CEO performance targets: The impact of Big 4 accounting firms versus other compensation consultants

Using a sample of ASX 500 firms over the 2005–2019 period, we document substantial variation in the use of performance targets within Chief Executive Officer (CEO) compensation contracts, contrasting firms advised by Big 4 accounting entities with other compensation consulting firms. Firms that engage a Big 4 accounting firm are more likely to implement explicit non-financial performance targets within the short-term incentive plan, effectively minimising opportunities for post hoc justification. They also favour the incorporation of relative performance targets that mitigate pay for luck in the long-term incentive plan. Firms that engage a Big 4 accounting firm demonstrate a similar pay-for-performance relation to firms that do not engage a compensation consultant, while firms engaging non-Big 4 consultants exhibit a lower pay-for-performance relation. Our findings suggest that Big 4 accounting firms provide compensation recommendations that encourage the alignment of interests between managers and shareholders. JEL Classification: J33, M12, M52, L25

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Australian Journal of Management
Published
2024-10-07
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/03128962241270838
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Corporate Finance and Governance
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.95
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

CEO performance targets: The impact of Big 4 accounting firms versus other compensation consultants

Helen Spiropoulos, Rebecca L. Bachmann, Sameera Rasool
1 citations
Australian Journal of Management
Corporate Finance and Governance
0.95
article

CEO performance targets: The impact of Big 4 accounting firms versus other compensation consultants

Helen Spiropoulos, Rebecca L. Bachmann, Sameera Rasool
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Using a sample of ASX 500 firms over the 2005–2019 period, we document substantial variation in the use of performance targets within Chief Executive Officer (CEO) compensation contracts, contrasting firms advised by Big 4 accounting entities with other compensation consulting firms. Firms that engage a Big 4 accounting firm are more likely to implement explicit non-financial performance targets within the short-term incentive plan, effectively minimising opportunities for post hoc justification. They also favour the incorporation of relative performance targets that mitigate pay for luck in the long-term incentive plan. Firms that engage a Big 4 accounting firm demonstrate a similar pay-for-performance relation to firms that do not engage a compensation consultant, while firms engaging non-Big 4 consultants exhibit a lower pay-for-performance relation. Our findings suggest that Big 4 accounting firms provide compensation recommendations that encourage the alignment of interests between managers and shareholders. JEL Classification: J33, M12, M52, L25

Australian Journal of ManagementVol. 50(4)
University of Technology Sydney (AU), Macquarie University (AU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 19%
Corporate Finance and Governance
0.95
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.