The Optimal and Actual Use of EVA versus Earnings in Actual Compensation
Proponents of EVA and related "shareholder value" measures intend to replace earnings and to supplement stock returns by including their own measures in managerial compensation schemes. Stern Stewart's EVA appears to be the most widely recognized measure. However, there are not very many firms have explicitly adopted such schemes. One obvious reason, which we account for explicitly, is that they are not appropriate for all firms. An additional, less obvious fact, is that firms can directly or even indirectly mimic EVA measures. Firms such as Clorox and O.M. Scott use their own performance measures, which are arguably variants of EVA. In this paper, we use publicly available estimates of firm level EVA and examine whether firms pay according to it regardless of their explicit policies. This research approach captures the fact mentioned above, that firms can do home-made EVA performance evaluation. We adapt the technique of Garvey and Milbourn (2000) to model the optimal weight placed on EVA at the firm level. There is enormous cross-sectional heterogeneity in the estimated "value-added" of EVA for various firms. With our estimates of optimal weights, we verify empirically that compensation paid to the top five executives in over 2,000 firms is highly consistent with our optimal compensation arrangements.
|Date of creation:||2000|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 500 E. 9th Street, Claremont, CA 91711|
Phone: (909) 607-3041
Fax: (909) 621-8249
Web page: http://www.claremontmckenna.edu/rdschool/papers/
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Yermack, David, 1995. "Do corporations award CEO stock options effectively?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(2-3), pages 237-269.
- Ross, Stephen A, 1973. "The Economic Theory of Agency: The Principal's Problem," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 63(2), pages 134-39, May.
- Bikhchandani, Sushil & Hirshleifer, David & Welch, Ivo, 1992.
"A Theory of Fads, Fashion, Custom, and Cultural Change in Informational Cascades,"
Journal of Political Economy,
University of Chicago Press, vol. 100(5), pages 992-1026, October.
- Sushil Bikhchandani & David Hirshleifer & Ivo Welch, 2010. "A theory of Fads, Fashion, Custom and cultural change as informational Cascades," Levine's Working Paper Archive 1193, David K. Levine.
- Garen, John E, 1994. "Executive Compensation and Principal-Agent Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(6), pages 1175-99, December.
- Robert T. Kleiman, 1999. "Some New Evidence On Eva Companies," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 12(2), pages 80-91.
- Jensen, Michael C & Murphy, Kevin J, 1990.
"Performance Pay and Top-Management Incentives,"
Journal of Political Economy,
University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(2), pages 225-64, April.
- Michael C. Jensen & Kevin J. Murphy, 1990.
"Ceo Incentives - It'S Not How Much You Pay, But How,"
Journal of Applied Corporate Finance,
Morgan Stanley, vol. 3(3), pages 36-49.
- Rajesh Aggarwal & Andrew A. Samwick, 1998.
"The Other Side of the Tradeoff: The Impact of Risk on Executive Compensation,"
NBER Working Papers
6634, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Rajesh K. Aggarwal & Andrew A. Samwick, 1999. "The Other Side of the Trade-off: The Impact of Risk on Executive Compensation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(1), pages 65-105, February.
- Bengt Holmstrom, 1979.
"Moral Hazard and Observability,"
Bell Journal of Economics,
The RAND Corporation, vol. 10(1), pages 74-91, Spring.
- Gerald T. Garvey & Todd T. Milbourn, 2000. "EVA versus Earnings: Does it Matter which is More Highly Correlated with Stock Returns?," Claremont Colleges Working Papers 2000-52, Claremont Colleges.
- Paul, Jonathan M, 1992. "On the Efficiency of Stock-Based Compensation," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 5(3), pages 471-502.
- Fama, Eugene F. & French, Kenneth R., 1997. "Industry costs of equity," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 153-193, February.
- Haubrich, Joseph G, 1994.
"Risk Aversion, Performance Pay, and the Principal-Agent Problem,"
Journal of Political Economy,
University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(2), pages 258-76, April.
- Joseph G. Haubrich, 1991. "Risk aversion, performance pay, and the principal-agent problem," Working Paper 9118, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.
- Wallace, James S., 1997. "Adopting residual income-based compensation plans: Do you get what you pay for?," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 275-300, December.
- Bengt Holmstrom & Paul R. Milgrom, 1985.
"Aggregation and Linearity in the Provision of Intertemporal Incentives,"
Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers
742, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
- Holmstrom, Bengt & Milgrom, Paul, 1987. "Aggregation and Linearity in the Provision of Intertemporal Incentives," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(2), pages 303-28, March.
- Sloan, Richard G., 1993. "Accounting earnings and top executive compensation," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1-3), pages 55-100, April.
- Rogerson, William P, 1997. "Intertemporal Cost Allocation and Managerial Investment Incentives: A Theory Explaining the Use of Economic Value Added as a Performance Measure," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(4), pages 770-95, August.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:clm:clmeco:2000-53. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ()
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.