UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
SCHEDULE 14A
Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934
☑ Filed by the Registrant ☐ Filed by a Party other than the Registrant
Check the appropriate box: | ||
☐ |
Preliminary Proxy Statement | |
☐ |
CONFIDENTIAL, FOR USE OF THE COMMISSION ONLY (AS PERMITTED BY RULE 14a-6(e)(2)) | |
☑ |
Definitive Proxy Statement | |
☐ |
Definitive Additional Materials | |
☐ |
Soliciting Material Pursuant to ss.240.14a-12 |
GENERAL MOTORS COMPANY
(Name of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter)
(Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if other than the Registrant)
Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box): | ||
☑ |
No fee required. | |
☐ |
Fee computed on table below per Exchange Act Rules 14a-6(i)(14) 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:
| ||
☐ |
Fee paid previously with preliminary materials. | |
☐ |
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:
|
i |
|
Notice of 2019 Annual Meeting of Shareholders
ii |
Important Information About GMs Online Annual Meeting
GMs 2019 Annual Meeting will be conducted online only, via live video webcast. If you were a holder of record of GM common stock at the close of business on April 8, 2019, you are entitled to participate in the annual meeting on June 4, 2019. Below are some frequently asked questions regarding the new online format for our Annual Meeting.
Patricia F. Russo Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee Chair |
Why did the Board decide to adopt an online format for the 2019 Annual Meeting?
Your Board believes the online format will enhance attendance by providing convenient meeting access to all of our shareholders, regardless of where they live not just those shareholders who have the time and means to travel to an in-person meeting. Over the past five years, attendance at our Annual Meeting has averaged less then 35 shareholders. This year, even shareholders without an internet connection or a computer will be able to listen to the meeting by calling a toll-free telephone number. In addition, we believe the online format will provide a better opportunity for shareholders to communicate with your Board by submitting questions before and during the meeting through the online portal and by calling in live via telephone during the meeting. Finally, the online meeting format will also eliminate many of the costs associated with holding a physical meeting, which is a smart choice for GM and its shareholders. We look forward to increasing participation this year while lowering operating costs for the Company.
|
u How can I view and participate in the Annual Meeting? To participate, visit gm.onlineshareholdermeeting.com and login with your 16-digit control number included in your proxy materials.
u When can I join the Annual Meeting online? You may begin to log into the meeting platform beginning at 7:45 a.m. Eastern Time on June 4, 2019. The meeting will begin promptly at 8:00 a.m. Eastern Time on June 4, 2019.
u How can I ask questions and vote? We encourage you to submit your questions and vote in advance by visiting proxyvote.com. Shareholders will also be permitted to ask questions by telephone during the meeting (subject to time restrictions). Shareholders may also vote and submit questions online in advance of and during the meeting. To participate in the meeting webcast visit gm.onlineshareholdermeeting.com.
|
COMMITMENT TO TRANSPARENCY
If there are questions pertinent to meeting matters that cannot be answered during the Annual Meeting due to time constraints, management will post answers to a representative set of such questions at investor.gm.com/shareholder. The questions and answers will be available as soon as practicable after the meeting and will remain available until GMs 2020 Proxy Statement is filed.
|
||||||
u What if I lost my 16-digit control number? You will be able to login as a guest. To view the meeting webcast visit gm.onlineshareholdermeeting.com and register as a guest. You will not be able to vote your shares or submit questions during the meeting.
u What if I dont have internet access? Please call (877) 328-2502 (toll free) or (412) 317-5419 (international) to listen to the meeting proceedings. You will not be able to vote your shares during the meeting.
u What if I experience technical difficulties? Please call (800) 586-1548 (U.S.) or (303) 562-9288 (International) for assistance.
u Where can I find additional information? For additional information about how to attend the Annual Meeting, please see General Information About the Annual Meeting on page 78.
u What if I have additional questions? You may contact GM Shareholder Relations at shareholder.relations@gm.com or (313) 667-1432 for assistance.
|
iii |
|
Cautionary Note on Forward-Looking Statements: This Proxy Statement contains forward-looking statements regarding GMs current expectations within the meaning of the applicable securities laws and regulations. These statements are subject to a variety of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from expectations. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, the risks detailed in GMs filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including the Risk Factors section of GMs Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018. We assume no obligation to update any of these forward-looking statements.
|
iv |
This summary highlights information contained elsewhere in this Proxy Statement. It does not contain all the information that you should consider. Please read the entire Proxy Statement carefully before voting.
Agenda and Voting Recommendations
Proposal |
Board Vote Recommendation | Page Reference | ||||
BOARD PROPOSALS:
|
||||||
Item No. 1 Election of Directors
|
FOR
|
|
8
|
| ||
Item
No. 2 Approval of, on an Advisory
Basis,
|
FOR | 69 | ||||
Item
No. 3 Ratification of the Selection
of
|
FOR | 70 | ||||
SHAREHOLDER PROPOSALS:
|
||||||
Item No. 4 Independent Board Chairman
|
AGAINST
|
|
73
|
| ||
Item No. 5 Report on Lobbying Communications and Activities
|
AGAINST
|
|
76
|
|
GM HAS THE RIGHT BOARD AT THE RIGHT TIMEThe Board and management are overseeing a period of strategic and cultural transformation at GM amidst a period of unprecedented change in the automotive and mobility industries. Ensuring the Board is composed of directors who bring diverse viewpoints and perspectives, possess a variety of skills, professional experience, and backgrounds, and effectively represent the long-term interests of shareholders is a top priority of your Board and the Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee (the Governance Committee). Our membership criteria and director recruitment procedures align the Boards capabilities with the execution of the Companys business strategy. As part of our comprehensive refreshment and recruitment process, keeping in mind our commitment to diversity, we added six new directors in the past four years, including since our last annual meeting Ms. Miscik, Vice Chairman and Chief Executive Officer ("CEO") of Kissinger Associates, Inc., and Mr. Bush, Chairman of Northrop Grumman Corporation. These new directors complement our current directors mix of skills by bringing to the Board key leadership, technology, and manufacturing expertise as well as experience navigating geopolitical and macroeconomic risks. For a detailed discussion of why GM has the right Board at the right time, please see Item No. 1Election of Directors on page ["].
Composition of Board Nominees
AGE OF DIRECTORS GENDER DIRECTOR TENURE DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE
1 |
PROXY STATEMENT SUMMARY
The following table provides summary information about each director nominee. For more detailed information about our directors, please see Item No. 1Election of DirectorsYour Boards Nominees for Director on page 11.
Name | Age | Director Since |
Principal Occupation | Independent | Committee Memberships | |||||
Mary T. Barra |
57 | 2014 |
Chairman & |
Executive Chair | ||||||
Theodore M. Solso |
72 | 2012 |
Independent Lead Director, |
Executive | ||||||
Wesley G. Bush |
58 | 2019 |
Chairman, Northrop
Grumman |
Executive Compensation Finance | ||||||
Linda R. Gooden |
66 | 2015 |
Retired Executive Vice
President, |
Audit Cybersecurity Chair Executive Risk | ||||||
Joseph Jimenez |
59 | 2015 |
Retired Chief Executive
Officer, |
Executive Compensation Governance | ||||||
Jane L. Mendillo |
60 | 2016 |
Retired President & |
Finance Audit | ||||||
Judith A. Miscik |
60 | 2018 |
Chief Executive Officer & |
Risk Audit | ||||||
Patricia F. Russo |
66 | 2009 | Chairman, Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company |
Executive Executive Compensation Finance Governance Chair | ||||||
Thomas M. Schoewe |
66 | 2011 | Retired Executive Vice President & Chief Financial Officer, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. |
Audit Chair Cybersecurity Executive Finance Risk | ||||||
Carol M. Stephenson |
68 | 2009 |
Retired Dean, Ivey Business |
Executive Executive Compensation Chair Governance | ||||||
Devin N. Wenig |
52 | 2018 |
President & Chief Executive Officer, eBay Inc. |
Risk
|
2 |
|
PROXY STATEMENT SUMMARY
We recognize that strong corporate governance contributes to long-term shareholder value. We are committed to sound governance practices, including those described below.
Independence Ten out of eleven directors are independent Strong Independent Lead Director with clearly delineated duties All standing Board Committees other than the Executive Committee composed entirely of independent directors Regular executive sessions of independent directors Board and Committees may hire outside advisors independently of management Best Practices CEO and executive leadership succession planning Active shareholder engagement; Director-Shareholder Engagement Policy Diverse Board in terms of gender, ethnicity, and specific skills and qualifications Strategy and risk oversight by full Board and Committees (see page ["] for the Risk Committees 2019 risk areas of focus) Board oversight of ESG issues and priorities, including regular ESG updates to Governance Committee Robust stock ownership guidelines for executive officers and non-employee directors Overboarding limits Orientation program for new directors and continuing education for all directors Accountability Annual election of all directors Annual election of Chair, and if CEO, Independent Lead Director by non-employee directors Majority voting with director resignation policy (plurality voting in contested elections) Annual Board and Committee self-evaluations Annual evaluation of CEO (including compensation) by independent directors Clawback policy that applies to our short-and long-term incentive plans Shareholder Rights Proxy access Shareholder right to call special meetings No poison pill or dual-class shares One-share, one-vote standard SPOTLIGHT: POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS AND LOBBYING OVERSIGHT Our Board has adopted a U.S. Corporate Political Contributions and Expenditures Policy (Political Contributions Policy), which, together with other policies and procedures of the Company, guides GMs approach to political contributions and lobbying. In 2018, we revised our Governance Committee charter to enhance oversight of GMs lobbying efforts. Our Political Contributions Policy and Voluntary Report on Political Contributions are available on our website investor.gm.com/resources. GMs robust disclosure is recognized as being in the First Tier of top performers by the CPA-Zicklin Index. For more information regarding the Boards position on this issue, see page ["]. environmental, social, and governance ("ESG") please
3 |
PROXY STATEMENT SUMMARY
Full-Year 2018 Results Overview
GAAP vs. 2017 Non-GAAP vs. 2017 Net Revenue $147.0 B + 1.0 % EBIT-adj. Margin 8.0% (0.8) pts Income $8.1 B + 2,347 % EBIT-adj. $11.8 B (8.3) % EPS-Diluted $5.58 + 2,436% EPS-Diluted-adj. $6.54 (1.2) % Auto Operating Cash Flow $11.7 B $(2.6) B
Note: The financial information above and included in this Proxy Statement relates to our continuing operations and not our discontinued operations, which consist of the Opel and Vauxhall businesses and certain other assets in Europe and the European financing subsidiaries and branches that were sold in 2017. EBIT-adjusted, EBIT-adjusted margin and EPS-diluted-adjusted are non-GAAP financial measures. Appendix A includes a reconciliation of these non-GAAP financial measures to their most directly comparable measures reported under generally accepted accounting principles in the United States. |
Transformation Takes Shape in 2018
u GM reported strong full-year 2018 earnings driven by strong pricing, surging crossover sales, successful execution of the Companys light-duty full-size truck launch, growth of GM Financial earnings, and disciplined cost control.
u In November 2018, the Company announced steps to align its product portfolio and capacity in North America with changed consumer preferences and transform its workforce to position the Company for long-term success.
u GM introduced the first production-ready autonomous vehicle built to operate safely with no driver or manual controls. GM Cruise has secured commitments of more than $5 billion from external investors who are attracted to Cruises integrated approach to software and hardware development.
u GM Financial had record full-year earnings and revenue performance in 2018.
u In the U.S., GM delivered nearly 3 million vehicles, helped by crossover sales that topped 1 million for the year. Average transaction prices (ATPs) were a record of nearly $36,000, while incentives as a percent of ATPs fell 0.3% year over year.
|
COMPARISON OF CUMULATIVE TOTAL RETURN
Cumulative Value of $100 Investment Through December 31, 2018
GM delivered another strong year of earnings in a highly volatile environment in 2018. We will continue to make bold decisions to lead the transformation of this industry and drive significant shareholder value.
Mary Barra, Chairman & CEO |
4 |
|
PROXY STATEMENT SUMMARY
Our Capital Allocation Framework
Your Board takes its role as the steward of your capital seriously. As a result, your Board has worked closely with management to establish a disciplined and transparent Capital Allocation Framework designed to drive long-term shareholder value. The Framework consists of the following three pillars:
Reinvest to Drive Growth Maintain Investment Grade Balance Sheet Return Available Cash to Shareholders (Target Opportunities with 20%+ ROIC-adj.) ($18 billion average target cash balance) (Through dividends and share repurchases)
Capital Allocation Oversight: Strategic Transformation
Your Board, together with its Finance and Audit Committees, oversees GMs critical capital allocation decisions, including establishing and maintaining the dividend rate, pursuing strategic investments, approving medium- and long-term capital plans, and maintaining GMs overall liquidity. In November 2018, GM announced proactive steps to improve its overall business performance by driving cost efficiencies, lowering capital expenditures, and realigning manufacturing capacity with changed consumer preferences. These actions not only are expected to result in significantly improved adjusted automotive free cash flow by the end of 2020, but also will enable GM to allocate more resources to the future of mobility over the next two years. Your Board worked with management to ensure that this strategic transformation was undertaken in accordance with our Capital Allocation Framework, including by securing a $3 billion revolving credit facility to maintain liquidity and financial flexibility while funding immediate transformation costs. Your Board believes that over the long term, these bold decisions will enable GM to generate additional cash to fund reinvestment in higher-return growth opportunities, maintain a healthy balance sheet, and return additional cash to shareholders.
Reinvesting to Drive Growth and Returning Available Cash to Shareholders
Since 2011, GM has returned more than $25 billion to shareholders through dividends and share repurchases, while continuing to make investments in higher-return opportunities that have enhanced our ability to lead in the future of mobility and strengthened our core business. Key investments include GMs 2016 decisions to invest in the ride-sharing company Lyft, Inc., (Lyft) and acquire Cruise Automation, Inc. The latter is now our subsidiary tasked with the development and commercialization of our AV technology. These strategic investments have been validated as our investment in Lyft has appreciated and Cruise has attracted $5 billion in external capital commitments.
5 |
PROXY STATEMENT SUMMARY
Executive Compensation Highlights
We provide highlights of our compensation program below. Please review our Compensation Discussion and Analysis beginning on page 38 and the accompanying compensation tables beginning on page 58 of this Proxy Statement for a complete discussion of our compensation program.
