伯特兰和穆雷风(2001),在他们的调查,石油工业的一个例子,研究了工业性能和CEO的行为是否影响工业行动在他的控制范围之内。他们发现,当石油价格上涨工资上升,反之亦然。这表明支付运气或幸运和行业活动超出了CEO的控制。他们还发现,未来五年的油价和支付朝着相反的方向,表明CEO的大多是奖励支付好运,但他们并不一定惩罚坏运气。除了注意到CEO是不能影响整个行业的公司运作,但有一定的局限性影响自己的行业内公司业绩和经济条件。
这表明CEO没有被支付整个行业带来重大的变化,但他只是被支付被幸运和指导公司根据整个市场的方向和经济条件经营业务。这是由市场力量明显改变立场,实际上不是CEO的行为的因果关系。因此,如果这抹杀了CEO的行动影响市场作为一个整体,也是必要的,他们应该接受合理的支付,不需要过多的薪酬。
Bertrand and Mullainathan (2001), in their investigation, took an example of the oil industry and studied the industry performance and the CEO’s actions on whether the industry actions are within or beyond his control of influence. They found out that when the oil prices went up the pay went up and vice versa. This indicates a pay for luck or being lucky and the industry activities being beyond the CEO’s control. They also found that the next five years had the oil prices and pay moving in opposite directions, indicating that the CEO’s are mostly rewarded for pay for good luck, but they are not necessarily punished for bad luck. In addition it is noticed that a CEO is not able to influence the entire industry in which the company operates, but has limitations to influence his own firm’s performance within the industry and the economic condition.
澳大利亚毕业论文迟交
This indicates that the CEO is not being paid for bringing about a major change in the entire industry, but he is just being paid for being lucky and steering the company according to the direction of the entire market and the economic condition to operate business. This is evident by the market forces that change their positions which are actually not the causation of the CEO’s actions. Thus, if this nullifies the CEO’s action in influencing the market as a whole, it is also imperative that they should settle for reasonable pay and not demand excessive pay packages.
