Search results

We examine the use of relative performance evaluation (RPE), asymmetry in pay for skill/luck, and compensation benchmarking for a sample of firms involved in a spinoff. The spinoff affects firm characteristics that influence the use of the identified compensation practices. We test for differences in the compensation practices for the pre- and post-spinoff firms. We find that RPE is used for post-spinoff CEOs, but not pre-spinoff CEOs. Post-spinoff CEOs are also paid asymmetrically for luck where they are rewarded for good luck but not punished for bad luck. Both pre- and post-spinoff CEOs receive similar levels of compensation benchmarking. The study provides additional evidence on factors that influence compensation practices. Our spinoff sample allows us to examine how compensation practices are affected by changes in firm characteristics while keeping other determinants of compensation constant (i.e., the board and, in many cases, the CEO). Our findings contribute to the understanding of how the identified compensation practices are used.

The empirical properties of benchmark revisions to key US macroeconomic aggregates are examined. News versus noise impact of revisions is interpreted via the cointegration property of successive benchmark revisions. Cointegration breaks down in the last two years before a benchmark revision. Hence, we conclude that there is some information content in benchmark revisions. This last point is illustrated by reporting that inflation forecasts could be improved by the addition of a time series that reflects benchmark revisions to real GDP. Standard backward- and forward-looking Phillips curves are used to explore the statistical significance of benchmark revisions.

In the 1930s, chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) were developed as safe, non-reactive alternatives to toxic and explosive refrigerants and propellants such as ammonia, chloromethane, and sulfur dioxide. American engineer Thomas Midgley famously demonstrated these properties by inhaling Freon (CFC-12) and blowing out a candle with it. He was presented with many awards for his discoveries, such as the Perkin, Priestley, and William Gibbs medals. In today's jargon, CFCs might have been called an eco-innovation, because they provided solutions to several environmental issues. However, CFCs solved environmental problems by creating others. In 1974, Sherwood Rowland and Mario Molina published their pathbreaking research that demonstrated CFCs were depleting the ozone layer. In 1989, the Montreal Protocol, which regulates a global phaseout of CFCs, entered into force. A few years later, in 1995, Rowland and Molina received the Nobel Price in Chemistry. The new substitutes for CFCs, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), have no known effects on the ozone layer but are extremely potent greenhouse gases (GHGs) and thus subject to the Kyoto Protocol.

Using data collected in 1999 from manufacturing units, this paper reports the results of an investigation into the interactive effect of benchmarking and incentives on manufacturing unit performance. Based on a mail questionnaire sent to a sample of manufacturing units within U.S. electronic industry, the results of this paper provide evidence of significant interaction effect of benchmarking and incentives resulting in product cost improvement and product quality performance.

Benchmarking has proven itself as a tool of management, not belonging to the typical management fads. Well-known both in research and business practice, employing benchmarking as a means of increasing the competitiveness goes along with considerable problems and challenges. By analyzing the very nature of benchmarking, it turns out that the respective problems can be explained in a comprehensive way by referring to the competence-based view. The paper points out the numerous threats connected with benchmarking. The isolating mechanisms, well-known from competence-based research, help to explain why it can be so difficult for firms to make use of benchmarking effectively. Among others, the concept of the absorptive capacity plays a major role when the real character of benchmarking is to be described. Understanding benchmarking as way to get access to firm-addressable resources, the recognition, the assimilation, and the exploitation of the benchmarked “best practices” represent the crucial steps of an effective benchmarking process. Pointing out the implications of benchmarking by a competence-based analysis and to draw some managerial and theoretical conclusions represent the main objectives of this paper.

We survey private foundations for governance factors and internal processes that help explain why they barely miss (or not) the benchmark for qualifying distributions that would save them taxes on net investment income. Private foundations are subject to a 2% tax rate on their net investment income. If qualifying distributions are above a benchmark, the foundation qualifies for a 50% reduction in the tax rate to a 1% tax rate. This tax rate structure provides a “cliff effect” where the additional distributions required to qualify for the lower tax rate may actually be less than the potential tax savings (Sansing & Yetman, 2006). For example, one foundation in our sample could have saved $15,613 in tax by paying an additional $318 in distributions. We view this situation as a clear governance failure. Our first contribution to the literature is that board interest and information system strength affect the likelihood of avoiding such a governance failure, even after controlling for the general quality of management with management compensation and professional fees. Our second contribution is that foundations without sufficient financial savvy and sophistication appear to pay higher taxes. Given the large number of small, relatively unsophisticated foundations in America, differential tax rates based on sophistication is an interesting policy debate.

This chapter introduces benchmarking as a multifaceted concept based on action-oriented approach that goes beyond the simple study of a process or the search for a performance measure; through the measurement, analysis, and comparison with the best internal or external references benchmarking encourages the organization to identify areas for improvement and activate the corresponding actions. The experiences of the last 30 years brought out different types of benchmarking, defined and used in relation to the different dimensions of analysis and objectives of a benchmarking project. The analysis provides guidelines for the understanding and implementation of a benchmarking project, and emphasizes that there are no formal rules to identify the most suitable configuration of all, but different business objectives simply pave the way for methods and structures more consistent with the expected results.

In this chapter we examine the process by which new firms become central actors within their industry networks. We focus, in particular, on how relatively new venture capital (VC) firms become more central within investment syndication networks. We present a model that captures the relationships among (1) the social capital and status of the new VC firm's founders, (2) the VC firm's resource endowments, (3) the VC firm's ability to forge relationships with other prestigious and central venture capital firms, (4) the visibility-enhancing performance of portfolio firms, and (5) the urgency and effort exhibited by the new VC as it pursues these opportunities. These factors combine to shape a new VC's journey from the periphery to the center of its industry network. To illustrate these processes, we develop in-depth case studies of Benchmark Capital and August Capital, two VC firms founded in 1995. We then elaborate upon the enacted nature of resource and opportunity constraints and conclude with a discussion of how new firms create their own self-fulfilling prophecies.