Search results

The purpose of this study is to examine the nonlinear relationship between financial constraints and the chief executive officer (CEO) stock options compensation and to analyze whether the impact of financial constraints on the CEO stock options compensation changes at certain level of financial constraints or not.

This study is based on a sample of 90 French firms for the period extending from 2008 to 2019. To deal with the non-linearity, the authors use a panel threshold method.

Using different measures of financial constraints [KZ index (Baker et al., 2003), SA index (Hadlock and Pierce, 2010) and FCP index (Schauer et al., 2019)], the results reveal that the impact of the financial constraints (SA index and FCP index) is positive below the threshold value and it becomes negative above.

The non-linearity between financial constraints and CEO stock options shows that the level of financial constraints can be a major determinant of the CEO compensation structure. More specifically, this study sheds light on the key role played by the level of financial constraints and how this latter influence management decisions.

This paper is the first to the best of the authors' knowledge to examine the nonlinear relationship between financial constraints and the CEO stock options compensation using a panel threshold model.

The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between stock options compensation and firm strategic risk-taking, employing a quantile regression (QR) model. This study aims to analyze whether the impact of stock options on firm strategic risk-taking changes across various quantiles and investigates the moderating role of firm performance.

This study is based on a sample of 90 French firms for the period extending from 2008 to 2019. To deal with the non-uniform association, the authors use a panel quantile method.

The results reveal that the impact of chief executive officer (CEO) stock options on firm strategic risk-taking varies across risk-taking quantiles. More specifically, the study’s results show a positive association at low quantile levels of strategic risk-taking, measured by research and development (R&D) and a negative linkage at high levels. The authors also find that firm performance moderates the impact of CEO stock options on strategic risk-taking.

The non-uniform relationship between CEO stock options and firm strategic risk-taking shows that the weight of CEO stock options in the total compensation can be a major determinant of the firm's strategic risk-taking attitude.

This study extends existing research on executive compensation and strategic risk-taking. Thus, this study has the potential to help stakeholders, board of directors and regulators, who are attempting to understand how the compensation contract – in particular, stock option pay – is related to the risk behavior of the agents and guide them to structure the executive compensation in an optimal way.

This paper contributes to the literature as follows. First, it examines if option and stock compensations raise creditor's risk, and which one is more important than the other. Second, it explores if CEO's compensation interacts with CEO overconfidence to raise creditor's risk. Third, it investigates how banks use different loan terms to alleviate their credit risk.

This study used advanced regression analysis and use of generalized methods of moment methodology.

The results show that option compensation is more important than stock compensation in raising credit risk; option compensation interacts with CEO overconfidence, giving rise to a much higher credit risk; and covenant usage is more important than other loan contract terms in mitigating credit risk given that covenant use could not be substituted away by using other loan contract terms such as increasing interest rate, reducing principal or shortening loan duration. This paper has practical implications for credit markets.

The main implication is that hand-collect data are available up to 2010.

It informs creditors the potential sources of loan risk emanating from option rather than stock incentives; it informs creditors that option incentive interacts with CEO overconfidence rendering the credit risk bigger than expected, and it informs creditors the importance of using covenants vis-à-vis other loan contract terms for mitigating compensation and overconfidence risk.

Banks are alerted to the risk due to the interaction between overconfidence and compensations, implying that overconfident managers remunerated with options compensations are more risky than overconfident managers who are not remunerated as such.

This paper is original: (1) The authors show that option compensation is more risky than stock compensation from viewpoint of creditors. This has not been assessed. (2) Interaction between managerial compensation and managerial overconfidence has not been assessed before. (3) Use of different loan contract terms to alleviate risk from overconfident managers (who are prone to over investment but who are innovative according to the literature) has not been evaluated.

The current study aims to investigate the mediating role of executive stock options in the nonlinear relationship between financial constraints and research and development (R&D) investment through two measures of financial constraints.

