No Result
View All Result
SUBSCRIBE | NO FEES, NO PAYWALLS
MANAGE MY SUBSCRIPTION
NEWSLETTER
Corporate Compliance Insights
  • Home
  • About
    • About CCI
    • Writing for CCI
    • NEW: CCI Press – Book Publishing
    • Advertise With Us
  • Explore Topics
    • See All Articles
    • Compliance
    • Ethics
    • Risk
    • FCPA
    • Governance
    • Fraud
    • Internal Audit
    • HR Compliance
    • Cybersecurity
    • Data Privacy
    • Financial Services
    • Well-Being at Work
    • Leadership and Career
    • Opinion
  • Vendor News
  • Career Connection
  • Events
    • Calendar
    • Submit an Event
  • Library
    • Whitepapers & Reports
    • eBooks
    • CCI Press & Compliance Bookshelf
  • Podcasts
  • Videos
  • Subscribe
  • Home
  • About
    • About CCI
    • Writing for CCI
    • NEW: CCI Press – Book Publishing
    • Advertise With Us
  • Explore Topics
    • See All Articles
    • Compliance
    • Ethics
    • Risk
    • FCPA
    • Governance
    • Fraud
    • Internal Audit
    • HR Compliance
    • Cybersecurity
    • Data Privacy
    • Financial Services
    • Well-Being at Work
    • Leadership and Career
    • Opinion
  • Vendor News
  • Career Connection
  • Events
    • Calendar
    • Submit an Event
  • Library
    • Whitepapers & Reports
    • eBooks
    • CCI Press & Compliance Bookshelf
  • Podcasts
  • Videos
  • Subscribe
No Result
View All Result
Corporate Compliance Insights
Home Governance

Communications Challenges at the New Frontiers of Corporate Governance

by Chuck Nathan
January 21, 2014
in Governance
frustrated woman on phone

The principal corporate governance campaigns of the past decade have reached a plateau in terms of both investor commitment and implementation. These governance issues (such as majority voting, de-classifying staggered boards, eliminating super-majority votes and executive compensation excesses) are not by any means going away. Indeed, there are concerted investor-led efforts to push favored corporate governance “best practices” down the corporate chain to mid-cap and small-cap companies. However, the activist community has clearly won the policy battles surrounding these governance principles, and their “sizzle” is dissipating.

Policy stasis does not become corporate governance activism, as its very name implies. Corporate governance activists will develop new “green fields” to plow; otherwise they risk becoming irrelevant. The question is not whether corporate governance activists will move on, but rather where they will go.

While there are a number of possible new foci, two stand out in particular:

  • the ratio of CEO pay to the median pay of all company employees; and
  • company sustainability, alternatively called ESG (environmental, social and governance) or CSR (corporate social responsibility), in terms of both company behavior and reporting to investors.

CEO Pay Ratio

Under the Dodd-Frank Act, CEO pay ratio will become a mandated disclosure for all public companies as soon as the SEC finishes its rule-making, widely expected in 2014 to take effect beginning with calendar year 2015. No matter how the eventual rule turns out (in terms of treatment of part-time, temporary and foreign employees and in terms of data collection and calculation), the reported ratio will be very high, even for CEOs whose compensation is relatively modest. Many observers believe the statutory requirement for pay ratio disclosure was a politically motivated Congressional mandate intended to create embarrassment and public pressure to reduce CEO pay. Whether or not this was its genesis, the disclosure will have that effect.

Populist (and political) sentiment against income disparity in the United States continues to rise. The public, the press and the political classes consistently demonstrate a lack of confidence in the integrity and fairness of corporate America, and there many signs of palpable anger at corporate America’s executive pay levels. These views are increasingly embraced by institutional investors of all stripes, even those who run on a for-profit model at which pay for senior executives is hardly modest.  A number of legislative proposals have surfaced in Europe explicitly designed to cap CEO pay ratios, all at rates that would have profound effect if imported to the U.S., as some foreign-based investors would like. While this risk appears very remote, it is part and parcel of what seems to be widespread pushback against current senior executive pay levels throughout the Western economies.

