UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, DC 20549
SCHEDULE 14A INFORMATION
Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
Filed by the Registrant ý | ||
Filed by a Party other than the Registrant o |
||
Check the appropriate box: | ||
o |
Preliminary Proxy Statement |
|
o | Confidential, for Use of the Commission Only (as permitted by Rule 14a-6(e)(2)) | |
ý | Definitive Proxy Statement | |
o | Definitive Additional Materials | |
o | Soliciting Material Pursuant to § 240.14a-12 |
AVERY DENNISON CORPORATION | ||||
(Name of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter) |
||||
N/A |
||||
(Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if Other Than the Registrant) |
||||
Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box): |
||||
ý |
No fee required. |
|||
o |
Fee computed on table below per Exchange Act Rules 14a-6(i)(1) and 0-11. |
|||
(1) | Title of each class of securities to which transaction applies: |
|||
(2) | Aggregate number of securities to which transaction applies: |
|||
(3) | Per unit price or other underlying value of transaction computed pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 0-11 (set forth the amount on which the filing fee is calculated and state how it was determined): |
|||
(4) | Proposed maximum aggregate value of transaction: |
|||
(5) | Total fee paid: |
|||
o |
Fee paid previously with preliminary materials. |
|||
o | Check box if any part of the fee is offset as provided by Exchange Act Rule 0-11(a)(2) and identify the filing for which the offsetting fee was paid previously. Identify the previous filing by registration statement number, or the Form or Schedule and the date of its filing. | |||
(1) | Amount Previously Paid: |
|||
(2) | Form, Schedule or Registration Statement No.: |
|||
(3) | Filing Party: |
|||
(4) | Date Filed: |
|
|
|||
Avery Dennison Corporation 207 Goode Avenue Glendale, California 91203 |
||||
|
|
|||
Notice of Annual Meeting |
To Our Stockholders: |
|||
of Stockholders | Our Annual Meeting of Stockholders will be held at the Hilton Hotel, 100 Glenoaks Boulevard, Glendale, California 91202 on Thursday, April 24, 2014, at 1:30 p.m. Pacific Time for the following purposes: |
|||
To be held on | ||||
April 24, 2014 | 1. | To elect Bradley Alford, Anthony Anderson, Peter Barker, Rolf Börjesson, Ken Hicks, Charles Noski, David Pyott, Dean Scarborough, Patrick Siewert, Julia Stewart and Martha Sullivan to our Board of Directors; | ||
2. |
To approve, on an advisory basis, our executive compensation; |
|||
3. |
To approve our Amended and Restated Senior Executive Annual Incentive Plan; |
|||
4. |
To ratify the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for the 2014 fiscal year; and |
|||
5. |
To transact any other business that may properly come before the meeting. |
|||
Our Board recommends that stockholders vote FOR each of the director nominees named in proposal 1 and FOR proposals 2, 3 and 4. After considering these matters at the meeting, Dean Scarborough, our Chief Executive Officer, will review our 2013 performance and answer your questions. |
||||
Stockholders of record as of February 24, 2014 are entitled to notice of and to vote at the meeting and any adjournment or postponement thereof. |
||||
We will be mailing our Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials on or before March 14, 2014. Stockholders who previously elected to receive a paper copy of our proxy materials will be mailed our 2014 proxy statement, 2013 annual report, Chairman's letter to stockholders and a proxy card on or before March 14, 2014. |
||||
We cordially invite all stockholders to attend the Annual Meeting. Even if you cannot attend, it is important that your shares be represented and voted. If you are viewing the proxy statement on the Internet, you may grant your proxy electronically via the Internet by following the instructions on the Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials mailed to you and the instructions on the voting website. As an alternative, you may follow the instructions in the Notice to request paper proxy materials. If you are reviewing a paper copy of the proxy statement, you may vote by completing and mailing the proxy card enclosed with the proxy statement, or you may grant your proxy by telephone or electronically on the Internet by following the instructions on the proxy card. |
||||
BY ORDER OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS |
||||
Susan C. Miller Corporate Secretary |
||||
Glendale, California March 7, 2014 |
AVERY DENNISON CORPORATION
207 GOODE AVENUE, GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA 91203
PROXY STATEMENT FOR 2014 ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
This proxy statement is being furnished to stockholders on behalf of our Board of Directors (our "Board") to solicit proxies for our Annual Meeting of Stockholders (the "Annual Meeting") to be held on Thursday, April 24, 2014, at 1:30 p.m. Pacific Time at the Hilton Hotel, 100 Glenoaks Boulevard, Glendale, California 91202 and at any adjournment or postponement thereof. The matters to be acted upon at the meeting are set forth in the Notice of Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which appears at the beginning of this document.
Our 2013 Annual Report to Stockholders will be mailed or made available to all stockholders of record on or before March 14, 2014.
We have elected to provide access to our proxy materials on the Internet. Accordingly, we are sending a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials (the "Notice") to our stockholders of record. Brokers, banks and other nominees (collectively, "nominees") who hold shares on behalf of beneficial owners (also called "street name" holders) will send a similar notice. All stockholders will have the ability to access our proxy materials on the website referred to in the Notice or request to receive printed proxy materials. Instructions on how to request printed materials by mail or electronically, including an option to receive paper copies on an ongoing basis, may be found in the Notice and on the website referred to in the Notice.
On or before March 14, 2014, we intend to make this proxy statement available on the Internet and to mail the Notice to all stockholders entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting. We intend to mail this proxy statement, together with a proxy card, to stockholders entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting who properly request paper copies of these materials within three business days of request. If you hold your shares in street name, you may request paper copies of the proxy statement and proxy card from your nominee by following the instructions on the notice your nominee provides to you.
We have adopted a procedure approved by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") called "householding." Under this procedure, we are permitted to deliver a single copy of our proxy statement and annual report to stockholders sharing the same address. Householding allows us to reduce our printing and postage costs and limits the volume of duplicative information received at your household. Householding affects only the delivery of proxy materials; it has no impact on the delivery of dividend checks.
For certain holders who share a single address, we are sending only one annual report and proxy statement to that address unless we received instructions to the contrary from any stockholder at that address. If you wish to receive an additional copy of our annual report or proxy statement, or if you received multiple copies of our annual report or proxy statement and wish to receive a single copy in the future, you may make such request by writing to our Corporate Secretary at Avery Dennison Corporation, 207 Goode Avenue, Glendale, California 91203.
If you are a street name holder and wish to revoke your consent to householding and receive separate copies of our proxy statement and annual report in future years, you may call Broadridge Investor Communications Services toll-free at 800.542.1061 or write to them c/o Householding Department, 51 Mercedes Way, Edgewood, New York 11717.
Stockholders of record as of the close of business on February 24, 2014 are entitled to notice of, and to vote at, the Annual Meeting. Our only class of shares outstanding is common stock and there were 95,974,669 shares of our common stock outstanding on February 24, 2014. A list of stockholders entitled to vote will be available for inspection at the Annual Meeting. Each stockholder of record is entitled to one vote for each share of common stock held on the record date.
You may vote by attending the Annual Meeting and voting in person or you may vote by submitting a proxy. If you hold your shares in
street name, you may only vote in person
1
at the meeting if you properly request and receive a legal proxy in your name from the nominee that holds your shares.
The method of voting by proxy differs depending on whether you are viewing this proxy statement on the Internet or reviewing a paper copy, as follows:
We encourage you to vote by telephone or on the Internet since these methods immediately record your votes and allow you to confirm that your votes have been properly recorded. Telephone and Internet voting facilities will close at midnight Eastern Time the night before the Annual Meeting.
Shares Held in Our Direct Share
Purchase and Sale Program
If you are a participant in our Direct Share Purchase and Sale Program, your shares acquired through the program may be voted by following the procedures described above.
Shares Held in Our Employee Savings Plan or
Our Stock Holding and Retirement Enhancement Plan
If you are a participant in our Employee Savings (401(k)) Plan or our Stock Holding and Retirement Enhancement (SHARE) Plan, your vote will serve as a voting instruction to Evercore Trust Company, N.A., the trustee of these plans, on how to vote the shares you hold through the plans. Your voting instructions must be received by the trustee by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on April 21, 2014 for them to be followed as instructed.
If your instructions are not timely received, the trustee will vote your shares in the same proportion as shares are
voted by participants in the applicable plan who timely furnish instructions. Shares of our common stock that have not been allocated to participant accounts will also be voted by the trustee in the same proportion as shares are voted by participants in the applicable plan who timely furnish instructions.
REVOKING YOUR PROXY OR CHANGING YOUR VOTE
A stockholder giving a proxy pursuant to this solicitation may revoke it at any time before it is acted upon at the Annual Meeting by (i) submitting another proxy by telephone or on the Internet (your latest telephone or Internet voting instructions will be followed); (ii) sending a later dated paper proxy; (iii) delivering to our Corporate Secretary a written notice of revocation prior to the voting of the proxy at the Annual Meeting; or (iv) voting in person at the Annual Meeting. Simply attending the Annual Meeting will not revoke your proxy.
If your shares are held in street name, you may change your vote by submitting new voting instructions to your nominee. You must contact your nominee to find out how you can change your vote. Shares held in the Employee Savings Plan or SHARE Plan cannot be changed or revoked after 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on April 21, 2014, nor can they be voted in person at the Annual Meeting.
Except in contested proxy solicitations, when required by law or as expressly authorized by you (such as by making a written comment on your proxy card, in which case the comment, but not your vote, will be shared with our company), your vote or voting instruction, irrespective of method of submission, is confidential and will not be disclosed to any other person other than the broker, trustee, agent or other person tabulating your vote. None of our directors, officers or employees will be able to access individual stockholder votes.
Votes cast by proxy or in person at the Annual Meeting will be tabulated by Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc., the
independent agent appointed as inspector of election by our Board. The inspector of election will also determine whether or not a quorum is present. At the Annual Meeting,
2
determination of the existence of a quorum and tabulation of votes will occur as follows:
As of the date of this proxy statement, we know of no other business that will be presented for consideration at the meeting. However, if any other business properly comes before the meeting, votes will be cast in respect of any such other business in accordance with the best judgment of the persons acting pursuant to the proxies.
We intend to announce preliminary voting results at the conclusion of the Annual Meeting. We expect to disclose final results in a Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on or before April 30, 2014.
We will bear all costs related to this solicitation of proxies. We have retained D. F. King & Co., Inc. to assist in soliciting proxies for a fee of $12,000, plus reimbursement for out-of-pocket expenses incident to the preparation and mailing of our proxy materials. Some of our employees may solicit proxies in person, by telephone or by email; these employees will not receive any additional compensation for their proxy solicitation efforts. We will reimburse banks, brokers and other custodians, nominees and fiduciaries for reasonable out-of-pocket expenses they incur in forwarding our proxy materials to beneficial owners of our common stock. You can help reduce these costs by electing to access proxy materials electronically.
ELECTRONIC ACCESS TO PROXY MATERIALS AND ANNUAL REPORT
This proxy statement and our 2013 Annual Report are available on our website at
www.investors.averydennison.com. Information on our website is not and should not be considered part of, nor is it incorporated by reference into, this proxy statement.
Instead of receiving paper copies of these documents by mail in the future, you can elect to receive an
3
email message that will provide a link to these documents on the Internet. By opting to access proxy materials via the Internet, you will be able to access them more quickly; save us the cost of printing and mailing them to you; reduce the amount of mail you receive from us; and help us preserve environmental resources.
You may enroll to access proxy materials and annual reports electronically for future Annual Meetings by registering online at the following website: https://enroll.icsdelivery.com/avy. If you vote on the Internet, simply follow the prompts on the voting website to link to the electronic enrollment website.
TIME AND LOCATION OF ANNUAL MEETING
The Annual Meeting will take place at 1:30 p.m. Pacific Time on April 24, 2014 at the Hilton Hotel, 100 Glenoaks Boulevard, Glendale, California 91202.
Admission
If you attend the Annual Meeting, you will be asked to present personal photo identification. If you are a stockholder of record, you may bring the top half of your proxy card or your Notice to serve as your admission ticket. If you hold your shares in street name, you will be required to present proof of ownership to be admitted into the meeting. Acceptable documentation includes your Notice, a recent brokerage statement or a letter from your nominee evidencing your beneficial ownership of shares of our common stock as of February 24, 2014. If you would like to receive an admission ticket in advance, you may send a written request with proof of ownership to our Corporate Secretary at Avery Dennison Corporation, 207 Goode Avenue, Glendale, California 91203.
