Institutional Investor Services (ISS) recently announced that it will be launching GRId 2.0 on February 20, 2012. GRId, or Governance Risk Indicators, is ISS’s rating system for publicly-traded companies’ corporate governance practices which ISS wants us to believe is designed to measure publicly-traded companies’ governance-related risk. GRId purports to be based upon ISS’s proxy voting policy guidelines.
Certain features of GRId will stay the same. ISS will continue to evaluate in the four categories of Audit, Board, Compensation and Shareholder Rights in metrics of “Low Concern,” “Medium Concern” and “High Concern.” However, ISS uses GRId 2.0 as an opportunity to change its scoring methodology. ISS is adding new questions on its pay-for-performance methodology based on its newly-published whitepaper, related-party transactions, board relationships and takeover defenses. Companies should expect to receive a numerical GRId score for each of the categories in addition to a level of concern.
ISS’s Pay-for-Performance Whitepaper outlines ISS’s latest approach effective February 1, 2012, to evaluating pay-for-performance. This is the primary method ISS uses in deciding whether to recommend for or against a company’s say-on-pay vote and for or against a proposal related to an equity compensation plan. The latest approach is based upon the alignment between CEO pay and one and three year total shareholder return (“TSR”) within a subject company’s peer group (as designated by ISS, not the company) and between CEO pay and five year TSR of the subject company.
If you have any questions about how GRId 2.0 will affect your company’s corporate governance rating or about ISS’s Pay-for-Performance methodology, please contact us.
This blog post was updated on December 21, 2011
- Partner
Mark Reuter advocates for business clients in transactions, proceedings and conflicts regulated by federal and state securities laws and stock exchange rules. A partner in the firm’s Business Representation & Transactions ...
Topics/Tags
Select- SEC
- Securities Regulation
- Securities Law
- Corporate Transparency Act
- Cybersecurity and Privacy Law
- Clawback Rules
- Nasdaq
- House Settlement
- NCAA
- NIL
- Sports
- Corporate Law
- IRS
- Coronavirus
- Tax Planning
- Cybersecurity Regulation
- EDGAR
- EDGAR Next
- SEC Enforcement
- Taxation
- Dodd-Frank
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- Paycheck Protection Program
- JOBS Act
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Tax
- FAST Act
- Consumer Protection Act
- Economic Sanctions
- Ohio LLC Act
- Proxy Access Rules
- Securities Litigation
- Crowdfunding
- Conflict Minerals
- Cryptocurrency
- Hedging
- Real Estate Law
- Emerging Growth Companies
- Investors
- Pay Ratio Disclosure
- Whistleblower
- Private Offerings
- Intellectual Property
- Technology
- LIBOR
- Opportunity Zone
- Executive Compensation
- Health Care Act
- Accredited Investors
- Sales Tax
- United States Supreme Court
- Online Trading Platforms
- Wall Street Reform
- IPO
- Registration Statement
- Annual Reports
- Ohio Foreclosure Reform
- Director Compensation
- Family-Controlled Entities
- Gift and Estate Transfers
- Board of Directors
- Director Independence
- Total Shareholder Return
- Cyber Insurance
- Data Breach
- Lenders
- Receivership Statute
- Regulation A
- Regulation D
- Compensation Committee Certification
- CDEs
- CDFI Fund
- Community Development Entities
- Community Development Financial Institutions Fund
- Government Shutdown
- New Markets Tax Credit
- NMTC
- NMTC Financing
- Regulation Fair Disclosure
- Social Media
- Benefits
- Healthcare Reform
- Litigation
- Marketing
- Public Company Transition Rules
- Employment Incentives
- HIRE Act
- Social Security Tax
- Tax Credit
Recent Posts
- Ninth Circuit Warning: Silence in the Face of SEC Comment Letters May Bolster Section 12(a)(2) Claims
- House Settlement Approved: College Sports Transition into a New but Familiar Legal Era
- Checking the Box(es): SEC Issues New Guidance Clarifying Clawback Expectations
- Pay vs. Performance and Cybersecurity Disclosure Rules: Will the SEC Retract Rulemaking?
- Corporate Transparency Act Update: FinCEN Eliminates Reporting Obligations for U.S. Companies and U.S. Persons
- Corporate Transparency Act Update: FinCEN Will Not Enforce the CTA Until Interim Rule is Effective
- Corporate Transparency Act Update: Injunction Lifted - Corporate Transparency Act Back in Effect
- Corporate Transparency Act Update: FinCEN Says Reporting Obligations Remain On Hold
- Next Up in 2025: EDGAR Next
- Corporate Transparency Act Update: Supreme Court Stays Nationwide Injunction – CTA Reporting Obligations Back in Effect