Firm performance and CEO pay: Evidence from Indian manufacturing

Ghosh, Saibal (2010): Firm performance and CEO pay: Evidence from Indian manufacturing. Published in: Journal of Entrepreneurship , Vol. 19, No. 2 (September 2010): pp. 137-147.

Abstract

CEO compensation considerations have gained prominence in recent times, especially in the wake of the subprime turmoil. Using cross-section data on Indian manufacturing firms for 2007, the paper explores the association between executive compensation and firm performance and concludes that pay for performance sensitivity estimates are significant although small in magnitude.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: CEO compensation; profits; manufacturing; India
• Subjects: L - Industrial Organization > L2 - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior > L25 - Firm Performance: Size, Diversification, and Scope; G - Financial Economics > G3 - Corporate Finance and Governance > G30 - General

References

Aggarwal, R.K., and Samwick, A. (1999). The other side of the trade-off: the impact of risk on executive compensation. Journal of Political Economy, 107: 65-105.

Bank for International Settlements (2009). Annual Report. BIS: Basel.

Bebchuk, L. and Fried, J. (2003). Executive compensation as an agency problem. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 17: 71-92.

Garen, J.E., (1994). Executive compensation and principal-agent theory. Journal of Political Economy, 102: 1175-99.

Ghosh, A. (2006). Determination of executive compensation in an emerging economy: Evidence from India. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 42: 66-90.

Jensen, M.C. and Murphy, K. (1990). Performance pay and top management incentives. Journal of Political Economy, 98: 225-64.

Parthasarathy, A., Menon, K and Bhattacharjee, D. (2006). Executive compensation, firm performance and corporate governance: An empirical analysis. Economic and Political Weekly, 41: 4139-47.

Sen, A. and Sarkar,S. (1996). Age, experience and remuneration of managers of seven large Indian firms. Indian Journal of Labor Economics, 21: 74-88.