Search results

1 – 10 of 648
Article
Publication date: 9 April 2018

Gerald Edward Ledford and Edward E. Lawler

The authors comment on the paper by Aguinis et al. (2018). The authors believe that their hypotheses probably are true, but their methodology is flawed and their data do not…

Abstract

Purpose

The authors comment on the paper by Aguinis et al. (2018). The authors believe that their hypotheses probably are true, but their methodology is flawed and their data do not support their conclusions.

Design/Methodology

The authors review and comment on the paper by Aguinis et al. (2018).

Findings

The data do not adequately demonstrate a power law distribution for chief executive officer’s (CEO) performance because the analysis confounded external conditions affecting performance, and the authors use inappropriate dependent variables. The analysis does not demonstrate a power law distribution for CEO pay because the analysis does not take into account changes in pay level and mix over time. The analysis does not show a lack of overlap between the two distributions because it does not take into account the way that the CEOs are paid for performance and because it uses CEO pay averaged over CEO tenure.

Research limitations/implications

A more convincing analysis of the authors’ hypothesis would require the use of total shareholder return (TSR) as the dependent variable for organizational performance and would require a number of much more specific controls.

Practical implications

The authors call for greater use of power law thinking by practitioners in setting CEO pay. Their analysis indicates that practitioners already think in power law terms and allocate CEO pay accordingly. Moreover, power law theory and findings could be misused as an excuse for paying average CEOs much more than they are already paid.

Social implications

The authors add another perspective on CEO pay.

Originality/value

The authors’ perspective is informed both by research and by consulting experience on CEO pay projects.

Objetivo

Comentamos el trabajo de Aguinis et al. (2018). Creemos que sus hipótesis son probablemente ciertas, pero su metodología presenta deficiencias y sus datos no apoyan sus conclusiones.

Diseño/Metodología

Revisamos y comentamos el trabajo de Aguinis y otros (en prensa).

Resultados

Los datos no demuestran adecuadamente la existencia de una distribución ley de potencia (power-law) porque sus análisis no consideran las condiciones externas que afectan al resultado de la empresa y los autores hacen un uso inapropiado de las variables dependientes. Los análisis no demuestran que la retribución de los CEO sigua una distribución de ley de potencia porque no toman en consideración cambios en el nivel o composición de la retribución en el tiempo. Los análisis no muestran una falta de superposición entre las dos distribuciones porque no toman en cuenta la forma en la que los CEO son retribuidos por los resultados y porque utilizan la retribución media calculada sobre la antigüedad del CEO.

Limitaciones/implicaciones

Un análisis más convincente de las hipótesis planteadas requiere el uso del rendimiento total de los accionistas como variable de resultados organizativos y un número mucho más específico de variables de control.

Implicaciones prácticas

Los autores animan a los profesionales a pensar más en términos de una distribución de ley de potencia a la hora de fijar la retribución del CEO. Sus análisis indican que los profesionales ya piensan en términos de ésta distribución y asignan las retribuciones de manera acorde a ella. Es más, los resultados derivaos de la teoría de la ley de potencia pueden utilizarse erróneamente como una excusa para pagar menos al CEO medio.

Implicaciones sociales

Añadimos otra perspectiva sobre el pago a los CEO.

Originalidad/valor

Nuestra perspectiva viene avalada por nuestra investigación y experiencia de consultoría en proyectos de retribución a CEOs.

Objetivo

Discutimos o trabalho de Aguinis et al. (2018). Acreditamos que as suas hipóteses são provavelmente verdadeiras, mas a sua metodologia apresenta deficiências e os dados apresentados não suportam as conclusões.

Design/metodologia

Analisamos e comentamos o trabalho de Aguinis et al. (2018).

Resultados

Os dados não demonstram adequadamente a existência de uma distribuição de poder-lei porque suas análises não consideram as condições externas que afetam o resultado da empresa e os autores fazem uso impróprio das variáveis dependentes. As análises não mostram que as recompensas dos CEOs seguem uma distribuição da lei do poder porque não tomam em consideração as mudanças no nível ou na composição da remuneração sobre o tempo. As análises não mostram falta de sobreposição entre as duas distribuições, porque não têm em conta a forma como os CEOs são pagos pelos resultados e porque utilizam a retribuição média calculada sobre a antiguidade do CEO.

Limitações/implicações

Uma análise mais convincente da hipótese proposta requer o uso do desempenho total dos acionistas como uma variável de resultados organizacionais e um número muito mais específico de variáveis de controle.

Implicações práticas

Os autores incentivam os profissionais a pensar mais em termos de uma distribuição da lei de potência quando se define o salário do CEO. Suas análises indicam que os profissionais já pensam em termos dessa distribuição e distribuem as recompensas de forma proporcional a ela. Além do mais, os resultados derivados da teoria da lei de poder podem ser erroneamente usados como uma desculpa para pagar menos para o CEO médio.

Implicações sociais

Agregamos uma outra perspectiva no pagamento ao CEO.

Originalidade/valor

Nossa perspectiva é apoiada pelo nosso pesquisa e experiência de consultoria em projetos de remuneração para CEOs.

Content available
Book part
Publication date: 27 October 2021

Abstract

Details

Advances in Group Processes
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-80071-677-3

Abstract

Details

Advances in Group Processes
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-78635-041-1

Content available
Book part
Publication date: 27 October 2022

Abstract

Details

Advances in Group Processes
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-80455-153-0

Content available
Book part
Publication date: 20 October 2020

Abstract

Details

Advances in Group Processes
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-80043-232-1

Book part
Publication date: 1 January 2014

Shane R. Thye, Aaron Vincent, Edward J. Lawler and Jeongkoo Yoon

This chapter analyzes the ways that individuals develop person-to-group ties. The chapter reviews the development and evidentiary basis of the theory of relational cohesion, the…

Abstract

Purpose

This chapter analyzes the ways that individuals develop person-to-group ties. The chapter reviews the development and evidentiary basis of the theory of relational cohesion, the affect theory of social exchange, and the theory of social commitments.

Methodology/Approach

We survey twenty-five years of published literature on these theories, and review unpublished theoretical tests and extensions that are currently in progress.

Findings

The research program has grown substantially over the past twenty-five years to encompass more varied and diverse phenomena. The findings indicate that structural interdependencies, repeated exchanges, and a sense of shared responsibility are key conditions for people to develop affective ties to groups, organizations, and even nation-states.

Research Limitations/Implications

The research implies that if people are engaged in joint tasks, they attribute positive or negative feelings from those tasks to their local groups (teams, departments) and/or to larger organizations (companies, communities). To date, empirical tests have focused on microlevel processes.

Practical Implications

Our work has practical implications for how managers or supervisors organize tasks and work routines in a way to maximize group or organizational commitment.

Social Implications

This research helps to understand problems of fragmentation that are faced by decentralized organizations and also how these can be overcome.

Originality/Value of the Chapter

The chapter represents the most complete and comprehensive review of the theory of relational cohesion, the affect theory of social exchange, and the theory of social commitments to date.

Details

Advances in Group Processes
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-78441-078-0

Keywords

Content available
Book part
Publication date: 14 December 2023

Abstract

Details

Advances in Group Processes
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-83797-477-1

Content available
Book part
Publication date: 8 November 2010

Abstract

Details

Advances in Group Processes
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-0-85724-329-4

Content available
Book part
Publication date: 19 October 2012

Abstract

Details

Biosociology and Neurosociology
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-78190-257-8

Abstract

Details

Advances in Group Processes
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-78560-076-0

1 – 10 of 648