Edgar Filing: CAMPBELL SOUP CO

DEF 14A

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 x 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))

x	Definitive Proxy Statement

¨	Definitive Additional Materials

¨	Soliciting Material under §240.14a–12

CAMPBELL SOUP COMPANY
(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 the appropriate box):

x	No fee required

¨	Fee computed on table below per Exchange Act Rules 14a–6(i)(1) and 0–11

	(1)	Title of each class of securities to which transaction applies:

	(2)	Aggregate number of securities to which transaction applies:

	(3)	Per unit price or other underlying value of transaction computed pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 0–11 (set forth the amount on which the filing fee is calculated and state how it was determined):

	(4)	Proposed maximum aggregate value of transaction:

	(5)	Total fee paid:




¨	Fee paid previously with preliminary materials.

¨	Check box if any part of the fee is offset as provided by Exchange Act Rule 0–11(a)(2) and identify the filing for which the offsetting fee was paid previously. Identify the previous filing by registration statement number, or the Form or Schedule and the date of its filing.

	(1)	Amount Previously Paid:

	(2)	Form, Schedule or Registration Statement No.:

	(3)	Filing Party:

	(4)	Date Filed:

Notice of the 2014 Annual Meeting

of Shareholders and Proxy Statement

LOGO

Campbell Soup Company

Wednesday, November 19, 2014 at 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time

Campbell Soup Company, 1 Campbell Place, Camden, New Jersey 08103

LOGO

Campbell Soup Company

1 Campbell Place

Camden, New Jersey 08103-1799

856-342-4800

October 1, 2014

Notice of Annual Meeting of Shareholders

to be held on

Wednesday, November 19, 2014

4:00 p.m. Eastern Time

AGENDA

1.	Elect 14 Directors.

2.	Ratify appointment of independent registered public accounting firm.

3.	Conduct an advisory vote on executive compensation.

4.	Re-approve Campbell Soup Company Annual Incentive Plan.

5.	Transact any other business properly brought before the meeting.

Shareholders of record at the close of business on September 22, 2014, are entitled to receive notice of the meeting and to vote. This year, the Company has again decided to provide access to its proxy materials, including its annual report, to certain shareholders of record, depending upon the number of shares held by the shareholder and including certain Company savings plan participants, via the Internet instead of mailing those shareholders copies of the materials. The Company believes that this decision reduces the amount of paper necessary to produce the materials, as well as the costs associated with mailing the materials to all shareholders. On or about October 3, 2014, the Company will begin mailing a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials (“e-proxy notice”) to certain shareholders of record and will post its proxy materials for those shareholders on the Web site referenced in the e-proxy notice (www.envisionreports.com/cpb). On or about October 3, 2014, the Company will also begin delivering the proxy statement and the accompanying proxy card to the remaining shareholders of record. If you do not own shares in your own name, you may access the Company’s Notice of Annual Meeting and Proxy Statement and its annual report, including the Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended August 3, 2014, at www.edocumentview.com/cpb.

Your vote is important. In order to have as many shares as possible represented, kindly CAST YOUR VOTE BY INTERNET OR PHONE OR SIGN, DATE AND RETURN THE ENCLOSED PROXY CARD IN THE ENVELOPE PROVIDED (see instructions on your proxy card or e-proxy notice).

By Order of the Board of Directors,

LOGO

Kathleen M. Gibson

Vice President and Corporate Secretary

Important Note. Shareholders as of September 22, 2014, may attend the 2014 Annual Meeting. Shareholders who wish to attend should pre-register to obtain an admission ticket. An admission ticket and government-issued photographic identification are required to enter the meeting. If you plan to attend, please see page 53 for additional information on pre-registration and admission to the 2014 Annual Meeting.

Table of Contents


		Page
¢	Item 1 — Election of Directors		1
	Security Ownership of Directors and Executive Officers		6
	Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners		7
	Corporate Governance		8
	Transactions with Related Persons		14
	Audit Committee Report		15
	Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm Fees and Services		16
	Compensation and Organization Committee Report		16
	Compensation Discussion and Analysis		17
	Fiscal 2014 Summary Compensation Table		30
	Grants of Plan-Based Awards in Fiscal 2014		33
	Outstanding Equity Awards at 2014 Fiscal Year-End		34
	Option Exercises and Stock Vested in Fiscal 2014		36
	Pension Benefits — Fiscal 2014		37
	Nonqualified Deferred Compensation — Fiscal 2014		40
	Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control		41
	Fiscal 2014 Director Compensation		46
¢	Item 2 — Ratification of Appointment of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm		47
¢	Item 3 — Advisory Vote on Executive Compensation		48
¢	Item 4 — Re-approval of the Campbell Soup Company Annual Incentive Plan		50
	Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans		51
	Submission of Shareholder Proposals		51
	Director and Executive Officer Stock Ownership Reports		52
	Other Matters		52
	Proxies and Voting at the Meeting		52
	Shareholders Sharing the Same Address		53
	Information about Attending the Meeting		53
	Appendix A — Corporate Governance Standards		A-1
	Appendix B — Non-GAAP Financial Measures		B-1
	Appendix C — Campbell Soup Company Annual Incentive Plan		C-1

Denotes items to be voted on at the meeting.

Shareholders may receive copies of the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended August 3, 2014, Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, Corporate Governance Standards, and the charters of the four standing committees of the Board of Directors, without charge, by:

(1)

writing to Investor Relations, Campbell Soup Company, 1 Campbell Place, Camden, NJ 08103-1799;

(2)

calling 1-800-840-2865; or

(3)

e-mailing the Company’s Investor Relations Department at investorrelations@campbellsoup.com.

These documents are also available on the Company’s Web site at www.campbellsoupcompany.com.

Shareholders may elect to receive future distributions of annual reports and proxy statements by electronic delivery and vote Campbell shares on-line. To take advantage of this service you will need an e-mail account and access to an Internet browser. To enroll, go to the investor center section on www.campbellsoupcompany.com and click on “E-Delivery of Materials.” If your shares are registered in your name, you will be asked to enter your account number, which is printed on your dividend check or Dividend Reinvestment Statement. If your shares are held by a broker, you will need your account number with the broker.

Item 1

Election of Directors

Your Board of Directors Recommends a Vote “For” ALL Nominees

The Board of Directors of the Company (“Board”), pursuant to the By-Laws, determines the number of directors of the Company. The Board is currently comprised of 16 directors. The directors are to be elected to hold office until the next Annual Meeting of the Shareholders and until their successors are elected and shall have qualified. Directors are elected by a plurality of the votes cast.

The Governance Committee is responsible for investigating, reviewing and evaluating the qualifications of candidates for membership on the Board and for assessing the contributions and performance of directors eligible for re-election. It is also responsible for recommending director nominees for approval by the Board and nomination for election at the Annual Meeting of Shareholders.

Director Qualifications

The Governance Committee believes that a nominee for election to the Board should, at minimum:

be a person of the highest integrity;

have the ability to exercise independent judgment;

be committed to act in the best interest of all shareholders;

abide by exemplary standards of business and professional conduct;

have the skills and judgment to discharge the duties and responsibilities of a director;

be willing and able to devote the proper time and attention to fulfill the responsibilities of a director;

have no conflicts of interest arising from other relationships or obligations; and

have the ability to provide active, objective and constructive input at meetings of the Board and committees.

In addition, the Committee believes that, collectively, the Board should reflect appropriate diversity of thought, background and experience, and include directors who are:

reasonably sophisticated about the duties and responsibilities of directors of a public company;

knowledgeable about the consumer products industry, business operations, marketing, finance and accounting;

respected in the business community;

knowledgeable about general economic trends; and

knowledgeable about the standards and practices of good corporate governance.

All candidates considered by the Governance Committee for potential recommendation to the Board as director nominees are evaluated in light of the minimum qualifications listed above. When vacancies occur, the Governance Committee also reviews the overall composition of the Board to determine whether the addition of a director with one or more of the additional skills or qualities listed above would be desirable to enhance the effectiveness of the Board, and whether candidates with other specific experience or expertise should be sought at that particular time.

Director Nominees

Fourteen of the current directors are standing for re-election. Under the Board’s retirement age policy, no director may stand for re-election if he or she would be age 72 or older at the time of election. The Board approved a limited exception to this policy to permit Paul R. Charron, who currently serves as Chairman of the Board and has reached the age of 72, to stand for re-election in November 2014 in order to provide for continuity of Board leadership. Edmund M. Carpenter and Charlotte C. Weber will have reached the age of 72 as of the Annual Meeting and will retire on November 19, 2014. Following the retirements of Mr. Carpenter and Ms. Weber, it is the intention of the Board of Directors to amend the Company’s By-laws to reduce the size of the Board to 14 directors.

All of the nominees are independent directors, except Ms. Morrison. If a nominee becomes unable or unwilling to serve, proxies will also be voted for election of such person as shall be designated by the Board of Directors. The Board knows of no reason why any nominee shall be unable or unwilling to serve. Except as otherwise specified in the proxy, proxies will be voted for election of the nominees named below.

Biographical information on the experience, qualifications and skills of the director nominees is included below.

LOGO

Paul R. Charron

Paul R. Charron, 72, was elected to the Board of Directors in 2003 and became non-executive Chairman of the Board in August 2009.

Mr. Charron has a wealth of experience as a board leader and as a seasoned executive of global consumer product companies. In 1995, he became President and Chief Executive Officer of Liz Claiborne Inc., having served for the previous year as Vice Chairman and Chief Operating Officer. He was elected Chairman of that company in May 1996, and retired as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer in 2006. He served as Senior Advisor at Warburg Pincus, a global private equity firm, from 2008 through 2012.

Earlier in his career, Mr. Charron was Executive Vice President of VF Corporation, a large publicly held apparel manufacturer. Before joining VF in 1988, he served as President and Chief Operating Officer of Brown & Bigelow, a Minnesota-based promotional products firm. He also served as Senior Vice President, sales and marketing, at Cannon Mills Company, and held marketing management positions at General Foods Corporation. Mr. Charron began his business career in the brand management organization at Procter & Gamble.

LOGO

Bennett Dorrance

Bennett Dorrance, 68, was elected to the Board of Directors in 1989. Mr. Dorrance serves as Co-Chair of the Governance Committee and is also a member of the Compensation and Organization Committee. He is the Managing Director and a co-founder of DMB Associates, a real estate development firm headquartered in Phoenix, Arizona, which specializes in large master planned communities. Mr. Dorrance has served on the board of Insight Enterprises, Inc. since 2004, and is also a director of several privately held corporations and partnerships.

In addition to his expertise in real estate development and operational management, Mr. Dorrance has extensive knowledge of Campbell Soup Company’s history, organization and culture. As a major shareholder, a descendent of the Company’s founder, and a director who has served on the Board for 25 years, he brings the perspective of a long-term, highly committed shareholder to the deliberations and decisions of the Board.

LOGO

Lawrence C. Karlson

Lawrence C. Karlson, 71, was elected to the Board of Directors in November 2009. He serves on the Audit Committee and the Finance and Corporate Development Committee. He is a private investor and formerly served as an independent consultant for industrial and technology companies. Mr. Karlson has served on the board of CDI Corp. since 1989, and on the board of H & E Equipment Services, Inc. since 2005.

Mr. Karlson has broad management, operational, and leadership experience, both from his business career and from his service on the boards of numerous private and public companies in the United States and Europe. He was the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Berwind Financial Corporation from 2001 to 2004. Mr. Karlson began his career at Fisher & Porter Co., where he served in various positions of increasing responsibility, including Director and President of U.S. Operations. In 1983, Mr. Karlson formed Nobel Electronics, an instruments manufacturing company that subsequently merged with Pharos AB, where he served as a director and became President and Chief Executive Officer. In 1990, Pharos acquired Spectra Physics. He served the successor company Spectra Physics AB as director and non-executive Chairman until his retirement.

LOGO

Randall W. Larrimore

Randall W. Larrimore, 67, was elected to the Board of Directors in 2002. He is Co-Chair of the Governance Committee and also serves on the Compensation and Organization Committee. Since 1997, he has been a director of Olin Corporation, where he is currently Chair of the governance committee and a member of the audit committee and compensation committee.

Mr. Larrimore brings to Campbell strong management expertise, business acumen, board experience and considerable knowledge of consumer marketing and the packaged goods industry. From 2003 to 2005, he was non-executive Chairman of Olin Corporation. From 1997 to 2002, he served as President and Chief Executive Officer and a director of United Stationers, Inc., a wholesaler and distributor of office products. Prior to joining United Stationers, Mr. Larrimore was President and Chief Executive Officer of MasterBrand Industries, Inc., a subsidiary of Fortune Brands, Inc. He also served as Chairman and CEO of the Master Lock Company and Chairman of Moen Incorporated. He was President of Beatrice Home Specialties from 1983 until 1988 (prior to its acquisition by Fortune Brands), and held executive positions at PepsiCo, including the position of President of Pepsi-Cola Italy. Earlier in his career, Mr. Larrimore was a senior consultant with McKinsey & Company and worked in brand management with Richardson-Vicks, now a part of Procter & Gamble.

LOGO

Marc B. Lautenbach

Marc B. Lautenbach, 53, was elected to the Board of Directors on June 11, 2014. He has served as President and Chief Executive Officer at Pitney Bowes Inc. and as a member of the Pitney Bowes Inc. board of directors since December 2012.

Mr. Lautenbach brings substantial operational, marketing, sales and product development experience to the Company’s Board. He has extensive experience working with a broad range of customers and clients, as well as significant international experience. Before joining Pitney Bowes, Mr. Lautenbach spent 27 years in senior leadership roles at IBM, most recently serving as Managing Partner, North America, IBM Global Business Services. During his tenure at IBM, he was General Manager of the Americas from 2005 to 2010. Prior to that, he served as General Manager of Global Small and Medium Business from 2000 to 2005, and Vice President of Small and Medium Business in Asia-Pacific from 1998 to 2000.

LOGO

Mary Alice Dorrance Malone

Mary Alice Dorrance Malone, 64, was elected to the Board of Directors in 1990, and currently serves on the Compensation and Organization Committee and the Finance and Corporate Development Committee. Ms. Malone is President of Iron Spring Farm, Inc., horse breeding and performance centers in Coatesville, Pennsylvania and Ocala, Florida, which she founded in 1976.

Ms. Malone is an entrepreneur, and a private investor and officer of several private companies. She also serves on the boards of several non-profit organizations and actively participates in various philanthropic organizations. Ms. Malone has a keen interest in health and wellness matters and brings valuable insights to the Board in this area. She is a descendant of the founder of the Company, a major shareholder, and a director with more than 20 years of service, and possesses extensive knowledge of the Company’s history, organization and culture, and the perspective of a long-term, highly committed shareholder.

LOGO

Sara Mathew

Sara Mathew, 59, was elected to the Board of Directors in 2005. Ms. Mathew is chair of the Audit Committee and also serves on the Governance Committee. She has been a director of Freddie Mac since December 2013, and of Avon Products, Inc. since January 2014. She is also a member of the Zurich International Advisory Council. Ms. Mathew previously served as a director of The Dun & Bradstreet Corporation from 2008 until October 2013.

Ms. Mathew brings to Campbell valuable insight and experience in global business and financial matters. She was Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of The Dun & Bradstreet Corporation from July 2010 until October 2013. Previously, she held a number of other leadership roles at Dun & Bradstreet, including President and Chief Executive Officer from January 2010 to July 2010; President and Chief Operating Officer from 2007 to 2009; President, U.S. from 2006 to 2007; President, International in 2006; and Chief Financial Officer from 2001 to 2007. In her preceding 18-year career at Procter & Gamble, she held a number of executive positions, the most recent of which was Vice President of Finance with responsibility for Australia, Asia and India.

LOGO

Denise M. Morrison

Denise M. Morrison, 60, has served as President and Chief Executive Officer of Campbell Soup Company since August 2011, and as a member of the Board of Directors since October 2010. Ms. Morrison has served on the board of MetLife, Inc. since February 2014, and previously served on the board of the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company from 2005 until 2011.

Ms. Morrison has more than 35 years of experience in the consumer packaged goods industry. She joined Campbell in April 2003 as Senior Vice President and President-Global Sales/Chief Customer Officer, and was appointed President of Campbell USA in 2005. She served as Senior Vice President and President of North America Soup, Sauces and Beverages from October 2007 until September 2010, and as Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer from October 2010 until assuming the role of President and CEO. From 1995 to 2003, she was employed by Kraft Foods and Nabisco, serving most recently as Executive Vice President and General Manager of Kraft Foods’ Snacks and Confections divisions. Ms. Morrison began her career at Procter & Gamble in 1975, and later worked at PepsiCo in trade and business development, and at Nestle USA, where she held senior marketing and sales positions.

LOGO

Charles R. Perrin

Charles R. Perrin, 69, was elected to the Board of Directors in 1999. Mr. Perrin is a member of the Compensation and Organization Committee and the Finance and Corporate Development Committee. He has served on the board of Abercrombie & Fitch, Co. since January 2014, and was the non-executive Chairman of Warnaco Group, Inc., from March 2004 until February 2013.

Mr. Perrin brings to the Board substantial experience in and perspective on consumer marketing, business operations and the packaged goods industry. In January 1998 he joined Avon Products, Inc. as Vice Chairman and Chief Operating Officer, and served as CEO of that company from June 1998 to November 1999. From 1994 to 1996, he was Chairman and CEO of Duracell International, Inc. He joined Duracell in 1985 as President of Duracell USA, and later held a number of other executive positions, including President and Chief Operating Officer of Duracell International, Inc. from 1992 to 1994. He previously worked at Cheeseborough-Ponds, Inc., where he held a series of management positions and served as President of the Packaged Food Division. Mr. Perrin began his business career at General Foods Corporation.

LOGO

A. Barry Rand

A. Barry Rand, 69, was elected to the Board of Directors in 2005, and serves on the Audit Committee and the Governance Committee. Mr. Rand served as Chief Executive Officer of AARP, the nation’s largest non-profit and advocacy organization from April 2009 until September 1, 2014. He has been a director of Agilent Technologies, Inc. since 2000 and is also a member of the Board of Trustees of Howard University.

Mr. Rand brings to the Company’s Board a strong mix of organizational and operational management skills and board leadership experience. From 2003 to 2005, he was the Chairman of Aspect Communications, a leading provider of enterprise customer contact center solutions. During the same period, he also served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Equitant, which manages the order-to-cash process for Fortune 500 companies. Mr. Rand was Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Avis Group Holdings, Inc. from 1999 to 2001. He completed his previous 30-year executive career with Xerox Corporation, ending as Executive Vice President of Worldwide Operations.

