evidence from Canada. J Bus Ethics 57(3):241–253

    Google Scholar 

  • Malmendier U, Tate G (2005) CEO overconfidence and corporate investment. J Corp Finance 60(6):2661–2700

    Google Scholar 

  • March JG (1978) Bounded rationality, ambiguity, and the engineering of choice. Bell J Econ 9(2):587–608

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin GP, Gomez-Mejia LR, Wiseman RM (2013) Executive stock options as mixed gambles: revisiting the behaviroal agency model. Acad Manag J 56(2):451–472

    Google Scholar 

  • Massaro M, Dumay J, Guthrie J (2016) On the shoulders of giants: undertaking a structured literature review in accounting. Account Audit Account J 29(5):767–801

    Google Scholar 

  • McGuire J, Dow S, Argheyd K (2003) CEO incentives and corporate social performance. J Bus Ethics 45(4):341–359

    Google Scholar 

  • McGuire J, Oehmichen J, Wolff M, Hilgers R (2017) Do contracts make them care? The impact of CEO compensation design on corporate social performance. J Bus Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3601-8

    Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams A, Siegel DS (2011) Creating and capturing value: strategic corporate social responsibilty, resource-based theory, and sustainable competitive advantage. J Manag 37(5):1480–1495

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell RK, Weaver GR, Agle BR, Bailey AD, Carlson J (2016) Stakeholder agency and social welfare: pluralism and decision making in the multi-objective corporation. Acad Manag Rev 41(2):216–228

    Google Scholar 

  • Ntim CG, Soobaroyen T (2013) Corporate governance and social responsibility. Corp Gov 21(5):468–494

    Google Scholar 

  • Obermann J, Velte P (2018) Determinants and consequences of executive compensation-related shareholder activism and say-on-pay votes: a literature review and research agenda. J Account Lit 40:116–151

    Google Scholar 

  • Pepper A, Gore J (2015) Behavioral agency theory: new foundations for theorizing about executive compensation. J Manag 41(4):1045–1068

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter ME (1991) America’s green strategy. Sci Am 264(4):168

    Google Scholar 

  • Raghuram S, Tuertscher P, Garud R (2010) Mapping the field of virtual work: a co-citation analysis. Inf Syst Res 21(4):983–999

    Google Scholar 

  • Rekker SAC, Benson KL, Faff RW (2014) Corporate social responsibility and CEO compensation revisited: do disaggregation, market stress, gender matter? J Econ Bus 72:84–103

    Google Scholar 

  • Riahi-Belkaoui A (1992) Executive compensation, organizational effectiveness, social performance and firm performance: an empirical investigation. J Bus Finance Account 19(1):25–38

    Google Scholar 

  • Rost K, Weibel A (2013) CEO pay from a social norm perspective: the infringement and reestablishment of fairness norms. Corp Gov 21(4):351–372

    Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau DM, Manning J, Denyer D (2008) Evidence in management and organizational science: assembling the field’s full weight of scientific knowledge through syntheses. Acad Manag Ann 2(1):475–515

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanchez-Marin G, Lozano-Reina G, Baixauli-Soler JS, Lucas-Perez ME (2017) Say on pay effectiveness, corporate governance mechanisms, and CEO compensation alignment. BRQ-Bus Res Q 20(4):226–239

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiehll E, Bellavance F (2009) Boards of directors, CEO ownership, and the use of non-financial performance measures in the CEO bonus plan. Corp Gov 17(1):90–106

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon HA (1955) A behavioral model of rational choice. Q J Bus Econ 69(1):99–118

    Google Scholar 

  • Sjöström E (2008) Shareholder activism for corporate social responsibility: what do we know? Sustain Dev 16(3):141–154

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanwick PA, Stanwick SD (2001) CEO compensation: does it pay to be green? Bus Strategy Environ 10(3):176–182

    Google Scholar 

  • Starik M, Kanashiro P (2013) Toward a theory of sustainability management: uncovering and integrating the nearly obvious. Organ Environ 26(1):7–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Stathopoulos K, Voulgaris G (2016) The importance of shareholder activism: the case of say-on-pay. Corp Gov 24(3):359–370

