Skip to Main Content
Article navigation

Smith and Swan (2013), referred to as SS, question the robustness of the results of Hartzell and Starks (2003), referred to as HS. We discuss the fact that they have to make two significant and unwarranted changes to our model specifications in order to remove the significance of the HS results. Simply logging firm size does not affect the significance of the relation between pay for performance and institutional investor concentration. In order to find an insignificant relation, SS also must develop a different and inferior measure of institutional investor concentration, and use that measure in conjunction with changes to the firm size controls. Thus, we maintain our original conclusion, as well as that of other researchers, that institutional investors both care about and have the ability to influence corporate governance, including executive compensation.

Licensed re-use rights only
You do not currently have access to this content.
Don't already have an account? Register

Purchased this content as a guest? Enter your email address to restore access.

Please enter valid email address.
Email address must be 94 characters or fewer.
Pay-Per-View Access
$39.00
Rental

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal