NYT » Topics » Key Factors in Setting Compensation

These excerpts taken from the NYT DEF 14A filed Mar 11, 2009.

Key Factors in Setting Compensation

In setting or recommending the amounts of each component of an executive's compensation and considering his or her overall compensation package, the Committee evaluates each of the following factors:

Benchmarking—Each year, the Committee reviews market data for corporate executives in positions comparable to those of Mr. Sulzberger, Jr., Ms. Robinson and Messrs. Golden and Follo, to the extent available, and operating unit executives in positions comparable to those of Messrs. Heekin-Canedy and Ainsley. For several years, in setting compensation for corporate officers, the Committee examined market data on pay practices at a cross-industry selection of 80 U.S. publicly traded companies with median revenues comparable to the Company, viewed as representative of the companies with which the Company competes for senior executives. In meetings in November and December 2007, as part of its 2008 compensation-setting process, the Committee reviewed its approach and selected a smaller comparative group that included traditional newspaper companies, other print publishing companies, news and information companies of various sizes, and a selection of general industry companies with revenues comparable to the Company's. These companies generated 2007 revenues ranging from approximately $1 billion to $21 billion, with median revenues of approximately $3.7 billion. The new group consisted of the following 40 companies, each of which was a participant in the Towers Perrin Executive Compensation Database, a widely used source of executive compensation information.
Advance Publications Inc.
Advanstar Communications Inc.
Allergan, Inc.
Belo Corp.
Cablevision Systems Corp.
Clear Channel Communications, Inc.
Comcast Cable Communications Inc.
Cox Enterprises
Crain Communications Inc.
Cytec Industries, Inc.
Disney Publishing Worldwide
Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
Foster Wheeler Ltd.
Gannett Co., Inc.
Google Inc.
Hachette Filipacchi Media U.S., Inc.
  Media General Inc.
Meredith Corporation
Reuters America, Inc.
The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company
Sonoco Products Company
Steelcase Inc.
The E.W. Scripps Company
The Hearst Corp.
The Thomson Corporation
The Washington Post Company
Time Inc.
Time Warner Cable Inc.
Tribune Company
Trinity Induselies, Inc.
United States Cellular Corporation
Viacom Inc.
Hasbro, Inc.
IAC/InterActiveCorp.
The McClatchy Company
McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
  Vulcan Materials Company
W.R. Grace & Co.
Williams-Sonoma, Inc.
Yahoo! Inc.

    The Committee concluded that the new group provided a better comparison because it included a sizable number of direct competitors as well as general industry companies representative of those with which the Company competes for senior executive talent.

    The Committee's independent compensation consultant, Exequity, provided information regarding market practices and trends and analyzed competitive market data from the selected peer group of companies. In the case of media companies, which were included in the peer group regardless of size, the data was size-adjusted by revenues using regression analysis. In prior years, the Committee measured the appropriateness of each element of an executive's compensation package in relation to 60th percentile compensation levels in the benchmark group. For 2008, however, the Committee adjusted the relevant standard for measuring pay adequacy, deciding instead to review annual salary targets for corporate executives against the 50th percentile, with targets for total compensation (total cash compensation plus the value of long-term incentive awards) reviewed against the 60th percentile. The Committee's decision to reduce the standard for base salary assessment reflected its desire to emphasize the performance-dependency of an executive's overall pay opportunity.

    For operating unit executives, such as Mr. Heekin-Canedy, president and general manager of The Times, and Mr. Ainsley, publisher of the Globe, the Committee reviewed pay practices for similarly situated individuals at other media companies based on market data provided by the Towers Perrin CDB Media Industry Survey for those media companies that participated in the survey. Again, the Committee reviewed annual salary targets against the 50th percentile and measured total compensation against the 60th percentile.