    Google Scholar 

  • Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (2018) SASB materiality map. https://materiality.sasb.org/. Accessed 30 Dec 2018

  • Tang Y, Mack DZ, Chen G (2018) The differential effects of CEO narcissism and hubris on corporate social responsibility. Strateg Manag J 39(5):1370–1387

    Google Scholar 

  • Tirole J (2001) Corporate governance. Econometrica 69(1):1–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Tosi HL, Werner S, Katz JP, Gomez-Mejia LR (2000) How much does performance matter? A meta-analysis of CEO pay studies. J Manag 26(2):301–339

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky A, Kahneman D (1974) Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 185(4157):1124–1131

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky A, Kahneman D (1992) Advances in prospect theory: cumulative representation of uncertainty. J Risk Uncertainty 5(4):297–323

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations (2015) Transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development, A/RES/70/1. http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/70/1&Lang=E. Accessed 30 Dec 2018

  • van Duuren E, Plantinga A, Scholtens B (2016) ESG integration and the investment management process: fundamental investing reinvented. J Bus Ethics 38(3):525–533

    Google Scholar 

  • van Essen M, Otten J, Carberry EJ (2015) Assessing managerial power theory: a meta-analytic approach to understanding the determinants of CEO compensation. J Manag 41(1):164–202

    Google Scholar 

  • Velte P (2016) Sustainable management compensation and ESG performance—the German case. Probl Perspect Manag 14(4):17–24

    Google Scholar 

  • vom Brocke J, Simons A, Niehaves B, Reimer K, Plattfaut R, Cleven A (2009) Reconstructing the giant: on the importance of rigour in documenting the literature search process. ECIS Proceedings, Paper 161

  • Walls JL, Berrone P, Phan PH (2012) Corporate governance and environmental performance: is there really a link? Strateg Manag J 33(8):885–913

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh JP, Seward JK (1990) On the efficiency of internal and external corporate control mechanisms. Acad Manag Rev 15(3):421–458

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang JC, Markόczy L, Sun SL, Peng MW (2018) She’-E-O compensation gap: a role congruity view. J Bus Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3807-4

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber M, Camerer CF (1998) The disposition effect in securities trading: an experimental analysis. J Econ Behav Organ 33(2):167–184

    Google Scholar 

  • White T, McBurney D (2012) Research method, 9th edn. Wadsworth, Belmont

    Google Scholar 

  • Winschel J (2019) Towards sustainable value creation for all stakeholders: conceptualizing the sustainable executive compensation framework. Working Paper

  • Wiseman RM, Gomez-Mejia LR (1998) A behavioral agency model of managerial risk taking. Acad Manag Rev 23(1):133–153

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood DJ (1991a) Corporate social performance revisited. Acad Manag Rev 16(4):691–718

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood DJ (1991b) Toward improving corporate social performance. Bus Horiz 35(4):66–73

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood DJ (2010) Measuring corporate social performance: a review. Int J Manag Rev 12(1):50–84

    Google Scholar 

  • World Commission on Environment and Development (1987) Our common future. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Yermack DL (2006) Flights of fancy: corporate jets, CEO perquisites, and inferior shareholder returns. J Financ Econ 80(1):211–242

    Google Scholar 

  • Zupic I, Čater T (2015) Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organ Res Methods 18(3):429–472

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Leuphana University of Lüneburg, Universitätsallee 1, 21335, Lüneburg, Germany

    Julija Winschel

  2. Ostwestfalen-Lippe University of Applied Sciences, Liebigstraβe 87, 32657, Lemgo, Germany

    Martin Stawinoga

Authors
  1. Julija Winschel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Martin Stawinoga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martin Stawinoga.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Winschel, J., Stawinoga, M. Determinants and effects of sustainable CEO compensation: a structured literature review of empirical evidence. Manag Rev Q 69, 265–328 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-019-00154-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-019-00154-9

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation