Proxy Statements That Mention ERI Data
The Compensation Committee is in the process of considering whether further adjustments for 2013 are warranted in light of the completion of the acquisition and the substantial changes to the responsibilities of the NEOs. Survey data as reviewed by our third party consultants from various sources also were utilized, including the following: Economic Research institute, 2013 Executive COmpensation Assessor Radford 2012 Towers Watson 2012/2013 Top Management Compensation Compensation Calculator
View the complete proxy here
The Compensation Consultant compiled compensation data for the peer group from a variety of sources, including proxy statements and other publicly filed documents and also compiled published survey compensation data from multiple sources, including the <span class="proxyERI">Economic Research Institute</span>, Mercer and Towers Watson. This compensation data was then used to compare the compensation of our named executive officers to our peer group where the peer group had individuals serving in similar positions and to the market.<br />
View the complete proxy here
Arthur Warren Associates also assisted the Committee in the review of equity incentive plan design trends, particularly among Salisbury’s peer group, as determined through industry surveys and published proxy statements. The Compensation Committee also relied on other survey sources including Pearl Meyer & Partners 2012 New York Bankers Association Banking Compensation Survey, Pearl Meyers & Partners 2012 Northeast Bankers Survey, and <span class="proxyERI">ERI Economic Research Institute</span> Survey.<br />
View the complete proxy here
Management periodically obtains survey data of comparably situated companies from <span class="proxyERI">Economic Research Institute ("ERI")</span> to guide it in its recommendations of compensation increases. The specific parameters defined for <span class="proxyERI">ERI</span> are job description, company revenue size, company SIC code and geographic location. Based upon these inputs, <span class="proxyERI">ERI</span> supplies base salaries, incentive and total compensation information for comparable job descriptions. Where comparable job descriptions do not exist, further analysis is necessary to determine appropriate comparable compensation parameters. Thus, because it is our current practice to have both an Executive Chairman and a President and Chief Executive Officer, the starting point for our consideration of the compensation for these two positions is determined by combining the <span class="proxyERI">ERI</span> data for the position of "Outside Chairman" and the position of "President and Chief Executive Officer" and adjusting for the additional activities and responsibilities of our Executive Chairman.<br />
View the complete proxy here
The Compensation Committee also used the consultant’s assistance in setting parameters for awards consistent with peer group awards in BSB Bancorp, Inc.’s competitive market place. The Compensation Committee also relied on other survey sources including Pearl Meyer & Partners 2012 Massachusetts Bankers Association Banking Compensation Survey, Pearl Meyer & Partners 2012 Northeast Bankers Survey, and <span class="proxyERI">ERI Economic Research Institute</span> Survey.<br />
View the complete proxy here
Data for the salary surveys were selected based upon one or more of the following criteria: (i) industry group; (ii) geographic location; and (iii) company revenue. In addition, Adams conducted a competitive market analysis of comparable positions by utilizing surveys from Watson Wyatt, <span class="proxyERI">Economic Research Institute</span>, CompData, the National Executive Compensation Survey and Salary.com.<br />
View the complete proxy here
The 2009 market study, which provided base salary, total cash compensation and total direct compensation analysis, utilized proxy data of our peer group from 2006 to 2008 and survey data from the following sources: Executive Compensation Assessor, Economic Reasearch Institute, 2009
View the complete proxy here
The Compensation and Human Resources Committee instructed Arthur Warren Associates to benchmark the Bank's compensation programs against its peers to ensure that such programs are consistent with prevailing practices in its industry. The peer group consisted of three market surveys (Connecticut Bankers Association, <span class="proxyERI">Economic Research Institute</span> and Pearl Meyer & Partners) as well as 10 publicly traded banks within the region having assets ranging between $134 million and $559 million. Based on the analysis prepared by Arthur Warren Associates, the Compensation and Human Resources Committee determined that the Bank's compensation programs and levels were generally lower than the compensation programs and levels maintained by the Bank's peers.<br />
View the complete proxy here
EW also analyzed survey data from the 1) 2010 / 2011 Financial Institutions Benchmark Compensation Report (asset size between $2 billion and $9.9 billion), the 2) State of California Department of Financial Institutions' 33rd Annual Executive Officer and Director Compensation Survey, effective June 1, 2010 (asset size over $1 billion), the 3) Executive Assessor developed by the <span class="proxyERI">Economic Research Institute</span>, as of April 2011 (financial institutions in California between $3 billion and $5 billion) and 4) the 2010 California Bankers Association Compensation & Benefits Survey (asset size between $1 billion and $20 billion).<br />
View the complete proxy here
L&A compiled compensation data for the peer group from a variety of sources, including proxy statements and other publicly filed documents. L&A also provided published survey compensation data from multiple sources, including the following surveys: Economic Research Institute</span>, Mercer Inc., Kenexa, and Towers Watson.