Performance—The Committee ties a substantial portion of each named executive officer's total potential compensation to Company and individual performance. All executive officers, including the named executive officers, are eligible for annual cash bonuses and long-term performance cash awards that reinforce the relationship between pay and performance by linking compensation to the achievement of important short- and long-term

33


    financial, strategic, operating and individual performance targets set by the Committee in advance based on the Company objectives set out in the operating budget. In its continuing effort to ensure executive compensation aligns with operating results, the Committee determined that commencing in 2010, grants of restricted stock units will also be tied to the Company's performance for the most recently completed fiscal year.

    The Committee considers the individual performance of each named executive officer by reviewing, among other factors, recommendations of the Chief Executive Officer with respect to the named executive officers other than herself and our Chairman, achievement of pre-established individual performance objectives and annual self-assessments. The amount of each component of a named executive officer's compensation is based in part on the Committee's assessment of that individual's performance.

Internal Pay Equity—The Committee's approach to compensation is that executives holding comparable positions of responsibility should have similar compensation opportunities, adjusted to reflect their responsibilities and role within the Company and recognizing that actual rewards earned should reflect achievement of individual performance objectives.

In setting compensation for 2008, the Committee reviewed tally sheets detailing the total compensation of the named executive officers. These tally sheets identified all components of compensation for these executives, including the compensation such executives would be eligible to receive under different termination scenarios, as described in "—Payment Upon Termination or Change-in Control Table." At the conclusion of this review, the Committee concluded that the amounts of compensation to be paid were appropriate and reasonable in light of the factors discussed above.

Key Factors in Setting Compensation



In
setting or recommending the amounts of each component of an executive's compensation and considering his or her overall compensation package, the Committee evaluates each of the following factors:




Benchmarking—Each year, the Committee reviews market data for corporate executives in positions comparable to
those of Mr. Sulzberger, Jr., Ms. Robinson and Messrs. Golden and Follo, to the extent available, and operating unit executives in positions comparable to those of
Messrs. Heekin-Canedy and Ainsley. For several years, in setting compensation for corporate officers, the Committee examined market data on pay practices at a cross-industry selection of 80
U.S. publicly traded companies with median revenues comparable to the Company, viewed as representative of the companies with which the Company competes for senior executives. In meetings in November
and December 2007, as part of its 2008 compensation-setting process,
the Committee reviewed its approach and selected a smaller comparative group that included traditional newspaper companies, other print publishing companies, news and information companies of various
sizes, and a selection of general industry companies with revenues comparable to the Company's. These companies generated 2007 revenues ranging from approximately $1 billion to
$21 billion, with median revenues of approximately $3.7 billion. The new group consisted of the following 40 companies, each of which was a participant in the Towers Perrin Executive
Compensation Database, a widely used source of executive compensation information.




















Advance Publications Inc.

Advanstar Communications Inc.

Allergan, Inc.

Belo Corp.

Cablevision Systems Corp.

Clear Channel Communications, Inc.

Comcast Cable Communications Inc.

Cox Enterprises

Crain Communications Inc.

Cytec Industries, Inc.

Disney Publishing Worldwide

Dow Jones & Company, Inc.

Foster Wheeler Ltd.

Gannett Co., Inc.

Google Inc.

Hachette Filipacchi Media U.S., Inc.
 Media General Inc.

Meredith Corporation

Reuters America, Inc.

The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company

Sonoco Products Company

Steelcase Inc.

The E.W. Scripps Company

The Hearst Corp.

The Thomson Corporation

The Washington Post Company

Time Inc.

Time Warner Cable Inc.

Tribune Company

Trinity Induselies, Inc.

United States Cellular Corporation

Viacom Inc.
Hasbro, Inc.

IAC/InterActiveCorp.

The McClatchy Company

McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
 Vulcan Materials Company

W.R. Grace & Co.

Williams-Sonoma, Inc.

Yahoo! Inc.





    The
    Committee concluded that the new group provided a better comparison because it included a sizable number of direct competitors as well as general industry companies representative of those with
    which the Company competes for senior executive talent.



