Ittner, Lambert, and Larcker (J. Accounting Economics (2003) this issue) present compelling evidence that new economy firms rely more on stock-based compensation than do old economy firms, based on 1998 and 1999 data from a proprietary sample of companies. I complement the ILL results by analyzing data over a longer time period (1992–2001) and, more importantly, document the effect of the 2000 market crash on stock-based pay in new economy firms. Finally, I offer evidence supporting the conjecture that differences in pay practices between new and old economy firms reflect accounting considerations, perceived costs, and competitive inertia.

Research in incentives has focused on performance measures and pay-performance sensitivities but has largely ignored the “performance standard”, which generates important incentives whenever plan participants can influence the standard-setting process. “Internally determined” standards are directly affected by management actions in the current or prior year, while “externally determined” standards are less easily affected. I show that companies choose external standards when prior performance is a noisy estimate of contemporaneous performance. In addition, companies using budget based and other internally determined performance standards have less-variable bonus payouts, and are more likely to smooth earnings, than companies using externally determined standards.

Economic theories of efficient compensation predict a positive relationship between executive pay and corporate performance, and yet efforts to document this relationship have been largely unsuccessful. In this paper, we argue that previous cross-sectional studies have omitted important variables which seriously bias their results. Using data that focus on individual executives over time, we find that executive compensation is strongly positively related to corporate performance as measured by shareholder return and growth in firm sales. The results are robust to the stock market performance measure utilized.

This paper studies optimal incentive contracts when workers have career concerns--concerns about the effects of current performance on future compensation. We show that the optimal compensation contract optimizes total incentives: the combination of the implicit incentives from career concerns and the explicit incentives from the compensation contract. Thus the explicit incentives from the optimal compensation contract should be strongest for workers close to retirement because career concerns are weakest for these workers. We find empirical support for this prediction in the relation between chief executive compensation and stock market performance.

Our estimates of the pay-performance relation (including pay, options, stockholdings, and dismissal) for chief executive officers indicate that CEO wealth changes $3.25 for every $1,000 change in shareholder wealth. Although the incentives generated by stock ownership are large relative to pay and dismissal incentives, most CEOs hold trivial fractions of their firm's stock, and ownership levels have declined over the past 50 years. We hypothesize that public and private political forces impose constraints that reduce the pay-performance sensitivity. Declines in both the pay-performance relation and the level of CEO pay since the 1930s are consistent with this hypothesis.

[This paper challenges the widely accepted stylized fact that chief executive officers (CEOs) in the United States are paid significantly more than their foreign counterparts. Using CEO pay data across fourteen countries with mandated pay disclosures, we show that the U.S. pay premium is economically modest and primarily reflects the performance-based pay demanded by institutional shareholders and independent boards. Indeed, we find no significant difference in either level of CEO pay or the use of equity-based pay between U.S. and non-U.S. firms exposed to international and U.S. capital, product, and labor markets. We also show that U.S. and non-U.S. CEO pay has largely converged in the 2000s.]

Using a procedure that allows selective pooling of certain subsamples of the data, this study examines the determinants of state unemployment rates in the United States. By selectively pooling the data, more reliable parameter estimates result than could otherwise be obtained were the data disaggregated to the state level, and the specification error inherent in a complete pooling of the data is avoided. The models are estimated using two stage least squares, and the empirical results indicate considerable heterogeneity across areas in the ways in which unemployment rates are determined.

Very few business topics attract as much public attention as the paychecks of top executive officers in the largest U.S. companies. Undoubtedly, part of this interest has been fueled by the large and continuous increases in chief executive officers ’ (CEOs) compensation over the past three decades. Even ignoring the more recent escalation in the use of executive stock options (Brian Hall and Kevin J. Murphy, 2000, 2003), the base salaries and bonuses of Forbes 800 CEOs increased from an average of $700,000 in 1970 (in 2002-constant dollars) to over $2.2 million in 2000. 1 During the same period, the ratio of CEO cash compensation to average pay for production workers increased from about 25 in 1970 to nearly 90 in 2000. 2 The most prevalent explanation in popular press for this trend is the “fat cat ” theory, a variant of which has been espoused among academics by Lucian Bebchuk, Jesse Fried, and

This paper studies optimal incentive contracts when workers have career concerns--concerns about the effects of current performance on future compensation. The authors show that the optimal compensation contract optimizes total incentives: the combination of the implicit incentives from career concerns and the explicit incentives from the compensation contract. Thus, the explicit incentives from the optimal compensation contract should be strongest for workers close to retirement because career concerns are weakest for these workers. The authors find empirical support for this prediction in the relation between chief-executive compensation and stock-market performance.

Executive compensation consultants face potential conflicts of interest that can lead to higher recommended levels of CEO pay, including the desires to “cross-sell” services and to secure “repeat business.” We find evidence in both the US and Canada that CEO pay is higher in companies where the consultant provides other services, and that pay is higher in Canadian firms when the fees paid to consultants for other services are large relative to the fees for executive-compensation services. Contrary to expectations, we find that pay is higher in US firms where the consultant works for the board rather than for management.