LOGO

Nick Shreiber

Nick Shreiber, 65, was elected to the Board of Directors in July 2009, and serves on the Audit Committee and the Governance Committee.

Mr. Shreiber brings strong international and operational experience to the Board, with more than 30 years of senior leadership experience in both line management and management consulting. In 2005 he completed an 18-year career at the Tetra Pak Group, a world leader in packaging and processing solutions for food, during the last five of which he served as President and Chief Executive Officer. He previously was a partner with McKinsey & Co., where he spent eight years with engagement responsibility for major clients in Europe and Latin America in diverse industrial and service sectors. Mr. Shreiber served on the board of Radiant Systems, Inc. in 2011, and currently serves on the Board of North Highland, an international management consulting company. In addition to his Board work, Mr. Shreiber mentors senior corporate executives on issues relating to leadership, organization and strategy.

LOGO

Tracey T. Travis

Tracey T. Travis, 52, was elected to the Board of Directors in November 2011, and serves on the Audit Committee and Finance and Corporate Development Committee. She is currently Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer for The Estée Lauder Companies Inc., a role to which she was appointed in August 2012. Ms. Travis was a director of Jo-Ann Stores, Inc. from 2003 until 2011.

Ms. Travis possesses valuable business experience and particular strengths in the areas of financial management and reporting, brand building and operational management. Before assuming her current role at Estée Lauder, she served as Senior Vice President of Finance and Chief Financial Officer at Ralph Lauren Corporation from 2005 until July 2012, and as Senior Vice President of Finance for Limited Brands, Inc. from 2002 to 2004. From 2001 to 2002, she was Chief Financial Officer of Intimate Brands, Inc., a division of Limited Brands. Ms. Travis served as Chief Financial Officer of the Beverage Can Americas Group of American National Can from 1999 to 2001, and held various management positions at PepsiCo and Pepsi Bottling Group from 1989 to 1999. She began her career as an engineer with General Motors Corporation in 1983 and went on to work in various financial roles.

LOGO

Archbold D. van Beuren

Archbold D. van Beuren, 57, was elected to the Board of Directors in November 2009. Mr. van Beuren serves on the Audit Committee and Finance and Corporate Development Committee.

Mr. van Beuren brings to the Board wide-ranging skills in operational management and extensive knowledge of the Company, its customers, its products and the food industry. He began his 26-year career with Campbell in 1983 as an Associate Marketing Manager and served in various positions of increasing responsibility, including President of Godiva Chocolatier; President of a division responsible for the North America Foodservice business and the Company’s Canadian, Mexican and Latin American businesses; and Senior Vice President and President — Global Sales and Chief Customer Officer from 2007 until his retirement from Campbell on October 1, 2009. Mr. van Beuren began his career as an analyst with Belden & Associates Investments in 1979 and in 1980 moved to Triton Press, where he was Manager of Sales and Marketing.

Mr. van Beuren serves on the board of Bissell Company, Inc. He is a descendant of the founder of the Company.

LOGO

Les C. Vinney

Les C. Vinney, 65, was elected to the Board of Directors in 2003. Mr. Vinney is Chair of the Compensation and Organization Committee and also serves on the Finance and Corporate Development Committee. Mr. Vinney retired as President and CEO of STERIS Corporation in 2007. He has been a director of Patterson Companies, Inc. since 2008 and served on the Board of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland from 2005 through 2010.

Mr. Vinney brings to the Board extensive experience and perspective in the areas of accounting, finance and business operations. After joining STERIS Corporation in 1999 as Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, he was elected President and Chief Executive Officer of that company from 2000 to 2007. From 2007 to 2009, Mr. Vinney served as a Senior Advisor to STERIS. Prior to joining STERIS, Mr. Vinney worked at Goodrich Corporation, which he joined in 1991 as Vice President of Finance — Specialty Chemicals and where he held successive executive positions until his election as Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer in 1998. Prior to joining Goodrich, Mr. Vinney held a number of senior operating and financial management positions with Engelhard Corporation. He began his career at Exxon Corporation in 1972 in financial management.

Security Ownership of Directors and Executive Officers

The following table sets forth information regarding beneficial ownership as of the record date (except where otherwise indicated) of Campbell’s stock by each director and director nominee, by each of the named executive officers identified in the Fiscal 2014 Summary Compensation Table included in this proxy statement, and by all directors and executive officers as a group. The table also sets forth Campbell stock units credited to each individual’s deferred compensation account upon deferral of previously earned compensation. Additional stock units are credited to the deferred compensation accounts upon payment of dividends. The individuals are fully at risk as to the value of the Campbell stock units in their deferred compensation accounts. The table also includes unvested, non-deferred restricted share units granted to executives under the Company’s Long-Term Incentive Program. Stock units in deferred compensation accounts and unvested restricted share units granted under the Long-Term Incentive Program do not carry voting rights, but the individuals do have a pecuniary interest in these units.


	Number of Shares		Number of Shares Underlying Vested Options		Total Number of Shares Beneficially Owned(a)		Number of Campbell Stock Units Deferred		Number of Restricted Share Units		Total
Edmund M. Carpenter		36,067		19,656		55,723		17,834		0		73,557
Paul R. Charron		18,369		10,336		28,705		57,200		0		85,905
Bennett Dorrance(b)		46,292,965		37,029		46,329,994		24,240		0		46,354,234
Lawrence C. Karlson		17,239		0		17,239		0		0		17,239
Randall W. Larrimore		19,243		19,656		38,899		0		0		38,899
Marc B. Lautenbach		1,433		0		1,433		0		0		1,433
Mary Alice D. Malone(c)		53,191,978		19,656		53,211,634		49,131		0		53,260,765
Sara Mathew		0		10,336		10,336		42,004		0		52,340
Denise M. Morrison		214,479		0		214,479		25,607		282,393		522,479
Charles R. Perrin		0		0		0		43,708		0		43,708
A. Barry Rand		0		0		0		27,936		0		27,936
Nick Shreiber		19,689		0		19,689		0		0		19,689
Tracey T. Travis		9,258		0		9,258		0		0		9,258
Archbold D. van Beuren(d)		17,919,068		0		17,919,068		23,585		0		17,942,653
Les C. Vinney		56,244		0		56,244		6,065		0		62,309
Charlotte C. Weber(e)		12,538,280		10,336		12,548,616		39,445		0		12,588,061
Mark R. Alexander		118,446		0		118,446		10,065		85,028		213,539
Carlos J. Barroso		3,396		0		3,396		0		26,597		29,993
Anthony P. DiSilvestro		64,023		0		64,023		17,323		38,508		119,854
Ellen Oran Kaden		211,199		0		211,199		58,485		94,217		363,901
B. Craig Owens(f)		72,301		0		72,301		5,761		109,689		187,751
TOTAL*		130,915,138		127,005		131,042,143		461,994		818,244		132,322,381

*	Total includes all directors, director nominees, named executive officers and other executive officers as a group (26 persons), who collectively own 42.1% of the outstanding shares of Campbell stock.

(a)	The shares shown include shares of Campbell stock as to which directors and executive officers can acquire beneficial ownership because of stock options that are currently vested. All persons listed own less than 1% of the Company’s outstanding shares of stock, except:


	% of Outstanding Shares
Bennett Dorrance		14.7	%
Mary Alice D. Malone		16.9	%
Archbold D. van Beuren		5.7	%
Charlotte C. Weber		4.0	%

(b)

Bennett Dorrance is a grandson of John T. Dorrance (the founder of the Company), the brother of Mary Alice D. Malone and a first cousin of Charlotte C. Weber. Share ownership does not include 1,105,142 shares held by trusts for his children or 82,028 shares held by DFE Partners, as to which shares he disclaims beneficial ownership. Share ownership includes 22,919,355 shares that are pledged to banks as collateral for loans. Over the last 12 months, Mr. Dorrance reduced the number of shares that are subject to pledge arrangements from 27,819,355 shares to 22,919,355 shares, a reduction of 4,900,000 shares, or 17.6%. Over the past 24 months Mr. Dorrance has reduced the number of pledged shares by 10,650,000 shares, or 31.7%. See also “Principal Shareholders” below.

(c)

Mary Alice D. Malone is a granddaughter of John T. Dorrance, the sister of Bennett Dorrance and a first cousin of Charlotte C. Weber. Share ownership does not include 1,094,325 shares held by trusts for her children for which Ms. Malone is not a trustee and as to which shares she disclaims beneficial ownership. See also “Principal Shareholders” below.

(d)

Archbold D. van Beuren is a great-grandson of John T. Dorrance. Share ownership includes 17,023,498 shares held by the Voting Trust (defined in “Principal Shareholders” below) as of September 22, 2014 over which he, as a Voting Trustee, has shared voting power. Share ownership also includes 871,470 shares, over which he has sole voting and dispositive power. Share ownership does not include 180,000 shares held by a trust for his wife, as to which shares he disclaims beneficial ownership. See also “Principal Shareholders” below.

(e)

Charlotte C. Weber is a granddaughter of John T. Dorrance and a first cousin of Bennett Dorrance and Mary Alice D. Malone. Share ownership includes 1,300,000 shares that are pledged to a bank as security for a revolving credit loan. Over the last 24 months, Ms. Weber has reduced the number of shares that are subject to pledge arrangements by 10,000 shares.

(f)	Share ownership for B. Craig Owens is as of May 1, 2014, the effective date of his retirement as Senior Vice President – Chief Financial Officer and Chief Administrative Officer and the last date on which he was an executive officer of the Company.

Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners

At the close of business on September 22, 2014, the record date for the meeting, there were outstanding and entitled to vote 314,293,061 shares of Campbell stock, all of one class and each having one vote. The holders of a majority of the shares outstanding and entitled to vote, present in person or represented by proxy, constitute a quorum for the meeting.

Principal Shareholders

Information concerning the owners of more than 5% of the outstanding Campbell stock as of the record date for the meeting follows:


Name/Address	Amount/Nature of Beneficial Ownership			Percent of Outstanding Stock
Bennett Dorrance DMB Associates 7600 E. Doubletree Ranch Road Scottsdale, AZ 85258		46,292,965	(1)		14.7	%

Mary Alice D. Malone Iron Spring Farm, Inc. 75 Old Stottsville Road Coatesville, PA 19320		53,191,978	(2)		16.9	%
Archbold D. van Beuren and David C. Patterson, Voting Trustees under the Major Stockholders’ Voting Trust dated as of June 2, 1990, as amended (“Voting Trust”), and Related Persons		23,392,486	(3)		7.4	%
c/o Brandywine Trust Company 7234 Lancaster Pike Hockessin, DE 19707 (4)

(1)	A director nominee. See note (b) on page 6.

(2)	A director nominee. See note (c) on page 7.

(3)	Archbold D. van Beuren is a director nominee. See note (d) on page 7.

Total disclosed above is as of September 22, 2014, and includes 17,023,498 shares (5.4% of the outstanding shares) held by the Voting Trust and 6,368,988 shares held outside the Voting Trust by Voting Trust participants or by persons related to them, for a total of 23,392,486 shares 7.4% of the outstanding shares).

Participants in the Voting Trust have certain rights to withdraw shares deposited with the Voting Trustees, including the right to withdraw these shares prior to any annual or special meeting of the Company’s shareholders. Dispositive power as used above means the power to direct the sale of the shares; in some cases it does not include the power to direct how the proceeds of a sale can be used. The Voting Trust was formed by certain descendants (and spouses, fiduciaries and a related foundation) of the late John T. Dorrance. The participants have indicated that they formed the Voting Trust as a vehicle for acting together as to matters which may arise affecting the Company’s business, in order to obtain their objective of maximizing the value of their shares. The Voting Trustees will act for participants in communications with the Company’s Board of Directors. Participants believe the Voting Trust may also facilitate communications between the Board and the participants.

(4)	Under the Voting Trust Agreement, all shares held by the Voting Trust will be voted by the Voting Trustees, whose decision must be approved by two of the three Voting Trustees. The Voting Trust continues until January 1, 2024, unless it is sooner terminated or extended.

Unless otherwise noted, the foregoing information relating to Principal Shareholders is based upon the Company’s stock records and data supplied to the Company by the holders as of the record date for the meeting.

Corporate Governance

The Board of Directors is responsible for overseeing the business of the Company, and the competence and integrity of its management, to serve the long-term interests of the shareholders. The Board believes that sound corporate governance is essential to diligent and effective fulfillment of its oversight responsibilities.

Corporate Governance Standards

Campbell first published Corporate Governance Standards in its proxy statement in 1992. The Company’s current Corporate Governance Standards appear in Appendix A. Also set forth in Appendix A are procedures by which interested persons can communicate concerns to the Board of Directors and the Audit Committee.

Director Independence

A statement of standards that the Board has adopted to assist it in evaluating the independence of Campbell directors is set forth in Appendix A, and appears in the governance section of the Company’s Web site at www.campbellsoupcompany.com. The Standards for the Determination of Director Independence (the “Standards”) describe various types of relationships that could potentially exist between a director and the Company, and define the thresholds at which such relationships would be deemed material. The Board will deem a director to be independent if (i) no relationship exists that would disqualify the director under the guidelines set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Standards, and (ii) the Board has determined, based on all relevant facts and circumstances, that any other relationship between the director and the Company, not covered by paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Standards, is not material. In any case in which the Board makes the latter determination, the relationship will be disclosed in the proxy statement, along with the basis for the Board’s con clu sion that it is not material.

The Board has determined that no relationship exists between the Company and any nominee for director listed in this proxy statement, except Ms. Morrison, which would influence or impair the nominee’s independence as a director. Each of the following directors and director nominees is independent under the rules of the New York Stock Exchange and the Standards set forth in Appendix A:


Edmund M. Carpenter		Charles R. Perrin
Paul R. Charron		A. Barry Rand
Bennett Dorrance		Nick Shreiber
Lawrence C. Karlson		Tracey T. Travis
Randall W. Larrimore		Archbold D. van Beuren
Marc B. Lautenbach		Les C. Vinney
Mary Alice D. Malone		Charlotte C. Weber
Sara Mathew

Board Leadership Structure

Campbell has a long-standing tradition of separating the roles of Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer. The Board continues to believe that this is the most appropriate leadership structure for the Company. The principal responsibility of the Chief Executive Officer is to manage the business. The principal responsibilities of the Chairman of the Board are to manage the operations of the Board of Directors and its committees and provide counsel to the Chief Executive Officer on behalf of the Board.

Board Committee Structure

Pursuant to the By-Laws, the Board had established four standing committees as of the record date: the Audit Committee, the Compensation and Organization Committee, the Finance and Corporate Development Committee and the Governance Committee. Each of the standing committees has a charter that is reviewed annually by that committee. Proposed changes to the charter of any standing committee are reviewed by the Governance Committee and approved by the Board. The committee charters are available in the governance section of the Company’s Web site at www.campbellsoupcompany.com.

All members of the Audit Committee, the Compensation and Organization Committee and the Governance Committee are independent directors as defined by the rules of the New York Stock Exchange and the Standards set forth in Appendix A. All members of the Audit Committee also satisfy the independence requirements for audit committee members set forth in the SEC rules. The Board has determined that Sara Mathew is an audit committee financial expert, as defined by the SEC rules. Each member of the Compensation and Organization Committee qualifies as a “Non-Employee Director” as defined in Rule 16b-3 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and as an “outside director” for purposes of Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code.

Membership in the standing committees on October 1, 2014, was as follows:


Audit	Compensation and Organization	Finance and Corporate Development	Governance
Sara Mathew, Chair	Les C. Vinney, Chair	Edmund M. Carpenter, Chair	Bennett Dorrance, Co-chair
Lawrence C. Karlson	Edmund M. Carpenter	Lawrence C. Karlson	Randall W. Larrimore, Co-chair
A. Barry Rand	Bennett Dorrance	Mary Alice D. Malone	Sara Mathew
Nick Shreiber	Randall W. Larrimore	Charles R. Perrin	A. Barry Rand
Tracey T. Travis	Mary Alice D. Malone	Tracey T. Travis	Nick Shreiber
Archbold D. van Beuren	Charles R. Perrin	Archbold D. van Beuren	Charlotte C. Weber
	Charlotte C. Weber	Les C. Vinney

Actions taken by any of the standing committees are reported to the Board. Generally, all members of the Board receive copies of the minutes of all committee meetings and copies of the materials distributed in advance of the meetings for all of the committees.

The principal responsibilities of the standing committees, and the number of meetings held by each committee in fiscal 2014, were as follows:

Audit Committee

13 meetings in fiscal 2014

Evaluates the performance of and selects the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm, subject only to ratification by the shareholders;

Reviews the scope and results of the audit plans of the independent registered public accounting firm and the internal auditors;

Oversees the adequacy and effectiveness of the Company’s internal controls and disclosure controls and procedures;

Reviews the performance and resources of the internal audit function, which reports directly to the Audit Committee;

Confers independently with the internal auditors and the independent registered public accounting firm;

Reviews the Company’s financial reporting and accounting principles and standards and the audited financial statements to be included in the annual report;

Reviews the Company’s quarterly financial results and related disclosures;

Approves all permissible non-audit services to be performed by the independent registered public accounting firm and all relationships that the independent registered public accounting firm has with the Company;

Determines the appropriateness of fees for audit and non-audit services performed by the independent registered public accounting firm; and

Reviews the Company’s compliance and ethics program and Code of Business Conduct and Ethics.

Compensation and Organization Committee

7 meetings in fiscal 2014

Conducts an annual performance evaluation of the Chief Executive Officer by all independent directors;

Determines and approves the salary and incentive compensation, including bonus and performance restricted stock, for the Chief Executive Officer, with input from the other independent directors;

Reviews and approves the salaries and incentive compensation for senior executives;

Reviews and approves the short-term and long-term incentive compensation programs, including the performance goals;

Reviews the executive salary structure and the apportionment of compensation among salary and short-term and long-term incentive compensation;

Reviews and approves the total incentive compensation to be allocated annually to employees;

Reviews and recommends to the Board significant changes in the design of employee benefit plans;

Reviews major organizational changes;

Reviews executive organization and principal programs for executive development, and annually reports to the Board on management development and succession planning; and

Conducts an assessment of the independence of any outside advisor it chooses to retain.

For a discussion of the process by which the Compensation and Organization Committee determines executive compensation and the roles of executive officers and the Committee’s independent compensation consultant in determining executive compensation in fiscal 2014, see “Corporate Governance of Executive Compensation” and “Independent Compensation Consultant” on pages 17 through 18.