    The
    Committee's independent compensation consultant, Exequity, provided information regarding market practices and trends and analyzed competitive market data from the selected peer group of
    companies. In the case of media companies, which were included in the peer group regardless of size, the data was size-adjusted by revenues using regression analysis. In prior years, the
    Committee measured the appropriateness of each element of an executive's compensation package in relation to 60th percentile compensation levels in the benchmark group. For 2008,
    however, the Committee adjusted the relevant standard for measuring pay adequacy, deciding instead to review annual salary targets for corporate executives against the
    50th percentile, with targets for total compensation (total cash compensation plus the value of long-term incentive awards) reviewed against the
    60th percentile. The Committee's
    decision to reduce the standard for base salary assessment reflected its desire to emphasize the performance-dependency of an executive's overall pay opportunity.



    For
    operating unit executives, such as Mr. Heekin-Canedy, president and general manager of The Times, and Mr. Ainsley, publisher of the Globe, the Committee reviewed pay practices for similarly
    situated individuals at other media companies based on market data provided by the Towers Perrin CDB Media Industry Survey for those media companies that participated in the survey. Again, the
    Committee reviewed annual salary targets against the 50th percentile and measured total compensation against the 60th percentile.





Performance—The Committee ties a substantial portion of each named executive officer's total potential
compensation to Company and individual performance. All executive officers, including the named executive officers, are eligible for annual cash bonuses and long-term performance cash
awards that reinforce the relationship between pay and performance by linking compensation to the achievement of important short- and long-term

33










    financial,
    strategic, operating and individual performance targets set by the Committee in advance based on the Company objectives set out in the operating budget. In its continuing effort to ensure
    executive compensation aligns with operating results, the Committee determined that commencing in 2010, grants of restricted stock units will also be tied to the Company's performance for the most
    recently completed fiscal year.



    The
    Committee considers the individual performance of each named executive officer by reviewing, among other factors, recommendations of the Chief Executive Officer with respect to the named executive
    officers other than herself and our Chairman, achievement of pre-established individual performance objectives and annual self-assessments. The amount of each component of a
    named executive officer's compensation is based in part on the Committee's assessment of that individual's performance.





Internal Pay Equity—The Committee's approach to compensation is that executives holding
comparable positions of responsibility should have similar compensation opportunities, adjusted to reflect their responsibilities and role within the Company and recognizing that actual rewards earned
should reflect achievement of individual performance objectives.


In
setting compensation for 2008, the Committee reviewed tally sheets detailing the total compensation of the named executive officers. These tally sheets identified all components of compensation for
these executives, including the compensation such executives would be eligible to receive under different termination scenarios, as described in "—Payment Upon Termination or Change-in
Control Table." At the conclusion of this review, the Committee concluded that the amounts of compensation to be paid were appropriate and reasonable in light of the factors discussed above.




These excerpts taken from the NYT DEF 14A filed Mar 25, 2008.

Key Factors in Setting Compensation

In setting or recommending the amounts of each component of an executive's compensation and considering his or her overall compensation package, the Committee considers each of the following four factors:

Benchmarking—Each year, the Committee reviews market data for corporate executives in positions comparable to that of Mr. Sulzberger, Jr., Ms. Robinson and Messrs. Golden and Follo, and operating unit executives in positions comparable to that of Mr. Ainsley. In September 2006, as part of its 2007 compensation-setting process for corporate executives, the Committee considered the level of compensation paid for comparable corporate executive positions at a cross-industry selection of 80 U.S. companies with 2005 revenues ranging from $1 billion to $8.3 billion, with a median revenue of $3.4 billion, the same as our 2005 revenues. The companies were selected by Hewitt Associates, then the Committee's compensation consultant, and represented the 40 next larger and 40 next smaller manufacturing and services companies in the Hewitt Associates Total Compensation DataBase™. The DataBase™ is a widely used source of executive compensation information. The Committee did not examine the specific pay practices at, nor the similarities of the Company to, each organization in the benchmark community. Instead, the Committee considered the 60th percentile pay levels in the benchmark community, and relied on those statistical representations as typifying general industry practices. It was against these norms that the Committee drew its conclusions about the appropriateness of the Company's executive officer pay levels and based its decisions about 2007 pay adjustments. Given the limited number of direct media company peers, the Committee believes that it is useful to benchmark against an independently prepared cross-industry selection that is representative of the types of companies with which we compete to recruit and retain executive talent.

