Less than one in five (14%) of company secretaries surveyed said that remuneration structures for top executives did not need to be rethought with 26% of respondents remaining undecided.

The opinion about LTIPs is evenly split with one third feeling the model is not fit for purpose, another third believes that it is and the remaining third are undecided.

There was strong support for more regular binding shareholder vote on executive remuneration with the majority staing that the current system of allowing a vote every three years was too infrequent given the variations in company success.

A large number believed that executive pay should be tied to the salaries of company employees although there was recognition that it would be difficult to find a correlation between the two.

Simon Osborne, chief executive of ICSA said: ‘I am surprised that 40% of people are either sitting on the fence or feel that the system is not broken. The drive to align remuneration to shareholder returns and company performance while meeting the expectations of shareholders and voting agencies has resulted in complex structures which do not fully meet anyone’s expectations.

Furthermore, there is growing anecdotal evidence that executives do not understand their exotic packages. Some of the blame for excessive pay must lie with remuneration consultants as benchmarking has pushed up rates. However, until the short-term focus of investors is addressed, it is difficult to see how remuneration can fundamentally change.’