Finance and Corporate Development Committee

6 meetings in fiscal 2014

Reviews and recommends to the Board all issuances, sales or repurchases of equity and long-term debt;

Reviews and recommends changes in the Company’s capital structure;

Reviews and recommends the financing plan, dividend policy, capital budget and capital expenditure program;

Reviews and recommends acquisitions, divestitures, joint ventures, partnerships or combinations of business interests;

Reviews financial risks and the Company’s principal policies, procedures and controls with respect to investment and derivatives, foreign exchanges and hedging transactions;

Recommends proposed appointments to the Administrative Committee of the Company’s 401(k) savings plan and pension plans; and

Oversees the administration and the investment policies and practices of the Company’s 401(k) saving plan and pension plans.

Governance Committee

6 meetings in fiscal 2014

Reviews and makes recommendations to the Board regarding:

The organization and structure of the Board;

Qualifications for director candidates;

Candidates for election to the Board;

Evaluation of the Chairman’s performance;

Candidates for the position of Chairman of the Board;

Chairpersons and members for appointment to the Board Committees;

Remuneration for Board members who are not employees; and

The role and effectiveness of the Board, the respective Board Committees and the individual directors in the Company’s corporate governance process.

The Governance Committee determines the amount and design of all compensation provided to non-employee directors. The Senior Vice President—Chief Legal and Public Affairs Officer and the Vice President and Corporate Secretary make recommendations to the Governance Committee regarding changes to the director compensation program. The Governance Committee also reviews any transaction with a related person in accordance with the Board’s policy concerning such transactions, as further described on page 14.

The Governance Committee seeks potential nominees for Board membership in various ways and will consider suggestions submitted by shareholders. See pages 12 through 13 for the procedures for submitting nominee information.

Compensation and Organization Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

There are no Compensation and Organization Committee interlocks. No member of the Committee has ever been an officer or employee of the Company, and none of the members has any relationship required to be disclosed under this caption under the rules of the SEC.

Evaluations of Board Performance

Since 1995, the Board’s Governance Committee has led annual evaluations of Board performance. The evaluation process is designed to facilitate ongoing, systematic examination of the Board’s effectiveness and accountability, and to identify opportunities for improving its operations and procedures.

In accordance with the requirements of the Corporate Governance Listing Standards of the New York Stock Exchange, in 2014, the Board completed an evaluation process focusing on the effectiveness of the performance of the Board as a whole, and each standing committee conducted a separate evaluation of its own performance and of the adequacy of its charter. The Governance Committee designed and coordinated the Board evaluation and reported on its results. Each committee also reported to the Board on the results of its annual self-evaluation.

In the Board evaluation process, each non-employee director completed an evaluation form that solicited directors’ assessments regarding 30 questions relating to the qualifications and responsibilities of directors, the effectiveness of Board and committee operations, and the oversight of management. Following review and discussion of a composite report by the Governance Committee, its Co-Chairs presented a report to the Board that provided recommendations to enhance Board effectiveness based upon the responses received in this process.

In the committee evaluation process, the members of each standing committee completed an evaluation form that elicited assessments regarding the appropriateness of the committee’s charter and the adequacy of the written materials distributed in advance of meetings, the time available for discussion of important policy matters, and the manner in which specific committee responsibilities were discharged. Following discussion of a composite report within each committee, the chair of the committee reported to the Board regarding its overall findings and recommendations to improve committee operations.

Director Continuing Education

Since fiscal 2005, the Company has maintained a formal program of continuing education for directors. In September 2010, the Governance Committee revised the program and established the expectation that each Director will complete a total of 16 hours of director continuing education over the course of two years through a combination of Company-sponsored courses or events, in-person or online director education programs sponsored by outside parties, online training courses offered as part of the Company’s compliance training program for employees, and certain other educational experiences as may be approved by the Governance Committee from time to time. In fiscal 2014, directors participated in Company-sponsored sessions on business-related topics, and also participated in courses provided by outside parties covering various governance matters and topics of interest to audit and compensation committee members.

Board Oversight of Enterprise Risk

In accordance with New York Stock Exchange Corporate Governance Listing Standards, the Audit Committee charter assigns to that committee the responsibility to review the Company’s policies and practices with respect to risk assessment and risk management, including major financial risk exposures, and the steps management has taken to monitor and control such exposures. As noted in the commentary to the Listing Standards, enterprise risk management is fundamentally a responsibility of the Company’s management, but the Audit Committee is charged with reviewing the policies and practices that govern this process.

In 2006, the Audit Committee recommended, and the Board approved, a framework pursuant to which the Board as a whole and each of the standing committees have been assigned specific accountabilities for review of the Company’s management of certain categories of enterprise risk. The responsibilities reflected in the framework are included in the annual schedules of recurring agenda items for the Board and the respective committees, and the Audit Committee reviews the framework annually. In addition, a review of the principal enterprise risks whose oversight is assigned to the Board as a whole is incorporated in the Board’s annual agenda.

Policy on Pledging

In September 2013, the Board of Directors, upon the recommendation of the Governance Committee, adopted a policy that prohibits any director or executive officer from pledging any shares of Campbell common stock that he or she owns or controls, directly or indirectly, as security under any obligation. This policy is prospective and is not applicable to pledge arrangements in existence as of September 25, 2013. Directors who had pledged shares as of September 25, 2013 are expected to reduce the number of shares pledged in a reasonable manner over time. See the footnotes following the Security Ownership of Directors and Executive Officers table on pages 6 through 7 for additional information regarding shares subject to pledge obligations and reductions in the number of shares pledged.

Process for Nomination and Evaluation of Candidates for Director

Recommendation of New Nominees. When vacancies on the Board arise due to the retirement or resignation of directors, the Governance Committee may consult with other directors and/or with senior management to obtain recommendations of potential candidates to fill these positions, and may also retain a search firm to assist it in identifying and evaluating candidates. The Governance Committee also considers candidates for election to the Board who are recommended to the Committee by shareholders.

Please see page 1 for a description of the criteria for the selection of directors.

All candidates considered by the Governance Committee for potential recommendation to the Board as director nominees are evaluated by the Governance Committee in light of the minimum qualifications listed on page 1. When vacancies occur, the Governance Committee also reviews the overall composition of the Board to determine whether the addition of a director with one or more of the additional skills or qualities listed on page 1 would be desirable to enhance the effective ness of the Board, and whether candidates with other specific experience or expertise should be sought at that particular time. If an outside search firm is retained to assist in identifying and evaluating candidates, the Governance Committee also considers the assessments of the search firm and the background information it provides on the persons recommended for consideration. The Chairman of the Board, the Co-Chairs of the Governance Committee and the Chief Executive Officer customarily interview leading candidates. Other directors and/or members of senior management may also interview these candidates. Candidates recommended by shareholders will be evaluated using the same process that is employed to evaluate any other candidate.

2014 Nominees. All director nominees listed in this proxy statement, other than Marc B. Lautenbach, were also nominated by the Board and elected by the shareholders in November 2013. Mr. Lautenbach was elected as a director effective June 11, 2014.

Mr. Lautenbach was identified by a search firm that was retained by the Governance Committee. The search firm was instructed to identify candidates who met the minimum qualifications for directors set forth on page 1, and who also satisfied the additional criteria established by the Governance Committee for this search. Follow-

ing the completion of the thorough review and interview process described above, Mr. Lautenbach was recommended for election to the Board by the Governance Committee.

Re-Nomination of Incumbent Directors. The Company’s Corporate Governance Standards require the Governance Committee to assess the performance of each director eligible for re-election at the Annual Meeting. The Governance Committee’s annual agenda contemplates that these assessments will occur in advance of the Governance Committee’s recommendation of a slate of director nominees for approval by the Board. In the individual director assessment conducted by the Governance Committee in fiscal 2014, each director serving at the time of such assessment who would be standing for re-election was evaluated in light of the criteria set forth in the Corporate Governance Standards with respect to the qualification of directors and the composition of the Board. In addition, the Co-Chairs of the Governance Committee solicited an assessment of each director from the Chairman of the Board.

Shareholder Recommendations. Shareholders who wish to recommend candidates for nomination for election to the Board may do so by writing to the Corporate Secretary of Campbell Soup Company at 1 Campbell Place, Camden, New Jersey 08103-1799. The recommendation must include the following information:

The candidate’s name and business address;

A resume or curriculum vitae which describes the candidate’s background and demonstrates that he or she meets the minimum qualifications set forth above;

A letter from the candidate stating that he or she is willing to serve on the Board if elected, and identifying any legal or regulatory proceedings in which he or she has been involved during the last ten years; and

A statement from the shareholder recommending the candidate, indicating that he or she is the registered owner of Campbell shares, or a written statement from the “record holder” of Campbell shares indicating that the shareholder is the beneficial owner of such shares.

Requirement of Majority Shareholder Votes in Uncontested Director Elections

In 2007, the Board adopted a policy, set forth in the Company’s Corporate Governance Standards, which provides that any nominee for director in an uncontested election who receives more votes “withheld” from his or her election than votes “for” his or her election shall immediately tender an offer of resignation following certification of the shareholder vote. The Board will accept the resignation unless there is a compelling reason for the director to remain on the Board, and will promptly disclose the action it has taken and the reasons for it.

Director Attendance at Board and Committee Meetings

Directors meet their responsibilities by preparing for and attending Board and committee meetings, and through communication with the Chairman, the Chief Executive Officer and other members of management on matters affecting the Company. During fiscal 2014, the Board of Directors held six regular meetings. All directors attended at least 92% of scheduled Board meetings and meetings held by committees of which they were members.

Director Attendance at Annual Meeting of Shareholders

All directors who are standing for re-election are expected to attend the Annual Meeting of Shareholders. Fourteen of the fifteen directors who were standing for re-election attended the 2013 Annual Meeting of Shareholders.

This Corporate Governance section, which began on page 8 was reviewed and discussed by the Governance Committee, and the Governance Committee recommended to the Board that it be included in this proxy statement.

Governance Committee

Bennett Dorrance, Co-Chair

Randall W. Larrimore, Co-Chair

Sara Mathew

A. Barry Rand

Nick Shreiber

Charlotte C. Weber

Transactions with Related Persons

Under the Company’s written Policy Concerning Transactions with Related Persons (the “Related Persons Policy”), the Governance Committee is required to review and, in appropriate circumstances, approve or ratify any transaction in which the Company was or is to be a participant, the amount involved exceeded or is expected to exceed $120,000 and any related person had or will have a direct or indirect interest, as well as any material amendment to or modification of such a transaction.

Management has established procedures for identifying and monitoring transactions that may be subject to Governance Committee review under the Related Persons Policy or disclosure under SEC rules. Under the Company’s conflicts of interest policy, directors and executive officers have a duty to report transactions in which they or their immediate family members have a direct or indirect interest and which might be deemed to constitute related person transactions. Directors and executive officers also annually complete a proxy questionnaire in which they are asked to identify all for-profit and not-for-profit entities with which they are associated. Based on the disclosures in the proxy questionnaires, management ascertains whether the Company has engaged or is expected to engage in any transactions involving these entities, directly or indirectly, of which the relevant director or executive officer may be unaware.

The Related Persons Policy specifies that the Governance Committee shall review the material terms of such a transaction, including the approximate dollar amount, and the material facts as to the related person’s direct or indirect interest in, or relationship to, the transaction. In determining whether to approve or ratify a transaction, the Governance Committee is directed to consider, among other factors it may deem appropriate, whether the transaction was or will be on terms no less favorable than those generally available to an unaffiliated third party under the same or similar circumstances. No director may participate in the discussion or approval of a transaction in which he or she, or a member of his or her immediate family, has a direct or indirect interest.

The Co-Chairs of the Governance Committee (or, if a transaction involves one of the Committee Co-Chairs, the Chairman of the Board) may approve or ratify a related person transaction in which the aggregate amount involved is less than $1 million. Any transaction approved by the Co-Chairs or the Chairman is to be reported to the Governance Committee at its next regularly scheduled meeting.

The following types of transactions are deemed by the Related Persons Policy to have been approved in advance by the Governance Committee, even if the aggregate amount involved exceeded or will exceed $120,000:

Compensation paid by the Company to a director or executive officer for services rendered to the Company as a director or executive officer.

Transactions with other entities in which a related person has a direct or indirect interest solely as a result of being a director of the other entity or of owning, with all other related persons, a less than 10% equity or limited partnership interest in the entity, and the aggregate amount of the transaction does not exceed the greater of $1 million or 2% of that entity’s total annual revenues.

Contributions by the Company to charitable organizations with which a related person’s relationship is solely that of an employee (other than an executive officer), director or trustee, and the aggregate amount of the contribution does not exceed the lesser of $25,000 or 2% of the charitable organization’s annual receipts.

Transactions in which a related person’s only interest is as a holder of the Company’s stock, and all holders received or will receive proportional benefits (such as the payment of regular quarterly dividends).

Transactions involving competitive bids.

Transactions in which the rates or charges are regulated by law or government authority.

Transactions involving services as a bank depositary of funds, transfer agent, registrar, trustee under a trust indenture, or similar services.

There were no transactions during the period from July 29, 2013 to October 1, 2014, and none are currently proposed, in which the Company was or is to be a participant, the amount involved exceeded or is expected to exceed $120,000, and any related person had or will have a direct or indirect material interest.

Audit Committee Report

The Audit Committee is comprised of the six directors named below. The Board has determined that each member of the Committee meets the current requirements as to independence, experience and expertise established by the New York Stock Exchange. Sara Mathew is an audit committee financial expert as defined by SEC rules. A copy of the Audit Committee Charter, as most recently updated in September 2004, is available at the Company’s corporate website at www.campbellsoupcompany.com in the governance section under Board Committees.

One of the Audit Committee’s primary responsibilities is to assist the Board in its oversight of the integrity of the Company’s financial statements and financial reporting process, including its system of internal controls.

To fulfill these oversight responsibilities, the Committee has reviewed and discussed with management and the independent registered public accounting firm the audited financial statements included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended August 3, 2014, and has reviewed and discussed with the independent registered public accounting firm the matters required to be discussed by applicable requirements of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board regarding the independent registered public accountants’ communications with the Audit Committee. In addition, the Committee has received from the independent auditors a written report stating that they are not aware of any relationships between the registered public accounting firm and the Company that, in their professional judgment, may reasonably be thought to bear on their independence, as required by applicable requirements of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board regarding the independent accountant’s communication with the audit committee concerning independence. The Committee has discussed with the independent registered public accounting firm the firm’s objectivity and independence. The Committee has also considered whether the provision of non-audit services by the independent registered public accounting firm to the Company for the most recent fiscal year and the fees and costs billed and expected to be billed by the independent registered public accounting firm for those services are compatible with maintaining its independence.

The Audit Committee discussed with the Company’s internal auditors and independent registered public accounting firm the overall scope and plans for their respective audits. The Committee has reviewed with the internal auditors and independent registered public accounting firm, with and without members of management present, the results of their examinations, their assessment of the Company’s internal controls and the overall quality of the Company’s financial reporting. In addition, the Audit Committee has discussed with the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer the processes that they have undertaken to evaluate the accuracy and fair presentation of the Company’s financial statements and the effectiveness of the Company’s system of disclosure controls and procedures.

Based on the review and discussions described in this report, the Audit Committee recommended to the Board of Directors that Campbell’s audited consolidated financial statements be included in Campbell’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended August 3, 2014, for filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The Audit Committee also recommended to the Board that PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP be appointed independent registered public accounting firm for the Company for fiscal 2015.

Audit Committee

Sara Mathew, Chair

Lawrence C. Karlson

A. Barry Rand

Nick Shreiber

Tracey T. Travis

Archbold D. van Beuren

Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm Fees and Services

The aggregate fees, including expenses, billed by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Campbell’s independent registered public accounting firm, for professional services in fiscal 2014 and 2013 were as follows:


Services Rendered	Fiscal 2014		Fiscal 2013
Audit Fees	$	4,569,000	$	5,445,000
Audit-Related Fees	$	60,000	$	422,000
Tax Fees	$	930,000	$	636,000
All Other Fees	$	16,000	$	16,000

The audit fees for the years ended August 3, 2014, and July 28, 2013, include fees for professional services rendered for the audits of the consolidated financial statements and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of the Company, quarterly reviews, statutory audits, SEC filings, comfort letters and accounting consultations.

The audit-related fees for the years ended August 3, 2014, and July 28, 2013, include fees for services related to accounting and reporting considerations, pension plan audits, agreed-upon procedures reports, and due diligence procedures.

The Audit Committee’s charter provides that the Committee will pre-approve all audit services and all permissible non-audit services (including the fees and terms thereof) to be performed for the Company by its independent registered public accounting firm. From time to time, the Committee may delegate its authority to pre-approve non-audit services to one or more Committee members. Any such approvals shall be reported at the next Audit Committee meeting.

Tax fees for the years ended August 3, 2014, and July 28, 2013, include fees for services related to tax compliance, including the preparation of tax returns and tax assistance with tax audits, transfer pricing and expatriate tax matters.

Other fees for the years ended August 3, 2014, and July 28, 2013, include fees associated with the use of accounting and technical research software and use of a human resource benchmarking tool.

In fiscal 2014 and 2013, 100% of the audit fees, audit-related fees, tax fees and all other fees were approved either by the Audit Committee or its designee.

Compensation and Organization Committee Report

The Compensation and Organization Committee has reviewed and discussed the following Compensation Discussion and Analysis with management, and based on such reviews and discussions, the Committee recommended to the Board that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in this proxy statement.

Compensation and Organization Committee

Les C. Vinney, Chair

Edmund M. Carpenter

Bennett Dorrance

Randall W. Larrimore

Mary Alice D. Malone

Charles R. Perrin

Charlotte C. Weber

Compensation Discussion and Analysis (“CD&A”)

This CD&A describes the Company’s executive compensation program for its Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”), Chief Financial Officer and the other most highly compensated executive officers who are named in the summary compensation table (“named executive officers” or “NEOs”). Certain other Company employees, including all executive officers, also participate in some or all aspects of the programs described in this section. The Company maintains other compensation programs for certain employees based on the employee’s job function, business unit, or geographic location.

Corporate Governance of Executive Compensation

The Compensation and Organization Committee (“Committee”) approves the Company’s executive compensation policies and programs, reviews major organizational changes and reviews the Company’s succession planning and leadership development processes. The Committee’s charter is available in the governance section of the Company’s Web site at www.campbellsoupcompany.com. The Board has determined that all members of the Committee are independent directors as defined by the New York Stock Exchange rules and the Company’s Standards.