In the case of operating unit executives, such as Mr. Ainsley, who is the publisher of The Boston Globe, the Committee considers the 60th percentile level of compensation for similarly situated individuals at other media companies based on market data provided by the Towers Perrin CDB Media Industry Survey for those media companies that participate in the survey.

Performance—The Committee ties a substantial portion of each named executive officer's total potential compensation to Company and individual performance. All executive officers, including the named executive officers, are eligible for annual cash bonuses and long-term performance cash awards that reinforce the relationship between pay and performance by linking compensation to the achievement of important short- and long-term financial, strategic, operating and individual performance targets set by the Committee in advance based on the Company objectives set out in the operating budget.

The Committee considers the individual performance of each named executive officer by reviewing, among other factors, recommendations of the Chief Executive Officer with respect to the named executive officers other than herself and our Chairman, achievement of pre-established individual performance objectives and annual self-assessments. The amount of each component of a named executive officer's compensation is based in part on the Committee's assessment of that individual's performance.  

Internal Pay Equity—The Committee compares the compensation of individual executive officers for internal pay equity purposes. The Committee's approach to compensation is that executives holding comparable positions of responsibility should receive comparable compensation, subject to adjustments based upon achievement of individual performance objectives.

Operating Budget—The Committee considers the total compensation payable to executives and the impact that it will have on our operating budget.

In setting compensation for 2007, the Committee reviewed tally sheets prepared by Hewitt Associates, detailing the total compensation of the named executive officers. These tally sheets identified all components of compensation for these executives, including the compensation such executives would be eligible to receive under different termination scenarios. At the conclusion of this review, the Committee determined that the amounts of compensation to be currently paid, in aggregate, and the amounts that would be paid upon retirement or other termination of employment, in aggregate, were appropriate and reasonable in light of the factors discussed above.

Key Factors in Setting Compensation



In
setting or recommending the amounts of each component of an executive's compensation and considering his or her overall compensation package, the Committee considers each of the following four
factors:





Benchmarking—Each year, the Committee reviews market data for corporate executives in positions comparable to
that of Mr. Sulzberger, Jr., Ms. Robinson and Messrs. Golden and Follo, and operating unit executives in positions comparable to that of Mr. Ainsley. In September 2006, as
part of its 2007 compensation-setting process for corporate executives, the Committee considered the level of compensation paid for comparable corporate executive positions at a cross-industry
selection of 80 U.S. companies with 2005 revenues ranging from $1 billion to $8.3 billion, with a median revenue of $3.4 billion, the same as our 2005 revenues. The companies were
selected by Hewitt Associates, then the Committee's compensation consultant, and represented the 40 next larger and 40 next smaller manufacturing and services companies in the Hewitt Associates Total
Compensation DataBase™. The DataBase™ is a widely used source of executive compensation information. The Committee did not examine the specific pay practices at, nor the
similarities of the Company to, each organization in the benchmark community. Instead, the Committee considered the 60th percentile pay levels in the benchmark community, and
relied on those statistical representations as typifying general industry practices. It was against these norms that the Committee drew its conclusions about the appropriateness of the Company's
executive officer pay levels and based its decisions about 2007 pay adjustments. Given the limited number of direct media company peers, the Committee believes that it is useful to benchmark against
an independently prepared cross-industry selection that is representative of the types of companies with which we compete to recruit and retain executive talent.


In
the case of operating unit executives, such as Mr. Ainsley, who is the publisher of The Boston Globe, the Committee considers the 60th percentile level of compensation
for similarly situated individuals at other media companies based on market data provided by the Towers Perrin CDB Media Industry Survey for those media companies that participate in the survey.





