| E-mail this page | Print this page | |||||
Contact:
Charles Salmans
Tel:
+1
212
345 4512
United States
New York,
9 April 2007
The drive for responsible executive pay continues to gain traction as new proxy rules require companies to disclose the value of compensation, benefits and perquisites. While the median change in CEO total direct compensation (salary, bonus and long-term incentives) was 8.9%, corporate net income increased by 14.4%, up from 13% in 2005, and total shareholder return was 15.1%, more than double the 6.8% return in 2005. Companies heard the message that pay has to be linked to performance: Over half of the companies granted performance shares – shares that are earned only if performance goals are met – according to the Mercer Human Resource Consulting 2006 CEO Compensation Survey. The annual survey of the latest proxy filings of 350 large public companies was published today in The Wall Street Journal.
The long-awaited total compensation numbers
are in, disclosed for the first time this year: According to the Mercer 350
study, total compensation (total direct compensation plus benefits and
perquisites) is not as eye-popping as expected.
Mercer reports a median total of $8.2 million. The new elements totaled less than $1.3 million at the median or approximately 15% of the median CEO package. Most of the added value came from the annual increase in pension values; the reported median increase was approximately $1.0 million.
CEO base salary increased to a median $995,000 after
having been at $975,000 for two years. Constant incumbent CEOs received a median
increase of 4.1%, higher than the median increase of 3.6% in 2005. In 2006,
about one quarter of the CEOs did not get a pay increase; boards were tougher in
2005, when one third of the sample did not get a pay increase.
Median total cash compensation – salary and
annual bonus – rose to $2.6 million, slightly higher than the $2.4 million
reported in 2005. The median increase for constant incumbent CEOs was
7.1%, the same rate as in 2005. An increase in total cash is not
surprising given strong corporate performance. Median net income rose
14.4%.
The big story this year is that, as predicted,
long-term incentives (LTI) are being linked to performance, Mercer’s survey
found. The number of CEOs receiving option grants declined from 192 in 2005 to
185 in 2006, and the number of CEOs receiving restricted stock grants declined
from 181 to 172 in the same period. However, the number of CEOs receiving
performance shares, including performance-contingent restricted stock, jumped
from 111 in 2005 to 178 in 2006. The portion of the CEOs’ LTI pay that was
made up of performance-based shares and units jumped in the period 2005 to 2006
from 21% of the LTI pay mix to 31%, while restricted stock was stable, rising
slightly from 22% to 23%, and stock options dropped from 52% of the LTI pie to
just 46%. As recently as 2002, stock options made up 76% of CEO LTI pay.
“We have been predicting the rise of
performance-based equity awards for several years,” said Diane Doubleday, global
leader of Mercer’s executive remuneration business. “At the heart of
shareholders’ expectations for pay aligned with performance is the structure of
long-term equity programs, specifically programs that vest or pay out based on
performance. As of 2006, the accounting rules that facilitate using
performance-based equity were in effect for almost all companies. As a result,
we now see a significant increase in performance shares and
performance-contingent restricted stock. In addition, the new disclosure
rules include previously unknown information about performance goals and
targets.”
“Target-setting will be the next area of focus, as
companies are forced to define how performance is being measured and rewarded,”
said Peter Chingos, a senior executive compensation consultant with Mercer. “The
increased disclosure and need for analysis is also likely to cause many
companies to simplify their programs. The process of preparing the Compensation
Discussion and Analysis (CD&A) caused some companies to make changes and
will probably prompt more to simplify and clarify the performance criteria in
their compensation programs. This could range from tweaking the programs to
making major changes to ensure clarity to external audiences.”
Did shareholders get what they wanted? They
continue to be unhappy with what they perceive as slow progress on reining in
CEO pay. Several institutional investors have focused their efforts on having a
greater influence on compensation. This year there are more than 60
proposals for a “say on pay” – a proposal to put executive compensation to a
non-binding vote by shareholders. In addition, shareholders have put forward
more specific proposals to limit severance and require pay to be more tightly
linked to performance. With majority voting for directors becoming widespread
this year, directors who have been at the heart of controversy are more likely
to hear shareholders’ dissatisfaction loud and clear.
And many believe that the disclosures were so
lengthy and confusing that shareholders’ objectives have not been
achieved. Mercer’s crystal ball anticipates further refinement of the
disclosure rules before next year’s proxy season.
Industry
variations
Mercer’s 2006 CEO Compensation Survey also
looks at trends in nine major industries (see Table 3). CEOs in the oil and gas
sector, for example, had the highest level of total direct compensation among
the nine industries analyzed, with a median of $11.0 million. But the median
increase for constant incumbents in the oil and gas sector was the lowest of the
industries analyzed, only 1.3%. Total shareholder return for companies in
the oil and gas business was a strong 18.2%. The consumer goods sector had
the lowest total shareholder return (7.8%) but the constant incumbent CEOs in
the group saw median increases in total direct compensation of 10.5%.
