首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
In 1965, America’s big companies had a hell of a year. The stock market was booming. Sales were rising briskly, profit margins w
In 1965, America’s big companies had a hell of a year. The stock market was booming. Sales were rising briskly, profit margins w
admin
2015-01-10
63
问题
In 1965, America’s big companies had a hell of a year. The stock market was booming. Sales were rising briskly, profit margins were fat, and corporate profits as a percentage of GDP were at an all-time high. Almost half a century later, some things look much the same: big American companies have had a hell of a year, with the stock market soaring, margins strong, and profits hitting a new all-time high. But there’s one very noticeable difference. In 1965, CEOs at big companies earned on average about 20 times as much as their typical employee. These days, CEOs earn about 270 times as much.
That huge gap between the top and the middle is the result of a boom in executive compensation, which rose 876 per cent between 1978 and 2011. In response, we’ve had a host of regulatory reforms designed to curb executive pay. The latest of these is a rule, unveiled by the SEC last month, requiring companies to disclose the ratio of the CEO’s pay to that of the median worker. The idea is that, once the disparity is made public, companies will be less likely to award outsized pay packages.
Faith in disclosure has been crucial to the regulation of executive pay since the 1930s. More recently, rules have made companies detail the size and the structure of compensation packages and have enforced transparency about the kinds of comparisons they rely on to determine salaries. The result is that shareholders today know far more about CEO compensation than ever before. There’s only one problem: even as companies are disclosing more and more, executive pay keeps going up and up.
This isn’ t a coincidence: the drive for transparency has actually helped fuel the spiralling salaries. For one thing, it gives executives a good idea of how much they can get away with asking for. A more crucial reason, though, has to do with the way boards of directors set salaries. As Charles Elson and Craig Ferrere write, boards at most companies use what’ s called " peer benchmarking. " They look at the CEO salaries at peer-group firms, and then peg their CEO’s pay to the 50th, 75th, or 90th percentile of the peer group—never lower. This leads to the so-called Lake Wobegon effect: every CEO gets treated as above average. "Relying on peer-group comparisons, the way boards do, mathematically guarantees that pay is going to go up," Elson told me.
On top of this, peer-group comparisons aren’ t always honest: boards can be too cozy with CEOs and may tweak the comparisons to justify overpaying. A recent study shows that boards tend to include as peers companies that are bigger than they are and that pay CEOs more. The system is skewed by so-called "leapfroggers," the few CEOs in a given year who, whether by innate brilliance or by dumb luck, end up earning astronomical salaries. Those big paydays reset the baseline expectations for everyone else.
This isn’t just an American problem. Nor is it primarily a case of boards being helplessly in thrall to a company’ s executives. Boards are far more independent of management than they used to be, and it’s notable that a CEO hired from outside a company—typically gets 20 to 25 per cent more than an inside candidate. The real issues are subtler, though no less insidious. Some boards remain convinced of what Elson calls "superstar theory": they think that CEOs can work their magic anywhere, and must be overpaid to stay. In addition, Elson said, "if you pay below average, it makes it look as if you’d hired a below-average CEO, and what board wants that?"
Transparent pricing has perverse effects in other fields. In a host of recent cases, public disclosure of the prices that hospitals charge for various procedures has ended up driving prices up rather than down. And the psychological causes in both situations seem similar. We tend to be uneasy about bargaining in situations where the stakes are very high: do you want the guy doing your neurosurgery, or running your company, to be offering discounts? Better, in the event that something goes wrong, to be able to tell yourself that you spent all you could. And overspending is always easier when you’ re spending someone else’ s money. Corporate board members are disbursing shareholder funds; most patients have insurance to foot the bill.
Sunlight is supposed to be the best disinfectant. But there’ s something naive about the new SEC rule, which presumes that full disclosure will embarrass companies enough to restrain executive pay. As Elson told me, "People who can ask to be paid a hundred million dollars are beyond embarrassment. " More important, as long as the system for setting pay is broken, more disclosure makes things worse instead of better. We don’t need more information. We need boards of directors to step up and set pay themselves, instead of outsourcing the job to their peers. The rest of us don’ t get to live in Lake Wobegon. CEOs shouldn’t, either.
Which of the following CANNOT be true about the drive for transparency of executive salaries?
选项
A、It has actually checked the ever increasing of executive salaries.
B、It is intended to disclose the gap in income so as to eliminate such gaps.
C、It gives the boards the chance to compare CEO salaries with peer-group firms.
D、It has led to the formation of "leapfroggers" system and astronomical salaries.
答案
A
解析
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/wxSO777K
本试题收录于:
NAETI高级口译笔试题库外语翻译证书(NAETI)分类
0
NAETI高级口译笔试
外语翻译证书(NAETI)
相关试题推荐
PhilanthropyIthasbecomeanAmericantraditionthatthosewhoattaingreatwealthreturnsomeofittothepublicthrough
Theresearchteamcanhandle________needstobehandled.
Theschoolisgoingthe________miletocreatethenextgenerationofsportingstarsthankstoitsuniquedevelopmentprogram.
Thisisanabidingcomplaintamongyoungmeninacountrywithasurfeitofconsensus.
Thisexplainswhendrivingthroughthecountrysideyoucanseeonesideofafenceisasbareasaboardandtheotherwithfoot
党的十一届三中全会以来,随着党和国家工作重点转移到以经济建设为中心,教育在社会主义现代化建设中的地位和作用也越来越重要,我国教育的改革和发展取得了很大的成就。进入20世纪90年代,科学技术日新月异,知识经济初见端倪,综合国力竞争日趋激烈,我国社会
Listentothefollowingpassage.WriteashortEnglishsummaryofaround150-200wordsofwhatyouhaveheard.Youwillhearthe
A、Discussinginflationwiththeman.B、Helpingherparentspayfordebts.C、Seekingapermanentjoboverseas.D、Studyinginafo
反面广告有奇效,至少对一名瑞典护工来说是如此。他曾多次尝试用较为传统的方法来找一份新的工作,失败后就采用了这种新方法。他在地方日报上登出广告说“本人需要高薪工作。本人完全没有想像力,反社会,缺乏创造力且无一技之长。”三天之后,他到一家公司进行了面试。该公司
LosAngelescabinet-makerEdwardStewartmaybeamodernDr.Frankenstein.In1959,heclaims,herestoredadeadfriendtolife
随机试题
以下指资产评估结论是为资产业务提供的专业化估价意见的是()
下列血常规检查部分中哪项异常( )
如果物资验收入库的同时支付货款,则通过“应付账款”账户核算;如果物资验收入库后仍未付款,则按发票账单金额通过银行存款核算。()
在下列乘数中,是正值的乘数有()。
企业仓储管理的主要任务有()。
根据合伙企业法律制度的规定,下列情形中,属于有限合伙人当然退伙的有()。
下列关于中西人际关系文化差异的表述中,错误的是()
过程能力指数不包括()。
在下列著名的园林中,不是以假山著称的是()。
在美国纽约,有这样一种有趣的现象。每天晚上,总有几个时刻,城市的用水量突然增大。经过观察,这几个时刻都是热门电视节目间隔中插播大段广告的时间。而用水量的激增是人们同时去洗手间的缘故。以下哪项作为从上述现象中推出的结论最为合理?
最新回复
(
0
)