COMPENSATION PROGRAM EVOLUTION THROUGH 2018Since 2014, we have taken significant action to simplify and align our compensation programs with shareholders interests by focusing our leaders on the key areas that both drive the business forward and align to the short-term and long-term interests of our shareholders.For short-term incentive compensation, we maintained focus on key financial measures and individual performance results for each NEO.For the long-term incentive compensation, we remained consistent with granting Stock Options and Performance Share Units for each NEO. Our Stock Options focus leaders on absolute stock price appreciation and PSUs measure our performance against other OEMs for ROIC-adjusted and TSR.For an in-depth discussion of how our compensation programs have evolved, including in response to active shareholder engagement, see Executive CompensationCompensation OverviewShareholder Engagement Initiatives on page ["] (PSUs) original equipment manufacturers Return on Invested Capital-adjusted Total Shareholders Return
Performance-Based Compensation Structure
CEO 2018 COMPENSATION STRUCTURE90% At-Risk Pay 10% Base 31% Short-Term Cash 21% STIP 69% Long-Term Equity Long-Term Equity PSU 75% Stock Options 25%AVERAGE NEO 2018 COMPENSATION STRUCTURE82% At-risk Pay 18% Base 41% Short-Term Cash 23% STIP 59% Long-Term Equity Long-Term Equity PSU 75% Stock Options 25%
2018 Summary Compensation Snapshot
Name | Salary ($) |
Bonus ($) |
Stock Awards ($) |
Option Awards ($) |
Nonequity Incentive Plan Compensation ($) |
Change in Pension Value and NQ Deferred Compensation Earnings ($) |
All Other Compensation ($) |
Total ($) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mary T. Barra |
|
2,100,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
11,081,760 |
|
|
3,425,006 |
|
|
4,452,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
811,684 |
|
|
21,870,450 |
| ||||||||
Dhivya Suryadevara |
|
668,100 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,446,635 |
|
|
796,263 |
|
|
1,192,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
402,592 |
|
|
5,506,090 |
| ||||||||
Daniel Ammann |
|
1,450,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,993,891 |
|
|
1,234,383 |
|
|
1,921,300 |
|
|
|
|
|
372,307 |
|
|
8,971,881 |
| ||||||||
Mark L. Reuss |
|
1,200,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,276,007 |
|
|
1,012,504 |
|
|
1,590,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
277,579 |
|
|
7,356,090 |
| ||||||||
Alan S. Batey |
|
1,025,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,178,894 |
|
|
673,429 |
|
|
1,230,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
233,197 |
|
|
5,340,520 |
| ||||||||
Charles K. Stevens, III |
|
1,100,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,255,775 |
|
|
1,006,252 |
|
|
1,320,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
257,153 |
|
|
6,939,180 |
|
Note: For additional information on the table above, please see the Summary Compensation Table in Executive Compensation on page 58.
6 |
|
PROXY STATEMENT SUMMARY
Environmental and Sustainability Performance
PROGRESS TOWARD OUR VISIONGM continues to work toward its vision of Zero Crashes. Zero Emissions. Zero Congestion. Were doing so through the integration of sustainability into every part of our business all under the purview of our Board of Directors Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee whose members review progress at every Board meeting. 3.5XOur AVs drove 3.5 times more miles in 2018 than in 2017. That underscores the tremendous progress were making toward the commercial introduction of AVs a key part of our Zero Crashes vision. We also secured commitments for more than $5 billion of external investment in our AV subsidiary, Cruise Automation, demonstrating the level of confidence in our vision.MEMBER OF Dow Jones Sustainability Indices In Collaboration with RobecoSAM#1 GM ranks first on Equileaps 2018 Gender Equality in the Workplace. Among the reasons: We are one of just two global businesses that has pay equality in top, middle and bottom bands as well as no overall gender pay gap across the company.2 We introduced two new EVs in China, the worlds largest new energy vehicle market, this year; were committed to 20 new EVs by 2023. In the U.S., Cadillac will be our lead brand for electrification technologies, and 75% of our engineering force will be focused on clean energy technologies.1.4 MillionIn 2018, Maven electric drives saved 1.4 million gallons of gas. Our car-sharing platform is not only providing new approaches to personal mobility, but also helping to promote EVs by placing them in high-mileage, shared-use fleets.20%In 2018, 20% of our global electricity needs were met by renewable energy well on the way to our commitment of 100% by 2050.XX,000We continued to hire more than XX STEM positions in 2018 that equates to approximately one every 26 minutes, emphasizing our focus on attracting and retaining the top talent in the fields of connectivity, autonomous and artificial intelligence technologies. 43%Research by the The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has found that GM vehicles with autobrake and forward collision warning were involved in 43% fewer crashes compared to the same vehicles without those features.1stWe are the first automotive company to commit to sourcing sustainable natural rubber for tires in order to mitigate deforestation and its effects on climate change. 20% Weve reduced our manufacturing carbon intensity since 2010 three years ahead of goal. the by 20%
7 |
ITEM NO. 1 ELECTION OF DIRECTORS
SUMMARYAt the 2019 Annual Meeting, 11 directors will be elected. The Governance Committee evaluated the nominees in accordance with the Committees charter and our Corporate Governance Guidelines and submitted the nominees to the full Board for approval. Other than Judith A. Miscik and Wesley G. Bush, all of the nominees were elected to the Board at the 2018 Annual Meeting. Ms. Miscik was elected to the Board effective October 8, 2018, and Mr. Bushs was elected to the Board effective February 11, 2019.
Overview of Your Board Nominees
Mary T. Barra Age: 57 Direct Since: 2014Theodore M. Solso Age: 72 Independent Director Since: 2012 Wesley G. Bush Age: 58 Independent Director Since: 2019 Joseph Jimenez Age: 59 Independent Director since: 2015 Thomas M. Schoewe Age: 66 Independent Director Since: 2011 Devin N. Wenig Age: 52 Independent Director Since: 2018Carol M. Stephenson Age: 68 Independent Director Since: 2009 Patricia F. Russo Age: 66 Independent Director Since: 2009 Judith A. Miscik Age: 61 Independent Director Since: 2018 Jane L Mendillo Age: 60 Independent Director Since: 2016Linda R. Gooden Age : 66 Independent Director Since: 2015 11 NOMINEES
8 |
|
ITEM NO. 1 ELECTION OF DIRECTORS
GM HAS THE RIGHT BOARD AT THE RIGHT TIMEGM's long-term strategy is to strengthen its core business by deploying capital to higher-return opportunities and developing new technologies like EVs and AVs that will unlock our vision of Zero Crashes, Zero Emissions, and Zero Congestion while also driving cost efficiencies. Your Board believes that its nominees collectively possess the right mix of skills, qualifications, and experiences to protect shareholder interests and independently oversee management as it accelerates GMs strategic and cultural transformation, capitalizes on key opportunities, and addresses critical risks.Transforming Our Core Business: In November 2018, we announced plans to accelerate GM's transformation for the future, building on the comprehensive strategy the Company laid out in 2015 to strengthen its core business, capitalize on the future of personal mobility, and drive significant cost efficiencies. Management remains focused on strengthening GM's core business by delivering winning vehicles, building profitable adjacent businesses, making tough, strategic decisions, and continuing to target 10% core margins. Your Board has directors with established track records for strategic planning and successful business restructurings as CEOs and senior leaders of large, global public companies.Leading in the Future of Personal Mobility: With our vision of Zero Crashes, Zero Emissions, and Zero Congestion, GM is transforming the future of personal mobility through investments in electrification, AV, connectivity, and ridesharing. GM's recent transformation actions are designed to provide the Company with the financial flexibility to invest in the future. Your Board has directors with extensive technology expertise gained from leading and serving in senior leadership roles at large technology companies.Overseeing a Complex, Global Manufacturing Company: As a large, complex manufacturing company with operations around the globe, GM faces a variety of critical challenges from managing our global supply chain, addressing international trade issues, and controlling raw material costs to maintaining strong relationships with our international workforce. To help management tackle these challenges, your Board has directors with extensive experience leading large, global organizations as CEOs and senior leaders. In 2018 and 2019, your Board added new directors with extensive manufacturing, geopolitical, and risk management expertise.Performance Throughout the Business Cycle: The automotive industry is cyclical. As our recent transformation actions demonstrate, we are serious about ensuring that GM is well-prepared to perform throughout the automotive business cycle. GM has taken decisive actions to maintain a strong balance sheet and consistently deploy its capital to the highest-return opportunities. Your Board has directors with deep finance and capital markets expertise to oversee management's capital allocation strategy and effectively balance long-term investment with return of value to shareholders in the near term.Navigating a Heavily Regulated Industry: As an automotive manufacturing company, GM must navigate a complex regulatory landscape with overlapping and sometimes conflicting federal, state, and international emissions, environmental, and safety regulations. In addition, as a leader in AV development, GM is working with regulators to develop new rules for AVs, a technology that did not exist just a few years ago. Your Board has directors with experience leading companies in highly regulated industries, as well as directors with public policy expertise.Fostering Deep Customer Relationships: In addition to being a global manufacturing company, GM is at its core a consumer products company. One of our key priorities is to put the customer at the center of everything we do. To support this priority, your Board has directors with marketing expertise and experience leading consumer products companies to help management grow GM brands and drive customer loyalty.Your Board is a strategic asset for GM and is driving effective oversight and execution of GM 's strategic plan and holding management accountable.
9 |
ITEM NO. 1 ELECTION OF DIRECTORS
Diversity of Skills, Qualifications, and Experience
Your Board nominees offer a diverse range of skills and experience in relevant areas.
SKILL/ QUALIFICATION
|
BARRA
|
SOLSO
|
BUSH
|
GOODEN
|
JIMENEZ
|
MENDILLO
|
MISCIK
|
RUSSO
|
SCHOEWE
|
STEPHENSON
|
WENIG
| |||||||||||
● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||||||
|
● | ● | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | |||||||||||||||
|
● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||||||||
|
● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | |||||||||||
|
● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | |||||||||||
|
● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||||||
|
● | ● | ● | |||||||||||||||||||
|
● | ● | ● | ● | ● | |||||||||||||||||
|
● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● |
Board Membership Criteria, Refreshment, and Succession Planning
The selection of qualified directors is fundamental to the Boards successful oversight of GMs strategy and enterprise risks. Ensuring your Board is composed of directors who bring diverse viewpoints and perspectives, possess a variety of skills, professional experiences, and backgrounds, and effectively represent the long-term interests of shareholders is critical to your Board and the Governance Committee. The priorities for recruiting new directors are continually evolving based on the Companys strategic needs and the skills composition of your Board at any particular time. These dynamic priorities ensure the Board remains a strategic asset capable of overseeing and helping management address the risks, trends, and opportunities that GM will face in the future.
In evaluating potential director candidates, the Governance Committee considers, among other factors, the criteria shown above in the skills and qualifications matrix for current directors and any additional characteristics that it believes one or more directors should possess based on an assessment of the needs of the Board at that time. In every case, director candidates must be able to contribute significantly to your Boards discussion and decision-making on the broad array of complex issues facing GM. The Governance Committee also engages a reputable, qualified search firm that uses our skills matrix to inform the search and help identify and evaluate potential candidates.
SPOTLIGHT: RECENT BOARD SUCCESSION PLANNINGOver the past several years, your Board has worked hard to develop a succession plan that will serve the Company and its shareholders in preparation for the departures of Admiral Mullen and Mr. Mulva, who will not be standing for reelection at the Annual Meeting. Your Board consciously endeavored to replace departing directors with directors having comparable or additional skill sets. In addition, your Board also has decided to waive the retirement age for Tim Solso for one-year because we believe the new members of the Board and our shareholders will benefit from his continued leadership during this period of transformation. We also plan to refresh your Boards committee assignments in May 2019. For additional information, please see pages 25 to 27.
10 |
|
ITEM NO. 1 ELECTION OF DIRECTORS
u | Board Diversity |
The Governance Committee seeks individuals with a broad range of business experience and varied backgrounds. Although GM does not have a formal policy governing diversity among directors, your Board strives to identify candidates with diverse backgrounds. We recognize the value of overall diversity and consider members and candidates opinions, perspectives, personal and professional experiences, and backgrounds, including gender, race, ethnicity, and country of origin. We believe that the judgment and perspectives offered by a diverse board of directors improves the quality of decision making and enhances the Companys business performance. We also believe such diversity can help the Board respond more effectively to the needs of customers, shareholders, employees, suppliers, and other stakeholders.
u | Candidate Recommendations |
The Governance Committee will consider persons recommended by shareholders for election to the Board. The Governance Committee will review the qualifications and experience of each recommended candidate using the same criteria for candidates proposed by Board members and communicate its decision to the candidate or the person who made the recommendation.
TO RECOMMEND AN INDIVIDUAL FOR BOARD MEMBERSHIP, WRITE TO:GMs Corporate Secretary, at General Motors Company, Mail Code 482-C24-A68, 300 Renaissance Center, Detroit, Michigan 48265, or by e-mail to shareholder.relations@gm.com.
u | Director Recruitment Process |
1 Candidate Recommendations From search firms, directors, management, and shareholders 2 Governance Committee Considers detailed skills matrix and the current and future needs of the Board Screens qualifications and considers diversity Reviews independence and potential conflicts Interviews potential directors Recommends nominees to the Board 3 Board of Directors Evaluates candidates, analyzes independence and other issues, and selects nominees 4 Shareholders Vote on nominees at Annual Meeting NEW DIRECTORS 6 added in the past four years, bringing fresh perspectives to the Board Joseph Jimenez, Retired CEO, Novartis AG Linda Gooden, Retired Executive VP, Lockheed Martin Jane Mendillo, Retired President & CEO, Harvard Management Devin Wenig, President & CEO, eBay Jami Miscik, Vice Chairman & CEO, Kissinger Associates Wes Bush, Chairman, Northrop Grumman
Your Boards Nominees for Director
Set forth below is important information about our director nominees. We believe each of your Boards nominees is highly qualified with unique experiences that are particularly beneficial to GM.
The Board of Directors recommends a vote FOR each of the nominees below.
11 |
ITEM NO. 1 ELECTION OF DIRECTORS
Mary T. Barra | Theodore M. Solso | |
Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, General Motors Company |
Independent Lead Director, General Motors Company, and Retired Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, | |
57 years old | 72 years old | |
Director since: 2014 | Director since: 2012 | |
Committees
Executive (Chair)
Current Public Company Directorships
The Walt Disney Company
Prior Public Company Directorships
General Dynamics Corporation (2011 to 2017)
Prior Experience Ms. Barra has served as Chairman of GMs Board of Directors since January 2016 and Chief Executive Officer of GM since January 2014. Prior to that time, she served as Executive Vice President, Global Product Development, Purchasing and Supply Chain from 2013 to 2014; Senior Vice President, Global Product Development from 2011 to 2013; Vice President, Global Human Resources from 2009 to 2011; and Vice President, Global Manufacturing Engineering from 2008 to 2009. Ms. Barra began her career at GM in 1980.
Reasons for Nomination u Extensive senior leadership experience as the CEO of GM and in other key leadership positions at the Company, including experience in operational excellence, strategic planning, purchasing and supply chain, human resources, and manufacturing and engineering. u In-depth knowledge of the global automotive industry. u Deep understanding of GMs strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, challenges, risks, and corporate culture. u Ability to drive the efficient execution of GMs strategic plan and vision for the future. u Strong leadership and management skills coupled with extensive engineering and global product development experience. u Valuable knowledge of key governance matters gained as a director of GM and other large global public companies. |
Committees
Executive
Current Public Company Directorships
Ad-Astra Rocket Company
Prior Public Company Directorships
Ashland Inc. (1999 to 2012) (Lead Director 2003 to 2010) and Ball Corporation (2003 to 2019) (Lead Director 2013 to 2019)
Prior Experience Mr. Solso served as Non-Executive Chairman of the GM Board of Directors from 2014 to 2016. He was Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Cummins, Inc., from 2000 until his retirement in 2011 and President and Chief Operating Officer of Cummins from 1995 to 2000.
Reasons for Nomination u Extensive senior leadership experience gained as the CEO of Cummins, including automotive-related experience and experience in finance, accounting, and vehicle and workplace safety. u Background leading a company through strong financial performance and shareholder returns, international growth, and business restructurings. u Valuable knowledge of key governance matters, including environmental issues, corporate responsibility, diversity, and human rights issues, gained as the CEO of Cummins and the Independent Lead Director of GM and other large global public companies. u Extensive experience in automotive manufacturing and engineering, including with respect to emissions reduction technology, development of diesel engines, and compliance with challenging emissions laws and regulations. u Valuable insight into advancing the business priorities of GMs international operations gained as the U.S. Chairman of the U.S.-Brazil CEO Forum. |
12 |
|
ITEM NO. 1 ELECTION OF DIRECTORS
Wesley G. Bush | Linda R. Gooden | |
Chairman, Northrop Grumman Corporation | Retired Executive Vice President, Information Systems & Global Solutions, Lockheed Martin Corporation | |
58 years old | 66 years old | |
Director since: 2019 | Director since: 2015 | |
Committees
Executive Compensation, Finance
Current Public Company Directorships
Northrop Grumman Corporation (Northrop Grumman) and Dow Inc.
