Another Independence Issue Brewing
According to a recent study by the US Congress, consultants who recommend compensation packages for corporate clients have "pervasive" conflicts of interest that appear to be inflating executive compensation.
The study found that at least 113 of the nation's 250 largest companies rely on compensation consultants who also do other, more lucrative work for them. On the surface, this fact isn't problematic given that multi-service firms often provide an array of services to big organizations.
What troubles some legislators is that, on average, median CEO pay in 2006 was 67 percent higher at companies whose consultants had the most potential for such conflicts, compared with those whose consultants didn't have such conflicts.
The implication is that consultants sweeten their recommended pay packages in an effort to win other work from their clients. It may be easy for some people to believe that consulting firms try to line their own pockets by stuffing their clients' wallets, but it's probably time to take a deep breath and fully explore the issue--and the study's methodology and results.
Maybe the executive pay that some compensation consultants recommend is in the stratosphere. But as soon as the market comes to believe that a quid pro quo exists that trades executive compensation for future consulting work, the firms involved could lose some or all of their work with clients.
Most firms won't sell their integrity, or future, even if the price runs into the millions. Still, the issue has grabbed the attention of legislators, so stay tuned.
The last time we heard this type of concern, the US Congress passed the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.