Performance—The Committee ties a substantial portion of each named executive officer's total potential
compensation to Company and individual performance. All executive officers, including the named executive officers, are eligible for annual cash bonuses and long-term performance cash
awards that reinforce the relationship between pay and performance by linking compensation to the achievement of important short- and long-term financial, strategic, operating and
individual performance targets set by the Committee in advance based on the Company objectives set out in the operating budget.


The
Committee considers the individual performance of each named executive officer by reviewing, among other factors, recommendations of the Chief Executive Officer with respect to the named executive
officers other than herself and our Chairman, achievement of pre-established individual performance objectives and annual self-assessments. The amount of each component of a
named executive officer's compensation is based in part on the Committee's assessment of that individual's performance.
 



Internal Pay Equity—The Committee compares the compensation of individual executive officers for
internal pay equity purposes. The Committee's approach to compensation is that executives holding comparable positions of responsibility should receive comparable compensation, subject to adjustments
based upon achievement of individual performance objectives.


Operating Budget—The Committee considers the total compensation payable to executives and the impact that it will
have on our operating budget.


In
setting compensation for 2007, the Committee reviewed tally sheets prepared by Hewitt Associates, detailing the total compensation of the named executive officers. These tally sheets identified all
components of compensation for these executives, including the compensation such executives would be eligible to receive under different termination scenarios. At the conclusion of this review, the
Committee determined that the amounts of compensation to be currently paid, in aggregate, and the amounts that would be paid upon retirement or other termination of employment, in aggregate, were
appropriate and reasonable in light of the factors discussed above.



These excerpts taken from the NYT PREC14A filed Feb 26, 2008.

Key Factors in Setting Compensation

In setting or recommending the amounts of each component of an executive's compensation and considering his or her overall compensation package, the Committee considers each of the following four factors:

Benchmarking—Each year, the Committee reviews market data for corporate executives in positions comparable to that of Mr. Sulzberger, Jr., Ms. Robinson and Messrs. Golden and Follo, and operating unit executives in positions comparable to that of Mr. Ainsley. In September 2006, as part of its 2007 compensation-setting process for corporate executives, the Committee considered the level of compensation paid for comparable corporate executive positions at a cross-industry selection of 80 U.S. companies with 2005 revenues ranging from $1 billion to $8.3 billion, with a median revenue of $3.4 billion, the same as our 2005 revenues. The companies were selected by Hewitt Associates, then the Committee's compensation consultant, and represented the 40 next larger and 40 next smaller manufacturing and services companies in the Hewitt Associates Total Compensation DataBase™. The DataBase™ is a widely used source of executive compensation information. The Committee did not examine the specific pay practices at, nor the similarities of the Company to, each organization in the benchmark community. Instead, the Committee considered the 60th percentile pay levels in the benchmark community, and relied on those statistical representations as typifying general industry practices. It was against these norms that the Committee drew its conclusions about the appropriateness of the Company's executive officer pay levels and based its decisions about 2007 pay adjustments. Given the limited number of direct media company peers, the Committee believes that it is useful to benchmark against an independently prepared cross-industry selection that is representative of the types of companies with which we compete to recruit and retain executive talent.

In the case of operating unit executives, such as Mr. Ainsley, who is the publisher of The Boston Globe, the Committee considers the level of compensation for similarly situated individuals at other media companies based on market data provided by the Towers Perrin CDB Media Industry Survey for those media companies that participate in the survey.

Performance—The Committee ties a substantial portion of each named executive officer's total potential compensation to Company and individual performance. All executive officers, including the named executive officers, are eligible for annual cash bonuses and long-term performance cash awards that reinforce the relationship between pay and performance by linking compensation to the achievement of important short- and long-term financial, strategic, operating and individual performance targets set by the Committee in advance based on the Company objectives set out in the operating budget.

The Committee considers the individual performance of each named executive officer by reviewing, among other factors, recommendations of the Chief Executive Officer with respect to the named executive officers other than herself and our Chairman, achievement of pre-established individual performance objectives and annual self-assessments. The amount of each component of a named executive officer's compensation is based in part on the Committee's assessment of that individual's performance.  

