In this paper, we provide a novel rationale for credit ratings. The rationale that we propose is that credit ratings can serve as a coordinating mechanism in situations where multiple equilibria can obtain. We show that credit ratings provide a "focal point" for firms and their investors.We explore the vital, but previously overlooked implicit contractual relationship between a credit rating agency and a firm. Credit ratings can help fix the desired equilibrium and as such play an economically meaningful role. Our model provides several empirical predictions and insights regarding the expected price impact of ratings changes, the discreteness in funding cost changes, and the effect of the focus of organizations on the efficacy of credit ratings.2
Little evidence exists that ¢rms index executive compensation to remove the in£uence of marketwide factors. We argue that executives can, in principle, replicate such indexation in their private portfolios. In support, we ¢nd that market risk has little e¡ect on the use of stock-based pay for the average executive. But executives'ability to ''undo''excessive market risk can be hindered by wealth constraints and inalienability of human capital.We replicate the standard result that there is little relative performance evaluation (RPE) for the average executive, but ¢nd strong evidence of RPE for younger executives and executives with less ¢nancial wealth.
Extensive discussions on the inefficiencies of "short-termism" in executive compensation notwithstanding, little is known empirically about the extent of such shorttermism. We develop a novel measure of executive pay duration that reflects the vesting periods of different pay components, thereby quantifying the extent to which compensation is short-term. We calculate pay duration in various industries and document its correlation with firm characteristics. Pay duration is longer in firms with more growth opportunities, more long-term assets, greater R&D intensity, lower risk, and better recent stock performance. Longer CEO pay duration is negatively related to the extent of earnings-increasing accruals.
In this paper, we provide a novel rationale for credit ratings. The rationale that we propose is that credit ratings can serve as a coordinating mechanism in situations where multiple equilibria can obtain. We show that credit ratings provide a "focal point" for firms and their investors.We explore the vital, but previously overlooked implicit contractual relationship between a credit rating agency and a firm. Credit ratings can help fix the desired equilibrium and as such play an economically meaningful role. Our model provides several empirical predictions and insights regarding the expected price impact of ratings changes, the discreteness in funding cost changes, and the effect of the focus of organizations on the efficacy of credit ratings.2
M arket-based theories predict that differences in CEO skills lead to potentially large differences in pay, but it is challenging to quantify the CEO skill premium in pay. In a first step toward overcoming this empirical challenge, we code detailed biographical information for a large sample of CEOs for a panel of S&P 1500 firms between 1993 and 2005 to identify specific reputational, career, and educational credentials that are indicative of skills. Newly appointed CEOs earn up to a 5% or $280,000 total pay premium per credential decile, which is concentrated among CEOs with better reputational and career credentials, those with the very best credentials, and those who run large firms. Consistent with the unique economic mechanism of market-based theories, CEO credentials have a positive impact on firm performance. The performance differential for newly appointed CEOs is up to 0.5% per credential decile and is also concentrated among CEOs with better reputational and career credentials and those at large firms. Credentials are positively correlated with unobserved CEO heterogeneity in pay and performance, which further validates our hypothesis that boards use them as publicly observable signals of otherwise hard-to-gauge CEO skills. In all, our results offer direct evidence in support of market-based explanations of the overall rise in CEO pay.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.