Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If you need an accessible version of this item please contact JSTOR User Support

Top-Management Compensation and Capital Structure

Teresa A. John and Kose John
The Journal of Finance
Vol. 48, No. 3, Papers and Proceedings of the Fifty-Third Annual Meeting of the American Finance Association: Anaheim, California January 5-7, 1993 (Jul., 1993), pp. 949-974
Published by: Wiley for the American Finance Association
DOI: 10.2307/2329022
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2329022
Page Count: 26
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Download ($33.95)
  • Cite this Item
If you need an accessible version of this item please contact JSTOR User Support
Top-Management Compensation and Capital Structure
Preview not available

Abstract

The interrelationship between top-management compensation and the design and mix of external claims issued by a firm is studied. The optimal managerial compensation structures depend on not only the agency relationship between shareholders and management, but also the conflicts of interests which arise in the other contracting relationships for which the firm serves as a nexus. We analyze in detail the optimal management compensation for the cases when the external claims are (1) equity and risky debt, and (2) equity and convertible debt. In addition to the role of aligning managerial incentives with shareholder interests, managerial compensation in a levered firm also serves as a precommitment device to minimize the agency costs of debt. The optimal management compensation derived has low pay-performance sensitivity. With convertible debt, instead of straight debt, the corresponding optimal managerial compensation has high pay-to-performance sensitivity. A negative relationship between pay-performance sensitivity and leverage is derived. Our results provide a reconciliation of the puzzling evidence of Jensen and Murphy (1990) with agency theory. Other testable implications include (1) a relationship between the risk premium in corporate bond yields and top-management compensation structures, and (2) the announcement effect of adoption of executive stock option plans on bond prices. The model yields implications for management compensation in banks and Federal Deposit Insurance reform. Our results explain the dynamics of top-management compensation in firms going through financial distress and reorganization.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
949
    949
  • Thumbnail: Page 
950
    950
  • Thumbnail: Page 
951
    951
  • Thumbnail: Page 
952
    952
  • Thumbnail: Page 
953
    953
  • Thumbnail: Page 
954
    954
  • Thumbnail: Page 
955
    955
  • Thumbnail: Page 
956
    956
  • Thumbnail: Page 
957
    957
  • Thumbnail: Page 
958
    958
  • Thumbnail: Page 
959
    959
  • Thumbnail: Page 
960
    960
  • Thumbnail: Page 
961
    961
  • Thumbnail: Page 
962
    962
  • Thumbnail: Page 
963
    963
  • Thumbnail: Page 
964
    964
  • Thumbnail: Page 
965
    965
  • Thumbnail: Page 
966
    966
  • Thumbnail: Page 
967
    967
  • Thumbnail: Page 
968
    968
  • Thumbnail: Page 
969
    969
  • Thumbnail: Page 
970
    970
  • Thumbnail: Page 
971
    971
  • Thumbnail: Page 
972
    972
  • Thumbnail: Page 
973
    973
  • Thumbnail: Page 
974
    974