This excerpt taken from the PBI DEF 14A filed Mar 26, 2009.
2008 Annual Incentive Payout
In applying negative discretion in determining the awards for 2008 performance, the Committee measured the companys financial and strategic performance against objectives that were set by the Committee in the first quarter of 2008. The 2008 financial objectives, which were each weighted at 17.5% at target, were as follows:
The 2008 strategic performance objective was weighted at 30% at target and was based on the development and delivery of a robust long-term strategic plan created to identify potential growth opportunities.
The Committee also considers factors such as customer loyalty, talent and leadership development, and other significant accomplishments in applying negative discretion.
In February 2009, the Committee determined 2008 performance. The company exceeded its performance target for adjusted free cash flow and achieved the performance target of the establishment of a robust long-term strategic plan. Given the challenging economic environment in 2008, the company did not meet its target organic growth. Adjusted earnings per share and adjusted earnings before interest and taxes were slightly below target levels. The Committee compared actual performance to the predetermined targets and interpolated these results between threshold and target, or target and maximum, to determine the resulting performance factor. The resulting performance factor of each metric may be between 0-150% of the applicable target. Based on these results, the Committee approved annual incentive awards for named executive officers at approximately 96% of amounts they would have received if target performance had been achieved.
This excerpt taken from the PBI DEF 14A filed Mar 27, 2008.
2007 Annual Incentive Payout
For the named officers, annual incentive payments for 2007 were subject to the company first achieving a threshold income from continuing operations objective of $485,412,000, excluding all one-time items. Actual 2007 income from continuing operations was $601,114,000.
In February 2008, in applying its negative discretion, the Committee awarded 2007 performance payments by measuring the companys financial performance against objectives that were set by the Committee for the annual incentive pool in the first quarter of 2007. The companys 2007 financial performance was disappointing. The company did not meet its target organic growth, adjusted earnings per share and adjusted earnings before interest and taxes. However, the company exceeded its performance target for adjusted free cash flow. The Committee evaluated the companys performance against these goals and then, using the discretion it has to increase or decrease the incentive pool by up to 25%, the Committee increased the incentive pool by ten percent. This increase was based on the Committees assessment of factors such as improvements in customer retention, employee engagement, talent and leadership and progress on strategic objectives and other significant items such as the successful transition of the chief executive officer role from Mr. Critelli to Mr. Martin, the companys acquisition and integration of MapInfo Corporation and the thorough and extensive strategic review management conducted with the board of directors.
The Committee approved annual incentive awards for executive officers at levels that were in a range of 17-57% of salary which was approximately 40% of amounts executive officers would have been awarded if target performance had been achieved. The Committee set an aggregate limit on the annual incentive awards for
executive officers with the understanding that Mr. Martin would have the flexibility to make specific recommendations for individual executives to the extent that he believed that an individuals performance would merit a different annual incentive amount. After Mr. Martin reviewed his recommendations with the Committee, each of the named officers was awarded an incentive payment representing 40% of his or her incentive target, with the exception of Mr. Keddy and Mr. Weiss. Mr. Keddy received an annual incentive equal to 17% of his salary due to the decline in earnings in the International business from 2006 to 2007. The percentage of Mr. Weiss salary paid as an annual incentive was 21% due to the decline in earnings in the U.S. mailing business from 2006 to 2007. The percentage of salary paid as annual incentives to Messrs. Martin, Critelli, Nolop and Monahan were 53%, 57%, 32% and 28%, respectively, and to Ms. Abi-Karam was 27%, in each case approximately 40% of his or her target incentive, as shown in the following table.
The following table outlines the annual incentive targets for each of the named officers for 2007 and the actual annual incentive amounts earned in 2007 and paid in 2008.
This excerpt taken from the PBI DEF 14A filed Apr 3, 2007.
2006 Annual Incentive Payout
The following table outlines the annual incentive targets for each of the named executive officers in 2006 and the actual annual incentive amounts earned and paid.