Executives
in sentence
553 examples of Executives in a sentence
And during Antibiotic Awareness Week, pharmaceutical
executives
presumably met to discuss AMR.
LGBT at WorkDAVOS – When Apple CEO Tim Cook announced last year that he is gay, I was inundated by emails and telephone messages from
executives
around the world.
Likewise, senior
executives
being visibly out makes a huge difference.
LGBT employees are 85% more likely to be out at companies where senior
executives
are out (24% versus 13%).
Bank
executives
who hold large numbers of these bonds would have an incentive to lobby to dilute the bonds’ guarantee.
In order for board directors and senior
executives
to make judicious decisions, they cannot think only about whether they will directly benefit.
That is why, as in 2005, Poland can expect a purge of
executives
in the public media and state-owned companies.
Hundreds of business executives, aware of the dramatic costs – and potential benefits – at stake, are now preparing to attend a UN conference on disaster-risk reduction in Sendai, Japan.
There is an aspect to this debate, however, that deserves greater scrutiny: the freedom of
executives
to pick the moment when they can cash out on their equity-based incentives.
Standard pay arrangements give
executives
broad discretion over when they sell shares and exercise options that have been awarded to them.
The freedom to time the moment they cash out enables
executives
to use the special knowledge they have about their companies to sell before a stock-price decline.
Although insider-trading laws supposedly prevent
executives
from using “hard” material information,
executives
usually also have “soft” information at their fingertips which gives them an advantage over the market.
Indeed, it is a well documented fact that
executives
make considerable “abnormal” profits – that is, above-market returns – when trading in their own firms’ stock.
A second problem with
executives
being free to time the sales of their stock options and shares is that such freedom provides them with an incentive to use their influence over company disclosures to rig the stock price from declining before they execute their trades.
For starters, executives’ payoff from stock sales should not depend on a single stock price.
Under one possible arrangement,
executives
seeking to cash out shares would sell them to the company in return for a price based on the average stock price during, say, the subsequent six months.
This approach would still leave
executives
free to select the period in which they cash out shares, though not the exact day.
To improve the link between pay and performance further, and limit executives’ ability to weaken it by using their access to inside information and control over company disclosures,
executives
could be required to announce their choice of period substantially in advance.
An alternative to requiring pre-trading disclosure is to adopt a “hands-off” arrangement that leaves
executives
no discretion over when their equity-based compensation is cashed out.
The company’s board should set the schedule in a way that ensures that
executives
always retain the desired level of equity ownership.
Because such a hands-off approach leaves
executives
no discretion over when they cash out their equity-based compensation, it provides the most effective method for preventing
executives
from “gaming” the market and for ensuring that they are not rewarded for their information advantage.
There is absolutely no reason to let executives’ payoffs be based on the happenstance of the stock price on a single day, at best, much less on their ability to use their access to inside information or control over disclosures.
In Silicon Valley, drooling
executives
are both investing in Bitcoin and pouring money into competitors.
If common perceptions about inequality tend to inflate what is actually happening, that is because many companies’ top
executives
are earning increasingly massive sums relative to the workers under them.
Khalilzad will have plenty of support in the Bush Administration, which is heavily loaded with oil industry
executives.
At most, such research has found that more highly paid
executives
took greater risks, but it is unclear whether this is a cause or an effect.
Executives
in highly leveraged institutions should be paid more, because they bear more risk.
To be sure, these investigations are limited to the top five executives, for which data is publicly available.
But the rolling series of scandals surrounding global megabanks makes it difficult for anyone to keep a straight face when
executives
insist that our largest banks must maintain their current scale and scope.
Now Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull’s administration has responded to this activity, introducing legislation that bans foreign donations to political parties and activist groups, including some charities, and requires former politicians, lobbyists, and
executives
working for foreign interests to register if they are to be involved in Australian politics.
Back
Related words
Their
Companies
Which
Corporate
Compensation
Would
Senior
Company
Firms
Business
About
Other
Should
Shareholders
Financial
Stock
There
People
Chief
Large