Many executives have compensation that is potentially forfeit conditioned on the circumstances surrounding their departure from the firm. We study firms' endogenous decisions to use such compensation “holdbacks” as a bonding device and find that firms with higher executive replacement costs, greater information asymmetry, more certain operating environments, and recent accounting concerns are more likely to have holdbacks. Additionally, holdbacks are negatively associated with incentive-based compensation, consistent with theoretical predictions that termination incentives can substitute for incentive pay. Further, holdbacks are positively associated with abnormal compensation, consistent with arguments that managers demand a premium to accept risky pay.

Our research firstly tests the difference in investment efficiency between state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and private firms and secondly evaluates the effect of privatisation and equitisation policies on the investment efficiency of former state owned enterprises (SOEs). We use a novel dataset from Viet Nam which covers large and non-listed SMEs across construction, manufacturing, and service sectors. Our methodology uses a structural model to test the relationship between Tobin's Q and capital spending. While evident differences in investment efficiency are found across heterogeneous groups of private firms (size, industry, financially constrained and location), we find no evidence of investment spending being linked to marginal returns by SOEs across all sectors and size classes. However, former SOEs that have been privatised and equitized with a minority state shareholding display positive links between Q and investment. In fact, the link is stronger for these firms than for private firms. Differences are also evident across size and sector highlighting that the method of divestment chosen by government shareholders has a differential impact on efficiency across groups of firms and industries.

Payout policies based on share repurchase programs provide greater flexibility than do those based on cash dividends. We develop and test an empirical model in which strongly governed companies outperform weakly governed companies after announcing share repurchase programs. Our findings include positive associations between strong governance and both post-announcement adjusted operating performance and abnormal stock returns. The results are robust to sample selection bias, different sample criteria, governance measurement, and various control variables. In addition, governance strength is associated with larger post-announcement changes in CEO incentive compensation and merger and acquisition activity, both of which we argue are consistent with strongly governed companies using the financial flexibility derived from choosing share repurchases over cash dividends to drive better performance. Consistent with current literature on attenuation of former anomalies, the associations we find between governance and post-announcement performance tend to disappear in the latter half of our sample period.