Prior Public Company Directorships
Norfolk Southern Corporation
Prior Experience In 2011, Mr. Bush was appointed Chairman of the Board of Directors of Northrop Grumman. He also served as the Chief Executive Officer of Northrop Grumman from 2010 to 2018. Prior to that, Mr. Bush served in numerous leadership roles at Northrop Grumman, including President and Chief Operating Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and President of the companys Space Technology sector. He also served in a variety of leadership positions at TRW, Inc., before it was acquired by Northrop Grumman in 2002. He is a member of the National Academy of Engineering.
Reasons for Nomination u Strong track record of creating shareholder value in a complex manufacturing enterprise known for its advanced engineering and technology. u Strong financial acumen, excellent strategic instincts, and an ability to think broadly about complex business issues. u Valuable knowledge of key governance matters, including compensation, finance, risk management, and environment, health, and safety, gained as a director of Northrop Grumman and other large global public companies. u Valuable knowledge of key governance matters gained as a director of GM and other large global public companies. |
Committees
Audit, Cybersecurity (Chair), Executive, Risk
Current Public Company Directorships
Automatic Data Processing, Inc., and The Home Depot, Inc.
Prior Public Company Directorships
WGL Holdings, Inc., and Washington Gas & Light Company, a subsidiary of WGL Holdings, Inc.
Prior Experience Ms. Gooden served as Executive Vice President, Information Systems & Global Solutions of Lockheed Martin Corporation (Lockheed Martin) from 2007 to 2013. She also served as Deputy Executive Vice President, Information and Technology Services of Lockheed Martin from October to December 2006; and President, Information Technology of Lockheed Martin from 1997 to December 2006.
Reasons for Nomination u Significant senior leadership experience gained through various leadership positions at Lockheed Martin, including experience in technology, innovation, acquisitions, divestitures, business restructuring, and finance. u Strong track record of identifying and mitigating enterprise risks in various senior leadership roles. u Valuable insight into GMs information technology (IT) function, technology systems and processes, and cybersecurity framework, including those related to mobility and autonomous vehicles, gained through various leadership roles at Lockheed Martin. u Extensive expertise in cybersecurity and IT, as well as significant operational, strategic planning, and government relations experience. u Valuable knowledge of key governance matters gained as a director of GM and other large global public companies. |
13 |
ITEM NO. 1 ELECTION OF DIRECTORS
Joseph Jimenez | Jane L. Mendillo | |
Retired Chief Executive Officer, Novartis AG | Retired President & Chief Executive Officer, Harvard Management Company | |
59 years old | 60 years old | |
Director since: 2015 | Director since: 2016 | |
Committees
Executive Compensation, Governance and Corporate Responsibility
Current Public Company Directorships
The Procter & Gamble Co.
Prior Public Company Directorships
Colgate-Palmolive Company (2010 to 2015)
Prior Experience Mr. Jimenez served as Chief Executive Officer of Novartis AG (Novartis) from 2010 until his retirement in 2018. He was Head of Novartis Pharmaceuticals Division from October 2007 to 2010 and Head of Novartis Consumer Health Division from April to October 2007. Prior to joining Novartis, Mr. Jimenez served as Advisor to the Blackstone Group L.P., a private equity firm, from 2006 to 2007. He was President and Chief Executive Officer of H.J. Heinz Company (Heinz) North America from 2002 to 2006 and Executive Vice President, President and Chief Executive Officer of Heinz Europe from 1999 to 2002. Prior to joining Heinz, Mr. Jimenez held various leadership positions at ConAgra Foods Inc. (ConAgra), including President and Senior Vice President of two operating divisions from 1993 to 1998.
Reasons for Nomination u Extensive senior leadership experience gained as the CEO of Novartis and in other senior leadership positions in the consumer products industry, including experience in international operations, strategic planning, and finance. u Valuable insight into GMs strategy to enhance the customer experience and earn customers for life gained through various senior leadership positions at Heinz and ConAgra and as a director of Procter & Gamble. u Experience executing business restructurings and significant business transformations at both Heinz and Novartis. u Valuable knowledge of key governance matters gained as the CEO of Novartis and a director of GM and other large global public companies. |
Committees
Audit, Finance
Current Public Company Directorships
Lazard Ltd.
Prior Public Company Directorships
None
Prior Experience Ms. Mendillo served as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Harvard Management Company (HMC) from 2008 to 2014, managing Harvard Universitys approximately $37 billion global endowment and related assets. Prior to joining HMC, she was Chief Investment Officer of Wellesley College from 2002 to 2008; and prior to that, she spent 15 years at HMC in investment management positions, including in public and private equity markets and alternative asset investments. She also serves as a Trustee to the Old Mountain Private Trust Company and a member of the board and executive committee of the Berklee College of Music. She has also previously served as Chair of the investment committee of the Partners Healthcare System; a member of the investment committees at Yale University and the Rockefeller Foundation; and a member of the board of directors and investment committees of the Mellon Foundation and the Boston Foundation.
Reasons for Nomination u Extensive senior leadership experience gained as the CEO of HMC, including experience in risk and crisis management. u Deep capital markets expertise gained from her more than 30 years managing globally diverse endowments and investment portfolios. u Valuable insight into GMs disciplined capital allocation framework and its financial policies and strategies. u Valuable knowledge of key governance matters gained as a director of GM and another large global public company. |
14 |
|
ITEM NO. 1 ELECTION OF DIRECTORS
Judith A. Miscik | Patricia F. Russo | |
Chief Executive Officer & Vice Chairman, Kissinger Associates, Inc. |
Chairman, Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company | |
60 years old | 66 years old | |
Director since: 2018 | Director since: 2009 | |
Committees
Audit, Risk
Current Public Company Directorships
Morgan Stanley
Prior Public Company Directorship
EMC Corporation (2012 to 2016) and Pivotal Software, Inc. (2014 to 2016)
Prior Experience In July 2017, Ms. Miscik was appointed as Chief Executive Officer and Vice Chairman of Kissinger Associates, Inc. (Kissinger Associates). Prior to that time, she served as Co-Chief Executive Officer and Vice Chairman of Kissinger Associates from 2015 to 2017 and as President and Vice Chairman of Kissinger Associates from 2009 to 2015. Prior to joining Kissinger Associates, Ms. Miscik was the Global Head of Sovereign Risk at Lehman Brothers from 2005 to 2008 and served at the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) from 1983 to 2005, where she was the Deputy Director for Intelligence from 2002 to 2005.
Reasons for Nomination u Extensive leadership experience gained as CEO of Kissinger Associates and as Deputy Director for Intelligence at the CIA. u Valuable experience in assessing and mitigating geopolitical and macroeconomic risks in both public and private sector roles, which will provide significant insight into GMs overall strategy, particularly as GM navigates critical international issues such as trade and global economic conditions. u Unique and extensive background in intelligence, security, risk analysis, and mitigation, which will provide significant insight into the Boards oversight of GMs enterprise risk identification and mitigation processes. u Valuable knowledge of key governance matters gained as a director of GM and another large global company. |
Committees
Executive, Executive Compensation, Finance, Governance and Corporate Responsibility (Chair)
Current Public Company Directorships
Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company (Chairman), KKR Management LLC, and Merck & Co. Inc.
Prior Public Company Directorships
Hewlett-Packard Company (2011 to 2015) (Lead Director 2014 to 2015) and Alcoa, Inc. (2016)
Prior Experience Ms. Russo served as Lead Director of the Hewlett-Packard Company Board of Directors from 2014 to 2015. She was Independent Lead Director of the GM Board of Directors from March 2010 to January 2014. She also served as Chief Executive Officer of Alcatel-Lucent S.A. (Alcatel-Lucent) from 2006 to 2008; Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Lucent Technologies, Inc., (Lucent) from 2003 to 2006; and President and Chief Executive Officer of Lucent from 2002 to 2006.
Reasons for Nomination u Extensive senior leadership gained as the CEO of Alcatel-Lucent and Lucent, including experience in corporate strategy, finance, sales and marketing, technology, and leadership development. u Significant strategic business experience gained through managing critical technology disruptions and successfully leading Lucent through a severe industry downturn. u Valuable insight into GMs evaluation and execution of strategic transactions gained through experience overseeing Hewlett-Packard Companys split into two companies, the Alcoa-Arconic split, and managing the Alcatel-Lucent merger. u Valuable knowledge of key governance matters, including executive compensation, gained as the CEO of Alcatel-Lucent and Lucent and as a director of GM and other large global public companies. |
15 |
ITEM NO. 1 ELECTION OF DIRECTORS
Thomas M. Schoewe | Carol M. Stephenson, O.C. | |
Retired Executive Vice President & Chief Financial Officer, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. |
Retired Dean, Ivey Business School, University of Western Ontario | |
66 years old | 68 years old | |
Director since: 2011 | Director since: 2009 | |
Committees
Audit (Chair), Cybersecurity, Executive, Finance, Risk
Current Public Company Directorships
KKR Management LLC and Northrop Grumman Corporation
Prior Public Company Directorship
PulteGroup, Inc. (2009 to 2012)
Prior Experience Mr. Schoewe served as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (Wal-Mart) from 2000 to 2011. Prior to joining Wal-Mart, he was Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Black & Decker Corporation (Black & Decker) from 1996 to 1999; Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Black & Decker from 1993 to 1996; Vice President of Finance of Black & Decker from 1989 to 1993; and Vice President of Business Planning and Analysis of Black & Decker from 1986 to 1989.
Reasons for Nomination: u Extensive financial expertise as the CFO of Wal-Mart and Black & Decker. u Significant senior leadership experience gained in various leadership positions, including experience in financial reporting, accounting and controls, business planning and analysis, and risk management. u Valuable insight into GMs IT function, technology systems and processes, and cybersecurity framework gained through experience leading large-scale, transformational IT implementations at Wal-Mart and Black & Decker. u Valuable knowledge of key governance matters gained as a director of GM and other large global public companies. |
Committees
Executive, Executive Compensation (Chair), Governance and Corporate Responsibility
Current Public Company Directorships
Intact Financial Corporation (formerly ING Canada) and Maple Leaf Foods Inc.
Prior Public Company Directorships
Ballard Power Systems, Inc. (2012 to 2017) and Manitoba Telecom Services (2008 to 2016)
Prior Experience Ms. Stephenson served as Dean of the Ivey Business School at the University of Western Ontario from 2003 until her retirement in 2013. Prior to joining the Ivey Business School, she was President and Chief Executive Officer of Lucent Technologies Canada from 1999 to 2003. She was also a member of the Advisory Board of General Motors of Canada, Limited, a GM subsidiary, from 2005 to 2009 and was appointed an officer of the Order of Canada in 2009.
Reasons for Nomination u Significant senior leadership experience gained as Dean of the Ivey Business School and in leadership positions in the telecommunications industry. u Valuable insight into GMs strategy to strengthen our core business and transform the future of personal mobility gained through expertise in marketing, operations, strategic planning, technology development, and financial management. u Extensive expertise in North American trade issues and the Canadian business environment gained as a director at several leading Canadian companies. u Valuable knowledge of key governance matters, including executive compensation, gained as a director of GM and other large global public companies. |
16 |
|
ITEM NO. 1 ELECTION OF DIRECTORS
Devin N. Wenig | ||
President & Chief Executive Officer, eBay Inc. |
||
52 years old | ||
Director since: 2018 | ||
Committees
Risk
Current Public Company Directorships
eBay Inc.
Prior Public Company Directorships
None
Prior Experience In July 2015, Mr. Wenig was appointed as President and Chief Executive Officer of eBay Inc. (eBay). Prior to that time, he served as President of eBays Marketplaces business from 2011 to July 2015. Prior to joining eBay, Mr. Wenig was Chief Executive Officer of Thomson Reuters Corporations (Thomson Reuters) largest division, Thomson Reuters Markets, from 2008 to 2011; Chief Operating Officer of Reuters Group plc (Reuters) from 2006 to 2008; and President of Reuters Business divisions from 2003 to 2006.
Reasons for Nomination u Extensive senior leadership experience gained as the CEO of eBay, including experience in technology, global operations, and strategic planning. u Critical technology insight into GMs strategies related to the future of mobility, autonomous vehicles, vehicle connectivity, and data monetization gained through various roles at eBay. u Valuable insight into GMs strategy to enhance the customer experience and earn customers for life gained through various consumer-facing leadership roles at eBay, Thomson Reuters, and Reuters. u Valuable knowledge of key governance matters gained as the CEO and as a director of eBay. |
17 |
ITEM NO. 1 ELECTION OF DIRECTORS
Non-Employee Director Compensation
Our non-employee directors receive cash compensation as well as equity compensation in the form of GM Deferred Share Units (DSUs) for their Board service. Compensation for our non-employee directors is set by the Board at the recommendation of the Governance Committee.
u | Guiding Principles |
u | Fairly compensate directors for their responsibilities and time commitments. |
u | Attract and retain highly qualified directors by offering a compensation program consistent with those at companies of similar size, scope, and complexity. |
u | Align the interests of directors with our shareholders by providing a significant portion of compensation in equity and requiring directors to continue to own our common stock (or common stock equivalents). |
u | Provide compensation that is simple and transparent to shareholders. |
u | Annual Review Process |
The Governance Committee, which consists solely of independent directors, annually assesses the form and amount of non-employee director compensation and recommends changes, if appropriate, to the Board based upon competitive market practices. GMs Legal Staff also supports the Committee in determining director compensation and designing the related benefit programs. In addition, if the Governance Committee determines it is necessary, it has the authority to engage the services of outside consultants, experts, and others to assist in designing and setting director compensation. As part of its annual review, the Committee conducts extensive benchmarking by reviewing director compensation data for the executive compensation peer group described in Executive CompensationCompensation OverviewPeer Group for Compensation Comparisons on page 42. Following its annual review of GMs director compensation in December 2018, the Governance Committee recommended that the Board maintain the same structure and level of compensation and stock ownership requirements for 2019 as were in place in 2018.
u | Director Stock Ownership and Holding Requirements |
u | Each non-employee director is required to own our common stock or DSUs with a market value of at least $500,000. |
u | Each director has up to five years from the date he or she is first elected to the Board to meet this ownership requirement. |
u | Non-employee directors are prohibited from selling any GM securities or derivatives of GM securities, such as DSUs, while they are members of the Board. |
u | Ownership guidelines are reviewed each year to confirm they continue to be effective in aligning the interests of the Board and our shareholders. |
u | All of our directors are in compliance with our stock retention requirements. Ms. Miscik and Messrs. Bush and Wenig are within their five-year compliance period and are expected to meet the ownership requirement by the end of such period. All other directors have met or exceeded the ownership requirement. |
u | Annual Compensation |
During 2018, compensation for non-employee directors consisted of the elements described in the table below. We do not pay any other retainers or meeting fees. The Independent Lead Director and Committee Chairs receive additional compensation due to the increased workload and additional responsibilities associated with these positions. In particular, Mr. Solsos compensation as Independent Lead Director reflects the additional time commitment for this role, which includes, among other responsibilities, attending all Board Committee meetings, meeting with the Companys investors, and attending additional meetings with the Companys senior management, including the CEO. For additional information about the roles and responsibilities of our Independent Lead Director, see Corporate GovernanceBoard Leadership Structure on page 22.