Stockholders will be admitted into the Annual Meeting beginning at 1:00 p.m. Pacific Time and seating will be on a first-come basis. For safety and security reasons, cameras, camera phones, recording equipment, computers, or large bags, briefcases or other packages will not be permitted into the meeting.
Conduct Procedures
Our Chairman will conduct the Annual Meeting in an orderly and timely manner in accordance with our Amended and Restated Bylaws (our
"Bylaws") and Delaware law. To assist the Chairman in fulfilling his responsibilities, we have
established rules for stockholders wishing to address the meeting, copies of which will be made available at the meeting. Only stockholders as of the record date or their properly-appointed proxies may address the meeting, and they may do so only after recognized by our Chairman, who will determine the nature and length of discussion on any particular matter.
As a result of time constraints and other considerations, we cannot assure you that every stockholder wishing to address the meeting will have the opportunity to do so. However, all stockholders are invited to direct inquiries or comments regarding business matters to our Investor Relations team by email to investorcom@averydennison.com or by mail to Avery Dennison Corporation, 207 Goode Avenue, Glendale, California 91203. In addition, stockholders wishing to address matters to our Board or any of its members may do so as described under Communicating with Our Board of Directors.
SUBMISSION OF STOCKHOLDER PROPOSALS FOR 2015 ANNUAL MEETING
For potential consideration at the 2015 Annual Meeting, stockholder proposals must be received at our principal executive offices on or before November 15, 2014. Our Bylaws generally provide that stockholders wishing to nominate persons for election to our Board or to bring any other business before the stockholders at an annual meeting must notify our Corporate Secretary in writing 90 to 120 days prior to the first anniversary of the preceding year's annual meeting (with respect to the 2015 Annual Meeting, no earlier than December 25, 2014 and no later than January 24, 2015). The notice must include, among other things, the following:
4
We will not permit stockholder proposals that do not comply with the foregoing notice requirements to be brought before the 2015 Annual Meeting.
ALL STOCKHOLDERS ARE URGED TO VOTE BY TELEPHONE OR ON THE INTERNET BY FOLLOWING THE INSTRUCTIONS ON THE NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY OF PROXY MATERIALS. IF YOU HAVE PROPERLY REQUESTED AND RECEIVED A PAPER COPY OF THIS PROXY STATEMENT, YOU MAY VOTE YOUR SHARES BY (A) SUBMITTING A PROXY BY TELEPHONE OR ON THE INTERNET BY FOLLOWING THE INSTRUCTIONS ON THE PROXY CARD OR (B) COMPLETING, DATING AND SIGNING THE PROXY CARD AND PROMPTLY RETURNING IT IN THE PREADDRESSED, POSTAGE PAID ENVELOPE PROVIDED. STOCKHOLDERS OF RECORD MAY OBTAIN A COPY OF THIS PROXY STATEMENT WITHOUT CHARGE BY WRITING TO OUR CORPORATE SECRETARY, AVERY DENNISON CORPORATION, 207 GOODE AVENUE, GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA 91203.
PROPOSALS FOR 2014 ANNUAL MEETING
|
|
Proposal |
|
Board Recommendation |
|
Vote Required |
|
Discretionary Broker Voting |
|
|||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. |
Election of Directors |
FOR each nominee |
Majority of votes cast |
No |
||||||||||||||
2. |
Advisory Vote to Approve Executive Compensation |
FOR |
Majority of shares represented and entitled to vote |
No |
||||||||||||||
3. |
Approval of Amended and Restated Senior Executive Annual Incentive Plan |
FOR |
Majority of shares represented and entitled to vote |
No |
||||||||||||||
4. |
Ratification of Appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm for 2014 Fiscal Year |
FOR |
Majority of shares represented and entitled to vote |
Yes |
5
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE POLICIES AND PRACTICES
Under the oversight of our Board, we have designed our corporate governance program not only to ensure continued compliance with laws and regulations, the rules of the SEC and the listing standards of the NYSE, but also to reflect best practices as informed by the policies of other public companies, recommendations of our outside advisors, the voting guidelines of our stockholders and the policies of proxy advisory firms.
Our website includes information about our corporate governance policies and practices, including our Code of Conduct; Code of Ethics for the Chief Executive Officer and Senior Financial Officers; Corporate Governance Guidelines (our "Governance Guidelines"); Charters for the Audit Committee, the Compensation and Executive Personnel Committee (the "Compensation Committee"), and the Governance and Social Responsibility Committee (the "Governance Committee"); and the Audit Committee Complaint Procedures for Accounting and Auditing Matters. Our website also includes copies of our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation (our "Certificate of Incorporation") and our Bylaws. You can access this information by going to the "Corporate Governance" section of our investor website at www.investors.averydennison.com, but should note that information on our website is not and should not be considered part of, nor is it incorporated by reference into, this proxy statement. In addition, you can receive copies of these documents, without charge, upon written request to our Corporate Secretary at Avery Dennison Corporation, 207 Goode Avenue, Glendale, California 91203.
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE HIGHLIGHTS
As described in further detail in this section, we employ a variety of practices that together ensure that our corporate governance program is aligned with our goals and strategies and reflects best practices, including the following:
6
Our Board currently consists of the following directors:
As required by the mandatory director retirement policy contained in our Bylaws and Governance Guidelines, Mr. Cardis is scheduled to retire from our Board on the date of the Annual Meeting.
Our objective is to achieve leadership positions in our global markets by bringing insight, quality and innovation to end-customers who need to elevate their brands at consumer decision points, improve clarity of information and grow their business efficiently. Integrity, service, teamwork, innovation, excellence and community are the values that provide the foundation of everything we do; they are the core beliefs that guide our actions and support our vision to make every brand more inspiring and the world more intelligent. The following leadership principles represent the characteristics and behaviors we expect from our leaders as they pursue our strategies in a manner consistent with our values and ethics:
7
The values and ethics embodied in these leadership principles provide the foundation for our corporate governance program. We have a Chief Compliance Officer who, with assistance from our General Counsel, Vice President of Internal Audit and members of their respective teams, partners with our business group leaders to ensure that our values and ethics are being maintained globally.
Code of Conduct
Our Code of Conduct, which applies to all of our directors, officers and employees and is available in the "Corporate Governance" section of our investor website at www.investors.averydennison.com, is built on our leadership principles, and encourages ongoing dialogue about the choices we make every day to help us make legal and ethical decisions. It highlights our core policies and guides the behavior of our team members:
properly using company assets and intellectual property, appropriately managing information and not engaging in insider trading, and respecting personal privacy and protecting personal data;
Our Code of Conduct has been translated into 30 languages and our employees receive training on the code and affirm their commitment to comply with it when they first join our company and periodically thereafter.
Our Business Conduct GuideLine is a telephone and web-based hotline available at all hours for employees or third parties to report potential violations of our Code of Conduct. The GuideLine is operated by an independent third party and accepts reports in several languages to accommodate the needs of our global workforce and customer/supplier base. All reports are investigated under the direction of our Chief Compliance Officer and senior management, with oversight from the Governance Committee. Our policies prohibit retaliation for good-faith reporting.
Code of Ethics for CEO and Senior Financial Officers
In addition to our Code of Conduct, we have adopted a Code of Ethics that requires our Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Chief Financial
Officer (CFO) and Corporate Controller to act professionally and ethically in fulfilling their responsibilities. These individuals are expected to avoid actual or apparent conflicts between their
personal and
8
professional relationships and disclose any material transaction or relationship that could reasonably be expected to give rise to a conflict of interest to the Governance Committee. In addition, they are expected to cause reports and documents filed with the SEC to contain full, fair, accurate and understandable information; respect the confidentiality of information acquired in the course of the performance of their responsibilities; employ corporate assets and resources in a responsible manner; and report violations of our Code of Ethics to the Chairman of either the Audit Committee or the Governance Committee.
Only the Governance Committee or Audit Committee can amend or waive the provisions of the Code of Ethics, and any such amendments or waivers must be posted promptly on our website and timely filed on Form 8-K with the SEC. Since the inception of the Code of Ethics in February 2004, no amendments have been made and no waivers have been granted.
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE GUIDELINES
Our Governance Guidelines provide the corporate governance framework for our company, and represent the beliefs of our Board with respect to the following matters, each of which is discussed in further detail in this section:
serve as Lead Independent Director. In addition, our independent directors should regularly, and in any event at least once per year, meet in executive session.
Our Bylaws provide for our Board to consist of between eight and 13 directors, with the exact number fixed from time to time by Board
resolution. Our Board currently has fixed the number of directors at 12, one of whom (Mr. Cardis) is scheduled to retire on the date of the Annual Meeting and 11 of whom are nominated for
election at the Annual Meeting. Our Board currently intends to reduce the size of the Board from 12 to 11 upon Mr. Cardis's retirement. As a result, if all
9
nominees are elected, our Board will consist of 11 directors following the Annual Meeting.
Excluding Mr. Cardis, the ages of our directors range from 57 to 71, with an average age of 60. Their lengths of service range from one to 14 years, with an average tenure on our Board of approximately eight years. None of our directors serves on more than two other boards of SEC-reporting companies, except for Mr. Anderson, who is retired and serves on three other such boards.
Selection of Director Nominees
Director nominees are recommended by the Governance Committee for nomination by our Board and election by our stockholders. Director nominees may also be recommended by the Governance Committee for appointment to our Board, with election by stockholders to follow at the next Annual Meeting. Our Board believes that the backgrounds and qualifications of the directors, considered as a group, should provide a mix of complementary experience, knowledge and abilities that will allow our Board to fulfill its responsibilities.
In considering whether to recommend a candidate as a director nominee, including candidates recommended by stockholders, the Governance Committee applies a number of criteria described in our Governance Guidelines. This assessment includes consideration of a potential nominee's ability to qualify as independent, to ensure that a substantial majority of our Board remains independent; relevant business experience (considering factors such as size, the particular industry, scope, complexity and international operations); time commitments, including other boards on which the nominee serves; potential conflicts of interest; ability to contribute to the oversight and governance of our company; and ability to represent the balanced interests of stockholders as a whole, rather than those of any special interest group in the context of the needs of our Board. For incumbent directors, these factors also include contributions to our Board and Committees; attendance record at Board and Committee meetings; compliance with our director stock ownership policy; and mandatory retirement date to assist with Board succession planning. The Governance Committee does not assign specific weights to the criteria and no particular criterion is necessarily applicable to all nominees.
The
Governance Committee reviews the qualifications of any candidate with those of current directors to determine
coverage and gaps in experience in relevant industries and in diverse functional areas, such as finance, manufacturing, technology, and investing. Sources for identifying potential nominees may include existing Board members, our executive officers, third-party search firms, and stockholders.
Consideration of Diversity
Although we do not have a formal policy regarding the consideration of diversity in identifying director nominees, the Governance Committee seeks to recommend nominees with a broad diversity of experience, profession, skill, geographic representation and background, which may include consideration of personal characteristics such as race, color, gender and national origin. While diversity is a consideration, nominees are not chosen or excluded solely or primarily based on such basis; rather, the Governance Committee focuses on skills, expertise and background to complement the existing Board in light of the diverse and global nature of our businesses and operations.
Stockholder Submission of Director Nominees
Stockholders may recommend director candidates by submitting the candidate's name, together with his or her biographical information, professional experience and written consent to nomination, to:
Governance
Committee Chairman
c/o Corporate Secretary
Avery Dennison Corporation
207 Goode Avenue
Glendale, California 91203
To be considered at the 2015 Annual Meeting, stockholder nominations must comply with the requirements described in Submission of Stockholder Proposals for 2015 Annual Meeting. The Governance Committee considers stockholder nominees on the same basis as it considers all other nominees.
Qualifications of Current Directors
The qualifications, professional experiences and areas of expertise that are particularly desirable for our directors to possess in order to provide oversight and stewardship of our company include the following:
10
experience provides us with alternative perspectives with which to assess our operations, execute our strategies and mitigate related risks, and improve our policies and procedures.