Internal Pay Equity—The Committee compares the compensation of individual executive officers for internal pay equity purposes. The Committee's approach to compensation is that executives holding comparable positions of responsibility should receive comparable compensation, subject to adjustments based upon achievement of individual performance objectives.

Operating Budget—The Committee considers the total compensation payable to executives and the impact that it will have on our operating budget.

In setting compensation for 2007, the Committee reviewed tally sheets prepared by Hewitt Associates, detailing the total compensation of the named executive officers. These tally sheets identified all components of compensation for these executives, including the compensation such executives would be eligible to receive under different termination scenarios. At the conclusion of this review, the Committee determined that the amounts of compensation to be currently paid, in aggregate, and the amounts that would be paid upon retirement or other termination of employment, in aggregate, were appropriate and reasonable in light of the factors discussed above.

Key Factors in Setting Compensation



In
setting or recommending the amounts of each component of an executive's compensation and considering his or her overall compensation package, the Committee considers each of the following four
factors:




Benchmarking—Each year, the Committee reviews market data for corporate executives in positions comparable to
that of Mr. Sulzberger, Jr., Ms. Robinson and Messrs. Golden and Follo, and operating unit executives in positions comparable to that of Mr. Ainsley. In September 2006, as
part of its 2007 compensation-setting process for corporate executives, the Committee considered the level of compensation paid for comparable corporate executive positions at a cross-industry
selection of 80 U.S. companies with 2005 revenues ranging from $1 billion to $8.3 billion, with a median revenue of $3.4 billion, the same as our 2005 revenues. The companies were
selected by Hewitt Associates, then the Committee's compensation consultant, and represented the 40 next larger and 40 next smaller manufacturing and services companies in the Hewitt Associates Total
Compensation DataBase™. The DataBase™ is a widely used source of executive compensation information. The Committee did not examine the specific pay practices at, nor the
similarities of the Company to, each organization in the benchmark community. Instead, the Committee considered the 60th percentile pay levels in the benchmark community, and
relied on those statistical representations as typifying general industry practices. It was against these norms that the Committee drew its conclusions about the appropriateness of the Company's
executive officer pay levels and based its decisions about 2007 pay adjustments. Given the limited number of direct media company peers, the Committee believes that it is useful to benchmark against
an independently prepared cross-industry selection that is representative of the types of companies with which we compete to recruit and retain executive talent.


In
the case of operating unit executives, such as Mr. Ainsley, who is the publisher of The Boston Globe, the Committee considers the level of compensation for similarly situated individuals at
other media companies based on market data provided by the Towers Perrin CDB Media Industry Survey for those media companies that participate in the survey.



Performance—The Committee ties a substantial portion of each named executive officer's total potential
compensation to Company and individual performance. All executive officers, including the named executive officers, are eligible for annual cash bonuses and long-term performance cash
awards that reinforce the relationship between pay and performance by linking compensation to the achievement of important short- and long-term financial, strategic, operating and
individual performance targets set by the Committee in advance based on the Company objectives set out in the operating budget.


The
Committee considers the individual performance of each named executive officer by reviewing, among other factors, recommendations of the Chief Executive Officer with respect to the named executive
officers other than herself and our Chairman, achievement of pre-established individual performance objectives and annual self-assessments. The amount of each component of a
named executive officer's compensation is based in part on the
Committee's assessment of that individual's performance.
 



Internal Pay Equity—The Committee compares the compensation of individual executive officers for
internal pay equity purposes. The Committee's approach to compensation is that executives holding comparable positions of responsibility should receive comparable compensation, subject to adjustments
based upon achievement of individual performance objectives.


Operating Budget—The Committee considers the total compensation payable to executives and the impact that it will
have on our operating budget.


