Management compensation contracts and distribution policies in the US technology sector

Grey, Colette; Flynn, Antoinette; Donnelly, Ray

doi:10.1016/j.irfa.2019.101403

Cited by 7 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thirdly, and to test H3 and H4 (the moderating effect of SBC on the PSS ), the study creates interaction variables between the SBC and the individual components of CEO pay ( BCEO , STCEO , LTCEO , TRCEO , and TRCEOP ) and the SBC and the various measures of executive pay ( TBEN , STCOM , LTCOM , TCOM , and TCOMP ) variables. Finally, following prior research (e.g., Grey et al, 2013, 2020; Gujarati, 2009; Nguyen et al, 2021), the study includes board size ( BSIZE ), presence of sustainability committee ( SCOM ), firm size ( FSIZE ), audit firm size ( AFS ), age ( AGE) , leverage ( LEV ), and capitalization ( CAP ) as control variables as explained in Table 2 in order to limit possible omitted variables bias (Gujarati, 2009; Shahab, Ntim, Chengang, et al, 2018).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…Table 2 summarizes all the variables, which were employed in examining the research hypotheses. Firstly, in line with prior research (e.g., Haque & Ntim, 2020;Qian & Schaltegger, 2018) ing prior research (e.g., Grey et al, 2013Grey et al, , 2020Gujarati, 2009;Nguyen et al, 2021), the study includes board size (BSIZE), presence of sustainability committee (SCOM), firm size (FSIZE), audit firm size (AFS), age (AGE), leverage (LEV), and capitalization (CAP) as control variables as explained in Table 2 in order to limit possible omitted variables bias (Gujarati, 2009;Shahab, Ntim, Chengang, et al, 2018).…”

Section: Variable Definition and Econometric Modelsmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…2020) who observe that companies that employ LTCOM such as stock awards to compensate executives make greater distributions across all channels. This stems from the fact that correlating executive's wealth with long-term sustainable performance should encourage them to think like shareholders (Grey et al, 2020).…”

Section: Research Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Executive compensation and sustainable business practices: The moderating role of sustainability‐based compensation

2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study seeks to contribute to the extant business strategy and the environment literature by investigating the effect of CEO pay and executive compensation (EC) on sustainable business practice (SBPs). It also distinctively ascertains whether the payfor-sustainability sensitivity (PSS) is reinforced in firms with sustainability-based compensation (SBC) policy. Using a sample of 262 UK listed firms from 2009 to 2018, our findings are threefold. First, the findings reveal that both CEO pay and EC variables have positive effect on all SBP measures, except CO 2 reduction performance where the link is negative. Second, the study shows that the PSS is reinforced for firms that implement SBC policy. Finally, we detect that both the PSS and the moderation effect of SBC on the PSS are higher in the symbolic construct of SBPs than the actual measures. The results support insights drawn from neo-institutional theory. The findings have key implications for regulators and policy makers.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 91%

Section: Variable Definition and Econometric Modelsmentioning

confidence: 87%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Executive compensation and sustainable business practices: The moderating role of sustainability‐based compensation

2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some other studies have suggested that executive compensation affects dividend policy. Recent research has shown that when managers are compensated using executive stock options, they tend to distribute less dividends than when stock awards are used (Grey et al, 2020). Further, Chintrakarn et al (2018) find that an increase in CEO power by one standard deviation is associated with a decrease in the probability of dividend payments by as much as 17.48% supporting the view that CEOs view dividends as unfavorable.…”

Section: Management and Dividend Policymentioning

confidence: 92%

The impact of board composition on the dividend policy of US firms

Thompson¹,

Manu²

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This paper aims to examine whether the characteristics of boards are more important in determining dividend policy than management characteristics. The authors show that as the final declarers of dividend policy is a firm’s board, the composition of a firm’s board significantly subsumes the effect of management characteristics that may also influence dividend policy. Design/methodology/approach Using the dividend declaration dummy variable, the authors run a fixed effect logistic regression of the dividend indicator on board characteristics, and managerial characteristics with firm level controls, year effects and industry effects while clustering standard errors at the firm level. For dividend yield variable which is censored at zero, they use a fixed effect Tobit regression. Findings The results of the study show that board characteristics such as average age, female presence and size have a strong positive significant effect, whereas board independent chair and voting right of directors have a negative significant effect on the likelihood of dividend declaration. For dividend yields, the results suggest that the presence of directors with financial expertise and the board size are the main influencers of dividend policy. Managerial characteristics are subsumed by director characteristics for determining dividend policy. The results overall support the evidence on the monitoring role of boards on management. Originality/value The originality and value of this study lies in the approach of including a comprehensive number of board characteristics unlike previous studies which makes the study of the influence of board composition on dividends more encompassing.

show abstract

“…According to Ahmed et al (2020), dividend policy is a "puzzle" whose determinants are still poorly understood. At the same time, the increase in additional research work on the DDP-like Taleb and Ben Lahouel (2020); Duqi et al (2020); Tahir et al (2020aTahir et al ( , 2020b; Endang et al (2020); Grey et al (2020); Juhmani (2020); Ahmed et al (2020); Thompson and Adasi Manu (2021); Ain et al (2021); Bataineh (2021); Dissanayake and Dissabandara (2021); Hasan et al (2021); Trinh et al (2021); El Ammari (2021) and even other authors-justifies the fact that this research topic is a topical subject and that the debate on the reality of this famous financial phenomenon is not yet closed and still requires heated debate.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do CEO Duality and Ownership Concentration Impact Dividend Policy in Emerging Markets? The Moderating Effect of Crises Period

Ammari¹

2021

IJFS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite developments of recent theoretical and numerous empirical studies on the policies effectively adopted by companies, the dividend distribution policy (DDP) remains largely unexplained. In this regard, the main purpose of the current study is to empirically examine the effects of both CEO duality and ownership concentration on DDP during a crisis period. Furthermore, we test, using an interaction variable, the moderating effect of the crisis period on the association between both the degree of CEO duality and the ownership concentration on the DDP by analyzing panel data on selected listed firms in an emerging economy, namely, Tunisia. Based on a sample made up of 576 firm-year observations over the period 1996–2019, the findings of this research indicate that the crisis period plays an important role in mitigating the positive effect of both CEO duality and ownership concentration on DDP. The findings confirm furthermore that the crisis period on the one hand and both CEO duality and ownership concentration on the other represent two competing forces influencing DDP. Our results also support the agency theory on which DDP depends, among other things, family ownership, board and company size, and ROE.

show abstract

Management compensation contracts and distribution policies in the US technology sector

Cited by 7 publications

References 57 publications

Executive compensation and sustainable business practices: The moderating role of sustainability‐based compensation

Executive compensation and sustainable business practices: The moderating role of sustainability‐based compensation

The impact of board composition on the dividend policy of US firms

Do CEO Duality and Ownership Concentration Impact Dividend Policy in Emerging Markets? The Moderating Effect of Crises Period

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About