<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance</title>
	<atom:link href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2011/12/10/top-ten-issues-for-boards-in-2012/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu</link>
	<description>The leading online blog in the fields of corporate governance and financial regulation.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 30 Aug 2026 11:30:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.5.10</generator>

 
	<item>
		<title>Top Ten Issues For Boards in 2012</title>
		<link>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2011/12/10/top-ten-issues-for-boards-in-2012/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=top-ten-issues-for-boards-in-2012</link>
		<comments>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2011/12/10/top-ten-issues-for-boards-in-2012/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Dec 2011 15:18:02 +0000</pubDate>
<!-- 		<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator> -->
				<category><![CDATA[Boards of Directors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Corporate Elections & Voting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Corporate Social Responsibility]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Executive Compensation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Practitioner Publications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Board leadership]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Citizens United v. FEC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Say on pay]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Shareholder rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/corpgov/?p=23300?d=20150113153330EST</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As we approach the end of the year, it is time to start thinking about the hot button issues that will face boards and senior management &#8211; and that may show up in proxy statements &#8211; in 2012. Here are my top ten broken out by four categories: A. Executive Compensation/Say on Pay 1. Responding [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<hgroup><em>Posted by Francis H. Byrd, Laurel Hill Advisory Group, on Saturday, December 10, 2011 </em><div class='e_n' style='background:#F8F8F8;padding:10px;margin-top:5px;margin-bottom:10px;text-indent:2.5em;'><strong style='margin-left:-2.5em;'>Editor's Note: </strong> <p style="margin:0; display:inline;"><a href="http://www.laurelhill.com/people/francisbyrd.aspx" target="_blank">Francis H. Byrd</a> is Senior Vice President, Corporate Governance &amp; Risk Practice Leader at Laurel Hill Advisory Group. This post is based on a Laurel Hill newsletter by Mr. Byrd.</p>
</div></hgroup><p>As we approach the end of the year, it is time to start thinking about the hot button issues that will face boards and senior management &#8211; and that may show up in proxy statements &#8211; in 2012. Here are my top ten broken out by four categories:</p>
<p><strong> A. Executive Compensation/Say on Pay</strong></p>
<p>1. <em>Responding to your SOP vote</em> &#8211; Compensation committees should prepare with a similar level of intensity as last year. Many institutional investors, like ISS, usually revise their voting guidelines annually and could make changes that negatively impact on how they view your compensation program;</p>
<p>2. <em>Problematic Pay Practices</em> &#8211; Boards should seriously consider last year&#8217;s SOP votes as a wake-up call for compensation committees that have failed to remove or end practices that both proxy advisory firms and large shareholders have deemed problematic;</p>
<p>3. <em>Say-On-Pay Engagement</em> &#8211; Compensation committees should be asking, especially those at firms that either lost or sustained their SOP vote by narrow margins, how best to reach out and engage their shareholders on these issues. The compensation committee and senior management should be prepared to consult with advisors before reaching out.</p>
<p> <a href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2011/12/10/top-ten-issues-for-boards-in-2012/#more-23300" class="more-link"><span aria-label="Continue reading Top Ten Issues For Boards in 2012">(more&hellip;)</span></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2011/12/10/top-ten-issues-for-boards-in-2012/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