Compensation Element |
2018 |
|||
Board Retainer |
$ |
285,000 |
| |
Independent Lead Director Fee |
$ |
100,000 |
| |
Audit Committee Chair Fee |
|
$30,000 |
| |
All Other Committee Chair Fees (excluding the Executive Committee) |
|
$20,000 |
|
18 |
|
ITEM NO. 1 ELECTION OF DIRECTORS
Non-employee directors are required to defer at least 50% of their annual Board retainer ($142,500) into DSUs under the General Motors Company Deferred Compensation Plan for Non-Employee Directors (the Director Compensation Plan). Directors may elect to defer all or half of their remaining Board retainer or amounts payable (if any) for serving as Committee Chair or Independent Lead Director into additional DSUs. The fees for a director who joins or leaves the Board or assumes additional responsibilities during the year are prorated for his or her period of service.
u | How Deferred Share Units Work |
Each DSU is equal in value to a share of GM common stock and is fully vested upon grant, but does not have voting rights. DSUs will not be available for disposition until after the director leaves the Board. After leaving the Board, the director will receive a cash payment or payments based on the number of DSUs in the directors account valued at the average daily closing market price for the quarter immediately preceding payment. Directors will be paid in a lump sum or in annual installments for up to five years, based on their deferral elections. All DSUs granted are rounded up to the nearest whole unit. Any portion of the retainer that is deferred into DSUs may also earn dividend equivalents, which are credited at the end of each calendar year to each directors account in the form of additional DSUs. DSUs granted are determined as follows:
Amount of compensation required or elected to be deferred each calendar year under the Director Compensation Plan / Average daily closing market price of our common stock for that calendar year = DSUs Granted
u | Other Compensation |
As outlined below, we provide certain additional benefits to non-employee directors.
Type |
Purpose | |
u Company Vehicles |
We provide directors with the use of Company vehicles to provide feedback on our products as well as enhance the public image of our vehicles. Retired directors also receive the use of a Company vehicle for a period of time. Participants are charged with imputed income based on the lease value of the vehicles and are responsible for associated taxes.
| |
u
Personal Accident Insurance
|
We provide PAI coverage in the event of accidental death or dismemberment. Directors are responsible for associated taxes on the imputed income from the coverage.
|
(1) | Ms. Barra, our sole employee director, does not receive additional compensation for her Board service other than the PAI benefit described above, the value of which is reported for Ms. Barra in the Summary Compensation Table on page 58. |
Non-employee directors are not eligible to participate in any of the savings or retirement programs for our employees. Other than as described in this section, there are no separate benefit plans for directors.
19 |
ITEM NO. 1 ELECTION OF DIRECTORS
u | 2018 Non-Employee Director Compensation Table |
This table shows the compensation that each non-employee director received for his or her 2018 Board and Committee service.
Director |
Fees Earned or Paid in Cash(1) ($) |
Stock Awards(2) ($) |
All Other Compensation(3) ($) |
Total ($) |
||||||||||||
Linda R. Gooden |
|
162,500 |
|
|
126,073 |
|
|
18,782 |
|
|
307,355 |
| ||||
Joseph Jimenez |
|
142,500 |
|
|
126,073 |
|
|
23,803 |
|
|
292,376 |
| ||||
Jane L. Mendillo |
|
142,500 |
|
|
126,073 |
|
|
9,573 |
|
|
278,146 |
| ||||
Judith A. Miscik(4) |
|
35,625 |
|
|
34,487 |
|
|
1,394 |
|
|
71,506 |
| ||||
Michael G. Mullen |
|
162,500 |
|
|
126,073 |
|
|
31,719 |
|
|
320,292 |
| ||||
James J. Mulva |
|
162,500 |
|
|
126,073 |
|
|
29,115 |
|
|
317,688 |
| ||||
Patricia F. Russo |
|
162,500 |
|
|
126,073 |
|
|
19,261 |
|
|
307,834 |
| ||||
Thomas M. Schoewe |
|
172,500 |
|
|
126,073 |
|
|
37,282 |
|
|
335,855 |
| ||||
Theodore M. Solso |
|
242,500 |
|
|
126,073 |
|
|
18,990 |
|
|
387,563 |
| ||||
Carol M. Stephenson |
|
162,500 |
|
|
126,073 |
|
|
16,823 |
|
|
305,396 |
| ||||
Devin N. Wenig(5) |
|
106,875 |
|
|
97,072 |
|
|
10,889 |
|
|
214,836 |
|
(1) | This column reflects director compensation eligible to be paid in cash, which consists of 50% of the annual Board retainer ($142,500) and any applicable Committee Chair or Independent Lead Director fees. Each of the following directors elected to receive DSUs in lieu of such amounts eligible to be paid in cash in the following amounts: Ms. Gooden$20,000; Mr. Jimenez$142,500; Ms. Mendillo$142,500; Admiral Mullen$20,000; Mr. Mulva$162,500; Ms. Russo$20,000; Mr. Solso$242,500; Ms. Stephenson$81,250; and Mr. Wenig$106,875. |
(2) | Reflects aggregate grant date fair value of DSUs granted in 2018, which does not include any cash fees that directors voluntarily elected to receive as DSUs. Grant date fair value is calculated by multiplying the number of DSUs granted by the closing price of GM common stock on December 31, 2018, which was $33.45. The holders of DSUs also receive dividend equivalents, which are reinvested in additional DSUs based on the market price of the common stock on the date the dividends are paid. |
(3) | The following table provides more information on the type and amount of benefits included in the All Other Compensation column. |
Director |
Company Vehicle Program (a) |
Other (b) |
Total | Director |
Company Vehicle Program (a) |
Other (b) |
Total | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Ms. Gooden |
|
$18,542 |
|
|
$240 |
|
|
$18,782 |
|
Ms. Russo |
|
$19,021 |
|
|
$240 |
|
|
$19,261 |
| |||||||||||
Mr. Jimenez |
|
$23,563 |
|
|
$240 |
|
|
$23,803 |
|
Mr. Schoewe |
|
$37,042 |
|
|
$240 |
|
|
$37,282 |
| |||||||||||
Ms. Mendillo |
|
$ 9,333 |
|
|
$240 |
|
|
$ 9,573 |
|
Mr. Solso |
|
$18,750 |
|
|
$240 |
|
|
$18,990 |
| |||||||||||
Ms. Miscik |
|
$ 1,354 |
|
|
$ 40 |
|
|
$ 1,394 |
|
Ms. Stephenson |
|
$16,583 |
|
|
$240 |
|
|
$16,823 |
| |||||||||||
Admiral Mullen |
|
$31,479 |
|
|
$240 |
|
|
$31,719 |
|
Mr. Wenig |
|
$10,729 |
|
|
$160 |
|
|
$10,889 |
| |||||||||||
Mr. Mulva |
|
$28,875 |
|
|
$240 |
|
|
$29,115 |
|
(a) | The Company vehicle program includes the estimated annual lease value of the Company vehicles driven by directors. We include the annual lease value because it is more reflective of the value of the Company vehicle perquisite than the Companys incremental costs, which are generally significantly lower because the Company manufactures and ordinarily disposes of Company vehicles for a profit, resulting in minimal incremental costs, if any. Taxes related to imputed income are the responsibility of each director. |
(b) | Reflects the cost of premiums for providing personal accident insurance (annual premium cost of $240 is prorated, as applicable, for the period of service). In addition, Mr. Solso received tickets to attend a special event; the tickets had no incremental cost to the Company. |
(4) | Ms. Miscik joined the Board on October 8, 2018. |
(5) | Mr. Wenig joined the Board on April 18, 2018. |
20 |
|
Role of the Board of Directors
The Board is Actively Engaged in Shaping the Companys Purpose and Overseeing Strategy
Every year, the Board holds a multi-day session devoted to discussing, debating, challenging, and validating managements strategic objectives, initiatives, and execution. During these discussions, directors engage in an active dialogue and shape various aspects of managements strategy and execution. This annual strategy session is supplemented by frequent updates and discussions of GMs strategy throughout the year at every Board meeting and between regularly scheduled sessions as may be necessary from time to time. Since the last annual meeting, these strategy discussions included review of the Companys recent transformation actions; Cadillacs future growth plans; performance and strategic opportunities in China; regulatory issues related to vehicle efficiency standards; the Companys electric vehicle execution strategy; and other issues critical to the future viability of the Company. Your Board also solicits independent views on GMs business and key industry trends from outside experts including investment bankers and buy- and sell-side analysts as well as investors through its robust Director-Shareholder Engagement Policy. For additional information on shareholder engagement, please see pages 31 and 32.
|
The Board is Actively Engaged in Shaping the Company's Purpose and Overseeing Strategy Every year, the Board holds a multi-day session devoted to debating, challenging, and validating management's strategic objectives, initiatives, and execution. During these discussions, directors engage in an active debate and dialogue, challenge and validate management's assumptions, and shape various aspects of management's strategy and execution. This annual strategy session is supplemented by frequent updates and discussions of GM's strategy throughout the year-at every Board meeting and between regularly scheduled sessions as may be necessary from time to time. Since the last annual meeting, these strategy discussions included review of the Company's recent transformation actions; Cadillac's future growth plans; performance and strategic opportunities in China; regulatory issues related to vehicle efficiency standards; the Company's electric vehicle execution strategy; and other issues critical to the future viability of the Company. Your Board also solicits independent views on GM's business and key industry trends from outside experts-including investment bankers and buy- and sell-side analysts-as well as investors through its robust Director-Shareholder Engagement Policy. For additional information on shareholder engagement, see page ["].
Code of Business Conduct and Ethics: Winning with Integrity
21 |
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
Corporate Governance Guidelines
Your Board has the flexibility to decide when the positions of Chairman and CEO should be combined or separated and whether an executive or an independent director should be Chairman. This allows the Board to choose the leadership structure that will best serve the interests of our shareholders at any particular time. In January 2016, the Board recombined the positions of Chairman and CEO under the leadership of Ms. Barra and designated Mr. Solso as Independent Lead Director. For 2018, your Board unanimously voted to elect Ms. Barra as Chairman of the Board, and the independent directors unanimously voted to appoint Mr. Solso as the Independent Lead Director. The Boards key duties include oversight of strategy, risk management, and legal and regulatory compliance as well as CEO succession planning. In each of these areas, the Board determined that a combined role of Chairman and CEO together with a strong Independent Lead Director and governance best practices is the optimal Board leadership structure for GM at this time. Mr. Solsos perspective on your Boards leadership structure is provided on the following page.
22 |
|
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
A Message from the Independent Lead Director Regarding
Your Boards Leadership Structure
As the Independent Lead Director, I regularly engage with GMs investors and other key stakeholders on a variety of issues, including GMs corporate governance structure and practices and, importantly, your Boards leadership structure. I want to share with you the same message I deliver during these engagements.
Mary Barra Is the Right Person to Lead Your Board
Your Board carefully considers the appropriate leadership structure for GM and its shareholders on an annual basis and determines whether to combine or split the roles of Chairman and CEO. Your Board believes that Ms. Barras service as both Chairman and CEO has provided, and continues to provide, a clear and unified strategic vision for GM during this time of unprecedented industry change. As the individual with primary responsibility for managing the Company, Ms. Barras in-depth knowledge of our business and understanding of GMs day-to-day operations brings focused leadership to your Board. She has been a key leader as we have defined our corporate purpose and vision, reset our culture of safety, and relentlessly focused on putting the customer at the center of everything we do. Her leadership of the Board is especially critical at this time as the Company implements its transformation acceleration, announced in November 2018, and prepares to negotiate important labor agreements in 2019.
Your Board Is Independent and Holds Management Accountable
Your Board holds management accountable. Ten of the eleven director nominees are independent. We have the right mix of skills, qualifications, and experiences to oversee, guide, and challenge the leadership team. We are engaged in shaping and overseeing GMs strategy. Strategy is a part of every Board meeting, and your Board has been deeply involved in GMs recent actions to accelerate GMs transformation and invest in the future. During strategic discussions, Board members engage in active debate and dialogue, challenge and validate management assumptions, and shape various aspects of managements strategy and execution.
My Role as the Independent Lead Director
My job is to complement Ms. Barras role as Chairman by providing strong independent leadership in my role as the Independent Lead Director with the following key duties and responsibilities:
As always, I am proud to work closely with our Chairman and CEO and my fellow directors as we drive long-term shareholder value. Your Board has significantly refreshed its membership in recent years to ensure it maintains the right mix of skills, qualifications, and experiences to help lead GM through the continued transformation of its business and the automotive industry. As a part of your Boards refreshment and succession planning, I look forward to continuing to provide strong and independent leadership throughout this important transition.
On behalf of the entire Board, thank you for your continued support.
|
Theodore M. Solso Independent Lead Director
|
23 |
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
Independent directors have an opportunity to meet in executive session without management present as part of each regularly scheduled Board and Committee meeting. Executive sessions are chaired by the Independent Lead Director, Mr. Solso, or the respective Committee Chair.
During executive sessions, the independent directors may review CEO performance, compensation, and succession planning; strategy; key enterprise risks; future Board agendas and the flow of information to directors; corporate governance matters; and any other matters of importance to the Company raised during a meeting or otherwise presented by the independent directors.
The non-management directors of the Board, all of whom are independent, met in executive session six times in 2018.
Your Board of Directors has seven standing Committees: Audit, Cybersecurity, Executive Compensation, Finance, Governance, Risk, and Executive. The key responsibilities, recent activities, and focus areas of each Committee are set forth below, together with their current membership and the number of meetings held in 2018. Each Committee Chair meets regularly with management during the year to discuss Committee business, shape agendas, and facilitate efficient meetings. The Chairman, Ms. Barra, and the Independent Lead Director, Mr. Solso, attend all Committee meetings to serve as a resource and identify topics requiring the full Boards attention. The Board has determined that each member of the Audit, Compensation, Governance, Cybersecurity, Finance, and Risk Committees is independent according to NYSE listing standards and our Corporate Governance Guidelines. In May 2019, we will refresh the Boards Committee memberships and combine the Risk and the Cybersecurity Committees into a new Risk and Cybersecurity Committee. The new Committee memberships are described on pages 25 to 27.
Find more online.
Each Committee has a charter governing its activities. Committee charters are available on our website at investor.gm.com/resources.
|
24 |
|
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
|
| |||||||||
Thomas M. Schoewe, Chair
|
AUDIT
Members: Thomas M. Schoewe (Chair), Linda R. Gooden, Jane L. Mendillo, Judith A. Miscik, and Michael G. Mullen
Meetings held in 2018: 7 |
Linda R. Gooden, Chair
|
CYBERSECURITY
Members: Linda R. Gooden (Chair), Michael G. Mullen, and Thomas M. Schoewe
Meetings held in 2018: 4 | |||||||
Key Responsibilities u Monitors the effectiveness of GMs financial reporting processes and systems and disclosure and internal controls; u Selects and engages GMs external auditors and reviews and evaluates the external auditors audit process; u Reviews and evaluates the scope and performance of the internal audit function; u Facilitates ongoing communications about GMs financial position and affairs between the Board and the external auditors, GMs financial and senior management, and GMs internal audit staff; u Reviews GMs policies and procedures regarding ethics and compliance; and u Oversees the preparation of the Audit Committee Report and related disclosures for the annual Proxy Statement.
The Board has determined that all members of the Audit Committee meet heightened independence and qualification criteria and are financially literate in accordance with the NYSE Corporate Governance Standards and SEC rules and that Ms. Gooden, Ms. Mendillo, and Mr. Schoewe are each qualified as an audit committee financial expert as defined by the SEC.
