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
(Amendment No. )
 |
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 under § 240.14a-12 |

TARGET CORPORATION
(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 all
boxes that apply): |
 |
No fee required |
 |
Fee paid previously with preliminary materials |
 |
Fee computed on table in exhibit required by Item 25(b) per
Exchange Act Rules 14a-6(i)(1) and 0-11 |
Dear Fellow Shareholders,
It has been an honor to serve as Target’s Lead Independent Director
during 2021, which was a consequential year for Target. It was the
fifth full year of deep investment in an outstanding team and a
long-term growth strategy; it was the second full year of
uncertainty in the face of the resurging pandemic. Through the
positive developments, like widespread availability of COVID-19
vaccines, and the unforeseen twists, like rising inflation and
global supply-chain constraints, the Target team showed what it
means to stay true to its purpose — and to grow and win in the
marketplace by caring for all stakeholders.
Target’s double-digit growth in comp sales last year was second
only to the extraordinary growth of 2020. There are many additional
years of growth potential ahead, stemming from past and continuing
investments. What’s clear to me, in my first year as Lead
Independent Director, is how firmly those investments are rooted in
care — for team members, guests, partners, communities, and
shareholders.
Speaking on behalf of the entire Target Board of Directors (Board),
we truly see care as the key both to long-term profitable growth
and to a stronger, more sustainable future for Target’s
stakeholders.
Equity, opportunity and safety start with team
In 2021, the Board continued to ensure that Target had a
high-performing, responsive, and responsible senior-management
team. The Board also supported management decisions to continue
investing heavily in the Target team, on the principle that taking
care of the team is fundamental to Target’s further growth and to
long-term value creation for shareholders.
Over the past five years, Target has announced significant
enhancements in wages, an industry-leading education-assistance
program, free access to counseling services and doctors, and more
stable, flexible schedules. As a result, Target is driving positive
change in the lives of hundreds of thousands of team members who
have more steady income, pathways to career growth and education,
and access to benefits that meet their evolving needs.
Earlier this year, Target announced an additional $300 million investment to raise
wages and expand access to healthcare benefits for more team
members and their families.
This focus on continuous team investment sets Target apart among
peer-competitors and builds on the more than $1 billion incremental investment
it made to support team member safety and well-being in the first
year of the pandemic.
These expanded wage and benefits investments are also a critical
step in delivering on Target’s commitments to people and the planet
through the Target Forward strategy announced in 2021, which aims
in part to create opportunity and equity for our team, partners,
and guests. Target Forward recognizes that environmental and social
sustainability are essential to future business success and must
work in concert with the other elements of our corporate strategy
to deliver long-term value for all stakeholders. Additional
information on Target Forward is contained in this proxy
statement.
Continued leadership in DE&I
Target also announced significant additional progress in its
longstanding commitments to Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
(DE&I), meeting or exceeding 2019-2021 goals such as: increased
promotion for people of color, reduced turnover rates for people of
color, increased promotion of women to senior leadership, and
targeted expenditure with diverse suppliers.
Target sets clear DE&I goals on three-year timeframes, and the
Board fully supports the 2022-2024 goals announced earlier this
year.
Governance accountability in ESG
With the growing focus among stakeholders on how companies are
addressing the risks and opportunities related to environmental,
social, and governance (ESG) issues, the Board revised its
committee structure in 2021, clarifying and enhancing our oversight
of these matters. Additional information on these changes is
contained in this proxy statement.
To ensure the Board has a diverse and relevant mix of perspectives
and expertise, we regularly refresh our Board composition.
Two independent directors, Gail Boudreaux and David Abney, joined
the Board in 2021. Gail brings significant expertise in healthcare
and wellbeing, while David is an expert in supply chains. Both have
chief-executive experience in managing large companies.
Two independent directors left the Board in 2021, Cal Darden when
he retired and Ken Salazar when he became U.S. Ambassador to
Mexico. The Board wishes to recognize and thank them both, along
with Mary Minnick, who has announced her plans to retire from
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
3 |
the Board following the end of her term at the Annual Shareholders’
Meeting. We appreciate their many years of service, their
collaborative counsel and influence, and we wish them well in their
future pursuits.
As we move through 2022 and beyond, the Board is committed to
strong governance for this fast-growing enterprise, as management
continues to focus on deepening guest engagement, investing in the
team’s wellbeing, growth and development, and putting Target’s size
and scale to work toward a sustainable future for all.
Finally, on behalf of the Board I want to recognize our Target team
for their incredible efforts to deliver for our guests and you
during the past year. And I want to thank you as shareholders for
your continued support, which we do not take lightly.
Sincerely,
Monica C. Lozano
Lead Independent Director
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
4 |
This Meeting Notice & Proxy Summary highlights information
described in other parts of this 2022 Proxy Statement and does not
contain all information you should consider in voting. Please read
the entire 2022 Proxy Statement carefully before voting.
For the meaning of capitalized terms or acronyms used in the
2022 Proxy Statement, please see Appendix A “Commonly used or
defined terms” beginning on page A-1.
To our shareholders,
You are invited to attend Target Corporation’s 2022 Annual Meeting
to be held as follows:
Time and Date
|
|
Place
|
|
Record Date
|
Wednesday, June 8, 2022
12:00 p.m. Central Daylight Time
|
|
Online at
virtualshareholdermeeting.com/TGT2022
|
|
April 11, 2022
|
We are holding the 2022 Annual Meeting in a virtual-only meeting
format. You will not be able to attend the 2022 Annual Meeting at a
physical location.
Items
of business
Item
|
Board’s Recommendation
|
Election of 12 directors (page 19)
|
FOR each Director
Nominee
|
Ratification of Ernst & Young LLP as our independent
registered public accounting firm (page 65)
|
FOR
|
Advisory approval of executive compensation (Say on Pay)
(page 67)
|
FOR
|
Shareholder proposals, if properly presented at the meeting
(page 68)
|
AGAINST each
proposal
|
In addition, at the 2022 Annual Meeting we will conduct any other
business that may properly come before the meeting. See Question 11
of the “Questions and answers about the 2022 Annual Meeting”
beginning on page 73 for more information. Following the formal
business of the 2022 Annual Meeting, our Chairman & Chief
Executive Officer will provide prepared remarks, followed by a
question and answer session. Shareholders can submit written
questions in advance at www.proxyvote.com and during the
2022 Annual Meeting at
virtualshareholdermeeting.com/TGT2022.
Proxy
solicitation
The Board solicits the enclosed proxy for the 2022 Annual Meeting
and any adjournment or postponement of the 2022 Annual Meeting. Any
proxy may be revoked at any time prior to its exercise at the 2022
Annual Meeting.
Voting
You may vote if you held shares of Target common stock as of the
record date (April 11, 2022). You are able to vote your
shares by providing instructions to the proxy holders who will then
vote in accordance with your instructions. We urge you to read the
2022 Proxy Statement carefully and to vote in accordance with the
recommendations of the Board.
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
5 |
If voting in advance of the 2022 Annual Meeting, you may do so as
follows:
Method(1)
|
 |
 |
 |
Instruction
|
●
Go to the website identified on proxy card, VIF, or Internet
Availability Notice.
●
Enter control number on proxy card, VIF, or Internet Availability
Notice.
●
Follow instructions on the website.
|
●
Call the toll-free number identified on the enclosed proxy card or
VIF or, after viewing the proxy materials on the website provided
in your Internet Availability Notice, call the toll-free number for
telephone voting identified on the website.
●
Enter control number on the proxy card, VIF, or Internet
Availability Notice.
●
Follow the recorded instructions.
|
●
Mark your selections on the enclosed proxy card or VIF.
●
Date and sign your name exactly as it appears on the proxy card or
VIF.
●
Promptly return the proxy card or VIF in the enclosed postage-paid
envelope to ensure that the proxy card or VIF is received before
the deadline.
|
Deadline
|
●
Registered Shareholders or Beneficial Owners — 11:59 p.m.
Eastern Daylight Time on June 7, 2022.
●
Participants in the Target 401(k) Plan — 6:00 a.m. Eastern
Daylight Time on June 6, 2022.
|
(1)
Internet and Telephone voting is available 24 hours a day, seven
days a week up to the applicable deadline. If you are a Beneficial
Owner holding shares outside of the Target 401(k) Plan, you may
only vote by Internet and Telephone if your broker, trustee, bank,
or nominee makes those methods available to you. If you did not
receive a proxy card or VIF and would like to vote by mail, you
must request a written copy of the proxy materials, which will
include a proxy card or VIF, by visiting www.proxyvote.com, dialing
1-800-579-1639, or emailing sendmaterial@proxyvote.com. If
requesting a written copy of the proxy materials, please be
prepared to provide your control number, which can be found in your
Internet Availability Notice.
|
If you do not vote in advance and instead plan to vote during the
2022 Annual Meeting, you may do so if you enter the 16-digit
control number found on your proxy card, VIF, or Internet
Availability Notice, as applicable, at the time you log into the
meeting at virtualshareholdermeeting.com/TGT2022. Shares
held within the Target 401(k) Plan may only be voted by the trustee
pursuant to voting instructions received in advance of the 2022
Annual Meeting, and may not be voted by a participant at the 2022
Annual Meeting.
Questions and answers about the
2022 Annual Meeting
We encourage you to review the “Questions and answers about the
2022 Annual Meeting” beginning on page 71 for answers to common
questions about the meeting, proxy materials, voting, and other
related topics.
Thank you for your continued support.
Sincerely,
 |
Don H. Liu
|
Corporate Secretary
|
Approximate Date of Mailing of Proxy Materials or
Internet Availability Notice:
|
|
April 25, 2022
|
Your vote is important. Thank you for voting.
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
6 |
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
7 |
Back to
Contents
Our core corporate governance practices are listed in the following
table. In addition, we regularly evaluate our practices against
prevailing best practices and emerging and evolving topics
identified through shareholder outreach, current literature, and
corporate governance organizations.
Practice
|
Description
|
More
information
|
Accountability to shareholders
|
|
Board evaluations and refreshment
|
The Board regularly evaluates its performance in a variety of ways.
Those evaluations, changes in business strategy and operations, and
anticipated director retirements are used to identify desired
characteristics for future Board members.
|
20
|
Annual elections
|
All directors are elected annually, which reinforces our Board’s
accountability to shareholders.
|
19
|
Majority voting standard
|
Our Articles of Incorporation require a “majority voting” standard
in uncontested director elections—each director must receive more
votes “For” their election than votes “Against” in order to be
elected.
|
19
|
Director resignation
policy
|
An incumbent director that does not meet the majority voting
standard must promptly offer to resign. The Governance &
Sustainability Committee will make a recommendation and the Board
must act on the offer within 90 days and publicly disclose its
decision and rationale.
|
19
|
Proxy access
|
Any shareholder or group of up to 20 shareholders owning 3% or more
of Target common stock continuously for at least the previous three
years may nominate and include in our proxy materials director
nominees totaling up to the greater of 20% of the Board or at least
two directors.
|
76
|
No poison pill
|
We do not have a poison pill.
|
|
10% special meeting threshold
|
Shareholders owning 10% or more of Target’s outstanding stock have
the right to call a special meeting of shareholders.
|
|
Shareholder voting rights are proportionate to economic
interests
|
|
Single voting class
|
Target common stock is the only class of voting shares
outstanding.
|
71
|
One share, one vote
|
Each share of Target common stock is entitled to one vote.
|
71
|
Responsiveness to shareholders
|
|
Responses to shareholder proposals
|
The Board responds to shareholder proposals that receive
significant support by either making the proposed changes or
explaining why the actions were not taken through the shareholder
engagement process, proxy statement disclosure, or other means.
|
68
|
Understanding opposition to management proposals
|
As part of its shareholder engagement process, the Board seeks to
understand the reasons for, and respond to, significant shareholder
opposition to management proposals.
|
|
Availability of independent directors
|
Target’s Lead Independent Director is expected to communicate with
major shareholders, as appropriate, and Target also makes other
independent directors available, as appropriate, for shareholder
engagement.
|
10, 18
|
Strong, independent leadership
|
|
Independence
|
A majority of our directors must be independent. Currently, all of
our directors other than our CEO are independent, and all of our
Committees consist exclusively of independent directors.
|
12, 17
|
Lead Independent
Director
|
Whenever our CEO is also the Chair of the Board, we require a Lead
Independent Director position with specific responsibilities to
provide independent oversight of management.
|
10
|
Annual Elections for Lead Independent
Director and Chair
|
Both the Lead Independent Director and the Chair of the Board are
elected annually by the independent directors, which ensures that
the leadership structure is reviewed at least annually.
|
10
|
Committee membership and leadership rotations
|
The Governance & Sustainability Committee reviews and
recommends Committee membership. The Board appoints members of its
Committees annually, rotates Committee assignments periodically,
and seeks to rotate the Lead Independent Director position and
Committee Chair assignments every four to six years.
|
10, 11
|
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
8 |
Back to
Contents
Practice
|
Description
|
More
information
|
Structures and practices enhance Board effectiveness
|
|
Diversity
|
The composition of our Board represents broad perspectives,
experiences, and knowledge relevant to our business while
maintaining a balanced approach to gender and ethnic diversity.
|
19, 21
|
Director tenure policies
|
Our director tenure policies include mandatory retirement at age 72
and a maximum term limit of 20 years. These policies encourage
Board refreshment and provide additional opportunities to maintain
a balanced mix of perspectives and experiences.
|
20
|
Director maximum outside boards policy
|
Any director serving as a CEO of a public company is expected to
serve on no more than two public company boards (including our
Board), and other directors are expected to serve on no more than
four public company boards (including our Board).
|
|
Strategy and risk oversight
|
We disclose how strategy and risk oversight is exercised at the
Board level and how risk oversight responsibilities are allocated
among the Board and its Committees.
|
13, 14
|
Management development and succession planning
|
Our Board regularly reviews management development and succession
planning, with more in-depth reviews regularly conducted by the
Compensation & Human Capital Management Committee.
|
15
|
Sustainability & ESG
|
We disclose how oversight responsibility for sustainability and ESG
matters is allocated among the Board and its Committees and how
management integrates those priorities in our business. We also
report about sustainability and ESG matters under the most widely
used reporting frameworks.
|
15
|
Information security, cybersecurity, and data privacy
|
We disclose how oversight responsibility for risks related to
information security, cybersecurity, and data privacy are shared by
the Board, its Committees, and management.
|
16
|
Capital allocation
|
We disclose our capital allocation policies and priorities and how
they are overseen by the Board and its Committees.
|
17
|
Management incentive structures are aligned with long-term
strategy
|
|
Performance linked to long-term strategy drives incentive
awards
|
The Compensation & Human Capital Management Committee has
identified short- and long-term performance goals that align with
Target’s strategy and has incorporated those goals into executive
compensation plans to serve as drivers of incentive awards.
|
37
|
Communicating executive compensation to shareholders
|
The CD&A explains how performance goals drive our executive
compensation plans and connect to Target’s long-term strategy.
|
33
|
Follow leading compensation practices
|
See “Target’s executive compensation practices.”
|
49
|
|
|
|
For your convenience, we organized the corporate governance
highlights listed above to show how our corporate governance
practices compare favorably with the corporate governance
principles developed by ISG, which reflect common corporate
governance beliefs featured in the proxy voting guidelines of the
largest institutional investors and global asset managers who are
part of ISG.
