Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

SCHEDULE 14A

(RULE 14a-101)

SCHEDULE 14A INFORMATION

Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of the

Securities Exchange Act of 1934

(Amendment No.    )

Filed by the Registrant  ☒                             Filed by a party other than the Registrant  ☐

Check the appropriate box:

FORTIVE CORPORATION

(Name of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter)

(Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if other than the Registrant)

Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box):

Table of Contents

2017

Notice of Annual Meeting

of Shareholders

and Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

FORTIVE CORPORATION

6920 Seaway Blvd

Everett, WA 98203

Notice of 2017 Annual Meeting of Shareholders

When:   June 6, 2017 at 3:00 p.m., local time.   Where:   Fortive Corporation, Headquarters, 6920 Seaway Blvd, Everett, WA 98203		Items of Business:   5 measures to review as listed below		Who Can Vote:   Shareholders of Fortive’s common stock at the close of business on April 10, 2017.		Attending the Meeting:   Shareholders who wish to attend the meeting in person should review the instructions set forth in the attached proxy statement under “Annual Meeting Admission.”   Date of Mailing:   The date of mailing of this Proxy Statement or Notice of Internet Availability is on or about April 19, 2017.

Items of Business:

1. To elect Ms. Kate Mitchell and Mr. Israel Ruiz to serve as Class I Directors, each for a three-year term expiring at the 2020 annual meeting and until their successors are elected and qualified.

2. To ratify the selection of Ernst & Young LLP as Fortive’s independent registered public accounting firm for the year ending December 31, 2017.

3. To approve on an advisory basis Fortive’s named executive officer compensation.

4. To hold an advisory vote relating to the frequency of future shareholder advisory votes on Fortive’s named executive officer compensation.

5. To approve an amendment to Fortive’s Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation to declassify the Board of Directors to provide for the annual election of directors.

6. To consider and act upon such other business as may properly come before the meeting or any adjournment thereof.

YOUR VOTE IS IMPORTANT. PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR PROXY OR VOTING INSTRUCTIONS AT YOUR EARLIEST CONVENIENCE, WHETHER OR NOT YOU PLAN TO ATTEND THE ANNUAL MEETING.

Most shareholders have a choice of voting over the Internet, by telephone or by using a traditional proxy card or voting instruction form. Please refer to the attached proxy materials or the information forwarded by your bank, broker or other holder of record to see which voting methods are available to you.

IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING THE AVAILABILITY OF PROXY MATERIALS FOR THE SHAREHOLDER MEETING TO BE HELD ON JUNE 6, 2017:

The Notice of Internet Availability, Notice of Annual Meeting, Proxy Statement and the Annual Report are available at: http://www.proxyvote.com.

By Order of the Board of Directors,

PETER C. UNDERWOOD

Secretary

April 19, 2017

Table of Contents

2017 Annual Meeting of Shareholders

Notice of Annual Meeting and Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

		2017 Proxy Statement		i

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

To assist you in reviewing the proposals to be acted upon at our 2017 Annual Meeting, below is summary information regarding the meeting contained elsewhere in this Proxy Statement. The following description is only a summary. For more information about these topics, please review the complete Proxy Statement.

2017 Annual Meeting of Shareholders

Separation and Company Overview

On July 2, 2016, we separated from Danaher Corporation (the “Separation”), creating a new market-leading, independent, publicly traded S&P 500 company, enhancing shareholder value, creating new capital deployment opportunities, and heightening strategic focus.

Today we are a diversified industrial growth company encompassing businesses that are recognized leaders in attractive markets. With 2016 revenues of $6.2 billion, our well-known brands hold leading positions in field solutions, transportation technology, sensing, product realization, automation and specialty, and franchise distribution markets. We are headquartered in Everett, Washington and employ a team of more than 24,000 research and development, manufacturing, sales, distribution, service and administrative employees in more than 40 countries around the world.

Items of Business

		2017 Proxy Statement		1

Table of Contents

Proxy Statement Summary

Corporate Governance Highlights

Our Board of Directors recognizes that enhancing and protecting long-term value for our shareholders require a robust framework of corporate governance that serves the best interests of all our shareholders.

In connection with our Board’s dedication to strong corporate governance, our Board has approved the following corporate governance matters following the Separation:

Recent Governance Action

Following are additional highlights of our corporate governance framework:

Table of Contents

Proxy Statement Summary

Executive Compensation Highlights

Overview of Executive Compensation Program

Our executive compensation program consists of four core elements, listed in order of significance, with a bias toward compensation that is dependent on long-term company performance and with compensation that is balanced to mitigate risks appropriately.

		2017 Proxy Statement		3

Table of Contents

Proxy Statement Summary

Compensation Governance Highlights

		Core Executive Compensation Principles Designed to Promote Shareholder Value
		Performance Measures Aligned with Business Objectives
		Pay for Performance
		Limit Perquisites
		Maintain Stock Ownership Requirements (Including Multiple of Five Times Base Salary for the CEO)
		Maintain a Compensation Recoupment Policy
		Maintain Long Vesting Periods for Equity Awards
		Engage an Independent Compensation Consultant
		Monitor for Risk-Taking Incentives
		Require Minimum Vesting Schedule in Stock Incentive Plan

		No Excise Tax Gross-Ups
		No “Single-Trigger” Change-of-Control Severance Benefits
		No “Single-Trigger” Change-of-Control Equity Vesting
		No Pledging of our Common Stock by Executive Officers
		No Hedging Transactions
		No Evergreen Provision in Stock Incentive Plan
		No Repricing of Stock Options
		No Liberal Share Recycling under Stock Incentive Plan
		No Liberal Definition of Change-of-Control
		No Supplemental Defined Benefit Pension
		No Delivery of Payment of Dividends on Unvested Equity Awards

Table of Contents

Fortive Corporation

6920 Seaway Blvd

Everett, WA 98203

2017 Annual Meeting of Shareholders

June 6, 2017

This Proxy Statement is furnished in connection with the solicitation by the Board of Directors (“Board”) of Fortive Corporation, a Delaware corporation (“Fortive”), of proxies for use at the 2017 Annual Meeting of Shareholders (the “Annual Meeting”) to be held at Fortive Corporation, Headquarters, 6920 Seaway Blvd., Everett, WA 98203 at 3:00 p.m., local time, and at any and all postponements or adjournments thereof. Fortive’s principal address is 6920 Seaway Blvd., Everett, WA 98203. The date of mailing of this Proxy Statement is on or about April 19, 2017.