RECENT ACTIVITIES AND KEY FOCUS AREAS Monitored the integration of the Companys new independent auditor, Ernst & Young LLP Oversaw managements rollout of the new incident and investigation tracking tool called AIMS (Awareline and Issue Management System) Oversaw the strategic transformation of GM's internal audit staff, including th eenhancement of its digital capabilities Reviewed the impact of the Company's new revenue recognition standard on a modified retrospective basis Reviewed internal controls over financial reporting to maintain world-class control environment
For additional information about the Audit Committee and its 2018 activities, see its report included in this Proxy Statement, beginning on page 71.
Effective May 10, 2019, the Audit Committee members will be Mr. Schoewe (Chair), Mr. Bush, Ms. Gooden, Ms. Mendillo, and Ms. Miscik. |
Key Responsibilities u Oversees the effectiveness of the Companys cybersecurity programs and its practices for identifying, assessing, and mitigating cybersecurity risks; u Reviews the Companys controls to prevent, detect, and respond to cyberattacks and breaches involving GMs electronic information, intellectual property, sensitive data, connected products, and the connected ecosystem; u Oversees managements implementation of cybersecurity programs and risk policies and procedures and managements actions to safeguard their effectiveness; and u Evaluates the Companys cyber-crisis preparedness, incident response plans, and disaster recovery capabilities.
RECENT ACTIVITIES AND KEY FOCUS AREAS Utilized a Global Cybersecurity Risk Scorecard to track implementation of cybersecurity programs, risk policies and procedures, and management's actions to safeguard the effectiveness and integrity of GM's electronic systems and facilities Continued evaluation of GM's key cybersecurity risks and enterprise and product cybersecurity programs Monitored global regulatory developments and shifting consumer expectations on data privacy practices
Effective May 10, 2019, the Cybersecurity Committee and the Risk Committee will be combined into the new Risk and Cybersecurity Committee and the members will be Ms. Gooden (Chair), Mr. Jimenez, Ms. Miscik, Mr. Schoewe, and Mr. Wenig. |
25 |
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
Carol M. Stephenson, Chair
|
Executive compensation Finance
Members: Carol M. Stephenson (Chair), Wesley G. Bush, Joseph Jimenez, James J. Mulva, and Patricia F. Russo
Meetings held in 2018: 6 |
James J. Mulva, Chair
|
Members: James J. Mulva (Chair), Wesley G. Bush, Jane L. Mendillo, Patricia F. Russo, and Thomas M. Schoewe
Meetings held in 2018: 4 | |||||
Key Responsibilities u Oversees the Companys executive compensation policies, practices, and programs; u Reviews and approves corporate goals and objectives for compensation, evaluates performance (along with the full Board), and determines compensation levels for the Chairman and CEO; u Reviews and approves compensation of NEOs, executive officers, and other senior leaders under its purview; u Oversees compensation policies and practices so that the plans do not encourage unnecessary or excessive risks; and u Oversees the Companys compensation policies and practices that promote diversity and inclusion.
The Board has determined that all members of the Compensation Committee meet heightened independence and qualification criteria in accordance with NYSE listing standards and SEC rules. The Compensation Committees charter permits the Committee to delegate its authority to members of management and also form and delegate authority to subcommittees consisting of one or more members when it deems it appropriate.
Effective May 10, 2019, the Executive Compensation Committee members will be Ms. Stephenson (Chair), Ms. Russo, Mr. Jimenez, and Mr. Bush. RECENT ACTIVITIES AND KEY FOCUS AREASReviewed compensation programs to ensure the design supports the talent needs of the Company by attracting the talent needed for both today and in the future Supported key leadership changes to strengthen our core business and deliver on our vision of a future with Zero Crashes, Zero Emissions, and Zero Congestion Revised short-term incentive compensation considerations to better link safety performance and compensation Updated key governance documents, including the Companys Equity Grant Policy and the Committees Delegation of Authority to Management
|
Key Responsibilities u Assists the Board in its oversight of financial policies, strategies, and capital structure; u Reviews the Companys cash management policies and proposed capital plans, capital expenditures, dividend actions, stock repurchases, issuances of debt or equity securities, and credit facility and other borrowings; u Reviews any significant financial exposures and contingent liabilities of the Company, including foreign exchange, interest rate, and commodities exposures, and the use of derivatives to hedge those exposures; and u Reviews the regulatory compliance, administration, financing, investment performance, risk and liability profile, and funding of the Companys U.S. pension obligations.
Effective May 10, 2019, the Finance Committee members will be Mr. Jimenez (Chair), Ms. Mendillo, Mr. Schoewe, Ms. Russo, and Mr. Bush. RECENT ACTIVITIES AND KEY FOCUS AREASContinued to oversee GMs disciplined Capital Allocation Strategy Maintained focus on macroeconomic factors affecting the Companys performance and results of operations Monitored efforts to deliver world-class cost performance following efforts to create structural cost savings and increased focus on cash flow Oversaw GM Financials continued execution of its full captive strategy |
26 |
|
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
Patricia F. Russo, Chair
|
Governance and corporate responsibility risk
Members: Patricia F. Russo (Chair), Joseph Jimenez, and Carol M. Stephenson
Meetings held in 2018: 4 |
|
Admiral Michael G. Mullen, Chair
|
Members: Michael G. Mullen (Chair), Linda R. Gooden, Judith A. Miscik, James J. Mulva, Thomas M. Schoewe, and Devin N. Wenig
Meetings held in 2018: 4 | ||||
Key Responsibilities u Reviews the Companys corporate governance framework, including all significant governance policies and procedures; u Oversees Company policies and strategies related to corporate responsibility, sustainability, and political contributions and lobbying activities; u Reviews the appropriate composition of the Board and recommends director nominees; u Oversees the self-evaluation process of the Board and Committees; u Recommends compensation of non-employee directors to the Board; and u Reviews and approves related party transactions and any potential Board conflicts of interest, as applicable.
RECENT ACTIVITIES AND KEY FOCUS AREAS Continued Board succession planning and refreshment with the recruitment of Judith A. Miscik and Wesley G. Bush Managed Director-Shareholder Engagement Policy, which facilitated important feedback to the Board Maintained focus on ESG strategy to improve GMs third-party rankings and performance Expanded oversight of lobbying activities as part of the annual review of U.S. political expenditures
Effective May 10, 2019, the Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee members will be Ms. Russo (Chair), Ms. Mendillo, Mr. Solso, and Ms. Stephenson.
|
Key Responsibilities u Assists the Board in its oversight of the Companys risk management framework and practices; u Reviews the Companys risk culture, including open risk discussions and the integration of risk management into the Companys behaviors, decision making, and processes; u Reviews managements evaluation of strategic and operating risksincluding risk concentrations, mitigating measures and the types and levels of risk that are acceptable in the pursuit and protection of shareholder value; u Reviews the impact of the Companys programs and practices regarding vehicle and workplace safety; and u Reviews risks related to the Companys public policy positions in the U.S. and internationally.
RECENT ACTIVITIES AND KEY FOCUS AREAS Reviewed efforts to develop a stronger, more effective, enterprisewide workplace safety culture Conducted review of key strategic and business risks, including trade, labor asset sustainment, vehicle safety, and others Evaluated key public policy, geopolitical, and region-specific risks (including Korea and China) and reviewed mitigating actions taken by management Reviewed results of the annual enterprise risk assessment, including determination of enterprise risk focus for 2019
Effective May 10, 2019, the Risk Committee and the Cybersecurity Committee will be combined into the new Risk and Cybersecurity Committee and the members will be Ms. Gooden (Chair), Mr. Jimenez, Ms. Miscik, Mr. Schoewe, and Mr. Wenig.
|
EXECUTIVE
|
Your Board has an Executive Committee composed of the Chairman and CEO, the Independent Lead Director, and the Chairs of all other standing Committees. The Executive Committee is chaired by Ms. Barra, and it can act on certain limited matters for the full Board in intervals between meetings of the Board. The Executive Committee meets as necessary, and all actions by the Executive Committee are reported and ratified at the next succeeding Board meeting. The Executive Committee did not meet in 2018.
|
27 |
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
The Board and each Board Committee can select and retain the services of outside advisors at the Companys expense.
Board and Committee Meetings and Attendance
In 2018, your Board held a total of 10 meetings, and average director attendance at Board and Committee meetings was 96%. Each director standing for re-election attended at least 75% of the total meetings of the Board and Committees on which he or she served in 2018. Directors are expected to attend our Annual Meeting of Shareholders, which is held in conjunction with a regularly scheduled Board meeting. All directors in office at such time attended the 2018 Annual Meeting.
Board and Committee Oversight of Risk
BOARD OF DIRECTORSO versight and monitoring of GMs significant risks AUDIT COMMITTEE COMPENSATION COMMITTEE CYBERSECURITY COMMITTEE FINANCE COMMITTEE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE RISK COMMITTEE MANAGEMENT Identification, assessment, and mitigation of risks across GM
Your Board has the overall responsibility for risk oversight, with a focus on the most significant risks facing the Company. At GM, effective risk management is everyones responsibility, with the tone established by Ms. Barra, our CEO and Chief Risk Officer, and other members of management, specifically the Senior Leadership Team. The Senior Leadership Team also utilizes our Risk Advisory Council, an executive-level body with delegates from each business and function to discuss and monitor the most significant enterprise risks in a cross-functional setting. They are tasked with championing risk management practices and integrating them into their functional or regional business units. An annual risk assessment to prioritize the most significant enterprise risks to GM is reviewed with the Risk Committee and serves to guide the focus and selection of risks that are brought to the Risk Committee for review or covered by the full Board or Committees. Your Board discharges its risk oversight responsibilities both as a whole and through delegation to its Committees, particularly the Risk Committee. The Board receives regular reports from management on particular risks within the Company through review of the Companys strategic plan and through regular communication with its Committees. Management provides comprehensive reports to the Risk Committee on the key strategic, operating, vehicle and workplace safety, financial, and compliance risks facing the Company, including managements response to managing and mitigating such risks, as appropriate. The Strategic Risk Management, Compliance, and GM Audit Service teams play a key role in setting GMs risk management guidelines, providing a consistent approach to risk and controls and independent assurance, which assists the Risk, Audit, and Cybersecurity Committees in fulfilling their oversight obligations.
The Chair of the Risk Committee coordinates with the Chairs of the other Board Committees in their review of the Companys risks that have been delegated to these Committees to support them in coordinating the relationship between risk management policies and practices and their respective oversight responsibilities. Each of the other Committees, which meet regularly and report back to the Board, is responsible for oversight of risk management practices for categories of risks relevant to the subject matter of such Committee.
28 |
|
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
This structure allows the Company to pursue its risk management vision of:
u | Creating a risk-aware culture across the enterprise to facilitate open transparent dialogue; |
u | Striving to focus on strategic and cross-functional analysis to identify future and emerging risks; and |
u | Making sure risks are taken into consideration before critical decisions are made. |
As part of the risk management process, each of the Companys business units and functions is responsible for identifying key risks that could affect the achievement of business goals and strategies or impact our customers or the environment, for assessing and prioritizing the risks, and for proposing actions to be taken to manage and mitigate such risks, as appropriate. In 2018, the Company launched a new forum, which includes the CEO and CFO, to encourage and monitor risk at a business and functional level. Each business unit and functional head reports on various risk management issues, including the integration of risk management practices into its area of responsibility, key risks to its business area, and any emerging risks. By the end of 2019, each of the Companys business units and functions will have conducted such a review. Highlights of these reviews are provided to the Risk Committee on a quarterly basis.
Your Board believes that its structure for risk oversight provides for open communication between management and the Board and its Committees, which effectively supports managements enterprise risk management program. In addition, strong independent directors chair each of the Committees involved in risk oversight, and all directors are involved in the risk assessment and ongoing risk reviews.
Board oversight drives culture and increases diversity and inclusive
|
Your Board believes that one of its primary responsibilities is to oversee the development of executive-level talent to successfully execute GMs strategy. Management succession is regularly discussed by the directors with the CEO and during the Boards executive sessions. The Board reviews candidates for all senior executive positions to confirm that qualified and diverse successor-candidates are available for all positions and that development plans are being utilized to strengthen the skills and qualifications of successor-candidates.
The Boards investment in people development does not stop with management succession planning. It actively takes an interest in making sure all employees are fully engaged and realizing their potential. To accomplish this, the Board annually reviews the diversity pipeline at all levels of the Company and receives an update on various hiring initiatives for diversity groups supported by the Company. At this time, the Board believes it has a deep and diverse talent pipeline from which to promote employees at all levels of the Company.
Since 2012, another tool the Board has used to monitor people development is review of results from the Companys salaried and hourly Workplace of Choice survey. This provides the Board with feedback and enables it to hold leaders accountable for developing talent and maintaining a winning culture.
The Board also believes that visits to Company facilities enable it to judge the Companys cultural journey first-hand. For example, within the past year, the Board has visited the Companys Global Propulsion Engineering Center, its Performance and Racing Center, its Research and Development laboratories, and its autonomous vehicle subsidiary, Cruise. These experiences enable the Board to judge whether the Company is adopting business practices that create the engaged and stable workforce that is needed to create competitive advantage.
For additional
information on human capital management initiatives and actions to
gm.com/content/dam/company/docs/us/en/gmcom/GM_Diversity_and_Inclusion.pdf
|
Our Independent Lead Director oversees the process for CEO succession and leads, at least annually, the Boards discussion of CEO succession planning. Our CEO provides the Board with recommendations for and evaluations of potential CEO successors and reviews with the Board development plans for these successors. Directors engage with potential CEO and senior management talent at Board and Committee meetings and in less formal settings to enable directors to personally assess candidates. The Board reviews management succession in the ordinary course of business as well as contingency planning in the event of an emergency or unanticipated event.
Board and Committee Evaluations
The Board and each Committee conduct an annual self-evaluation to assess effectiveness and consider opportunities for improvement. As part of the evaluation process, each director completes a written questionnaire and is also interviewed by the Chairman and, if requested
29 |
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
or needed, the Independent Lead Director. The results of the written questionnaires are compiled anonymously by the Corporate Secretary in the form of summaries for the full Board and each Committee. The feedback received from the questionnaires and interviews is reviewed and discussed by the Governance Committee (as it relates to both the Board and all Committees) and each other Committee (as it relates to such Committee). Following review and discussion by the Committees, the Chairman and the Chair of the Governance Committee summarize the results of the evaluations and report to the full Board for discussion and any action items. In addition, the Chairman and, if applicable, the Independent Lead Director provide feedback from the individual director interviews to the full Board.
Matters considered in evaluations include the following:
u The effectiveness of the Boards leadership and Committee structure;
u Board and Committee skills composition and diversity and Board succession planning;
u Board and Committee culture and dynamics, including the effectiveness of discussion and debate at Board and Committee meetings;
|
u The quality of Board and Committee agendas and the appropriateness of Board and Committee priorities;
u The dynamics between the Board and management, including the quality of management presentations and information provided to the Board and Committees; and
u The contributions and performance of individual directors, including the Chairman, Independent Lead Director, and Committee Chairs.
|
The CEO reports annually to the Board regarding achievement of previously established goals and objectives. The non-management directors, meeting separately in executive session, annually conduct a formal evaluation of the CEO, which is communicated to the CEO by the Independent Lead Director. The evaluation is based on both objective and subjective criteria, including, but not limited to: the Companys financial performance; accomplishment of ongoing initiatives in furtherance of the Companys long-term strategic objectives; and development of the Companys top management team. The results of the evaluation are considered by the Compensation Committee in its deliberations when determining the compensation of the CEO as further described in Executive Compensation on page 37.
