The Adoption of Deferred Share Unit Plans for Outside Directors and Shareholder Wealth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Manuscript Type: Empirical Research Question/Issue: We examine the impact of the adoption of deferred share unit (DSU) plans for directors on a firm's stock market value. We also examine the differential response to plan and firm characteristics. Research Findings/Results: The sample comprises all firms within Canada's top 1,000 that adopted DSU plans between 1997 (first one) and 2005. Results show that adopters exhibit positive abnormal returns at the adoption announcements and that these vary in accordance with DSU attributes: Investors reward firms that adopt stricter standards. Findings also indicate a more positive reaction when firms are widely held, have higher levels of related directors, higher free cash flows, and are not cross‐listed in the US. Theoretical/Implications: The paper adds to the scant literature on directors' compensation by examining a recent development in directors' pay; DSU plans having many distinguishing features that set them apart from stock options. Second, it investigates whether investors' reaction varies with DSU attributes. Third, the specificity of the Canadian settings allows an analysis of the reaction to DSU adoption given different ownership structures and stock market listing. Practial Implications: The positive stock market reaction to DSU adoption provides valid economic underpinnings to the current worldwide trend in director compensation toward the cancellation of stock option plans and their substitution by DSU. However, the adoption of DSU plans for directors does not add much value in settings where there is already good monitoring by a large shareholder, by a broader investor base or by the board.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".