Purpose of the Annual Meeting

The purpose of the meeting is to:

Annual Meeting Admission

Please be prepared to present photo identification for admittance. If you are a shareholder of record or hold your shares through the Fortive Corporation Retirement Savings Plan or the Fortive Corporation Union Retirement Savings Plan (collectively, the “Savings Plans”), your name will be verified against the list of shareholders of record or plan participants on the record date prior to your being admitted to the Annual Meeting. If you are not a shareholder of record or a Savings Plan participant but hold shares through a broker, bank or nominee (i.e., in street name), you should also be prepared to provide proof of beneficial ownership as of the record date, such as a brokerage account statement showing your ownership as of the record date, a copy of the voting instruction card provided by your broker, bank or nominee, or other similar evidence of ownership.

Outstanding Stock and Voting Rights

In accordance with Fortive’s Amended and Restated Bylaws, the Board has fixed the close of business on April 10, 2017 as the record date for determining the shareholders entitled to notice of, and to vote at, the Annual Meeting. Only shareholders of record at the close of business on that date will be entitled to vote. The only outstanding securities of Fortive entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting are shares of Common Stock, $.01 par value (“Common Stock”). Each outstanding share of Common Stock entitles the holder to one vote on each directorship and other matter brought before the Annual Meeting. As of the close of business on April 10, 2017, 346,563,520 shares of Common Stock were outstanding, excluding shares held by or for the account of Fortive.

		2017 Proxy Statement		5

Table of Contents

Proxy Statement

Solicitation of Proxies

The proxies being solicited hereby are being solicited by Fortive’s Board. The total expense of the solicitation will be borne by Fortive, including reimbursement paid to banks, brokerage firms and nominees for their reasonable expenses in forwarding material regarding the Annual Meeting to beneficial owners. Solicitation of proxies may be made personally or by mail, telephone, internet, e-mail or facsimile by officers and other management employees of Fortive, who will receive no additional compensation for their services.

Proxy Instructions

Proxies will be voted as specified in the shareholder’s proxy.

If you sign and submit your proxy card with no further instructions, your shares will be voted:

Notice of Electronic Availability of Proxy Materials

As permitted by the SEC rules, we are making the proxy materials available to our shareholders primarily via the Internet. By doing so, we can reduce the printing and delivery costs and the environmental impact of the Annual Meeting. On April 19, 2017, we mailed a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials (the “Notice”) to our shareholders. The Notice contains instructions on how to access our proxy materials and how to vote online or by telephone. If you would like to receive a paper copy of the proxy materials, please follow the instructions in the Notice.

Voting Requirements With Respect to Each of the Proposals Described in this Proxy Statement

Quorum. The quorum necessary to conduct business at the Annual Meeting consists of a majority of the issued and outstanding shares of Common Stock entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting as of the record date. Abstentions and broker non-votes will be counted as present in determining whether the quorum requirement is satisfied.

Broker Non-Votes. Under New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) rules, if your broker holds your shares in its name and does not receive voting instructions from you, your broker has discretion to vote those shares on Proposal 2, which is considered a “routine” matter. However, on “non-routine” matters such as Proposals 1 and 3-5, your broker must receive voting instructions from you, as it does not have discretionary voting power for these particular items. Therefore, if you are a beneficial owner and do not provide your broker with voting instructions, your shares may constitute broker non-votes with respect to Proposals 1 and 3-5. Broker non-votes will not affect the required vote with respect to Proposals 1 and 3-4. However, because approval of Proposal 5 requires affirmative vote of the holders of 80 percent of the outstanding shares entitled to vote generally in the election of directors on the record date, broker non-votes will have the same effect as a vote against Proposal 5.

Table of Contents

Proxy Statement

Approval Requirements. If a quorum is present, the vote required under the Company’s Amended and Restated Bylaws and the Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation to approve each of the proposals is as follows:

Tabulation of Votes. Our inspector of election, Broadridge Financial Services, will tabulate votes cast by proxy or in person at the meeting. We will report the results in a Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC within four business days of the Annual Meeting.

Voting Methods

If your shares are registered directly in your name with our transfer agent, Computershare Trust Company, N.A., you are considered the registered holder of those shares. As the registered shareholder, you can ensure your shares are voted at the Annual Meeting by submitting your instructions by telephone, over the internet, by completing, signing, dating and returning the enclosed proxy card in the envelope provided, or by attending the Annual Meeting and voting your shares at the meeting. Telephone and internet voting for registered shareholders will be available 24 hours a day, up until 11:59 p.m., Central time on June 5, 2017.

		2017 Proxy Statement		7

Table of Contents

Proxy Statement

Detailed instructions for telephone and internet voting are set forth on the Notice.

If you hold your shares through a broker, bank or nominee, rather than registered directly in your name, you are considered the beneficial owner of shares held in street name, and the proxy materials are being forwarded to you by your broker, bank or nominee, together with a voting instruction form. As the beneficial owner, you are entitled to direct the voting of your shares by your intermediary. Brokers, banks and nominees typically offer telephonic or electronic means by which the beneficial owners of shares held by them can submit voting instructions, in addition to the traditional mailed voting instruction forms.

If you participate in the Fortive Stock Fund through either of the Savings Plans, your proxy will also serve as a voting instruction for Fidelity Management Trust Company (“Fidelity”), the trustee of the Savings Plans, with respect to shares of Common Stock attributable to your Savings Plan account as of the record date. Fidelity will vote your Savings Plan shares as of the record date in the manner directed by you. If Fidelity does not receive voting instructions from you by June 2, 2017, Fidelity will not vote your Savings Plan shares on any of the proposals brought at the Annual Meeting.

Changing Your Vote

Any person giving a proxy pursuant to this solicitation has the power to revoke it at any time before it is voted. It may be revoked by filing with the Secretary of Fortive a written notice of revocation or a duly executed proxy bearing a later date, or it may be revoked by attending the meeting and voting in person. Please note, however, that if your shares are held of record by a broker, bank or nominee and you wish to revoke your proxy or vote at the meeting, you must follow the instructions provided to you by the record holder and/or obtain from the record holder a proxy issued in your name. Attendance at the meeting will not, by itself, revoke a proxy.