This study is based on a sample of 90 French firms for the period extending from 2008 to 2020. The authors employ a panel threshold method to analyze whether the impact of financial constraints on R&D investment depends on the level of financial constraints or not.

Using SA index (Hadlock and Pierce, 2010) and FCP index (Schauer et al., 2019) as measures of financial constraints, the authors demonstrate that the relationship between financial constraints and R&D investment is nonlinear. Moreover, the authors find that executive stock options mediate partially the relationship between financial constraints and R&D investment. More specifically, the authors show that stock options could play two roles depending on the level of the financial constraints; inconsistent mediation for firms with low/medium level of financial constraints and partial mediation for highly constrained firms.

This paper is the first to the best of the authors' knowledge to investigate the nonlinear relationship between financial constraints and R&D investment as well as the mediating role of executive stock option using dynamic panel threshold models.

Based on the background of the restricted stock has gradually replaced stock option and has become the mainstream equity incentive model in China, this paper aims to investigate the which factors affect the choice of equity incentive model, and the impacts of equity incentive model.

The theoretical analysis is based on the game theory between shareholders and top executives. The empirical analysis is based on the detailed data of equity incentives in China’s listed companies from 2006 to 2017; the logit method and least square method are implemented to estimate the regression coefficients and Black–Scholes options pricing model to estimate the value of restricted stock/option granted to the CEO.

This paper documents that enterprises with serious agency problems, high investment risks, high stock price synchronicity and great executive power are significantly and positively related to restricted stock. The main empirical findings still hold after several robust tests. In addition, restricted stock can significantly improve corporate performance when the performance evaluation index is strict and the validity period is long, while for the sample group with loose performance index and short validity period, restricted stock significantly reduces corporate performance.

This paper analyzes the “black box” of equity incentive model selection from the stakeholders’ game perspective by constructing a game theory model to investigate the reasons for the choice of equity incentive model in various situations, which enriches the research in this field. Moreover, this paper finds that restricted stock has both incentive and welfare characteristics, and the rationality of performance appraisal goals is the key factor leading to the difference in incentive effects. Overall, the research indicates that only well-designed equity incentive plans can improve corporate performance, which contributes to regulators and practitioners to form a rational understanding of restricted stock model and provides a reference for their decision-making.

Outstanding unexercised stock options can motivate managers to engage in actions that increase the value of their company’s stock, including buying back their firm’s stock. The objective of granting stock options to managers is to align their interests with stockholders by tying a portion of their compensation to the company’s stock performance. However, unexercised stock options may have unintended consequences by providing managers with a vested interest in artificially boosting stock prices via stock buybacks. The primary objective of this research is to study the main factors that influence firms' buyback decisions amongst hospitality firms at a time when these firms were clamoring for taxpayer bailouts. Results from logistic regression seem to suggest that outstanding executive stock options are a major contributory factor in a firm’s buyback decision. Estimates also indicate that larger, more profitable firms will likely engage in stock buybacks. These findings survive a battery of tests.

The authors use logistic regression to predict the probability of a firm’s buyback decision based on a given set of exogenous explanatory variables.

The paper supports the hypothesis that buyback decisions are guided by the motive to prop support stock prices in the presence of outstanding restricted stock options/warrants granted to firms' executives.

The paper focuses on the buyback decision of U.S. hospitality firms. The results, therefore, might not be generalizable to firms in other industries or countries.

U.S. share repurchase corporate policy and government regulation needs to be revisited given the economic imperative for firms to invest in activities to restore employment and put them in a position for economic recovery.

Public criticism of the size, structure and form (i.e. loan vs grant) of COVID-19 bailouts warrants an examination of whether the factors that drive hospitality and tourism firms to repurchase shares support economic recovery.

Consistent with agency theory, the authors find a significant positive association between outstanding restricted stocks and a firm’s decision to support the stock prices by buying back shares.