Name
|
Age
|
Director
since
|
Current or most recent company
|
Title
|
Independent
|
Other public
boards
|
David P. Abney
|
66
|
2021
|
United Parcel Service, Inc.
|
Former Chairman & CEO
|
Yes
|
2
|
Douglas M. Baker, Jr.
|
63
|
2013
|
Ecolab Inc.
|
Executive Chairman
|
Yes
|
1
|
George S. Barrett
|
67
|
2018
|
Cardinal Health, Inc.
|
Former Chairman & CEO
|
Yes
|
0
|
Gail K. Boudreaux
|
61
|
2021
|
Anthem, Inc.
|
President & CEO
|
Yes
|
1
|
Brian C. Cornell
|
63
|
2014
|
Target Corporation
|
Chairman & CEO
|
No
|
1
|
Robert L. Edwards
|
66
|
2015
|
Safeway Inc.
|
Former President & CEO
|
Yes
|
0
|
Melanie L. Healey
|
61
|
2015
|
The Procter & Gamble Company
|
Former Group President, North America
|
Yes
|
3
|
Donald R. Knauss
|
71
|
2015
|
The Clorox Company
|
Former Chairman & CEO
|
Yes
|
2
|
Christine A. Leahy
|
57
|
2021
|
CDW Corporation
|
President & CEO
|
Yes
|
1
|
Monica C. Lozano
|
65
|
2016
|
The College Futures Foundation
|
President & CEO
|
Yes
|
2
|
Mary E. Minnick(1)
|
62
|
2005
|
Digital Media Solutions, Inc.
|
Chairman
|
Yes
|
3
|
Derica W. Rice
|
57
|
2020(2)
|
CVS Health Corporation /
CVS Caremark
|
Former Executive Vice President / Former President
|
Yes
|
3
|
Dmitri L. Stockton
|
58
|
2018
|
General Electric Company
|
Former Senior Vice President & Special Advisor to the
Chairman
|
Yes
|
2
|
(1)
Ms. Minnick will not seek re-election and will leave the Board when
her current term ends at the 2022 Annual Meeting.
(2)
Mr. Rice previously served on our Board from September 2007 to
January 2018. We include his prior service in determining his total
tenure with the Board for purposes of our tenure policies.
|
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
9 |
Back to
Contents
We do not have an express policy on whether the roles of Chair of
the Board and CEO should be combined or separated. Instead, the
Board prefers to maintain the flexibility to determine which
leadership structure best serves the interests of Target and our
shareholders based on the evolving needs of the company. We
currently have a combined Chair of the Board and CEO leadership
structure.
The Board reevaluates our Board leadership structure at least
annually as part of the Board evaluation process described under
“Board and Committee evaluations” on page 20 and also considers
shareholder feedback on the topic. As a result of its most recent
evaluation, the Board decided to continue having Mr. Cornell serve
as both Chair of the Board and CEO to coordinate the development,
articulation, and execution of a unified strategy at the Board and
management levels.
Our Corporate Governance Guidelines require that both the Chair of
the Board and Lead Independent Director be elected annually by the
independent, non-employee directors, which ensures that the
leadership structure is reviewed at least annually. Where the Chair
of the Board and CEO roles are combined as they are currently, our
Corporate Governance Guidelines require that we have a Lead
Independent Director position to complement the Chair of the
Board’s role and to serve as the principal liaison between the
non-employee directors and the CEO. The Board is committed to
continuing to seek shareholder feedback on its approach as part of
its ongoing shareholder outreach efforts and will continue to
reassess its Board leadership structure on a regular basis.
Ms. Lozano currently serves as our Lead Independent Director,
providing effective, independent leadership of our Board through
her clearly defined and robust set of roles and
responsibilities.
Monica C.
Lozano
|
Robust
responsibilities:
●
Convene meetings. Has the authority to convene meetings of
the Board and executive sessions consisting solely of independent
directors at every meeting.
●
Preside at certain meetings. Presides at all meetings of the
Board at which the Chair of the Board is not present, including
executive sessions of independent directors.
●
CEO performance review. Consults with the Compensation &
Human Capital Management Committee as it conducts the annual
performance review of the CEO, with input from the other
independent directors.
●
Director liaison. Serves as the primary liaison between the
CEO and the non-employee directors.
●
Meeting schedules, agendas, and information. Approves
meeting schedules, agendas, and the information furnished to the
Board to ensure that the Board has adequate time and information
for discussion.
|
●
Shareholder engagement. Is expected to engage in
consultation and direct communication with major shareholders, as
appropriate.
●
Non-employee director expectations. Coordinates with the CEO
to establish expectations for non-employee directors to
consistently monitor Target’s operations and those of our
competitors.
●
Composition and director succession planning. Consults with
the Governance & Sustainability Committee regarding Board and
Committee composition, Committee Chair selection, the annual
performance review of the Board and its Committees, and director
succession planning.
|
Annual
election:
Elected annually by the independent, non-employee directors.
Service
length:
As a guideline, the Lead Independent Director should serve in that
capacity for no more than four to six years.
|
Lead Independent
Director
(Since 2021)
|
|
The Board met seven times during Fiscal 2021. All directors
attended at least 85% of the aggregate total of meetings of the
Board and Committees on which the director served during the last
fiscal year.
Twelve of our thirteen then-serving directors attended our 2021
Annual Meeting. The Board has a policy requiring all directors to
attend all annual meetings of shareholders, absent extraordinary
circumstances. The only director who did not attend the 2021 Annual
Meeting was Calvin Darden, whose term ended at the 2021 Annual
Meeting.
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
10 |
Back to
Contents
Membership
|
|
Name
|
|
Audit &
Risk
|
Compensation &
Human Capital
Management
|
Governance &
Sustainability
|
Infrastructure &
Finance
|
|
|
|
|
David P. Abney
|
|
●
|
|
|
●
|
|
|
|
|
Douglas M. Baker, Jr.
|
|
|
●
|
C
|
|
|
|
|
|
George S. Barrett
|
|
|
●
|
●
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gail K. Boudreaux
|
|
●
|
|
|
●
|
|
|
|
|
Robert L. Edwards
|
|
C
|
|
|
●
|
|
|
|
|
Melanie L. Healey
|
|
|
●
|
●
|
|
|
|
|
|
Donald R. Knauss
|
|
|
●
|
|
●
|
|
|
|
|
Christine A. Leahy
|
|
|
●
|
●
|
|
|
|
|
|
Monica C. Lozano
|
|
|
C
|
●
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mary E. Minnick(1)
|
|
|
|
|
C
|
|
|
|
|
Derica W. Rice
|
|
●
|
|
|
●
|
|
|
|
|
Dmitri L. Stockton
|
|
●
|
|
●
|
|
|
|
|
|
Meetings held in Fiscal 2021(2)
|
|
7
|
6
|
5
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
Ms. Minnick will leave the Infrastructure & Finance Committee
when her current Board terms ends at the 2022 Annual Meeting.
(2)
During Fiscal 2021, the Board’s Risk & Compliance Committee met
two times until it was eliminated and its responsibilities were
reallocated to other Committees in September 2021. For more
information about the Committee restructuring, please see
“Committee restructuring” below.
|
|
|
Committee restructuring
In September 2021, the Board revised its Committee structure and
charters to clarify and enhance its approach to oversight of risk
and ESG matters by reallocating to its Committees oversight
responsibility for those topics that fall within their respective
functions and related responsibilities.
The revised structure and charters for the Committees were guided
by our prior Board and Committee self-evaluations, the evolving
needs of our business, and consideration of external trends in
corporate governance. In addition, we believe the changes
appropriately reflect how companies are adjusting to current
expectations of Board oversight of ESG matters. For more
information, see “Risk oversight” on page 14 and “Sustainability
& ESG” on page 15.
Determining composition and leadership
The Governance & Sustainability Committee is responsible for
reviewing and recommending Committee membership. The Board appoints
members of its Committees annually and rotates Committee
assignments periodically. The following considerations provide the
framework for determining Committee composition and leadership:
●
The guideline for rotating Committee Chair assignments is four to
six years of service.
●
The Board seeks to have each director serve on two Committees.
●
The Board considers a number of factors in deciding Committee
composition, including individual director experience and
qualifications, prior Committee experience, and increased time
commitments for directors serving as a Committee Chair or Lead
Independent Director.
●
By virtue of the position, the Lead Independent Director is a
member of the Governance & Sustainability Committee.
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
11 |
Back to
Contents
Information about our Committees
All members of each Committee are independent directors. Each
Committee operates under a written charter, a current copy of which
is available on our company’s website, as described in Question 16
“How may I access or receive the proxy materials, other periodic
filings, key corporate governance documents, and other
information?” on page 75. In fulfilling the oversight and other
responsibilities delegated by the Board, each Committee:
●
provides the Board with regular reports of its activities;
●
has the sole authority to retain or terminate its consultants and
other advisors;
●
receives appropriate funding to pay for necessary resources and
administrative expenses; and
●
annually evaluates its performance.
 |
Oversight and other responsibilities
● Accounting
and financial reporting. Accounting and financial reporting
process, including the integrity of our financial statements and
internal controls.
● Independent
auditor. Independent auditor engagement, qualifications, and
independence.
● Internal
audit. Internal audit’s function, results, and assessment of
our risk management processes.
● Tax
matters. Positions with respect to income and other tax
obligations.
● Committee
report. “Report of the Audit & Risk Committee” on page 66,
describing the Audit & Risk Committee’s duties and
activities.
● Policy
oversight. Policies and procedures related to oversight areas
(including auditor independence matters, accounting and auditing
complaints, and related party transactions).
|
● Compliance
and ethics. Compliance and ethics programs, monitoring,
investigations and remediation efforts, including reports of
potential misconduct.
● Enterprise
risk management. Enterprise risk management programs, principal
business and operational risks (including vendor risk management,
cybersecurity and information security, privacy, product and food
safety, and business continuity and disaster recovery), and
coordination of risk oversight with the Board and other
Committees.
● Supply
chain ESG matters. Management’s efforts to instill responsible
and ethical practices within Target’s supply chain, including
vendor human capital and responsible sourcing practices.
|
Committee
members
Mr. Edwards
(Chair)
Mr. Abney
Ms. Boudreaux
Mr. Rice
Mr. Stockton
Number of
meetings
during Fiscal
2021
7
|
Audit & Risk
Committee(1)
|
(1)
The Board has determined that all members of the Audit & Risk
Committee satisfy the applicable audit committee independence
requirements of the NYSE and the SEC. The Board has also determined
that all members have acquired the attributes necessary to qualify
them as “audit committee financial experts” as defined by
applicable SEC rules. The determination for each of Mr. Edwards,
Mr. Abney, Ms. Boudreaux, and Mr. Rice was based on experience as a
principal financial officer, principal accounting officer,
controller, public accountant or auditor, or actively supervising a
person holding one of those positions. For Mr. Stockton, the
determination was based on his financial oversight experiences with
General Electric Company.
|
 |
Oversight and other responsibilities
● Executive
compensation program. Compensation philosophy, plans,
selection, and relative weightings of different compensation
elements to balance risk, reward, and retention objectives, and the
alignment of incentive compensation performance measures with our
strategy.
● CEO
compensation. Goals, objectives, elements, and value for the
CEO’s compensation (in consultation with independent members of the
Board).
● Other
executive officer compensation. Compensation elements and value
for all other executive officers.
● Management
development and succession planning. Senior management
development, evaluation, and succession planning, including CEO
succession planning.
|
● Board
compensation. Compensation provided to non-employee members of
the Board.
● Committee
report. “Compensation & Human Capital Management Committee
Report” on page 33.
● Compensation
risk management. Risks associated with our compensation
policies, practices, and incentives, and whether those policies and
practices create material risks to Target.
● Human
capital management. Human capital matters with respect to our
workforce, including DE&I, culture and employee engagement, pay
equity, broad-based compensation and benefits, growth and
development, and purpose and values.
|
Committee
members
Ms. Lozano
(Chair)
Mr. Baker
Mr. Barrett
Ms. Healey
Mr. Knauss
Ms. Leahy
Number of
meetings
during Fiscal
2021
6
|
Compensation &
Human Capital
Management
Committee(1)
|
(1)
The Board has determined that all members of the Compensation &
Human Capital Management Committee satisfy the applicable
compensation committee independence requirements of the NYSE and
the SEC.
|
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
12 |
Back to
Contents
 |
Oversight and other responsibilities
● Corporate
governance. Corporate governance structure and practices.
● Director
succession planning. Director succession planning reviews and
identification and recruitment of individuals qualified to become
Board members.
● Board
and Committee composition and leadership. Recommendations, in
consultation with the Lead Independent Director, on overall
composition of the Board and its Committees, and the selection of
the Committee Chairs and the Lead Independent Director.
|
● Board
and Committee evaluations. Annual performance review of the
Board and its Committees in consultation with the Lead Independent
Director.
● Sustainability
& ESG matters. Overall approach to significant
sustainability and ESG matters (including strategy, prioritization,
monitoring, and external reporting), environmental stewardship
practices, social and political issues and risks not allocated to
other Committees, and philanthropy and community engagement.
● Public
policy advocacy and political activities. Our policies and
practices regarding public policy advocacy and political
activities.
|
Committee
members
Mr. Baker
(Chair)
Mr. Barrett
Ms. Healey
Ms. Leahy
Ms. Lozano
Mr. Stockton
Number of
meetings
during Fiscal
2021
5
|
Governance &
Sustainability
Committee
|
 |
Oversight and other responsibilities
● Investment
activity. Investment activity, including aligning investments
with our strategy, and evaluating the effectiveness of investment
decisions.
● Infrastructure
resources. Management’s resource allocation plans regarding
infrastructure requirements.
● Significant
transactions. Management’s plans and strategies for significant
transactions within strategic framework reviewed by the Board,
including level of investment, sources of financing, expected
returns, and post-acquisition integration and performance of
acquired businesses.
|
● Financial
matters. Financial policies and financial condition, including
our liquidity position, funding requirements, ability to access the
capital markets, interest rate exposures, and policies regarding
return of cash to shareholders.
● Financial
risk management. Financial risk assessment process, management
activities and strategies, and use of third party insurance and
self-insurance strategies.
|
Committee
members
Ms. Minnick
(Chair)
Mr. Abney
Ms. Boudreaux
Mr. Edwards
Mr. Knauss
Mr. Rice
Number of
meetings
during Fiscal
2021
5
|
Infrastructure
& Finance
Committee
|
The Board is responsible for overseeing the business and affairs of
our company, which covers a wide range of activities. To provide
you with a better understanding of how our Board meets that
responsibility, this section discusses some core functions our
Board performs and how those functions oversee, support, and relate
to management’s roles and responsibilities.
Strategy oversight
The Board has an important role in overseeing the development,
periodic review, and ongoing monitoring of our strategy to meet our
corporate purpose to help all families discover the joy of everyday
life. Our team, technology, and operations enable us to meet that
purpose and offer a preferred shopping experience to our guests
through a durable, growth-driving strategy that differentiates
Target in the marketplace. The six pillars of our strategy are:
●
Delivering affordability to our guests;
●
Differentiating from our competition with our owned brands and a
curated assortment of leading national brands;
●
Investing to create an engaging and differentiated shopping
experience;
●
Leveraging our stores-as-hubs to efficiently provide a convenient
and safe experience for our guests whether they purchase online or
physically in-store;
●
Maintaining and enhancing our relevancy to deepen engagement with
guests; and
●
Leveraging our size and scale to benefit people, the planet, and
our business, primarily through Target Forward, the
sustainability-focused component of our overall business strategy,
announced in 2021 and discussed in more detail in “Sustainability
& ESG” on page 15.
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
13 |
Back to
Contents
With a strong overall strategy in place, the Board and its
Committees are focused on overseeing the execution of this strategy
by:
●
Ensuring that Target has a high-performing management team and
appropriate resources to carry out the strategy, and
●
Confirming that the primary risks to successfully executing our
strategy are appropriately identified and managed.
To support its strategy oversight role, at each regular meeting the
Board receives updates about our financial and strategic
performance. In addition, it receives regular updates on the major
events, activities and challenges affecting our business, and
ongoing strategy.
Risk oversight
Oversight of the various risks we face in implementing our strategy
is an integral and continuous part of the Board’s oversight of our
business. The Board, each Committee, and management have specific
roles and responsibilities with respect to those risks.