The Mercer Human Resource Consulting 2006 CEO
Compensation Survey analyzes and reports on the most current publicly
available compensation information as disclosed in the proxy statements of 350
large US companies. This is the 15th consecutive year that Mercer has prepared
the survey for The Wall Street Journal. For 10-year trend data, see
Table 1.
Mercer Human Resource Consulting is a global leader for trusted HR and related financial advice and services, with more than 15,000 employees serving clients in over 180 cities and 42 countries and territories worldwide. The company is a wholly owned subsidiary of Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc., which lists its stock (ticker symbol: MMC) on the New York, Chicago and London stock exchanges.
Notes on methodology and terminology
-
The 350 surveyed companies are major industrial and service companies that filed their latest proxy statements by April 3, 2007. All have revenue in excess of $1 billion.
-
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) changed the proxy disclosure rules during 2006, requiring companies to provide shareholders and other readers with expanded information about CEO and other named executive officer pay. This expanded disclosure included details that had not been available previously, such as the change in the value of the executive’s pension and earnings on nonqualified deferred compensation.
-
Total Direct Compensation (TDC): The sum of salary, bonus and other annual incentives, and the grant value of restricted stock, stock options and other long-term performance-based incentives.
-
Total Compensation: The sum of TDC, pension value change, nonqualified deferred compensation earnings and all other compensation. The Mercer survey definition of Total Compensation differs from the proxy definition. The survey definition includes the value of all long-term incentives granted during 2006. The proxy definition includes compensation that was granted in earlier years.
-
Total Shareholder Return (TSR): One-year total return for the company’s stock, reflecting stock price appreciation and reinvestment of dividends.
Table 1: 10 year trends (percentage change over prior years)
Year |
CEO Annual Compensation (Salary and Bonus) |
Exempt Employees Annual Compensation |
CorporateProfits |
AnnualCPI |
|
1997 |
11.7% |
4.2% |
8.9% |
2.3% |
|
1998 |
5.2% |
4.2% |
5.0% |
1.6% |
|
1999 |
11.0% |
4.2% |
15.1% |
2.2% |
|
2000 |
10.0% |
4.2% |
8.9% |
3.4% |
|
2001 |
–2.8% |
4.4% |
–17.8% |
2.8% |
|
2002 |
10.0% |
3.8% |
14.8% |
1.6% |
|
2003 |
7.2% |
3.6% |
19.2% |
2.3% |
|
2004 |
14.5% |
3.4% |
23.0% |
2.7% |
|
2005 |
7.1% |
3.6% |
13.0% |
3.4% |
|
2006 |
7.1% |
3.7% |
14.4% |
3.2% |
Table 2: CEO Pay Mix
Year |
Salary |
Bonus |
Long-Term Incentives |
|
2002 |
16% |
16% |
68% |
|
2003 |
18% |
19% |
63% |
|
2004 |
15% |
23% |
62% |
|
2005 |
16% |
22% |
62% |
|
2006 |
16% |
26% |
58% |
Table 3: 2006 CEO compensation by industry
|
Industry |
Salary and Bonus (000) |
TDC* (000) |
Salary and Bonus |
TDC* |
TSR** |
|
Basic Materials |
$2,560.0 |
$5,246.5 |
15.7% |
12.6% |
18.4% |
|
Consumer Goods |
$2,605.2 |
$6,785.3 |
4.1% |
10.5% |
7.8% |
|
Consumer Services |
$1,806.0 |
$4,082.3 |
6.3% |
6.6% |
12.4% |
|
Financial |
$4,517.9 |
$10,466.5 |
6.5% |
4.9% |
18.9% |
|
Health Care |
$2,992.7 |
$10,342.0 |
14.0% |
6.9% |
15.1% |
|
Industrials |
$2,377.8 |
$5,612.2 |
7.1% |
15.3% |
14.9% |
|
Oil & Gas |
$3,300.0 |
$11,038.1 |
3.5% |
1.3% |
18.2% |
|
Technology |
$2,696.5 |
$8,169.5 |
12.1% |
10.1% |
12.0% |
|
Utilities |
$2,539.1 |
$5,085.3 |
7.4% |
6.4% |
18.3% |
|
Full Sample |
$2,598.3 |
$6,548.8 |
7.1% |
8.9% |
15.1% |
*Total Direct Compensation: Salary, bonus and long-term
perquisites.
**Total Shareholder Return: One-year return reflecting stock
price appreciation and
reinvestment of dividends.