CEO performance targets: The impact of Big 4 accounting firms versus other compensation consultants

1Citations
Citations of this article
11Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Using a sample of ASX 500 firms over the 2005–2019 period, we document substantial variation in the use of performance targets within Chief Executive Officer (CEO) compensation contracts, contrasting firms advised by Big 4 accounting entities with other compensation consulting firms. Firms that engage a Big 4 accounting firm are more likely to implement explicit non-financial performance targets within the short-term incentive plan, effectively minimising opportunities for post hoc justification. They also favour the incorporation of relative performance targets that mitigate pay for luck in the long-term incentive plan. Firms that engage a Big 4 accounting firm demonstrate a similar pay-for-performance relation to firms that do not engage a compensation consultant, while firms engaging non-Big 4 consultants exhibit a lower pay-for-performance relation. Our findings suggest that Big 4 accounting firms provide compensation recommendations that encourage the alignment of interests between managers and shareholders.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Bachmann, R. L., Rasool, S., & Spiropoulos, H. (2025). CEO performance targets: The impact of Big 4 accounting firms versus other compensation consultants. Australian Journal of Management, 50(4), 1294–1332. https://doi.org/10.1177/03128962241270838

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free