CEO Compensation in IPOs

Research Question/Issue: Does inside debt compensation affect previous thought on compensation effects in IPOs? What explains variation in compensation when a company goes public? What is the composition of CEO compensation in an IPO? What types of compensation may be more optimal for or are associa...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Randy Beavers
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Taylor & Francis Group 2019-01-01
Series:Cogent Economics & Finance
Subjects:
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2019.1640099
id doaj-72c6c33f8ecd42d89a76b0a2d2ea80ef
record_format Article
spelling doaj-72c6c33f8ecd42d89a76b0a2d2ea80ef2021-02-18T13:53:27ZengTaylor & Francis GroupCogent Economics & Finance2332-20392019-01-017110.1080/23322039.2019.16400991640099CEO Compensation in IPOsRandy Beavers0Seattle Pacific UniversityResearch Question/Issue: Does inside debt compensation affect previous thought on compensation effects in IPOs? What explains variation in compensation when a company goes public? What is the composition of CEO compensation in an IPO? What types of compensation may be more optimal for or are associated with future financial success for the firm? Research Findings/Insights: Using a sample of 852 IPOs in the United States from 2006 until 2014, we find only one-third of firms have or reported having compensation broken down further into categories of pensions, retirement plans, and deferred compensation. These types of compensation are associated with higher financial success through profitability and asset management. Option compensation remains detrimental to a firm’s financial success through lower profitability and worse asset management. Theoretical/Academic Implications: A theoretical compensation model provides and empirically explains 79% of the variation in compensation in IPOs in the first year of the public firm. In addition, this study finds the majority of firms are still inaccurately reporting deferred compensation, at least in the Summary Compensation Table. Future research could look to see why this is the case. Practitioner/Policy Implications: Further investigation and potential litigation by the SEC may be necessary in the future to force firms to place information appropriately in the summary compensation table, especially concerning pension plans, retirement accounts, and other deferred compensation. In addition, individuals on compensation committees may consider giving the CEO more long-term compensation through stock and pensions instead of options.http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2019.1640099corporate governanceexecutive compensationinitial public offerings
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Randy Beavers
spellingShingle Randy Beavers
CEO Compensation in IPOs
Cogent Economics & Finance
corporate governance
executive compensation
initial public offerings
author_facet Randy Beavers
author_sort Randy Beavers
title CEO Compensation in IPOs
title_short CEO Compensation in IPOs
title_full CEO Compensation in IPOs
title_fullStr CEO Compensation in IPOs
title_full_unstemmed CEO Compensation in IPOs
title_sort ceo compensation in ipos
publisher Taylor & Francis Group
series Cogent Economics & Finance
issn 2332-2039
publishDate 2019-01-01
description Research Question/Issue: Does inside debt compensation affect previous thought on compensation effects in IPOs? What explains variation in compensation when a company goes public? What is the composition of CEO compensation in an IPO? What types of compensation may be more optimal for or are associated with future financial success for the firm? Research Findings/Insights: Using a sample of 852 IPOs in the United States from 2006 until 2014, we find only one-third of firms have or reported having compensation broken down further into categories of pensions, retirement plans, and deferred compensation. These types of compensation are associated with higher financial success through profitability and asset management. Option compensation remains detrimental to a firm’s financial success through lower profitability and worse asset management. Theoretical/Academic Implications: A theoretical compensation model provides and empirically explains 79% of the variation in compensation in IPOs in the first year of the public firm. In addition, this study finds the majority of firms are still inaccurately reporting deferred compensation, at least in the Summary Compensation Table. Future research could look to see why this is the case. Practitioner/Policy Implications: Further investigation and potential litigation by the SEC may be necessary in the future to force firms to place information appropriately in the summary compensation table, especially concerning pension plans, retirement accounts, and other deferred compensation. In addition, individuals on compensation committees may consider giving the CEO more long-term compensation through stock and pensions instead of options.
topic corporate governance
executive compensation
initial public offerings
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2019.1640099
work_keys_str_mv AT randybeavers ceocompensationinipos
_version_ 1724262744407932928