The Committee annually reviews the Company’s compensation strategy, principles and policies, including the apportionment of pay between fixed compensation elements and incentive compensation, and the design of incentive compensation programs. The Committee approves all compensation and benefits for approximately 20 executives in the Company (including the named executive officers), authorizes the aggregate amount of annual incentive awards for all eligible participants under the Annual Incentive Plan (“AIP”) and the Long-Term Incentive (“LTI”) Program, and authorizes the CEO to allocate awards to other participants under the AIP and LTI Program, up to the aggregate amount. It is the Company’s customary practice for the CEO and the Senior Vice President and Chief Human Resources Officer to provide recommendations to the Committee on compensation actions for these 20 executives (except for his or her own compensation actions) and on potential changes in the design of executive compensation programs. By the terms of its charter, the Committee has delegated to the Chair of the Committee the authority to approve compensation actions for these 20 executives between Committee meetings when necessary for business continuity purposes. The Chair of the Committee and the Chairman of the Board of Directors must jointly approve any equity grants made to executive officers between meetings.

Each September, the Committee reviews the performance of the NEOs and approves for each executive his or her base salary, annual incentive payment and long-term incentive grant. This review of all major elements of executive compensation at one time provides the Committee with a comprehensive analysis of the target dollar amount of compensation being delivered by each element of compensation, assuming the required performance goals are 100% attained. In September 2014, the CEO and the Senior Vice President and Chief Human Resources Officer recommended to the Committee compensation actions for the NEOs (other than their own positions), including AIP awards for fiscal 2014 and base salaries and LTI grants for fiscal 2015.

The Senior Vice President – Chief Legal and Public Affairs Officer and the Senior Vice President and Chief Human Resources Officer work with the Committee to develop the annual list of agenda items and the annual schedule of meetings for the Committee, which are set prior to each fiscal year. The list of agenda items is approved by the Committee.

Independent Compensation Consultant

Pursuant to its charter, the Committee is authorized to engage an outside advisor to assist in the design and evaluation of the Company’s executive compensation program, as well as to approve the fees paid to such advisor and other terms of the engagement. Prior to the retention of an outside advisor, the Committee assesses the prospective advisor’s independence, taking into consideration all relevant factors, including those factors specified in the NYSE listing standards.

In fiscal 2014, the Committee engaged Frederic W. Cook & Co., Inc. (“F.W. Cook”) as its compensation consultant. The Committee did not engage any other advisor in fiscal 2014. F.W. Cook advised the Committee on CEO compensation, compensation trends, governance issues and other matters of interest to the Committee. The Committee assessed F.W. Cook’s independence, taking into account a number of factors such as: (1) the provision of other services to the Company by F.W. Cook; (2) amount of fees received from the Company by F.W. Cook as a percentage of the total

revenue of F.W. Cook; (3) F.W. Cook’s policies and procedures to prevent conflicts of interest; (4) any business or personal relationship between F.W. Cook and the members of the Committee; (5) any ownership of Company stock by the individuals at F.W. Cook performing consulting services for the Committee; and (6) any business or personal relationship between F.W. Cook and any executive officer of the Company. F.W. Cook provided the Committee with appropriate assurances regarding its independence. The Committee believes that F.W. Cook has been independent throughout its service to the Committee and that there are no conflicts of interest.

Compensation Principles and Policies

The Committee annually reviews, and the Board approves, the principles and policies for executive compensation. The principles and policies are:

Campbell offers a total compensation package that is designed to attract, motivate and retain talent of the caliber needed to deliver successful business performance in absolute terms and relative to competition.

Campbell’s compensation program is designed to link pay to Company, business unit and individual performance in absolute terms and relative to competition.

Compensation levels are set after comparing Campbell’s pay levels and practices to the practices of other food, beverage and consumer products companies in the Compensation Peer Group (see below) where the Company primarily competes for executive talent. Composition of this group is reviewed annually by the Committee.

Campbell targets base salaries, annual incentives and total annual cash compensation to the median of the Compensation Peer Group. Long-term incentives are targeted above the median. Total compensation, consisting of salary, annual incentives and long-term incentives, is targeted at 5% to 10% above the median, in the aggregate. Since Campbell is smaller than the median size of the group, a regression analysis is performed to adjust the compensation data for the top executive positions to take account of differences in the total revenue of various companies compared to Campbell’s total revenue. The Company’s competitive position is reviewed annually by the Committee.

Annual incentive payments are based on annual Company performance compared with goals established at the beginning of the fiscal year in four measurement areas relating to the Company’s financial, marketplace, operational and strategic objectives for that year. The Committee evaluates performance compared to goals each year and uses discretion to determine the total AIP pool available. Individual payouts are based on a combination of total Company or applicable business unit performance, and an assessment of individual performance against objectives established for each participant.

Long-term incentive grants are delivered in a combination of performance-restricted share units and time-lapse restricted share units, with the mix varying by level of responsibility within the organization. Employees with higher levels of responsibility receive a higher percentage of performance-restricted share units. Individual grants are based on an assessment of each participant’s performance and future leadership potential.

Senior executives have a substantial portion of compensation at risk, based upon the achievement of the performance goals for annual incentive payments and the performance goals for long-term incentives. When Company performance is strong, senior executives will receive compensation that is well above the median of the Compensation Peer Group. When Company performance is weak, senior executives will receive compensation well below the median. To align the interests of the Company’s senior executives with those of shareholders, a higher proportion of incentive compensation is delivered to senior executives through long-term incentives that are paid out depending upon the Company’s financial performance (see below for description of the LTI Program).

Compensation Objectives

The objectives of the Company’s executive compensation program are to:

Align the financial interests of the Company’s NEOs with those of its shareholders, in both the short and long term;

Provide incentives for achieving and exceeding the Company’s short-term and long-term goals;

Attract, motivate and retain highly competent executives by providing total compensation that is competitive with compensation paid at other well-managed companies in the food, beverage and consumer products industries; and

Differentiate the level of compensation based on individual and business unit performance, leadership potential, and level of responsibility within the organization. Individual performance is rated based upon demonstrated leadership skills, accomplishment of objectives, business unit or functional accountabilities and personal contributions.

Results of 2013 Shareholder Advisory Votes Relating to Executive Compensation

At the 2013 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, the Company held its annual shareholder advisory vote on executive compensation, or say-on-pay vote. Ninety-eight percent (98%) of the votes cast were in favor of the say-on-pay proposal.

As the Committee evaluated the Company’s compensation principles and policies during fiscal 2014, it was mindful of this favorable outcome and the shareholders’ strong support of the Company’s compensation objectives and compensation programs. The Committee has maintained its general approach to executive compensation, and made no material changes in fiscal 2014 to the compensation principles and policies or the objectives of the Company’s compensation program. The Company will continue to hold say-on-pay votes annually until the next shareholder advisory vote on frequency takes place. See “Item 3 — Advisory Vote on Executive Compensation” on pages 48 through 49 for additional information on the 2014 say-on-pay vote.

Peer Groups

The Committee identifies both a Compensation Peer Group and a Performance Peer Group in designing and determining compensation for its executive officers. The Committee uses the Compensation Peer Group to evaluate the competitiveness of executive compensation and uses the Performance Peer Group to measure the competitiveness of the Company’s total shareholder return (“TSR”) performance. In order to determine total compensation paid by companies that compete with the Company for executive talent, in fiscal 2014, the Committee compared Campbell’s total compensation levels with the levels at 30 companies in the food, beverage and consumer products industries (“Compensation Peer Group”), using compensation data purchased from Aon Hewitt by management. Given Campbell’s relatively small size in relation to many of the companies in the Compensation Peer Group, a regression analysis was performed to adjust the compensation data for the top positions for differences in the total revenues of the various companies compared to Campbell’s total revenue. The Committee believes that use of the Compensation Peer Group is the most effective method to evaluate and set the compensation needed to attract, motivate and retain the executive talent needed to manage the Company’s businesses and operations successfully, because these are the primary companies with which Campbell competes for senior executives. Use of this peer group also provides a broad database that allows Campbell to obtain accurate, representative survey information for a majority of its positions. The composition of the Compensation Peer Group is approved by the Committee each fiscal year after obtaining advice from its independent compensation consultant. For the purpose of determining fiscal 2014 compensation, the Compensation Peer Group consisted of the following companies:

Compensation Peer Group


Anheuser-Busch Companies. Inc.	H. J. Heinz Company	McCormick & Company, Inc. (1)
The Clorox Company	The Hershey Company (1)	Mead Johnson Nutrition Company (1)
The Coca-Cola Company	Hillshire Brands Company	Mondelez International, Inc. (1)
Colgate-Palmolive Company	Hormel, Inc. (1)	Nestle USA, Inc.
ConAgra Foods, Inc. (1)	Johnson & Johnson Company	PepsiCo, Inc.
Dean Foods Company	The J.M. Smucker Company (1)	The Procter & Gamble Company
Del Monte Foods Company	Kellogg Company (1)	Reynolds American Inc.
Diageo North America, Inc.	Kimberly-Clark Corporation	S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc.
Dr. Pepper Snapple Group, Inc.	Kraft Foods Group, Inc. (1)	Tyson Foods, Inc. (1)
General Mills, Inc. (1)	Mars, Inc.	Unilever United States, Inc.

(1)

These companies, plus Campbell, constitute the Standard & Poor’s Packaged Foods Group (“Performance Peer Group”), which is used to measure TSR performance for calculation of the payout of TSR performance-restricted share units under the LTI Program. In addition, Keurig Green Mountain was added to the Standard & Poor’s Packaged Foods Group during fiscal 2014, and is included in the Performance Peer Group for the fiscal 2014 LTI program, a description of which begins on page 25. During fiscal 2014, the Committee approved the addition of Keurig Green Mountain to the Compensation Peer Group for fiscal 2015.

The Performance Peer Group, which is a subset of the Compensation Peer Group, is independently selected by Standard & Poor’s (“S&P”) based upon the similarities of the companies’ businesses in the packaged foods industry. Companies that are added to and deleted from the S&P Packaged Foods Group are automatically added to or deleted from the list of companies whose TSR rankings are compared to Campbell’s ranking for TSR performance-restricted stock units. The list of companies in the S&P Packaged Foods Group is readily available through S&P.

The Committee and management exercise no discretion in selecting the companies that are included in the S&P Packaged Foods Group. The Committee reviewed the Performance Peer Group in fiscal 2014 and continues to believe that it is the appropriate group in Campbell’s industry against which to measure the Company’s TSR performance. TSR performance of the companies in the Compensation Peer Group that are not in the packaged foods industry is more likely to be affected by economic developments that do not affect the packaged foods industry.

Risk Assessment — Incentive Compensation Programs

During fiscal 2014, management completed, for review by the Committee, an assessment of the Company’s compensation programs on a global basis, with a focus on incentive compensation programs. Based on a number of factors, including the governance process employed, the relative size of the potential payouts in the aggregate and for any individual, the inclusion of a “cap” on the maximum payout and the use of multiple metrics in the respective incentive programs, the Committee believes that the Company’s compensation programs do not present a risk that is reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on the Company.

Elements of Executive Compensation

The elements of Campbell’s executive compensation program for its NEOs are:

base salary;

performance-based annual incentive compensation;

long-term equity incentive compensation;

pension and nonqualified deferred compensation benefits;

perquisites; and

post-termination compensation and benefits.

The proportion of compensation delivered in each of these elements is designed to:

put more compensation at risk based upon Company or business unit and individual performance for NEOs, whose performance is more likely to influence the results of the executive’s business unit or function, or the results of the Company;

provide the opportunity for NEOs to earn above-median compensation primarily through annual and long-term incentives, with performance goals that align executives’ interests directly with those of Campbell’s shareholders;

provide consistency over time in the proportion of compensation opportunity among the elements, while varying actual pay based upon Company, business unit and individual performance; and

be competitive with the practices of the Compensation Peer Group in order to attract, motivate and retain key executives.

Base Salary

Base salaries are intended to provide a base level of income that is competitive in relation to the responsibilities of each executive’s position. Midpoints of base salary ranges are targeted at the median of the Compensation Peer Group, reduced by regression for executive officers based on revenue by reason of the Company’s relatively small size compared to many of the companies in the Compensation Peer Group. Salary ranges and individual salaries for NEOs are reviewed annually by the Committee. The Committee considers salary levels for NEOs each September, when it also reviews the performance of those executives. Merit increases are generally based on the CEO’s (for executives other than the CEO) and the Committee’s assessment of individual performance. Targets for annual incentive payments and long-term incentive grants are a percentage of base salary (see below).

The Committee considers a number of factors in determining individual base salaries, including the scope of an individual’s job responsibilities, his or her individual contributions, business performance, job market conditions, the Company’s salary budget guidelines, and the individual’s current base salary as compared with those of persons in similar positions at other companies

in the Compensation Peer Group, as well as within the Company. The Committee does not use a mathematical formula in which these factors or their interrelationships are quantified and weighted (either in general, or with respect to any individual executive). During a particular year, one factor or group of factors may play a more significant role in the determination of an individual’s base salary than in other years, based on the Committee’s judgment and discretion.

An individual’s performance may be assessed based upon any of his or her demonstrated leadership skills, accomplishment of objectives, business unit or functional accountabilities, and personal contributions. A broad range of factors relevant to each of these areas, generally qualitative in nature, may be considered in this assessment. The Committee’s judgments regarding base salaries are also strongly influenced by the judgments and recommendations of the CEO with respect to the other named executive officers. In the case of the CEO’s base salary, the assessment is made by the Committee and the Board.

Named executive officers have annual performance objectives which include individual goals that relate to the business performance of the Company and/or the individual’s business unit or corporate function. As indicated above, the extent to which an executive attains these objectives is one of the factors considered in determining his or her base salary for the following year. However, no single individual performance factor or specific set of individual or business performance factors is dispositive in this determination, and no specific factor or specific set of factors is material to determinations concerning base salaries for any of the NEOs

Annual Incentive Plan

Background

Annual incentives are cash awards that are intended to motivate and reward the achievement of business goals approved by the Board in the annual operating plan and three-year strategic plan, and to assure that these goals are achieved in a manner that strengthens the business for the long term. Annual incentive targets are set at the median of the Compensation Peer Group. At the beginning of each fiscal year, the Committee establishes a competitive annual incentive target, expressed as a percentage of base salary, for each executive salary level. For fiscal 2014, the annual incentive targets for the NEOs, other than the CEO, ranged from 65% to 100% of base salary. These percentages are at or near the median for similar executive positions at companies in the Compensation Peer Group. The sum of the individual incentive targets for all participants (approximately 1,715 executives, managers and professionals) comprises the target incentive pool.

Since fiscal 2003, the Committee has used a Company “scorecard” in which a number of quantitative and qualitative goals for the Company as a whole and its business units are established at the beginning of each fiscal year for the purposes of the AIP. The goals defined in the scorecard fall within four key measurement areas relating respectively to the Company’s financial, strategic, operational and marketplace objectives. Goals include a mix of quantitative and qualitative factors. The goals in the four measurement areas require effective execution of business plans and are difficult to attain. Corresponding goals, consistent with the total Company scorecard, are established for the respective business units. The goals listed in the scorecard are not weighted in any manner; however, performance against the goals in the financial quadrant is a significant factor in the Committee’s overall assessment.

After a fiscal year has ended, the Committee assesses total Company performance in light of the goals enumerated in the scorecard for that year, and exercises discretion in determining the aggregate amount of the incentive pool for the total Company for that year. The Committee’s determination of the overall Company score is not based on any mathematical calculation or formula. This plan intentionally provides substantial opportunity for the exercise of judgment and discretion in determining the overall Company score. In exercising its discretion in any given year, the Committee may consider financial performance compared to peers.

The Committee’s determination of the funding of the AIP pool may range from 0 to 175%. AIP awards to each NEO, within the limits of the approved total pool, are based on business unit/function performance, individual performance and, for certain NEOs, total Company performance, and can vary from 0 to 200% of the individual’s incentive target. The sum of individual awards cannot exceed the approved total AIP pool. Extraordinary items, such as major restructuring and accounting changes (whether positive or negative), are excluded in determining the approved total AIP pool.

AIP awards for NEOs who are leaders of business units also reflect the Committee’s assessment of total Company performance for the year in order to link individual AIP awards for those executives more directly to the achievement of overall Company goals while continuing to reward business unit success. Fiscal 2014 AIP awards to NEOs who were business unit leaders were

determined by multiplying the individual’s annual incentive target for the year by:

1) a percentage, based 30% on the assessment of total Company performance, and 70% on the assessment of business unit performance; and

2) a percentage based on the assessment of the participant’s performance against his or her individual objectives established at the beginning of the fiscal year.

As indicated above, payments made to participants in the AIP are influenced by their managers’ assessments of individual performance against objectives established for each participant at the beginning of the fiscal year. In the case of NEOs other than the CEO, the Committee’s assessments of individual performance are generally based on the CEO’s judgments and recommendations. The assessment of the CEO’s individual performance is made by the Committee itself, with input from all directors. For fiscal 2014, the CEO provided recommendations to the Committee regarding the individual performance of NEOs (other than for herself). However, since awards made to NEOs under the AIP are closely tied to the assessment of overall Company performance or, in relevant cases, to the assessments of business unit performance, determinations relating to individual performance for fiscal 2014 are not a significant differentiating factor for these executives.

At the beginning of a fiscal year, the Committee also establishes a performance goal for the AIP that is applicable only to executive officers. This goal is referred to as the “162(m) performance goal.” The 162(m) performance goal for fiscal 2014 required that the Company achieve 80% of its adjusted EPS goal for the year. In fiscal 2014, the goal for adjusted EPS was $2.61 (adjusted for acquisitions and other extraordinary items). In order for an executive officer to be eligible to receive the maximum payment of 200% of his or her annual incentive target, the Company must meet the 162(m) performance goal for the year. If the Company achieves less than 80% but at least 50% of the adjusted EPS goal, executive officers are eligible to receive a maximum of 100% of their annual incentive targets. If the Company does not achieve at least 50% of the adjusted EPS goal, executive officers are not eligible for any AIP award. As described below, the Company exceeded its adjusted EPS goal, thereby providing an opportunity for executive officers to earn up to 200% of their AIP targets.

The Company’s achievement of the 162(m) performance goal does not assure that an executive officer will receive the maximum incentive award because the Committee has retained “negative discretion” to reduce the award based upon the assessment of the performance of his or her business unit (or, in the case of an executive officer who is a member of the corporate staff, the assessment of total Company performance) in light of the goals set forth in the scorecard, and the assessment of his or her individual performance against individual annual objectives. The Committee has consistently exercised its negative discretion in determining annual incentive payments to executive officers. Although the Company has regularly achieved the 162(m) performance goal of 80% of the adjusted EPS goal established annually by the Committee over the last several years, during that time, no NEO in the applicable fiscal year has received an award equal to the maximum potential payment.

