Annual Survey Shows Majority Voting Being Increasingly Embraced Even Among
Smaller Companies, But Failing Incumbents Are Rarely Expected To Resign
NEW YORK, Feb. 20, 2013
NEW YORK, Feb. 20, 2013 /PRNewswire/ --According to a report released today
by The Conference Board in collaboration with NASDAQ OMX and NYSE Euronext,
majority voting is increasingly being embraced as the standard for director
elections even among smaller companies. However, when the company is small,
incumbent board members failing to receive the required majority of votes are
seldom expected to offer their resignation. In addition, the study revealed
that almost half of the smallest companies (as measured by annual revenue) do
not review political contribution practices, while formal policies regulating
donations made by senior business leaders are rarely in place.
Director Compensation and Board Practice: 2013 Edition is based on a survey of
334 public companies jointly conducted by the three partnering organizations
among their members. The Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance and
Financial Regulation, Stanford University's Rock Center for Corporate
Governance, the National Investor Relations Institute (NIRI), the Shareholder
Forum, and Compliance Week each endorsed the survey. Participants in the
survey (corporate secretaries, general counsel, and investor relations
officers) were asked to provide information on a wide range of corporate
practices, including: board composition and leadership, director elections,
anti-takeover measures, compensation policies, risk oversight, CEO succession
planning, board-shareholder engagement, and practices on director performance
assessment and retirement. The findings constitute the basis for a
benchmarking tool with more than 150 data points searchable by company size
(measurable by revenue and asset value) and 20 industrial sectors.
"Over the years, we have established an impressive database that documents
evolving trends in corporate governance and board compensation. This data is
quite valuable to our member companies using peer comparisons and industry
benchmarks to make an informed decision on several organizational and
oversight practices," said Matteo Tonello, Managing Director of Corporate
Leadership at The Conference Board and an author of the report. "We are
grateful to our partners on this annual project, NASDAQ OMX and NYSE Euronext,
for their intellectual contribution to the study and their support in
expanding the outreach of the annual survey."
"NASDAQ is committed to providing public companies with the tools to minimize
risk by streamlining governance, risk and compliance activities. With the
complexity of today's corporate governance environment, we are pleased to
support this valuable report to help companies fuel better business
decisions," said Bruce Aust, Executive Vice President, Corporate Client Group,
Scott Cutler, Executive Vice President and Head of Global Listings for NYSE
Euronext, stated, "NYSE Euronext is committed to supporting governance
practices that reflect the highest standards of independence, oversight and
transparency. As the governance landscape continues to evolve, with
shareholder engagement increasingly important, access to relevant governance
and compliance-related resources is critical for public companies. We are
pleased to partner with The Conference Board and NASDAQ OMX on this important
annual report and believe it will be a valuable asset for companies, boards
and their advisors."
The following are the major findings discussed in the report.
On director compensation:
oDirectors are best compensated in the energy industry, but company size
can make a huge difference. Computer services companies are the most
generous with full value share awards, but equity-based compensation is
widely used across industries and irrespective of company size.
oStock options are not as favored as they used to be, except by the
smallest companies increasing skepticism on the effectiveness of stock
options and stock appreciation rights as long-term incentives has led to
their decline, especially in the last few years.
oAdditional cash retainers for board chairmen are seldom offered by larger
companies, which are more likely to reward lead directors.
oA corporate program financing the matching of personal charitable
contributions is the most common among the director perquisites reported
oDirectors of large company boards take corporate aircrafts to board
meetings, unless it is a financial institution.
On director qualifications and board service policies:
oWhile many non-executive directors have C-suite experience, the percentage
of former or current CFOs serving on the board of financial services
companies is lower than the ones for manufacturing and non-financial
oLarger financial services companies often set stricter director
independence requirements than national securities exchanges.
oLarger companies continue to combine CEO and board chairman positions,
while three-quarters of financial institutions have appointed an
oLarge financial companies are less inclined to use an over-boarding policy
as it may impair their ability to attract director talent.
oAs the workload and challenges facing board committees increase, member
rotation policies remain infrequent.
On proxy access and director election:
oMajority voting is being increasingly embraced even among smaller
companies, but incumbents failing to obtain the required votes are rarely
expected to resign.
oAccording to the director nomination policy of large companies, diversity
matters as much as business skills. Yet, aside from some level of female
representation, corporate boards remain remarkably uniform.
oTo limit expenses, most smaller companies avoid retaining search firm fees
and use personal connections to recruit new director nominees.
oProxy access rights and reimbursement of solicitation expenses remain
On anti-takeover defenses:
oTraditional takeover defenses (including poison pills and board
classification) are being dismantled, while large financial companies tend
to restrict action by written consent and prohibit special meetings called
On say-on-pay and executive compensation oversight:
oWhile an annual say-on-pay vote appears to be the standard for most
companies, almost one-third of the smallest financial institutions opt for
a less frequent consultation of shareholders.
oWhile designing new executive compensation policies, large financial
companies set equity retention periods and go above and beyond regulatory
requirements in the formulation of contractual clawback clauses.
oLarge companies are more likely to enforce anti-gross-up policies.
oCompensation benchmarking disclosure also tends to be a feature of larger
companies, with industry and company size the most frequently used
criteria in the selection of the peer-comparison group.
oCompensation consultant fees tend to be lower than the amount for which
disclosure is required.
On strategy and risk oversight:
oWhile directors of smaller companies collaborate directly with management
in the business strategy setting process, larger company boards review
strategy more frequently than others.
oFrequency of risk reporting to the board and the institution of chief risk
office reveal the differing state of risk governance practices among
On sustainability oversight:
oResponsibility for sustainability oversight depends on company size, with
larger companies elevating it to the board committee level and smaller
companies delegating it to the CEO.
oEnvironmental impact and, for financial services companies, data security
are among the main sustainability items in board agenda.
oBoards of directors at almost half of the smallest companies (as measured
by annual revenue) do not review political contribution practices, while
formal policies for senior business leader are seldom in place.
On CEO performance review and succession planning:
oSmall companies do not have a board process for the systematic and
periodic review of their CEO succession plan.
oFormal policies on board retention of the departing CEO are uncommon,
except in large companies where the CEO is formally required to also leave
On board-shareholder engagement:
oFormal board-shareholder engagement policies begin to emerge, and may
include the requirement for directors to actively participate in annual
shareholder meetings as well as the adoption of a protocol detailing when
and how shareholders can reach out to directors and expect a response to a
On director education and performance assessment:
oFinancial services companies of all size are ahead in the use of secure
online technology for intra-board communication.
oMore than one-third of companies with less than $100 million in revenue do
not periodically evaluate their director performance.
oApproximately two companies out of 10 require their board members to
attend some type of continuing education programs to remain abreast of
regulatory and compliance developments.
Director Compensation and Board Practices: 2013 Edition
Report #1509, February 2013
The Conference Board /NASDAQ OMX/ NYSE Euronext
Access the report online at
About The Conference Board
The Conference Board is a global, independent business membership and
research association working in the public interest. Our mission is unique: To
provide the world's leading organizations with the practical knowledge they
need to improve their performance and better serve society. The Conference
Board is a non-advocacy, not-for-profit entity holding 501(c)(3) tax-exempt
status in the United States.
Follow The Conference Board
Twitter | Facebook | LinkedIn
SOURCE The Conference Board
Contact: Peter Tulupman, +1-212-339-0231, email@example.com
Press spacebar to pause and continue. Press esc to stop.