IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sek/iefpro/4807442.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Corporate monitoring mechanism and corporate governance influence CEO compensation level: Evidence from non-financial firms of Pakistan

Author

Listed:
  • Anam Tasawar

    (University of Gujrat)

Abstract

Managerial compensation is strategically pivotal and practically interesting to manage as it has long-lasting ties with firm?s performance. It is regarded as most crucial tool to attract and retain the top-notched professionals to achieve the firm?s strategic and long term objectives. The executives tends to support their comparatively higher level of compensation sometimes, may be at the cost of priority to firm?s value and interest of principles. In corporate finance literature, this phenomenon of opportunistic behavior has been controlled by various monitoring mechanisms. The new spectacle is apposite in Pakistani financial institutions that have no more strict application of compensation regulation. The current study empirically evaluates the impact of different corporate governance attributes such as institutional shareholders? activism, independence of audit committee and board structure and block holding on the level of compensation paid to CEO of Pakistani listed firms for a period of 2007-2013. All these personas worked as monitoring mechanism for CEOs is scrutiny through stepwise regression. The results found that independent audit committee and board of director along with dual CEO structure and greater family ownership are helpful in mitigating the higher level of CEO compensation with is in align with the agency cost hypothesis. Moreover, higher financial institutional ownership found positively related to CEO compensation which is in accordance with the strategic alliance hypothesis. However, the role of institutions in deciding CEO compensation becomes negative in case of family firms as compared to non-family firms.