AIP Scorecard and Results for 2014

In fiscal 2014, the Company was primarily focused on its dual mandate to strengthen its core business and expand into higher-growth spaces. The AIP scorecard for fiscal 2014 focused on performance goals related to the execution of the dual mandate, and the Committee assessed fiscal 2014 Company performance using this context. As noted above, the AIP scorecard consists of four quadrants: financial, marketplace, operational and strategic. Goals in the financial area for fiscal 2014 included, among other things, objectives related to net sales and earnings per share (“EPS”). In fiscal 2014, the goal for adjusted net sales was $8.589 billion and the goal for adjusted EPS was $2.61, adjusted in both cases for acquisitions and other extraordinary items. Marketplace goals consisted of various measures relating to consumer purchases of the Company’s products. Operational goals consisted of objectives relating to innovation, customer relationships, cost management, product quality, high-performance culture, corporate responsibility and acquisition integration. Goals in the strategic area included objectives relating to the advancement of the dual mandate.

Based on its review of the results achieved in fiscal 2014 against the objectives defined at the beginning of the year in each of the four measurement areas of the Company scorecard and its qualitative assessment of various aspects of total Company performance, the Committee determined that the aggregate amount of the incentive pool should be funded at approximately 75% of the target amount established at the beginning of the fiscal year. In making this determination, the Committee applied no mathematical calculations or specific weightings to individual objectives identified in the scorecard. The Committee considered the external factors that impacted Company performance in fiscal

2014, and the current challenging environment for packaged food companies. Its final determination for funding of the incentive pool was based on its qualitative judgments of the Company’s performance during fiscal 2014, including the following:

net sales of $8.268 billion and adjusted EPS of $2.53 fell short of the scorecard targets set at the beginning of the fiscal year, but were consistent with the Company’s revised guidance;

sales growth in the Bolthouse Farms business, driven by brand-building investments and expanded distribution;

encouraging growth in key emerging markets, led by Kelsen Group in China and expansion of the sweet biscuit business in Indonesia;

successful divestiture of the European simple meals business;

responsible cost-management across the organization;

meaningful steps towards establishing a foundation for expansion into faster-growing spaces, such as packaged fresh, e-commerce, immediate consumption channels and emerging markets.

Fiscal 2014 incentive payments to the NEOs, other than the CEO, listed on page 30 ranged from 71% to 90% of their target incentive amounts, with an average of 77%. The annual incentive awards made to the NEOs for fiscal 2014 are listed in the Fiscal 2014 Summary Compensation Table on page 30 in the column captioned “Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation.” See Appendix B for a discussion of the adjustments to EPS and a reconciliation to the results as reported in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.

Long-Term Incentive Program

Overview

Long-term incentives are intended to motivate and reward executives based upon the Company’s success in delivering superior value to its shareholders and to retain executives. Equity grants are approved by the Committee each September, which is near the beginning of the Company’s fiscal year. Individual grants are based on the executive’s level of responsibility in the Company, possession of critical skills, individual performance and future leadership potential as assessed in the Company’s human resources organization planning process. All shares paid out under the Company’s executive compensation programs are shares that were previously issued and outstanding or were reacquired by the Company. For fiscal 2014, long-term incentive targets for NEOs, other than the CEO, ranged from 155% to 255% of base salary at median performance. These targets were designed to deliver total direct compensation at 5% to 10% above the median of the Compensation Peer Group. Grants made under the program during fiscal 2014 were made at the beginning of the fiscal year to approximately 1,050 participants.

The components of the LTI Program have evolved over time and are modified periodically to further the goals of the program. The fiscal 2014 LTI Program consisted of four types of restricted share units:

TSR performance-restricted share units, which are earned based upon the Company’s TSR performance over the performance period compared to the TSRs of the other companies in the Performance Peer Group;

strategic performance-restricted share units (“SPUs”), which are based on achievement of net sales and EPS goals over the course of the performance period;

EPS performance-restricted share units, which are earned based on the achievement of a threshold level of EPS during the performance period, which is designed to qualify the payment of the shares as tax deductible under Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code (“IRC”); and

time-lapse restricted share units, which vest over a period of time based on continued employment.

Under the fiscal 2014 program for NEOs, 35% of their long-term incentive opportunity was delivered in TSR performance-restricted share units, 35% in SPUs and 30% in EPS performance-restricted share units. There is no payment of dividends during the restriction period; instead, accumulated dividend equivalents will be paid in cash on the units that vest at the end of the restriction period when the grants are paid out. A more detailed description of each of these components is set forth below.

TSR Performance-Restricted Share Units

Beginning in fiscal 2013, the Committee returned to using TSR performance-restricted share units for a portion of the LTI Program. The Committee believed that it was appropriate to include an element that compared Company performance to an external peer group. At the time of payment, the Committee can exercise negative discretion in determining the Company’s ranking under the TSR performance-restricted share unit portion of the program in the event of extraordinary circumstances.

TSR performance-restricted share units are paid out based upon the Company’s TSR performance over a three-year period compared to the TSRs of the other companies in the Performance Peer Group over the same three-year period. There were no TSR performance-restricted share units with a performance period ending in fiscal 2014.

Strategic Performance-Restricted Share Units

Background

SPUs were added to the LTI Program in fiscal 2012 as an interim alternative to TSR performance-restricted share units during a period of strategic transition. SPUs vest based upon the achievement of net sales and EPS growth targets, and have a performance period established by the Committee at the time of grant. The Committee chose net sales and EPS as metrics for the SPUs because it believed that achievement of the Company’s net sales and EPS growth targets would result in value creation for shareholders, and that metrics reflecting performance against internal plan objectives were an effective method of retaining and motivating executives.

The two performance metrics for SPU grants are weighted equally, with 50% based on net sales growth and 50% based on EPS growth. At the end of the performance period, the Committee assesses each metric individually and adds the results together to determine each participant’s total payout percentage, which could range from 0% to 200%. At the time of the grant, the Committee establishes circumstances under which the net sales and EPS targets for the SPUs may be modified. Unlike the AIP, the Committee does not retain discretion to make any additional qualitative or quantitative judgments to determine the resulting payout.

The Committee also establishes a performance goal for the SPU portion of the LTI Program that is applicable only to executive officers who are subject to the compensation deduction limits set forth in IRC Section 162(m). The Section 162(m) performance goal for the SPU portion of the LTI Program requires that the Company achieve 80% of its cumulative adjusted EPS goal at the end of the performance period. In order for an executive officer to be eligible to receive the maximum payment of 200% of his or her SPU target, the Company must meet the Section 162(m) performance goal for the performance period. If the Company achieves less than 80% but not less than 50% of the cumulative adjusted EPS goal for the performance period, executive officers are eligible to receive a maximum of 100% of his or her SPU target. If the Company does not achieve at least 50% of the cumulative adjusted EPS goal for the performance period, executive officers are ineligible for an SPU payout.

SPU Results for Fiscal 2013-Fiscal 2014 Performance Period

For the fiscal 2013-fiscal 2014 performance period, the SPU target for net sales growth (adjusted to reflect acquisitions and other extraordinary items) was $8.769 billion, which represented a compound average growth rate over the two-year period of 10.55%. Achievement of this level of net sales would result in a 100% payout of the portion of the SPUs linked to net sales. The Company’s adjusted net sales at the end of the fiscal 2013–fiscal 2014 performance period were $8.401 billion, representing a two-year compound average growth rate of 8.21%. The Company’s results over the two-year period resulted in a payout of 0% of the portion of the SPUs linked to net sales.

The SPU target for adjusted EPS at the end of the fiscal 2013–fiscal 2014 performance period was $2.58 (adjusted to reflect acquisitions and other extraordinary items). Meeting this adjusted EPS target would result in a 100% payout of the portion of SPUs linked to EPS. At the end of the fiscal 2013–fiscal 2014 performance period, adjusted EPS was $2.53, a cumulative two-year growth rate of 4.65%, which resulted in a payout of 70% of the portion of the SPUs linked to EPS.

The net sales and EPS metrics were weighted equally to determine the final percentage of SPUs to be paid out at the end of the performance period. In accordance with the formula described above, the SPUs granted for the fiscal 2013—fiscal 2014 performance period vested at a rate of 35% of the target amount.

See Appendix B for a discussion of the adjustments to net sales and EPS and, where applicable, a reconciliation to the results as reported in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.

EPS Performance-Restricted Share Units

EPS performance-restricted share units are paid out two months following the end of each fiscal year in the three-year performance period, provided that the adjusted EPS achieved in the fiscal year is at least 50% of the adjusted EPS goal for the AIP approved by the Committee for that fiscal year. This performance goal is designed to qualify the payment of EPS performance-restricted awards as deductible under IRC Section 162(m). The payout of EPS performance-restricted share units is either 0 or 100%. For fiscal 2014, the goal for adjusted EPS was $2.61, and actual adjusted EPS was $2.53, which was greater than 50% of the goal; therefore, the payout for the EPS performance-restricted share units that were based on fiscal 2014 performance was 100%. The achievement of the adjusted EPS goal for fiscal 2014 means that one-third of the EPS performance-restricted share units granted in each of the fiscal years 2012, 2013 and 2014 vested and will be paid out. See Appendix B for a discussion of the adjustments to EPS and, where applicable, a reconciliation to the results as reported in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.

Summary of LTI Awards with Performance Periods Ended in Fiscal 2014

The table below summarizes the performance-based LTI awards granted to NEOs in prior fiscal years with performance periods that ended during fiscal 2014. To the extent these awards vested, shares were paid out to the NEOs following the end of fiscal 2014.


Type of Award	Year Granted	Performance Period	Percent Vested
Strategic Performance-Restricted Share Units	Fiscal 2013	Fiscal 2013—Fiscal 2014	35%
EPS Performance-Restricted Share Units	Fiscal 2012	Fiscal 2014	100%*
EPS Performance-Restricted Share Units	Fiscal 2013	Fiscal 2014	100%*
EPS Performance-Restricted Share Units	Fiscal 2014	Fiscal 2014	100%*

*Refers to the portion of the award that was tied to fiscal 2014 EPS performance, which is one-third of the total grant, as noted above.

Fiscal 2014 LTI Program

Background

In fiscal 2014, the Committee granted TSR performance-restricted share units, SPUs and EPS performance-restricted share units under the LTI Program. The Committee believed that it was appropriate to include an element that compared Company performance to an external peer group, as well as components that would measure performance against internal plan objectives. The Committee retained net sales and EPS as the performance metrics for the fiscal 2014 SPU grant. The TSR performance-restricted share units, SPUs and EPS performance-restricted share units granted under the fiscal 2014 LTI Program each have a three-year performance period (fiscal 2014-fiscal 2016). The Committee chose a three-year performance period for the SPUs granted in fiscal 2014 in order to retain executives and align the performance periods for all aspects of the LTI Program. Estimated future payouts of awards made under the fiscal 2014 LTI Program are listed in the Grants of Plan-Based Awards in Fiscal 2014 table on page 33.

Fiscal 2014 TSR Performance-Restricted Share Units

For the fiscal 2014-2016 performance period, the percentage of TSR performance-restricted share units to be paid out will be based upon the Company’s TSR performance ranking as set forth in the chart below. At the time of payment, the Committee can exercise negative discretion in determining the Company’s ranking under the TSR performance-restricted share unit portion of the program in the event of extraordinary circumstances.

Campbell’s TSR

Performance Rank

Percentage Payout

200

175

150

125

100

Fiscal 2014 SPUs

The two performance metrics for the fiscal 2014 SPU grant — net sales growth and EPS growth — are weighted equally, with 50% based on net sales growth and 50% based on EPS growth. At the end of the performance period, the Committee will assess each metric individually and add the results together to determine each participant’s total payout percentage, which can range between 0% and 200%. The cumulative three-year net sales and EPS results will be adjusted to reflect acquisitions and other extraordinary items.

Fiscal 2014 EPS Performance-Restricted Share Units

EPS performance-restricted share units were granted to NEOs as part of the fiscal 2014 LTI Program. One-third of these units will vest based on performance in each of fiscal 2014, 2015 and 2016, as described above. The Company met its adjusted EPS goal for fiscal 2014, therefore, one-third of the EPS performance restricted units that were granted in fiscal 2014 vested and will be paid out. See “EPS Performance-Restricted Share Units” and “Summary of LTI Awards with Performance Periods Ended in Fiscal 2014” above for additional information.

Executive Stock Ownership

The Company requires NEOs to own shares to further align their interests with those of shareholders. It is the Company’s policy that NEOs achieve an ownership stake in the Company that represents a significant multiple of their base salaries. Until the ownership level is achieved, NEOs must retain at least half of the after-tax value of each equity award in shares of Campbell stock upon the vesting of restricted share units or exercise of options. All NEOs are compliant with the retention requirements and all have either met or are making meaningful progress toward their respective ownership standard. Progress toward a designated ownership standard is measured annually.

The share ownership requirements for NEOs are set forth below. The ownership standard is expressed as a multiple of salary that is determined based on organization level or salary grade. Establishing ownership standards as a multiple of base salary links the program with pay actions (i.e., base salary increases), which are performance-based, and ensures that ownership objectives remain competitive. The ownership multiples have been set at market median.


Organization Level	Multiple of Salary
CEO		6.0x
Other NEOs		3.5x

Executives may count toward these requirements the value of shares owned and shares and share units that are deferred and fully vested in the Company’s 401(k) plan and other deferred compensation programs. Unvested restricted share units and unexercised stock options are not counted in calculating ownership. Company policy prohibits executives from hedging the economic risk associated with fully owned shares, restricted share units and unexercised stock options. The Company also has a policy that prohibits future pledging of shares by directors and executive officers.

Retirement Plans

Eligible NEOs participate in two defined benefit plans: (1) the Retirement and Pension Plan (“Qualified Plan”) and (2) the Mid-Career Hire Pension Plan (“MCHP”). The Qualified Plan provides funded, tax-qualified benefits up to the limits allowed under the IRC for full-time U.S. employees who commenced employment with the Company prior to January 1, 2011. The MCHP provides unfunded benefits that are in excess of the IRC limits applicable to the Qualified Plan to senior executives who were hired in the middle of their careers. Such executives typically gave up future pension benefits that they would have earned if they remained with their prior employers. MCHP benefits are offset by benefits paid under the Qualified Plan and the plans prohibit duplication of benefits. Both plans were closed to new participants, effective December 31, 2010.

The Company maintains the Qualified Plan and the MCHP as an additional means to retain employees and to provide a competitive level of pension benefits. The retirement plans provide employees, including the NEOs, the opportunity to plan for future financial needs during retirement. Under the Qualified Plan, the actual pension benefit is calculated on the same basis for all participants, and is based on:

length of service;

covered compensation (base salary and annual incentive); and

age at retirement.

Time-lapse restricted share units and performance-restricted share units, as well as any extraordinary remuneration, play no part in the calculation of retirement benefits. For a more detailed discussion of the retirement plans and the accumulated benefits under these plans, see the Pension Benefits table and the accompanying narrative beginning on page 37.

U.S.-based NEOs who are not eligible to participate in the MCHP because they were hired or promoted into an eligible salary grade on or after January 1, 2011, are eligible to receive an Executive Retirement Contribution. The Executive Retirement Contribution is a credit to the participant’s Supplemental Retirement Plan account. The amount of the Executive Retirement Contribution is calculated on the same basis for all participants using covered compensation (base salary and annual incentive) and is subject to vesting criteria. The Executive Retirement Contribution is consistent with the Company’s objective to attract and retain experienced senior executives to execute the Company’s strategies, and was adopted as a means to provide a competitive level of retirement benefits to executives hired following the closure of the MCHP to new participants. For a more detailed discussion of the Executive Retirement Contribution, see the narrative on page 39 following the Pension Benefits table and the Nonqualified Deferred Compensation table and accompanying narrative beginning on page 40.

Deferred Compensation Plans

The Company adopted the Deferred Compensation Plan and the Supplemental Retirement Plan to provide an opportunity for eligible U.S.-based participants, including eligible NEOs, to save for future financial needs. The amount of salary and annual incentive earned by an employee is not affected by the plans. The plans essentially operate as unfunded, tax-advantaged personal savings accounts of the employee administered by the Company, and they contribute to the Company’s attractiveness as an employer. For a more detailed discussion of the deferred compensation arrangements relating to the NEOs, see the Nonqualified Deferred Compensation table and accompanying narrative beginning on page 40.

Perquisites

The Company’s Personal Choice Program provides quarterly cash payments to NEOs in lieu of reimbursements for items such as tax or estate planning services or financial planning services. The Committee believes that perquisite payments are appropriate to reimburse executives for financial and tax planning services or other purposes, so that the executives are not distracted from devoting their time and energy to their responsibilities to the Company. The Company also provides long-term disability protection for NEOs. For additional information on perquisites provided to the NEOs in fiscal 2014, please see “All Other Compensation” on page 32.

Severance Plans

The NEOs are covered by the Company’s severance plans, under which payments are based on level of responsibility, seniority and/or length of service. For the NEOs, the maximum payment under the plans is two times base salary. The payment and benefit levels defined in the Company’s severance plans for eligible U.S.-based exempt employees have been determined primarily by reference to the amount of time customarily required for employees who are involuntarily terminated without cause to find other employment. The Company believes that, due to the relative scarcity of senior executive roles, employees at higher levels in the organization generally need more time to locate comparable positions elsewhere than employees at lower levels. The Company also periodically reviews the severance benefits provided at other Fortune 500 companies. Assurance of a reasonable measure of financial security in the event of involuntary termination is important to candidates for executive positions, and the extent of the severance benefits offered by Campbell in comparison with those available at other companies is sometimes a significant factor in their evaluations of the attractiveness of opportunities at Campbell. The Company does not have employment contracts with any of its NEOs, including the CEO. For a more detailed discussion of these severance arrangements, see Potential Payments on Termination or Change in Control beginning on page 41.

Change in Control Benefits

The Company has entered into “double-trigger” Change in Control Severance Protection Agreements (“CIC Agreements”) with each of the NEOs. The CIC Agreements provide for severance pay and continuation of certain benefits should a termination of employment in connection with a change in control occur. The independent members of the Board of Directors unanimously approved entry into the CIC Agreements beginning in 2000. The Committee believes that the CIC Agreements are necessary in order to retain stability in the senior executive team in the event there is a threatened or actual change in control. The Agreement requires the occurrence of the following two events in order for an executive to receive payments and benefits: (1) the executive’s employment must be terminated involuntarily and without cause (whether actual or “constructive”) and (2) the termination must occur within two years following a change in control. The Company also has double-trigger change in control provisions in its AIP, its long-term incentive plans and its U.S. retirement plans, and these provisions apply equally to all participants in the plans, including the NEOs. In March 2010, the Committee determined that provisions for “gross-up” payments to cover any federal excise taxes owed on change in control-related severance payments and benefits will be eliminated in any change in control agreement entered into after January 1, 2011. For a more detailed discussion of these CIC Agreements, see Potential Payments on Termination or Change in Control, beginning on page 41.