In
setting compensation for 2007, the Committee reviewed tally sheets prepared by Hewitt Associates, detailing the total compensation of the named executive officers. These tally sheets identified all
components of compensation for these executives, including the compensation such executives would be eligible to receive under different termination scenarios. At the conclusion of this review, the
Committee determined that the amounts of compensation to be currently paid, in aggregate, and the amounts that would be paid upon retirement or other termination of employment, in aggregate, were
appropriate and reasonable in light of the factors discussed above.




These excerpts taken from the NYT PRE 14A filed Feb 21, 2008.

Key Factors in Setting Compensation

In setting or recommending the amounts of each component of an executive's compensation and considering his or her overall compensation package, the Committee considers each of the following four factors:

Benchmarking—Each year, the Committee reviews market data for corporate executives in positions comparable to that of Mr. Sulzberger, Jr., Ms. Robinson and Messrs. Golden and Follo, and operating unit executives in positions comparable to that of Mr. Ainsley. In September 2006, as part of its 2007 compensation-setting process for corporate executives, the Committee considered the level of compensation paid for comparable corporate executive positions at a cross-industry selection of 80 U.S. companies with 2005 revenues ranging from $1 billion to $8.3 billion, with a median revenue of $3.4 billion, the same as our 2005 revenues. The companies were selected by Hewitt Associates, then the Committee's compensation consultant, and represented the 40 next larger and 40 next smaller manufacturing and services companies in the Hewitt Associates Total Compensation DataBase™. The DataBase™ is a widely used source of executive compensation information. The Committee did not examine the specific pay practices at, nor the similarities of the Company to, each organization in the benchmark community. Instead, the Committee considered the 60th percentile pay levels in the benchmark community, and relied on those statistical representations as typifying general industry practices. It was against these norms that the Committee drew its conclusions about the appropriateness of the Company's executive officer pay levels and based its decisions about 2007 pay adjustments. Given the limited number of direct media company peers, the Committee believes that it is useful to benchmark against an independently prepared cross-industry selection that is representative of the types of companies with which we compete to recruit and retain executive talent.

In the case of operating unit executives, such as Mr. Ainsley, who is the publisher of The Boston Globe, the Committee considers the level of compensation for similarly situated individuals at other media companies based on market data provided by the Towers Perrin CDB Media Industry Survey for those media companies that participate in the survey.

Performance—The Committee ties a substantial portion of each named executive officer's total potential compensation to Company and individual performance. All executive officers, including the named executive officers, are eligible for annual cash bonuses and long-term performance cash awards that reinforce the relationship between pay and performance by linking compensation to the achievement of important short- and long-term financial, strategic, operating and individual performance targets set by the Committee in advance based on the Company objectives set out in the operating budget.

The Committee considers the individual performance of each named executive officer by reviewing, among other factors, recommendations of the Chief Executive Officer with respect to the named executive officers other than herself and our Chairman, achievement of pre-established individual performance objectives and annual self-assessments. The amount of each component of a named executive officer's compensation is based in part on the Committee's assessment of that individual's performance.  

Internal Pay Equity—The Committee compares the compensation of individual executive officers for internal pay equity purposes. The Committee's approach to compensation is that executives holding comparable positions of responsibility should receive comparable compensation, subject to adjustments based upon achievement of individual performance objectives.

Operating Budget—The Committee considers the total compensation payable to executives and the impact that it will have on our operating budget.

In setting compensation for 2007, the Committee reviewed tally sheets prepared by Hewitt Associates, detailing the total compensation of the named executive officers. These tally sheets identified all components of compensation for these executives, including the compensation such executives would be eligible to receive under different termination scenarios. At the conclusion of this review, the Committee determined that the amounts of compensation to be currently paid, in aggregate, and the amounts that would be paid upon retirement or other termination of employment, in aggregate, were appropriate and reasonable in light of the factors discussed above.