The Board and its Committees
The Board provides oversight of overall risks, with emphasis on
strategic risks, which occurs as an integral and continuous part of
the Board’s oversight of our business and seeks to ensure that
management has processes in place to appropriately manage risk. For
example, our principal strategic risks are reviewed as part of the
Board’s regular discussion and consideration of our strategy,
including the development and monitoring of specific initiatives
and their overall alignment with our strategy. Similarly, at every
meeting the Board reviews the principal factors influencing our
operating results, including the competitive environment, and
discusses with our senior executive officers the major events,
activities, and challenges affecting Target.
The Audit & Risk Committee oversees our enterprise risk
management program and periodically reviews our approach to risk
identification, assessment, and mitigation strategies with the
Board to facilitate coordination with the activities of the Board
and other Committees. The Chief Legal & Risk Officer provides
the Audit & Risk Committee with regular updates on the
enterprise risk management program and the status of key risks
facing the business. The Audit & Risk Committee also regularly
receives updates on key risk areas from other members of management
with primary responsibility for managing those risk areas, and
regularly reviews legal and regulatory risk, compliance, and ethics
matters.
The general risk oversight functions among the Board and its
Committees is as follows. For more detail on the specific oversight
and responsibilities of each Committee, see pages 12-13.

|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
14 |
Back to
Contents
Management
The primary responsibility for the identification, assessment, and
management of the various risks that we face belongs with
management.
Our Chief Legal & Risk Officer provides centralized oversight
of Target’s enterprise risk management program. Our Chairman &
CEO and his direct reports meet regularly with the Chief Legal
& Risk Officer and the enterprise risk management team to
identify, assess, and manage risks facing the business. In
addition, the Chief Legal & Risk Officer and other enterprise
risk management Team Members regularly meet with leaders of
business areas to inform, coordinate, and manage the enterprise
risk management program.
Our risk management capabilities are intended to increase the
likelihood of desired business outcomes. The different risk-related
roles and responsibilities, which are aligned and coordinated using
a common framework, including tools, technology, and defined
routines, are fulfilled by different business functions as
follows:
●
Business teams. Define business objectives and desired
outcomes; execute, oversee and monitor day-to-day business
activities and risks, leveraging the risk and compliance function’s
tools and support as appropriate.
●
Enterprise risk management. Partner with business teams to
identify, assess, prioritize, treat, and monitor top enterprise
risks.
●
Risk and compliance function. Develop, help implement,
monitor and evaluate processes, as appropriate, to enable business
teams’ oversight and day-to-day risk management.
●
Internal audit. Provide independent assurance and risk
insights to instill confidence in and evaluate whether Target’s
programs and processes will sustainably achieve intended
outcomes.
Management development and succession
planning
One of the primary responsibilities of the Board is to ensure that
Target has a high-performing management team. To meet that goal,
the Board, the Compensation & Human Capital Management
Committee, and management share responsibility for management
development and succession planning:
Responsible party
|
Oversight area for management development and succession
planning
|
Board
|
Oversight of these topics as part of its overall oversight role,
including regular reviews of management development and succession
planning to maximize the pool of internal candidates who can assume
top management positions without undue interruption
|
Compensation & Human Capital Management Committee
|
Primary responsibilities for organizational talent and development
and management succession planning, including regular reviews of
executive performance, diverse representation, potential, and
succession planning with a deeper focus than the full Board review,
emphasizing career development for management with potential
|
Management
|
The Chief Human Resources Officer and senior Human Resources
leaders work with functional leaders across Target in developing
and implementing programs to attract, assess, and develop
management-level talent for possible future senior leadership
positions
|
Sustainability & ESG
We engage with a diverse group of stakeholders around the world,
including the people who manufacture the products we sell, the Team
Members who welcome our guests, the communities where we work, the
nonprofits that work with us, and the investors who make our work
possible. Their perspectives are one of a variety of factors we
consider as we analyze which ESG matters to prioritize in
determining and evaluating our sustainability strategy.
During Fiscal 2021, we announced Target Forward, the
sustainability-focused component of our overall business strategy,
which reflects those prioritized ESG matters integrated into our
strategy and purpose. Target Forward builds on our legacy of
corporate responsibility and seeks to leverage our size and scale
to benefit people, the planet, and our business. It incorporates
specific, time-bound goals that support our ambitions to design and
elevate sustainable brands, innovate to eliminate waste, and
accelerate opportunity and equity with team members, guests,
partners, and communities. More information about Target Forward
and our goals can be found on our website at
https://corporate.target.com/sustainability-ESG.
Given the breadth of ESG matters for a company of our size and
scale, oversight of those issues is allocated throughout the Board
and its Committees:
Responsible party
|
Oversight areas for ESG matters
|
Board
|
●
Sustainability and ESG strategy (through oversight of our business
strategy and annual strategic priorities)
●
Crisis management and response
●
Organizational team health
|
Audit & Risk Committee
|
●
Supply chain ESG, including vendor human capital and responsible
sourcing practices
●
Cybersecurity and information security
●
Product and food safety
|
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
15 |
Back to
Contents
Responsible party
|
Oversight areas for ESG matters
|
Governance & Sustainability Committee
|
●
Overall approach to significant sustainability and ESG matters
(including strategy, prioritization, monitoring, and external
reporting)
●
Environmental stewardship practices (including climate and energy,
waste, natural resources, and chemicals)
●
Social and political issues and risks not allocated to other
Committees
●
Philanthropy and community engagement
●
Policies and practices regarding public policy and political
activities
|
Compensation & Human Capital Management Committee
|
●
Culture and employee engagement
●
Broad-based compensation and benefits
|
At the management level, our ESG matters are led and coordinated by
our Senior Vice President, Corporate Responsibility, who regularly
engages with the Governance & Sustainability Committee and the
full Board. The Senior Vice President, Corporate Responsibility is
responsible for:
●
conducting regular priority assessments to determine the topics of
most significance to our stakeholders;
●
collaborating with other members of management to instill
ESG-related priorities into our business operations, including
product design and development, sourcing and supply chain
operations, human capital management, and our new store
development; and
●
developing ESG-related goals and managing our ESG data,
measurement, and reporting.
We report ESG matters in our annual Corporate Responsibility
Report, which has extensive information on specific ESG topics and
appendices that organize the information according to the most
widely used reporting frameworks. Our most recent report is
available on our website at
https://corporate.target.com/sustainability-ESG/governance-and-reporting/reporting-progress.
Information security, cybersecurity, and data
privacy
Securing the information we receive and store about our guests,
Team Members, vendors, and other third parties is important to us.
We have systems in place to safely receive and store that
information and to detect, contain, and respond to data security
incidents. While everyone at Target plays a part in information
security, cybersecurity, and data privacy, oversight responsibility
is shared by the Board, its Committees, and management:
Responsible party
|
Oversight area for information security, cybersecurity, and data
privacy
|
Board
|
Oversight of these topics within Target’s overall risks
|
Audit & Risk Committee
|
Primary oversight responsibility for information security,
cybersecurity, and data privacy, including internal controls
designed to mitigate risks related to these topics
|
Management
|
Our Chief Information Officer, our Chief Information Security
Officer, and senior members of our cybersecurity and compliance and
ethics teams are responsible for identifying and managing risks
related to these topics, and reporting to the Audit & Risk
Committee and/or the full Board
|
Our program and practices for these areas include the
following:
●
Frequent Board and Committee updates. Management provides
regular updates to the Board and/or Audit & Risk Committee on
these topics throughout the year and, at least annually, the Chief
Information Security Officer provides an information security
program review to the Audit & Risk Committee to inform the
Committee in its oversight of these topics.
●
Systems and processes. We use a combination of
industry-leading tools and in-house technologies to protect Target
and our guests, operate a proactive threat intelligence program to
identify and assess risk, and run a Cyber Fusion Center to
investigate and respond to threats.
●
Understanding evolving threats in the industry and with our
suppliers. Our Cyber Threat Intelligence team works to
understand evolving threats and industry trends, and our Vendor
Security team monitors and assesses risks with our suppliers.
●
Investment, training, and development of our cybersecurity
team. We invest in building and developing cybersecurity talent
and engineering expertise in-house rather than relying solely on
third-party providers. We also offer in-house training and
educational courses through our Cyber Plus Institute, which is a
security training curriculum leveraging internal subject matter
expertise along with curated resources.
●
Collaboration with organizations across all industries. We
share information and collaborate with organizations across
different industries to fight cybercrime and advance capabilities
in these areas.
●
Regular training and compliance activities for our Team
Members. Our Team Members receive annual training to understand
the behaviors and technical requirements necessary to protect
company and guest information. We also offer ongoing practice and
education for Team Members to recognize and report suspicious
activity.
●
Use of third parties. Beyond our in-house capabilities we
engage with leading security and technology vendors to assess our
program and test our technical capabilities.
●
Insurance coverage. We maintain insurance coverage to limit
our exposure to certain events, including network security
matters.
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
16 |
Back to
Contents
Capital allocation
Our disciplined and balanced approach to capital allocation is
based on the following priorities, ranked in order of
importance:
Priority
|
Description
|
1. Investing in our business
|
Fully invest in opportunities to profitably grow our business,
create sustainable long-term value, and maintain our current
operations and assets
|
2. Annual dividend
|
Maintain a competitive quarterly dividend and seek to grow it
annually
|
3. Share repurchase
|
Return excess cash to shareholders by repurchasing shares within
the limits of our credit rating goals
|
We use share repurchase to balance the levels of debt and equity on
our balance sheet to support our credit rating goals, and have
flexibility to adjust the level of share repurchase activity to
respond to changes in our operating performance, investment
opportunities, and the external environment.
Management is responsible for developing and executing our capital
allocation policy with oversight by the Board and its Committees.
The Infrastructure & Finance Committee is responsible for
reviewing the execution of our capital allocation policy and making
recommendations to the Board on the amount of dividends and share
repurchase levels, while the Compensation & Human Capital
Management Committee oversees the compensation effects of capital
allocation priorities on plan design, goal-setting process,
performance updates, and payouts.
The Board believes that a majority of its members should be
independent directors. The Board annually reviews all relationships
that directors have with Target to affirmatively determine whether
the directors are independent. If a director has a material
relationship with Target, that director is not independent. The
listing standards of the NYSE also detail certain relationships
that, if present, preclude a finding of independence. The Board
affirmatively determined that all non-employee directors are
independent. Mr. Cornell is the only employee director and is
not independent.
In making its independence determination, the Board specifically
considered the following transactions during the past three years
and concluded that none of them impaired any director’s
independence:
●
Mr. Baker serves as Executive Chairman of Ecolab Inc., from which
we purchased supplies, merchandise, servicing, repairs, and food
safety and compliance audits.
●
Ms. Boudreaux serves as President & Chief Executive Officer of
Anthem, Inc., from which we obtained the wellness services that
comprise our Team Member life resources program.
●
Ms. Leahy serves as President & Chief Executive Officer of CDW
Corporation, from which we purchased supplies, merchandise,
equipment, software, servicing, repairs, and maintenance.
Each of the transactions above involved amounts that represented an
immaterial percentage of our, and the other entity’s, revenues, and
were well below the amounts that would preclude a finding of
independence under the NYSE listing standards. In addition, none of
the above transactions are related-party transactions because none
of the directors have a direct or indirect material interest in the
listed transactions.
The Board has adopted a written policy requiring that any
transaction: (a) involving Target, (b) in which one of our
directors, nominees for director, executive officers, or greater
than five percent shareholders, or their immediate family members,
have a direct or indirect material interest, and (c) where the
amount involved exceeds $120,000 in any fiscal year, be approved by
a majority of independent directors of the full Board or by a
designated Committee. The Board has designated the Audit & Risk
Committee as having responsibility for reviewing and approving all
such transactions except those dealing with compensation of
executive officers and directors, or their immediate family
members, in which case it will be reviewed and approved by the
Compensation & Human Capital Management Committee.
In determining whether to approve any such transaction, the
independent directors or relevant Committee must consider, in
addition to other factors deemed appropriate, the material facts of
the transaction and whether the transaction is on terms no less
favorable to Target than those involving unrelated parties. The
Audit & Risk Committee must prohibit any transaction it
determines to be inconsistent with the interests of Target and its
shareholders. No director may participate in any review or approval
of any transaction if the director, or the director’s immediate
family member, is a party to the transaction.
We approved two related party transactions in accordance with this
policy during Fiscal 2021. The son of Donald Knauss, a non-employee
director, is employed as a sales representative by a supplier from
which Target purchases wholesale merchandise. Mr. Knauss’s son
represented the supplier in its relationship with Target
Corporation during Fiscal 2021. In Fiscal 2021, we purchased
approximately $7.4 million of merchandise from the supplier, which
represented less than 0.01% of our annual revenues. Target’s
decisions regarding purchases of merchandise from its suppliers are
made by Team Members in the merchandising departments and no member
of the Board has any input or involvement in such decisions. The
transaction involving Mr. Knauss’s son did not affect Mr. Knauss’s
independence and the Board affirmatively determined that Mr. Knauss
is independent. The other transaction dealt with compensation of an
immediate family member of Stephanie Lundquist, who served as one
of our executive officers until February 2021. Ms. Lundquist’s
sister joined Target in 2006, has been a team member in data
sciences since that time and earned annual compensation of $145,971
in 2021, which is commensurate with her peers.
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
17 |
Back to
Contents
We are committed to conducting business ethically and lawfully. All
of our directors and named executive officers, like all Target Team
Members, are required to act with honesty and integrity.
Our Code of Ethics, which applies to all Target Team Members,
including our executive officers and Chief Accounting Officer &
Controller, establishes expectations to guide ethical
decision-making, including putting ethics into action, working
together, maintaining trust, conducting business fairly,
safeguarding what’s ours, and caring for our world. Included within
those topics is how we address conflicts of interest, fair dealing,
required information disclosures and compliance with laws, rules
and regulations, and prompt reporting. Our Code of Ethics also
describes the means by which any Team Member can provide an
anonymous report of an actual or apparent violation of our Code of
Ethics.
Similarly, our directors are subject to a separate Code of Ethics
contained within our Corporate Governance Guidelines, which is
tailored to the unique role fulfilled by members of the Board and
addresses conflicts of interest, corporate opportunities,
maintaining confidentiality, compliance with laws, fair dealing,
and compliance procedures.
On our website we disclose any amendments to, or waivers from, any
provision of the applicable Code of Ethics involving our directors,
executive officers, Chief Accounting Officer & Controller, or
other persons performing similar functions.
We regularly engage with our shareholders, both large and small,
relating to our business, compensation practices, and ESG matters.
We involve one or more independent directors in these
conversations, as appropriate. The principal topics of engagement
since our 2021 Annual Meeting included:
●
Board and Committee oversight of ESG matters;
●
Our sustainability strategy, Target Forward, including how it
relates to our purpose and business strategy;
●
Human capital management, including DE&I and how we have
invested in our team;
●
Sustainability and ESG matters within our supply chain, including
our responsible sourcing practices; and
●
Environmental topics, such as the circular economy, packaging, net
zero goals, and carbon emissions.
While we benefit from an ongoing dialogue with many of our
shareholders, we recognize that we have not communicated directly
with all of our shareholders. If you would like to engage with us,
please send correspondence to Target Corporation, Attn: Investor
Relations, 1000 Nicollet Mall, TPN-0841, Minneapolis,
Minnesota 55403 or email investorrelations@target.com.
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
18 |
Back to
Contents
Item one Election of
directors
Item of business
|
|
Board recommendation
|
|
Voting approval standard
|
Election of 12 director nominees
named in the 2022 Proxy Statement
|
|
The Board recommends that shareholders vote FOR each
director nominee.
 |
|
More votes “For” than “Against.”
