Pay-for-Performance
Realized-pay vs peer median, paired with 3-year TSR to produce a per-NEO alignment score.
Compare realized total direct compensation (base + actual STI + LTI vested) to peer median, paired with relative TSR over the same period. Output an alignment score per NEO.
Realized-pay data per NEO (last 3 years), peer-set realized-pay distribution, 3-yr cumulative TSR for company and peers.
Per-NEO realized pay vs peer median, TSR vs peer TSR, alignment score (Strong / Moderate / Weak), and narrative-ready commentary.
Realized-pay methodology varies (Equilar, ISS, FW Cook all differ). Confirm which definition the comp committee uses before locking the proxy CDA.
Three Strong, three Moderate alignment scores; no Weak. CEO and President NA tell the cleanest stories — top-quartile pay paired with top-quartile performance.
Carry the alignment narrative into the proxy CD&A — see Proxy Disclosure Support.
| NEO | Role | Realized TDC | Peer median TDC | Δ vs peer | Alignment | Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M. Reyes | CEO | $11.40M | $9.80M | +16.3% | Strong | Pay above peer median, but performance materially exceeds peers — well-aligned. |
| S. Patel | CFO | $4.65M | $4.30M | +8.1% | Strong | Roughly market pay, strong relative performance — aligned. |
| A. Chen | COO | $4.98M | $4.10M | +21.5% | Strong | Above peer pay, above peer performance — aligned. |
| L. O'Brien | CTO | $5.28M | $4.90M | +7.8% | Moderate | Above peer pay; performance aligned. Consider TSR-modifier on next PSU grant. |
| K. Suzuki | GC | $3.24M | $2.80M | +15.7% | Moderate | Pay above peer; no individual TSR linkage. Document scorecard rationale in proxy CDA. |
| R. Kapoor | CHRO | $2.98M | $2.65M | +12.5% | Moderate | Pay slightly above peer median; weakest TSR linkage in the NEO group. |
| J. Martin | Pres NA | $4.12M | $4.35M | -5.3% | Strong | Below peer pay, above peer performance — strongest P4P story. |
CHRO is the weakest P4P link — pay above peer median with no individual TSR-linked LTI metric. GC similarly has scorecard-only LTI metrics that don't include TSR or relative performance.
ISS Quality of Compensation analysis flags executives with no quantitative LTI performance metrics. Even strong absolute outcomes can score 'Medium concern' if the metric design doesn't link to relative performance.
On next LTI grant cycle, add a relative-TSR modifier (capped at ±25%) to PSU grants for CHRO and GC. Document in the CD&A narrative.
Adding TSR modifiers retroactively to in-flight PSU grants requires recipient consent and accounting re-measurement; do at next grant cycle only.
- Has the comp committee considered relative-TSR modifiers for non-CEO NEOs?
- Does the company prefer 1-yr, 3-yr, or 5-yr TSR comparison windows? ISS uses 3-yr by default.
Realized pay = base + actual STI paid + LTI vested in period. Realizable pay (in-flight grants) is a separate disclosure topic.
Open Stock Ownership Guidelines to confirm ownership-building keeps pace with pay growth.