Accounting and Tax Implications

Section 162(m) of the IRC limits the tax deductibility of compensation paid to an NEO to $1 million, except to the extent the compensation is qualified performance-based compensation. The Committee’s policy is to structure compensation such that it is deductible under IRC Section 162(m), except where the Committee determines that it would not be in the best interests of the Company and its shareholders. All annual incentive payments and restricted stock unit grants to NEOs during fiscal year 2014, except the time-lapse restricted stock grant to Mr. Barroso, met the requirements for deductibility under IRC Section 162(m); however this may not be the case in future years. A tax deduction is not available under IRC Section 162(m) for the incremental amount of the base salary of a NEO that exceeds $1 million.

CEO Compensation

Denise M. Morrison became President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company as of August 1, 2011, the beginning of fiscal 2012. The fiscal 2014 compensation components for Ms. Morrison were consistent with the program described above. Ms. Morrison’s compensation was designed to be competitive with the CEO compensation paid by companies in the Compensation Peer Group over time, and her incentive compensation was directly linked to both Company performance and individual performance. The process used to review and establish Ms. Morrison’s compensation was as follows:

In June 2011, after reviewing CEO compensation paid by companies in the Compensation Peer Group, the Committee established a base salary for Ms. Morrison for fiscal 2012 of $950,000, a fiscal 2012 AIP target of 140% of base salary, and a fiscal 2012 LTI target of 510% of base salary.

In June 2012, the Committee reviewed Ms. Morrison’s AIP and LTI targets and determined it was appropriate to raise her LTI target for fiscal 2013 to 525% of base salary.

In September 2012, the Committee reviewed Ms. Morrison’s base salary in comparison to CEO compensation paid by companies in the Compensation Peer Group and raised her base salary to $1,000,000, effective October 1, 2012.

In June 2013, the Committee reviewed Ms. Morrison’s AIP and LTI targets and determined that the targets continued to be competitive and should remain unchanged.

In September 2013, the Committee reviewed Ms. Morrison’s base salary and total compensa

tion compared to other CEOs in the Compensation Peer Group, and also reviewed Company performance and Ms. Morrison’s individual performance for fiscal 2013. Based on this review, Ms. Morrison’s base salary was raised to $1,050,000, effective October 1, 2013, and she received a grant of 47,738 SPUs, 47,737 TSR restricted share units and 40,918 EPS performance-restricted share units on October 1, 2013, which represented 120% of her target LTI amount.

In June 2014, the Committee reviewed Ms. Morrison’s AIP and LTI targets and determined that the targets continued to be competitive and should remain unchanged.

In September 2014, the Committee and the Board evaluated Ms. Morrison’s performance based on the Company’s performance for fiscal 2014 against the goals in the annual AIP scorecard described above under “Annual Incentive Plan” and her individual performance as determined by the Committee and the Board in the CEO evaluation process.

Ms. Morrison’s AIP award for fiscal 2014 was $1,102,500, which represented 75% of her target amount. Her award was based on the Committee’s evaluation of fiscal 2014 Company performance against the goals in the AIP scorecard (as described on pages 22 through 23), and her individual performance during the fiscal year, including her leadership in the following areas: achievement of financial results and maintenance of financial controls, management of operations, talent management and succession planning, internal and external communications, strategic planning, and achievement of strategic and business objectives.

Fiscal 2014 Summary Compensation Table

The following Summary Compensation Table provides information concerning the compensation of the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, current Chief Financial Officer, former Chief Financial Officer and the three other most highly compensated executive officers (“named executive officers” or “NEOs”) for fiscal 2014. Fiscal 2013 and 2012 information is not included for Anthony P. DiSilvestro and Carlos J. Barroso because they were not named executive officers during those fiscal years. The principal position shown in the table for each NEO is as of August 3, 2014. For a complete understanding of the table, please read the narrative disclosures that follow the table.


Name and Principal Position (a)	Year (b)		Salary ($) (c)		Bonus ($) (d)		Stock Awards ($) (e)		Option Awards ($) (f)		Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation ($) (g)		Change In Pension Value and Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Earnings ($) (h)		All Other Compensation ($) (i)		Total ($) (j)
Denise M. Morrison		2014	$	1,041,667	$	0	$	5,384,353	$	0	$	1,102,500	$	1,946,562	$	212,007	$	9,687,089
President and		2013	$	991,667	$	0	$	5,313,818	$	0	$	1,680,000	$	540,635	$	182,322	$	8,708,442
Chief Executive Officer		2012	$	950,000	$	0	$	5,067,264	$	0	$	1,197,000	$	1,371,001	$	171,138	$	8,756,403
Anthony P. DiSilvestro		2014	$	485,980	$	0	$	696,055	$	0	$	299,250	$	661,382	$	72,117	$	2,214,784
Senior Vice President —
Chief Financial Officer
B. Craig Owens		2014	$	630,466	$	0	$	1,803,973	$	0	$	451,173	$	1,491,217	$	148,561	$	4,525,390
Former Senior Vice		2013	$	825,038	$	0	$	2,314,982	$	0	$	1,042,956	$	1,123,762	$	102,827	$	5,409,565
President — Chief Financial		2012	$	808,860	$	0	$	2,334,039	$	0	$	803,397	$	2,062,565	$	91,196	$	6,100,057
Officer and Chief
Administrative Officer
Mark R. Alexander		2014	$	620,782	$	0	$	1,527,987	$	0	$	405,007	$	834,208	$	91,779	$	3,479,763
Senior Vice President and		2013	$	590,703	$	0	$	1,729,137	$	0	$	741,020	$	0	$	86,465	$	3,147,325
President — Campbell North		2012	$	540,042	$	0	$	1,265,505	$	0	$	413,707	$	754,189	$	749,299	$	3,722,742
America
Carlos J. Barroso		2014	$	470,000	$	250,000	$	1,394,210	$	0	$	274,950	$	0	$	174,438	$	2,563,598
Senior Vice President –
Global Research & Development
Ellen Oran Kaden		2014	$	729,458	$	0	$	1,563,717	$	0	$	548,888	$	726,878	$	209,287	$	3,778,228
Senior Vice President —		2013	$	714,583	$	0	$	1,996,888	$	0	$	904,050	$	38,095	$	194,814	$	3,848,430
Chief Legal and Public Affairs		2012	$	665,012	$	0	$	1,821,395	$	0	$	646,800	$	1,592,995	$	179,361	$	4,905,563
Officer

Salary (Column C)

The amounts reported in this column represent base salaries paid to each of the NEOs for fiscal 2014, 2013 and 2012, if the individual was a NEO in those years.

Bonus (Column D)

Mr. Barroso joined the Company in August 2013. The amount reported in this column for Mr. Barroso represents a one-time cash payment in recognition of the forfeiture of consulting fees and other income from Mr. Barroso’s prior employment.

Stock Awards (Column E)

The amounts reported in this column represent the aggregate grant date fair value of the stock awards, calculated in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718, for the listed fiscal year. The assumptions used by the Company in calculating these amounts are included in Note 17 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended August 3, 2014 (“2014 Form 10-K”). The

amounts reported in the Summary Compensation Table for these awards assume a future payout at the target level and may not represent the amounts that the NEOs will actually realize from the awards. Whether, and to what extent, an NEO realizes value will depend on the Company’s actual operating performance and the NEO’s continued employment. If Company performance results in a future payout at the maximum level, the aggregate grant date fair value of the stock awards

granted in fiscal 2014 would have been as follows: Ms. Morrison, $9,082,474; Mr. DiSilvestro, $1,174,108; Mr. Owens, $3,042,957; Mr. Alexander, $2,577,443; Mr. Barroso, $1,821,832; and Ms. Kaden, $2,637,694. For additional information on grant date fair value and estimated future payouts of stock awards, see the Grants of Plan-Based Awards in Fiscal 2014 table on page 31, and to see the value of stock awards actually realized by the NEOs in fiscal 2014, see the Option Exercises and Stock Vested in Fiscal 2014 table on page 36.

Option Awards (Column F)

No stock options were granted to NEOs in fiscal years 2014, 2013 or 2012; therefore, there is no amount to report above. The Company ceased issuing stock options to employees in fiscal 2006. To see the value received by NEOs upon exercise of option awards in fiscal 2014, see the Option Exercises and Stock Vested in Fiscal 2014 table on page 36. No NEO held outstanding option awards at 2014 fiscal year-end.

Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation (Column G)

The amounts reported in this column reflect the amounts earned and paid to the NEOs for fiscal 2014, 2013 and 2012 under the AIP. Payments under the AIP were calculated as described in the CD&A beginning on page 21.

Change in Pension Value and Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Earnings (Column H)

The change in pension amounts reported for fiscal 2014 are comprised of changes between July 29, 2013, and August 3, 2014, in the actuarial present value of the accumulated pension benefits for each of the NEOs. The NEOs receive pension benefits under the same formula applied to all eligible U.S.-based salaried employees, except for benefits accrued under the MCHP. The assumptions used by the Company in calculating the change in pension value are described on page 39.

The values reported in this column are theoretical, as those amounts are calculated pursuant to SEC requirements and are based on assumptions used in preparing the Company’s consolidated audited financial statements for the years ended July 28, 2013 and August 3, 2014. The Company’s pension plans utilize a different method of calculating actuarial present value for the purpose of determining a lump sum payment, if any, under the plans. The change in pension value from year to year as reported in the table is subject to market volatility and may not represent the value that a NEO will actually accrue under the Company’s pension plans during any given year. The material provisions of the Company’s pension plans and deferred compensation plans are described beginning on page 37 and on page 40.

No NEO received above-market earnings (as this term is defined by the SEC) on their nonqualified deferred compensation accounts during fiscal 2014.

All Other Compensation (Column I)

The amounts reported in this column reflect, for each NEO, the sum of (i) the incremental cost to the Company of all perquisites and other personal benefits; (ii) amounts contributed by the Company to the 401(k) plan and the 401(k) supplemental program, which are part of the Company’s deferred compensation plans; (iii) Executive Retirement Contributions; and (iv) the premiums paid by the Company for executive long-term disability benefits.

The following table outlines those (i) perquisites and other personal benefits and (ii) additional all other compensation required by the SEC rules to be separately quantified:


Name	Personal Choice(1)		401(k) Company Contribution		401(k) Supplemental Company Contribution(2)		Executive Retirement Contribution(3)		Long- Term Disability		Other			Total

Denise M. Morrison	$	48,000	$	10,400	$	100,133	$	0	$	5,574	$	47,900	(4)	$	212,007
Anthony P. DiSilvestro	$	32,000	$	10,870	$	26,292	$	0	$	2,955	$	0		$	72,117
B. Craig Owens	$	24,000	$	10,400	$	57,916	$	0	$	4,288	$	51,957	(5)	$	148,561
Mark R. Alexander	$	32,000	$	10,400	$	45,065	$	0	$	4,314	$	0		$	91,779
Carlos J. Barroso	$	32,000	$	28,829	$	992	$	47,000	$	2,390	$	63,227	(6)	$	174,438
Ellen Oran Kaden	$	47,000	$	10,400	$	56,136	$	0	$	6,747	$	89,004	(7)	$	209,287

(1)	See page 27 for a description of the Company’s Personal Choice program

(2)	See page 41 for a description of the supplemental 401(k) program.

(3)	This amount is unvested and is subject to forfeiture if the vesting criteria are not met. See page 39 for a description of the Executive Retirement Contribution.

(4)	Other compensation consists of driver, vehicle and transportation expenses.

(5)	Other compensation consists of amounts paid post-retirement for accrued, unused vacation time.

(6)	Other compensation consists of commuting and other expenses associated with relocation.

(7)	Other compensation consists of driver expenses.

Total Compensation (Column J)

The amounts reported in this column are the sum of columns C through I for each of the NEOs. All compensation amounts reported in this column include amounts paid and amounts deferred.

Grants of Plan-Based Awards in Fiscal 2014


				Estimated Possible Payouts Under Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards						Estimated Future Payouts Under Equity Incentive Plan Awards						All Other Stock Awards: # of Stock Units (#)		Grant Date Fair Value of Stock Awards ($)
Name	Type of Award	Grant Date		Threshold ($)		Target ($)		Maximum ($)		Threshold (#)		Target (#)		Maximum (#)		All Other Stock Awards: # of Stock Units (#)		Grant Date Fair Value of Stock Awards ($)
Denise M. Morrison	SPU Grant		10/1/2013		—		—		—		11,934		47,738		95,476		—	$	1,967,283
	TSR Grant		10/1/2013								23,868		47,737		95,474		—	$	1,730,839
	EPS Grant		10/1/2013		—		—		—		40,918		40,918		40,918		—	$	1,686,231
	AIP		—	$	0	$	1,470,000	$	2,940,000		—		—		—		—		—
Anthony P. DiSilvestro	SPU Grant		10/1/2013		—		—		—		1,542		6,171		12,342		—	$	254,307
	TSR Grant		10/1/2013								3,085		6,171		12,342		—	$	223,747
	EPS Grant		10/1/2013		—		—		—		5,290		5,290		5,290		—	$	218,001
	AIP		—	$	0	$	399,000	$	798,000		—		—		—		—		—
B. Craig Owens	SPU Grant		10/1/2013		—		—		—		3,998		15,994		31,988		—	$	659,113
	TSR Grant		10/1/2013								7,996		15,993		31,986		—	$	579,871
	EPS Grant		10/1/2013		—		—		—		13,710		13,710		13,710		—	$	564,989
	AIP		—	$	0	$	633,225	$	1,266,450		—		—		—		—		—
Mark R. Alexander	SPU Grant		10/1/2013		—		—		—		3,386		13,547		27,094		—	$	558,272
	TSR Grant		10/1/2013								6,773		13,547		27,094		—	$	491,184
	EPS Grant		10/1/2013		—		—		—		11,612		11,612		11,612		—	$	478,531
	AIP		—	$	0	$	563,175	$	1,126,350		—		—		—		—		—
Carlos J. Barroso	Time-Lapse Grant		8/1/2013		—		—		—		—		—		—		16,237	$	771,582
	SPU Grant		10/1/2013		—		—		—		1,380		5,520		11,040		—	$	227,479
	TSR Grant		10/1/2013		—		—		—		2,760		5,520		11,040		—	$	200,143
	EPS Grant		10/1/2013		—		—		—		4,732		4,732		4,732		—	$	195,006
	AIP		—	$	0	$	305,500	$	611,000		—		—		—		—		—
Ellen Oran Kaden	SPU Grant		10/1/2013		—		—		—		3,466		13,864		27,728		—	$	571,335
	TSR Grant		10/1/2013								6,931		13,863		27,726		—	$	502,642
	EPS Grant		10/1/2013		—		—		—		11,884		11,884		11,884		—	$	489,740
	AIP		—	$	0	$	731,850	$	1,463,700		—		—		—		—		—

The Committee sets annual grant targets for NEOs under the LTI Program. The dollar targets are expressed as a percentage of salary and converted to units based upon Campbell’s average closing stock price during the last 20 trading days in the month of August prior to the grant date. The Committee’s practice is to approve LTI grants at its September meeting with a grant date of October 1. The performance period for TSR, SPU and EPS performance-based grants made during fiscal 2014 is fiscal years 2014-2016. The target units are credited to the NEOs on the grant date. For units granted in fiscal 2014, dividend equivalents will not be paid on the units during the performance period. Instead, accumulated dividend equivalents will be paid in cash on the restricted share units that vest at the end of the performance period when the grants are paid out.

The Committee certifies the attainment of performance goals, and any earned shares are distributed to participants following the end of the applicable performance period. See the description in the CD&A beginning on page 23 for information about targets, performance goals and payment of shares. The grants have specific rules related to the treatment of the units in the event of termination for cause, voluntary resignation, retirement, involuntary termination and change in control. These provisions are described under Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control beginning on page 41.

The amounts listed under the Estimated Possible Payments under Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards columns represent the minimum, target and maximum payouts for each executive under the AIP for fiscal 2014. Actual amounts awarded for fiscal 2014 to each NEO are listed in the Fiscal 2014 Summary Compensation Table on page 30.

Outstanding Equity Awards at 2014 Fiscal Year-End

The following table provides information on the holdings of restricted share units by each of the NEOs at fiscal year-end. This table includes unvested time-lapse restricted share units; and unvested performance-restricted share units. None of the NEOs held any vested, unexercised stock options at 2014 fiscal year-end. Each equity grant is shown separately for each NEO. The vesting schedule for the unvested stock awards is shown following this table, and is organized based on the grant date. The market value of the stock awards is based on the closing market price of Campbell stock on August 1, 2014, which was $41.96. The performance-restricted share units, which were initially granted on October 1, 2011, October 1, 2012 and October 1, 2013, are subject to specific goals during the performance period as explained in the CD&A beginning on page 23. The market value as of August 1, 2014, shown below assumes the satisfaction of these goals. The information shown in the table below for Mr. Owens reflects the pro-rated portion of his outstanding equity awards following his retirement on May 1, 2014. For additional information about the stock awards, see the description of the LTI Program in the CD&A beginning on page 23.