Abstentions and broker
non-votes have no effect in
calculating the required vote.
|
For additional details about the Board recommendation and voting
standards, please see Question 10 “What items are being voted upon,
how does the Board recommend that I vote, and what are the
standards for determining whether any item has been approved?” on
page 73.
Our election process is backed by sound corporate governance
principles:
•
All directors are elected annually.
•
Directors are elected under a “majority voting” standard—each
director in an uncontested election must receive more votes “For”
his or her election than votes “Against” in order to be
elected.
•
An incumbent director who is not re-elected must promptly offer to
resign. The Governance & Sustainability Committee will make a
recommendation on the offer to the full Board, and the Board must
accept or reject the offer within 90 days and publicly disclose its
decision and rationale.
The Governance & Sustainability Committee is responsible for
identifying individuals qualified to become Board members and
making recommendations on director nominees to the full Board. The
Governance & Sustainability Committee considers the following
factors in its efforts to identify potential director
candidates:
•
Input from the Board and management and feedback from our
shareholders to identify the backgrounds and skill sets that are
desired.
•
Changes in our business strategy or operating environment and the
future needs of the Board in light of anticipated director
retirements under our Board tenure policies.
The criteria the Board follows in determining the composition of
the Board are as follows:
•
Directors are to have broad perspective, experience, knowledge, and
independent judgment.
•
The Board as a whole should consist predominantly of persons with
strong business backgrounds that span multiple industries.
•
The Board does not have a specific policy regarding consideration
of gender, ethnic, or other diversity criteria in identifying
director candidates, but understands the value of DE&I and has
a strong history of gender and racial/ethnic diversity on the
Board.
The Governance & Sustainability Committee’s background, skill
sets, and composition criteria for Board members are used by our
internal talent acquisition team or, periodically, a third-party
search firm to identify candidates. In addition, the Governance
& Sustainability Committee considers candidates who are
recommended by shareholders, other Board members, the CEO, and
management against that criteria. Any shareholder who wants to
recommend a candidate for the Governance & Sustainability
Committee to consider nominating for the 2023 Annual Meeting should
submit a written request and related information to our Corporate
Secretary no later than December 31, 2022 in order to allow for
sufficient time to consider the recommendation. Shareholders may
also nominate director candidates directly if they comply with our
bylaws, which are described in more detail in Question 19 “How do I
submit a proposal or nominate a director candidate for the 2023
Annual Meeting?” on page 76.
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
19 |
Back to
Contents
Overview
The Governance & Sustainability Committee, in consultation with
the Lead Independent Director, annually leads an evaluation
reviewing the performance of the Board and its Committees. The
evaluation process seeks to obtain each director’s assessment of
the effectiveness of the Board, the Committees and their
leadership, Board and Committee composition, and Board/management
dynamics. In addition, as part of the process the Board evaluates
individual director performance through questions in the survey
focused on obtaining candid feedback on individual directors and
through the one-on-one conversations between the Lead Independent
Director and each director. This annual evaluation has periodically
been conducted by a third-party consultant, as appropriate. Our
Corporate Secretary’s Office administered the recent
evaluation.
Process

Actions
Over the past few years, the evaluation process has contributed to
different enhancements to the Board and its Committees,
including:
•
Reallocating Committee responsibilities and renaming the Committees
to reflect their revised scope.
•
Clarifying the roles of the Board and its Committees with respect
to oversight of ESG matters.
•
Managing Board composition and refreshment to provide a wealth of
relevant expertise, diverse mix of skills, and balanced tenure.
Tenure policies
The Board maintains tenure policies (contained in our Corporate
Governance Guidelines) as a means of ensuring that the Board
regularly benefits from a balanced mix of perspectives and
experiences.

|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
20 |
Back to
Contents
Tenure and age of independent directors
Our current Board’s composition represents a balanced approach to
tenure for our independent directors, allowing the Board to benefit
from the experience of longer-serving directors combined with fresh
perspectives from newer directors:

(1)
Mr. Rice previously served on our Board from September 2007 to
January 2018. We include his prior service in determining his total
tenure with the Board for purposes of our tenure policies.
Board diversity
The Board values DE&I and the composition of the Board’s
current membership and leadership positions is consistent with the
strong history of gender and racial/ethnic diversity on the
Board.

(1)
Our racially or ethnically diverse directors are Ms. Healey, Ms.
Lozano, Mr. Rice, and Mr. Stockton.
Information about new directors
On August 11, 2021, the Board elected David P. Abney and Gail K.
Boudreaux to fill vacancies on the Board, effective August 11,
2021, and September 23, 2021, respectively. Mr. Abney was
identified as a candidate by our CEO. Ms. Boudreaux was identified
by our internal talent acquisition team. After Mr. Abney and Ms.
Boudreaux were identified, management reviewed their qualifications
and the Governance & Sustainability Committee evaluated them
against the criteria described on page 19 before recommending their
election to the full Board.
Mr. Abney provides the Board with significant experience in
leadership of complex organizations, strategic planning,
operations, logistics, transportation, and engineering. Ms.
Boudreaux provides the Board with significant experience in
public-company governance, navigating regulatory and public policy
matters in complex organizations, execution of corporate strategy,
financial oversight, and technology and digital solutions. You can
view biographical information about Mr. Abney and Ms. Boudreaux on
pages 23 and 24, respectively.
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
21 |
Back to
Contents
Skills and diversity matrix
The Board believes that the combination of backgrounds, skills, and
experiences has produced a Board that is well-equipped to exercise
oversight responsibilities on behalf of Target’s shareholders and
other stakeholders. The following tables describe key
characteristics of our business, the desired skills for those
business characteristics, what those skills represent, which
independent members of our Board nominated for election at the 2022
Annual Meeting possess those skills based on the directors
self-identifying as having those skills, and the diversity
attributes of those directors.
Target’s business characteristics
|
Desired skill
|
What the skill represents
|
Target is a large retailer that offers everyday essentials and
fashionable, differentiated merchandise at discounted prices in
stores and through digital channels.
|
Retail Industry
Experience
|
Executive officer level experience
at a large retail or consumer products company.
|
Target’s scale and complexity requires aligning many areas of our
operations, including marketing, merchandising, supply chain,
technology, human capital management, property development, credit
card servicing, and our community and charitable activities.
|
Senior
Leadership
|
Experience in an executive officer
level role or senior government leadership role.
|
Our brand is the cornerstone of our strategy to provide a relevant
and affordable differentiated shopping experience for our
guests.
|
Marketing / Brands
|
Executive officer level experience
in marketing or managing well-known brands or the types of consumer
products we sell.
|
Our business includes a large network of stores, distribution
centers, and other facilities that are owned or leased by us.
|
Real Estate
|
Experience with real estate
transactions, property management, or actively supervising someone
performing similar functions.
|
We have a large and global workforce, which represents one of our
key resources, as well as one of our largest operating
expenses.
|
Human Capital
Management
|
Executive officer level experience
managing a large or global workforce.
|
Our business has become increasingly complex as we have expanded
our offerings as well as the channels in which we deliver our
shopping experience. This increased complexity requires
sophisticated technology infrastructure.
|
Technology
|
Knowledge or experience that
contributes to the Board’s understanding of technology, digital
platforms and new media, data security, or data
analytics.
|
Our business involves sourcing merchandise domestically and
internationally from numerous vendors and distributing it through
our fulfillment network.
|
Global Supply Chain
|
Executive officer level experience
at a company with global supply chain operations.
|
We are a large public company with a disciplined approach to
financial management and accurate disclosure.
|
Financial Expertise
|
Qualification as an “audit
committee financial expert” under applicable SEC
rules.
|
We are subject to a variety of risks and seek to identify, assess,
and manage those risks for the long-term success of our business
and to meet our legal and regulatory obligations.
|
Risk
Management
|
Executive officer level experience
in enterprise risk management or actively supervising someone
performing similar functions.
|
To be successful, we must preserve, grow, and leverage the value of
our reputation with our guests, Team Members, vendors, the
communities in which we operate, and our shareholders.
|
Reputation
Management
|
Experience in community relations,
public service, government affairs, corporate governance, or
actively supervising someone performing similar
functions.
|
As we leverage our size and scale to benefit people, the planet,
and our business, we seek to identify, assess, and prioritize the
ESG matters affected by our business.
|
ESG Understanding
|
Knowledge or experience that
contributes to the Board’s understanding of one or more ESG matters
affected by our business.
|
Desired skill
|
Mr.
Abney
|
Mr.
Baker
|
Mr.
Barrett
|
Ms.
Boudreaux
|
Mr.
Edwards
|
Ms.
Healey
|
Mr.
Knauss
|
Ms.
Leahy
|
Ms.
Lozano
|
Mr.
Rice
|
Mr.
Stockton
|
Retail Industry Experience
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
|
●
|
●
|
|
Senior Leadership
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
Marketing / Brands
|
●
|
●
|
|
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
|
●
|
|
●
|
Real Estate
|
●
|
●
|
|
|
●
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
●
|
Human Capital Management
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
Technology
|
|
|
|
●
|
●
|
|
|
●
|
●
|
|
|
Global Supply Chain
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
|
●
|
|
Financial Expertise
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
Risk Management
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
Reputation Management
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
ESG Understanding
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
|
Diversity attribute
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Race / Ethnicity
|
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
|
|
●
|
●
|
●
|
Gender
|
|
|
|
●
|
|
●
|
|
●
|
●
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
22 |
Back to
Contents
After considering the recommendations of the Governance &
Sustainability Committee, the Board has set the number of directors
at 12 and nominated all current directors to stand for re-election,
except for Mary Minnick who will depart the Board at the end of her
current term. The Board believes that each of these nominees is
qualified to serve as a director of Target and, in addition to the
skills listed in the table on page 22, the specific qualifications
of each nominee that were considered by the Board follow each
nominee’s biographical description.
We believe that all nominees will be able and willing to serve if
elected. However, if any nominee should become unable or unwilling
to serve for any reason, proxies may be voted for another person
nominated as a substitute by the Board, or the Board may reduce the
number of directors.
David P.
Abney
Age 66
Director since 2021
Independent
Committees
•
Infrastructure & Finance
|
Background
David P. Abney is the former Chairman of the Board & Chief
Executive Officer of United Parcel Service, Inc., a multinational
package delivery and supply chain management company. He held that
position from February 2016 to June 2020, when he became Executive
Chairman, a position he held until September 2020. Mr. Abney
formerly held various other leadership positions within United
Parcel Service, including Chief Operating Officer, President of
United Parcel Service Airlines, and President of United Parcel
Service International.
Qualifications
Having served United Parcel Service for more than 40 years in
positions of senior leadership with escalating levels of
responsibility, Mr. Abney provides the Board with significant
experience in leadership of complex organizations, strategic
planning, operations, logistics, transportation, and
engineering.
Other public
company boards
Current
Northrop Grumman Corporation
Freeport-McMoRan Inc.
Within past five
years
Macy’s, Inc.
United Parcel Service, Inc.
Johnson Controls International plc
|
Douglas M.
Baker, Jr.
Age 63
Director since 2013
Committees
•
Governance & Sustainability (Chair)
•
Compensation & Human Capital Management
|
Background
Douglas M. Baker, Jr. is Executive Chairman of Ecolab Inc., a
provider of water and hygiene services and technologies for the
food, hospitality, industrial, and energy markets. He has served in
this role since January 2021. He previously served Ecolab as
Chairman of the Board & Chief Executive Officer from May 2006
to December 2020. Mr. Baker previously held various other
leadership positions within Ecolab, including President and Chief
Operating Officer.
Qualifications
Mr. Baker provides the Board with valuable global marketing, sales,
and general management experience, as well as operational and
governance perspectives. His recent role as CEO of a large
publicly-held company provides the Board with additional top-level
perspective in organizational management.
Other public
company boards
Within past five
years
U.S. Bancorp
|
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
23 |
Back to
Contents
George S.
Barrett
Age 67
Director since 2018
Independent
Committees
•
Compensation & Human Capital Management
•
Governance & Sustainability
|
Background
George S. Barrett is the former Chairman & Chief Executive
Officer of Cardinal Health, Inc., a global integrated healthcare
services and products company. He held that position from August
2009 until the end of 2017, when he became Executive Chairman, a
position he held until November 2018. Mr. Barrett previously held a
number of executive positions with global pharmaceutical
manufacturer Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., including Chief
Executive Officer of its North American business and Executive Vice
President for global pharmaceuticals.
Qualifications
Through his services in leadership positions with companies in the
healthcare industry for over 30 years, Mr. Barrett provides the
Board with extensive experience in the areas of executive
leadership, distribution and manufacturing operations, regulatory
compliance, finance, strategic planning, human capital management,
and corporate governance.
Other public
company boards
Within past five
years
Cardinal Health, Inc.
Montes Archimedes Acquisition Corp.
|
Gail K.
Boudreaux
Age 61
Director since 2021
Independent
Committees
•
Infrastructure & Finance
|
Background
Gail K. Boudreaux has served as the President & Chief Executive
Officer of Anthem, Inc., a leading health benefits provider, since
November 2017. From July 2015 to November 2017 Ms. Boudreaux served
as Chief Executive Officer of GKB Global Health, LLC, a healthcare
consulting company. She previously held executive level leadership
positions at UnitedHealth Group, Inc. and its subsidiary,
UnitedHealthcare, and at Health Care Services Corporation and
Aetna, Inc.
Qualifications
With more than 30 years of experience in the healthcare industry
and through her service on several public company boards, Ms.
Boudreaux provides the Board with significant experience in
public-company governance, navigating regulatory and public policy
matters in complex organizations, execution of corporate strategy,
financial oversight, and technology and digital solutions.
Other public
company boards
Within past five
years
Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc.
Xcel Energy Inc.
Novavax, Inc.
|
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
24 |
Back to
Contents
Brian C.
Cornell
Age 63
Director since 2014
Committees
|
Background
Brian C. Cornell has served as Chairman of the Board & Chief
Executive Officer of Target Corporation since August 2014. Mr.
Cornell previously served as Chief Executive Officer of PepsiCo
Americas Foods, a division of PepsiCo, Inc. He also served as Chief
Executive Officer & President of Sam’s Club, a division of
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., and as an Executive Vice President of
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Qualifications
Through his more than 30 years in escalating leadership positions
at leading retail and global consumer product companies, including
three CEO roles and more than two decades doing business in North
America, Asia, Europe, and Latin America, Mr. Cornell provides
meaningful leadership experience and retail knowledge. His
experience includes time as both a vendor partner and a competitor
to Target, and he brings insights from those roles to the company
today.
Other public
company boards
Current
Yum! Brands, Inc.
Within past five
years
None
|
Robert L.
Edwards
Age 66
Director since 2015
Independent
Committees
•
Infrastructure & Finance
|
Background
Robert L. Edwards is the former President & Chief Executive
Officer of Safeway Inc., a United States food and drug retail
company. He also served as President & Chief Executive Officer
of AB Acquisition LLC, a North American food and drug retail
company due to Albertsons’ acquisition of Safeway Inc. Mr. Edwards
previously held several other executive level positions with
Safeway Inc., including President & Chief Financial Officer and
Executive Vice President & Chief Financial Officer. He also
held executive positions at Maxtor Corporation and Imation
Corporation.
Qualifications
Mr. Edwards provides the Board with substantial food and drug
retail expertise and perspectives. In addition, his prior
experiences as a CEO of a large publicly-held company and as CFO of
multiple public companies provide the Board with extensive public
company accounting and financial reporting expertise and a
top-level perspective in organizational management.
Other public
company boards
Within past five
years
Blackhawk Network Holdings, Inc.
|
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
25 |
Back to
Contents
Melanie L.