Director Updates Since 2013 Annual Meeting
Our Governance Guidelines require that directors who change the principal occupation, position or responsibility they held when they were elected to our Board volunteer to resign from the Board. A director who changes his or her position or retires should not necessarily leave our Board, rather the Governance Committee should review the continued appropriateness of Board membership in light of the relevant circumstances. None of our directors experienced any such change since the 2013 Annual Meeting.
Our Governance Guidelines also require that directors advise our Chairman and the Governance Committee Chairman before accepting an invitation to serve on another public company board and that the Governance Committee review a director's continued ability to fulfill his or her responsibilities as a Board member if he or she serves on more than five other public company boards. None of our directors either serves on more than five other public company boards or accepted an invitation to serve on another public company board since the 2013 Annual Meeting.
Director Independence Standards
Our Governance Guidelines require that our Board be comprised of a majority of directors who satisfy the criteria for independence
under NYSE listing standards. These standards also require that our audit, compensation and nominating committees be comprised entirely of independent directors. An independent director is one who
meets the independence requirements of the NYSE and who our Board
11
affirmatively determines has no material relationship with our company, directly or indirectly as a partner, stockholder or officer of an entity with which we have a relationship.
Director Independence Analysis in 2014
Each year, our directors and director nominees complete a questionnaire designed to solicit disclosures that may have a bearing on the annual independence determination, including all relevant relationships they have with our company, directly or indirectly through our company's sale or purchase of products or services to or from the companies or firms with which they are affiliated. Our Board, through the Governance Committee, reviews with our General Counsel and Corporate Secretary any relevant disclosures made in the questionnaires, as well as transactions our company has with director-affiliated entities. In February 2014, the Governance Committee reviewed the following director relationships:
Director Independence Determination in 2014
After review and discussion of the relevant facts and circumstances, including the amounts involved and the director's interest therein, the Governance Committee concluded that only Mr. Scarborough had a relationship that was disqualifying under NYSE listing standards, otherwise material or impairing of director independence. As a result, upon recommendation of the Governance Committee, our Board affirmatively determined the directors in the following table to be independent.
|
|
|
||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS |
|
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
Bradley Alford | Charles Noski | |||||||
Anthony Anderson | David Pyott | |||||||
Peter Barker | Patrick Siewert | |||||||
Rolf Börjesson | Julia Stewart | |||||||
John Cardis | Martha Sullivan | |||||||
Ken Hicks |
These 11 directors constitute 92% of our current 12-member Board. After Mr. Cardis retires in April 2014, assuming all of the individuals nominated for election are elected at the Annual Meeting, 10 directors of our 11-member Board, or 91%, will be independent.
Our CEO currently serves as Chairman and we have a Lead Independent Director with broad authority and responsibility. We believe that this structure is appropriate because it allows for one individual to speak as our leader with a cohesive vision for our company, the ability to execute that vision, and the understanding of the significant enterprise risks that need to be mitigated or overcome to achieve that vision. Combined leadership at the top provides the necessary flexibility for us to respond to the changing needs of our diverse businesses in today's globally interdependent economic environment. Balancing our combined Chairman and CEO is our Lead Independent Director, who has critical duties in the boardroom to ensure effective and independent oversight, and our Committee Chairmen, all of whom are independent. Our independent directors have robust and candid discussions at regular executive sessions presided over by the Lead Independent Director during which they discuss the performance of our company, CEO and management. With the independent members of the Compensation Committee conducting a rigorous annual evaluation of the CEO's performance that is discussed by all independent directors during executive session and the independent members of the Governance Committee overseeing an annual performance evaluation of our Chairman and Lead Independent Director, we believe our Board leadership structure provides independent oversight of our company.
12
Our Board believes that, in part because assigning the responsibilities of the roles of Chairman and CEO can be a useful component of succession planning, our Board leadership structure should be reevaluated periodically by our Board through the Governance Committee. The Governance Committee generally performs this evaluation annually and last did so in February 2014.
Chairman & Chief Executive Officer Dean Scarborough
Mr. Scarborough currently serves as our Chairman. He joined the Board in May 2000 when he was elected by our Board as our President and Chief Operating Officer. Mr. Scarborough was elected by our Board as President and CEO in May 2005 and in that capacity is responsible for the general supervision, direction and control of our businesses and affairs. In February 2010, our non-management directors first elected Mr. Scarborough to the additional role of Chairman, effective April 2010. Mr. Scarborough serves in these capacities at the pleasure of our independent directors because he does not have an employment agreement, is elected as Chairman only for a one-year term, and his service in that capacity could be immediately terminated upon the election and qualification of a successor.
The Governance Committee evaluated our Board leadership structure in February 2014 and recommended to our Board that Mr. Scarborough continue serving as Chairman, noting that his leadership generated strong financial performance in 2013 and his service on the board of Mattel, Inc. continues to provide him with additional insights into board processes and decision-making. In addition, he remains best positioned to identify matters of operating and strategic importance for our Board, including the risks to which our businesses and strategies are subject. The Governance Committee recognized that Mr. Scarborough has served as an effective bridge between management and our Board since his election as Chairman, noting that feedback from our independent directors regarding his performance continued to be favorable during the 2013 Board evaluation process.
Our independent directors determined to continue Mr. Scarborough's service as Chairman based on their continued belief that the combined leadership structure enhances our ability to execute our strategic priorities. Mr. Scarborough was re-elected by our independent directors as Chairman in February 2014 to serve, subject to his election by our stockholders, a one-year term beginning immediately after the Annual Meeting.
Lead Independent Director David Pyott
With the combined roles of Chairman and CEO, we believe that it is important to have a Lead Independent Director to ensure independent oversight of Board decision-making. Our Governance Guidelines describe the duties of the Lead Independent Director, which give him substantial authority and delineate clear responsibilities to ensure independent stewardship of our Board. These duties include the following:
In connection with its review of our Board leadership structure in February 2014, the Governance Committee determined that Mr. Pyott should remain as Lead Independent Director, noting his strong performance in providing independent stewardship of our Board and that his chairmanship of the Compensation Committee and membership on the Governance Committee continue to provide him with valuable insights on executive compensation and corporate governance matters that are of significant concern to stockholders.
Upon the Governance Committee's recommendation (with Mr. Pyott abstaining from the vote), our independent directors (with Mr. Pyott abstaining from the vote) selected Mr. Pyott as Lead Independent Director in February 2014 to serve, subject to his election by our stockholders, for a one-year term beginning immediately after the Annual Meeting.
13
Executive Sessions
Our Board believes it is important to have executive sessions without our CEO present, which are scheduled during every regular meeting of the Board and may also occur during special meetings of the Board. During 2013, Mr. Pyott presided as Lead Independent Director at two executive sessions of non-management directors (which excluded Mr. Scarborough and included former non-independent director Peter W. Mullin, who retired from the Board on the date of the 2013 Annual Meeting) and three executive sessions of independent directors only (following Mr. Mullin's retirement, which excluded Mr. Scarborough).
Each of our Board committees has a written charter which describes the purposes, goals and responsibilities of the committee. These charters, which may be found in the "Corporate Governance" section of our investor website at www.investors.averydennison.com, are reviewed by the respective committee on an annual basis, with any recommended changes adopted upon approval by our Board and updated charters promptly posted on our website. During 2013, executive sessions during which members of management were not present were scheduled for each regular meeting of the Audit, Compensation and Governance Committees.
In February 2014, in connection with its annual appointment of committee chairmen and members, our Board, on the recommendation of the Governance Committee, determined to combine the Audit and Finance Committees, effective immediately after the Annual Meeting. As a result, thereafter our Board anticipates having the following three standing committees: the Audit and Finance Committee, the Compensation Committee and the Governance Committee.
Board/Committee Membership, Meetings & Attendance
The following table shows the membership of, and number of meetings held by, our Board and Committees, and the percentage of applicable meetings attended by each director, during 2013.
There were seven meetings of our Board and 18 meetings of Committees of our Board in 2013. Each of our directors attended at least 77% of the aggregate number of meetings of our Board and Committees of which he or she was a member held during 2013, or if shorter, the period of time he or she served during the year; the average attendance of all directors in 2013 was 97%. Directors are strongly encouraged to attend our annual stockholder meetings; with the exception of Mr. Börjesson who was unable to attend due to illness, all of our directors attended the 2013 Annual Meeting.
14
2013 BOARD/COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP, MEETINGS AND ATTENDANCE
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Name |
|
Board of Directors |
|
Audit Committee |
|
Compensation Committee |
|
Governance Committee |
|
Finance Committee |
|
||||||||||||
|
Mr. Alford |
M, 100% | M, 100% | M, 83% | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mr. Anderson |
M, 100% | M, 100% | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mr. Barker |
M, 100% | M, 100% | C, 100% | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mr. Börjesson(1) |
M, 86% | M, 80% | M, 0% | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mr. Cardis(2) |
M, 100% | C, 100% | M, 100% | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mr. Hicks |
M, 86% | M, 100% | M, 100% | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mr. Noski |
M, 100% | M, 100% | M, 100% | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mr. Pyott |
LID, 100% | C, 100% | M, 100% | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mr. Scarborough |
C, 100% | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mr. Siewert |
M, 86% | M, 100% | M, 100% | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Ms. Stewart |
M, 100% | M, 100% | C, 100% | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Ms. Sullivan(3) |
M, 100% | M, 100% | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Meetings in 2013 (#) |
7 | 8 | 4 | 5 | 1 |
M = Member C = Chairman LID = Lead Independent Director
Audit Committee
Responsibilities
The Audit Committee is appointed to assist our Board with the following:
our internal controls report and the independent auditor's attestation thereof;
15
All members of the Audit Committee satisfy the enhanced independence standards for audit committee members set forth in SEC rules and NYSE listing standards. Our Board has designated each of Messrs. Anderson, Barker, Cardis and Noski as an "audit committee financial expert" under applicable SEC regulations.
Complaint Procedures for Accounting and Auditing Matters
The Audit Committee is responsible for ensuring that complaints related to accounting, accounting standards, internal accounting controls and audit practices are treated appropriately and has adopted procedures for the confidential, anonymous submission of complaints regarding these matters. These procedures relate to complaints for fraud or deliberate error in the preparation, evaluation, review or audit of any of our financial statements or other financial reports; fraud or deliberate error in the recording and maintaining of our financial records; deficiencies in or noncompliance with our internal accounting controls; misrepresentation or false statement to or by a senior officer or accountant regarding a matter contained in our financial records, financial statements, or other financial reports; or deviation from full and fair reporting of our financial condition.
16
Any person, including third parties, may submit a good faith complaint regarding accounting and auditing matters; employees may do so without fear of dismissal or other retaliation. The Audit Committee oversees these procedures, and investigations are conducted under the direction of our internal audit department in consultation with counsel and other members of senior management to the extent appropriate under the circumstances.
Stockholders and other interested parties interested in communicating regarding the Audit Committee Complaint Procedures for Accounting and Auditing Matters may (i) make an anonymous, confidential call to our Business Conduct GuideLine at 888.567.4387 toll-free in the United States or at 704.731.0166 collect from outside the United States or (ii) write to:
Audit
Committee Chairman
c/o Corporate Secretary
Avery Dennison Corporation
207 Goode Avenue
Glendale, California 91203
Compensation and Executive Personnel Committee
Responsibilities
The Compensation Committee is appointed by our Board to oversee the compensation of our non-employee directors, CEO and other executive officers. In December 2012 and 2013, on recommendation of the Compensation Committee, the Board approved amended charters for the Committee prospectively to comply with NYSE listing standards regarding the responsibilities and authority of compensation committees. Under its charter, the Committee is responsible for performing the following functions:
All members of the Compensation Committee satisfy the enhanced independence standards for compensation committee members set forth in SEC rules and NYSE listing standards. In addition, all Compensation Committee members qualify as "non-employee directors" for purposes of Rule 16b-3 under the Exchange Act, and as "outside directors" for purposes of Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code (as amended, the "Code").
The Compensation Committee may delegate authority to subcommittees or the CEO when appropriate. For information on the processes and procedures followed by the Compensation Committee in considering and determining executive compensation and the roles of its compensation consultant and our CEO in those processes and procedures, see Compensation Discussion and Analysis.