These observations illustrate the potentially explosive nature of the mandatory pay ratio disclosure regime that will come permanently to the U.S. next year. Consequences almost certainly include union exploitation of the CEO’s pay ratio in confrontations with management on almost any issue. Moreover, unions and “socially conscious” institutional investors (not to mention individual shareholders ranging from the “gadfly” to a politically progressive owner of a few hundred shares) could easily launch a wave of shareholder proposals aimed at reducing a CEO’s pay ratio, either in the context of some form of labor dissatisfaction or simply as a matter of what they will label good corporate governance.

To compound the problem, it seems clear that the SEC rule will make comparability among companies extremely difficult. As proposed, the rule will allow great flexibility in permissible statistical methodologies for calculating the median pay at any given company. Moreover, the proposed rule does not permit adjusting median pay to take into account temporary, part-time or seasonal employment or differences in wage scales in different geographical areas inside or, worse, outside the U.S. Finally, the proposed rule does not deal with differences in business models, such as the use of independent contractors rather than employees to perform functionally equivalent tasks or the use of subcontractors rather than company-owned plants to produce sub-assemblies or finished products.

The bottom line is clear. Public companies need to plan for a 2015 implementation of CEO pay ratio disclosure sooner rather than later. In addition to determining the data collection and manipulation required simply for compliance with the new rule (a task that could easily take all or most of 2014), each public company should begin developing its plan for presenting the required ratio in the context of a narrative that puts the single data point (which is intended to provoke a strong negative reaction) into a more meaningful context that investors, the financial press and hopefully politicians can understand.

What does this mean in terms of concrete action? We believe every public U.S. company should:

  • Establish a team to deal with the pay ratio disclosure and develop and hone the company’s explanatory narrative.
  • Determine the informational requirements needed to support the company’s narrative because they may be as or more complicated than the generation of the median pay number itself.
  • Assess the desirability of creating a meaningful peer group for purposes of the analysis, taking into account similarities and differences in businesses and business models.
  • Develop the framework for the company’s peer group narrative, taking into account availability of information about proposed peer companies.
  • Adjust planning as the SEC rule-making process continues in order to stay abreast of changes in the final rule.

Sustainability

Sustainability, like the Tower of Babel, has many voices. According to The Conference Board, sustainability as a concept encompasses 72 separate environmental, social and governance practices. A plethora of competing measurement standards for company sustainability performance also exists, such as the GRI Framework for Reporting, CSRHub Ratings, Brandlogic’s Sustainability IQ Matrix, Bloomberg’s ESG Disclosure Scores, Newsweek’s Greenest Companies, CR 100 Best Corporate Citizens and the EIRIS Global Sustainability Ratings. The multitude of issues under the sustainability umbrella coupled with different – and often competing – reporting metrics is both good news and bad news.

It is good news in the sense that a company can shape its sustainability practices and reporting to its business model and its aspirations. Unlike most corporate governance best practices, there is no single “right” sustainability model (or, as some would have it, straitjacket). But the very imprecision and amorphous nature of the concept is also bad news. Unless a corporation is truly comprehensive in its definition of sustainability and its sustainability achievements—a very difficult goal, if not impossible—critics may be able to find fault by focusing on those particular aspects of sustainability ignored by the company or at which it performs relatively poorly.

Moreover, it is increasingly clear that sustainability is of growing importance to investors, particularly those who pride themselves on their corporate governance activism. This investor group notably includes state and local pension funds and union pension funds, which are the most active proponents of use of shareholder resolutions to change corporate conduct. In fact, the largest single category of shareholder proposals in recent years has been those dealing with sustainability issues. Corporate governance advocates are buttressed in their increasing attention to sustainability and its measurement by a growing number of academic studies purporting to demonstrate a high degree of correlation between good sustainability practices and higher share valuations. There is also academic evidence that sustainability efforts can enhance reputation, increase employee retention and increase resilience in times of crisis. Finally, there can be little doubt that the other side of the sustainability coin—such as worker exploitation in a company’s supply chain, poor environmental practices or exposure of confidential customer information—can cause significant reputational loss and customer antipathy.