Key Factors in Setting Compensation



In
setting or recommending the amounts of each component of an executive's compensation and considering his or her overall compensation package, the Committee considers each of the following four
factors:




Benchmarking—Each year, the Committee reviews market data for corporate executives in positions comparable to
that of Mr. Sulzberger, Jr., Ms. Robinson and Messrs. Golden and Follo, and operating unit executives in positions comparable to that of Mr. Ainsley. In September 2006, as
part of its 2007 compensation-setting process for corporate executives, the Committee considered the level of compensation paid for comparable corporate executive positions at a cross-industry
selection of 80 U.S. companies with 2005 revenues ranging from $1 billion to $8.3 billion, with a median revenue of $3.4 billion, the same as our 2005 revenues. The companies were
selected by Hewitt Associates, then the Committee's compensation consultant, and represented the 40 next larger and 40 next smaller manufacturing and services companies in the Hewitt Associates Total
Compensation DataBase™. The DataBase™ is a widely used source of executive compensation information. The Committee did not examine the specific pay practices at, nor the
similarities of the Company to, each organization in the benchmark community. Instead, the Committee considered the 60th percentile pay levels in the benchmark community, and
relied on those statistical representations as typifying general industry practices. It was against these norms that the Committee drew its conclusions about the appropriateness of the Company's
executive officer pay levels and based its decisions about 2007 pay adjustments. Given the limited number of direct media company peers, the Committee believes that it is useful to benchmark against
an independently prepared cross-industry selection that is representative of the types of companies with which we compete to recruit and retain executive talent.


In
the case of operating unit executives, such as Mr. Ainsley, who is the publisher of The Boston Globe, the Committee considers the level of compensation for similarly situated individuals at
other media companies based on market data provided by the Towers Perrin CDB Media Industry Survey for those media companies that participate in the survey.



Performance—The Committee ties a substantial portion of each named executive officer's total potential
compensation to Company and individual performance. All executive officers, including the named executive officers, are eligible for annual cash bonuses and long-term performance cash
awards that reinforce the relationship between pay and performance by linking compensation to the achievement of important short- and long-term financial, strategic, operating and
individual performance targets set by the Committee in advance based on the Company objectives set out in the operating budget.


The
Committee considers the individual performance of each named executive officer by reviewing, among other factors, recommendations of the Chief Executive Officer with respect to the named executive
officers other than herself and our Chairman, achievement of pre-established individual performance objectives and annual self-assessments. The amount of each component of a
named executive officer's compensation is based in part on the
Committee's assessment of that individual's performance.
 



Internal Pay Equity—The Committee compares the compensation of individual executive officers for
internal pay equity purposes. The Committee's approach to compensation is that executives holding comparable positions of responsibility should receive comparable compensation, subject to adjustments
based upon achievement of individual performance objectives.


Operating Budget—The Committee considers the total compensation payable to executives and the impact that it will
have on our operating budget.


In
setting compensation for 2007, the Committee reviewed tally sheets prepared by Hewitt Associates, detailing the total compensation of the named executive officers. These tally sheets identified all
components of compensation for these executives, including the compensation such executives would be eligible to receive under different termination scenarios. At the conclusion of this review, the
Committee determined that the amounts of compensation to be currently paid, in aggregate, and the amounts that would be paid upon retirement or other termination of employment, in aggregate, were
appropriate and reasonable in light of the factors discussed above.




Wikinvest © 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012. Use of this site is subject to express Terms of Service, Privacy Policy, and Disclaimer. By continuing past this page, you agree to abide by these terms. Any information provided by Wikinvest, including but not limited to company data, competitors, business analysis, market share, sales revenues and other operating metrics, earnings call analysis, conference call transcripts, industry information, or price targets should not be construed as research, trading tips or recommendations, or investment advice and is provided with no warrants as to its accuracy. Stock market data, including US and International equity symbols, stock quotes, share prices, earnings ratios, and other fundamental data is provided by data partners. Stock market quotes delayed at least 15 minutes for NASDAQ, 20 mins for NYSE and AMEX. Market data by Xignite. See data providers for more details. Company names, products, services and branding cited herein may be trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. The use of trademarks or service marks of another is not a representation that the other is affiliated with, sponsors, is sponsored by, endorses, or is endorsed by Wikinvest.
Powered by MediaWiki