If the company flourishes under the guidance of a CEO he deserves whatever he can get. The problem is that at present, CEO's rake it in even if they are total failures that destroy companies.
The money given to those folks does far more damage than the money given to the workers at the same company.
Whatever happened to merit pay?
All of a sudden, an opportunity for very wonderful new equipment comes in. It will cost a ton to upgrade, but over the long haul it will make the company grow leaps and bounds. What is the CEO to do? Does he spend all the money on the outlay, or does he hold onto money as profit for a few quarters, giving himself a huge bonus because of "performance". Even in this case, the company is doing "super" but not really, when ya look 5 years down the road.
A good incentive plan would be to pay the CEO's well. Expect performance, question their actions and have them justify their decisions, and put the stock options out for them to only be excercised say 3-5 years after they leave the company. I feel terrible for a CEO now who does the right thing, invests in new techs, and gets a lower bonus, while their successor sits on their hands, skips R&D, and lives off the fruit of their predecessor. Most huge companies have many fundamentals in place that really are out of the hands of a 3-5 year shelf life CEO. It's 5 years later often when the fruits of their actions will be known. They will feel responsible in long term growth, grooming a capable successor, and will benefit the company and economy.
Really good CEOs know how to make their employees with the $15-20 an hour worth every dime they might be paid. Most problems in companies does have to do with poor management --- morale problems in a corporation lead to low productivity and poor quality. When a company does poorly---- you have to look at middle and upper management.