Committee Compensation Advisors
Committee Authority
Under its charter, the Compensation Committee has the authority, in its sole discretion, to obtain advice and
17
assistance from internal or external advisors. The Compensation Committee may retain and terminate any compensation consultant or other external advisor and has sole authority to approve any such advisor's fees and other terms and conditions of the retention and receives appropriate funding from our company for the retention. In retaining its advisors, the Committee must consider each advisor's independence from management, in accordance with SEC rules and NYSE listing standards.
Advisor Independence
The Compensation Committee considered the independence of its advisors in December 2013 in accordance with SEC rules and NYSE listing standards, evaluating, among other things, any business or personal relationships with the members of the advisory team. At that time, the Compensation Committee affirmatively determined its compensation consultant, Towers Watson, to be independent.
Towers Watson and the Compensation Committee have had the following protocols in place since the commencement of the engagement to establish and maintain Towers Watson's independence from management:
In December 2013, the Compensation Committee conducted a review of potential conflicts of interest of Towers
Watson and the members of the engagement team advising the Committee, including the firm's policies and procedures designed to prevent conflicts of interest, in connection with its annual assessment of the consultant's performance and determined that there were no such conflicts.
2013 Compensation Consultant Services,
Fees and Performance
During 2013, the Compensation Committee directly retained Towers Watson as its compensation consultant. Towers Watson assists the Compensation Committee by providing competitive market compensation data for senior executives; conducting periodic reviews of elements of our non-employee director, officer and employee compensation programs; identifying best practices in annual and long-term incentive compensation design, including performance objectives and weightings thereof; and sharing executive and non-employee director compensation trends, issues and regulatory developments.
Representatives of Towers Watson were present at every Compensation Committee meeting held in 2013, and may be consulted in between meetings at the Compensation Committee's discretion. Towers Watson performed no services for our company in 2013 other than its work undertaken for or at the request of the Compensation Committee, except for assistance calculating the amounts contained in the table included in the "Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change of Control" section of our 2013 proxy statement and assessing the potential impacts thereon of Section 280G of the Code. In 2013, Towers Watson received $248,183 in compensation, excluding reimbursement for reasonable expenses, from our company, over 90% of which was for professional services directly performed for or at the request of the Compensation Committee.
The Compensation Committee conducted its annual assessment of Towers Watson's performance in December 2013, which included a review of various performance measures and evaluation criteria as well as the fees paid for the firm's services. The Compensation Committee determined that it remained satisfied with the performance of Towers Watson and the individual members of the firm serving the committee.
18
Governance and Social Responsibility Committee
Pursuant to its charter, the Governance Committee is appointed by our Board to:
Finance Committee
In addition to the above committees required by applicable SEC rules and NYSE listing standards, we also had a Finance Committee during 2013. The Finance Committee was appointed by our Board to oversee matters relating to our financial affairs and capital requirements and
in that capacity performs the following activities on behalf of our Board:
In February 2014, in connection with its annual appointment of committee chairmen and members, our Board, on the recommendation of the Governance Committee, determined to combine the Audit and Finance Committees, effective immediately after the Annual Meeting. As a result, going forward, our Board will no longer have a separate standing Finance Committee.
Oversight of Risks Confronting Our Businesses
Management is responsible for the day-to-day management of risks confronting our businesses, but our Board has broad oversight responsibility for our risk management programs, including enterprise risk management (ERM) oversight. We have a Chief Compliance Officer who, with assistance from our Vice President of Internal Audit and members of their respective teams, provides support and drives ERM accountability into our businesses, ensures that our business groups semiannually complete a risk profile, and semiannually prepares a corporate risk profile based on identified business-specific risks as well as enterprise-wide risks. In addition, we have robust global processes that together support a strong internal control environment to promote the early identification and continued management of risks by our company's leadership. Our legal and compliance functions report into our General Counsel to provide independent oversight over our businesses.
Our
Board as a whole oversees risks related to our corporate and business strategies and operations and exercises this responsibility by considering the relevant risks in connection with
all of its deliberations and decisions. In performing its oversight role, our Board is responsible for ensuring that the risk management processes designed and implemented by management are
functioning, and that
19
necessary steps are taken to foster a culture of risk-adjusted decision-making within our company. Each year, the full Board receives reports on the strategic plans and risks facing our company as a whole from our CEO and CFO, as well as our individual businesses from our business group Presidents and their management teams. These risks may include financial risks, political and regulatory risks, legal risks, supply chain risks, competitive risks, information technology risks, and risks inherent in the ways in which we do business. Employees who supervise various day-to-day risks, such as environmental, tax and sustainability matters, provide reports periodically to Board Committees, as well as occasionally to our full Board.
Our Board has delegated to its Committees certain elements of its risk oversight function to better coordinate with management and serve the long-term interests of our stockholders. In this context, the Audit Committee regularly discusses our risk assessment and mitigation processes to ensure that our risk management programs are effective and periodically meets in executive session with each of our CFO, General Counsel, Vice President of Internal Audit, Chief Compliance Officer, and our independent registered public accounting firm. In addition, the Audit Committee oversees our internal control environment and evaluates the effectiveness of our internal controls at least annually.
Our Board receives reports from Committee Chairmen regarding topics discussed at every Committee meeting, which may include the following areas of risk overseen primarily by its Committees:
The material risks related to our businesses are described under Part I, Item 1A, "Risk Factors," in our 2013 Annual Report on Form 10-K, filed with the SEC on February 26, 2014.
Oversight of Risks Associated with Compensation Policies and Practices
As described in Compensation Discussion and Analysis, we maintain best practices in compensation and corporate governance that collectively encourage ongoing risk assessment and mitigation. The Compensation Committee has designed our executive compensation program to provide incentives that do not encourage our executives to take excessive risks in managing their businesses or functional areas.
The Compensation Committee's independent compensation consultant, Towers Watson, last conducted a risk assessment of our executive compensation program and reported to the Compensation Committee regarding its findings in February 2013. Towers Watson evaluated our executive compensation program as a whole, noting the following:
20
(iv) utilize targets established by the Compensation Committee, with awards determined based on our actual performance and a qualitative assessment of the circumstances under which the goals were achieved, with appropriate adjustments to payouts;
Based on the above factors and the advice of Towers Watson, the Compensation Committee concluded that our executive compensation program strikes an appropriate
compensation-risk balance and does not encourage excessive risk-taking.
In addition to these compensation program elements, we have a robust ethics and compliance program to educate executives and employees on risk-mitigating behavior, with adverse employment consequences for any actions determined to have been inappropriate. We encourage employees and third parties to report potential violations of our Code of Conduct and actual or perceived conflicts of interest through multiple reporting channels and with no risk of retaliation. See Values and Ethics.
Based on the foregoing, the Compensation Committee concluded that our compensation policies and practices do not as a whole create risks that are reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on our company.
Succession Planning
Our Board is actively engaged and involved in talent management to identify and cultivate our future leaders. We maintain a robust mid-year and annual performance review process for our employees, as well as a leadership development program that cultivates our leadership principles in our future leaders. Management develops leadership at lower levels of our organization by identifying core talent, cultivating the skills and capabilities that will allow identified individuals to become future leaders, assessing their development in embodying our leadership principles and identifying gaps and developmental needs in skills and experience.
The Compensation Committee conducts executive succession planning at least annually during our Board's mid-year review of our business strategies. In July 2013 and February 2014, the Compensation Committee reviewed individuals identified as possible CEO succession candidates, including progress in current job position and career development in terms of strategy, leadership and execution. In addition, in July 2013, the Compensation Committee discussed leadership below the executive officer level, identifying the talent that is currently ready or with continued development on their current trajectory with mentorship and coaching from our current leaders will be ready to fill executive officer positions in the event of a vacancy.
Through
regular reports to the Board from senior management, our Board has the opportunity to meet with leaders of our company, including executive officers,
21
business group leaders and functional leaders in areas such as legal, finance, information technology, risk, and human resources. In addition, Board members have freedom of access to all employees, and are encouraged to make site visits to meet local management and attend company events.
Director Orientation and Continuing Education
Our director education program consists of periodic visits to our facilities and management presentations regarding our business operations, strategies and risks and our values and ethics, including the policies and practices that guide how we do business. We sponsor in-house orientation and continuing education programs for our Board and provide updates on relevant topics of interest to our Board throughout the meeting calendar. We also reimburse directors who attend accredited director education programs and institutes for program fees and related expenses.
Our new director orientation generally includes discussion of our corporate vision, strategy and leadership team; investor messaging; the business and strategy of our business groups and divisions; finance matters, including our financial reporting policies and practices, internal control environment, internal audit deployment, tax planning and compliance and capital structure; legal matters, including corporate governance policies and procedures, values and ethics, compliance, and ERM; human resources matters, including executive compensation, succession planning and non-employee director compensation; and our information technology strategy.
Board and Committee Evaluations
The Governance Committees oversees and conducts an annual performance evaluation of our Board, Chairman and Lead Independent Director, and Board Committees, including the Committee Chairmen. Many of the improvements in our corporate governance practices and Board processes have resulted from the annual evaluation process. Our Board views the annual evaluation process as an integral part of its commitment to cultivating excellence and best practices in its performance.
COMMUNICATING WITH OUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Outreach and Engagement
We value your opinions about our business, and we actively solicit stockholder input through our investor relations program. In this regard, we maintain a robust investor relations calendar that balances direct marketing through investor roadshows, with meetings semi-annually in primary markets such as New York and London and annually in secondary markets such as Chicago and Los Angeles, participating in eight to twelve conferences per year and occasionally meeting one-on-one with institutional investors. In addition, we communicate with analysts covering our company during our quarterly earnings teleconferences.
You can contact our investor relations department by phone at 626.304.2000 or by email at investorcom@averydennison.com. It is our customary practice promptly to respond to inquiries from our stockholders whether they be individuals or institutions and we welcome the feedback on our company, including our corporate governance and executive compensation programs, that this active and ongoing engagement provides.
Contacting our Board
Stockholders may write to our Board, Chairman, Lead Independent Director, any Committee or Committee Chairman, or any other individual director concerning business-related matters by writing to the group or individual as follows:
Board
of Directors
(or a particular subgroup or individual director)
c/o Corporate Secretary
Avery Dennison Corporation
207 Goode Avenue
Glendale, California 91203
Our Corporate Secretary reviews all communications received and forwards them as addressed. However, unsolicited advertisements, business solicitations, surveys, product-related inquiries, junk mail or mass mailings, resumes or other job-related inquiries or offensive, illegal or otherwise inappropriate communications that do not substantively relate to the duties and responsibilities of our Board may not be forwarded.
22
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MATTERS
PROPOSAL 1 ELECTION OF DIRECTORS
Our Bylaws provide for a Board of between eight and 13 directors, with the exact number fixed from time to time by a resolution of our Board. There are currently 12 directors on our Board, 11 of whom are to be elected at the Annual Meeting due to Mr. Cardis's retirement. All directors are being nominated for a one-year term. Effective as of the Annual Meeting, the Board plans to fix the authorized number of directors at 11.
Each of the 11 nominees is presently serving as our director and has consented to being named in this proxy statement and to continue serving if elected.
Majority Voting Standard for Director Elections
Our Bylaws provide for the majority voting for directors in uncontested elections like this one and require that an incumbent director who is not re-elected tender his or her resignation from the Board. Our Board, excluding the tendering director, is required to determine whether to accept the resignation taking into account the recommendation of the Governance Committee and any other factors or information it considers appropriate and relevant and publicly disclose its decision regarding the tendered resignation, including the rationale for the decision, within 90 days from the date election results are certified. In a contested election, plurality voting is the standard for election of directors.
In voting for the election of directors, each share has one vote for each position to be filled and there is no cumulative voting.
Recommendation of Board of Directors
Your Board of Directors recommends that you vote FOR each of the director nominees. The persons named as proxies will vote for the election of each of the 11 nominees, unless you specify otherwise. If any of the director nominees were to become unavailable prior to the Annual Meeting, your proxy would be voted for a substitute nominee designated by our Board or we would reduce the size of our Board.
2014 Director Nominees
The following pages provide information for each nominee for election at the Annual Meeting, including his or her age, positions held, current principal occupation and business experience during at least the past five years. We also indicate the names of any other public companies on which each director currently serves, or has served during the past five years, as a director; for these purposes, "public company" means a company that is required to file reports with the SEC.
