Compensation Philosophy and General Objectives
Our executive compensation philosophy is focused on pay for performance and is designed to reflect appropriate governance practices aligned with the needs of our business. We grant target levels of compensation that are designed to attract and retain employees who are able to meaningfully contribute to our success. Our Compensation Committee considers several factors in designing target levels of compensation, including, but not limited to, historical levels of pay for each executive, actual turnover in the executive ranks, market data on the compensation of executive officers at similar companies, and its judgment about retention risk with regards to each executive relative to their importance to the Company. In reviewing market data, our Compensation Committee has reviewed the total compensation for each executive officer relative to executives in the same or similar positions in an appropriate market comparison group, which includes seventeen business development or private equity companies, adjusting the total compensation observed at these peers for their size relative to the Company. The seventeen companies are American Capital, Ltd., Apollo Global Management, LLC, Blackstone Group LP, Capital Southwest Corp, Carlyle Group, Compass Diversified Holdings, Harris & Harris Group, Hercules Tech Growth Cap, Icahn Enterprises, KKR, Kohlberg Capital Corp, Leucadia, Loews Corp, Main Street Capital Corp, MCG Capital Corp, Safeguard Scientifics Inc. and Triangle Capital Corp. While median, size-adjusted total compensation is initially presumed to be competitive market pay, the Compensation Committee does not attempt to target a specific percentile within a peer group or otherwise rely exclusively on that data to determine named executive officer compensation. The Compensation Committee does not use market data to target specific components of total compensation, such as salary or bonuses, and instead determines the target total level of compensation necessary to be competitive for each executive in the relevant market for that executive’s talent.
The Company’s mix of fixed versus variable compensation, within the target total level of pay, is driven by the Company’s emphasis on pay for performance. The Company uses variable compensation, including performance-based equity grants, as well as management’s accumulated equity holdings, both vested and unvested, to enhance alignment of our named executive officers’ and stockholders’ interests.
Components of Executive Compensation
Our compensation program generally has four basic elements: salary, initial equity grants, incentive compensation and other benefits. Salary and benefits are designed to aid in the retention of our employees. Initial equity grants are generally, though not necessarily, awarded upon hiring or promotion, and may consist of restricted stock or stock options with a vesting period. Incentive compensation generally consists of bonuses for individual and company performance, and may be awarded as cash or equity. Equity awards will typically be vested over a period of years to enhance both retention and alignment of interests.
We believe that the various components of our executive compensation program are effective in attracting and retaining our employees and providing a strong alignment of their interests with those of our stockholders. Although each element of compensation described below is considered separately, our Compensation Committee makes its determinations regarding each individual component of the compensation program in the context of the aggregate effect on total compensation for each named executive officer.
The principal elements of compensation for our named executive officers in Fiscal 2015 were:
| |
• | variable compensation potential consisting of cash and equity payouts; and |
How We Determine Each Element of Compensation
Our Compensation Committee is responsible for our executive compensation program design and administration, including a regular review of our compensation programs and evaluation of management performance and awards consistent with our bonus plan. In Fiscal 2015, our Compensation Committee was advised by Hodak, its independent executive compensation firm, and separate outside counsel, as it deemed appropriate. Throughout Fiscal 2015, our Compensation Committee, with the assistance of its advisors, reviewed the Company’s compensation program, including target levels of compensation for current and new employees, bonus plans or equity awards, and other compensation policies affecting executive officers and directors.
In light of new SEC rules and new NYSE Rules, our Compensation Committee considered the independence of its compensation consultant, including assessment of the following factors: (i) other services provided to the Company by the consultant; (ii) fees paid as a percentage of the consulting firm’s total revenue; (iii) policies or procedures maintained by the consulting firm that are designed to prevent a conflict of interest; (iv) any business or personal relationships between the individual consultants involved in the engagement and any member of our Compensation Committee; (v) any Company stock owned by the individual consultants involved in the engagement; and (vi) any business or personal relationships between our executive officers and the consulting firm or the individual consultants involved in the engagement. Our Compensation Committee has concluded that no conflict of interest exists that would prevent our compensation consultant from independently representing our Compensation Committee.
