We study how corporate boards set earnings performance targets in CEOs’ annual incentive plans (AIPs) and the implications for strategic management earning guidance. We find that corporate boards rely on management and analyst information in setting the earnings performance targets, and the weight placed on each signal increases with its precision. We also find that management earnings guidance issued before compensation committee meetings (“event-window management forecast (MF)”) is more pessimistic than that issued by the same firm at other times. The pessimism in the event-window MF is more pronounced when the expected managerial benefits of having lower performance targets are greater. Ex post, the event-window MF pessimism is associated with higher bonus payouts to CEOs. We use a theoretical framework to illustrate how the use of earnings performance targets might drive our findings. This study highlights boards’ tradeoffs in designing executive compensation and the resulting managerial strategic disclosure.

This paper investigates the effect of internal information asymmetry (IIA) within conglomerate firms on the quality of management forecasts and financial statements. We develop a novel measure to capture IIA between divisional managers and top corporate managers, computed as the difference in their respective trading profits on their own company's stock (DIFRET). Numerous validation tests indicate that DIFRET indeed captures the information asymmetry between divisional managers and top managers. In our primary tests, we find that DIFRET is associated negatively with the accuracy, bias, specificity, and frequency of management forecasts. Furthermore, the likelihood of error-driven accounting restatements increases with DIFRET. Our results, thus, suggest that external communication quality suffers when the information asymmetry between divisional managers and top managers is more severe.