In addition to the information presented below regarding each director's experience, qualifications, attributes and skills that led our Board to the conclusion that he or she should serve as a director which includes senior leadership experience, industry knowledge, global operations experience, financial expertise, and public company board and corporate governance experience we believe that each of our directors has integrity, adheres to high ethical standards, and represents the long-term interests of our stockholders. Each of them also has demonstrated an ability to exercise sound judgment, as well as a commitment to overseeing our company and serving our stockholders.
23
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Name |
|
Age |
|
Director Since |
|
Principal Occupation |
|
Independent |
|
AC(1) |
|
CC |
|
GC |
|
Other Public Boards |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mr. Alford |
57 | 2010 | Retired Chairman & CEO, Nestlé USA |
Yes | M | M | 0 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mr. Anderson |
58 | 2012 | Retired Vice Chair & Managing Partner, Ernst & Young LLP |
Yes | M | 3 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mr. Barker |
65 | 2003 | Retired Chairman of California, JPMorgan Chase & Co. |
Yes | C | 2 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mr. Börjesson |
71 | 2005 | Retired Chairman, Rexam PLC |
Yes | M | 0 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mr. Hicks |
61 | 2007 | Chairman, President & CEO, Foot Locker, Inc. |
Yes | M | M | 1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mr. Noski |
61 | 2011 | Retired Vice Chairman, Bank of America Corporation |
Yes | M | 2 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mr. Pyott (LID) |
60 | 1999 | Chairman & CEO, Allergan, Inc. |
Yes | C | M | 2 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mr. Scarborough |
58 | 2000 | Chairman, President & CEO, Avery Dennison Corporation |
No | 1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mr. Siewert |
58 | 2005 | Managing Director, The Carlyle Group |
Yes | M | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Ms. Stewart |
58 | 2003 | Chairman & CEO, DineEquity, Inc. |
Yes | M | C | 1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Ms. Sullivan |
57 | 2013 | President & CEO, Sensata Technologies Holding N.V. |
Yes | M | 1 |
AC = Audit and Finance Committee CC = Compensation & Executive Personnel
Committee GC = Governance & Social Responsibility Committee
M = Member C = Chairman LID = Lead Independent Director
24
Bradley A. Alford |
Age
57
Director since April 2010
Post-Election Board Roles:
Compensation Committee Member
Governance Committee Member
Other Current Public Company Directorships:
None
Other Public Company Directorships in Past 5 Years:
None
Anthony K. Anderson |
Age
58
Director since December 2012
Post-Election Board Roles:
Audit and Finance Committee Member
Other Current Public Company Directorships:
AAR Corporation
Exelon Corporation
First American Financial Corporation
Other Public Company Directorships in Past 5 Years:
None
Select Business Experience:
Nestlé
USA,
a nutrition, health and wellness company
Nestlé
Brands Company,
an operating unit of Nestlé USA
Select Skills and Qualifications:
Substantial leadership experience
Industry knowledge
Global operations experience
Select Business Experience:
Ernst &
Young LLP,
an assurance, tax, transaction and
advisory services firm
Select Skills and Qualifications:
Substantial leadership experience
Financial expertise
Public board experience
25
Peter K. Barker |
Age
65
Director since January 2003
Post-Election Board Roles:
Audit and Finance Committee Chairman
Other Current Public Company Directorships:
Fluor Corporation
Franklin Resources, Inc.
Other Public Company Directorships in Past 5 Years:
GSC Investment Corp.
Rolf L. Börjesson |
Age
71
Director since January 2005
Post-Election Board Roles:
Governance Committee Member
Other Current Public Company Directorships:
None
Other Public Company Directorships in Past 5 Years:
None
Select Business Experience:
JPMorgan
Chase & Co.,
a global financial services firm
Goldman
Sachs & Co.,
an investment banking, securities and
investment management firm
Select Skills and Qualifications:
Substantial leadership experience
Financial expertise
Public board experience
Select Business Experience:
Rexam PLC,
a consumer packaging company
Select Skills and Qualifications:
Substantial leadership experience
Industry knowledge
Global operations experience
26
Ken C. Hicks |
Age
61
Director since July 2007
Post-Election Board Roles:
Audit and Finance Committee Member
Governance Committee Member
Other Current Public Company Directorships:
Foot Locker, Inc. (Chairman)
Other Public Company Directorships in Past 5 Years:
J.C. Penney Company, Inc.
Charles H. Noski |
Age
61
Director since November 2011
Post-Election Board Roles:
Audit and Finance Committee Member
Other Current Public Company Directorships:
Avon Products, Inc.
Microsoft Corporation
Other Public Company Directorships in Past 5 Years:
Air Products & Chemicals, Inc.
Automatic Data Processing, Inc.
Morgan Stanley
Select Business Experience:
Foot
Locker, Inc.,
a specialty athletic retailer
J.C.
Penney Company, Inc.,
a retail company
Payless
ShoeSource, Inc.,
a specialty family footwear retailer
Select Skills and Qualifications:
Substantial leadership experience
Industry knowledge
Public board experience
Select Business Experience:
Bank
of America Corporation,
a global financial services firm
Northrop
Grumman Corporation,
an aerospace and defense contractor
AT&T
Corporation,
a telecommunications company
Select Skills and Qualifications:
Substantial leadership experience
Financial expertise
Public board experience
27
David E. I. Pyott |
Age
60
Director since November 1999
Post-Election Board Roles:
Lead Independent Director
Compensation Committee Chairman
Governance Committee Member
Other Current Public Company Directorships:
Allergan, Inc. (Chairman)
Edwards Lifesciences Corporation
Other Public Company Directorships in Past 5 Years:
None
Dean A. Scarborough |
Age
58
Director since May 2000
Post-Election Board Roles:
Chairman
Other Current Public Company Directorships:
Mattel, Inc.
Other Public Company Directorships in Past 5 Years:
None
Select Business Experience:
Allergan, Inc.,
a global health care company
Select Skills and Qualifications:
Substantial leadership experience
Global operations experience
Public board experience
Select Business Experience:
Avery Dennison Corporation
Select Skills and Qualifications:
Substantial leadership experience
Global operations experience
Public board experience
28
Patrick T. Siewert |
Age
58
Director since April 2005
Post-Election Board Roles:
Audit and Finance Committee Member
Other Current Public Company Directorships:
Mondelez International, Inc.
Other Public Company Directorships in Past 5 Years:
None
Julia A. Stewart |
Age
58
Director since January 2003
Post-Election Board Roles:
Governance Committee Chairman
Compensation Committee Member
Other Current Public Company Directorships:
DineEquity, Inc. (Chairman)
Other Public Company Directorships in Past 5 Years:
None
Select Business Experience:
The
Carlyle Group,
a global alternative investment firm
The
Coca-Cola Company,
the world's largest beverage company
Select Skills and Qualifications:
Industry knowledge
Global operations experience
Public board experience
Select Business Experience:
DineEquity, Inc.,
owner, operator and franchisor of IHOP and
Applebee's restaurants globally
IHOP
Corporation,
DineEquity's predecessor entity
Select Skills and Qualifications:
Substantial leadership experience
Global operations experience
Public board experience
29
Martha N. Sullivan |
Age
57
Director since February 2013
Post-Election Board Roles:
Compensation Committee Member
Other Current Public Company Directorships:
Sensata Technologies Holding N.V.
Other Public Company Directorships in Past 5 Years:
None
Select Business Experience:
Sensata
Technologies Holding N.V.,
a leading supplier of sensors and controls
Texas
Instruments, Inc.,
Sensata's predecessor entity
Select Skills and Qualifications:
Substantial leadership experience
Global operations experience
Public board experience
30
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MATTERS
NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTOR COMPENSATION
The Compensation Committee aims to position non-employee director compensation at or around the median of companies similar in size, global scope and complexity with which we compete for director talent to support the recruiting and retention of our non-employee directors. In addition, the Compensation Committee designs our non-employee director compensation to link compensation to our company's performance and facilitate increased ownership of our company's common stock to align director interests with those of our other stockholders. The table on the following page provides information regarding the compensation earned by or awarded to our non-employee directors during 2013. The components of this compensation are described below.
Deferrable Cash Compensation
Through the date of our 2013 Annual Meeting, our non-employee directors earned an annual retainer of $65,000, except that (i) the Lead Independent Director earned an annual retainer of $85,000 and (ii) the retainer was prorated for any director's partial service during the year. In addition, the Chairman of the Audit, Compensation, Finance and Governance Committees received an annual retainer of $15,000, $12,500, $7,500 and $7,500, respectively, for his or her service in that capacity. Non-employee directors also received $1,500 per Board meeting attended; $2,000 per Committee meeting attended as Chairman; and $1,500 per Committee meeting attended as member. Following the effectiveness of our new non-employee director compensation program after the 2013 Annual Meeting, per-meeting fees were eliminated and our non-employee directors earned an annual retainer of $90,000, except that (i) the Lead Independent Director earns an annual retainer of $110,000 and (ii) the retainer is prorated for any director's partial service during the year. In addition, the Chairman of the Audit, Compensation, Finance and Governance Committees received an annual retainer of $20,000, $15,000, $15,000 and $15,000, respectively, for his or her service in that capacity. Amounts in 2013 were prorated for the eight-month period during which the new program was in effect during the year. All amounts are paid semi-annually in arrears. We also reimburse directors for travel expenses incurred to attend Board meetings.
Non-employee directors may choose to receive their compensation in (i) cash, either paid directly or deferred into an account under the Directors Variable Deferred Compensation Plan ("DVDCP"); (ii) deferred stock units ("DSUs") credited to an individual account established in their name under the Directors Deferred Equity Compensation Plan ("DDECP"); or (iii) a combination of cash and DSUs. Fees deferred under the DVDCP accrue earnings at the rate of return of certain bond and equity investment funds managed by an insurance company. When a director participating in the DDECP retires or otherwise ceases serving as a director, the dollar value of the DSUs in his or her account is divided by the closing price of our common stock on the last date of the director's service, with the resulting number of shares of our common stock issued to the director. Dividend equivalents, representing the value of dividends per share paid on shares of our common stock calculated with reference to the number of DSUs held as of a dividend record date, are reinvested on the respective payable date in the form of additional DSUs credited to the accounts of directors who participate in the DDECP.
Equity Compensation
Each of our non-employee directors received an annual equity grant of approximately $125,000 on May 1, 2013, denominated in restricted stock units (RSUs) that vest ratably over three years, except that all unvested RSUs fully vest upon a director's death, disability, retirement from our Board after reaching age 72 or termination of service within 24 months after a change in control. They each received 3,045 RSUs based on the fair value of our common stock on the grant date. In connection with her appointment to our Board on February 27, 2013, Ms. Sullivan received an equity grant under our previous non-employee director compensation program that was prorated from the date of her election to the date of the 2013 Annual Meeting, resulting in her receipt of 207 RSUs and an option to purchase 824 shares of our common stock at an exercise price of $40.33, the average of the high and low prices of our common stock on the grant date.
31
Matching Gift Program
We match up to $10,000 per year of each non-employee director's contributions to charitable organizations or educational institutions.
Director Stock Ownership
To further align our directors' interests with those of our stockholders, our stock ownership policy requires that non-employee directors acquire and maintain a minimum equity interest in our company equal to the lesser of (i) $325,000 divided by our stock price or (ii) 6,500 shares.
The
Governance Committee reviewed non-employee director stock ownership in February 2014, noting that 11 of our 12 directors had exceeded the minimum ownership level required by the
policy and that Ms. Sullivan, having been on
our Board for only one year, was on track to meet the minimum ownership level within the requisite five years of joining our Board. All of our directors with at least one year of service own stock in our company.
Our insider trading policy expressly prohibits our directors from (i) purchasing financial instruments (such as prepaid variable forward contracts, equity swaps, collars and exchange funds) designed to hedge or offset any decrease in the market value of our common stock held, directly or indirectly, by them or (ii) pledging any of their shares of common stock to secure personal loans or other obligations, including by holding such shares in a margin account. To our knowledge, based solely on our review of their written representations, none of our directors has engaged in hedging or pledging transactions with respect to our common stock.
