This is a complex issue and I'm not sure that a direct link is healthy. If macro-economic pressures push down profits (e.g. oil price drops) then everyone suffers. A good CEO would limit the hit.
So should a CEO who has sustained a 5% hit compared a sector average of 20% have his pay cut? Similarly with rises.
I would argue that the CEO in the above example would have put the company in a very good position to take advantage of an economic turn-around and should be rewarded.
That would then raise the question of whether the reward should be immediate, considering that the company needs the funds to combat the downturn. Any Keynesians out there?