Healey
Age 61
Director since 2015
Independent
Committees
•
Compensation & Human Capital Management
•
Governance & Sustainability
|
Background
Melanie L. Healey is the former Group President, North America, of
The Procter & Gamble Company, one of the world’s leading
providers of branded consumer packaged goods. Ms. Healey also
served as Group President & Advisor to the Chairman & Chief
Executive Officer of The Procter & Gamble Company. Ms. Healey
held a number of other leadership roles at Procter & Gamble,
including Group President & CEO, Global Health, Feminine and
Adult Care Sector. Prior to working at Procter & Gamble, Ms.
Healey served in a variety of marketing leadership roles for
Johnson & Johnson and S.C. Johnson & Sons.
Qualifications
Ms. Healey provides the Board with valuable strategic, branding,
distribution, and operating experience on a global scale obtained
over her more than 30-year career in the consumer goods industry at
three multinational companies. Her deep experience in marketing,
including her 18 years outside the United States, provides the
Board with strategic and operational leadership and critical
insights into brand building and consumer marketing trends
globally.
Other public
company boards
Current
Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc.
PPG Industries, Inc.
Verizon Communications Inc.
Within past five
years
None
|
Donald R.
Knauss
Age 71
Director since 2015
Independent
Committees
•
Compensation & Human Capital Management
•
Infrastructure & Finance
|
Background
Donald R. Knauss is the former Chairman & Chief Executive
Officer of The Clorox Company, a leading multinational manufacturer
and marketer of consumer and professional products. He also served
as Executive Chairman of The Clorox Company. Mr. Knauss previously
served as Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of
Coca-Cola North America and in various other senior management
roles for its subsidiary businesses, and held various marketing and
sales positions with PepsiCo, Inc. and The Procter & Gamble
Company. Mr. Knauss also served as an Officer in the United States
Marine Corps.
Qualifications
Mr. Knauss possesses substantial senior management level experience
in a variety of areas, including branded consumer products and
consumer dynamics, manufacturing and supply chain, the retail
environment, and sales and distribution, which strengthens the
Board’s collective knowledge, capabilities, and experience.
Other public
company boards
Current
Kellogg Company
McKesson Corporation
Within past five
years
None
|
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
26 |
Back to
Contents
Christine A.
Leahy
Age 57
Director since 2021
Independent
Committees
•
Compensation & Human Capital Management
•
Governance & Sustainability
|
Background
Christine A. Leahy is the President and Chief Executive Officer of
CDW Corporation, a multi-brand technology solutions provider to
business, government, education, and healthcare customers. She has
served in this role since January 2019. She previously served CDW
Corporation as Chief Revenue Officer from July 2017 to December
2018, Senior Vice President–International from May 2016 to July
2017, and Chief Legal Officer/General Counsel and Corporate
Secretary from January 2002 to July 2017. Before joining CDW
Corporation, she was a corporate partner in the Chicago office of
Sidley Austin.
Qualifications
Ms. Leahy provides the Board significant experience in strategic
planning and leadership of complex organizations, technology and
digital solutions, and operations and distribution.
Other public
company boards
Within past five
years
None
|
Monica C.
Lozano
Age 65
Director since 2016
Lead Independent Director
Committees
•
Compensation & Human Capital Management (Chair)
•
Governance & Sustainability
|
Background
Monica C. Lozano is President and Chief Executive Officer of The
College Futures Foundation, a position she has held since December
2017. She also co-founded The Aspen Institute Latinos and Society
Program and served as Chair of its Advisory Board from January 2015
to October 2019. Ms. Lozano previously served as Chairman of U.S.
Hispanic Media, Inc., a leading Hispanic news and information
company. Ms. Lozano previously served in the roles of Chair and
Chief Executive Officer of ImpreMedia, LLC, a wholly owned
subsidiary of U.S. Hispanic Media, Inc. Ms. Lozano also served as
Chief Executive Officer and Publisher of La Opinion, a subsidiary
of ImpreMedia, LLC, and in several management-level roles with the
company.
Qualifications
Ms. Lozano possesses substantial senior management experience in
areas such as operations, strategic planning and marketing,
including multi-media content. She also has a deep understanding of
issues that are important to Hispanics, a growing U.S. demographic.
Ms. Lozano has board-level experience overseeing large
organizations with diversified operations on matters such as
governance, risk management, and financial reporting.
Other public
company boards
Current
Apple Inc.
Bank of America Corporation
Within past five
years
None
|
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
27 |
Back to
Contents
Derica W.
Rice
Age 57
Director since 2020
Independent
Committees
•
Infrastructure & Finance
|
Background
Derica W. Rice is the former Executive Vice President of CVS Health
Corporation, a provider of health services and plans in the United
States, and former President of CVS Caremark, the pharmacy benefits
management business of CVS Health Corporation. He served in those
positions from March 2018 to February 2020. Mr. Rice previously
held several other executive level positions over nearly three
decades with Eli Lilly and Company, a pharmaceutical company,
including Executive Vice President, Global Services from January
2010 through December 2017 and Chief Financial Officer from May
2006 through December 2017. He also previously served on Target
Corporation’s Board of Directors from September 2007 to January
2018.
Qualifications
Mr. Rice’s career has provided him with practical knowledge of
executive management of complex, worldwide businesses, and
extensive experience in a wide range of financial and accounting
matters including management of worldwide financial operations,
financial oversight, risk management, and the alignment of
financial and strategic initiatives.
Other public
company boards
Current
Bristol-Myers Squibb
The Carlyle Group Inc.
The Walt Disney Company
Within past five
years
Target Corporation
|
Dmitri L.
Stockton
Age 58
Director since 2018
Independent
Committees
•
Governance & Sustainability
|
Background
Dmitri L. Stockton is the former Senior Vice President &
Special Advisor to the Chairman of General Electric Company, a
global infrastructure and technology conglomerate. He held that
position from July 2016 to March 2017. Mr. Stockton previously held
several other executive level positions with General Electric
Company, including Chairman, President, & Chief Executive
Officer of GE Asset Management Incorporated, President & Chief
Executive Officer of GE Capital Global Banking, Senior Vice
President of General Electric Company based in London, President
& Chief Executive Officer of GE Consumer Finance, Central &
Eastern Europe, and Vice President of General Electric Company.
Qualifications
Mr. Stockton’s 30-year career with General Electric Company has
provided him with substantial experience in managing worldwide
financial operations. His expertise gives the Board additional
skills in the areas of leadership, financial oversight, risk
management, consumer banking, asset management, employee benefits,
governance, regulatory compliance, and the alignment of financial
and strategic initiatives.
Other public
company boards
Current
Deere & Company
Ryder System, Inc.
Within past five
years
Stanley Black & Decker, Inc.
|
 |
The Board recommends that shareholders vote For each of the nominees named above for
election to our Board.
|
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
28 |
Back to
Contents
Stock ownership that must be disclosed in the 2022 Proxy Statement
includes shares directly or indirectly owned and shares issuable or
options exercisable that the person has the right to acquire within
60 days. Our stock ownership guidelines vary from the SEC’s
required ownership disclosure in that they do not include any
options, but do include share equivalents held under deferred
compensation arrangements as well as unvested RSUs and PBRSUs at
the minimum share payout. Further, our stock ownership guidelines
do not include shares that are subject to a mandatory post-exercise
holding period (while the shares are subject to that holding
period).
In Fiscal 2021, we adjusted the ownership guidelines requirement
for our directors from a fixed $500,000 value to five times the
annual cash retainer (not including any additional cash retainer(s)
for serving as Lead Independent Director or a Committee Chair).
This change allows the ownership guidelines requirements to adjust
as director pay changes. At the current cash retainer of $115,000
for Fiscal 2021, this 5x multiple has a dollar value of $575,000,
which effectively is a $75,000 increase over the prior ownership
guidelines requirement’s fixed $500,000 value.
We believe our stock ownership guidelines for our directors and
executive officers are aligned with shareholders’ interests because
the guidelines reflect equity that has economic exposure to both
upside and downside risk.
|
Ownership guidelines by position
|
|
Directors
5x annual cash
retainer
|
|
CEO
7x base
salary
|
|
Other NEOs
3x base
salary
|
|
Equity used to meet stock ownership guidelines
|
|
Yes
|
•
Outstanding shares that the person beneficially owns or is deemed
to beneficially own, directly or indirectly, under the federal
securities laws.
•
PBRSUs (at their minimum share payout, which is 75% of the at-goal
payout level) and RSUs, whether vested or unvested.
•
Deferred compensation amounts that are indexed to Target common
stock, but ultimately paid in cash.
|
|
No
|
•
Options, regardless of when they are exercisable.
•
PSUs because their minimum share payout is 0% of the at-goal payout
level.
•
Shares that are subject to a mandatory post-exercise holding period
(while the shares are subject to that holding period).
|
All directors and executive officers are expected to achieve the
required levels of ownership under our stock ownership guidelines
before the end of the fifth full fiscal year occurring after their
election or appointment. If a director or executive officer has not
satisfied the ownership guideline amounts on the Compliance Date,
they must retain all shares acquired on the vesting of equity
awards or the exercise of stock options (in all cases net of
exercise costs and taxes) until the required level of ownership is
achieved. In addition, if an executive officer is below the
ownership guideline amounts before the Compliance Date, they must
retain at least 50% of all shares acquired on the vesting of equity
awards or the exercise of stock options (in all cases net of
exercise costs and taxes) until the required level of ownership is
achieved.
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
29 |
Back to
Contents
The following table shows the holdings of our current directors and
NEOs recognized for purposes of our stock ownership guidelines as
of April 5, 2022 and the respective ownership guidelines
calculations.
|
|
RSUs &
PBRSUs
|
|
Share
equivalents
|
|
Other
shares
held(1)
|
Total stock
ownership for
guidelines
(# of shares)(1)
|
Stock
ownership
guidelines
calculation
|
Directors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Multiple of
annual cash
retainer(2)
|
David P. Abney(3)
|
|
1,418
|
|
0
|
|
0
|
|
1,418
|
|
2.6
|
Douglas M. Baker, Jr.
|
|
28,995
|
|
0
|
|
3,895
|
|
32,890
|
|
61.4
|
George S. Barrett
|
|
11,101
|
|
0
|
|
0
|
|
11,101
|
|
20.7
|
Gail K. Boudreaux(3)
|
|
1,952
|
|
0
|
|
0
|
|
1,952
|
|
3.6
|
Robert L. Edwards
|
|
16,387
|
|
0
|
|
10,000
|
|
26,387
|
|
49.3
|
Melanie L. Healey
|
|
15,774
|
|
0
|
|
0
|
|
15,774
|
|
29.5
|
Donald R. Knauss
|
|
16,387
|
|
0
|
|
11,393
|
|
27,780
|
|
51.9
|
Christine A. Leahy
|
|
2,835
|
|
0
|
|
0
|
|
2,835
|
|
5.3
|
Monica C. Lozano
|
|
14,496
|
|
0
|
|
0
|
|
14,496
|
|
27.1
|
Mary E. Minnick
|
|
79,764
|
|
521
|
|
886
|
|
81,171
|
|
151.6
|
Derica W. Rice
|
|
4,060
|
|
0
|
|
0
|
|
4,060
|
|
7.6
|
Dmitri L. Stockton
|
|
11,821
|
|
0
|
|
0
|
|
11,821
|
|
22.1
|
Current named executive officers
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Multiple of base
salary(2)
|
Brian C. Cornell
|
|
76,437
|
|
9,629
|
|
361,048
|
|
447,114
|
|
68.6
|
Michael J. Fiddelke
|
|
13,857
|
|
0
|
|
22,743
|
|
36,600
|
|
10.8
|
John J. Mulligan
|
|
30,838
|
|
0
|
|
171,800
|
|
202,638
|
|
43.5
|
Michael E. McNamara
|
|
15,558
|
|
0
|
|
132,495
|
|
148,053
|
|
43.9
|
Don H. Liu
|
|
15,352
|
|
0
|
|
72,081
|
|
87,433
|
|
28.9
|
(1)
The “Total stock ownership for guidelines” calculation, like the
required disclosure of “Total shares beneficially owned” on page
31, includes “Other shares held” but differs by (a) excluding (i)
all options, regardless of whether they can be converted into
common stock on or before June 4, 2022 and (ii) shares that are
subject to a mandatory post-exercise holding period (while the
shares are subject to that holding period) and (b) including (i)
share equivalents that are held under deferred compensation
arrangements and (ii) RSUs and PBRSUs (at their minimum share
payout, which is 75% of the at-goal payout level), whether vested
or unvested, even if they will be converted into common stock more
than 60 days from April 5, 2022.
(2)
Based on closing stock price of $214.79 as of April 5, 2022.
(3)
Mr. Abney and Ms. Boudreaux joined the Board on August 11, 2021 and
September 23, 2021, respectively. They both currently comply with
our stock ownership guidelines because they have five years from
the start of Fiscal 2022 to meet the required stock ownership level
of 5x annual cash retainer.
|
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
30 |
Back to
Contents
The following table includes information about the shares of Target
common stock (our only outstanding class of equity securities)
which are beneficially owned on April 5, 2022 or which the person
has the right to acquire within 60 days of that date for each
director, named executive officer in the “Summary compensation
table” on page 53, and all current Target directors and executive
officers as a group.
Directors
|
|
Shares
issuable
within
60 days(1)
|
|
Stock options
exercisable
within
60 days
|
|
Other
shares held
|
|
Total shares
beneficially
owned(2)
|
David P. Abney
|
|
760
|
|
0
|
|
0
|
|
760
|
Douglas M. Baker, Jr.
|
|
28,337
|
|
0
|
|
3,895
|
|
32,232
|
George S. Barrett
|
|
10,027
|
|
0
|
|
0
|
|
10,027
|
Gail K. Boudreaux
|
|
878
|
|
0
|
|
0
|
|
878
|
Robert L. Edwards
|
|
15,729
|
|
0
|
|
10,000
|
|
25,729
|
Melanie L. Healey
|
|
15,116
|
|
0
|
|
0
|
|
15,116
|
Donald R. Knauss
|
|
15,729
|
|
0
|
|
11,393
|
|
27,122
|
Christine A. Leahy
|
|
1,761
|
|
0
|
|
0
|
|
1,761
|
Monica C. Lozano
|
|
13,838
|
|
0
|
|
0
|
|
13,838
|
Mary E. Minnick
|
|
78,603
|
|
0
|
|
886
|
|
79,489
|
Derica W. Rice
|
|
2,986
|
|
0
|
|
0
|
|
2,986
|
Dmitri L. Stockton
|
|
10,747
|
|
0
|
|
0
|
|
10,747
|
Named executive officers
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brian C. Cornell
|
|
0
|
|
0
|
|
361,048
|
|
361,048
|
Michael J. Fiddelke
|
|
0
|
|
0
|
|
22,743
|
|
22,743
|
John J. Mulligan
|
|
0
|
|
0
|
|
171,800
|
|
171,800
|
Michael E. McNamara
|
|
0
|
|
0
|
|
132,495
|
|
132,495
|
Don H. Liu
|
|
0
|
|
0
|
|
72,081
|
|
72,081
|
All current directors and executive officers
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As a group (25 persons)
|
|
194,511
|
|
117,821
|
|
1,034,692(3)
|
|
1,347,024
|
(1)
Includes shares of common stock that the named individuals may
acquire on or before June 4, 2022 pursuant to the conversion of
vested RSUs into common stock.
(2)
All directors and executive officers as a group own less than 1% of
Target’s outstanding common stock. The persons listed have sole
voting and investment power with respect to the shares listed.
(3)
Includes shares of common stock owned by executive officers in the
Target 401(k) Plan as of April 5, 2022.
|
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
31 |
Back to
Contents
The following table includes certain information about each person
or entity known to us to be the beneficial owner of more than five
percent of our common stock:
Name and address of >5% beneficial owner
|
Number of
common shares
beneficially owned
|
Percent of
class(1)
|
The Vanguard Group
100 Vanguard Boulevard
Malvern, Pennsylvania 19355
|
42,664,160(2)
|
9.2%
|
BlackRock, Inc.