Director Orientation and Continuing Education
All new directors participate in the Companys director orientation program, which generally commences promptly after the meeting at which a new director is elected. The Governance Committee oversees this orientation program to on-board new directors through the preparation of GM-specific and other background materials and meetings with senior management. The orientation also includes tours of one or more GM plants, a visit to the Design Studio at the Warren Technical Center, dealer visits, and/or attendance at auto show events. The orientation enables new directors to become familiar with the Companys business and strategic plans; significant financial matters; core values, including ethics, compliance programs, and corporate governance practices; and other key policies and practices, including, but not limited to sustainability, vehicle and workplace safety, public policy and governance relations, risk management, and investor relations.
Continuing education opportunities are provided to keep directors updated with information about the Company and its strategy, operations, products, and other matters relevant to Board service. Board members are encouraged to visit GM facilities and dealers and attend auto shows and other key corporate and industry events to enhance their understanding of the Company and its competitors in the auto industry. In addition, all directors are encouraged to attend, at our expense, director continuing education programs sponsored by governance organizations and other institutions.
30 |
|
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
Director Service on Other Public Company Boards
The Board recognizes that service on other public company boards provides valuable governance and leadership experience that benefits the Company. The Board also believes, however, that it is critical that directors dedicate sufficient time to their service on the Companys Board. Directors are expected to advise the Chairman of the Board, Independent Lead Director, or Chair of the Governance Committee in advance of accepting an invitation to serve on another board of directors or any audit committee of another public company board. This provides an opportunity to assess the impact of joining another board based on various factors relevant to the specific situation, including the nature and extent of a directors other professional obligations and the time commitment attendant to the new position. Directors who are engaged in active, full-time employment, for example, could have less time to devote to Board service than a director whose principal occupation is serving on boards.
Our Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that without obtaining the approval of the Board:
u A director may not serve on the boards of more than four other public companies (excluding nonprofits and subsidiaries). u No member of the Audit Committee may serve on more than two other public company audit committees.
|
In general, senior members of management may not serve on the board of more than one other public company or for-profit entity and must obtain the approval of the Governance Committee prior to accepting an invitation to serve on an outside board.
All directors and senior members of management are in compliance with this policy.
Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation
Mses. Stephenson and Russo and Messrs. Bush, Jimenez, and Mulva served on the Compensation Committee in 2018. During 2018 and as of the date of this Proxy Statement, none of the members of the Compensation Committee was or is an officer or employee of the Company, and no executive officer of the Company served or serves on the compensation committee or board of any company that employed or employs any member of the Companys Compensation Committee or Board of Directors.
A priority for the Board is to meet with and hear from shareholders. Your Board and management regularly engage with shareholders in a variety of forums from in-person and telephonic meetings to investor events and industry conferences. This dialogue helps the Board and management gain feedback on a variety of topics, including strategic and financial performance, operations, products, executive compensation, Board composition, and leadership structure, as well as on important environmental and social issues. The constructive insights, experiences, and ideas exchanged during these engagements enable your Board to further evaluate and assess key initiatives from different perspectives and viewpoints.
31 |
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
DIRECTOR-SHAREHOLDER (adopted in 2016)
u Frequent and
u Shareholders and
Since the beginning of 2019, |
|
The table below provides an overview of the common themes we have heard since our last
| ||||
Message
|
Actions
| |||||
Encouraged to communicate the Boards succession plan given retirements of Admiral Michael G. Mullen and James J. Mulva. |
Please see page 9 for actions taken to maintain the right Board at the right time for GM.
| |||||
Encouraged to further explain the Boards role in capital allocation planning. |
Please see page 5 for a description of GMs current Capital Allocation Framework and the Boards oversight role in its development and oversight. | |||||
Encouraged to further explain how GMs corporate purpose and culture align with its long-term strategy and how they enhance human capital management initiatives. |
Launched We Are General Motors to further align employees with our purpose and vision of zero crashes, zero emissions, and zero congestion. Please see the Q&A on page i for additional information on GMs approach to culture and strategy. | |||||
Encouraged to enhance the Boards oversight of lobbying activities. |
Amended the Governance Committee charter to include oversight of lobbying activities. Please see page 33 for additional information on GMs comprehensive political and lobbying disclosure. | |||||
Encouraged to develop processes and disclosures related to climate change. | Conducted first internal climate workshop to analyze, prepare, and adapt to two-degree scenario planning. See Sustainability Report at gmsustainability.com for additional information. | |||||
Encouraged to include safety and ESG metrics in executive compensation decisions. |
Added safety as a consideration in individual performance for short-term incentive awards to further drive accountability and reinforce or safety culture. | |||||
|
||||||
Find more online.
Instructions on contacting our Board of Directors are available on our website at investor.gm.com/resources.
|
Your Board is committed to governance structures and practices that protect shareholder value and important shareholder rights. Our Governance Committee regularly reviews these structures and practices, which include the following:
32 |
|
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
Corporate Political Contributions and Lobbying Expenditures
We participate in the political process to help shape public policy and address legislation that impacts GM, our industry, and our shareholders. GM has a history of supporting and will continue to support public policies that work to drive or are necessary to further the achievement of our long-term, sustainable growth. To guide our activities, the Board has adopted a U.S. Corporate Political Contributions and Expenditures Policy (Political Contributions Policy). The Political Contributions Policy and the other policies and procedures of the Company guide GMs approach to political contributions.
In addition, as specified in its charter, the Governance Committee oversees this policy and annually reviews the Companys engagement in the public policy process. The Governance Committee also annually reviews all corporate political contributions, reviews GM Political Action Committee (GM PAC) contributions and expenditures (which are funded entirely by voluntary employee contributions) and the process by which they are made, and receives multiple updates each year regarding the Companys lobbying expenditures.
The Board also receives a monthly report on the most pressing public policy issues. It uses this report to continuously assess which issues are important to the Companys long-term interests and which organizations the Company is working with to advance those interests.
In keeping with our goal of transparency, our Political Contributions Policy and annual voluntary report of U.S. political contributions (the Report) are available on our website at investor.gm.com/resources.
The Report includes information about contributions to political organizations known as section 527 organizations; corporate contributions to individual candidates for state and local office; portions of dues or similar payments to trade associations and social welfare organizations to the extent the dues or other payments equal or exceed $50,000 and are attributable to political purposes; and links to the GM quarterly and semi-annual reports required by the Lobbying Disclosure Act.
Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions
Our code of business conduct and ethics, Winning with Integrity, requires all of our employees and directors to avoid any activity that is in conflict with our business interests. In addition, your Board has adopted a written policy regarding the review and approval or ratification of related party transactions. Under the Related Party Transactions Policy, which is administered by our Governance Committee, directors and executive officers must report any potential related party transactions (including transactions involving immediate family members of directors and executive officers) to the General Counsel or Corporate Secretary to determine whether the transaction constitutes a related party transaction.
For purposes of our Related Party Transactions Policy, a related party transaction includes transactions in which our Company is a participant, the amount involved exceeds $120,000, and a related party has or will have a direct or an indirect material interest. Related parties of our Company consist of directors (including nominees for election as directors), executive officers, shareholders beneficially owning more than 5% of the Companys voting securities, and the immediate family members of these individuals.
Once a related party transaction has been identified, the Governance Committee will review all of the relevant facts and circumstances and approve or disapprove entry into the transaction.
Find more online.
Our
Related Party Transactions Policy is available on
|
33 |
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
u | Factors Used in Assessing Related Party Transactions |
If any member of the Governance Committee has a potential interest in any related party transaction, such member will recuse himself or herself and abstain from voting on the approval or ratification of the related party transaction, but may participate in all or a portion of the Governance Committees discussions of the related party transaction if requested by the Chair of the Governance Committee. As required under SEC rules, we disclose all related party transactions annually in our Proxy Statement.
The son of Craig Glidden, Executive Vice President and General Counsel, is employed by the Company in a non-executive position and in 2018 received compensation of $248,767 and customary Company benefits. His total compensation is similar to the total compensation provided to other employees of the same level with similar responsibilities. The terms of his sons employment with GM were approved by the Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee pursuant to the Companys Related Party Transactions Policy.
In the first quarter of 2018, we repurchased 2,518,257 shares of our common stock from the UAW Retiree Medical Benefits Trust, a greater than 5% beneficial owner of GMs common stock, at a cash price of $39.71 per share, for a total consideration of $100 million (the Repurchase). The price paid in the Repurchase represented a 1% discount over the closing price of our common stock on the day the Repurchase was announced. The Repurchase was made pursuant to our previously authorized stock repurchase program and was approved by the Board pursuant to the Companys Related Party Transactions Policy.
34 |
|
SECURITY OWNERSHIP INFORMATION
Security Ownership of Directors, Named Executive Officers, and Certain Other Beneficial Owners
The following table and accompanying footnotes show information regarding the beneficial ownership of GMs issued and outstanding common stock by (i) each of our directors and NEOs, and all directors and executive officers as a group, each as of April 1, 2019, and (ii) each person known by us to beneficially own more than 5% of the issued and outstanding common stock as of the dates indicated in the footnotes. All directors and officers have sole voting and dispositive power over the shares.
Name
|
Shares of Common
|
Percentage of Outstanding
|
||||||
Non-Employee Directors(1)
|
||||||||
Wesley G. Bush
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
| ||
Linda R. Gooden
|
|
1,000
|
(2)
|
|
*
|
| ||
Joseph Jimenez
|
|
32,330
|
(2)
|
|
*
|
| ||
Jane L. Mendillo
|
|
4,560
|
(2)
|
|
*
|
| ||
Judith A. Miscik
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
| ||
Michael G. Mullen
|
|
750
|
(2)
|
|
*
|
| ||
James J. Mulva
|
|
28,343
|
(2)
|
|
*
|
| ||
Patricia F. Russo
|
|
12,300
|
(2)
|
|
*
|
| ||
Thomas M. Schoewe
|
|
22,005
|
(2)
|
|
*
|
| ||
Theodore M. Solso
|
|
5,000
|
(2)
|
|
*
|
| ||
Carol M. Stephenson
|
|
800
|
(2)
|
|
*
|
| ||
Devin N. Wenig
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
| ||
Named Executive Officers(1)
|
||||||||
Mary T. Barra
|
|
3,703,390
|
(3)
|
|
*
|
| ||
Dhivya Suryadevara
|
|
167,043
|
(3)
|
|
*
|
| ||
Daniel Ammann
|
|
1,009,850
|
(3)
|
|
*
|
| ||
Mark L. Reuss
|
|
655,717
|
(3)
|
|
*
|
| ||
Alan S. Batey
|
|
279,857
|
(3)
|
|
*
|
| ||
Charles K. Stevens III
|
|
165,174
|
(3)
|
|
*
|
| ||
All Directors and Executive Officers as a Group (23 persons, including the foregoing)
|
|
7,235,093
|
(3)
|
|
*
|
| ||
Certain Other Beneficial Owners(4)
|
||||||||
Capital World Investors(5)**
|
|
103,755,329
|
|
|
7.3%
|
| ||
The Vanguard Group(6)
|
|
100,405,163
|
|
|
7.1%
|
| ||
UAW Retiree Medical Benefits Trust(7)
|
|
100,150,000
|
|
|
7.0%
|
| ||
BlackRock, Inc.(8)**
|
|
78,211,614
|
|
|
5.5%
|
| ||
Berkshire Hathaway Inc.(9)
|
|
72,269,696
|
|
|
5.1%
|
|
35 |
SECURITY OWNERSHIP INFORMATION
* | Less than 1%. |
** | BlackRock, Inc., and certain affiliates of Capital World Investors provide investment management services to Company-sponsored pension plans. The total amount of the fees will fluctuate based on allocation decisions made by the applicable fiduciary. |
(1) | c/o General Motors Company, 300 Renaissance Center, Detroit, Michigan 48265. |
(2) | Directors are granted Deferred Share Units (DSUs), which are unit equivalents of our common stock, under the Director Compensation Plan described on page 18. Directors hold the following number of DSUs: 16,912 DSUs for Ms. Gooden; 29,881 DSUs for Mr. Jimenez; 20,875 DSUs for Ms. Mendillo; 1,043 DSUs for Ms. Miscik; 25,103 DSUs for Adm. Mullen; 55,980 DSUs for Mr. Mulva; 35,010 DSUs for Ms. Russo; 30,005 DSUs for Mr. Schoewe; 74,342 DSUs for Mr. Solso; 59,317 DSUs for Ms. Stephenson; and 5,928 DSUs for Mr. Wenig. |
(3) | These amounts include shares that may be acquired upon exercise of stock options that are currently exercisable or will become exercisable within 60 days of April 1, 2019, as follows: 2,655,387 shares for Ms. Barra; 156,302 shares for Ms. Suryadevara; 995,850 shares for Mr. Ammann; 342,248 shares for Mr. Reuss; 189,324 shares for Mr. Batey; and 165,174 shares for Mr. Stevens. |
(4) | The Company is permitted to rely on the information reported by each beneficial owner in filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and has no reason to believe that the information is incomplete or inaccurate or that the beneficial owner should have filed an amended report and did not. |
(5) | Based solely on information set forth in Schedule 13G filed with the SEC on February 14, 2019, Capital World Investors reported that as of December 31, 2018, it had sole voting and dispositive power for 103,755,329 shares of GMs outstanding common stock. No shared voting or dispositive powers were reported. Capital World Investors divisions of Capital Research and Management Company and Capital International Limited collectively provide investment management services under the name Capital World Investors. The address for Capital World Investors is 333 South Hope Street, Los Angeles, California 90071. |
(6) | Based solely on Schedule 13G/A filed with the SEC on February 11, 2019, The Vanguard Group reported that it and its subsidiaries listed on Appendix A of Schedule 13G/A were the beneficial owners of 100,405,163 shares of GMs outstanding common stock as of December 31, 2018. As of December 31, 2018, The Vanguard Group had the sole power to vote 1,506,930 shares; the sole power to dispose of 98,680,854 shares; the shared power to vote 284,478 shares; and the shared power to dispose of 1,724,309 shares. The address for The Vanguard Group is 100 Vanguard Boulevard, Malvern, Pennsylvania 19355. |
(7) | Based solely on information set forth in a Form 4 filed with the SEC on March 5, 2018, the UAW Retiree Medical Benefits Trust, as advised by its fiduciary and investment advisor Brock Fiduciary Services LLC, reported that as of March 5, 2018, it had shared voting and dispositive power of 100,150,000 shares of GMs outstanding common stock. No sole voting and dispositive powers were reported. The address for the UAW Retiree Medical Benefits Trust is 200 Walker Street, Detroit, Michigan 48207. The UAW Medical Benefits Trusts percentage ownership is based on 1,420,831,726 shares of our common stock outstanding as of April 8, 2019. |
Pursuant to the Stockholders Agreement dated October 15, 2009, between the Company and the UAW Retiree Medical Benefits Trust, the Trust will vote its shares of our common stock on each matter presented to the shareholders at the Annual Meeting in the same proportionate manner as the holders of our common stock other than our directors and executive officers. The Trust will be subject to the terms of the Stockholders Agreement until it beneficially owns less than 2% of the shares of our common stock then issued and outstanding. |
(8) | Based solely on information set forth in Schedule 13G/A filed with the SEC on February 4, 2019, Blackrock, Inc., reported that it and its subsidiaries listed on Exhibit A to Schedule 13G/A were the beneficial owners of 78,211,614 shares of GMs outstanding common stock as of December 31, 2018. BlackRock reported having sole voting power for 67,432,668 shares and sole dispositive power of 78,211,614 shares. No shared voting or dispositive powers were reported. The address for BlackRock, Inc., is 55 East 52nd Street, New York, New York 10055. |
(9) | Based solely on information set forth in Schedule 13G filed with the SEC on February 14, 2019, Warren E. Buffet and Berkshire Hathaway Inc. and its subsidiaries listed on Exhibit A to Schedule 13G reported being the beneficial owners of 72,269,696 shares of GMs outstanding common stock as of December 31, 2018, having shared voting and dispositive power of 72,269,696 shares. No sole voting or dispositive power was reported. |
Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance
Federal securities laws require that our directors and executive officers and shareholders that own more than 10% of our common stock report to the SEC and the Company certain changes in ownership and ownership information within specified periods. Based solely on a review of the reports furnished to us or filed with the SEC and upon information furnished by these people, we believe that during 2018 all of our directors and officers timely filed all reports they were required to file under Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
36 |
|
Table of Contents
Mary T. Barra |
|
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer | ||
Dhivya Suryadevara |
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer | ||
Daniel Ammann |
|
President | ||
Mark L. Reuss |
|
Executive Vice President and President, Global Product Group and Cadillac | ||
Alan S. Batey |
|
Executive Vice President and President, North America | ||
Charles K. Stevens, III |
|
Advisor and Former Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
Positions as of December 31, 2018.
