S&P 500 CEO transitions, 2010 to 2022
Do externally hired CEOs cost more and deliver less than internal promotions? A study of 611 transitions, with a sports free-agency comparison.
Headline finding
Companies often hire a CEO from outside, and they usually pay more to do it. The premium is real but small, about 9 percent over the predecessor. It does not buy a better result. The claim that external hires cost more and deliver less does not hold: the cost premium is imprecise, and the weaker returns are mostly selection. The robust finding, which holds under every control and repeats in four sports datasets, is simpler. What you pay for outside talent does not predict what you get.
Key numbers
Robust standard errors. Industry, size, and year controls.
The picture
Premium over predecessor against the return that followed, for external hires. The fitted slope is near zero (p = 0.14 on stock performance, 0.45 on operating performance). Scatter is illustrative.
What this research tracks
For each CEO change, the study first records whether the new CEO was promoted from within (internal) or brought in from outside (external). Then it measures four things.
The question
Whether the price paid for an outside CEO predicts the return the company gets. A backward-looking test, not a hiring tool.
The approach
Pay from SEC proxy filings, accounting from SEC XBRL, returns from public prices. The sample was frozen before any financial data was collected.
The data
453 internal, 158 external. Reproducible from public sources, with no licensed database. Code and snapshots are in the repository.