55 East 52nd Street
New York, New York 10055
|
39,463,243(3)
|
8.5%
|
State Street Corporation
One Lincoln Street
Boston, Massachusetts 02111
|
36,017,144(4)
|
7.8%
|
(1)
Based on shares outstanding on April 5, 2022.
(2)
The Vanguard Group (Vanguard), as an investment advisor, reported
its direct and indirect beneficial ownership on a Schedule 13G/A
filed with the SEC on February 10, 2022. The filing indicates that
as of December 31, 2021, Vanguard had sole voting power for 0
shares, shared voting power for 801,696 shares, sole dispositive
power for 40,666,686 shares, and shared dispositive power for
1,997,474 shares.
(3)
BlackRock, Inc. (BlackRock), as a parent holding company, reported
its direct and indirect beneficial ownership on a Schedule 13G/A
filed with the SEC on February 1, 2022. The filing indicates that
as of December 31, 2021, BlackRock had sole voting power for
33,306,000 shares, shared voting power for 0 shares, sole
dispositive power for 39,463,243 shares, and shared dispositive
power for 0 shares.
(4)
State Street Corporation (State Street), as a parent holding
company, reported its direct and indirect beneficial ownership in
various fiduciary capacities (including as trustee under the Target
401(k) Plan) on a Schedule 13G/A filed with the SEC on February 14,
2022. The filing indicates that as of December 31, 2021, State
Street had sole voting power for 0 shares, shared voting power for
33,005,151 shares, sole dispositive power for 0 shares, and shared
dispositive power for 35,922,818 shares, and that State Street
Global Advisors Trust Company (SSgA Trust), a subsidiary of State
Street, had sole voting power for 0 shares, shared voting power for
11,099,167, sole dispositive power for 0 shares, shared dispositive
power for 25,666,445 shares, and aggregate beneficial ownership of
25,675,186 shares. Based on that information, SSgA Trust is also a
beneficial owner of more than five percent of our common stock,
holding 5.5% of Target’s outstanding common shares.
|
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
32 |
Back to
Contents
The Compensation & Human Capital Management Committee has
reviewed and discussed the following CD&A with management.
Based on this review and discussion, the Compensation & Human
Capital Management Committee recommended to the Board that the
CD&A be included in the 2021 Annual Report and the 2022 Proxy
Statement.
Compensation & Human Capital Management Committee
Monica C. Lozano, Chair
Douglas M. Baker, Jr.
George S. Barrett
Melanie L. Healey
Donald R. Knauss
Christine A. Leahy
This CD&A focuses on how our NEOs were compensated for Fiscal
2021 and how their Fiscal 2021 compensation aligned with our pay
for performance philosophy.
For Fiscal 2021, our NEOs were:
Name and
principal position
|
|
Brian C. Cornell
|
Chairman & Chief Executive Officer
|
|
|
Michael J. Fiddelke
|
Executive Vice President & Chief Financial Officer
|
|
|
John J. Mulligan
|
Executive Vice President & Chief Operating Officer
|
|
|
Michael E. McNamara
|
Executive Vice President & Chief Information Officer
|
|
|
Don H. Liu
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Legal & Risk Officer
|
|
As previously disclosed, Mr. McNamara intends to retire as Target’s
Chief Information Officer in 2022 and intends to remain in his
current role until a successor is appointed, and as an employee for
a transition period following such appointment.
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
33 |
Back to
Contents
Throughout Fiscal 2021, Target’s long-term growth strategy and the
investments made in taking care of our team continued to solidify
our position as an industry-leader in top- and bottom-line
performance. Our team, technology, and resilient operations enabled
us to offer a preferred shopping experience to our guests that
differentiates us in the marketplace. Even as non-essential
retailers reopened, the Target team delivered outstanding
performance across our core categories, driving double-digit
comparable sales growth in Fiscal 2021 and protecting $10 billion
of unprecedented market share gains made in 2020. Our
stores-as-hubs model continued to set Target apart from other
retailers and drove traffic, fueled digital sales, and provided our
guests ease, convenience, and safety. Same-day services drove over
half of digital sales in Fiscal 2021, driven by 45% growth in Drive
Up, Order Pickup, and Shipt (on top of 235% growth in Fiscal 2020).
Beyond our fulfillment options, we continued to benefit from our
balanced multi-category assortment, which allows our team to serve
the rapidly evolving needs of our guests. Despite unpredictability
in the environment, Target delivered exceptional performance
consistently throughout the year, resulting in Sales growth of
$12.2 billion in Fiscal 2021.
Our success in 2021 was fueled by our team. Our ability to attract
and retain our team is driven by our purpose, culture, and the
overall Team Member experience. We offer competitive compensation
and benefits that positively impact our Team Members and fosters
our culture, enabling the team to care, grow, and win together.
Notably, in the past year:
•
We introduced Dream to Be, an industry-leading education assistance
benefit for all Team Members that provides access to debt-free
undergraduate and associates degrees, as a part of our ongoing
commitment to promote access to education and to create an
equitable and inclusive workforce.
•
We announced our plan to invest up to $300 million more in our team
in 2022 to set a new starting wage range of $15 to $24 per hour and
expand access to health care benefits, making about 20% of our team
newly eligible to enroll in our comprehensive health care benefits
package. We also reduced the waiting period to enroll in a Target
medical plan, offered faster access to the Target 401(k) Plan, and
enhanced our well-being benefits.
That’s in addition to recognition bonuses and numerous enhancements
made to our total rewards package, including free backup care and
access to virtual healthcare and online resources to support the
well-being of our Team Members. These investments in our team
demonstrate our commitment to delivering on our Target Forward
strategy, which aims in part to create opportunity and equity for
our team, partners and guests. Additional information on Target
Forward is described on page 15. Our success begins and ends
with our team; and despite ongoing challenges in the external
environment, the flexibility of our business model and the
resilience of our team delivered outstanding performance
consistently throughout 2021, as illustrated in the “Financial
performance highlights for Fiscal 2021” on the following page.
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
34 |
Back to
Contents
Financial performance highlights for Fiscal
2021
Comparable sales
growth |
|
Sales fulfilled by
stores |
|
Adjusted EPS
growth(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
12.7% |
|
96.4% |
|
44.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
After-tax
ROIC(2) |
|
5% of profits given
to communities(3) |
|
Capital invested in
the business |
|
|
|
|
|
33.1% |
|
$274M |
|
$3.5B |
(1)
Adjusted EPS, a non-GAAP metric, excludes the impact of certain
items. See page 24 of the 2021 Annual Report for a reconciliation
of Adjusted EPS to GAAP diluted EPS and page 19 of the 2021 Annual
Report for the calculation of the “Adjusted EPS growth” provided
above.
(2)
ROIC is a ratio based on GAAP information, with the exception of
the add-back of operating lease interest to operating income. The
calculation of the number provided above is disclosed on page 26 of
the 2021 Annual Report.
(3)
Calculated based upon the average of the prior two years of pre-tax
profits. Includes cash and in-kind donations.
The pay programs described throughout our CD&A align with our
pay for performance philosophy and are structured based on
financial and operational performance and shareholder outcomes.
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
35 |
Back to
Contents
Summary of key incentive design decisions made in
Fiscal 2021
While the core structure of our incentive programs remained intact
in support of our enterprise strategy, the following table
summarizes changes to our Fiscal 2021 STIP and PSU program granted
in Fiscal 2021. The majority of changes are intended to be one-time
in nature to address volatility from the ongoing pandemic.
Incentive program
|
Description of key design changes made for Fiscal 2021
|
More
information
|
Fiscal 2021 STIP:
|
As described in last year’s CD&A, we made the following changes
to our Fiscal 2021 STIP design at the onset of the fiscal year to
manage expected volatility in the economy and consumer
sentiment:
•
Separated the financial component of STIP into two equally weighted
semi-annual periods.
•
Shifted the at-goal weighting back to 67% financial and 33% team
scorecard. This weighting was effectively used for our STIP program
in Fiscal 2017 through Fiscal 2019, a period of significant
disruption in the retail industry, as we focused on aggressively
investing in our business to emerge with a durable financial
model.
|
41
|
PSU program granted in Fiscal 2021:
|
Our PSU program is fully based on relative performance versus our
retail peer group. The pandemic created volatility, which distorted
performance comparisons across our peer group that may not be fully
representative of actual growth. As a result of the volatility in
2020 and continued uncertainty in 2021, we made the following
one-time changes to our PSU program granted in Fiscal 2021 to
normalize peer performance:
•
Extended the performance period from a three- to four-year period.
We believe comparing four-year performance against the common
starting point of the pre-pandemic year of 2019 would provide the
best comparison of relative competitive performance across these
four years.
•
Capped the maximum payout opportunity at 150% of goal, reduced from
200% of goal in prior years.
|
44
|
Shareholder support for our 2021 advisory vote on
executive compensation and shareholder outreach program
At the 2021 Annual Meeting, shareholders approved our Say on Pay
proposal in support of our executive compensation program by a vote
of 92.9%, in line with the 2020 vote of 93.6% and 2019 vote of
94.8%. We believe open dialogue with our shareholders and
incorporation of their feedback into our executive compensation
program are important.
As described on page 18, we regularly communicate with our
shareholders regarding a variety of topics and involve one or more
independent directors in these conversations, as appropriate. We
look forward to continued dialogue on compensation matters and
other issues relevant to our business.
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
36 |
Back to
Contents
Pay for performance
We have a long-standing belief that our executive compensation
should directly reflect our organization’s performance with
substantial emphasis on the creation of long-term value for our
shareholders. We do that by providing our NEOs a mix of base
salary, short-term, and long-term incentives with compensation
opportunities measured by a variety of time horizons to balance our
near-term and long-term strategic goals.
Annual TDC is the summed at-goal value of each pay component and is
used by the Compensation & Human Capital Management Committee
as the measure of the intended total value of pay at the time the
pay decision is made, understanding that the actual amount earned
will be higher or lower based on actual performance.
Consistent with our guiding principles, 92% of CEO Annual TDC and
83% of other NEO Annual TDC is performance-based. In addition, 100%
of our annual LTI grants feature relative performance-based
metrics.
Importantly, the financial metrics we use for our pay programs are
either based directly on GAAP financial measures, or in the
specific circumstances where they are not, we explain how and why
they differ from GAAP.
(1)
Annual TDC differs from the “Total” for Fiscal 2021 in the “Summary
compensation table” on page 53 because it (a) includes STIP
opportunity at-goal as approved, rather than the actual payout that
was earned, (b) includes the annual PSU and PBRSU grants based on
the dollar value used by the Compensation & Human Capital
Management Committee in determining the number of shares granted,
rather than the aggregate grant date fair value of awards, as
computed in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718, and (c) excludes
the items shown under the “Change in pension value and nonqualified
deferred compensation earnings” and “All other compensation”
columns.
|
How annual CEO pay is tied to
performance
|
|
The following pay elements are performance-based and represent a
significant percentage of Annual TDC. The payout ranges below are
based on awards outstanding as of the end of Fiscal 2021.
•
STIP — Payouts range
from 0% to 200% of goal depending on Sales, Incentive Operating
Income, and the assessment of the Team Scorecard.
•
PSUs — As described in
detail in the PSUs section on page 44, payouts range from 0% to
150% of goal for PSUs granted in 2021 and range from 0% to 200% of
goal for PSUs granted prior to 2021, depending on Adjusted Sales
growth, EPS growth, and ROIC performance relative to our retail
peer group. Payout value is also tied to stock price
performance.
•
PBRSUs — Payouts range
from 75% to 125% of goal depending on TSR performance relative to
our retail peer group. Payout value is also tied to stock price
performance.
|
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
37 |
Back to
Contents
Performance highlights
The following graphs highlight our historical performance on key
metrics that we used in our executive compensation programs over
each of the last three years. The metrics used in our compensation
program are described in more detail in the CD&A narratives for
each compensation element, as well as in the footnotes on this
page.
(1)
Sales is as reported on page 38 of the 2021 Annual Report. We use
Sales as reported above as one of the metrics in both our PSU and
STIP compensation elements.
(2)
Operating Income is as reported on page 38 of the 2021 Annual
Report and provides the basis for Incentive Operating Income, which
is one of the metrics we use in our STIP compensation element.
Incentive Operating Income, a non-GAAP metric, represents Operating
Income on a pre-short-term incentive compensation basis and is
calculated by excluding short-term incentive expense from our
Operating Income.
(3)
EPS from continuing operations is as reported on page 24 of our
2021 Annual Report. For PSUs, we use EPS as reported above, except
that for Fiscal 2021 we excluded the impact of the one-time gain on
sale of the Dermstore business, which decreased the amount by $0.55
per share to $13.55.
(4)
ROIC is a ratio based on GAAP information, with the exception of
the add-back of operating lease interest to operating income. For
Fiscal 2021 and Fiscal 2020 it is as reported on page 26 of the
2021 Annual Report and, for Fiscal 2019, page 24 of our 2020 Annual
Report. For PSUs, we use ROIC as reported above, except that for
Fiscal 2021 we excluded the impact of the one-time gain on sale of
the Dermstore business from net operating profit after tax and
excluded net assets of Dermstore from average invested capital in
the ROIC calculation, which decreased the amount by 1.2 percentage
points.
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
38 |
Back to
Contents
Incentive measures and actual performance
Actual payouts vary based on performance against goals approved by
the Compensation & Human Capital Management Committee at the
beginning of the performance period. Our ongoing incentive programs
have a proven track record of variable payouts based on performance
over time.
•
Our STIP is based on a combination of absolute financial goals and
progress made toward key strategic priorities. As shown in the
table below, our financial component and team scorecard resulted in
an overall weighted payout of 143% of goal. For further discussion
of our Fiscal 2021 financial goals and performance, see pages
41-42. For additional information on our 2021 team scorecard
assessment, see page 43.
•
100% of our ongoing LTI program features performance-based metrics
and is tied to relative performance versus our retail peers over a
three-year time period.
|
|
|
Spring(1)
|
|
Fall(2)
|
|
|
Weight
|
|
Goal(3)
|
|
Actual(3)
|
Actual
performance
as a
percentage
of goal
|
|
|
Goal(3)
|
|
Actual(3)
|
Actual
performance
as a
percentage
of goal
|
Overall weighted
payout as a
percentage
of goal
|
2021 STIP Performance
|
67%
|
Sales
|
|
$43,007
|
|
$48,705
|
113.2%
|
|
|
$55,564
|
|
$55,906
|
100.6%
|
100%
|
Incentive Operating Income(4)
|
|
$ 3,243
|
|
$ 5,182
|
159.8%
|
|
|
$ 4,432
|
|
$ 4,305
|
97.1%
|
33%
|
Team Scorecard
|
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
43%
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total combined payout as a percentage of goal
|
|
143%
|
|
|
|
Metric
|
|
Performance
rank relative to
peers
|
Payout
percentage
|
Total
Payout
|
2019-2021 LTI Performance
|
PSUs
|
Adjusted sales
growth
|
3 of 17
|
200%
|
193.3%
|
EPS growth
|
3 of 17
|
200%
|
ROIC
|
5 of 17
|
180%
|
|
|
|
|
Performance
rank relative to
peers
|
TSR(5)
|
Total
Payout
|
PBRSUs
|
TSR
|
|
1 of 16
|
257%
|
125%
|
(1)
Represents the Q1 and Q2 semi-annual performance period of 2021,
weighted 50%.
(2)
Represents the Q3 and Q4 semi-annual performance period of 2021,
weighted 50%.
(4)
See the “Performance highlights” tables and footnotes on page 38
for a description of how Incentive Operating Income is calculated
from our financial statements.
(5)
TSR is calculated based on the stock price of each company on the
first and last day of the performance period using the average of
each company’s stock price for the 90 calendar days immediately
preceding the two measurement dates.