While many companies issue sustainability reports on an annual basis, many do not. Companies in the latter category should re-examine this policy and, if practicable, begin reporting on their sustainability record every year in conjunction with the issuance of their annual report to shareholders. However, it is critical to bear in mind that the content of the report is more important that its existence. Providing an annual report on sustainability will have a positive “check the box” compliance effect. But unless the report focuses on the company’s most salient sustainability challenges, it can all too easily become the source of investor criticism and wind up doing more harm than good.

Accordingly, we believe that a company should:

  • Regularly identify its potential sustainability trouble spots and develop programs targeted to improving its sustainability profile.
  • Monitor sustainability initiatives, both domestic and international, to be sure it is up to date on the sustainability issues du jour and does not get blindsided by an attack based on the latest and greatest sustainability issue.
  • Survey the different sustainability indexes and measurement services and positively work to improve its ratings, at least in the more prominent ones.
  • Undertake a sustainability communications program that might include, in addition to an annual sustainability report:
    • a company Web page targeted to investors focusing on its sustainability programs;
    • separate communications streams (and delivery protocols) devoted to employees, customers and local communities to deal with sustainability issues of most relevance to each constituency;
    • creation of a public affairs function to deal with sustainability issues;
    • development of proactive responses to address sustainability vulnerabilities, as well as standby statements for investor or media inquiries; and
    • creation of a crisis response team and protocol against the possible occurrence of a sustainability “crisis.”

Conclusion

The writing is on the wall for anyone to see. Governance activists have already begun to pivot from their more traditional concerns to new horizons—first and foremost CEO pay ratio and sustainability. Public companies should not wait for shareholder resolutions on these topics. Rather, they should proactively prepare to deal with these issues on the merits and communicate their stories to all of their constituencies on a regular basis and effectively.


Tags: Third Party Risk Management
Previous Post

Five Essential Leadership Traits

Next Post

Conselium: Boston Scientific Corporation Names Sergey Gusev as Legal Counsel in CEE & Russia

Chuck Nathan

Chuck Nathan

Chuck Nathan advises global clients on M&A, financial transactions, governance, Board issues and shareholder matters at RLM Finsbury, a leading global strategic communications firm.  Prior to joining RLM Finsbury, Nathan was partner at Latham & Watkins, a large international law firm where in his capacity as Global Co-Chair of the firm’s M&A practice he represented companies and financial advisors in many significant, high-profile mergers and acquisitions, including Roche’s acquisition of the public’s minority stake in Genentech, InBev’s acquisition of Anheuser-Busch, and LiveNation’s merger with Ticketmaster Entertainment.
Nathan has been named by the National Association of Corporate Directors as one of the 100 most influential corporate governance professionals for two consecutive years. He is currently serving as a member of a Conference Board Governance Center Advisory Board on Shareholder Engagement, and as a member of a task force dealing with Say on Pay that has been created by the Conference Board Governance Center, the American Society of Corporate Secretaries and Governance Professionals and the Center on Executive Compensation.
Nathan is the author of many articles on M&A and corporate governance topics, is a frequent panelist at M&A and corporate governance seminars and programs, teaches M&A at Yale Law School, and has chaired a number of bar association committees. Nathan received his B.A. from The Johns Hopkins University and his J.D. from Yale Law School, where he graduated summa cum laude.
Read recent articles and blog posts authored by or about Chuck Nathan:
·         Conference Board, Debunking Myths About Activist Investors ·         Conference Board, Myths and Realities of Say on Pay Engagement ·         “Nathan the sensible” by Hoffer Kaback, Directors and Boards ·         A 12-Step Program to Truly Good Corporate Governance ·         Corporate Governance Activism: Here To Stay? ·         “Say on Pay 2011: Proxy Advisors on Course for Hegemony” ·         Future of Institutional Share Voting Revisited: A Fourth Paradigm ·         Proxy Advisory Business: Apotheosis or Apogee? ·         The Future of Institutional Share Voting: Three Paradigms ·         The Parallel Universes of Institutional Investing and Institutional Voting

Related Posts

credit score gauge

Sales at All Costs? Unified Credit Risk Management Can Squash Bad Deals Before They Happen

by Matthew Debbage
March 15, 2023

The collapse of a business doesn’t usually happen all at once. There are warning signs. Late payments, legal filings and...

