Jacobs Engineering Group, which was the first S&P 500 company in 2011 to report a failed say-on-pay vote, received more than 96 percent support (based on shares present) for its compensation practices at its Jan. 26 annual meeting, according to a company filing.

Last year, the California-based company earned just 45 percent approval amid investor concerns over pay-for-performance alignment. After engaging with investors, the company reduced strictly time-based stock awards, decreased the ratio of stock options in its long-term pay mix, established double-triggered change-in-control vesting provisions for new grants, and raised the CEO’s stock holding requirement to six times. In addition, total CEO pay decreased.

Another large-cap company that fared better this year is Monsanto, which earned almost 85 percent support for its pay practices at its Jan. 24 annual meeting, up from about 65 percent approval in 2011. 

Following last year’s vote, the agricultural products company sought feedback from the 50 largest shareowners who voted against. Monsanto said it was unable to identify a single common reason for the negative votes, but several investors mentioned compensation screening models, the valuation of equity grants (versus realized pay), and goal disclosure. Meanwhile, the company’s total shareholder return and operational performance have improved, while total CEO pay has declined by 7 percent and is closer to that of peer companies, according to the ISS report on Monsanto.