Householding

We are permitted to send a single set of our proxy statement and annual report to shareholders who share the same last name and address. This procedure is called “householding” and is intended to reduce our printing and postage costs. We will promptly deliver a separate copy of our annual report and proxy statement to you if you contact us at Fortive Corporation, Attn: Investor Relations, 6920 Seaway Blvd., Everett, WA 98203; telephone us at 425-446-5000; or email us at investors@fortive.com. In addition, if you want to receive separate copies of the proxy statement or annual report in the future; if you and another shareholder sharing an address would like to request delivery of a single copy of the proxy statement or annual report at such address in the future; or if you would like to make a permanent election to receive either printed or electronic copies of the proxy materials and annual report in the future, you may contact us at the same address, telephone number or email address. If you hold your shares through a broker or other intermediary and would like additional copies of our proxy statement or annual report or would like to request householding, please contact your broker or other intermediary.

Table of Contents

Directors and Executive Officers

The following table sets forth as of April 10, 2017 (unless otherwise indicated) the number of shares and percentage of Common Stock beneficially owned by each of Fortive’s directors, nominees for director and each of the executive officers named in the Summary Compensation Table (the “named executive officers”), and all executive officers and directors of Fortive as a group. Except as otherwise indicated and subject to community property laws where applicable, each person or entity included in the table below has sole voting and investment power with respect to the shares beneficially owned by that person or entity. Under applicable SEC rules, the definition of beneficial ownership for purposes of this table includes shares over which a person or entity has sole or shared voting or investment power, whether or not the person or entity has any economic interest in the shares, and also includes shares as to which the person has the right to acquire beneficial ownership within 60 days of April 10, 2017. Except as indicated, the address of each director and executive officer shown in the table below is c/o Fortive Corporation, 6920 Seaway Blvd, Everett, WA 98203.

		2017 Proxy Statement		9

Table of Contents

Beneficial Ownership of Common Stock by Directors, Officers and Principal Shareholders

Principal Shareholders

The following table sets forth the number of shares and percentage of Common Stock beneficially owned by each person who owns of record or is known to Fortive to beneficially own more than five percent of Common Stock.

Table of Contents

All current members of the Board were appointed by Danaher, as Fortive’s then sole shareholder, immediately prior to the Separation.

Pursuant to the Company’s Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation adopted prior to the Separation and prior to the appointment of any of the current directors, the Board was constituted into three classes as follows:

At the Annual Meeting, shareholders will be asked to elect each of the current Class I director nominees identified below (each of whom has been recommended by the Nominating and Governance Committee, nominated by the Board and currently serves as a Class I Director of Fortive) to serve until the 2020 Annual Meeting of Shareholders and until his or her successor is duly elected and qualified.

As discussed in greater detail in Proposal 5, on January 24, 2017, the Board unanimously approved an amendment to Fortive’s Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation to declassify the Board and to provide, after a sunset period, for the annual election of directors, subject to the approval by the shareholders at the Annual Meeting. If Proposal 5 is approved by the requisite vote of the shareholders:

We have set forth below information as of April 10, 2017 relating to each nominee for election as director and each director continuing in office, including: his or her principal occupation and any board memberships at other public companies during the past five years; the other experience, qualifications, attributes or skills that led the Board to conclude that he or she should continue to serve as a director of Fortive; the year in which he or she became a director; and age. Please see “Corporate Governance – Board of Directors and Committees of the Board – Director Nomination Process” for a further discussion of the Board’s process for nominating Board candidates. In the event a nominee declines or is unable to serve, the proxies may be voted in the discretion of the proxy holders for a substitute nominee designated by the Board, or the Board may reduce the number of directors to be elected. We know of no reason why this will occur.

		2017 Proxy Statement		11

Table of Contents

Proposal 1. Election of Directors of Fortive

Class I Director Nominees – Three Year Term That Will Expire in 2020

Kate D. Mitchell has served as a partner and co-founder of Scale Venture Partners, a Silicon Valley-based firm that invests in early-in-revenue technology companies, since 1997. Prior to her current role, Ms. Mitchell served with Bank of America, a multinational banking and financial services corporation, from 1988 to 1996, most recently as Senior Vice President for Bank of America Interactive Banking. Ms. Mitchell currently serves on the boards of directors of SVB Financial Group, Silicon Valley Community Foundation and other private company boards on behalf of Scale Venture Partners.

Israel Ruiz has been the Executive Vice President and Treasurer at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), a private research university of science and technology, since 2011. In this role, Mr. Ruiz oversees all principal administrative and financial functions of MIT. Prior to his current role, Mr. Ruiz served as the Vice President for Finance for MIT from 2007 to 2011 and as a principal for MIT’s Office of Budget and Financial Planning from 2001 to 2007.

Table of Contents

Proposal 1. Election of Directors of Fortive

Current Class II Directors – Directors with Term That Will Expire in 2018

Feroz Dewan has served as the Chief Executive Officer of Arena Holdings Management LLC, an investment holding company, since October 2016. Previously, Mr. Dewan served in a series of positions with Tiger Global Management, an investment firm with approximately $20 billion under management across public and private equity funds, from 2003 to 2015, including most recently as Head of Public Equities. He also served as a Private Equity Associate at Silver Lake Partners, a private equity firm focused on leveraged buyout and growth capital investments in technology, technology-enabled and related industries, from 2002 to 2003.

James A. Lico has served as the Chief Executive Officer and President of Fortive Corporation since the Separation in 2016. From 1996 to 2016, Mr. Lico served in various leadership positions at Danaher Corporation, a global science and technology company, including as Executive Vice President from 2005 to 2016.

		2017 Proxy Statement		13

Table of Contents

Proposal 1. Election of Directors of Fortive

Current Class III Directors – Directors with Term That Will Expire in 2019

Mr. Rales is a co-founder of Danaher Corporation and has served as Chairman of the Executive Committee of Danaher since 1984. He was also President of Danaher from 1984 to 1990. In addition, for more than the past five years, he has been a principal in private and public business entities in the manufacturing area.

Mr. Rales is co-founder of Danaher Corporation and has served as Chairman of the Board of Danaher since 1984. He was also CEO of Danaher from 1984 to 1990. In addition, for more than the past five years, he has been a principal in a private business entity in the area of film production.

Mr. Spoon has served as Partner Emeritus of Polaris Partners, a company that invests in private technology and life science firms, since January 2015. Mr. Spoon has been a partner at Polaris since May 2000, and served as Managing General Partner from 2000 to 2010. In addition to his leadership role at Polaris Partners, Mr. Spoon previously served as president, chief operating officer and chief financial officer of one of the country’s largest, publicly-traded education and media companies, and has served on the boards of numerous public and private companies.

Table of Contents

Corporate Governance Overview

Our Board of Directors recognizes that enhancing and protecting long-term value for our shareholders require a robust framework of corporate governance that serves the best interests of all our shareholders.

