BulletProofBlog the blog on crisis communications

Last month, a largely unnoticed wrinkle emerged in the executive compensation debate that promises to take on added significance in the coming months. Soon, it won’t just be C-Suite pay practices that are under the microscope; the board members who decide executive compensation policy will be in the spotlight as well – though not for the reason many might think.

In a story published by Reuters last December, directors at Nabors Industries were scrutinized not because of what they pay the company’s executive leadership; but because of what they, themselves, are paid to fulfill their duties as members of the board. On average, each of Nabors’ directors received $420,000 in 2008.

While that figure represents almost twice what the average Standard & Poor’s 500 company pays its directors, that’s not why Nabors found itself as the centerpiece of the story. Rather, it was the fact that the company’s stock price had plummeted 60 percent since June 2008 – and that the bulk of directors’ work in that time had been performed from the luxurious Fairmont Hamilton Princess Hotel in Bermuda.

Of course, given the recent precipitous drop in oil prices, it’s quite possible that the vision and leadership the Nabors board provided during that time protected the company against even greater losses. But in an environment where questions about compensation are now being directed to all aspects and levels of corporate leadership, maybes aren’t enough. With investors, the media, and government entities watching closely, it is more important than ever that companies justify pay by measuring tangible performance against a wide spectrum of metrics.

Too often, companies under fire for what some stakeholders deem to be excessive compensation reflexively communicate that it is all about the company’s need to be competitive in attracting top talent and leave it at that. A robust communications program, on the other hand, does not wait for critics to appear. Instead, it proactively conditions the environment to demonstrate for all to see why an action is the right one.

That said, the power of sacrificial symbolic gestures is also often overlooked when executive pay becomes an issue. By holding board meetings or other leadership gatherings at the office, instead of a coveted vacation venue, companies send the message that they understand their stakeholders’ concerns – and are willing to act accordingly.

Simply put, it’s not the pay that’s the issue; it’s the perception – and perceptions can be shaped.

Michael W. Robinson is a Senior Vice President and Chair of the Corporate Practice at Levick Strategic Communications, the nation's top crisis communications firm. He is also a contributing author to Bulletproof Blog. Connect with Levick on Twitter: @Levick.