Shareholder conflict: the story so far – and its relevance to evaluation

Two themes wrapped up together here. Firstly, you will be sure to have noticed references to a ‘Shareholder Spring’ in which normally quiet and docile shareholders have been increasingly resistant to executives’ claims for ever higher rewards. There’s a link to a very handy summary below. Secondly, this serves as a reminder of one of the several ways in which you can boost the evaluative component of your answers.

The arguments over higher pay for executives are heating up. During the long boom years, the issue took a back seat and shareholders seemed to be untroubled by huge pay increases for bosses. The public appeared to accept that exceptional performance deserved exceptional rewards. Now the mood has soured. The key issue still doesn’t seem to be high pay in itself, but rewards for failure.

It’s perhaps unsurprising that banks like Barclays have been at the forefront of these debates. It’s an industry where executive pay has spiralled out of control, and rewards bear little relation to performance.

Helpfully, the Guardian have provided a timeline tracking these disputes.

There’s an important insight into evaluation here. This is the part of your answer when you add “however….” and “it depends on ….” elements to your conclusions. Is Plan X a good idea? Basically, it depends on factors like:

Stakeholder perspectives – see above. What’s good for one stakeholder might not be for others.
Magnitude – will it have a big impact or a small impact?
Priority – what’s the most important thing for the business right now? And the least important?
Unknowns – what factors haven’t been mentioned, or are unknown – and could come along to make a big difference?
Context – would it work in this situation? What about that situation?
Effectiveness – Is the suggestion likely to be implemented smoothly? Will it boost or harm the overall efficiency of the company?
Timescale – most business proposals might have one impact in the short run, but a very different one in the long run.