In connection with our Board’s dedication to strong corporate governance, our Board has approved the following corporate governance matters following the Separation:

Recent Governance Action

Following are additional highlights of our corporate governance framework:

Corporate Governance Guidelines, Committee Charters and Standards of Conduct

As part of its ongoing commitment to good corporate governance, our Board of Directors has codified its corporate governance practices into a set of Corporate Governance Guidelines and adopted written charters for each of the Audit Committee, the Compensation Committee, the Nominating and Governance Committee, and the Finance Committee of the Board. The Board of Directors has also adopted for the Company our Standards of Conduct that includes, among others, a code of business conduct and ethics for directors, officers (including our principal executive officer, principal financial officer and principal accounting officer) and employees. The Corporate Governance Guidelines, Audit Committee Charter, Compensation Committee Charter, Nominating and Governance Committee Charter, and Standards of Conduct referenced

above are each available in the “Investor – Corporate Governance” section of our website at http://www.fortive.com.

		2017 Proxy Statement		15

Table of Contents

Corporate Governance

Board Leadership Structure and Risk Oversight

Board Leadership Structure. The Board has separated the positions of Chairman and CEO because it believes that the separation of the positions best enables the Board to ensure that our businesses, risks, opportunities and affairs are managed effectively and in the best interests of our shareholders.

The entire Board selects its Chairman, and our Board has selected Alan G. Spoon, an independent director, as its Chairman, in light of Mr. Spoon’s independence and his deep experience and knowledge with corporate governance, board management, shareholder engagement, risk management and Fortive’s diverse businesses and industries.

As the independent Chairman of the Board, Mr. Spoon leads the activities of the Board, including:

In the event that the Chairman of the Board is not an independent director, the Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that the independent directors, upon recommendation from the Nominating and Governance Committee, will select by majority vote an independent director to serve as the Lead Independent Director with the authority to:

The Board’s non-management directors meet in executive session following the Board’s regularly-scheduled meetings, with the executive sessions chaired by the independent Chairman. In addition, the independent directors meet as a group in executive session at least once a year.

Risk Oversight. The Board’s role in risk oversight at the Company is consistent with the Company’s leadership structure, with management having day-to-day responsibility for assessing and managing the Company’s risk exposure and the Board and its committees overseeing those efforts, with particular emphasis on the most significant risks facing the Company.

Table of Contents

Corporate Governance

Board of Directors

The Board oversees the Company’s risk management processes directly and through its committees. In general, the Board oversees the management of risks inherent in the operation of the Company’s businesses, the implementation of its strategic plan, its acquisition and capital allocation program, its capital structure and liquidity and its organizational structure, and also oversees the Company’s risk assessment and risk management policies.

Committees

Each committee reports to the full Board on a regular basis, including as appropriate with respect to the committee’s risk oversight activities. In addition, since risk issues often overlap, committees from time to time request that the full Board discuss particular risks. On an annual basis, the Company’s Risk Committee (consisting of members of senior management) inventories, assesses and prioritizes the most significant risks facing the Company as well as related mitigation efforts, provides a report to the Board and provides a report of the process to the Audit Committee.

In determining to separate the position of the CEO and the Chairman, and in determining the appointment of the Chairman of the Board and the Chairs of the Committees, the Board and the Nominating and Governance Committee considered the implementation of a governance structure and appointment of chairpersons with appropriate and relevant risk management experience that would enable Fortive to efficiently and effectively assess and oversee its risks.

Director Independence

At least a majority of the Board must qualify as independent within the meaning of the listing standards of the NYSE. The Board has affirmatively determined that other than Messrs. James A. Lico, Steven Rales and Mitchell Rales, all of the remaining members of the Board, consisting of Ms. Kate D. Mitchell and Messrs. Feroz Dewan, Israel Ruiz and Alan G. Spoon, are independent within the meaning of the listing standards of the NYSE.

Board of Directors and Committees of the Board

Director Attendance. After the Separation, the Board met four times, and acted by unanimous written consent one time, during 2016. All directors attended at least 75% of the aggregate of the total number of meetings of the Board and of all committees of the Board on which they served (during the period they so served) during 2016. The Board expects, as a general matter, that its members will attend the Annual Meeting.

		2017 Proxy Statement		17

Table of Contents

Corporate Governance

Committee Membership. The membership of each of the Audit, Compensation, Nominating and Governance and Finance committees as of April 10, 2017 is set forth below.

Audit Committee. After the Separation, the Audit Committee met four times, and acted by unanimous written consent one time, during 2016. The Audit Committee is responsible for:

The Audit Committee relies on the expertise and knowledge of management, the internal auditor, and the independent auditor in carrying out its oversight responsibilities. Management is responsible for the preparation, presentation, and integrity of Fortive’s financial statements, accounting and financial reporting principles, internal control over financial reporting, and disclosure controls and procedures designed to ensure compliance with accounting standards, applicable laws, and regulations. Management is also responsible for objectively reviewing and evaluating the adequacy, effectiveness, and quality of Fortive’s system of internal control over financial reporting. Fortive’s independent auditor, Ernst & Young LLP, is responsible for performing an independent audit of Fortive’s financial statements and expressing an opinion on the conformity of those financial statements with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States.

The Audit Committee also prepares a report as required by the SEC to be included in this proxy statement. The Audit Committee typically meets in executive session, without the presence of management, at each regularly scheduled meeting, and reports to the Board on its actions and recommendations at each regularly scheduled Board meeting.

The Board has determined that each member of the Audit Committee is:

Table of Contents

Corporate Governance

Furthermore, as of the date of this proxy statement, no Audit Committee member serves on the audit committee of more than three public companies.

Compensation Committee. After the Separation, the Compensation Committee met three times, and acted by unanimous written consent two times, during 2016. The Compensation Committee is responsible for:

The Chair of the Compensation Committee works with our Senior Vice President-Human Resources and our Corporate Secretary to schedule the Compensation Committee’s meetings and set the agenda for each meeting. Our Senior Vice President-Human Resources, Vice President-Compensation, Corporate Secretary, and Vice President-Associate General Counsel and Assistant Secretary generally attend, and from time-to-time our CEO and CFO attend, the Compensation Committee meetings and support the Compensation Committee in preparing meeting materials and taking meeting minutes. In particular, our CEO provides background regarding the interrelationship between our business objectives and executive compensation matters and advises on the alignment of incentive plan performance measures with our overall strategy; participates in the Compensation Committee’s discussions regarding the performance and compensation of the other executive officers; and provides recommendations to the Compensation Committee regarding all significant elements of compensation paid to such other executive officers, their annual, personal performance objectives and his evaluation of their performance. The Compensation Committee typically meets in executive session, without the presence of management, at each regularly scheduled meeting, and reports to the Board on its actions and recommendation at each regularly scheduled Board meeting.

