CEOs the world over are confident that the worst of the recession has passed and that their businesses – and their headcounts – will grow during 2010. But what lessons have they learned from the crisis?
For the first time in ten years, the bosses of the UK's largest companies enjoyed pay rises less than those of the average British worker in 2009.
It's often said that money doesn't bring happiness. But the truth could be more complicated, according to researchers at University of Toronto and Stanford University.
Between 2007 and 2008, the US stock market fell by 37 per cent and 2.6 million American jobs disappeared. But amid the economic chaos, one group has remained immune from the pain. For America's CEOs, the gravy train has just kept on flowing.
To those who might question the value of a college degree, please let me encourage you to 'go for it.' If you still don't think it's worth it, perhaps a few figures might persuade you otherwise.
Reward for decision-makers has always been determined by vested interest. It obviously suits the men and women themselves to be paid enormous sums, irrespective of any rationale. But what can we do about it?
Assuming the economic recovery does not get blown off course, most American managers could be looking forward to pay rises and bonuses again next year.
Rather than encouraging executives to work harder, performance-related pay may actually have the opposite effect. So isn't it time for a wholesale rethink?
I've been following the healthcare reform debate in the United States from afar with great interest. Of all the arguments for and against, one voice has been particularly silent: that of management, such as CEOs, HR, CFOs, etc.
In the US, where health care access is tied to your ability to stay employed in troubles times, life for many people is looking more and more like the TV show Survivor.
Companies need to get more imaginative if they are going to take the poison out of the debate over executive pay, perhaps by putting bonuses into locked accounts that only pay out if long-term targets are met.
Executive pay and remuneration programmes have been slammed for encouraging the excessive risk-taking that brought the world economy to its knees
Amid all the talk of austerity, there has been precious little evidence of belt-tightening among Britain's top bosses over the past year, despite the value of their companies falling by a third.
More and more managers are seeing their wages being squeezed as firms direct scarce resources to rewarding sales staff or others who bring in revenue.
Employers are still in a tight financial corner when it comes to offering pay rises or bonuses, meaning managers are having to think more creatively about how they keep their employees engaged and happy.
It's crashingly unfair of course, but if you have good looks as well as a good brain you are far more likely to be at the top of your pay scale.
Despite the financial meltdown, many companies continue to claim that huge salaries and bonuses are essential to attracting and retaining talent. But the evidence suggests otherwise. Not only are people are not driven primarily by money, but the power of money can be deeply counter-productive.
Unless you live on another planet, or don't have a bank account, it's hard to miss what's been going on with AIG. In fact, everyone else seems to have their 'expert' opinion on what went wrong and why, so there's no need for me to add to the chorus.
The message may not yet have got through to an angry public, but many British and American boardrooms have been scrambling over the past few weeks to freeze executive pay and cap or slash bonuses.
The excesses of executive pay that we have seen over the past few years were driven as much by shareholder expectation as by the need to attract top talent, a new study has suggested.
Copyright ' 2000 - 2021
Management-Issues.com, except where otherwise noted. | Powered by SedaSoft