IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orinte/v43y2013i6p602-604.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Ombudsman: Is the Evidence Sufficient to Take Action on Executive Pay? Reply to Commentators

Author

Listed:
  • J. Scott Armstrong

    (Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104; and Ehrenberg-Bass Institute, University of South Australia, Adelaide 5001, Australia)

  • Philippe Jacquart

    (EMLYON Business School, 69134 Ecully, France)

Abstract

The experimental evidence in this collection of papers is sufficient for organizations to take action—at least with respect to investigating or testing alternative pay schemes. Some organizations have already implemented a number of these procedures. The failure of an organization’s directors to follow evidence-based procedures for executive pay might be used as a basis for legal action by shareholders when results are detrimental to a firm.

Suggested Citation

  • J. Scott Armstrong & Philippe Jacquart, 2013. "The Ombudsman: Is the Evidence Sufficient to Take Action on Executive Pay? Reply to Commentators," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 43(6), pages 602-604, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:orinte:v:43:y:2013:i:6:p:602-604
    DOI: 10.1287/inte.2013.0710
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/inte.2013.0710
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/inte.2013.0710?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robin M. Hogarth & Gueorgui I. Kolev, 2013. "The Ombudsman: The “Wicked” Environment of CEO Pay," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 43(6), pages 596-598, December.
    2. Armin Falk & James J. Heckman, 2009. "Lab Experiments are a Major Source of Knowledge in the Social Sciences," Working Papers 200935, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    3. J. Scott Armstrong, 1982. "The value of formal planning for strategic decisions: Review of empirical research," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 3(3), pages 197-211, July.
    4. Kesten C. Green & J. Scott Armstrong, 2005. "Competitor-oriented Objectives: The Myth of Market Share," Monash Econometrics and Business Statistics Working Papers 17/05, Monash University, Department of Econometrics and Business Statistics.
    5. Armstrong, J. Scott & Reibstein, David J., 1985. "Evidence on the Value of Strategic Planning in Marketing: How Much Planning Should a Marketing Planner Plan?," MPRA Paper 81680, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Derek C. Jones, 2013. "The Ombudsman: Employee Ownership as a Mechanism to Enhance Corporate Governance and Moderate Executive Pay Levels," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 43(6), pages 599-601, December.
    7. Christopher S. Armstrong, 2013. "The Ombudsman: A Closer Look at the Efficiency of Top Executive Pay and Incentives," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 43(6), pages 590-592, December.
    8. Philippe Jacquart & J. Scott Armstrong, 2013. "The Ombudsman: Are Top Executives Paid Enough? An Evidence-Based Review," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 43(6), pages 580-589, December.
    9. Green, Kesten C., 2005. "Game theory, simulated interaction, and unaided judgement for forecasting decisions in conflicts: Further evidence," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 463-472.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. J. Scott Armstrong, 1986. "The value of formal planning for strategic decisions: Reply," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(2), pages 183-185, March.
    2. de Villiers, Rouxelle & Woodside, Arch G. & Marshall, Roger, 2016. "Making tough decisions competently: Assessing the value of product portfolio planning methods, devil’s advocacy, group discussion, weighting priorities, and evidenced-based information," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 2849-2862.
    3. Wettstein, Dominik J. & Boes, Stefan, 2022. "How value-based policy interventions influence price negotiations for new medicines: An experimental approach and initial evidence," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(2), pages 112-121.
    4. Potters, Jan & Stoop, Jan, 2016. "Do cheaters in the lab also cheat in the field?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 26-33.
    5. Yamada, Katsunori & Sato, Masayuki, 2013. "Another avenue for anatomy of income comparisons: Evidence from hypothetical choice experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 35-57.
    6. Lechthaler, Wolfgang & Ring, Patrick, 2021. "Labor force participation, job search effort and unemployment insurance in the laboratory," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 748-778.
    7. Johannes Abeler & Felix Marklein, 2017. "Fungibility, Labels, and Consumption," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 15(1), pages 99-127.
    8. Amadou Boly & Robert Gillanders & Topi Miettinen, 2016. "Deterrence, peer effect, and legitimacy in anti-corruption policy-making: An experimental analysis," WIDER Working Paper Series 137, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    9. Debarliev, Stojan & Trpkova, Marija, 2011. "Strategic planning practice in transition economies: Empirical evidence from the Macedonian context," Business and Economic Horizons (BEH), Prague Development Center (PRADEC), vol. 4(1), pages 1-13, January.
    10. Thieme, Lutz & Winkelhake, Olaf & Hartmann, Ulrich, 2014. "Fairness als universelle Norm? Empirische Evidenz ohne Manna [Fairness as a universal norm? Empiric evidence without manna]," Working Papers of the European Institute for Socioeconomics 12, European Institute for Socioeconomics (EIS), Saarbrücken.
    11. Armstrong, J. Scott & Green, Kesten C. & Graefe, Andreas, 2015. "Golden rule of forecasting: Be conservative," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(8), pages 1717-1731.
    12. Omar Al-Ubaydli & John A. List, 2019. "How natural field experiments have enhanced our understanding of unemployment," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 3(1), pages 33-39, January.
    13. Krane, Ronja & Eulerich, Marc, 2020. "Going global: Factors influencing the internationalization of the internal audit function," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    14. Rode, Julian & Le Menestrel, Marc & Cornelissen, Gert, 2017. "Ecosystem Service Arguments Enhance Public Support for Environmental Protection - But Beware of the Numbers!," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 213-221.
    15. Stefano Carattini & Andrea Baranzini & Philippe Thalmann & Frédéric Varone & Frank Vöhringer, 2017. "Green Taxes in a Post-Paris World: Are Millions of Nays Inevitable?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(1), pages 97-128, September.
    16. Arno Riedl & Paul Smeets, 2017. "Why Do Investors Hold Socially Responsible Mutual Funds?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 72(6), pages 2505-2550, December.
    17. Snyder, Ralph D. & Ord, J. Keith & Koehler, Anne B. & McLaren, Keith R. & Beaumont, Adrian N., 2017. "Forecasting compositional time series: A state space approach," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 502-512.
    18. Dr. Oloo Caroline, PhD, 2024. "Strategic Planning Impacts on the Performance Dynamics of Micro Enterprises in Kisumu County: An in-Depth Analysis," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 8(3), pages 219-232, March.
    19. Gary Charness & Francesco Feri & Miguel A. Meléndez‐Jiménez & Matthias Sutter, 2014. "Experimental Games on Networks: Underpinnings of Behavior and Equilibrium Selection," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82(5), pages 1615-1670, September.
    20. Luís Santos-Pinto & Adrian Bruhin & José Mata & Thomas Åstebro, 2015. "Detecting heterogeneous risk attitudes with mixed gambles," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 79(4), pages 573-600, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:orinte:v:43:y:2013:i:6:p:602-604. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.