Pay More Stocks and Options to Directors? Theory and Evidence of Board Compensation

  • Gang Nathan DongEmail author


The compensation of board directors has received much attention, along with the growing debates on corporate governance in recent years, partly due to the ongoing financial crisis. While prior studies including Hall and Liebman (1998) have shown evidence of a dramatic increase in the use of equity-based incentives, resulting in an increase in the sensitivity of executive pay to firm performance, we ask whether it benefits shareholders to offer similar incentive contracts to board directors. This paper suggests that equity-based compensation for board directors is necessary and the level of incentives depends on directors’ effectiveness in monitoring and friendliness in advising CEOs. Using the market competition and pay correlation to proxy for monitoring effectiveness and advisory friendliness, we report empirical evidence supporting our hypotheses.


Corporate Governance Market Competition Supervisory Board Executive Compensation Board Director 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



I am grateful to conference participants at SEA (Atlanta), SWFA (San Antonio) and WEA (San Diego). I thank Frederick Bereskin, Ivan Brick, Simi Kedia, Yigitcan Karabulut, Jin-Mo Kim, Peter Klein, Tom Nohel, Darius Palia, Abraham Ravid, Nitish Sinha and Tim Zhou for helpful comments. I acknowledge the research financial support from Rutgers University Graduate School and Rutgers Business School. All errors and omissions remain my own.