Name
|
Fees Earned or Paid in Cash(1) |
Stock Awards(2) |
Option Awards(3) |
Change in Pension Value and Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Earnings(4) |
All Other Compensation(5) |
Total | |||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mr. Alford |
$ | 90,384 | $ | 117,898 | | | | $ | 208,282 | ||||||||||
Mr. Anderson |
$ | 87,384 | $ | 117,898 | | | | $ | 205,282 | ||||||||||
Mr. Barker |
$ | 104,759 | $ | 117,898 | | | $ | 10,000 | $ | 232,657 | |||||||||
Mr. Börjesson |
$ | 90,384 | $ | 117,898 | | | | $ | 208,282 | ||||||||||
Mr. Cardis |
$ | 110,134 | $ | 117,898 | | | $ | 10,000 | $ | 238,032 | |||||||||
Mr. Hicks |
$ | 93,384 | $ | 117,898 | | | $ | 10,000 | $ | 221,282 | |||||||||
Mr. Mullin(6) |
$ | 28,833 | | | $ | (8,872 | ) | $ | 10,000 | $ | 29,961 | ||||||||
Mr. Noski |
$ | 90,384 | $ | 117,898 | | | $ | 10,000 | $ | 218,282 | |||||||||
Mr. Pyott |
$ | 126,875 | $ | 117,898 | | $ | (2,314 | ) | $ | 10,000 | $ | 252,459 | |||||||
Mr. Siewert |
$ | 90,384 | $ | 117,898 | | | $ | 1,548 | $ | 209,830 | |||||||||
Ms. Stewart |
$ | 108,759 | $ | 117,898 | | | $ | 10,000 | $ | 236,657 | |||||||||
Ms. Sullivan(6) |
$ | 80,467 | $ | 125,798 | $ | 5,742 | | | $ | 212,007 |
32
their accounts as of December 31, 2013: Mr. Alford 9,273; Mr. Anderson 1,895; Mr. Barker 18,394; Mr. Cardis 355; Mr. Hicks 8,684; Mr. Noski 5,302; Mr. Pyott 36,256; Ms. Stewart 26,024; and Ms. Sullivan 1,801.
Name
|
Board Roles During 2013
|
Board Retainer |
Committee Chairman Retainer |
Meeting Fees |
||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mr. Alford | Compensation Committee Member; Governance Committee Member | $ | 84,384 | | $ | 6,000 | ||||||
Mr. Anderson | Audit Committee Member | $ | 84,384 | | $ | 3,000 | ||||||
Mr. Barker | Finance Committee Chairman; Audit Committee Member | $ | 84,384 | $ | 14,375 | $ | 6,000 | |||||
Mr. Börjesson | Finance Committee Member; Governance Committee Member | $ | 84,384 | | $ | 6,000 | ||||||
Mr. Cardis | Audit Committee Chairman; Finance Committee Member | $ | 84,384 | $ | 18,750 | $ | 7,000 | |||||
Mr. Hicks | Audit Committee Member; Governance Committee Member | $ | 84,384 | | $ | 9,000 | ||||||
Mr. Mullin | Finance Committee Member | $ | 25,833 | | $ | 3,000 | ||||||
Mr. Noski | Audit Committee Member; Finance Committee Member | $ | 84,384 | | $ | 6,000 | ||||||
Mr. Pyott | Lead Independent Director; Compensation Committee Chairman; Governance Committee Member | $ | 102,917 | $ | 13,958 | $ | 10,000 | |||||
Mr. Siewert | Audit Committee Member; Finance Committee Member | $ | 84,384 | | $ | 6,000 | ||||||
Ms. Stewart | Governance Committee Chairman; Compensation Committee Member | $ | 84,384 | $ | 14,375 | $ | 10,000 | |||||
Ms. Sullivan | Compensation Committee Member | $ | 78,967 | | $ | 1,500 |
33
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION MATTERS
COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
This Compensation Discussion and Analysis (this "CD&A") provides an overview and analysis of the principles and practices underlying our executive compensation program. In Compensation Tables, we provide a series of tables with compensation information for our following named executive officers (our "NEOs") for 2013:
Stockholders are urged to carefully review and consider this CD&A, together with the information contained in Compensation Tables, in casting their advisory vote to approve our executive compensation. See Proposal 2 Advisory Vote to Approve Executive Compensation.
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS AND DISCLAIMER
This CD&A contains "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These
forward-looking statements are subject to certain risks and uncertainties, which could cause actual
results to differ materially from the results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. For a detailed discussion of these risks, see Part I, Item 1a. "Risk Factors" and Part II, Item 7. "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations" in our 2013 Annual Report on Form 10-K, filed on February 26, 2014 with the SEC ("2013 Annual Report"). The forward-looking statements included in this CD&A are made only as of the dates indicated, and we undertake no obligation to update these statements to reflect subsequent events or circumstances.
Stockholders should note that statements contained in this CD&A regarding our company and business group performance targets and goals are disclosed in the limited context of our executive compensation program and should not be interpreted as statements of management's expectations, estimates of results or other guidance.
Our executive compensation program is designed to reflect the Compensation Committee's pay-for-performance philosophy by (i) aligning management's interests with the long-term interests of our other stockholders and (ii) providing compensation on the basis of corporate, business group and individual performance that advances our financial goals and strategic objectives.
Our 2013 Performance
Unless otherwise indicated, the following discussion of our performance is focused on our continuing operations as of the end of our 2013 fiscal year.
For complete information regarding our 2013 performance, including the definitions of and qualifications for certain of the non-GAAP financial measures used in this CD&A and a reconciliation of those measures to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measures, see "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations" in particular the information contained under the heading "Non-GAAP Financial Measures" and the audited consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes thereto contained in our 2013 Annual Report.
34
Strong 2013 Financial Performance and TSR
In May 2012, we first communicated to investors the long-term financial targets we plan to realize through the end of 2015. We delivered strong financial performance that met or exceeded each of these targets during 2013, which was also at the high end of the guidance ranges for adjusted earnings per share (EPS) and free cash flow we provided to our investors in January 2013, as shown in the following table.
|
||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Financial Metric (non-GAAP) |
|
2012-2015 Target(1) |
|
2013 Results |
|
||||||
|
Organic sales growth | 3%-5% | 4.8% | |||||||||
|
Adjusted EPS growth | 15%-20+% | 37% | |||||||||
|
Annual free cash flow | $300+ mil. | $330.3 mil. |
We achieved the following results in 2013:
Our 2013 total shareholder return (TSR) of 47.5% outperformed the S&P 500® Index, which reported a TSR of 32.4% for the year.
For 2014, we expect to achieve organic sales and adjusted EPS growth consistent with our long-term targets; deliver solid free cash flow and maintain our strong balance sheet; and continue our intent to return a majority of our free cash flow to our stockholders, while investing for future productivity and growth.
Strong Segment Results
The businesses in our Pressure-sensitive Materials (PSM) segment grew organic sales by 4.7% during 2013, within our long-term target range for these businesses of 3%-5%. Reported operating margin in 2013 improved 150 basis points compared to 2012, reaching 9.9%. In addition, the Materials Group business within our PSM segment exceeded its goal for sales from new products and introduced 17 innovations to the European market at the industry's biggest trade show, Labelexpo.
Our Retail Branding and Information Solutions (RBIS) segment delivered 4.9% organic sales growth, within our long-term target range for these businesses of 3%-5% and driven in part by the growth in our radio-frequency identification (RFID) and exterior embellishment market segments. Reported operating margin improved 160 basis points to 5.1% in 2013 compared to 2012.
Increased Return of Cash to Stockholders
In 2013, we maintained a healthy balance sheet while further delivering on our commitment to return cash to our stockholders through dividend payments and share repurchases. We returned approximately $396 million to our stockholders in 2013 using free cash flow and the proceeds from the sale of our Office and Consumer Products (OCP) and Designed and Engineered Solutions (DES) businesses, through the following means:
35
Divestiture of OCP and DES Businesses;
Sharpened Focus on Core Businesses
In January 2013, we entered into an agreement to sell our OCP and DES businesses for a total purchase price of $500 million. The transaction closed on July 1, 2013. We received approximately $481 million, net of cash provided, from the sale which, when offset by approximately $93 million of estimated net cash used in the OCP and DES businesses and divestiture-related payments, resulted in net proceeds of approximately $390 million. We used these net proceeds to repurchase shares and reduce our debt, including by making discretionary contributions to our pension plans. We believe that the transaction maximized the value of these businesses for our stockholders.
After the sale, we are better positioned for profitable growth and increased stockholder returns with our talent and resources sharply focused on our industry-leading PSM and RBIS businesses, which have significant strategic advantages, including global reach and scale; broad product portfolios; strength in emerging markets; proprietary technology and process expertise; innovation excellence; and strong relationships with end users and direct customers.
Greater Productivity through Restructuring
In 2012, we initiated a restructuring program to achieve more than $100 million in annualized savings by mid-2013. We launched this program to build on our competitive advantages and further strengthen our ability to achieve our long-term targets. We delivered on our commitment to stockholders by realizing in excess of $100 million in annualized savings from this program.
2013 Executive Compensation
Use of More Performance-Based LTI Awards and Multiple Performance Objectives; Reduced Burn Rate
For 2013, the Compensation Committee restructured the long-term incentive program to provide market-leveraged
stock units (MSUs) instead of stock options and time-vested restricted stock units (RSUs). The Compensation Committee made this change not only to improve the weighting of performance-based compensation in the LTI program, but also to more efficiently utilize shares of our common stock. In addition, the Compensation Committee took into account feedback from stockholders and proxy advisory firms in making the change.
Furthermore, the Compensation Committee added cumulative economic value added (EVA) as a second performance objective for the 2013-2015 MTIP (in addition to relative TSR) to provide a more balanced view of our performance and incent our NEOs to achieve profitable growth as well as improved stockholder value creation.
Despite the fact that we repurchased 6.6 million shares of our common stock, the Compensation Committee's decision to grant MSUs in lieu of stock options and RSUs together with the committee's decision to grant lower-level executives cash-based incentive awards reduced our burn rate (the number of equity awards granted at target divided by the weighted average number of outstanding common shares) from 2.8% in 2012 to 0.6% in 2013.
Strong 2013 Performance Resulted in Financial Modifier of 137%, 123% and 107% for Corporate, RBIS and Materials Group Annual Incentive Plan Awards, Respectively, and Vesting of First Tranche of MSUs at 142%
While we provide consistent, market-competitive total direct compensation opportunities for our NEOs, the actual compensation they realize varies year-to-year based on our performance. Our 2013 performance exceeded the target level for most of the performance objectives established by the Compensation Committee for our 2013 Corporate, RBIS and Materials Group Annual Incentive Plans (AIPs), resulting in financial modifiers of 137%, 123% and 107%, respectively.
36
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
AIP |
|
Performance Objective |
|
Weighting |
|
2013 Target |
|
2013 Results |
|
% of Target |
|
||||||||||||||
Corporate | Total Company Adjusted Sales Growth | 20% | 2.8% | 4.6% | 134.6% | |||||||||||||||||||||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Company Adjusted EPS | 60% | $2.55 | $2.68 | 134.2% | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Company Free Cash Flow | 20% | $290.0 mil. | $330.3 mil. | 145.8% | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Financial Modifier | 137% | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
RBIS | Total Company Adjusted EPS | 25% | $2.55 | $2.68 | 134.2% | |||||||||||||||||||||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
RBIS Segment Adjusted Sales Growth |
20% | 3.5% | 4.9% | 126.5% | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
RBIS Segment Adjusted Net Income | 35% | $56.7 mil | $55.0 mil. | 87.6% | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
RBIS Segment Free Cash Flow | 20% | $53.6 mil. | $63.6 mil. | 162.1% | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Financial Modifier | 123% | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Materials Group | Total Company Adjusted EPS | 25% | $2.55 | $2.68 | 134.2% | |||||||||||||||||||||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
PSM Segment Adjusted Sales Growth |
20% | 3.4% | 4.7% | 132.0% | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
PSM Segment Adjusted Net Income | 35% | $311.2 mil. | $301.5 mil. | 63.7% | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
PSM Segment Free Cash Flow | 20% | $277.3 mil. | $298.8 mil. | 125.9% | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Financial Modifier | 107% |
In addition, the first tranche of MSUs granted in 2013 was eligible for vesting based on our absolute TSR during the year, calculated on the basis of the average closing price of our common stock during January 2013 compared to the average closing price of our common stock during January 2014, plus compounded dividends. With 42% improvement in absolute TSR calculated on this basis in 2013, these MSUs vested at 142%.
|
||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Performance Objective |
|
Weighting |
|
2013 Results |
|
Payout |
|
||||||||
|
Absolute TSR | 100% | 42% | 142% |
Despite Strong Performance in 2013 and 2012, Weaker Performance in 2011 Resulted in No Payout on PUs Granted for the 2011-2013 Period and No AIP Awards for 2011
We did not achieve the threshold level of the performance objective established by the Compensation Committee for our 2011-2013 Mid-Term Incentive Plan (MTIP), resulting in the cancellation of the performance units (PUs) granted thereunder. Our one-year TSR outperformed the S&P 500® Index by 26% and 15% in 2012 and 2013, respectively. Our below-threshold three-year TSR solely reflected weaker performance in 2011.
