Bankers' bonuses not to blame, shows new research

Dec 14, 2011

(PhysOrg.com) -- Research from the University of Bath counters the claim that large bonuses in the banking industry are at the root of the global financial crisis.

The study of executive pay found that although pay in the financial services sector is high, compared to other industries there is no evidence to support the argument that inappropriate incentive structures led banking executives to take excessive risks for short-term profits.

The suggested dependence of bonus payments on short-term corporate performance has led to the notion that bankers were over-incentivised to take risks, and was named as a factor behind the crisis in the Turner Report (commissioned by the government to make recommendations for regulatory reform in the ).

To investigate this claim, researchers correlated directors pay in any year with the share price performance of the company in the same year, to see what the relationship was between pay and performance. They concluded that it was weak.

Professor Ian Tonks, from the University’s School of Management, said: “Following the crisis, a number of official reports have placed a lot of emphasis on curbing incentives, but in fact there is no evidence that incentive structures in banking were out of step with other sectors.

“Although pay in the financial services sector is high, the relationship between pay and performance in the run up to the of 2007/08 was not significantly higher than in other sectors, and was generally quite low.

“It’s difficult to see how incentive structures in banks could be blamed for the crisis since there is little hard evidence that executive compensation of bankers depended on short-term performance: they were paid high salaries irrespective of bank profits.”

The research showed a stronger link between executive pay and firm size, implying that executives may be incentivised to ‘grow’ their company either by internal organic growth or acquisitions.

Professor Tonks added: “Of course it could be argued that the experience of the financial crisis has shown that banks are so important to the functioning of the global economy, that compensation packages should be less sensitive to performance than for non-financial firms.”

“I should emphasise that we are not trying to defend bankers’ pay; our argument is simply that any poor decisions made by bankers that led to the financial crisis were not made because of their incentive payment structures.”

The research has been submitted to the government’s consultation on executive remuneration by Professor Tonks and co-researchers Professor Paul Gregg (from Bath’s Department of Social & Policy Sciences) and Dr Sarah Jewell (University of Reading).

Explore further: Study finds Illinois is most critical hub in food distribution network

More information: Executive Pay and Performance: Did Bankers’ Bonuses Cause the Crisis? Professor Paul Gregg, University of Bath (formerly Bristol), Sarah Jewell, University of Reading, and Professor Ian Tonks, University of Bath; International Review of Finance, forthcoming 2011. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2443.2011.01136.x

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Bonuses and risk not linked, says research

Nov 02, 2011

(PhysOrg.com) -- New research into the causes of the credit crisis has cast doubt on the alleged link between bonus payments and risk exposures in the UK financial sector.

Banks have difficulty adapting in crisis: study

May 18, 2011

(PhysOrg.com) -- Can the financial sector regulate itself? A study carried out by EPFL’s Swiss Finance Institute, involving 350 American institutions, shows that those that perform poorly in times of ...

Recommended for you

Ancient clay seals may shed light on biblical era

19 hours ago

Impressions from ancient clay seals found at a small site in Israel east of Gaza are signs of government in an area thought to be entirely rural during the 10th century B.C., says Mississippi State University archaeologist ...

Digging up the 'Spanish Vikings'

Dec 19, 2014

The fearsome reputation of the Vikings has made them the subject of countless exhibitions, books and films - however, surprisingly little is known about their more southerly exploits in Spain.

User comments : 6

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Squirrel
5 / 5 (4) Dec 14, 2011
"researchers correlated directors pay in any year with the share price performance of the company in the same year, to see what the relationship was between pay and performance". But that is not the link being blamed. It is that incentives led to risky decisions with a longer time-scale than a year. Profs Paul Gregg, and Ian Tonks ask the wrong question.
barakn
3.7 / 5 (3) Dec 14, 2011
Does anyone else find it amusing that bonus pay does not correlate with performance? More evidence that CEOs are overpaid.
dirk_bruere
5 / 5 (2) Dec 14, 2011
So their pay is not to blame - it is just a gigantic reward for a gigantic failure. That's a relief...
HannesAlfven
1 / 5 (1) Dec 14, 2011
There's no correlation between pay and stock performance because the stock performance is a form of randomness (even if not strictly so), and the pay is not.
LuckyExplorer
not rated yet Dec 15, 2011
The excessive bonus pays and inadequate high salaries are a problem by itself, not when they are payed
kaasinees
1 / 5 (1) Dec 15, 2011
There's no correlation between pay and stock performance because the stock performance is a form of randomness (even if not strictly so), and the pay is not.

Randomness only exists in the mind that cannot calculate it.

Can not calculate=appears to be random.

Randomness only exists between relativity, it does not exist physically.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.