Target CEO Brian Cornell has experienced a dramatic 87% reduction in annual compensation since 2020, with his earnings falling to $9.9 million in 2024. This substantial decrease comes as the retail chain confronts dual challenges of a nationwide boycott triggered by its rollback of diversity commitments and renewed economic pressures.
Compensation decline reflects broader struggles
The Minnesota Star Tribune reports that Cornell’s 2024 salary represents the lowest payment he has received since 2016, marking a striking contrast to his peak compensation of $77.5 million in 2020. This reduction also stands in sharp comparison to the nearly $18 million Cornell earned in 2018.
The significant drop in executive compensation aligns with Target’s difficulty meeting key business objectives over the past two years. The company has consistently fallen short of performance targets in critical areas including sales and profits, resulting in executives receiving approximately 62% of their potential bonus amounts.
These compensation reductions reflect ongoing challenges for the retailer as it attempts to navigate complex social and economic pressures. If current performance trends continue, Cornell and other executives may face additional pay decreases in the coming fiscal periods.
Diversity initiative reversal sparks consumer action
A primary factor contributing to Target’s current difficulties has been the intense backlash following the company’s January 2025 announcement ending its three-year diversity, equity and inclusion goals. The timing of this policy shift, coinciding with the return of the Trump administration, has drawn particular scrutiny from civil rights advocates.
The company’s decision to stop sharing diversity data with organizations such as the Human Rights Campaign’s Corporate Equality Index has prompted prominent civil rights leaders including Reverend Al Sharpton and Reverend Jamal Bryant to organize a national boycott against the retailer.
This coordinated consumer action has had measurable effects on Target’s operations, with data showing noticeable declines in both store traffic and sales in the weeks following the boycott announcement. Despite Cornell’s attempts to engage with boycott leaders in what the company described as constructive dialogue, organizers have maintained their protest activities.
The boycott has been particularly effective among Black consumers and advocacy groups who express feeling betrayed by the company’s shift away from previously stated diversity commitments. This consumer response has contributed significantly to the financial pressures reflected in executive compensation figures.
Economic factors compound corporate challenges
Beyond the social controversy, Target also faces mounting economic headwinds, including the impact of reinstated tariffs from the Trump administration. These external financial pressures have further complicated the retailer’s efforts to regain strong performance metrics.
The combination of internal policy decisions and external economic factors has created a particularly challenging environment for Target, placing additional pressure on Cornell’s leadership team as they attempt to reverse declining business metrics.
Target’s current struggles with executive compensation reflect broader issues facing retail corporations attempting to balance stakeholder expectations across different demographic groups while navigating changing economic conditions. The simultaneous pressures from both consumer boycotts and macroeconomic forces create complex operational dilemmas for major retailers.
Corporate accountability landscape evolves
Target’s situation illustrates emerging realities for large corporations navigating societal expectations around diversity initiatives. As consumers increasingly expect transparent corporate commitments to social responsibility, companies that retreat from previously announced diversity goals may face significant market consequences.
The situation serves as a potential warning for other major retailers considering changes to their diversity and inclusion policies. Consumer groups with specific expectations regarding corporate social positioning have demonstrated increasing willingness to organize coordinated spending responses to company decisions they view as regressive.
For Target specifically, rebuilding trust with disillusioned consumer groups presents a significant challenge. The company must weigh the immediate financial implications of current boycotts against the potential long-term impact of its diversity policy decisions on brand perception and customer loyalty.
Path forward remains uncertain
As Target seeks to address both its policy controversies and economic challenges, the company faces uncertain prospects for recovery. Cornell’s significantly reduced compensation package signals serious concern about current performance trajectories and recognition of leadership accountability for recent strategic decisions.
The company’s ability to restore consumer confidence, particularly within communities most engaged in the boycott efforts, will likely play a critical role in determining whether Target can reverse its current performance decline. Rebuilding relationships with advocacy organizations and demonstrating renewed commitment to inclusive practices may become essential components of any recovery strategy.
Market analysts continue monitoring both the immediate financial impacts of the boycott and the longer-term implications of Target’s strategic positioning on diversity issues. For Cornell, the dramatic reduction in compensation represents a tangible consequence of the company’s difficulties navigating these complex corporate challenges.