37 |
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
u | Our Company Performance |
In 2018, we continued to focus on our goal of a world with zero crashes, zero emissions, and zero congestion. The results below demonstrate how we are positioning GM to win in the core automotive business and the future of personal mobility:
|
$2.3 billion returned to shareholders through dividends and share repurchases, increased revenue 1% to $147.0 billion, and achieved the Companys second-highest EPS-adjusted of $6.54 in a highly volatile environment in 2018
|
We ended 2018 with the following key financial results(1):
| ||||
|
GM Financial generated record-breaking earnings before tax of $1.9 billion, up 58.3% versus 2017
|
|||||
|
Delivered record average transaction prices in the U.S. of nearly $36,000 for 2018
|
|||||
|
In the U.S., across all brands, sold nearly 1.3 million crossovers and SUVs. The following five vehicles had record calendar-year sales: Chevrolet Traverse, Chevrolet Equinox, Chevrolet Trax, Buick Encore, and GMC Terrain
|
|||||
|
Sold more than 1.2 million Buick vehicles worldwide and expanded the Buick Avenir line, which represents 20% of Buicks retail sales in the U.S.
|
|||||
|
In the U.S., Chevrolet and GMC sold nearly 1 million pickup trucks, more than any other automaker for the fifth consecutive year
|
|||||
|
Launched the all-new 2019 Chevrolet Silverado 1500. Debuted the all-new 2019 Chevrolet Blazer to further compete in the mid-size SUV category
|
|||||
|
Launched the all-new 2019 GMC Sierra 1500. More than 70% of GMC deliveries were premium Denali and AT4 models in the U.S. in 2018
|
|||||
|
Launched the first-ever Cadillac XT4 compact SUV, which became the best-selling vehicle in its segment just two months after launch. Cadillac will introduce a new model on average every six months through 2021
|
|||||
|
Provided complimentary Crisis Assist to OnStar-enabled vehicles in the areas impacted by Hurricane Florence, Hurricane Michael, and the California wildfires
|
|||||
|
SoftBank committed to investing a total of $2.25 billion in GM Cruise to further strengthen the Companys plan to commercialize autonomous vehicle technology at large scale
|
|||||
|
Collaborated with Honda, which has committed $2.75 billion to develop and deploy a new, purpose-built, shared autonomous vehicle with GM and GM Cruise
|
|||||
|
Autonomous vehicle test fleet fully transitioned to Gen 3 vehicles that are intended for commercial launch. Partnered with DoorDash to pilot zero emission food deliveries in San Francisco
|
|||||
|
Revealed the next-generation battery electric vehicle architecture and announced that Cadillac will lead the Companys move toward an all-electric future
|
|||||
|
Expanded car-sharing platform to include peer-to-peer rental offerings to 190,000 Maven members as of year-end 2018 |
KEY HIGHLIGHTS $147.0B REVENUE $11.8B EBIT-ADJ(2) 8% EBIT-ADJ MARGIN(2) 24.9% ROIC-ADJ(2) $6.54 EPS-DILUTED-ADJ(2)
(1) | The financial information relates to our continuing operations. |
(2) | These are non-GAAP financial measures. Refer to Appendix A for a reconciliation of EBIT-adjusted, EBIT-adjusted margin, ROIC-adjusted, and EPS-diluted-adjusted to their closest comparable GAAP measure. |
38 |
|
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
u | Leadership Changes |
The Company made the following leadership changes:
| Charles K. Stevens, III Transitioned to an advisory role effective September 1, 2018, after serving as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer since January 15, 2014; retired from the Company effective March 1, 2019. |
| Dhivya Suryadevara Promoted to Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer effective September 1, 2018, succeeding Charles K. Stevens, III. |
| Daniel Ammann Transitioned to Chief Executive Officer of GM Cruise effective January 1, 2019. |
| Mark L. Reuss Assumed additional responsibilities for Global Cadillac as Executive Vice President and President, Global Product Group and Cadillac, effective June 21, 2018. Named President on January 3, 2019, succeeding Daniel Ammann. |
| Alan S. Batey Transitioned to an advisory role effective April 1, 2019, after serving as Executive Vice President and President, North America, since January 15, 2014. |
u | Compensation Governance and Best Practices |
WHAT WE DO | ||
ü
|
Provide short-term and long-term incentive plans with performance targets aligned to business goals
| |
ü
|
Conduct annual advisory vote for shareholders to approve executive compensation
| |
ü
|
Maintain a Compensation Committee composed entirely of independent directors
| |
ü
|
Require stock ownership for all senior leaders
| |
ü
|
Continue to engage with shareholders on various topics with members of management and directors, including our Compensation Committee and our Independent Lead Director
| |
ü
|
Include non-compete and non-solicitation terms in all grant agreements with senior leaders
| |
ü
|
Retain an independent executive compensation consultant to the Compensation Committee
| |
ü
|
Maintain an Insider Trading Policy requiring directors, executive officers, and all other senior leaders to trade only during established window periods after contacting the GM Legal Staff prior to any sales or purchases of common stock
| |
ü
|
Require equity awards to have a double trigger (termination of employment and change in control) to initiate protection provisions of outstanding awards
| |
ü
|
Complete an annual incentive compensation risk review
| |
ü
|
Maintain a clawback policy that applies to actions that damage GMs reputation
| |
ü
|
Design simple and clear compensation programs that provide senior leaders direct line-of-sight to business goals
| |
ü
|
Conduct an annual audit of senior executive expenses and perquisites
| |
| ||
WHAT WE DONT DO | ||
û
|
Provide gross-up payments to cover personal income taxes or excise taxes pertaining to executive severance benefits
| |
û
|
Allow directors or executives to engage in hedging or pledging of GM securities
| |
û
|
Reward executives for excessive, imprudent, inappropriate, or unnecessary risk-taking
| |
û
|
Allow the repricing or backdating of equity awards
|
39 |
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
u | Shareholder Engagement Initiatives |
The Company values investor feedback and will continue to seek feedback through engagement initiatives to align our executive compensation programs with shareholder expectations. We view shareholder engagement as an important and continuous cycle. In 2018 and early 2019, members of the Board and/or management met with shareholders representing approximately 21% of our outstanding common stock on a range of issues. Through these engagements, we received feedback in support of our existing executive compensation program and, in particular, the Compensation Committees decision to further drive accountability and reinforce our safety culture. These discussions, Say-on-Pay voting results, aligning to the Company vision and strategic goals, and other factors are key drivers in our ongoing assessment of our compensation programs and help shape future programs. As the compensation programs evolve, the Board will remain committed to continuing the dialogue with shareholders on our compensation philosophy and practices.
|
SHAREHOLDER SAY-ON-PAY The Compensation Committee seeks to align the Companys executive compensation program with the interests of the Companys shareholders. The Compensation Committee considers the results of the annual Say-on-Pay vote, the long-term vision and strategic goals of the Company, input from management, input from its independent compensation consultant, and investor engagement feedback when setting compensation for our executives. In 2018, 96.7% of our shareholders voted in favor of our compensation programs. Discussions with investors and shareholder Say-on-Pay voting are key drivers in our compensation design to continue alignment between our compensation programs and the interests of shareholders.
|
|||
Say-on-Pay Voting and Annual Meeting Review Say-on-Pay Voting Meet with Investors Review Feedback and Adjust Plans File Annual Proxy Statement
Investor Alignment Topics
|
2018 Activities
| |
Evaluate ESG Performance |
We continue to factor performance related to Company and individual ESG results when determining individual STIP payouts for our NEOs. As displayed in the Our Company Performance section on page 38 and in the Performance Results and Compensation Decisions section for individuals starting on page 49, we have added a green leaf to represent results that reflect our ongoing commitment to ESG performance outcomes.
| |
Balanced Pay Plans |
Based on the feedback from our investors relating to both our STIP and LTIP, we elected to keep our measures and weightings the same for all plans in 2018. We continue to evaluate the external market and hold conversations with investors to ensure the competitiveness and appropriateness of our plans.
| |
Measure Relative Performance |
Our PSUs measure both Relative ROIC-adjusted and Relative TSR against the Companys OEM peers to drive our performance to be at the top of the industry regardless of where we are in our business cycle.
| |
Simple Compensation Plans |
We simplified our compensation plans in 2017 and kept the same measures for 2018 to focus our most senior leaders on both key operational performance measures and individual results in the STIP. This change enhanced line-of-sight into compensation for each senior leader including a focus on safety in everything we do. We maintained the LTIP structure to focus senior leaders on outperformance to our peers and increasing stock price to create value for our shareholders.
|
40 |
|
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
u | Compensation Program Evolution |
Our compensation programs focus our leadership on key areas that drive the business forward and align to the short-term and long-term interests of our shareholders. The Compensation Committee regularly reviews and discusses plan performance at each Compensation Committee meeting. The Compensation Committee considers many factors when electing to make plan changes for future incentive plans including results, market trends, feedback from their independent compensation consultant, and shareholder feedback. The table below shows the actions we have taken to simplify the compensation programs and to evolve and align the programs with shareholders interests:
2014 Actions We Took " Introduced a performance-based compensation structure with both STIP and LTIP " Introduced stock ownership requirements" STIP Performance based on the following measures: " 25% EBIT-adjusted " 25% Adjusted AFCF " 25% Global Market Share " 25% Global Quality " LTIP Structure for NEOs includes 75% PSUs and 25% RSUs " PSUs Performance-based vesting on 100% ROIC- adjusted with a Global Market Share modifier, PSUs vest at the end of the three-year performance period " RSUs Time-based vesting in equal tranches over three years 2015 Actions We Took " Introduced non-compete and non-solicitation terms into all LTIP awards for all Senior Leaders beginning with the Driving Stockholder Value grant 2016 Actions We Took " STIP Increased focus on EBIT-adjusted to drive profitable growth " 40% EBIT-adjusted " 25% Adjusted AFCF " 10% Global Market Share " 25% Global Quality 2017 Actions We Took " STIP Increased focus on key financial measures and added an individual performance element to incorporate individual performance goals for each NEO " 50% EBIT-adjusted " 25% Adjusted AFCF " 25% Individual Performance " LTIP Eliminated time-vested RSUs and replaced with Stock Options. NEOs have a mix of 75% PSUs and 25% Stock Options " Incorporated relative performance measures into PSUs " Relative ROIC-adjusted 50% of LTIP " Relative TSR 25% of LTIP 2018 Actions We Took " No changes to the STIP or LTIP based on positive feedback from our shareholders 2018 STIP 2018 LTIP
Relative ROIC-Adjusted (50% of LTIP) % PAYOUT Maximum: 200% Payout at 100th Percentile Target: 100% Payout at 60th Percentile Threshold: 50% Payout at 35th Percentile PERCENTILERelative TSR (25% of LTIP) % PAYOUT Maximum: 200% Payout at 75th Percentile or Greater Target: 100% Payout at 50th Percentile Threshold: 50% Payout at 25th Percentile PERCENTILE
The 2018 STIP focuses leadership on key financial measures (75% of STIP) and individual performance (25% of STIP). The total payout for the STIP ranges from 0% to 200% of target based on actual performance against pre-established goals. The Compensation Committee determines individual performance using a rigorous assessment process measuring performance against pre-established operational goals, safety results, and other measures. Threshold performance of at least one financial measure must be met for individual performance payout to be funded at any level.
41 |
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
The 2018 LTIP features Stock Options (25% of total LTIP) to align our most senior leaders with our shareholders interest in stock price appreciation and PSUs with relative performance measures that drive long-term results. The PSUs measure our Relative ROIC-adjusted (50% of total LTIP) and Relative TSR (25% of total LTIP).
Focusing performance on key financial measures and individual operational performance measures in the short term, combined with measuring Relative ROIC-adjusted and Relative TSR compared to our OEM peers in the long term, provides direct alignment of our executive compensation program with the interests of our shareholders and focuses senior leaders on making the investments that will provide profitable long-term growth.
u | Peer Group for 2018-2020 LTIP Performance |
We use the following OEMs in the Dow Jones Automobile & Parts Titans 30 Index to measure relative performance for Relative ROIC-adjusted and Relative TSR measures for the 2018-2020 PSU awards.
Dow Jones Automobiles & Parts Titans 30 Index OEM Peer Group(1)
| ||||
Bayerische Motoren Werke AG
|
Hyundai Motor Co.
|
Renault SA
| ||
Daimler AG
|
Kia Motors Corp.
|
Suzuki Motor Corp.
| ||
Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV
|
Mazda Motor Corp.
|
Tesla, Inc.
| ||
Ford Motor Company
|
Nissan Motor Co. Ltd
|
Toyota Motor Company
| ||
Honda Motor Co. Ltd.
|
Peugeot SA
|
Volkswagen AG
|
(1) | GM is a member of the Dow Jones Automobiles & Parts Titans 30 Index. Our performance will be determined on a continuous ranking for performance relative to OEM peers following the completion of the performance period. |
u | Peer Group for Compensation Comparisons |
The Compensation Committee annually reviews the peer group for compensation comparisons and makes updates as needed to align with both the established criteria and Company strategy. We do not limit the peer group to our industry alone because we believe compensation practices for NEOs at other large U.S.-based multinationals affect our ability to attract and retain diverse talent around the globe.
In determining 2018 compensation, the Compensation Committee considers the following factors when selecting our peer group:
Company | Industry | Company | Industry | |||
3M Company
|
Industrial Conglomerates
|
Honeywell International Inc.
|
Aerospace and Defense
| |||
The Boeing Company |
Aerospace and Defense |
IBM Corporation |
IT Consulting and Other Services
| |||
Caterpillar Inc. |
Construction Machinery and Heavy Trucks
|
Intel Corporation |
Semiconductors | |||
Deere & Company |
Agricultural and Farm Machinery
|
Johnson & Johnson |
Pharmaceuticals | |||
DowDuPont Inc.(1)
|
Diversified Chemicals
|
PepsiCo, Inc.
|
Soft Drinks and Food
| |||
Ford Motor Company
|
Automobile Manufacturers
|
Pfizer Inc.
|
Pharmaceuticals
| |||
General Electric Company |
Industrial Conglomerates |
The Procter & Gamble Company
|
Household Products | |||
HP, Inc. |
Technology Hardware, Storage, and Peripherals
|
United Technologies Corp. |
Aerospace and Defense |
(1) | The Compensation Committee removed DowDuPont Inc. at their June 2018 meeting based on announced corporate restructuring. |
42 |
|
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
u | How We Use Comparator Data to Assess Compensation |
We use executive compensation surveys composed of a broad array of industrial companies to benchmark relevant market data for executive positions. In addition, we benchmark pay practices and compensation levels against the proxy statement disclosures of our peer group and adjust this data to reflect GMs size and market expected compensation trends. Furthermore, the Compensation Committee reviews an analysis completed by their independent compensation consultant of the competitive position of each of our executives to the benchmark data.