ProcessUnity Unify Third Party Risk and Cybersecurity Whitepaper-f

Unify Third Party Risk & Cybersecurity for Sustainable Resiliency

by Corporate Compliance Insights
March 14, 2023

Align risk reduction efforts by bringing together third-party and cybersecurity functions White Paper Unify Third-Party Risk & Cybersecurity for Sustainable...

risk cliff

Gartner: 84% of Enterprise Risk Management Teams Have Overlooked a Third-Party Issue

by Staff and Wire Reports
February 21, 2023

A staggering eight in 10 executive risk committee members say their organizations have experienced operations disruptions due to a third-party...

thread needle

Regulatory Clarity Is Coming, But Companies Still Need to Thread the Needle on ESG

by Dean Alms
February 15, 2023

A handful of ESG-related regulations are in the works or go into effect in 2023 targeting global supply chains. Despite...

Next Post

Conselium: Boston Scientific Corporation Names Sergey Gusev as Legal Counsel in CEE & Russia

Compliance Job Interview Q&A

Jump to a Topic

AML Anti-Bribery Anti-Corruption Artificial Intelligence (AI) Automation Banking Board of Directors Board Risk Oversight Business Continuity Planning California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) Code of Conduct Communications Management Corporate Culture COVID-19 Cryptocurrency Culture of Ethics Cybercrime Cyber Risk Data Analytics Data Breach Data Governance DOJ Download Due Diligence Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) ESG FCPA Enforcement Actions Financial Crime Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) GDPR HIPAA Know Your Customer (KYC) Machine Learning Monitoring RegTech Reputation Risk Risk Assessment SEC Social Media Risk Supply Chain Technology Third Party Risk Management Tone at the Top Training Whistleblowing
No Result
View All Result

Privacy Policy

Founded in 2010, CCI is the web’s premier global independent news source for compliance, ethics, risk and information security. 

Got a news tip? Get in touch. Want a weekly round-up in your inbox? Sign up for free. No subscription fees, no paywalls. 

Follow Us

Browse Topics:

  • CCI Press
  • Compliance
  • Compliance Podcasts
  • Cybersecurity
  • Data Privacy
  • eBooks Published by CCI
  • Ethics
  • FCPA
  • Featured
  • Financial Services
  • Fraud
  • Governance
  • GRC Vendor News
  • HR Compliance
  • Internal Audit
  • Leadership and Career
  • On Demand Webinars
  • Opinion
  • Resource Library
  • Risk
  • Uncategorized
  • Videos
  • Webinars
  • Well-Being
  • Whitepapers

© 2022 Corporate Compliance Insights

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • About
    • About CCI
    • Writing for CCI
    • NEW: CCI Press – Book Publishing
    • Advertise With Us
  • Explore Topics
    • See All Articles
    • Compliance
    • Ethics
    • Risk
    • FCPA
    • Governance
    • Fraud
    • Internal Audit
    • HR Compliance
    • Cybersecurity
    • Data Privacy
    • Financial Services
    • Well-Being at Work
    • Leadership and Career
    • Opinion
  • Vendor News
  • Career Connection
  • Events
    • Calendar
    • Submit an Event
  • Library
    • Whitepapers & Reports
    • eBooks
    • CCI Press & Compliance Bookshelf
  • Podcasts
  • Videos
  • Subscribe

© 2022 Corporate Compliance Insights

Welcome to CCI. This site uses cookies. Please click OK to accept. Privacy Policy
Cookie settingsACCEPT
Manage consent

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
CookieDurationDescription
cookielawinfo-checbox-analytics11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checbox-functional11 monthsThe cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checbox-others11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy11 monthsThe cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
Functional
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytics
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Advertisement
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
Others
Other uncategorized cookies are those that are being analyzed and have not been classified into a category as yet.
SAVE & ACCEPT