Independent Compensation Consultant. Under the terms of its charter, the Compensation Committee has the authority to engage the services of outside advisors and experts to assist the Compensation Committee. Following the Separation and following the assessment and determination of Frederic W. Cook & Co, Inc.’s (“F.W. Cook”) independence from Fortive’s management, the Compensation Committee engaged F.W. Cook as the Compensation Committee’s independent compensation consultant. The Compensation Committee has the sole discretion and authority to select, retain and terminate F.W. Cook as well as to approve any fees, terms and other conditions of its service. F.W. Cook reports directly to the Compensation Committee and takes its direction solely from the Compensation Committee. F.W. Cook’s primary responsibilities in 2016 following the Separation were to provide advice and data in connection with the selection of Fortive’s peer group for assessing executive compensation, the structuring of the executive compensation programs, the compensation levels for Fortive’s executive officers, and the compensation levels for the Company’s directors; assess the Company’s executive compensation program in the context of market practice and corporate governance best practices;

		2017 Proxy Statement		19

Table of Contents

Corporate Governance

and advise the Compensation Committee regarding Fortive’s proposed executive compensation public disclosures. In the course of discharging its responsibilities, F.W. Cook may from time to time and with the Compensation Committee’s consent, request from management certain information regarding compensation amounts and practices, the interrelationship between our business objectives and executive compensation matters, the nature of our executive officer responsibilities and other business information. F.W. Cook does not provide any services to Fortive or its management, and the Compensation Committee is not aware of any work performed by F.W. Cook that raises any conflicts of interest.

Each member of the Compensation Committee is:

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation. During 2016, none of the members of the Compensation Committee was an officer or employee of Fortive. No executive officer of Fortive served on the compensation committee (or other board committee performing equivalent functions) or on the board of directors of any entity having an executive officer who served on the Compensation Committee.

Nominating and Governance Committee. After the Separation, the Nominating and Governance Committee met one time in 2016. The Nominating and Governance Committee is responsible for:

The Board has determined that each member of the Nominating and Governance Committee is independent within the meaning of the NYSE listing standards.

The Nominating and Governance Committee typically meets in executive session, without the presence of management, at each regularly scheduled meeting, and reports to the Board on its actions and recommendations at each regularly scheduled Board meeting.

Finance Committee. The Finance Committee assists the Board in assessing and approving business acquisitions, investments and divestitures.

Director Nomination Process

The Nominating and Governance Committee recommends to the Board director candidates for nomination and election at the annual shareholders meeting and, in the event of vacancies between annual shareholder meetings, for appointment to fill such

Table of Contents

Corporate Governance

vacancies. All of the current directors were originally identified, nominated and elected by Danaher prior to the Separation.

Board Membership Criteria. In assessing the candidates for recommendation to the Board as director nominees, the Nominating and Governance Committee will evaluate such candidates against the standards and qualifications set out in our Corporate Governance Guidelines, including:

The Nominating and Governance Committee annually reviews with the Board the skills, knowledge, experience, background and attributes required of Board nominees, considering current Board composition and the Company’s circumstances. In making its recommendations to our Board, the Nominating and Governance Committee considers the required standards and qualifications noted above, as well as, among others, the following skills, knowledge, experience, background and attributes:

The Nominating and Governance Committee takes into account a candidate’s ability to contribute to the diversity of perspective and analysis from the Board and, as such, believes it is important to consider attributes such as race, ethnicity, gender, age, education, cultural experience, and professional experience in evaluating candidates who may be able to contribute to the diverse perspective and practical insight of the Board as a whole. Although diversity is an important factor in assessing candidates as director nominees, neither the Board nor the Nominating and Governance Committee has a formal diversity policy. Furthermore, the Board does not make any particular weighting of diversity or any other characteristic in evaluating nominees and directors.

Shareholder Recommendations. Shareholders may recommend a director nominee to the Nominating and Governance Committee. A shareholder who wishes to recommend a prospective nominee for the Board should notify the Nominating and Governance Committee in writing using the procedures described below under “—Communications with the Board of Directors” with whatever supporting material the shareholder considers appropriate. If a prospective nominee has been identified other than in connection with a director search process initiated by the Nominating and Governance Committee, the Nominating and Governance Committee makes an initial determination as to whether to conduct a full evaluation of the

		2017 Proxy Statement		21

Table of Contents

Corporate Governance

candidate. The Nominating and Governance Committee’s determination of whether to conduct a full evaluation is based primarily on the Nominating and Governance Committee’s view as to whether a new or additional Board member is necessary or appropriate at such time, and the likelihood that the prospective nominee can satisfy the evaluation factors described above under “—Board Membership Criteria” and any such other factors as the Nominating and Governance Committee may deem appropriate. The Nominating and Governance Committee takes into account whatever information is provided to the Nominating and Governance Committee with the recommendation of the prospective candidate and any additional inquiries the Nominating and Governance Committee may in its discretion conduct or have conducted with respect to such prospective nominee.

Proxy Access. Pursuant to the proxy access provisions in Section 2.12 of our Amended and Restated Bylaws adopted by the Board following the Separation, a shareholder, or group of up to 20 shareholders, owing 3% or more of Fortive’s outstanding shares of common stock continuously for at least three years may nominate and include in our proxy materials directors constituting up to 20% of the Board. With respect to the 2018 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, the nomination notice and other materials required by these provisions must be delivered or mailed to and received by Fortive’s Secretary in writing between November 20, 2017 and December 20, 2017 (or, if the 2018 Annual Meeting of Shareholders is called for a date that is not within 30 calendar days of the anniversary of the date of the Annual Meeting, by the later of the close of business on the date that is 120 days prior to the date of the 2018 Annual Meeting of Shareholders or within 10 days after the public announcement of the date of the 2018 Annual Meeting of Shareholders) at the following address: Fortive Corporation, Attn: Secretary, 6920 Seaway Blvd., Everett, WA 98203. When submitting nominees for inclusion in the proxy materials pursuant to the proxy access provisions, shareholders must follow the notice procedures and provide the information required by our Amended and Restated Bylaws. Our Amended and Restated Bylaws are available at “Investor—Corporate Governance” section of our corporate website, http://www.fortive.com.

