American CEOs make a lot of money. That's been true for a long time--a very long time--so why has this become such a hot-button issue? Is it because American executives are lazy? Not so, suggests Gordon Smith of the Conglomerate Blog: Business, Law, Economics & Society Blog. Read his post, Lazy CEOs, commenting on a Wall Street Journal article and taking issue with the notion that American CEOs "just show up and don't do anything but reap rich rewards."
Let's say laziness isn't the problem. What explains the outrage over executive compensation? Articles like a 'Holy Cow' Moment in Payland' (paid subscription required) by New York Times columnist, Gretchen Morgenson, might shed some light on this question. The article discusses an Analog Devices proxy statement in which the company disclosed that its CEO received $145 million in deferred compensation last year. That'll get the tongues wagging, won't it?
Do journalists do the public any favors by writing articles like this? Should companies have to disclose this kind of information at all? For two very different points of view on these questions, check out Broc Romanec's post, A 'Holy Cow' Moment for Analog Device's Deferred Compensation Practices, at the TheCorporateCounsel.net Blog, and Geoffrey Manne's post, On disclosure: Hands-tying, at Truth on the Market.
.jpg)
Comment Preview