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
39 |
Back to
Contents
Guiding principles
We believe executive compensation should be directly linked to
performance and long-term value creation for our shareholders. With
that in mind, three principles guide our compensation program:
●
Deliver on our pay for performance philosophy in support of our
strategy.
●
Provide a framework that encourages outstanding financial results
and shareholder returns over the long-term.
●
Attract, retain, and motivate a premier management team to sustain
our distinctive brand and its competitive advantage in the
marketplace.
A significant portion of our executive compensation is at risk and,
therefore, may vary from targeted compensation based upon the level
of achievement of specified performance objectives and stock price
performance.
Elements of Annual TDC(1)
|
Element
|
Key
characteristics
|
Link to
shareholder
value
|
How we
determine
amount
|
Fixed
|
Base salary
|
Fixed compensation component payable in cash, representing less
than 20% of Annual TDC for our NEOs. Reviewed annually and adjusted
when appropriate.
|
A means to attract and retain talented executives capable of
driving superior performance.
|
Consider individual contributions to business outcomes, the scope
and complexity of each role, future potential, market data, and
internal pay equity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Performance-
based
|
Short-term
incentives
|
Variable compensation component payable in cash based on
performance against financial goals and assessment of team
performance.
|
Incentive targets are tied to achievement of key financial
measures.
NEOs are also evaluated against identified strategic initiatives
important to driving sustainable, durable, and profitable sales
growth.
|
Financial component of award based on:
•
Incentive Operating Income
For STIP, there is a team scorecard component based on the
Compensation & Human Capital Management Committee’s assessment
of management’s progress toward strategic priorities.
|
Performance share unit
awards
|
PSUs cliff vest at the end of the performance period and payouts
are based on relative performance within the performance period
versus our retail peer group.
|
PSUs recognize our executive officers for achieving superior
long-term relative performance on three key metrics:
|
Grant award levels based on individual contributions to business
outcomes, potential future contributions, historical grant amounts,
retention considerations, and market data.
|
Performance-based restricted stock
unit awards
|
PBRSUs cliff vest at the end of the performance period with the
number of shares based on relative TSR performance within the
performance period versus our retail peer group.
|
Fosters a culture of ownership, aligns the long-term interests of
Target’s executive officers with our shareholders and rewards or
penalizes based on relative TSR performance.
|
Grant award levels based on individual contributions to business
outcomes, potential future contributions, historical grant amounts,
retention considerations, and market data.
|
(1)
See page 37 for a description of how the Compensation & Human
Capital Management Committee uses Annual TDC and how it differs
from the “Total” in the “Summary compensation table” on page
53.
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
40 |
Back to
Contents
Base salary
We provide base salary as a means to deliver a stable amount of
cash compensation to our executive officers. In alignment with our
pay for performance philosophy, it represents the smallest portion
of Annual TDC.
In March 2021, the Compensation and Human Capital Management
Committee approved a Fiscal 2021 base salary increase of $100,000
for Mr. Fiddelke in consideration of his performance as well as
market positioning relative to our retail and general industry
peers.
Short-term incentives
All NEOs are eligible to earn cash awards under our STIP program,
which is designed to motivate and reward executives for performance
on key annual measures. The financial component of our STIP program
is based on two financial metrics: Sales (50%) and Incentive
Operating Income (50%). See the “Performance highlights” tables and
footnotes on page 38 for a description of how Sales are reported
and how Incentive Operating Income is calculated from our financial
statements.
As disclosed in our 2021 Proxy Statement, we made changes to our
Fiscal 2021 STIP design to reflect a wide range of outcomes based
on expected volatility in the economy and consumer sentiment caused
by the pandemic. Translating this uncertainty into an assessment of
performance, and ultimately tying to payout levels, was challenging
to prescribe at the onset of the year. Given these considerations,
we made the following changes to our STIP design in Fiscal
2021:
•
Separated the financial component of STIP into two independent and
equally weighted semi-annual periods, Spring (Q1 and Q2) and Fall
(Q3 and Q4).
•
Shifted the at-goal weighting back to 67% financial and 33% team
scorecard.
The semi-annual approach to goal-setting allowed the Board to
reassess both the performance and macroeconomic context when
setting Fall goals. Looking ahead, our Fiscal 2022 STIP design will
revert back to annual financial performance goals.
The following table shows financial and team scorecard payouts
expressed as a percentage of goal. The at-goal pay opportunity is
200% of base salary for our CEO and 100% of base salary for our
other NEOs.
|
Fiscal 2021 (payout as a percentage of goal)
|
Component
|
Weight
|
Threshold
|
Goal
|
Maximum
|
Financial
(Sales 50%, Incentive Operating Income 50%)
|
67%
|
13%
|
67%
|
134%
|
Team Scorecard
|
33%
|
7%
|
33%
|
66%
|
Total
|
|
20%
|
100%
|
200%
|
|
Fiscal 2021 financial STIP design, performance
goals, and how we performed in comparison to these goals
The Fiscal 2021 semi-annual goals and actual performance were:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparison to prior years
|
|
Metric
|
|
Goal
($)(2)
|
|
Actual
($)
|
Actual
performance
as a percentage
of goal
|
|
Goal vs
Fiscal 2020
|
Actual vs
Fiscal 2020
|
Actual vs
Fiscal 2019
|
|
Spring(1)
(weighted
50%)
|
Sales
|
$
|
43,007
|
$
|
48,705
|
113.3%
|
|
+2.2%
|
+15.8%
|
+36.9%
|
|
Incentive Operating Income(3)
|
$
|
3,243
|
$
|
5,182
|
159.8%
|
|
+6.5%
|
+70.1%
|
+96.3%
|
|
Fall(1)
(weighted
50%)
|
Sales
|
$
|
55,564
|
$
|
55,906
|
100.6%
|
|
+10.4%
|
+11.1%
|
+34.6%
|
|
Incentive Operating Income(3)
|
$
|
4,432
|
$
|
4,305
|
97.1%
|
|
+7.3%
|
+4.2%
|
+79.6%
|
|
(2)
Threshold and maximum financial performance amounts are -/+5% of
the Sales goal and -/+15% of the Incentive Operating Income
goal.
(3)
See the “Performance highlights” tables and footnotes on page 38
for a description of how Incentive Operating Income is calculated
from our financial statements.
|
|
When approving Spring and Fall goals for Fiscal 2021, the Board
took into account consumer environment and confidence, ongoing
risks and their impact to consumers, and enterprise strategies and
investments. The semi-annual approach to goal-setting allowed the
Board to reassess both the performance and macroeconomic context
when setting Fall goals, with knowledge of the stronger than
expected environment in the Spring. The assumptions and context
underpinning our semi-annual goals and performance against those
goals are further described on the following page.
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
41 |
Back to
Contents
Spring
In February 2021, independent members of our Board approved Spring
goals. At that time, a number of uncertain variables affected our
outlook including a slow and uneven economic recovery, stimulus
spending, vaccine rollout, and emergence of COVID-19 variants. The
market was expected to deliver flat to mid-single digit growth. In
consideration of market expectations, Spring goals were set above
the market rate. Our performance far exceeded our expectations for
the period.
•
Our Spring 2021 goal focused on holding the unprecedented market
share gains we realized in 2020, while delivering a profit rate
improvement compared to 2019. Fiscal 2019 actuals served as a
benchmark in establishing goals, given the high degree of
volatility we experienced in the first two quarters of Fiscal
2020.
•
The Board approved Spring goals requiring year-over-year growth of
2.2% and 6.5% for Sales and Incentive Operating Income. Relative to
2019 actual performance, these Spring goals represented growth of
20.9% and 22.8% for Sales and Incentive Operating Income,
respectively.
Ultimately, market performance exceeded expectations as stimulus
and pent-up savings fueled consumer spending power. Our aggressive
and strategic investments in our digital fulfillment options,
merchandise assortment, and store operating model positioned us to
thrive in supplying the needs of our guests.
•
Our strong Spring Sales performance in various categories
translated to over $5 billion in share gains since Spring 2019.
Total Sales growth of 15.8% in the Spring (on top of 18.2% growth a
year ago) was comprised of store Sales growth of 13.9% and digital
Sales growth of 25.2% (on top of 6.6% and 168.9% growth,
respectively, a year ago).
•
The strength in Sales translated to Operating Income performance
ahead of goal. Our Operating Income rate increased more than 3
percentage points versus Spring 2020, given a continuation of lower
markdown trends and expense leverage from higher Sales. Favorable
category mix also contributed to the increased rate as a result of
faster than anticipated growth in Apparel, Home, and Same Day
Fulfillment. This translated to Spring Operating Income of $4.8
billion, approximately $2.1 billion or 75% ahead of last year.
Our business delivered outstanding Spring performance that exceeded
the maximum Spring financial goals. As intended, our semi-annual
goal setting approach provided the agility to adjust our future
outlook as we planned for the second half of the year.
Fall
In August 2021, independent members of our Board approved Fall
goals. Given exceptional Spring performance on top of record growth
in 2020, combined with the continued strength in consumer spending,
we re-aligned our financial goals for Fall to expand upon the prior
year’s outsized market share and profit gains.
•
Fall Sales goal of $55.6 billion represented an increase of 10.4%
and 33.7% over actual Fall 2020 and 2019 Sales, respectively.
•
Fall Incentive Operating Income goal of $4.4 billion represented
increases of 7.3% and 84.9% over actual Fall 2020 and 2019,
respectively, or 12.3% and 92.5% Operating Income growth over
actual Fall 2020 and 2019, respectively.
Despite continued volatility in the environment brought on by new
COVID-19 variants and industry-wide challenges across the supply
chain, our business continued to deliver growth on top of record
setting increases last year, primarily driven by increases in store
traffic and growth in digital fulfillment.
•
Total Sales growth of 11.1% in Fall (on top of 21.2% growth a year
ago) was comprised of store Sales growth of 10.2% and digital Sales
growth of 14.9% (on top of 8.8% and 130.1% growth, respectively, a
year ago). We delivered our second strongest Fall sales comp in
more than 10 years, on top of last year’s record performance.
•
Fall Operating Income of $4.1 billion represents a $0.3 billion
increase, or almost 9% growth, over last year. Our Operating Income
rate contracted slightly year over year, reflecting increased costs
from our vendors and across our supply chain.
Continued strength in our Fall performance capped off a year of
record growth in 2021, reinforcing the durability of our business
model and confidence in our long-term growth strategy.
Following a year of record market share gains, Fiscal 2021
delivered strong results. The Compensation & Human Capital
Management Committee approved a collective STIP financial outcome
of 149% of goal payout, as generated under the plan and illustrated
in the following table:
|
Metric
|
Payout as a
percentage of goal
for each metric
|
Payout as a
percentage of goal
for each semi-annual period
|
Financial component
payout as a
percentage of goal
|
|
Spring
(weighted
50%)
|
Sales
|
200%
|
200%
|
149%
|
|
Incentive Operating Income
|
200%
|
Fall
(weighted
50%)
|
Sales
|
112%
|
98%
|
Incentive Operating Income
|
84%
|
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
42 |
Back to
Contents
Fiscal 2021 team scorecard assessment
The team scorecard provides a general structure for discussing and
measuring performance of the management team as a group. The team
scorecard portion of the STIP in 2021 emphasized the business
outcomes we expect from the execution of our strategic priorities,
and represents indicators that demonstrate the health of Target’s
business and team.
For Fiscal 2021, the primary team scorecard progress indicators
included: hold 2020 market share gains, advance progress on
three-year enterprise DE&I goals, maintain strong team
engagement, increase utilization of same-day fulfillment services,
and increase guest engagement with Target Circle.
Our management team drove meaningful progress against these
indicators:
•
We retained $10 billion of unprecedented 2020 market share gains.
At the category level, Food & Beverage, Beauty & Household
Essentials, Hardlines, and Home Furnishings & Decor, in
particular, drove share gains.
•
Positive progress on three-year enterprise DE&I goals. We met
or exceeded our ambitious goals for representation, advancement,
and experience. We increased promotion and reduced turnover rates
for people of color and increased promotion of women to senior
leadership.
•
Total company engagement was favorable based on our robust Annual
TeamVoice survey. Despite unprecedented challenges, we saw the
strength of our team and culture show up through stability and
strength in key areas.
•
Growth in same-day services, represented by 45% growth in Drive Up,
Order Pickup, and Shipt (on top of 235% growth last year), driven
by the continued investments made in our supply chain and store
operations.
•
Increased guest engagement with Target Circle, bringing our total
enrollment to more than 100 million members since launch.
Taking into consideration the outcomes described above, the
Compensation & Human Capital Management Committee approved a
130% team scorecard payout.
Total Fiscal 2021 STIP payout
The following table shows the resulting overall weighted payout as
a percentage of goal, based on actual financial performance for
each semi-annual period and progress made on key team scorecard
indicators as described above.
Component
|
Weight
|
Payout as a percentage of goal
|
Overall weighted payout
as a percentage of goal(1)
|
Financial
|
67%
|
149%
|
100%
|
Team Scorecard
|
33%
|
130%
|
43%
|
Total combined payout as a
percentage of goal
|
143%
|
(1)
Actual payout is 286% of base salary for our CEO and 143% of base
salary for our other NEOs.
|
Long-term incentives
To align our executive officers’ pay outcomes with long-term
performance, 100% of our annual LTI grants feature relative
performance-based metrics and LTI comprises the majority of each
NEO’s total compensation.
Value of LTI awarded at grant
In determining the amount of individual LTI awards, the
Compensation & Human Capital Management Committee considered
each NEO’s individual contributions to business outcomes during the
fiscal year, potential future contributions, historical annual
grant amounts, and retention considerations, as well as market data
for comparable executives from our retail and general industry peer
groups. The annual LTI grants are made in March of each year to
ensure the full-year financial results for the most recently
completed fiscal year may be considered prior to making the grants.
Once the total annual grant amount for a NEO is determined, the
Compensation & Human Capital Management Committee grants 60% of
that value in PSUs and 40% in PBRSUs. Under this approach, strong
long-term performance relative to peers becomes the key driver of
compensation realized by executive officers.
The Compensation & Human Capital Management Committee increased
Mr. Cornell’s annual LTI grant by $1,600,000, reflective of Mr.
Cornell’s leadership throughout his tenure and the execution of
strategic decisions in 2020 that has positioned Target for
long-term durable success. This resulted in positioning his overall
TDC at the 77th percentile of the combined peer group, which aligns
with our pay for performance philosophy. In addition, Mr.
Fiddelke’s annual LTI grant was increased by $600,000 in
recognition of his contributions to business outcomes and his
demonstrated leadership in navigating the volatility throughout the
fiscal year.
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
43 |
Back to
Contents
PSUs
In March 2021, the Committee granted the 2021 PSU awards. The core
design of our fully relative PSU program continues to support the
critical drivers of our success while incenting our performance
relative to competing retailers. Our metrics reflect how we
envision success in the execution of our strategy: to grow the
top-line relative to the retail sector, to grow it profitably, and
to ensure prudent deployment of capital to drive the business.
Consistent with last year, the three relative metrics used in our
PSU plan continue to be:
•
Adjusted sales growth. The compound annual growth rate in
adjusted sales over the performance period, relative to our retail
peer group, including adjustments to our reported results or those
of our peer group, as described on the following page.
•
EPS growth. The compound annual growth rate of our EPS
versus the reported EPS of our retail peer group.
•
ROIC. Average net operating profit after-tax divided by
average invested capital for both our results and our retail peer
group, excluding discontinued operations.
See the “Performance highlights” tables and footnotes on page 38
for a description of where Sales, EPS, and ROIC are reported in our
financial statements.