As a result of our weaker performance in 2011, none of our NEOs or other executives received an AIP award for that year.
2011-2013 MTIP RESULTS VS. TARGET
|
||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Performance Objective |
|
Weighting |
|
Target Set in 2011 |
|
Results Achieved in 2013 |
|
Payout |
|
||||||||||
|
Relative TSR | 100% | 50th %ile | 21st %ile | 0% |
Limited Increases in NEO Base Salary and AIP and LTI Opportunities
Our NEOs earned base salary merit increases of around 3%, consistent with the average merit increase for our other U.S. employees, except for Messrs. Butier and Nolan. Mr. Butier, who was promoted internally to CFO in 2010, received a 6.4% increase to bring his base salary closer to the market median; Mr. Nolan received an 8.1% increase to reward him for his business group's superior 2012 performance, reflect his additional responsibilities leading business divisions (Graphics Solutions, Reflective Solutions and Performance Tapes) previously led by another executive and position his salary around the market median. In 2013, the target AIP opportunity for Messrs. Butier, Neville and Nolan was increased from 60% to 75% and their target LTI opportunity was increased from 180% to 200%, in each case to reflect their increased responsibilities and competitive market levels.
37
2013 NEO Total Realized Compensation
The following table shows the compensation actually realized by our NEOs for 2013. It is not intended, nor should it be considered, as
a substitute for the Summary Compensation Table required by SEC regulations. Whereas the Summary Compensation Table includes the change in the actuarial present value of pension benefits to which NEOs
are entitled, the Total Realized Compensation Table excludes these amounts because they are based on the assumptions we use for financial reporting purposes and do not reflect amounts paid to or
realized by our NEOs. In
addition, amounts under the "Stock Awards" and "Option Awards" columns of the Summary Compensation Table reflect the grant date fair value of these awards for financial reporting purposes. The Total Realized Compensation Table instead includes any value realized by our NEOs from the exercise of stock options and vesting of MSUs, PUs and RSUs (in each case before payment of applicable withholding taxes and brokerage commissions).
The total compensation realized by our CEO was 58% of his total compensation reflected in the Summary Compensation Table.
TOTAL REALIZED COMPENSATION TABLE
|
|
|
Stock Awards | |
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Name
|
Salary
|
Non-Equity Incentive Compensation(1) |
MSUs(2)
|
Performance Units(3)
|
RSUs(4)
|
Option Awards(5)
|
All Other Compensation(6)
|
Total
|
|||||||||||||||||
Mr. Scarborough |
$ | 1,063,250 | $ | 2,200,000 | $ | 844,798 | | $ | 406,799 | | $ | 169,190 | $ | 4,684,037 | |||||||||||
Mr. Butier |
$ | 571,279 | $ | 893,966 | $ | 204,613 | | $ | 277,705 | $ | 267,776 | $ | 100,643 | $ | 2,315,982 | ||||||||||
Ms. Miller |
$ | 487,812 | $ | 484,707 | $ | 236,278 | | $ | 84,584 | $ | 1,290,450 | $ | 120,269 | $ | 2,704,100 | ||||||||||
Mr. Neville |
$ | 555,840 | $ | 758,989 | $ | 203,874 | | $ | 111,039 | $ | 282,786 | $ | 100,775 | $ | 2,013,303 | ||||||||||
Mr. Nolan |
$ | 608,358 | $ | 636,612 | $ | 215,250 | | $ | 115,509 | $ | 1,839,719 | $ | 214,313 | $ | 3,629,761 |
38
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION BEST PRACTICES
Our executive compensation program incorporates the following best practices, which we believe ensure that the program serves the long-term interests of our stockholders:
misconduct on the part of an NEO that necessitates a restatement of our financial results.
39
The Compensation Committee has designed our executive compensation program to tie a substantial majority of compensation to our success in meeting predetermined performance objectives and positively influencing the appreciation of our stock price. The objective of this strategy is primarily to motivate our executives to achieve our short- and long-term financial and strategic goals, as well as attract and retain the best possible executive talent and recognize individual contributions in light of our corporate and/or business group performance.
Substantial Majority of NEO Compensation at Risk
The Compensation Committee establishes target total direct compensation to provide our NEOs compensation that aligns with our financial performance over time, with reference to market practices. The Compensation Committee structures our compensation program to reward NEOs based on our corporate and/or their business group's performance, as well as their individual contributions, to motivate them and align their compensation with stockholder interests. As shown in dark gray in the following charts, the substantial majority of our NEOs' total direct compensation opportunity in 2013 was performance-based and at risk.
2013 Target Total Direct Compensation Mix for CEO
40
2013 Average Target Total Direct Compensation Mix for Other NEOs
CONSIDERATION OF 2013 SAY-ON-PAY VOTE
We provide our stockholders with the opportunity annually to approve our executive compensation. Although the vote is advisory and non-binding, the Compensation Committee considers the outcome of the vote as part of its executive compensation planning process, which also gives consideration to market practices, changes in laws and regulations, the voting guidelines of our institutional stockholders and the policies of proxy advisory firms.
Active Engagement with Stockholders
At the 2013 Annual Meeting, approximately 91% of the votes cast approved our executive compensation proposal. Our management continued its long-standing practice of transparency and open dialogue with stockholders in 2013. In advance of the 2013 Annual Meeting, we proactively contacted our twenty largest institutional stockholders, representing nearly 60% of our then-outstanding shares, to solicit their views on our executive compensation program and make management available to answer questions or address concerns based on publicly-available information. In addition, we reviewed correspondence submitted by institutional stockholders to our Board and management, discussed matters raised by our stockholders, assessed market practices, considered the advice of the Compensation Committee's independent compensation consultant and reviewed reports issued by proxy advisory firms.
As a result of our outreach efforts, we engaged in telephonic discussions with stockholders representing approximately 17% of our outstanding shares. We believe that the level of direct engagement was lower than in 2012 because stockholders had fewer concerns with our executive compensation due to our substantially improved one-year
performance, enhanced proxy statement disclosure and favorable recommendations from proxy advisory firms.
After the 2013 Annual Meeting, the Compensation Committee evaluated the results with Towers Watson and management, giving consideration to the voting guidelines of our institutional stockholders and the policies of proxy advisory firms. The Compensation Committee believes that the improved approval rate was primarily driven by improved stockholder sentiment given our strong 2012 and then year-to-date 2013 financial performance, including a superior TSR compared to the TSR for the S&P 500®.
2013 Compensation Committee Actions
No specific component of 2013 NEO compensation was altered based on the Compensation Committee's review of the 2013 vote results and engagement with stockholders since the vote and our telephonic discussions with stockholders occurred after the program had been determined in February 2013. However, in part to respond to stockholder feedback received in previous years and as described in last year's proxy statement, for the 2013 executive compensation program, the Compensation Committee determined to:
41
absolute TSR declines by more than 30% during the vesting period and are paid out at the threshold level of 70% if our absolute TSR decreases by 30% during the vesting period. MSUs are paid out at the target level of 100% if our absolute TSR remains constant during the vesting period and at more than 100% if our absolute TSR increases during the vesting period, subject to a maximum payout of 200%. Although dividend equivalents accrue on MSUs during the period, they are earned and paid only at vesting.
expressed concerns about these matters. These incentive vehicles have terms and conditions that mirror those of PUs, but are cash-based rather than equity-based. Our senior executives (including our NEOs) were granted equity-based PUs in 2013 to reinforce the alignment of their interests with those of our other stockholders and we currently expect to continue granting these employees equity-based PUs.
The Compensation Committee will consider the outcome of the 2014 advisory stockholder say-on-pay vote and disclose the nature and extent of such consideration in our 2015 proxy statement. We remain committed to continued engagement with our stockholders to solicit their viewpoints and discuss and demonstrate why we believe our executive compensation program properly aligns to our strategies and long-term operating and financial performance.
The Compensation Committee welcomes feedback regarding our executive compensation program. Stockholders may communicate with the Compensation Committee by writing to:
Compensation
Committee Chairman
c/o Corporate Secretary
Avery Dennison Corporation
207 Goode Avenue
Glendale, California 91203
2013 EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION PROGRAM
The Compensation Committee designs our incentive plans based on our mid- and long-term objectives to provide upside opportunity for exceeding performance targets and downside risk for missing performance targets. In addition, the program balances retention with reward for stockholder value creation, while also ensuring that the elements of the program, individually and in the aggregate, do not encourage excessive risk-taking.
42
The
key elements of our 2013 NEO compensation program are shown in the following table. Although the Compensation Committee is responsible for our executive
compensation program, its annual executive compensation decisions are reviewed and ratified by our independent directors.
|
||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Compensation Element (Form) |
|
Purpose |
|
Evaluation Criteria |
|
||||||
|
Base Salary (Cash) |
Provide fixed, monthly income for performing day-to-day responsibilities; relatively small percentage of total direct compensation | Eligible for annual merit increase, giving consideration to average U.S. employee merit increase; responsibilities of the position; individual experience and prior-year performance, including embodiment of leadership principles; company and business group financial results; internal equity; the competition for executive talent; and salary information from market surveys | |||||||||
|
Target AIP Award (Cash) |
Provide variable, cash-based incentive to reward for achievement of annual performance objectives with targets established to motivate our NEOs to achieve our annual financial goals and strategic objectives | Calculated using the following formula: Year-end Base Salary X Target AIP Opportunity (based on market survey data and consistent with total direct compensation positioning strategy) X Financial Modifier (based on corporate and/or business group performance against objectives determined at the beginning of the year) X Individual Modifier (based on achievement of individual objectives determined at the beginning of the year) |
|||||||||
|
Target LTI Award (50% PUs, 50% MSUs) |
Provide variable, equity-based incentive compensation designed to enhance the alignment with stockholder value creation; realized only if we deliver value creation by achieving predetermined performance objectives | LTI opportunity based on market survey data and consistent with total direct compensation positioning strategy | |||||||||
|
Perquisites |
Assist in attracting and retaining our NEOs | Modest perquisites consistent with market practices | |||||||||
|
Benefits |
Provide a benefit program that is competitive with other companies with which we compete for executive talent to support the recruiting and retention of our NEOs | NEOs are eligible for benefits made available to all our U.S. employees, including benefits under retirement, savings, health and welfare, and disability plans, and generally participate on the same basis as other employees; NEOs are also eligible for a few benefits only made available to certain employees |
43
Base Salary
In February 2013, the Compensation Committee approved the base salary increases shown in the following table for our NEOs. The amounts in the table do not conform to the amounts set forth in the Summary Compensation Table, which reflects the salary actually earned during 2013, because salary increases became effective as of April 1, 2013. Increases are generally driven by the NEO's performance, within the context of the average percentage merit increase provided to our U.S. employees and market salaries for positions with similar scope and responsibility.