	Stock Awards
Name	Grant Date for Restricted Units			Number of Unvested Stock Units (#)		Market Value of Unvested Stock Units ($)		Equity Incentive Plan Awards: Number of Unvested Stock Units (#)		Equity Incentive Plan Awards: Market Value of Unvested Stock Units ($)
Denise M. Morrison		10/1/2012	(1)						50,685	$	2,126,743
		10/1/2013	(1)						47,737	$	2,003,045
		10/1/2012	(2)						50,686	$	2,126,785
		10/1/2013	(3)						47,738	$	2,003,086
		10/1/2011	(4)						15,655	$	656,884
		10/1/2012	(4)						28,964	$	1,215,329
		10/1/2013	(4)						40,918	$	1,716,919
Anthony P. DiSilvestro		10/1/2012	(1)						7,211	$	302,574
		10/1/2013	(1)						6,171	$	258,935
		10/1/2012	(2)						7,211	$	302,574
		10/1/2013	(3)						6,171	$	258,935
		10/1/2011	(4)						2,332	$	97,851
		10/1/2012	(4)						4,122	$	172,959
		10/1/2013	(4)						5,290	$	221,968
B. Craig Owens		10/1/2012	(1)						11,654	$	489,002
		10/1/2013	(1)						3,110	$	130,496
		10/1/2012	(2)						17,482	$	733,545
		10/1/2013	(3)						3,110	$	130,496
		10/1/2011	(4)						7,211	$	302,574
		10/1/2012	(4)						12,618	$	529,451
		10/1/2013	(4)						13,710	$	575,272
Mark R. Alexander		10/1/2012	(1)						16,493	$	692,046
		10/1/2013	(1)						13,547	$	568,432
		10/1/2012	(2)						16,493	$	692,046
		10/1/2013	(3)						13,547	$	568,432
		10/1/2011	(4)						3,910	$	164,064
		10/1/2012	(4)						9,426	$	395,515
		10/1/2013	(4)						11,612	$	487,240
Carlos J. Barroso		8/1/2013	(5)		10,825	$	454,217
		10/1/2013	(1)						5,520	$	231,619
		10/1/2013	(3)						5,520	$	231,619
		10/1/2013	(4)						4,732	$	198,555
Ellen Oran Kaden		10/1/2012	(1)						19,047	$	799,212
		10/1/2013	(1)						13,863	$	581,691
		10/1/2012	(2)						19,047	$	799,212
		10/1/2013	(3)						13,864	$	581,733
		10/1/2011	(4)						5,627	$	236,109
		10/1/2012	(4)						10,885	$	456,735
		10/1/2013	(4)						11,884	$	498,653

(1)	These are TSR performance-restricted share units which vest 100% in 3 years, provided the Company achieves a TSR ranking that results in a 100% payment (see pages 24 and 26 of the CD&A).

(2)	These are SPUs which vest 100% in 2 years provided the Company meets the net sales and EPS growth targets required for 100% payment (see page 24 of the CD&A).

(3)	These are SPUs which vest 100% in 3 years, provided the Company meets the net sales and EPS growth targets required for 100% payment (see page 26 of the CD&A).

(4)	These are EPS performance-restricted share units which vest 1/3 in 1 year; 1/3 in 2 years; and 1/3 in 3 years, provided the fiscal year EPS performance goal is achieved (see pages 25 and 26 of the CD&A).

(5)	These are time-lapse restricted share units which vest in equal installments on each of the first three anniversaries of the grant date.

Option Exercises and Stock Vested in Fiscal 2014

The following table provides information for the NEOs on (1) stock option exercises during fiscal 2014, including the number of shares acquired upon exercise and the value realized, and (2) the number of shares acquired upon the vesting of stock awards and the value realized, each before payment of any applicable withholding tax.


	Option Awards				Stock Awards
Name (a)	Number of Shares Acquired on Exercise (#)(b)		Value Realized on Exercise ($)(c)		Number of Shares Acquired on Vesting (#)(d)		Value Realized on Vesting ($)(e)
Denise M. Morrison(1)		0	$	0		171,323	$	6,974,559
Anthony P. DiSilvestro(2)		0	$	0		26,463	$	1,077,309
B. Craig Owens(3)		0	$	0		82,311	$	3,350,881
Mark R. Alexander(4)		0	$	0		45,204	$	1,840,255
Carlos J. Barroso(5)		0	$	0		5,412	$	227,088
Ellen Oran Kaden(6)		75,900	$	1,322,208		64,794	$	2,637,764

(1)	Ms. Morrison received an aggregate of 171,323 shares at a market price of $40.71 on September 30, 2013, upon the vesting of 136,973 SPUs and 34,350 EPS performance-restricted share units.

(2)	Mr. DiSilvestro received an aggregate of 26,463 shares at a market price of $40.71 on September 30, 2013, upon the vesting of 20,403 SPUs and 6,060 EPS performance-restricted share units.

(3)	Mr. Owens received an aggregate of 82,311 shares at a market price of $40.71 on September 30, 2013, upon the vesting of 63,091 SPUs and 19,220 EPS performance-restricted share units.

(4)	Mr. Alexander received an aggregate of 45,204 shares at a market price of $40.71 on September 30, 2013, upon the vesting of 34,207 SPUs and 10,997 EPS performance-restricted share units.

(5)	Mr. Barroso received an aggregate of 5,412 shares at a market price of $41.96 on August 1, 2014, upon the vesting of time-lapse restricted share units.

(6)	The dollar value realized on the exercise of Ms. Kaden’s stock options reflects the total pre-tax value realized (Campbell stock price at exercise minus the option’s exercise price).

Ms. Kaden received an aggregate of 64,794 shares at a market price of $40.71 on September 30, 2013, upon the vesting of 49,233 SPUs and 15,561 EPS performance-restricted share units.

Pension Benefits — Fiscal 2014


Name (a)	Plan Name (b)	Number of Years of Credited Service (#) (c)		Present Value of Accumulated Benefit ($) (d)		Payments During Last Fiscal Year ($) (e)
Denise M. Morrison	Retirement and Pension Plan		11.3	$	261,743	$	0
	Mid-Career Hire Pension Plan		11.3	$	6,882,379	$	0
Anthony P. DiSilvestro	Retirement and Pension Plan		18.2	$	682,361	$	0
	Mid-Career Hire Pension Plan		18.2	$	2,911,977	$	0
B. Craig Owens	Retirement and Pension Plan		5.6	$	151,242	$	0
	Mid-Career Hire Pension Plan		5.6	$	7,194,683	$	0
Mark R. Alexander	Retirement and Pension Plan		21.9	$	640,985	$	0
	Mid-Career Hire Pension Plan		21.9	$	2,291,343	$	0
Carlos J. Barroso	Not applicable		0	$	0	$	0
	Not applicable		0	$	0	$	0
Ellen Oran Kaden	Retirement and Pension Plan		16.3	$	788,855	$	0
	Mid-Career Hire Pension Plan		16.3	$	6,750,187	$	0

Eligible NEOs participate in two defined benefit plans: (1) the Retirement and Pension Plan (“Qualified Plan”) and (2) the Mid-Career Hire Pension Plan (“MCHP”). Mr. Barroso is not eligible to participate in either plan, as both plans were closed to new participants prior to the start of his employment with the Company.

The Qualified Plan

The Qualified Plan was established and designed to provide funded, tax-qualified pension benefits for eligible U.S.-based employees of the Company up to the limits allowed under the IRC. The Qualified Plan became a cash balance pension plan on May 1, 1999. Participants who had an accrued benefit as of April 30, 1999, including Mr. Alexander, Mr. DiSilvestro and Ms. Kaden, are eligible to receive the greater of their pension benefit under the prior plan formula, which is based on final average pay, or the cash balance benefit. Employees who became participants in the Qualified Plan on or after May 1, 1999, including Ms. Morrison and Mr. Owens, are eligible only for the cash balance benefit.

In January 2010, the Board took action to close the Qualified Plan to new participants, effective December 31, 2010, and, instead, offer eligible employees new enhancements to the Company’s 401(k) plan. This action is consistent with the Company’s efforts to move towards defined contribution plans as the vehicle for offering retirement benefits to its employees. The Qualified Plan remains available to all active participants as of December 31, 2010.

A participant in the Qualified Plan receives an account consisting of an opening account balance, pay credits and interest credits.

Opening Account Balance: If an employee was an active participant on April 30, 1999, he or she would receive an opening account balance consisting of an age 65 benefit accrued under the Qualified Plan as of December 31, 1998, converted to a lump sum cash value using an interest rate of 5.25% and the 1983 unisex Group Annuity Mortality table. If an employee became a participant on or after May 1, 1999, the opening account balance is zero.

Pay Credits: Pay credits equal a percentage of a participant’s eligible compensation, which is limited by the IRC. Pay credits are credited as of the last day of each calendar year and made based upon the following formula:


Age as of December 31 of Prior Calendar Year	Pay Credit Rate
Less than 30		4.5	%
30 but less than 40		5.5	%
40 but less than 50		7.0	%
50 but less than 60		8.0	%
60 or more		9.0	%

If a participant terminates employment before the end of a calendar year, he or she will be credited with pay credits as of the last day of the month in which employment ended.

Interest Credits: Interest is credited to a participant’s cash balance account as of the last day

of each calendar year and is based on the average annual yield on the 30-year U.S. Treasury securities for November of the prior calendar year. Interest credits will never be less than 2.5% or more than 10%.

Eligible compensation includes non-deferred base pay and AIP payments, deferred compensation attributable to pre-tax contributions for medical and dental premiums and 401(k) plan deferrals. Under the Qualified Plan, the participating named executive officers are not eligible for unreduced benefits before attaining the normal retirement age of 65. The exceptions are Mr. Alexander, Mr. DiSilvestro and Ms. Kaden, who will each be eligible for an unreduced benefit after attaining age 62. In addition, the Company does not credit extra service beyond the actual years of an employee’s participation in the plan. Qualified Plan participants are 100% vested in their accrued benefit after attaining three years of service. Lump sum payments are available as a form of distribution under the Qualified Plan.

The Present Value of Accumulated Benefit is the lump sum present value of the annual pension benefit that was earned as of August 3, 2014 and that would be payable at age 65. The present value of accumulated benefits for the Qualified Plan was determined in this manner for Ms. Morrison, but not for Mr. Alexander, Mr. DiSilvestro and Ms. Kaden. Because Mr. Alexander, Mr. DiSilvestro and Ms. Kaden had an accrued benefit on April 30, 1999, their benefits are determined using the prior plan formula of 1% of their Final Average Pay up to the Social Security Covered Compensation amount plus 1.5% of their Final Average Pay in excess of the Social Security Covered Compensation times their years of service. Final Average Pay is the average of eligible compensation earned in the highest 5 calendar years, whether or not consecutive, during the last 10 years of employment. Social Security Covered Compensation is the un-indexed average of the taxable wage base in effect for each calendar year during the 35-year period ending with the last day of the calendar year in which the participant ceases to be an employee of the Company. Under the prior plan formula, if a participant continues to work with the Company until at least age 55 with 5 years of service, the benefit is reduced 5% per year for each year that the benefit commences prior to age 62. If the participant terminates employment after attaining age 62, he or she is eligible for an unreduced benefit. The present value of Mr. Alexander’s, Mr. DiSilvestro’s and Ms. Kaden’s accumulated benefit is the lump sum present value of the annual pension benefit that was earned as of August 3, 2014, and that would be payable at age 62.

The Mid-Career Hire Pension Plan

The MCHP was established as an unfunded, nonqualified plan for certain U.S.-based senior executives. It was intended to provide a participant with a pension benefit that approximates the pension earned by an employee who worked his or her entire career for the Company. The Company established the MCHP to attract and retain more experienced executives who were hired mid-career and would be unable to accumulate a full pension over an entire career with a single employer. The MCHP also provides benefits in excess of the IRC limits that are applicable to the Qualified Plan.

The benefit provided under the MCHP is payable as an annuity beginning on the first day of the seventh month following termination of employment. Depending on a participant’s age and years of service, he or she will be eligible to receive an MCHP benefit under either the income replacement formula or the excess benefit formula. If a participant satisfies the eligibility criteria such that he or she is eligible for an MCHP benefit under both formulas, the formula resulting in the higher benefit will apply.

In May 2010, the Committee determined to close the MCHP to any new participants, effective December 31, 2010, and instead, offer eligible senior executives a new nonqualified defined contribution account, which is further described below under “Executive Retirement Contribution.” Like the closure of the Qualified Plan, this action is consistent with the Company’s efforts to move toward defined contribution plans as the vehicle for offering retirement benefits to its employees. The current MCHP design will be maintained for all active participants.

Income Replacement Formula

A participant hired or promoted into an eligible salary grade on or before December 31, 2010 and who is age 55 with at least 5 years of employment is eligible for an MCHP benefit under the income replacement formula. If such a participant terminates employment on or after age 62, the MCHP benefit is calculated as an annual single life annuity equal to 37.5% of a participant’s Adjusted Final Pay reduced by the Qualified Plan benefit. If the participant terminates before age 62, the single life annuity will be reduced by 5% per year for each year that the benefit commences prior to age 62. Adjusted Final Pay is equal to the average of eligible compensation earned in the highest 5 calendar years, whether or not consecutive, during the last 10 years of a participant’s career as a covered employee. Participants are eligible for unreduced pensions under the income replacement formula beginning at age 62.

Excess Benefit Formula

A participant hired or promoted into an eligible salary grade on or before December 31, 2010 and who has at least 3 years of service is eligible for an MCHP benefit under the excess benefit formula. If such a participant terminates employment on or after 3 years of service, the benefit is calculated using the pension formula under the Qualified Plan described above but only on eligible compensation in excess of the IRC limit on compensation. Participants shall receive reduced pensions under the excess benefit formula if they begin to receive payments before normal retirement age, which is age 65.

The MCHP defines eligible compensation in the same manner as in the Qualified Plan. In addition, the MCHP provides benefit accruals on base pay or AIP payments that are deferred. Ms. Morrison, Mr. DiSilvestro and Ms. Kaden are vested in the MCHP benefit using the income replacement formula as they have satisfied the age and service criteria. Currently, none of the NEOs, other than Ms. Kaden, have attained age 62. The Company does not grant extra years of service for the pension benefit portion of the MCHP benefit. The Present Value of Accumulated Benefit is the lump sum present value of the annual pension benefit that was earned as of August 3, 2014, and that would be payable under the MCHP at age 62. A lump sum form of payment was used for purposes of completing the Pension Benefit Table, although a lump sum form of payment is not available under the MCHP.

Executive Retirement Contribution

Following the closure of the MCHP to new participants, the Committee implemented an Executive Retirement Contribution for eligible U.S.-based senior executives who were hired on or after January 1, 2011. The Executive Retirement Contribution is intended to attract experienced executives and provide retirement benefits to these executives, who are not eligible to participate in the MCHP. Executive Retirement Contributions are subject to a vesting schedule, which is designed to balance attraction and retention objectives.

The Company will credit an eligible participant’s Supplemental Retirement Plan account with an Executive Retirement Contribution equal to 10% of the participant’s base salary and annual incentive. The Executive Retirement Contributions are subject to an age-graded vesting schedule and do not begin to vest until the participant has attained age 55 and completed at least five years of service with the Company. The table below provides details on the vesting criteria:


Vesting Percentage		Criteria
50%		Age 55 and at least 5 years of service
60%		Age 56 and at least 5 years of service
70%		Age 57 and at least 5 years of service
80%		Age 58 and at least 5 years of service
90%		Age 59 and at least 5 years of service
100%		Age 60 and at least 5 years of service

Mr. Barroso is the only NEO who received an Executive Retirement Contribution in fiscal 2014, and the amounts credited to him are unvested. For additional information on the Executive Retirement Contribution to Mr. Barroso, please see the Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Table and accompanying narrative beginning on page 40.

Assumptions

For purposes of determining the Present Value of Accumulated Benefits, the following assumptions were used:


Fiscal Year Ended	2014	2013	2012
ASC 715 Discount Rate	4.3%	4.8%	4.0%
Retirement Age for Qualified Plan	65 for cash balance or 62 for the prior plan formula	65 for cash balance or 62 for the prior plan formula	65 for cash balance or 62 for the prior plan formula
Retirement Age for MCHP	62	62	62
Pre-retirement Mortality or Disability	None	None	None
Post-retirement Mortality	RP2000Proj2014 M/F	1994 GAM M/F	1994 GAM M/F
Cash Balance Interest Rate	3.50%	3.50%	2.75%
Form of Payment	Lump sum using ASC 715 assumption methods	Lump sum using ASC 715 assumption methods	Lump sum using ASC 715 assumption methods

The accumulated benefit is calculated based on credited service and pay as of August 3, 2014. The values reported in the Present Value of Accumulated Benefit column are theoretical and are calculated and presented according to SEC requirements. These values are based on assumptions used in preparing the Company’s consolidated audited financial statements for the year ended August 3, 2014. The Company’s pension plans use a different method of calculating actuarial present value for the purpose of determining a lump sum payment, if any, under the plans. Using applicable plan assumptions, the lump sum present value of the two defined benefit plans combined as of August 3, 2014 and payable as of September 1, 2014 was as follows: Ms. Morrison: $6,915,815; Mr. DiSilvestro: $3,419,264; Mr. Alexander: $2,095,345; and Ms. Kaden: $7,635,231. Mr. Barroso is not eligible to participate in the plans and Mr. Owens retired from the Company prior to August 3, 2014. All benefit calculations set forth in this narrative and in the Pension Benefit Table are estimates only; actual benefits will be based on data, applicable plan assumptions, pay and service at the time of retirement.

Nonqualified Deferred Compensation — Fiscal 2014


Name	Plan Name	Executive Contributions in Last Fiscal Year ($)(1)		Registrant Contributions in Last Fiscal Year ($)(2)			Aggregate Earnings in Last Fiscal Year ($)			Aggregate Withdrawals/ Distributions in Last Fiscal Year ($)		Aggregate Balance at Fiscal Year End(3) ($)
Denise M. Morrison	Deferred Compensation Plan	$	0	$	0		$	(2,090	)	$	0	$	22,905
	Supplemental Retirement Plan	$	0	$	100,133		$	(87,880	)	$	0	$	1,241,905
Anthony P. DiSilvestro	Deferred Compensation Plan	$	0	$	0		$	(177	)	$	0	$	1,943
	Supplemental Retirement Plan	$	0	$	26,292		$	(2,861	)	$	0	$	100,299
B. Craig Owens	Deferred Compensation Plan	$	0	$	0		$	0		$	0	$	0
	Supplemental Retirement Plan	$	834,365	$	57,916		$	145,385		$	0	$	2,176,741
Mark R. Alexander	Deferred Compensation Plan	$	0	$	0		$	(82	)	$	0	$	898
	Supplemental Retirement Plan	$	0	$	45,065		$	(8,022	)	$	0	$	206,456
Carlos J. Barroso	Deferred Compensation Plan	$	0	$	0		$	0		$	0	$	0
	Supplemental Retirement Plan	$	0	$	47,992	(4)	$	313		$	0	$	48,305
Ellen Oran Kaden	Deferred Compensation Plan	$	0	$	0		$	(154,973	)	$	0	$	1,698,696
	Supplemental Retirement Plan	$	0	$	56,136		$	(19,546	)	$	0	$	375,224

(1)	The amount listed for Mr. Owens was previously reported in a summary compensation table as an annual incentive payment.

(2)	The amounts listed for Mses. Morrison and Kaden and Messrs. DiSilvestro, Owens, Alexander and Barroso are reported in the 2014 Summary Compensation Table under “All Other Compensation.”

(3)	The amounts listed for Mses. Morrison and Kaden and Messrs. DiSilvestro, Owens and Alexander include amounts previously reported in summary compensation tables as salary, annual incentive payments or the value of grants of restricted stock.