Majority Voting for Directors. Our Amended and Restated Bylaws provide for majority voting in uncontested director elections, and our Board has adopted a director resignation policy. Under the policy, our Board will not appoint or nominate for election to the Board any person who has not tendered in advance an irrevocable resignation effective in such circumstances where the individual does not receive a majority of the votes cast in an uncontested election and such resignation is accepted by the Board. If an incumbent director is not elected by a majority of the votes cast in an uncontested election, our Nominating and Governance Committee will submit for prompt consideration by the Board a recommendation whether to accept or reject the director’s resignation. The Board expects the director whose resignation is under consideration to abstain from participating in any decision regarding that resignation.

At any meeting of shareholders for which Fortive’s Secretary receives a notice that a shareholder has nominated a person for election to the Board in compliance with our Amended and Restated Bylaws and such nomination has not been withdrawn on or before the tenth day before we first mail our notice of meeting to our shareholders, the directors will be elected by a plurality of the votes cast (which means that the nominees who receive the most affirmative votes would be elected to serve as directors).

Communications with the Board of Directors. Shareholders and other parties interested in communicating directly with the Board or with individual directors, the independent Chairman of the Board or, if the Chairman is not independent, the Lead Independent Director, or the non-management directors as a group may do so by addressing communications to the Board of Directors, to the specified individual director or to the non-management directors, as applicable, c/o Corporate Secretary, Fortive Corporation, 6920 Seaway Blvd, Everett, WA 98203.

Table of Contents

Policy

Under our Related Person Transactions Policy adopted by the Board, the Nominating and Governance Committee of the Board is required to review and, if appropriate, approve all related person transactions prior to consummation whenever practicable. If advance approval of a related person transaction is not practicable under the circumstances or if our management becomes aware of a related person transaction that has not been previously approved or ratified, the transaction is submitted to the Nominating and Governance Committee at its next meeting. The Nominating and Governance Committee is required to review and consider all relevant information available to it about each related person transaction, and a transaction is considered approved or ratified under the policy if the Nominating and Governance Committee authorizes it according to the terms of the policy after full disclosure of the related person’s interests in the transaction. Related person transactions of an ongoing nature are reviewed annually by the Nominating and Governance Committee. The definition of “related person transactions” for purposes of the policy covers the transactions that are required to be disclosed under Item 404(a) of Regulation S-K promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act.

Relationships and Transactions

On July 2, 2016, we completed the Separation of Fortive from Danaher. In connection with the Separation, our subsidiaries that currently operate our businesses and the corresponding assets and liabilities were transferred to Fortive, which, prior to such transfer, were held by Danaher. Following the Separation, Danaher and Fortive operate as separate publicly-traded companies and neither entity has any ownership interest in the other. However, two of our directors, Messrs. Steven M. Rales and Mitchell P. Rales, collectively own more than 10% of the equity of Danaher. Furthermore Messrs. Rales and Rales are executive officers of Danaher. In connection with the Separation, Danaher and Fortive entered into various agreements to effect the Separation and provide a framework for their relationship after the Separation, including an employee matters agreement, a tax matters agreement, an intellectual property matters agreement, a license agreement with respect to the Danaher Business System, or DBS (a proprietary set of business processes and methodologies that are designed to continuously improve business performance) and a transition services agreement. These agreements provide for the allocation between Danaher and Fortive of assets, employees, liabilities and obligations (including investments, property and employee benefits and tax-related assets and liabilities) attributable to periods prior to, at and after the Separation and govern certain relationships between Danaher and Fortive after the Separation. In addition, following the Separation, certain of our subsidiaries sell products and services to, or purchase products and services from, Danaher from time to time in the ordinary course of business and on an arms’-length basis. Following the Separation in 2016, Danaher billed approximately $13 million for transition services provided to Fortive and paid approximately $75,000 for transition services received from Fortive. In addition, our subsidiaries purchased approximately $10 million of products and services from, and sold approximately $11 million of products and services to, Danaher, which in each case is less than 0.3% of Fortive’s, and of Danaher’s, revenues for 2016. Our subsidiaries intend to sell products to and purchase products from Danaher in the future in the ordinary course of their businesses and on an arms’-length basis.

In addition, Messrs. Steven Rales and Mitchell Rales collectively own more than 10% of the equity of Colfax Corporation, a publicly traded company. Certain of our subsidiaries sell products to Colfax from time to time in the ordinary course of business and on an arms’-length basis. In 2016, following the Separation and following the transfer of such subsidiaries from Danaher to Fortive, our subsidiaries sold approximately $0.1 million of products to Colfax, which is less than 0.003% of Colfax’s, and of Fortive’s, revenues for 2016. Our subsidiaries intend to sell products to Colfax in the future in the ordinary course of their businesses and on an arms’-length basis.

		2017 Proxy Statement		23

Table of Contents

Summary of Director Compensation

Each of our non-management directors receives the following compensation:

In addition, the Board chair receives an annual cash retainer of $92,500 and an annual equity award with a target value of $92,500 (divided equally between options and RSUs, as described above), the chair of the Audit Committee receives an annual cash retainer of $20,000 and the chair of each of the Compensation Committee and Nominating and Governance Committee receives an annual cash retainer of $15,000, with all cash retainers paid in four, equal installments following each quarter of service.

Our Board has also adopted stock ownership requirements for non-management directors. Under the requirements, each non-management director (within five years of his or her initial election or appointment) is required to beneficially own shares of our common stock with a market value of at least five times his or her annual cash retainer. Once a director has acquired a number of shares that satisfies such ownership multiple, such number of shares then becomes such director’s minimum ownership requirement (even if his or her retainer increases or the fair market value of such shares subsequently declines). Under the policy, beneficial ownership includes RSUs and restricted shares held by the director and shares in which the director or his or her spouse or child has a direct or indirect interest, but does not include shares subject to unexercised stock options. In addition, our Board has adopted a policy that prohibits any director or executive officer from pledging as security under any obligation any shares of our common stock that he or she directly or indirectly owns and controls (other than shares that were issued in the Separation as a dividend on shares of Danaher common stock that were already pledged as of February 21, 2013), and provides that pledged shares of our common stock do not count toward our stock ownership requirements. We have also adopted a policy that prohibits our directors and employees from engaging in any transactions involving a derivative of our securities, including hedging transactions.

Table of Contents

Director Compensation

Director Summary Compensation Table

The table below summarizes the compensation paid to the non-management directors for the year ended December 31, 2016. Mr. Lico is a member of the Board but does not receive any additional compensation for services provided as a director.