Suggested Citation

  • Anam Tasawar, 2017. "Corporate monitoring mechanism and corporate governance influence CEO compensation level: Evidence from non-financial firms of Pakistan," Proceedings of Economics and Finance Conferences 4807442, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences.
    • Handle: RePEc:sek:iefpro:4807442
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://iises.net/proceedings/8th-economics-finance-conference-london/table-of-content/detail?cid=48&iid=014&rid=7442
    File Function: First version, 2017
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Martin J. Conyon & Lerong He, 2016. "Executive Compensation and Corporate Fraud in China," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 134(4), pages 669-691, April.
    2. Andres Almazan & Javier Suarez, 2003. "Entrenchment and Severance Pay in Optimal Governance Structures," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 58(2), pages 519-548, April.
    3. Ferdinand T. Siagian & Elok Tresnaningsih, 2011. "The impact of independent directors and independent audit committees on earnings quality reported by Indonesian firms," Asian Review of Accounting, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 19(3), pages 192-207, September.
    4. Yermack, David, 1996. "Higher market valuation of companies with a small board of directors," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 185-211, February.
    5. Thomas H. Noe, 2002. "Investor Activism and Financial Market Structure," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 15(1), pages 289-318, March.
    6. Hermalin, Benjamin E & Weisbach, Michael S, 1998. "Endogenously Chosen Boards of Directors and Their Monitoring of the CEO," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(1), pages 96-118, March.
    7. Weisbach, Michael S., 1988. "Outside directors and CEO turnover," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1-2), pages 431-460, January.
    8. Klein, April, 1998. "Firm Performance and Board Committee Structure," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 41(1), pages 275-303, April.
    9. Guercio, Diane Del & Hawkins, Jennifer, 1999. "The motivation and impact of pension fund activism," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 293-340, June.
    10. Croci, Ettore & Gonenc, Halit & Ozkan, Neslihan, 2012. "CEO compensation, family control, and institutional investors in Continental Europe," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 36(12), pages 3318-3335.
    11. Nikos Vafeas & James Waegelein, 2007. "The association between audit committees, compensation incentives, and corporate audit fees," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 241-255, April.
    12. Stephen L. Nesbitt, 1994. "LONG‐TERM REWARDS FROM SHAREHOLDER ACTIVISM: A STUDY OF THE “CalPERS EFFECT”," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 6(4), pages 75-80, January.
    13. Mike Burkart & Denis Gromb & Fausto Panunzi, 1997. "Large Shareholders, Monitoring, and the Value of the Firm," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(3), pages 693-728.
    14. Jay C. Hartzell & Laura T. Starks, 2003. "Institutional Investors and Executive Compensation," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 58(6), pages 2351-2374, December.
    15. Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W, 1986. "Large Shareholders and Corporate Control," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(3), pages 461-488, June.
    16. Anil Shivdasani & David Yermack, 1999. "CEO Involvement in the Selection of New Board Members: An Empirical Analysis," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 54(5), pages 1829-1853, October.
    17. Renée B. Adams & Daniel Ferreira, 2007. "A Theory of Friendly Boards," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 62(1), pages 217-250, February.
    18. Steven Huddart, 1993. "The Effect of a Large Shareholder on Corporate Value," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(11), pages 1407-1421, November.
    19. Andres Almazan & Javier Suarez, 2003. "Entrenchment and Severance Pay in Optimal Governance Structures," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 58(2), pages 519-547, April.
    20. Réal Labelle & Daniel B. Thornton & L. He, 2009. "Board monitoring, audit committee effectiveness, and financial reporting quality: Review and synthesis of empirical evidence," Post-Print halshs-00551606, HAL.
    21. 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 225-264, April.
    22. Chen, Chao-Jung & Hsu, Chung-Yuan & Chen, Yu-Lin, 2014. "The impact of family control on the top management compensation mix and incentive orientation," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 29-46.
    23. Holmstrom, Bengt & Tirole, Jean, 1993. "Market Liquidity and Performance Monitoring," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(4), pages 678-709, August.
    24. Julie Cotter & Mark Silvester, 2003. "Board and Monitoring Committee Independence," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 39(2), pages 211-232, June.
    25. Wahal, Sunil, 1996. "Pension Fund Activism and Firm Performance," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 31(1), pages 1-23, March.
    26. Chalmers, Keryn & Koh, Ping-Sheng & Stapledon, Geof, 2006. "The determinants of CEO compensation: Rent extraction or labour demand?," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 259-275.
    27. Smith, Michael P, 1996. "Shareholder Activism by Institutional Investors: Evidence for CalPERS," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 51(1), pages 227-252, March.
    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. Wolfgang Drobetz & Pascal Pensa & Markus M. Schmid, 2007. "Estimating the Cost of Executive Stock Options: evidence from Switzerland," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(5), pages 798-815, September.
    2. Renee B. Adams & Benjamin E. Hermalin & Michael S. Weisbach, 2010. "The Role of Boards of Directors in Corporate Governance: A Conceptual Framework and Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 48(1), pages 58-107, March.
    3. Easterwood, John C. & İnce, Özgür Ş. & Raheja, Charu G., 2012. "The evolution of boards and CEOs following performance declines," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 727-744.
    4. Szilagyi, P.G., 2007. "Corporate governance and the agency costs of debt and outside equity," Other publications TiSEM 9520d40a-224f-43a8-9bf9-b, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    5. Richard Chung & Scott Fung & Szu-Yin Hung, 2012. "Institutional Investors and Firm Efficiency of Real Estate Investment Trusts," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 171-211, June.
    6. Słomka-Gołębiowska, Agnieszka & Urbanek, Piotr, 2016. "Corporate boards, large blockholders and executive compensation in banks: Evidence from Poland," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 203-220.
    7. Hadani, Michael & Goranova, Maria & Khan, Raihan, 2011. "Institutional investors, shareholder activism, and earnings management," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 64(12), pages 1352-1360.
    8. Becker, Bo & Cronqvist, Henrik & Fahlenbrach, Rüdiger, 2011. "Estimating the Effects of Large Shareholders Using a Geographic Instrument," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(4), pages 907-942, August.
    9. Drymiotes, George, 2007. "The monitoring role of insiders," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 359-377, December.
    10. Cheng, Xu & Kong, Dongmin & Kong, Gaowen, 2022. "Foreign institutional investors and executive compensation incentives: Evidence from China," Journal of Multinational Financial Management, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    11. Manika Kohli, 2018. "Impact of Ownership Type and Board Characteristics on the Pay–Performance Relationship: Evidence from India," Indian Journal of Corporate Governance, , vol. 11(1), pages 1-34, June.
    12. Lily Qiu, 2005. "Managerial Reputation Concerns, Outside Monitoring, and Investment Efficiency," Working Papers 2005-08, Brown University, Department of Economics.
    13. Chauhan, Yogesh & Dey, Dipanjan Kumar & Jha, Rajneesh Ranjan, 2016. "Board structure, controlling ownership, and business groups: Evidence from India," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 63-83.
    14. Ferreira, Daniel & Ferreira, Miguel A. & Raposo, Clara C., 2011. "Board structure and price informativeness," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(3), pages 523-545, March.
    15. Loureiro, Gilberto & Makhija, Anil K. & Zhang, Dan, 2011. "Why Do Some CEOs Work for a One-Dollary Salary?," Working Paper Series 2011-7, Ohio State University, Charles A. Dice Center for Research in Financial Economics.
    16. Hussein Abedi Shamsabadi & Byung-Seong Min & Richard Chung, 2016. "Corporate governance and dividend strategy: lessons from Australia," International Journal of Managerial Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 12(5), pages 583-610, October.
    17. Nanda, Vikram & Onal, Bunyamin, 2016. "Incentive contracting when boards have related industry expertise," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 1-22.
    18. Cornett, Marcia Millon & Marcus, Alan J. & Saunders, Anthony & Tehranian, Hassan, 2007. "The impact of institutional ownership on corporate operating performance," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 1771-1794, June.
    19. Franco Ernesto Rubino & Paolo Tenuta & Domenico Rocco Cambrea, 2017. "Board characteristics effects on performance in family and non-family business: a multi-theoretical approach," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 21(3), pages 623-658, September.
    20. Aman, Hiroyuki & Nguyen, Pascal, 2013. "Does good governance matter to debtholders? Evidence from the credit ratings of Japanese firms," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 14-34.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Managerial Compensation; Corporate Governance; monitoring mechanism;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • G30 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - General
    • G39 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Other

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:sek:iefpro:4807442. 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: Klara Cermakova (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://iises.net/ .

    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.