Are they redundant??

This subject line is very catchy and I actually stole this from one of my college seniors effective presentation that I could still remember about. But that is NOT what I am going to jot down today.

I read this morning about Indian Government's recent noises about the "Vulgar" salaries paid to Indian corporate bigwigs. In fact, as per a leading business daily, top corporate salaries grew by an average rate of 18% during FY09. Remember this was at a time when the net profit of their companies fell on an average by 14%. Some believe that salaries moderate with a lag effect and pay hikes will slow down in FY10. There was this another leading business daily which mentioned the corporate bigwigs salary is 12,500 times better than the average indian salary. While I did NOT get the "average Indian Salary", 12500 times of X looks to be a bigger than bigger amount that I could imagine. It is true that Corporate pay remains a contentious issue around the world. It especially attracts attention when the broader economy isn’t doing well or when corporate scandals come to light.

I remember American president Mr.Obama, chided some of the bankers which got life and revived with the borrowed tax payer's money, paid 40% bonus to their top 1000 salesmen and a grand party in Hawaii-kawaii beach recently.

In my honest opinion, it is okay and necessary for the companies to pay as part of talent retaining power with this vitamin "M". However, should that NOT be directly proportional to the corporate performance overall. I agree with some of the exceptions of growing the talents even in the sinking boat.

But should the performance related compensation to be embraced as part of good corporate governance practices? Write to me if you have a opinion about it!!