  1. Adams, R., & Ferreira, D. (2007). A theory of friendly boards. Journal of Finance, 62, 217–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adams, R., & Ferreira, D. (2008). Do directors perform for pay? Journal of Accounting and Economics, 46, 154–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Adams, R., Hermalin, B., & Weibach, M. (2010). The role of boards of directors in corporate governance: a conceptual framework and survey. Journal of Economic Literature, 48, 58–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Angrist, J., & Krueger, A. (1999). Empirical Strategies in Labor Economics. Handbook of Labor Economics (Orley Ashenfelter and David Card, eds.) 3A, 1277–1366.Google Scholar
  5. Blair, M. (1995). Ownership and control: Rethinking corporate governance for the twenty-first century. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bolton, P., & Scharfstein, D. (1996). Optimal debt structure and the number of creditors. Journal of Political Economy, 104, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boyd, B. (1996). Determinants of U.S. outsider director compensation. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 4, 202–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brick, I., Palmon, O., & Wald, J. (2006). CEO compensation, director compensation, and firm performance: evidence of cronyism? Journal of Corporate Finance, 12, 403–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bryan, S., & Klein, A. (2004). Non-management director options, board characteristics, and future firm investments and performance. NYU Working Paper No. 04–009.Google Scholar
  10. Chambers, E., Foulon, M., Handfield-Jones, H., Hankin, S., & Michaels, E. (1998). The war for talent. McKinsey Quarterly, 3, 44.Google Scholar
  11. Dixon, W. (1960). Simplified estimation from censored normal samples. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 31, 385–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dong, G. (2012). Pay more stocks to directors: Theory of corporate governance and board’s compensation. Rutgers University Working Paper.Google Scholar
  13. Economist. (2001). A survey by PWC of British boards. The Economist Newspaper, February 10, 68.Google Scholar
  14. Farrell, K., Friesen, G., & Hersch, P. (2008). How do firms adjust director compensation? Journal of Corporate Finance, 14, 153–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fich, E., & Shivdasani, A. (2005). The impact of stock-option compensation for outside directors on firm value. Journal of Business, 78, 2229–2254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gao, H. (2010). Optimal compensation contracts when managers can hedge. Journal of Financial Economics, 97, 218–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gerhart, B., & Milkovich, G. (1990). Organizational differences in managerial compensation and financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 663–691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Grullon, G., Kanatas, G., & Kumar, P. (2006). The impact of capital structure on advertising competition: An empirical study. Journal of Business, 79, 3101–3124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Guercio, D., Seery, L., & Woidtke, T. (2008). Do boards pay attention when institutional investor activists just vote no. Journal of Financial Economics, 90, 84–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hall, B., & Liebman, J. (1998). Are CEOs really paid like bureaucrats? Quarterly Journal of Economics., 103, 653–691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Harris, M., & Raviv, A. (1978). Some results on incentive contracts with applications to education, insurance, and law enforcement. American Economic Review, 68, 20–30.Google Scholar
  22. Harris, M., & Raviv, A. (2008). A theory of board control and size. Review of Financial Studies, 21, 1797–1832.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hasings, C., Mosteller, F., Tukey, J., & Winsor, C. (1947). Low moments for small samples: A comparative study of order statistics. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 18, 413–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hempel, P., & Fay, C. (1994). Outside director compensation and firm performance. Human Resource Management, 33, 111–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hermalin, B., & Weisbach, M. (1998). Endogenously chosen boards of directors and their monitoring of the CEO. American Economic Review, 88, 96–118.Google Scholar
  26. Hermalin, B., & Weisbach, M. (2003). Boards of directors as an endogenously determined institution: A survey of the economic literature. Economic Policy Review, 9, 7–26.Google Scholar
  27. Herman, E. (1981). Corporate control, corporate power. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Holmstrom, B. (1979). Moral hazard and observability. Bell Journal of Economics, 10, 74–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Holmstrom, B., & Milgrom, P. (1987). Aggregation and linearity in the provision of intertemporal incentives. Econometrica, 55, 303–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jensen, M., & Meckling, W. (1976). The theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3, 305–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kostovetsky, L. (2009). Human capital flows and the financial industry. University of Rochester Working Paper.Google Scholar
  32. Kumar, P., & Sivaramakrishnan, K. (2008). Who monitors the monitor? The effect of board independence on executive compensation and firm value. Review of Financial Studies, 21, 1371–1401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Leonard, J. (1990). Executive pay and firm performance. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 43, 13–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Linn, S., & Park, D. (2005). Outside director compensation policy and the investment opportunity set. Journal of Corporate Finance, 11, 680–715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lorsch, J. (1989). Pawns or potentates. Cambridge: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  36. Mace, M. (1986). Directors, myth and reality. Cambridge: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  37. Masulis, R., & Nahata, R. (2009). Financial contracting with strategic investors: evidence from corporate venture capital backed IPOs. Journal of Financial Intermediation, 18, 599–631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Meyer, B. (1995). Natural and Quasi-experiments in Economics. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 13, 151–161.Google Scholar
  39. Randøy, T., & Jenssen, J. (2004). Board independence and product market competition in Swedish firms. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 12, 281–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Ryan, H., & Wiggins, R. (2004). Who is in whose pocket? Director compensation, board independence, and barriers to effective monitoring. Journal of Financial Economics, 73, 497–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Shadish, W., Cook, T., & Campbell, D. (2001). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Wadsworth Publishing. Cengage Learning, New York, USA.Google Scholar
  42. Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. (1997). A survey of corporate governance. Journal of Finance, 52, 737–783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Song, F., & Thakor, A. (2006). Information control, career concerns, and corporate governance. Journal of Finance, 61, 1845–1896.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Tirole, J. (1986). Hierarchies and bureaucracies, on the role of collusion in organization. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, 61, 1845–1896.Google Scholar
  45. Tirole, J. (1992). Collusion and the theory of organization, advances in economic theory. Advances in economic theory: sixth world congress. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  46. Tufano, P., & Sevick, M. (1997). Board structure and fee-setting in the U.S. mutual fund industry. Journal of Financial Economics, 46, 321–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Vafeas, N. (1999). Determinants of the adoption of director incentive plans. Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance, 14, 453–474.Google Scholar
  48. Warther, V. (1998). Board effectiveness and board dissent: a model of the board’s relationship to management and shareholders. Journal of Corporate Finance, 4, 53–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Whisler, T. (1984). The rules of the game. Homewood: Dow Jones-Irwin.Google Scholar
  50. Yermack, D. (2004). Remuneration, retention and reputation incentives for outside directors. Journal of Finance, 59, 2281–2308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Health Policy and ManagementColumbia UniversityNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations