I see parallels here with the core problems we have in America. I think we need a focused effort on restoring an effective and impartial press. The fourth estate is on the ropes and neither voters nor shareholders have reliable information with which to cast their votes. We need to encourage people to reward the unbiased sources of information on what is really going on, and encourage them to reject those sources that provide intellectually dishonest representations, even if they seem like people supporting their existing opinions. If we start reading and watching the objective press and stop reading and watching the infotainment people so much, ad revenues will shift to the people providing real and honest information you can use for better voting. When the opinion poles start to show candidates an informed voter, the candidates with integrity will conclude they can afford to run a campaign and have a chance to win.
The same is true in the board room, with some higher hurdles on voting, but perhaps lower hurdles on information. If we can get these advisory votes recently established to reject the cases where the board has not used the proper quality of compensation analysis, and simply cannot make the case for the pay packages proposed, they'll either have to lower the pay or make a better case.
A top flight CEO with rare skills and rare preparation may find themselves in the right place at the right time and actually be worth tens of millions of dollars to a company for a while. But how often that is the case and how long its true would need to be demonstrated in credible compensation analysis to avoid the rejection of a pay proposal.
Let's hope this keeps moving in the right direction!