View the complete proxy here
In this regard, the Compensation Committee, with the assistance of CFS, developed an external market model of similarly situated companies from which to develop its executive total compensation comparisons for benchmark executive positions. Market executive total compensation results were also drawn from two nationally recognized executive compensation surveys: <span class="proxyERI">Economic Research Institute ("ERI")</span> and Towers Watson's survey of Executive Total Compensation.<br />
View the complete proxy here
In addition to publicly available proxy statement information for the comparator group companies, Longnecker procured market compensation data from published survey sources utilizing companies that operate in the plastic and rubber manufacturing industry based upon GSE’s size. Those published survey sources included (i) <span class="proxyERI">Economic Research Institute</span>, 2012 <span class="proxyERI">ERI</span> Executive Compensation Assessor <br />
View the complete proxy here
In 2012, overall compensation package assessments were conducted with regard to the named executive officers, and decisions were guided, in part by the <span class="proxyERI">Economic Research Institute</span>… <br />
View the complete proxy here
In addition to the 2013 custom peer group, Longnecker derived the 2013 competitive pay information, in part, from published survey data from the following sources: Economic Research Institute ERI Executive Compensation Assessor; Towers Watson, 2012/2013 Top Management Compensation; Mercer, Inc 2012 US General Benchmark Survey;
View the complete proxy here
The Compensation Committee relies on the Corporate Human Resources Manager and external research to identify the individual companies which make up this group. In identifying the peer group of surveyed companies, the Corporate Human Resource Manager utilizes the Economic Research Institute, an industry and region specific compensation database, to assemble market data on publicly traded companies having similar industrial characteristics and revenues to that of the Company.<br />
View the complete proxy here
Longnecker also reviewed survey data as a reference point to compare the compensation of our executives to those of a broad range of companies. The following published surveys utilized by Longnecker were: Economic Research Institute, 2012 ERI Executive Compensation Assessor; Mercer, Inc. 2012 US General Benchmark Survey
View the complete proxy here
L&A also provided to the committee published survey compensation data from multiple sources, which makes up 50% of the market weight. L&A utilized the following surveys: <span class="proxyERI">Economic Research Institute</span>, Mercer, Inc. and Towers Watson. For each survey, L&A adjusted the data to appropriately reflect companies similar in size to us.<br />
View the complete proxy here
A number of published compensation surveys and databases dedicated to the community banking industry were utilized in the analysis, including those published by the American Bankers Association, CompData, Crowe Horwath, the Delves Group, <span class="proxyERI">Economic Research Institute</span> and Kenexa. Compensation data from these surveys focused on comparably-sized community financial institutions based on total assets.<br />
View the complete proxy here
Market compensation data from the Compensation Peer Group, McLagan’s database, and other surveys were aged by an annualized factor of 3.0% to adjust for the historical nature of the data. In addition, data from McLagan’s database and other surveys were adjusted utilizing data from the <span class="proxyERI">Economic Research Institute</span> to reflect the cost of wages in the Company’s local market.<br />
View the complete proxy here
Milliman relied on the following published compensation surveys for competitive market data: 2011 American Banking Association Executive Compensation Survey, 2011 Mercer Executive Compensation Benchmark Data Survey, 2011 <span class="proxyERI">Economic Research Institute</span> Top Management Compensation Report, 2011 Towers Watson Long-term Incentive Study, 2011 Towers Watson Top Management Compensation Report, and the 2011 Milliman Northwest Financial Industry Salary Survey.<br />
View the complete proxy here
Every two years Deloitte provides the Committee with a market assessment that utilizes blended market data from the most relevant compensation surveys available, including the Forest Products Industry Compensation Association Survey for industry-specific market data, and surveys from Mercer, <span class="proxyERI">Economic Research Institute</span> and Towers Watson for general industry market data representing similarly-sized companies.<br />
View the complete proxy here
