This seems to be a return to accountability from the excesses of the oughts (the 2000s). It's guys like Ken Lay (Enron) and Rich McGinn (Lucent), not to mentio

This seems to be a return to accountability from the excesses of the oughts (the 2000s). It's guys like Ken Lay (Enron) and Rich McGinn (Lucent), not to mention John Stumpf (Wells Fargo) who set up the expectation that executives should be freewheeling, and that living high was the best way to signal to shareholders that the company was in good shape. The days when the CEO drove himself to work in a Buick and showed up in a rumpled suit just off the red-eye at customer offices when there were problems delivering value seemed to have faded away. Anybody pulling down a seven-figure salary ought to be wise enough to salt a lot of it away. Baseball players and bigshot executives are both out there on the firing line. When they stop delivering their expected value, they should expect to be cut. Reversion to the mean makes this more likely than not for superstars. It's entirely positive that shareholders are paying attention to one of the biggest expense items - exec compensation - in their companies' budgets. It would help if shareholders were better at understanding long-term strategies. A good CEO (Jobs, Apple; Musk, Tesla; Welch, GE) is capable of persuading them.