2013 NEO BASE SALARY INCREASES
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Name |
|
Previous Base Salary |
|
% Incr. |
|
New Base Salary |
|
Rationale for Increase |
|
||||||||||||
|
Mr. Scarborough |
$ | 1,040,000 | 3.0% | $ | 1,071,000 | Consistent with average increase for U.S. employees | |||||||||||||||
|
Mr. Butier |
$ | 545,035 | 6.4% | $ | 580,027 | Gradual increase to market median since his promotion to CFO in 2010 | |||||||||||||||
|
Ms. Miller |
$ | 477,077 | 3.0% | $ | 491,390 | Consistent with average increase for U.S. employees | |||||||||||||||
|
Mr. Neville |
$ | 543,250 | 3.1% | $ | 560,036 | Consistent with average increase for U.S. employees | |||||||||||||||
|
Mr. Nolan |
$ | 573,355 | 8.1% | $ | 620,026 | Reward superior 2012 performance; reflect additional responsibilities and position salary around market median |
Incentive Compensation
We structure our incentive compensation to reward our NEOs based on our corporate and/or business group performance, as well as their individual contributions, to motivate them and align their interests with those of our other stockholders. The Compensation Committee allocates incentive compensation between cash and equity based on its assessment of our objectives and market practices.
Our incentive compensation for 2013 consisted of a target AIP award and LTI opportunity based on performance against goals established by the Compensation Committee in February 2013.
2013 AIP Awards
The 2013 AIP was designed to further our pay-for-performance strategy and give management additional incentive to create long-term stockholder value.
Financial Modifier
The following performance objectives for the 2013 AIP were established and weighted by the Compensation Committee, in consultation with Towers Watson. In setting the targets for these goals, the Compensation Committee aimed to (i) ensure consistency with our long-term financial goals; (ii) require continuing improvement in the trajectory of our businesses; and (iii) establish targets above the midpoint of our externally communicated guidance for 2013, adjusted for the classification of our DES business as discontinued operations. Consistent with the way we measure our financial performance and prior years, in evaluating our achievement of these performance objectives, the Compensation Committee has the discretion to exclude the impact, positive or negative, of extraordinary items such as currency translation; acquisitions and divestitures; restructuring and integration actions not included in our annual net income plan; changes in accounting principles, tax codes or related regulations and rulings; natural disasters, terrorism and war; costs related to the early extinguishment of debt; costs of litigation outside the normal course of business; and non-cash charges associated with the impairment of long-lived assets. Financial modifiers are capped at 200%.
44
in our businesses for the future and deliver strong stockholder returns through dividends and share repurchases, weighted 20%.
measures the business group's profit (revenues less the costs of doing business, depreciation, interest, taxes and other expenses), adjusted for tax-effected restructuring costs and other items, weighted 35%; and (iii) free cash flow, weighted 20%. The remaining 25% linked to corporate results is measured by adjusted EPS.
The following table shows the AIP financial modifiers for our NEOs. As shown, we exceeded the target level established for many of these performance objectives in 2013, delivering aggregate performance in excess of target for each of the Corporate AIP, RBIS AIP and Materials Group AIP. Our strong corporate and business group performance resulted in AIP financial modifiers of 137% for our corporate NEOs; 123% for Mr. Neville and 107% for Mr. Nolan.
45
|
Name |
|
Performance Measure |
|
Weighting |
|
Threshold Performance (50%) |
|
Target Performance (100%) |
|
Maximum Performance (200%) |
|
Actual Performance |
|
% of Target Achieved |
|
Weighted % of Target Achieved |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Mr. Scarborough Mr. Butier Ms. Miller |
Total Company Adjusted Sales Growth(1) |
20% | 0.7% | 2.8% | 7.9% | 4.6% | 134.6 | % | 26.9 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
Total Company Adjusted EPS(2) |
60% | $2.36 | $2.55 | $2.93 | $2.68 | 134.2 | % | 80.5 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
Total Company Free Cash Flow(3) |
20% | $261.0 mil. | $290.0 mil. | $377.0 mil. | $330.3 mil. | 145.8 | % | 29.2 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
Financial Modifier(7) |
137 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mr. Neville |
Total Company Adjusted EPS(2) |
25% | $2.36 | $2.55 | $2.93 | $2.68 | 134.2 | % | 33.6 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
RBIS Segment Adjusted Sales Growth(4) |
20% | 0.9% | 3.5% | 8.7% | 4.9% | 126.5 | % | 25.3 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
RBIS Segment Adjusted Net Income(4)(5) |
35% | $48.0 mil. | $56.7 mil. | $74.0 mil. | $55.0 mil. | 90.2 | % | 31.6 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
RBIS Segment Free Cash Flow(4) |
20% | $48.3 mil. | $53.6 mil. | $69.7 mil. | $63.6 mil. | 162.1 | % | 32.4 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
Financial Modifier |
123 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mr. Nolan |
Total Company Adjusted EPS(2) |
25% | $2.36 | $2.55 | $2.93 | $2.68 | 134.2 | % | 33.6 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
PSM Segment Adjusted Sales Growth(4) |
20% | 1.3% | 3.4% | 7.5% | 4.7% | 132.0 | % | 26.4 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
PSM Segment Adjusted Net Income(4)(5)(6) |
35% | $298.2 mil. | $311.2 mil. | $337.1 mil. | $301.5 mil. | 63.7 | % | 22.3 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
PSM Segment Free Cash Flow(4)(6) |
20% | $249.6 mil. | $277.3 mil. | $360.5 mil. | $298.8 mil. | 125.9 | % | 25.2 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
Financial Modifier |
107 | % |
46
Target AIP Opportunity
The target AIP opportunity for 2013 was 125% for Mr. Scarborough; 75% for Messrs. Butier, Neville and Nolan; and 60% for Ms. Miller. For 2013, the Compensation Committee increased the target AIP opportunity for our CFO and business group presidents to reflect their increased responsibilities and competitive market levels.
2013 NEO Individual Modifiers
Our NEOs are evaluated on their achievement of our financial and strategic goals as reflected in their individual performance plans for the year, with the Compensation Committee approving the CEO's goals for the year and the CEO approving the goals of the other NEOs. The NEOs' performance is assessed in February of the following year, measured against their goals and their demonstration of our leadership principles in achieving them, giving consideration to the totality of their performance rather than assigning specific weights to the applicable performance criteria. Individual modifiers are generally capped at 150%.
The Compensation Committee determines the individual modifier for our CEO based on its assessment of his performance. Our CEO recommends the individual modifiers for our other NEOs based on his assessment of their performance and the Compensation Committee considers our CEO's recommendations in approving the individual modifiers for our other NEOs.
For 2013, the Compensation Committee evaluated the performance of our NEOs and determined that they met or exceeded their respective performance objectives established at the beginning of the year, noting their following key achievements:
Based on the above assessment, the Compensation Committee determined the following individual modifiers for our NEOs.
2013 NEO INDIVIDUAL MODIFIERS
|
||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Name |
|
Individual Modifier |
|
||||
|
Mr. Scarborough | 120% | ||||||
|
Mr. Butier | 150% | ||||||
|
Ms. Miller | 120% | ||||||
|
Mr. Neville | 147% | ||||||
|
Mr. Nolan | 128% |
47
Our
NEOs received the AIP awards shown in the following table for 2013, based on their respective year-end
base salary, bonus opportunity, financial modifier and individual modifier:
2013 NEO AIP AWARDS
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Name |
|
2013 YE Base Salary |
|
Bonus Opportunity |
|
Target AIP Award |
|
Financial Modifier |
|
Individual Modifier |
|
Actual AIP Award |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mr. Scarborough | $ | 1,071,000 | 125 | % | $ | 1,338,750 | 137 | % | 120 | % | $ | 2,200,000 | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mr. Butier | $ | 580,027 | 75 | % | $ | 435,020 | 137 | % | 150 | % | $ | 893,966 | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Ms. Miller | $ | 491,390 | 60 | % | $ | 294,834 | 137 | % | 120 | % | $ | 484,707 | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mr. Neville | $ | 560,036 | 75 | % | $ | 420,027 | 123 | % | 147 | % | $ | 758,989 | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mr. Nolan | $ | 620,026 | 75 | % | $ | 465,020 | 107 | % | 128 | % | $ | 636,612 |
2013 LTI Awards
LTI awards are granted every year on the fourth Thursday of February, the day our Board has a regularly-scheduled meeting. The Compensation Committee does not offset the loss or gain of prior year grants in determining current year grants as doing so would compromise the intended risk/reward nature of these incentives.
Target LTI Opportunity
For 2013, the target opportunity was 420% for our CEO, 200% for Messrs. Butier, Neville and Nolan and 180% for Ms. Miller, in each case of 2012 year-end base salary. The Compensation Committee increased the target LTI opportunity for our CFO and business group Presidents in 2013 to reflect their increased responsibilities and competitive market levels. The target 2013 LTI award opportunity represented approximately 78% and 74%, respectively, of our CEO's, and other NEOs' average, total incentive compensation.
LTI Award Vehicles
In 2013, after discussions with Towers Watson, the Compensation Committee awarded the following LTI awards to our NEOs:
48
2013-2015 MTIP PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES
|
||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Name |
|
Performance Measure |
|
Weighting |
|
||||||
|
Mr. Scarborough |
|||||||||||
|
Mr. Butier |
Total Company Cumulative EVA | 50% | |||||||||
|
Ms. Miller |
Relative TSR | 50% | |||||||||
|
Mr. Neville | RBIS Segment Cumulative EVA | 75% | |||||||||
|
Relative TSR | 25% | ||||||||||
|
Mr. Nolan | PSM Segment Cumulative EVA | 75% | |||||||||
|
Relative TSR | 25% |
The Compensation Committee believes that these incentives appropriately align executive compensation with the long-term interests of our stockholders because appreciation of our stock price and economic profit directly impacts the number of shares that may be payable upon the vesting of PUs.
2013 NEO LTI Awards
Our NEOs received the 2013 LTI awards shown in the following table. The number of awards granted was approved by the Compensation Committee based on the NEO's respective year-end base salary and target LTI opportunity, with the number of PUs based on a grant date fair value equal to the average closing price for shares of our common stock during the first ten trading days of February 2013 and the number of MSUs based on a grant date fair value determined by a preliminary Monte-Carlo simulation using the first ten trading days of February 2013. As a result of the methodology for determining grant date fair value and timing, total LTI values awarded exceeded target LTI values.
* The following 51 companies comprised the peer group for purposes of the 2013-2015 MTIP: A. Schulman, Inc.; AEP Industries Inc.; Albermarle Corporation; AptarGroup, Inc.; Ashland Inc.; Ball Corporation; Bemis Company, Inc.; Berry Plastics Group, Inc.; Boise Inc.; Celanese Corporation; Chemtura Corporation; Clearwater Paper Corporation; Crown Holdings Inc.; Cytec Industries Inc.; Eastman Chemical Co; Ecolab Inc.; Ferro Corp.; FMC Corp; Graphic Packaging Holding Company; Greif Inc.; HB Fuller Co.; Huntsman Corporation; International Flavors & Fragrances Inc.; KapStone Paper and Packaging Corporation; Kraton Performance Polymers Inc.; MeadWestvaco Corporation;
Minerals Technologies Inc.; NewMarket Corporation; Olin Corp.; OM Group Inc.; OMNOVA Solutions Inc.; Owens-Illinois Inc.; Packaging Corp. of America; PH Glatfelter Co.; PolyOne Corporation; PPG Industries Inc.; Rock-Tenn Co.; Rockwood Holdings Inc.; RPM International Inc.; Sealed Air Corporation; Sensient Technologies Corporation; Sigma-Aldrich Corporation; Silgan Holdings Inc.; Sonoco Products Co.; Stepan Company; The Sherwin-Williams Company; The Valspar Corporation; Valhi Inc.; Verso Paper Corp.; W.R. Grace & Co.; and Wausau Paper Corp.
49
2013 NEO LTI AWARDS
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Name
|
|
2012 YE Base Salary |
|
Target LTI Opportunity |
|
Target LTI Value |
|
Adjustment Factor(1) |
|
PUs (#) |
|
PUs ($) |
|
MSUs (#) |
|
MSUs ($) |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mr. Scarborough |
$ | 1,040,000 | 420 | % | $ | 4,368,000 | | 57,488 | $ | 2,604,425 | 47,120 | $ | 2,422,086 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mr. Butier |
$ | 545,035 | 200 | % | $ | 1,090,070 | | 13,929 | $ | 631,044 | 11,417 | $ | 586,865 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Ms. Miller |
$ | 477,077 | 180 | % | $ | 858,739 | 23 | % | 10,973 | $ | 497,126 | 13,183 | $ | 677,642 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mr. Neville |
$ | 543,250 | 200 | % | $ | 1,086,500 | |