In connection with the preparation of the 2012 compensation program, the compensation consultant benchmarked the proposed compensation packages for the named executives against (i) proxy data available for the peer group, and (ii) published survey data (including the 2011 Mercer US Executive Benchmark Database, the TowersWatson 2010/2011 Top Management Calculator, and the 2011 <span class="proxyERI">Economic Research Institute</span> Executive Compensation Assessor).<br />
View the complete proxy here
The CEO's recommendations regarding the 2012 compensation of the other NEOs was also based, in part, on the reports produced by Pearl Meyers & Partners and the Hay Group. In 2012, management utilized the <span class="proxyERI">Economic Research Institute (ERI)</span> to benchmark the NEOs salary and total cash compensation and to update the market analysis previously provided by Pearl Meyers & Partners and the Hay Group.<br />
View the complete proxy here
EW Partners developed its analysis utilizing published compensation surveys and proxy statement data, where applicable, for the position being evaluated, including the 2012 California Bankers Association Compensation and Benefits Survey, the 2011 State of California Department of Financial Institutions Annual Executive Officer and Director Compensation Survey, the 2011 Financial Institutions Benchmark Compensation Report produced by Watson Wyatt, and the 2012 Executive Compensation Assessor developed by the <span class="proxyERI">Economic Research Institute</span>… <br />
View the complete proxy here
The Committee reviewed the following surveys in conjunction with the November 2011 Executive Compensation Review, implemented in 2012: Benchmark Database Executive Survey Report, Mercer (2011), CompAnalyst; Salary.com; Executive Assessor; Economic Research Institute (ERI) (2011)
View the complete proxy here
L&A compiled compensation data for the peer group from a variety of sources, including proxy statements and other publicly filed documents. The consultant also provided published survey compensation data from multiple sources, including the following surveys: <span class="proxyERI">Economic Research Institute</span>, Mercer, Inc., Kenexa and Towers Watson. For each survey, L&A adjusted the data to appropriately reflect companies of a similar size to the Company.<br />
View the complete proxy here
In 2012, overall compensation package assessments were conducted with regard to the named executive officers, and decisions were guided, in part, by review of the peer group data from Linden Place Financial and in part by reference to industry survey data provided for the Oil and Gas Field Services industry, Nationwide by the <span class="proxyERI">Economic Research Institute</span> and additional survey data for validation purposes from Mercer, LLC in 2011 (the peer group and industry survey data collectively referred to herein as the “market data”).<br />
View the complete proxy here
In 2012, we used <span class="proxyERI">Economic Research Institute</span> and CompAnalyst market data as additional comparison points. Total market data was compared with individual pay for each position, and “compra-ratios” were determined.<br />
View the complete proxy here
For 2012, the Committee and Board of Directors defined the competitive market for our executives (other than Mr. Smith) as the other 11 Federal Home Loan Banks (each individually a “FHLBank” and collectively with us, the “FHLBanks” and, together with the Office of Finance, a joint office of the FHLBanks, the “FHLBank System”) and non-depository financial services institutions with approximately $20 billion in assets as represented by broadbased survey data provided by the <span class="proxyERI">Economic Research Institute ("ERI")</span>. <br />
View the complete proxy here
In early 2012 the Compensation Committee reviewed cash compensation data from the <span class="proxyERI">Economic Research Institute</span> database and from Strategic Compensation Planning, Inc., a compensation consultant, and cash compensation practices at each of Energy Solutions, Headwaters, Inc., NuSkin Enterprises and USANA Health Sciences, each of which is a publicly-traded company based in Utah with revenues ranging from approximately $500 million to $1.8 billion (the "Utah Companies").<br />
View the complete proxy here
For 2011 and 2012, the Compensation Committee reviewed and considered Frost's 2010 Oilfield Manufacturing and Services Executive Compensation Survey, <span class="proxyERI">Economic Research Institute's</span> 2010 Executive Compensation Assessor, Towers Watson's 2010 Top Management Compensation Report and William M. Mercer's 2010 Energy Compensation Report. For 2013, the Compensation Committee reviewed and considered Frost's evaluation and analysis of the following sources: Mercer Energy Sector Survey Report 2012, Towers Watson Top Management Compensation Survey 2012, and Frost HR Consulting Oilfield Manufacturing and Services Industry Executive Compensation Survey 2012.<br />
View the complete proxy here