Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Does Pay Activism Pay Off for Shareholders?

Electronic data

  • MSR3_May 10_final

    Rights statement: Copyright © 2017, INFORMS

    Accepted author manuscript, 253 KB, PDF document

    Available under license: CC BY-NC: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Does Pay Activism Pay Off for Shareholders?: Shareholder Democracy and its Discontents

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Does Pay Activism Pay Off for Shareholders? Shareholder Democracy and its Discontents. / Dasgupta, Sudipto; Noe, Thomas.
In: Management Science, Vol. 65, No. 4, 01.04.2019, p. 1810-1832.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Dasgupta S, Noe T. Does Pay Activism Pay Off for Shareholders? Shareholder Democracy and its Discontents. Management Science. 2019 Apr 1;65(4):1810-1832. Epub 2017 Oct 26. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.2017.2854

Author

Dasgupta, Sudipto ; Noe, Thomas. / Does Pay Activism Pay Off for Shareholders? Shareholder Democracy and its Discontents. In: Management Science. 2019 ; Vol. 65, No. 4. pp. 1810-1832.

Bibtex

@article{e22fd6be8dbb4fb89426b4d13630ee76,
title = "Does Pay Activism Pay Off for Shareholders?: Shareholder Democracy and its Discontents",
abstract = "Typically, shareholders are not sure whether boards act in their interest or have been captured by management. They are also less well informed than boards about firm investment opportunities and operating conditions. We develop a model, consistent with these observations, in which discretionary compensation payments to managers might increase firm value or might simply enrich managers at the expense of shareholders. After observing the board{\textquoteright}s compensation and investment policies, shareholders use Bayes{\textquoteright}s rule to update the probability that the board is captured. Shareholders are “outraged” if this updated probability is sufficiently large. Outrage is costly for the board. Shareholder democracy, by enabling outrage to constrain board actions, typically lowers firm value relative to either governance regimes that insulate boards from shareholder outrage or regimes that ban discretionary compensation altogether.",
keywords = "governance, shareholder activism, executive compensation, discretionary pay, charter amendments",
author = "Sudipto Dasgupta and Thomas Noe",
note = "Copyright {\textcopyright} 2017, INFORMS",
year = "2019",
month = apr,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1287/mnsc.2017.2854",
language = "English",
volume = "65",
pages = "1810--1832",
journal = "Management Science",
issn = "0025-1909",
publisher = "INFORMS Inst.for Operations Res.and the Management Sciences",
number = "4",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Does Pay Activism Pay Off for Shareholders?

T2 - Shareholder Democracy and its Discontents

AU - Dasgupta, Sudipto

AU - Noe, Thomas

N1 - Copyright © 2017, INFORMS

PY - 2019/4/1

Y1 - 2019/4/1

N2 - Typically, shareholders are not sure whether boards act in their interest or have been captured by management. They are also less well informed than boards about firm investment opportunities and operating conditions. We develop a model, consistent with these observations, in which discretionary compensation payments to managers might increase firm value or might simply enrich managers at the expense of shareholders. After observing the board’s compensation and investment policies, shareholders use Bayes’s rule to update the probability that the board is captured. Shareholders are “outraged” if this updated probability is sufficiently large. Outrage is costly for the board. Shareholder democracy, by enabling outrage to constrain board actions, typically lowers firm value relative to either governance regimes that insulate boards from shareholder outrage or regimes that ban discretionary compensation altogether.

AB - Typically, shareholders are not sure whether boards act in their interest or have been captured by management. They are also less well informed than boards about firm investment opportunities and operating conditions. We develop a model, consistent with these observations, in which discretionary compensation payments to managers might increase firm value or might simply enrich managers at the expense of shareholders. After observing the board’s compensation and investment policies, shareholders use Bayes’s rule to update the probability that the board is captured. Shareholders are “outraged” if this updated probability is sufficiently large. Outrage is costly for the board. Shareholder democracy, by enabling outrage to constrain board actions, typically lowers firm value relative to either governance regimes that insulate boards from shareholder outrage or regimes that ban discretionary compensation altogether.

KW - governance

KW - shareholder activism

KW - executive compensation

KW - discretionary pay

KW - charter amendments

U2 - 10.1287/mnsc.2017.2854

DO - 10.1287/mnsc.2017.2854

M3 - Journal article

VL - 65

SP - 1810

EP - 1832

JO - Management Science

JF - Management Science

SN - 0025-1909

IS - 4

ER -