		2017 Proxy Statement		25

Table of Contents

The Audit Committee on behalf of the Company has selected Ernst & Young LLP, an international accounting firm of independent certified public accountants, to act as the independent registered public accounting firm for the Company and its consolidated subsidiaries for the year ending December 31, 2017. Representatives of Ernst & Young LLP are expected to be present at the Annual Meeting, will have the opportunity to make a statement if they desire to do so and will be available to respond to appropriate questions. Although shareholder approval of the selection of Ernst & Young LLP is not required by law, the Board of Directors believes that it is advisable to give our shareholders an opportunity to ratify this selection. If this proposal is not approved by our shareholders at the Annual Meeting, the Audit Committee will reconsider its selection of Ernst & Young LLP. Even if the selection of Ernst & Young LLP is ratified, the Audit Committee in its discretion may select a different independent registered public accounting firm at any time during the year if it determines that such a change would be in the best interests of the Company and our shareholders.

Fees Paid to Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

Concurrently with the Separation, the Audit Committee selected Ernst & Young LLP to act as the independent registered public accounting firm for the Company and its consolidated subsidiaries for the year ended December 31, 2016. Aggregate fees for professional services rendered by our independent registered public accounting firm, Ernst & Young LLP, for 2016 following the Separation are set forth in the table below. For the year ended December 31, 2015, we did not pay any fees for professional services to Ernst & Young LLP. Prior to the Separation, Danaher Corporation paid any audit, audit related, tax or other fees related to the Company’s businesses.

Table of Contents

Proposal 2. Ratification of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

Audit Committee Pre-Approval of Audit and Permissible Non-Audit Services of Independent Auditors

Under its charter, the Audit Committee must pre-approve all auditing services and permitted non-audit services to be performed for the Company and its consolidated subsidiaries by our independent registered public accounting firm. To assure that the audit and non-audit services performed by the independent registered public accounting firm do not impair its independence, the Audit Committee establishes on an annual basis the Pre-Approval Policy of the Audit Committee (the “Policy”). The Policy outlines the scope of services that Ernst & Young LLP may provide to the Company. The Policy sets forth guidelines and procedures the Company must follow when retaining Ernst & Young LLP to perform audit, audit-related, tax and other services. The Policy also specifies certain non-audit services that may not be performed by Ernst & Young LLP under any circumstances. Pursuant to the Policy, the Audit Committee approves services to be provided by Ernst & Young LLP and fee thresholds within each of the service categories, and services within these thresholds are deemed pre-approved. Additional services and fees materially exceeding those thresholds require further pre-approval. Requests for specific pre-approvals may be considered by the full Audit Committee. In addition, the Audit Committee has delegated to the Chair the authority to grant specific pre-approvals. Any such pre-approvals are reported to the full Audit Committee at its next meeting. The Policy is evaluated and updated annually by the Audit Committee.

		2017 Proxy Statement		27

Table of Contents

This report is not deemed to be “soliciting material” or to be “filed” with the SEC or subject to the SEC’s proxy rules or to the liabilities of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any prior or subsequent filing by Fortive Corporation under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, except to the extent Fortive Corporation specifically incorporates this report by reference therein.

The Audit Committee has been appointed by the Board of Directors to assist the Board of Directors in the oversight of (i) the integrity of the Company’s financial statements, (ii) the Company’s compliance with legal and regulatory requirements, (iii) the qualifications and independence of the Company’s independent auditor, and (iv) the performance of the Company’s internal audit function and independent auditors.

Management is responsible for the financial reporting process, including its internal control over financial reporting, and for the preparation of its consolidated and combined financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“GAAP”). The Company’s independent registered public accounting firm is responsible for performing an independent audit of the consolidated and combined financial statements, and expressing opinions on the conformity of the financial statements with GAAP.

The Audit Committee is directly responsible for the appointment, compensation, retention and oversight of the independent registered public accounting firm retained to audit the Company’s financial statements. Concurrently with the Separation, the Audit Committee appointed Ernst & Young LLP as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for fiscal year 2016.

The Audit Committee has reviewed and discussed with the Company’s management the audited consolidated and combined financial statements of the Company contained in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for year ended December 31, 2016. The Audit Committee has also discussed with Ernst & Young LLP the matters required to be discussed by AS 1301, Communications with Audit Committees.

The Audit Committee has received and reviewed the written disclosures and the letter from Ernst & Young LLP required by applicable requirements of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board regarding the independent accounting firm’s communications with the Audit Committee concerning independence, and has discussed with Ernst & Young LLP its independence.

Based on the review and discussions referred to above, the Audit Committee recommended to the Board of Directors that the audited consolidated and combined financial statements for the Company for the year ended December 31, 2016 be included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for its fiscal year 2016 for filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Audit Committee of the Board of Directors

Israel Ruiz (Chair)

Feroz Dewan

Kate D. Mitchell

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

		2017 Proxy Statement		29

Table of Contents

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

This Compensation Discussion and Analysis (“CD&A”) describes our executive compensation philosophy and the pay programs provided to our named executive officers (“NEOs”) for 2016.

Executive Summary

Introduction

On July 2, 2016, we completed our Separation from Danaher Corporation (“Danaher”) and our launch as an independent, publicly-traded, S&P 500 company.

Other than with respect to the compensation of Mr. Lico, our President and Chief Executive Officer, the total compensation arrangements for our NEOs (such NEOs other than Mr. Lico, the “Other NEOs”) in 2016 were established in accordance with Danaher’s policies by Danaher and its Compensation Committee in anticipation of the Separation and the roles to be assumed by such Other NEOs following the Separation.

In order to provide a view of NEO compensation for all of 2016, this CD&A and the corresponding compensation tables and narrative include information regarding compensation paid to the NEOs and decisions made by Danaher prior to the Separation.

Following the Separation, our Compensation Committee has been responsible for determining our compensation programs and policies for our executive officers and approving the compensation levels applicable to them. In such capacity, our Compensation Committee:

Named Executive Officers (“NEOs”)

This CD&A addresses the compensation of the following executive officers, who are our NEOs for 2016:

President and Chief Executive Officer

Senior Vice President—Chief Financial Officer

Senior Vice President

Senior Vice President

Senior Vice President—General Counsel and Secretary

Company Overview

We are a diversified industrial growth company encompassing businesses that are recognized leaders in attractive markets. With 2016 revenues of $6.2 billion, our well-known brands hold leading positions in field solutions, transportation technology, sensing, product realization, automation and specialty, and franchise distribution markets. We are headquartered in Everett, Washington and employ a team of more than 24,000 research and development, manufacturing, sales, distribution, service and administrative employees in more than 40 countries around the world. With a culture rooted in continuous improvement, the core of our operating model is the Fortive Business System.