Changes to the design in Fiscal 2021:
The pandemic caused significant disruptions across the retail
sector in Fiscal 2020, with many of our retail peer comparators
materially impacted by government mandated store closures. This
translated into record low financial performance or negative
reported earnings for approximately half of our comparator group.
As such, using Fiscal 2020 as the base year of performance in
measuring long-term growth would potentially result in a material
distortion in assessing Target’s relative performance.
Despite these factors, the Committee continues to believe that the
core relative design and metrics remain relevant and vital in
supporting the execution of Target’s strategy and creating
alignment with shareholders. With the intention of keeping the core
PSU design intact and normalizing peer performance in the face of
extraordinary circumstances, the Committee, in consultation with
the Compensation Consultant, approved the following changes to the
2021 PSU program:
•
Extended the performance measurement from a three- to four-year
performance period. We believe comparing four-year performance
against the common starting point of the pre-pandemic year of 2019
would provide the best comparison of relative competitive
performance across these four years.
•
Capped maximum payout opportunity at 150% of goal, reduced from
200% of goal in prior years.
|
2019
|
2020
|
2021
|
2022
|
2023
|
2024
|
FY20 Cycle
(2020-2022)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All metrics: 3-year cycle
Payout range: 0 - 200% of goal
|
|
|
FY21 Cycle
(2020-2023)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales & EPS: 4-year cycle using FY19 as baseline for
relative growth
ROIC: 4-year average
Payout range: 0 - 150% of goal
|
|
FY22 Cycle
(2022-2024)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All metrics: Return to 3-year cycle
Payout range: Return to 0 - 200% of goal
|
The Committee believes that these changes still result in
reasonable uncertainty of achievement at the time of grant while
allowing for a more accurate representation of both Target and peer
performance. The following example illustrates PSU payouts at
various levels of performance for the annual grant made in Fiscal
2021:
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
44 |
Back to
Contents
For more information about our peer groups, see pages 50-51.
PSU adjustments
The intent of our PSU program is to measure performance relative to
our peer group on the previously described metrics. To achieve this
measurement objectively, we base the initial rankings on annual
reported financial results of each member of the retail peer group
and Target (unless determined otherwise at the time of grant). The
Compensation & Human Capital Management Committee has reserved
discretion to adjust the reported financial results for Target or
any member of the retail peer group if it believes such adjustments
necessary to properly gauge Target’s relative performance.
For items known at the time of the grant, the Committee proactively
addresses them as part of the grant approval. For example, the 53rd
week from our sales and those of our peers is excluded to ensure a
consistent time frame comparison.
Historically, adjustments to Target’s results have included items
that did not reflect our ongoing core operations or were needed to
ensure consistent time frame comparisons over the performance
period. These adjustments typically decreased participants’
resulting payouts. The Compensation & Human Capital Management
Committee does not make adjustments that are inconsistent with
Target’s performance.
For the 2019 PSU award, this included:
•
Excluding the impact of the one-time gain in Fiscal 2021 due to
Target’s sale of Dermstore from EPS and ROIC to prevent Target’s
operational performance from being overstated due to the
transaction; and
•
Excluding Dermstore’s sales and profits from the Fiscal 2018 base
year used to determine Sales growth and EPS growth over the
respective performance period. No adjustments were made to 2021
Sales or profits given that the sale of the Dermstore business
occurred at the beginning of the fiscal year.
Other than as described above, no adjustments were made to our
annual reported results or those of our peers in determining the
payout of the 2019 PSU award.
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
45 |
Back to
Contents
2019-2021 PSU payout
In April 2022, the NEOs received payouts with respect to the PSU
awards that were granted in March 2019 for the three-year
performance period ended January 29, 2022. These awards were paid
at 193.3% of the goal number of shares.
The following table summarizes the rankings and payout results for
awards granted in Fiscal 2019. This outcome is based on comparing
our results to those of the retail peer group we disclosed in our
proxy statement covering the time of grant. The Adjusted sales
growth and EPS growth metrics utilize a base year of Fiscal 2018
and a final performance year of Fiscal 2021, while for ROIC we use
an average of 2019, 2020, and 2021.
Metric
|
Performance rank
relative to peers
|
Payout percentage
|
Total payout
|
Sales growth
|
3 of 17
|
200%
|
193.3%
|
EPS growth
|
3 of 17
|
200%
|
ROIC
|
5 of 17
|
180%
|
In consideration of the results discussed above, the Compensation
& Human Capital Management Committee approved a total payout of
193.3%.
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
46 |
Back to
Contents
PBRSUs
Our PBRSUs have a three-year performance period with the number of
shares based on relative three-year TSR performance versus our
retail peer group. The PBRSU amount will be adjusted up or down by
25 percentage points if Target’s TSR is in the top one-third or
bottom one-third for the retail peer group, respectively, over the
three-year vesting period. These stock-settled awards cliff vest at
the end of the performance period.
The following example illustrates PBRSU payouts at various levels
of performance for the annual grant made in Fiscal 2021:
(1)
The retail peers for PBRSUs exclude
Publix. The value of Publix’s stock price is established on an
annual basis, making them an inappropriate comparator for the
purpose of assessing our relative TSR performance.
|
2019-2021 PBRSU payout
In March 2022, the NEOs received payouts with respect to the PBRSU
awards that were granted in March 2019 for the three-year
performance period ended January 29, 2022. With a TSR ranking of 1
out of 16 relative to our retail peers, these awards were paid at
125% of the goal number of shares. This outcome is based on
comparing our results to those of the retail peer group we
disclosed in our proxy statement covering the time of grant.
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
47 |
Back to
Contents
We offer the following other benefits to our NEOs:
•
Pension plan. We maintain a pension plan for team members
hired prior to January 2009 who meet certain eligibility criteria.
We also maintain supplemental pension plans for those team members
who are subject to IRS limits on the basic pension plan or whose
pensions are adversely impacted by participating in our deferred
compensation plan. Our pension formula under these plans is the
same for all participants—there are no enhanced benefits provided
to executive officers beyond extending the pension formula to
earnings above the qualified plan limits or contributed to our
deferred compensation plan.
•
401(k) plan. The Target 401(k) Plan is available to all Team
Members after 90 days of employment. There is no enhanced benefit
for executives.
•
Deferred compensation plan. For a broad management group we
offer a non-qualified, unfunded, individual account deferred
compensation plan. The plan has investment options that generally
mirror the Target 401(k) Plan, but also includes a fund based on
Target common stock.
•
Perquisites. We provide certain perquisites to our executive
officers, principally to allow them to devote more time to our
business and to promote their health and safety. In addition, we
provide benefits to our NEOs that we believe serve a business
purpose for Target, but which are considered perquisites under SEC
disclosure rules. The Compensation & Human Capital Management
Committee reviews perquisites annually to ensure they are
consistent with our philosophy and appropriate in magnitude. Mr.
Cornell is only eligible for perquisites that serve a business
purpose for Target or support his safety, health and well-being,
such as home security, parking, executive physical, and personal
use of company-owned aircraft for security reasons.
•
Income continuation plan. We provide an ICP to executive
officers who are involuntarily terminated without cause to assist
in their occupational transitions.
Greater detail on our pension plan, 401(k) plan, deferred
compensation plan, and perquisites is provided in the footnotes and
tables that follow the “Summary compensation table” on page 53. See
Note 6 to the “Table of potential payments upon termination or
change-in control” for additional detail about the ICP.
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
48 |
Back to
Contents
Target’s executive compensation practices
Practice
|
Description
|
More
information
|
Pay for performance
|
A significant percentage of the total direct compensation package
features performance-based metrics, including 100% of our annual
LTI.
|
37
|
Robust stock ownership guidelines
|
We have stock ownership guidelines for executive officers of 7x
base salary for CEO, 3x base salary for non-CEO executive officers,
and 5x the annual cash retainer for directors.
|
29
|
Annual shareholder
“Say on Pay”
|
We value our shareholders’ input on our executive compensation
programs. Our Board seeks an annual non-binding advisory vote from
shareholders to approve the executive compensation disclosed in our
CD&A, tabular disclosures, and related narrative of the 2022
Proxy Statement.
|
67
|
Double trigger change-in-control
|
We grant equity awards that require both a change-in-control and an
involuntary termination or voluntary termination with good reason
before vesting.
|
59
|
Annual compensation
risk assessment
|
A risk assessment of our compensation programs is performed on an
annual basis to ensure that our compensation programs and policies
do not incentivize excessive risk-taking behavior.
|
51
|
Clawback policy
|
Our policy allows recovery of incentive cash, equity compensation,
and severance payments where a senior executive’s intentional
misconduct results in material financial or reputational harm or
results in a need for a restatement of our consolidated financial
statements.
|
52
|
Independent compensation consultant
|
The Compensation & Human Capital Management Committee retains
an independent compensation consultant to advise on executive
compensation programs and practices.
|
49
|
No hedging of company
stock
|
Executive officers and members of the Board may not directly or
indirectly engage in transactions intended to hedge or offset the
market value of Target common stock owned by them.
|
52
|
No pledging of company stock
|
Executive officers and members of the Board may not directly or
indirectly pledge Target common stock as collateral for any
obligation.
|
52
|
No tax gross-ups
|
We do not provide tax gross-ups to our executive officers.
|
|
No dividends on unearned performance awards
|
We do not pay dividends on unearned performance awards.
|
56
|
No repricing or exchange
of underwater stock
options
|
Our equity incentive plan does not permit repricing or exchange of
underwater stock options without shareholder approval.
|
|
No employment contracts
|
We do not use employment contracts with our NEOs.
|
|
Process for determining executive compensation
(including NEOs)
Compensation & Human Capital Management
Committee
The Compensation & Human Capital Management Committee is
responsible for determining the composition and value of the pay
packages for all of our executive officers, including the CEO. The
Compensation & Human Capital Management Committee receives
assistance from two sources: (a) an independent compensation
consulting firm, Semler Brossy, and (b) our internal executive
compensation staff, led by our Executive Vice President & Chief
Human Resources Officer. All decisions regarding executive
compensation are made solely by the Compensation & Human
Capital Management Committee. The Compensation & Human Capital
Management Committee may not delegate its primary responsibility of
overseeing executive officer compensation, but it may delegate to
management authority for our compensation plans that do not involve
the setting of compensation levels for executive officers. In
addition, the Compensation & Human Capital Management Committee
has established an Equity Subcommittee comprised of Ms. Lozano, Mr.
Baker, Mr. Barrett, Ms. Healey, and Ms. Leahy for the purposes of
granting equity awards to members of the Board and any officers who
are subject to Section 16 of the Exchange Act and to take any
action required to be performed by a committee or subcommittee of
“non-employee directors” to preserve the exemption available under
Rule 16b-3 of the Exchange Act.
Compensation & Human Capital Management
Committee’s independent consultant
Semler Brossy has been retained by and reports directly to the
Compensation & Human Capital Management Committee and does not
have any other consulting engagements with management or Target.
The Committee assessed Semler Brossy’s independence in light of the
SEC and NYSE listing standards and determined that no conflict of
interest or independence concerns exist.
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
49 |
Back to
Contents
With respect to CEO compensation, Semler Brossy provides an
independent recommendation to the Compensation & Human Capital
Management Committee, in the form of a range of possible outcomes,
for the Compensation & Human Capital Management Committee’s
consideration. In developing its recommendation, Semler Brossy
relies on its understanding of Target’s business and compensation
programs and their own independent research and analysis. Semler
Brossy does not meet with our CEO with respect to CEO compensation.
Semler Brossy provides an independent assessment of the CEO’s
recommendations on NEO compensation to the Compensation & Human
Capital Management Committee.
Compensation of other executive officers and role of
management
In developing compensation recommendations for other executive
officers, the Executive Vice President & Chief Human Resources
Officer provides our CEO with market data on pay levels and
compensation design practices provided by management’s external
compensation consultants, Willis Towers Watson and Korn Ferry
Group, covering our retail and general industry peer group
companies. Management’s outside consultants do not have any
interaction with either the Compensation & Human Capital
Management Committee or our CEO, but do interact with the Executive
Vice President & Chief Human Resources Officer and her staff.
In addition to providing market data, management’s external
compensation consultants perform other services for Target
unrelated to the determination of executive compensation.
Our Executive Vice President & Chief Human Resources Officer
and the CEO work together to develop our CEO’s compensation
recommendations to the Compensation & Human Capital Management
Committee for other executive officers. The CEO alone is
responsible for providing final compensation recommendations for
the other executive officers to the Compensation & Human
Capital Management Committee.
Benchmarking using compensation peer groups
Peer group market positioning is another important factor
considered in determining each executive officer’s Annual TDC.
The Annual TDC levels and elements described in the preceding pages
are evaluated annually for each executive officer relative to our
retail and general industry peer group companies. The market
comparisons are determined by use of compensation data obtained
from publicly available proxy statements analyzed by Semler Brossy
and proprietary survey data assembled by Willis Towers Watson and
Korn Ferry Group.
Due to a range of factors, including the scope of NEO positions,
tenure in role, and company-specific concerns, there is an
imperfect comparability of NEO positions between companies. As
such, market position served as a reference point in the Annual TDC
determination process rather than a formula-driven outcome.
The retail peer group was formulated based on an initial screen of
companies in the Global Industry Classification Standard retailing
index with revenue from core retail operations greater than
$15 billion. In Fiscal 2020, three non-essential retail peers
subject to mandatory store closures fell below this threshold.
However, due to ongoing volatility, no changes were made to our
peer group for Fiscal 2021. The retail peer group is also used
within our LTI plans. Target’s relative performance compared to
this peer group on key metrics determines overall payout for our
PSU and PBRSU awards.
General industry companies are also included as a peer group
because they represent companies with whom we compete for talent.
Like the selected retailers, the general industry companies are
large and among the leaders in their industries.
The composition of the peer groups is reviewed annually to ensure
it is appropriate in terms of company size and business focus, and
any changes made are reviewed with Semler Brossy and approved by
the Compensation & Human Capital Management Committee. There
were no changes to our retail or general industry peer groups in
Fiscal 2021.
2021 peer groups
|
Retail
|
Albertsons Companies, Inc.
|
The Kroger Co.
|
|
General industry
|
3M Company
|
McDonald’s Corporation
|
Amazon.com, Inc.
|
Lowe’s Companies, Inc.
|
|
Abbott Laboratories
|
MetLife, Inc.
|
Best Buy Co., Inc.
|
Macy’s, Inc.
|
|
Anthem, Inc.
|
Mondelez International, Inc.
|
Costco Wholesale Corporation
|
Nordstrom, Inc.
|
|
Archer-Daniels-Midland Company
|
NIKE, Inc.
|
CVS Health Corporation
|
Publix Super Markets, Inc.
|
|
Cigna Corporation
|
PepsiCo, Inc.
|
Dollar General Corporation
|
Rite Aid Corporation
|
|
The Coca-Cola Company
|
The Procter & Gamble Company
|
Dollar Tree, Inc.
|
Ross Stores, Inc.
|
|
FedEx Corporation
|
Raytheon Technologies Corporation
|
The Gap, Inc.
|
The TJX Companies, Inc.
|
|
General Mills, Inc.
|
Starbucks Corporation
|
|
|
The Home Depot, Inc.
|
Walgreens Boots Alliance, Inc.
|
|
|
Johnson & Johnson
|
United Parcel Service, Inc.
|
|
|
Kohl’s Corporation
|
Walmart Inc.
|
|
|
Johnson Controls International plc
|
UnitedHealth Group Incorporated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marriott International, Inc.
|
|
|
|
|
TARGET
CORPORATION 2022 Proxy Statement |
50 |
Back to
Contents
The following table summarizes our scale relative to our retail and
general industry peer groups. The financial information reflects
fiscal year-end data available as of January 29, 2022:
|
2021 peer group comparison(1)(2)
|
Retail
|
General industry
|
|
Revenues
|
|
Market cap
|
Employees
|
|
Revenues
|
|