We review each element of compensation compared with the market and generally target each element of our total direct compensation (base salary, STIP, and LTIP) for the executive group on average to be at or near the market median. An individual element or an individuals total direct compensation may be positioned above or below the market median due to considerations such as specific responsibilities, experience, and performance.
u | How We Plan Compensation |
GM MANAGEMENTMakes recommendations regarding compensation structure and design Provides input on individual performance and results against key business goals Provides additional information as requested by the CommitteeCOMMITTEE CONSULTANTAdvises the Committee on competitive benchmarking on pay levels, practices, and governance trends Assists with peer group selection and analysis Reviews and advises on recommendations, plan design, and measuresEXECUTIVE COMPENSATION COMMITTEEApproves plan design, metrics, and goals Approves overall incentive compensation funding levels Reviews and approves individual targets and actual compensation for the most senior executives
u | Performance-Based Compensation Structure |
Our NEOs are incentivized on optimizing long-term financial returns for our shareholders through increasing profitability, increasing margins, putting the customer at the center of everything we do, growing the business, and driving innovation.
The performance-based structure for 2018 incorporates both short-term and long-term incentives established from financial and operational metrics for fiscal year 2018 and beyond. In addition to base salary and the STIP award, this structure, shown graphically below, includes an LTIP award composed of PSUs and Stock Options in order to focus our executives on long-term Company performance. The Compensation Committee believes a majority of compensation should be in the form of equity to align the interests of executives with those of shareholders.
|
CEO 2018 COMPENSATION STRUCTURE 90% At-Risk Pay 10% Base 21% STIP 69% Long-Term Equity 31% Short-Term Cash Long-Term Equity PSU 75% Stock Options 25%AVERAGE NEO 2018 COMPENSATION STRUCTURE 82% At-Risk Pay 18% Base 23% STIP 59% Long-Term Equity 41% Short-Term Cash Long-Term Equity PSU 75% Stock Options 25%
43 |
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
u | Compensation Structure |
The NEOs 2018 compensation structure is market competitive with each pay element targeted at or near the market median. The 2018 compensation structure included the following pay elements:
ELEMENT PURPOSE PERFORMANCE PERIOD PERFORMANCE METRICS PAYOUT Base Salary Market-competitive base salary reflecting contribution, background, knowledge, skills and performance STIP Annual cash incentive based on achievements of Company financial goals and individual performance One Year 1/1/2018 -12/31/2018 EBIT-adjusted, Adjusted AFCF, and Individual Performance 0%-200% PSUs Align NEOs interests with long-term interests of the Company and shareholders Three Year 1/1/2018 -12/31/2020 Relative ROIC-adjusted and Relative TSR 0%-200% Stock Options Align NEOs interests and shareholders interest in stock price appreciation Three Year Vesting Ratably 10 Year Term Absolute stock price appreciation
u | Perquisites and Other Compensation |
We provide perquisites and other compensation to our NEOs consistent with market practices. The following perquisites and other compensation were provided to NEOs in 2018:
| Personal Air Travel Ms. Barra is prohibited by Company policy from commercial air travel due to security reasons identified by an independent third-party security consultant. As a result, the Company pays the costs associated with the use of private aircraft for both business and personal use. Other NEOs may travel on private aircraft in certain circumstances with prior approval from the CEO or the Senior Vice President, Global Human Resources. All NEOs incur imputed income for any personal travel. |
44 |
|
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
| Company Vehicle Programs NEOs are eligible to participate in the Executive Company Vehicle Program and may use evaluation vehicles for the purpose of providing feedback on Company products. In addition, NEOs are eligible to use driver services provided by the Company and in accordance with Company policies. |
| Security NEOs may receive security services, including home security systems and monitoring, for specific security-related reasons identified by independent third-party security consultants. We maintain security staff in order to provide all employees with a safe and secure environment to align with and reinforce our safety culture. |
| Financial Counseling NEOs are eligible to receive financial counseling, estate planning, and tax preparation services through an approved provider. |
| Executive Physicals NEOs are eligible to receive executive physicals with an approved provider. |
u | 2018 Target Compensation |
Our target total direct compensation for each NEO in 2018 was as follows:
Base Salary ($) |
STIP (%) |
STIP ($) |
Target Total Cash Compensation ($) |
LTIP | Target Total Compensation ($) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Name | PSUs(1) ($) |
Stock ($) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mary T. Barra |
|
2,100,000 |
|
|
200 |
% |
|
4,200,000 |
|
|
6,300,000 |
|
|
10,275,000 |
|
|
3,425,000 |
|
|
20,000,000 |
| |||||||||||||||||||
Dhivya Suryadevara |
|
900,000 |
|
|
125 |
% |
|
1,125,000 |
|
|
2,025,000 |
|
|
2,231,250 |
|
|
743,750 |
|
|
5,000,000 |
| |||||||||||||||||||
Daniel Ammann |
|
1,450,000 |
|
|
125 |
% |
|
1,812,500 |
|
|
3,262,500 |
|
|
3,703,125 |
|
|
1,234,375 |
|
|
8,200,000 |
| |||||||||||||||||||
Mark L. Reuss |
|
1,200,000 |
|
|
125 |
% |
|
1,500,000 |
|
|
2,700,000 |
|
|
3,037,500 |
|
|
1,012,500 |
|
|
6,750,000 |
| |||||||||||||||||||
Alan S. Batey |
|
1,025,000 |
|
|
125 |
% |
|
1,281,300 |
|
|
2,306,300 |
|
|
2,020,275 |
|
|
673,425 |
|
|
5,000,000 |
| |||||||||||||||||||
Charles K. Stevens, III |
|
1,100,000 |
|
|
125 |
% |
|
1,375,000 |
|
|
2,475,000 |
|
|
3,018,750 |
|
|
1,006,250 |
|
|
6,500,000 |
|
(1) | The number of PSUs awarded is determined by using the target PSU value divided by the closing price on the date of grant. PSUs with performance tied to Relative TSR are valued in the Summary Compensation Table using a Monte Carlo analysis resulting in amounts that may be higher or lower than target. |
u | How We Set Performance Targets |
Annually, the Compensation Committee approves the performance measures for the STIP and LTIP. The Compensation Committee reviews recommendations from management, receives input from their independent compensation consultant, evaluates the annual budget and mid-term business plan, and reviews prior-year performance to approve value-creating goals tied to long-term shareholder value.
u | 2018 STIP Performance |
The STIP rewards NEOs for performance linked to the Companys achievement of annual financial goals, operational performance goals, and individual performance results. The Compensation Committee annually reviews and approves STIP goals that align with shareholders through the achievement of the business plan and strategic objectives. 2018 STIP targets were challenging goals set at the beginning of the performance period based on the business plan. Individual performance is assessed using an individual performance scorecard measuring results against pre-established goals that the Compensation Committee approves at the beginning of the year. Individual performance results and final individual compensation decisions are discussed beginning on page 49.
STIP awards, if any, are determined following final Company performance against the measures displayed below and the Compensation Committees assessment of individual performance. The table below describes each STIP performance measure, its weighting, its target, and the behaviors each measure drives:
STIP Measure |
Weight |
Target |
Leadership Behaviors | |||||
EBIT-adjusted ($B)(1) |
50% |
$ |
12.9 |
|
Focus on operating profit and driving strong profitability | |||
Adjusted AFCF ($B)(1)(2) |
25% |
|
$5.4 |
|
Focus on driving strong cash flow to invest in the business | |||
Individual Performance |
25% |
|
25 pts. |
|
Focus on individual performance goals and behaviors that impact business results |
(1) | Measure adjusted for incentive purposes and excludes certain business operations. |
(2) | Adjusted AFCF for incentive purposes excludes payments related to certain recall-related expenses attributable to events occurring in 2014. For a description of how Adjusted AFCF is calculated, see Appendix A. |
45 |
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
The potential payouts for each Company performance measure ranges from 0% to 200% of target, based on actual Company performance, with the threshold performance level being 50% of EBIT-adjusted and 39% of Adjusted AFCF. Final STIP awards are calculated as follows:
Base Salary x Individual Target Award % Target Incentive Opportunity x EBIT-adjusted 50% Adjusted AFCF 25% Company Performance + Individual Results 25% Individual Performance = Short-Term Incentive Award
u | 20182020 LTIP Performance |
Grants under the LTIP are intended to link the financial interests of NEOs with the long-term interests of shareholders. The structure for NEOs includes 75% PSUs and 25% Stock Options. PSUs cliff-vest following a three-year performance period and Stock Options vest ratably over three years.
The 20182020 PSUs will be awarded based on Relative ROIC-adjusted and Relative TSR performance against our OEM peers displayed on page 42. PSU performance measures promote the efficient use of capital for long-term growth to create value for shareholders with an increased focus on stock price appreciation. The following table shows the PSU performance measures and the behaviors each measure drives:
Performance Measure |
PSU Weight |
Payout |
Leadership Behaviors | |||
Relative ROIC-adjusted |
67% | Threshold (50%) 35th Percentile Target (100%) 60th Percentile Maximum (200%) 100th Percentile |
Focus on making sound investments that follow the disciplined capital approach of driving 20% or higher returns in world-class vehicles and leading technology
| |||
Relative TSR |
33% |
Threshold (50%) 25th Percentile Target (100%) 50th Percentile Maximum (200%) 75th Percentile |
Focus on delivering shareholder returns that outperform our OEM peers |
The 20182020 PSUs vest and are awarded and delivered following the completion of the three-year performance period beginning January 1, 2018 and may be earned at a level between 0% and 200% of target based on actual Company results. When determining grant amounts, the Compensation Committee considers factors such as individual responsibilities, experience, and performance. In addition, the Compensation Committee factors relevant market compensation comparison data and seeks input from their independent compensation consultant. Final PSU awards are calculated as follows:
20182020 LTIP PSU GRANT Target PSU Opportunity x Relative ROIC-adjusted 67% Relative TSR 33% Company Performance = Actual Earned Long-Term PSU Award
46 |
|
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
u | Summary of Outstanding Performance Awards |
Award Performance Period Performance Metrics Potential Payouts (1) Vest Date 2020 2021 DSV Option Grant 7/28/2015 4.5 Years to 12/31/2019 TSR vs. OEM Peer Group 0% or 100% 2/15/2020 20172019 PSUs 1/1/2017 3 Years to 12/31/2019 Relative ROIC-adjusted Relative TSR 0%200% 2/14/2020 20182020 PSUs 1/1/2018 3 Years to 12/31/2020 Relative ROIC-adjusted Relative TSR 0%200% 2/13/2021 (1) The performance of each award will be measured and determined at the end of the performance period.
Performance Results and Compensation Decisions
u | 2018 STIP Results |
The Company portion of the 2018 STIP award was calculated based on the Companys achievement of EBIT-adjusted and Adjusted AFCF performance measures. In addition, each NEO has an individual performance portion of their STIP that measures performance against pre-established goals. Final STIP performance approved by the Compensation Committee is displayed below:
STIP Measure
|
Weight
|
Threshold
|
Target
|
Maximum
|
Performance Results
|
Performance Payout
|
||||||||||||||||||
EBIT-adjusted ($B)(1) |
|
50% |
|
|
$7.0 |
|
|
$12.9 |
|
|
$14.2 |
|
|
$12.5 |
|
|
48 |
% | ||||||
Adjusted AFCF ($B)(1)(2) |
|
25% |
|
|
$0.0 |
|
|
$5.4 |
|
|
$6.4 |
|
|
$4.7 |
|
|
23 |
% | ||||||
Individual Performance |
|
25% |
|
|
0 pts. |
|
|
25 pts. |
|
|
50 pts. |
|
|
25 35 pts. |
|
|
25%35 |
% | ||||||
Result |
|
96%106 |
% |
(1) | Measure adjusted for incentive purposes and excludes certain business operations. |
(2) | Adjusted AFCF for incentive purposes excludes payments related to certain recall-related expenses attributable to events occurring in 2014. Final performance result excludes $0.6B in pre-funding payments to certain non-U.S. pensions in Q3 2018. For a description of how Adjusted AFCF is calculated, see Appendix A. |
Despite significant incremental commodity and foreign exchange headwinds, the Company delivered strong performance in 2018. As demonstrated by the results above, the Compensation Committee continues to set challenging performance targets.
u | 20162018 LTIP Results |
The 20162018 PSU awards vested on February 10, 2019, based on Company performance for the three-year period beginning January 1, 2016, against pre-established performance targets for ROIC-adjusted and the Global Market Share modifier. The following performance was approved by the Compensation Committee:
LTIP Measure | Weight | Threshold | Target | Maximum | Performance Results |
Performance Payout |
||||||||||||||||||
ROIC-adjusted |
|
100% |
|
|
12.0% |
|
|
20.0% |
|
|
28.0% |
|
|
27.3 |
%(1) |
|
191 |
% | ||||||
Result |
|
166 |
%(2) |
(1) | Represents the average of ROIC-adjusted for 2016 through 2018. ROIC-adjusted for 2016 was 28.9%. ROIC-adjusted for 2017 and 2018 was 28.2% and 24.9%, respectively, as reported on a continuing operations basis. |
(2) | The three-year average Global Market Share modifier reduces the payout 25 points if below 10.8% and increases the payout 25 points if at or above 11.6%, not to exceed plan maximum of 200%. The Company achieved a result of 10.7%, excluding the impact of the Companys decision to exit markets during the performance period, thus a 25-point reduction was applied to the payout. |
47 |
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
Focusing leadership on ROIC-adjusted has resulted in significant performance improvements since calendar year 2012, when ROIC-adjusted was 16.0%. The Company continues to focus on delivering 20% or higher ROIC-adjusted results. We ended calendar year 2018 with ROIC-adjusted of 24.9%. Despite external pressures impacting TSR over the 2016-2018 performance period, we continued to meet our ROIC commitments while investing in the future. The 2016-2018 PSUs are the final awards that measure absolute ROIC-adjusted. Beginning with the 2017-2019 PSUs, performance is measured on Relative ROIC-adjusted and Relative TSR against OEM peers from the Dow Jones Automobiles & Parts Titans 30 Index.
u | One-Time 20152020 DSV Option Grant |
The DSV option grant was a one-time grant made on July 28, 2015, to senior leaders to secure non-compete and non-solicitation terms and to drive an increased focus on stock price appreciation. The DSV option grant featured 40% time-based vesting, which vested on February 15, 2017, and 60% performance-based vesting that vests upon meeting or exceeding the median TSR relative to the OEM peer group on the date of grant. Shown below are the results of two of the three performance-based tranches. The final 20% tranche remains outstanding with the performance period ending on December 31, 2019.
DSV Measure |
Performance Period |
Vesting Date |
Weight |
Target TSR |
Result |
Vesting |
||||||||||||||||||
Relative TSR |
|
July 28, 2015December 31, 2018 |
|
|
February 15, 2019 |
|
|
20 |
% |
|
50th Percentile |
|
|
88th Percentile |
|
|
100 |
% | ||||||
Relative TSR |
|
July 28, 2015December 31, 2017 |
|
|
February 15, 2018 |
|
|
20 |
% |
|
50th Percentile |
|
|
87th Percentile |
|
|
100 |
% |
48 |
|
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
49 |
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
50 |
|
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
51 |
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
52 |
|
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION