ABSTRACT
Chapter 12 builds on the discussion of the author’s conclusions set out in Chapter 11. It focuses specifically on the author’s (1) research objectives in terms respectively of academic, (2) UK practice and (3) findings in respect of both of these. As regards (1), the author discusses how his research programme aims to complement the qualitative studies of Bender, Conyon, Adamson, Bender and Franco-Santos, and de Gannes, and ‘fill in some gaps’ in the literature. Similar considerations apply regarding UK practice contribution, stressing the potential benefits – in line with Edmans and Gosling – of a combined academic/practice approach in examining the professional standards of executive remuneration consultants (and their in-house counterparts). In terms of the author’s findings, he considers that – with the exception of his proposals that RCG should consider making certain changes regarding the ambit of its activities/its VCC – the hypothesis of this book is proven (i.e., that any changes to the present regulatory regime applicable to executive remuneration consultants are unwarranted). In his view, the burden of justifying any proposed further changes lies on those making these.