Agency problems are more severe for multinational corporations (MNCs) and multinational enterprises compared to their domestic counterparts. As companies develop diversified operations, their managers face more challenges. An incentive compensation structure has been designed to align the benefits of managers with those of shareholders. Additionally, corporate social responsibility (CSR) has become increasingly crucial for companies. MNCs must gain the trust of more investors to improve their corporate reputation and financial performance. CSR enables MNCs with a high sense of social responsibility to expand their investor base, reduce perceived risks, and decrease information asymmetry. Our empirical findings reveal that Taiwanese MNCs can enhance their performance by implementing cash-based compensation and pursuing CSR activities.

This study aims to elaborate on how firms manage research and development (R&D) activities by examining the relationship between ownership concentration and corporate R&D investment, as well as the moderating role of stock options in this relationship.

The study sample comprised 354 Chinese listed firms from 2011 to 2019, and the Tobit model and the system GMM test are used to check robustness.

The results reveal that ownership concentration and R&D investment have an inverted U-shaped relationship. In the presence of stock options, this inverted U-shaped relationship is significantly weaker.

The results have important managerial implications for firms that aim to grant stock options and improve the impact of ownership concentration on R&D investment strategies.

The current study aims to investigate the impact of firm performance on chief executive officer (CEO) remuneration in the context of an emerging market, i.e. Pakistan. Further, the interactive effect of financial constraints is investigated in the pay–performance relationship.

The study's sample includes 173 non-financial firms listed on the Pakistan Stock Exchange. This study covers the years 2010–2019. The CEO compensation of the sample firms is measured in terms of salary and bonuses, perquisites and stock options paid to the CEO, whereas firm profitability is measured by return on assets, return on equity, Tobin's Q (Q) and earnings per share. The KZ Index measures the degree of financial constraint. The fixed effect model (FEM) and system GMM estimation techniques were used to conclude the study's findings. In addition, to test the robustness of the results, the authors computed the level of financial constraints using the WW Index.

The findings show that firm performance has a significant positive impact on CEO compensation in all profitability measures except Tobin's Q. Further financial constraints have a significant negative impact on CEO compensation. The interactive variables of FC with all profitability measures have a significant negative impact on CEO compensation.

This study examines the relationship between firm performance and CEO compensation. Furthermore, the current study expanded the analysis by incorporating the role of financial constraints in the pay–performance relationship, which has not previously been tested, particularly in the context of an emerging market.

Given the serious question raised by the subprime of the 2008 global financial crisis over the rising practices of excessive rewarding of executives in the USA and European firms, the executive pay-performance nexus has emerged as a popular topic of debate in the contemporary corporate finance research. Conducted mostly on the Anglo-Saxon contexts, research outcomes have been inconclusive and dichotomous. Considering this backdrop, this study aims to investigate the endogenous relationship between executive compensation and risk taking in the context of the USA.

Using a large sample of non-financial firms from 2010 to 2020 based on panel data and two-stage least square regression. In this study, the riskier corporate decision is measured as book leverage and ratio of R&D expense to total assets. Chief executive officers’ (CEO) experience and age are used as instrumental variables, and these are expected to influence compensation incentives and, hence, affect firm riskiness indirectly. Firm size, return on assets and CEO turnover are reported to affect compensation and corporate decisions, therefore, included as control variables. Given that higher executive compensation is related to riskier corporate decision in firms, this study incorporates total wealth (i.e. accumulated equity related compensation) as an additional proxy of compensation, and this selection is justifiable by the perfect contracting notion of the agency theory.

The results of this study show a significant positive and increasing nexus among compensation and riskier corporate decisions. Besides, the compensation level proxied through the percentage of each form of compensation in total compensation is very important as greater equity and greater salary diminishes risk taking.

The outcomes of this study have useful implications for firm stakeholders and policymakers.

The level of pay measured by the percentage of each type of compensation in total compensation is of utmost importance as it can increase or decrease risk taking in corporate decisions.