In the realm of public corporations, the topic of CEO compensation is a matter of economic concern rather than individual securities. It is crucial to understand the different types of CEOs and their corresponding roles in order to comprehend the rationale behind their compensation.

illustration

Copyright© Schmied Enterprises LLC, 2024.

Link of the day.
 Robotics w/ NVIDIA Here.

Link of the day.
 Affordable meeting room solutions. Here. Here. Here.

Link of the day.
 Need an AI estimate? Here.

There are three distinct categories of CEOs and two types of middle managers.

Firstly, there are CEOs who are akin to show business personalities, often becoming celebrities in their own right to both investors and customers. These CEOs are typically bound by non-compete clauses and long-term obligations. Their compensation often mirrors that of Hollywood actors, reflecting their brand desirability and the impact of their departure on the company's image.

Secondly, there are CEOs who are the responsible party, tasked with the execution of corporate strategies. These CEOs are less visible in the media presenting numbers and income. They can be replaced more readily if corporate results deviate from shareholder interests. Their compensation reflects the risk associated with their role and the scarcity of similar high-paying positions.

Lastly, there are strategic CEOs who represent the company's long-term vision. Their media presence is often a reassurance to investors that the company's strategy will be implemented consistently, thereby maintaining equity pricing. Their compensation is reflective of this assurance.

For instance, Tesla investors appear to value the stability of a long-term CEO, with the CEO's compensation reflecting the continuity of corporate strategy rather than celebrity value.

Our analysis indicates that the most effective middle level managers in Big Tech are efficient communicators who can swiftly and accurately relay executive decisions. Directors and senior vice presidents that reflect technical or social cultures often undermine strategies, leading to inefficiency sparking internal disputes of an established strategy. Consequently, the compensation of these managers is based on the trust and transparency they inspire in senior executives.

Traditional educational approaches, such as those provided by schools or coaching groups, may not be effective in companies led by responsible or strategic CEOs. Unique leadership styles may be more successful in companies led by a show business CEO.

For founders and co-founders, these insights can be invaluable when negotiating terms. Startup funding series often reflect the actual work invested, which can dilute the shares of high performers from earlier rounds. Founders can maintain a higher salary by developing a robust strategy and ensuring its long-term implementation. Show business CEOs may benefit from engaging a third-party personality to promote products, while responsible CEOs may focus on leveraging their past decisions and forming alliances with industry groups or foreign interests.

Founders and co-founders can set their future compensation by setting a target time span of running a company and sticking to a pre-defined management role. This can avoid so many disputes later by allowing investors to align their company profile and pricing with the strategy. Changing strategies often can lead to inefficiencies and crisis situations just like when interest rates spike or drop too quickly.

Stability has a value, and investors seem to be willing to pay for it.