Blame the Boards, Not the Executives [Beyond Wall Street]

by Sam on February 27, 2009

Yesterday I spent all day in Baltimore for meetings at Johns Hopkins University.  While there, I managed to sit in on a lecture by the Dean of Tuck Business School, Paul Danos, discussing his thoughts on the financial crisis.

[My Notes]:

Everyone has been blaming the wrong people for the current financial crisis.

Media and government have lambasted Wall Street CEO’s and Executives who earned fortunes over the past few years [in retrospect] seemingly at the expense of their investors. “How can Wall Street execs live with themselves?â€� is the ubiquitous war cry everywhere we turn — a discussion of excessive compensation and ethics underlies much of this anger.

However, this logic is faulty. Such excessive executive compensation is really not an issue of ethics; after all, who looks at a large paycheck they’ve earned legally and questions whether “it is ethical for them to cash it and reap their due reward for high performance, risk taking and long hours? The answer is no one – in any industry!

The concept of “greed� is the same its always been throughout the course of history.

Argument: The persons truly at fault are not executives accepting payments for what their contracts allowed; rather, it is largely the fault/failure of the Board of Directors.

It was/is the Boards who approved those checks and failed to consider that executive compensation could ultimately not be in alignment with the longer-term success of investors. Agency problems were never considered appropriately. Clawback provisions should have been considered under various scenarios. Where were these models? Where was the desire for a deeper understanding of process? Outcome? Outliers?

Ultimately Boards failed in their appointed duty to understand and consider the impacts of complex and leveraged investment instruments within an ever increasingly complex system. This crisis, more than anything else, resulted from poor stewardship.

One of the most interesting things Danos noted is that while SOX regulations have made a huge difference in terms of accountability and transparency for most publicly traded companies, somehow financial firms have been exempt. Overall, most publicly traded companies (and their boards) are much more cognizant of the need to play by the rules; why was this not the case for banks?

Next Steps: To be a Board member is a to assume a position of great responsibility. You must think on a scale much larger than firm-level; this is not a job based on micro economic principles. Boards can’t allow themselves to blindly follow CEOs. They must question. Board Members must aim for a richer understanding of their firm and its people, processes and products within the greater economic, environmental and global system(s). The fact that board members at financial institutions never asked for models showing the possibility of black swan situations is unacceptable.

Blame the Boards, Not the Executives [Beyond Wall Street]
  • http://workingthrough.com mike jolkovski

    I've been wondering why this point is isn't made more frequently — and why there isn't more focus on conflict of interest among board members who approve compensation packages wildly at odds with shareholder interests. If I had my 5 minutes w/Obama I'd ask why not more focus on this. Seems there ought to be opportunities for meaningful structural reform here.

  • http://www.leveragingideas.com Sam Huleatt

    Hey Mike!

    I agree. When I heard the argument it immediately 'clicked' and I started to
    ask myself why we have not been hearing this point made by media and
    government? And you're dead on — definitely transformation and reform are
    needed — you should check out Umair Haque's writings on this in his post on
    “Smart Growth” http://bit.ly/quZha

  • http://www.lalchronicles.com/ Ritesh

    It truly is shocking to see the blindness of these puppet directors. In the end these Directors are paid 6 figure sums to attend may be 4 meetings per year, and work maybe 50 hrs if that. There's no way, they will risk jeopardizing this cushy gig by raising attention against the CEO. The same CEO with whom they play golf, get access to nice vacation spots, free rides on the jets, admission to elite schools for their kids… No way they will risk all this and go against Exec team's wishes! I wrote a post comparing exec compensation in US vs Europe for similar size companies, as well as how exec compensation has risen from 40X avg. wages in 80s to 320X in 2000! http://www.lalchronicles.com/lalchronicles/2009…

  • http://www.leveragingideas.com Sam Huleatt

    Thanks! It's great to get compliments every now and then and know
    *someone* is reading :)

  • boarding

    Very informative, I am very much impressed, keep posting this type of posts, you truly rock.

  • http://www.leveragingideas.com Sam Huleatt

    Thanks! It's great to get compliments every now and then and know
    *someone* is reading :)

  • http://www.othersideboardsports.com/kiteboarding.html boarding

    Very informative, I am very much impressed, keep posting this type of posts, you truly rock.

  • http://www.leveragingideas.com Sam Huleatt

    Thanks! It's great to get compliments every now and then and know
    *someone* is reading :)