(4)	The amount listed for Mr. Barroso includes an Executive Retirement Contribution of $47,000 which is unvested.

The Deferred Compensation Plan and the Supplemental Retirement Plan are unfunded and maintained for the purpose of providing the Company’s eligible U.S.-based executives and key managers the opportunity to defer a portion of their earned compensation. Currently, participants may defer a portion of their annual incentive compensation. The ability of executives to defer all or a portion of their long-term incentive awards was eliminated in fiscal 2009, and the ability to defer base salary was eliminated as of January 1, 2011.

Each participant’s contributions to the plans are credited to an investment account in the participant’s name. Gains and losses in the participant’s account are based on the performance of the investment choices the participant has selected. For deferral accounts, seven investment choices are available, including the Campbell Stock Account. In addition to the Stock Account, participants have the opportunity to invest in: (i) Vanguard’s Institutional Index Fund; (ii) Vanguard’s Extended Market Index Fund; (iii) Vanguard’s Total International Stock Index Fund; (iv) Vanguard’s Total Bond Market Index Fund; (v) Vanguard’s Short-Term Bond Index Fund and (vi) BlackRock’s Liquidity TempFund. A participant may reallocate his or her investment account at any time among the seven investment choices, except that reallocations of the Stock Account must be made in compliance with the Company’s policies on trading Company stock. Dividends on amounts invested in the Stock Account may be reallocated among the seven investment accounts.

The Company credits a participant’s Supplemental Retirement Plan account with an amount equal to the matching contribution that the Company would have made to the participant’s 401(k) plan account if the participant had not deferred compensation under the plans. In addition, for those individuals whose base salary and annual incentive compensation exceed the IRC indexed compensation limit for the 401(k) plan ($255,000 for calendar year 2013 and $260,000 for calendar year 2014) and who defer a certain percentage of eligible pay to the 401(k) plan, the Company credits such individual’s account with an amount equal to the matching contribution the Company would have made to the 401(k) plan but for the compensation limit (supplemental 401(k) program). These Company contributions are fully vested. Except as described above, there is no Company match on deferred compensation.

The Company will also credit an eligible participant’s Supplement Retirement Plan account with an Executive Retirement Contribution equal to 10% of the participant’s base salary and annual incentive. Eligible participants are U.S.-based senior executives who were hired on or after January 1, 2011 and who do not participate in the MCHP. The Executive Retirement Contributions do not begin to vest until the participant has attained age 55 and completed at least five years of service with the Company. For additional information on the Executive Retirement Contribution and vesting criteria, please see page 39.

Potential Payments upon Termination or Change in Control

The following section describes potential incremental payments upon termination of a NEO’s employment under various circumstances.

Termination for Cause

In the event of termination for cause, a NEO will forfeit:

any annual incentive compensation for that fiscal year; and

any unvested time-lapse restricted and performance-restricted share units.

The NEO will be entitled to any vested pension benefits and the vested balance in his or her deferred compensation account.

Voluntary Resignation

In the event of voluntary resignation prior to the end of a fiscal year, a NEO will forfeit:

any annual incentive compensation for that fiscal year; and

any unvested time-lapse restricted and performance-restricted share units.

The NEO will be entitled to any vested pension benefits and the vested balance in his or her deferred compensation account.

Retirement

In the event of retirement after attaining age 55 and five years of service, a NEO will be entitled to:

A pro rata portion of any annual incentive compensation for the current fiscal year based upon length of employment during the fiscal year. The pro rata portion will be paid out based on business unit/function performance and individual performance as explained in the CD&A.

100% of any unvested time-lapse restricted share units, provided that the executive officer retires at least six months after the grant date.

A pro rata portion of any TSR performance-restricted share units or SPUs based on length of employment during the applicable restriction period, provided the executive officer retires at least six months after the grant date. The pro rata portion will be paid out at the end of the restriction period based upon the vesting criteria being met, as explained in the CD&A.

100% of any EPS performance-restricted share units at the end of the restriction period based upon the Company’s EPS performance as explained in the CD&A, provided the NEO retires at least six months after the grant date.

The NEO will be entitled to any vested pension benefits and the vested balance in his or her deferred compensation account.

Involuntary Termination

In the event of involuntary termination by the Company for any reason other than cause, a NEO will be entitled to:

A pro rata portion of any annual incentive compensation for the current fiscal year based on length of employment during the fiscal year, provided the officer was employed for at least three months in the fiscal year. The pro rata portion will be paid out based upon business unit/function performance and individual performance as explained in the CD&A.

A pro rata portion of any unvested time-lapse restricted share units based on length of employment during the applicable restriction period, provided the officer was employed for at least six months following the grant date.

A pro rata portion of any TSR performance-restricted share units or SPUs based on length of employment during the applicable restriction period, provided the executive officer was employed for at least six months after the grant date. The pro rata portion will be paid out at the end of the restriction period based upon the vesting criteria being met, as explained in the CD&A.

A pro rata portion of any EPS performance-restricted share units based on length of employment during the restriction period, provided the executive officer’s employment continued at least six months after the grant date. The pro rata portion will be paid out at the end of the restriction period based upon the Company’s EPS performance as explained in the CD&A.

The NEO will be entitled to any vested pension benefits and the vested balance in any deferred compensation account.

The Company has a regular severance policy that applies to all executive officers, including the NEOs. An executive officer will receive severance benefits equal to two times the officer’s base salary if the officer’s employment is involuntarily terminated by the Company without cause, except for change in control severance benefits which are described below. The severance benefits also include the continuation of medical benefits and life insurance unless the executive obtains medical benefits or life insurance from another employer.

In order to receive severance payments, executive officers must execute severance agreements that contain provisions prohibiting the executive officer from disparaging the Company, soliciting Company employees to work elsewhere and competing with the Company.

Change in Control

Generally, a “Change in Control” will be deemed to have occurred in any of the following circumstances:

(i)

the acquisition of 25% or more of the outstanding voting stock of the Company by any person or entity, with certain exceptions for Dorrance family members;

(ii)

the persons serving as directors of the Company as of September 28, 2000, and those replacements or additions subsequently approved by a two-thirds vote of the Board, cease to make up more than 50% of the Board;

(iii)

a merger, consolidation or share exchange in which the shareholders of the Company prior to the merger wind up owning 50% or less of the surviving corporation; or

(iv)

a complete liquidation or dissolution of the Company or disposition of all or substantially all of the assets of the Company.

Under the CIC Agreements with the NEOs, severance pay would equal two and one half years’ base salary and annual incentive compensation. Medical benefits and life insurance would be provided at the expense of the Company for the lesser of (i) 30 months or (ii) the number of months remaining until the executive’s 65th birthday. The Company would pay in a single payment an amount equal to the value of the benefit the executive would have accrued under the Company’s pension and 401(k) plans had the executive remained in the employ of the Company for an additional 30 months or until his or her 65th birthday, if earlier. The payments of these amounts are listed as “other payments” in the following tables.

Upon a Change in Control and termination of employment within two years thereafter, all restrictions upon any time-lapse restricted share units would lapse immediately and all such units would become fully vested. An executive officer would become vested in, and restrictions would lapse on, the greater of (i) fifty percent (50%) of any performance-restricted share units or (ii) a pro rata portion of such performance-restricted share units based on the portion of the performance period that has elapsed prior to the date of the change in control.

During any fiscal year in which a Change in Control occurs, each participant in the Annual Incentive Plan (a) whose employment is terminated prior to the end of

such year or (b) who is in the employ of the Company on the last day of such year would be entitled to receive, within 30 days thereafter, a cash payment equal to the greater of (i) his or her target bonus award for such year or (ii) the average of the awards paid or payable to him or her under the AIP for the two most recent fiscal years ended prior thereto. Any amount to be paid to a participant who is not employed for the entire fiscal year would be prorated.

The CIC Agreements provide for “gross-up” payments to cover any federal excise taxes owed on change in control-related severance payments and benefits. In March 2010, the Committee determined that effective for any change in control agreement entered into after January 1, 2011, the provision for “gross-up” payments to cover any federal excise taxes owed on change in control-related severance payments and benefits would be eliminated.

Tables

The following tables display the incremental payments that would be made and the value of equity awards that would vest in the event of termination of employment for the reasons listed. If an NEO is eligible to retire, the amounts listed below for voluntary resignation and retirement are the same. In addition to the amounts in the following tables, the NEOs would be entitled to any vested pension benefits and any vested amounts in deferred compensation accounts that are disclosed above under “Pension Benefits” and “Nonqualified Deferred Compensation.”

Assumptions — Ms. Morrison, Mr. DiSilvestro, Mr. Alexander, Mr. Barroso and Ms. Kaden

The amounts listed for the NEOs named above assume that termination occurred as of August 3, 2014, and use a Company stock price of $41.96, which was the Company’s stock price on August 1, 2014, the last business day of fiscal 2014. The amounts included in equity for these NEOs with respect to performance-based restricted share units assume that the applicable performance goal was attained and the units paid out at 100% of target, except in the event of a change in control, which assumes a payout in accordance with the terms of the CIC Agreements described above. Also included in the equity amount in the event of a change in control are accrued but unpaid dividend equivalents.

Assumptions — Mr. Owens

Mr. Owens retired from the Company as of May 1, 2014. The amounts listed for Mr. Owens were calculated using a Company stock price of $45.20, which was the Company’s closing stock price on May 1, 2014.

Denise M. Morrison


Incremental Benefits and Payments Upon Termination	Voluntary Resignation		Retirement		Involuntary Termination Without Cause		Change-in-Control
Compensation:
— Annual Incentive Plan (AIP) Award		—		—		—		—
— Equity	$	7,951,168	$	7,951,168	$	7,951,168	$	7,094,325
Benefits & Perquisites:
— Health and Welfare Benefits		—		—	$	25,620	$	32,025
Severance:
— Cash		—		—	$	2,100,000	$	6,300,000
— Excise Tax Gross-Up		—		—		—	$	9,483,398
— Other Payments		—		—		—	$	3,627,290

TOTAL:	$	7,951,168	$	7,951,168	$	10,076,788	$	26,537,038

Anthony P. DiSilvestro


Incremental Benefits and Payments Upon Termination	Voluntary Resignation		Retirement		Involuntary Termination Without Cause		Change-in-Control
Compensation:
— Annual Incentive Plan (AIP) Award		—		—		—		—
— Equity	$	1,098,890	$	1,098,890	$	1,098,890	$	987,471
Benefits & Perquisites:
— Health and Welfare Benefits		—		—	$	36,316	$	45,395
Severance:
— Cash		—		—	$	1,120,000	$	2,397,500
— Excise Tax Gross-Up		—		—		—		—
— Other Payments		—		—		—	$	1,013,263

TOTAL:	$	1,098,890	$	1,098,890	$	2,255,206	$	4,443,629

B. Craig Owens


Incremental Benefits and Payments Upon Termination	Voluntary Resignation		Retirement		Involuntary Termination Without Cause		Change-in-Control
Compensation:
— Annual Incentive Plan (AIP) Award		—		—		—		—
— Equity		—	$	3,114,054		—		—
Benefits & Perquisites:
— Health and Welfare Benefits		—		—		—		—
Severance:
— Cash		—		—		—		—
— Excise Tax Gross-Up		—		—		—		—
— Other Payments		—		—		—		—

TOTAL:		—	$	3,114,054		—		—

Mark R. Alexander


Incremental Benefits and Payments Upon Termination	Voluntary Resignation		Retirement		Involuntary Termination Without Cause		Change-in-Control
Compensation:
— Annual Incentive Plan (AIP) Award		—		—		—	$	14,189
— Equity		—		—	$	2,078,279	$	2,174,035
Benefits & Perquisites:
— Health and Welfare Benefits		—		—	$	35,240	$	44,050
Severance:
— Cash		—		—	$	1,251,500	$	3,007,784
— Excise Tax Gross-Up		—		—		—		—
— Other Payments		—		—		—	$	1,190,345

TOTAL:		—		—	$	3,365,019	$	6,430,403

Carlos J. Barroso


Incremental Benefits and Payments Upon Termination	Voluntary Resignation		Retirement		Involuntary Termination Without Cause		Change-in-Control
Compensation:
— Annual Incentive Plan (AIP) Award		—		—		—		—
— Equity		—		—	$	418,971	$	801,710
Benefits & Perquisites:
— Health and Welfare Benefits		—		—	$	35,084	$	43,855
Severance:
— Cash		—		—	$	940,000	$	1,938,750
— Excise Tax Gross-Up		—		—		—		—
— Other Payments		—		—		—	$	192,052

TOTAL:		—		—	$	1,394,055	$	2,976,367

Ellen Oran Kaden


Incremental Benefits and Payments Upon Termination	Voluntary Resignation		Retirement		Involuntary Termination Without Cause		Change-in-Control
Compensation:
— Annual Incentive Plan (AIP) Award		—		—		—	$	43,575
— Equity	$	2,735,708	$	2,735,708	$	2,735,708	$	2,482,405
Benefits & Perquisites:
— Health and Welfare Benefits		—		—	$	29,244	$	31,681
Severance:
— Cash		—		—	$	1,463,700	$	3,659,250
— Excise Tax Gross-Up		—		—		—		—
— Other Payments		—		—		—	$	951,070

TOTAL:	$	2,735,708	$	2,735,708	$	4,228,652	$	7,167,981

Fiscal 2014 Director Compensation


Name (a)	Fees Earned or Paid in Cash ($) (b)		Stock Awards (1) ($) (c)		Option Awards ($) (d)		Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation ($) (e)		Change in Pension Value and Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Earnings ($) (f)		All Other Compensation (2) ($) (g)		Total ($) (h)
Edmund M. Carpenter	$	117,500	$	117,500	$	0	$	0	$	0		—	$	235,000
Paul R. Charron	$	337,500	$	337,500	$	0	$	0	$	0		—	$	675,000
Bennett Dorrance	$	117,500	$	117,500	$	0	$	0	$	0		—	$	235,000
Lawrence C. Karlson	$	115,000	$	115,000	$	0	$	0	$	0		—	$	230,000
Randall W. Larrimore	$	117,500	$	117,500	$	0	$	0	$	0		—	$	235,000
Marc B. Lautenbach	$	65,625	$	65,625	$	0	$	0	$	0		—	$	131,250
Mary Alice D. Malone	$	112,500	$	112,500	$	0	$	0	$	0		—	$	225,000
Sara Mathew	$	122,500	$	122,500	$	0	$	0	$	0		—	$	245,000
Charles R. Perrin	$	112,500	$	112,500	$	0	$	0	$	0		—	$	225,000
A. Barry Rand	$	115,000	$	115,000	$	0	$	0	$	0		—	$	230,000
Nick Shreiber	$	115,000	$	115,000	$	0	$	0	$	0		—	$	230,000
Tracey T. Travis	$	115,000	$	115,000	$	0	$	0	$	0		—	$	230,000
Archbold D. van Beuren	$	115,000	$	115,000	$	0	$	0	$	0		—	$	230,000
Les C. Vinney	$	120,000	$	120,000	$	0	$	0	$	0		—	$	240,000
Charlotte C. Weber	$	112,500	$	112,500	$	0	$	0	$	0		—	$	225,000

(1)

Amounts reported represent the aggregate grant date fair value of shares issued to each director during fiscal 2014, calculated in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718. The assumptions used by the Company in calculating these amounts are included in Note 17 to the Company’s 2014 Form 10-K. Directors who served on the Board on January 1, 2014, were issued shares representing the dollar value of 50% of their board retainer and committee fees based on the closing price on January 7, 2014 of the Company’s common stock on the New York Stock Exchange ($42.87). Mr. Lautenbach was issued shares on July 1, 2014 representing the dollar value of 50% of his pro-rated board retainer based on the closing price on June 30, 2014 of the Company’s common stock on the New York Stock Exchange ($45.81).

(2)	The aggregate perquisites to any individual director did not exceed the SEC reporting threshold amount of $10,000.

The aggregate number of stock options outstanding for each non-employee director as of August 3, 2014, is set forth in the table below. The Company ceased issuing stock options to directors in fiscal 2006. Directors are fully vested in stock awards at the time of grant.


Name	Options(#)
Edmund M. Carpenter		19,656
Paul R. Charron		10,336
Bennett Dorrance		37,029
Lawrence C. Karlson		0
Randall W. Larrimore		19,656
Marc B. Lautenbach		0
Mary Alice D. Malone		19,656
Sara Mathew		10,336
Charles R. Perrin		0
A. Barry Rand		0
Nick Shreiber		0
Tracey T. Travis		0
Archbold D. van Beuren		0
Les C. Vinney		0
Charlotte C. Weber		19,656

Director Equity and Cash Retainers

For fiscal 2014, each non-employee director received an annual unrestricted stock retainer valued at approximately $112,500, and an annual cash retainer of $112,500 for his or her services as a member of the Board. In addition, the members of the Audit Committee received an annual retainer of $5,000, half of which was paid in unrestricted stock and half of which was paid in cash, and the chairman of the Audit Committee received an annual retainer of $20,000, half of which was paid in unrestricted stock and half of which was paid in cash. The chairman of the Compensation and Organization Committee received an annual retainer of $15,000, half of which was paid in unrestricted stock and half of which was paid in cash, and the chairs of the Governance Committee and Finance and Development Committee each received an annual retainer of $10,000, half of which was paid in unrestricted stock and half of which was paid in cash. The non-executive chairman of the Board was paid an additional annual retainer of $450,000, half of which was paid in unrestricted stock and half of which was paid in cash. Directors may elect to receive unrestricted stock in lieu of cash payments.

Deferred Compensation Plans for Non-Employee Directors

Under the Deferred Compensation Plan and the Supplemental Retirement Plan, a non-employee director may elect to defer payment of all or a portion of his or her fees until termination of his or her directorship. Directors participate in the same plans as executives. See pages 40 through 41 for a description of the material terms of the Deferred Compensation Plan and the Supplemental Retirement Plan.

Stock Ownership Requirements

Under the Company’s Corporate Governance Standards, directors are required to own at least 2,000 shares of Campbell stock within one year of election and 6,000 shares within three years of election.

Additional Arrangements

The Company pays for or provides (or reimburses directors for out-of-pocket costs incurred for) transportation, hotel, food and other incidental expenses related to attending Board and committee meetings or participating in director education programs and other director orientation or education meetings. In addition, non-employee directors are eligible to participate in the Company’s charitable matching gift program, pursuant to which the Company will pay, on a one-to-one basis, up to $3,000 per year in contributions to educational and certain other charitable institutions.

Item 2

Ratification of Appointment of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

Your Board of Directors Recommends a Vote “For” This Proposal