Table of Contents

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

In 2016, we separated from Danaher, creating a new market-leading, independent, publicly-traded, S&P 500 company, enhancing shareholder value, creating new capital deployment opportunities, and heightening strategic focus without disruptions to customers or employees. In addition, following the Separation, we completed two strategic acquisitions.

Shared Purpose and Values

We define our Shared Purpose as Essential Technology for the People Who Accelerate Progress. Our core strategy, including the way we define our compensation philosophy, is driven by our Shared Purpose and the following foundational Values:

Our compensation program is designed with the goal of translating our Shared Purpose and Values into action.

How We Pay Our Executives

Consistent with our Shared Purpose and our Values, our Compensation Committee adopted a compensation program that combines annual and long-term components, cash and equity, and fixed and variable payments, with a bias toward compensation that is dependent on long-term company performance and with a corresponding emphasis on equity-based compensation. Our 2016 compensation program, including compensation established by Danaher prior to the Separation and compensation established by our Compensation Committee after the Separation, is summarized below:

In addition to the primary compensation elements described above, we also provided our executives with limited compensation under other compensation arrangements, which are described in pages 46—48 of this proxy statement.

		2017 Proxy Statement		31

Table of Contents

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

Allocation of Our 2016 Executive Pay

The following pie charts show our emphasis on long-term and performance-based compensation in our reported 2016 compensation for our CEO and our Other NEOs:

Our Leading Pay Practices

		Core Executive Compensation Principles Designed to Promote Shareholder Value
		Performance Measures Aligned with Business Objectives
		Pay for Performance
		Limit Perquisites
		Maintain Stock Ownership Requirements (Including Multiple of Five Times Base Salary for the CEO)
		Maintain a Compensation Recoupment Policy
		Maintain Long Vesting for Equity Awards
		Engage an Independent Compensation Consultant
		Monitor for Risk-Taking Incentives
		Require Minimum Vesting Schedule in Stock Incentive Plan

		No Excise Tax Gross-Ups
		No “Single-Trigger” Change-of-Control Severance Benefits
		No “Single-Trigger” Change-of-Control Equity Vesting
		No Pledging of our Common Stock by Executive Officers
		No Hedging Transactions
		No Evergreen Provision in Stock Incentive Plan
		No Repricing of Stock Options
		No Liberal Share Recycling under Stock Incentive Plan
		No Liberal Definition of Change-of-Control
		No Supplemental Defined Benefit Pension (SERP)
		No Delivery of Payment of Dividends on Unvested Equity Awards

Table of Contents

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

Overview

Prior to our Separation, we were a wholly-owned subsidiary of Danaher, and all compensation paid to our NEOs was provided by Danaher and determined in accordance with policies and practices developed by Danaher. To provide a full-year view of our NEOs’ compensation during 2016, our disclosure includes information regarding compensation paid to the NEOs and compensation decisions made by Danaher prior to the Separation, as well as compensation we paid and decisions we made for 2016 after the Separation.

2016 Executive Compensation Decision-Making and Oversight

Pre-Separation Decisions and Oversight

Because we were an independent organization for only a portion of the year, many of the decisions impacting 2016 compensation were made by Danaher and were grounded in Danaher’s compensation philosophies and policies.

Mr. Lico was an executive officer of Danaher prior to the Separation and, as such, his annual compensation prior to Separation was determined and approved by the Danaher Compensation Committee in his role as an executive officer of Danaher.

Our Other NEOs were employed by Danaher prior to the Separation, but none of the Other NEOs were executive officers of Danaher. Prior to the Separation, Danaher’s management and the Danaher Compensation Committee developed compensation packages, including base salaries, target incentives and annual equity grant values, for our Other NEOs in anticipation of their respective roles with Fortive following the Separation. The compensation packages were based on a comprehensive market analysis of the anticipated roles and responsibilities with Fortive upon Separation and were approved prior to the Separation by the Danaher Compensation Committee in accordance with Danaher policies and practices.

Prior to the Separation, Danaher engaged Frederic W. Cook & Co. (“FW Cook”) to provide consulting services in connection with certain executive compensation matters related to the Separation.

Post-Separation Decisions and Oversight

The allocation of responsibilities for executive compensation decisions following the Separation is summarized in the table below:

Following the Separation, our Compensation Committee engaged FW Cook directly as its independent compensation consultant. Our Compensation Committee assessed the independence of FW Cook in accordance with the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) Listing Standards and applicable SEC regulations and concluded that FW Cook’s work does not raise any conflict of interest.

		2017 Proxy Statement		33

Table of Contents

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

Shared Purpose and Values

Our core strategy, including the way we define our compensation philosophy, is driven by the following Shared Purpose and Values:

		•  We seek out talented, curious people with a passion for continuous improvement.   •  We apply creativity and rigor to breakthrough products, services and processes.   •  Kaizen, or continuous improvement, is the foundation of our culture and fuels our passion for finding a better way.   •  We build our businesses to attract and retain long-term shareholders and employees.

Our compensation program is designed with the goal of translating our Shared Purpose and Values into action.

Analysis of 2016 Executive Compensation

Our 2016 executive compensation program—both before and after the Separation—consisted of four core elements, listed in order of significance.

Table of Contents

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

Long-Term Incentive Awards

Target LTI Mix

Equity data reflects annual grant guideline and

excludes new hire/founders awards

Pre-Separation Equity Awards

In February 2016 and in anticipation of the Separation, the Danaher Compensation Committee determined the target dollar value of equity compensation to be delivered to each of our NEOs who was then employed by Danaher and granted (i) annual equity awards and (ii) other than with respect to Messrs. Lico or Underwood, non-recurring “Founders Grants” to each NEO. The Danaher Compensation Committee took into account that the ultimate, realized value of each award would depend substantially on, prior to the Separation, Danaher’s and, following the Separation, Fortive’s long-term performance as well as each of the following factors (none of which was assigned a particular weight by the Danaher Compensation Committee):

The Danaher Compensation Committee did not make a Founders Grant to Mr. Lico, instead deferring such decision to our Compensation Committee in the context of determining his overall compensation arrangement in his capacity as our President and CEO following the Separation.

Mr. Underwood was not employed by Danaher or by us at the time the 2016 annual equity awards were granted, and he, therefore, did not receive a Founders Grant. In order to recognize Mr. Underwood’s expected contributions to the Company and to recognize the compensation Mr. Underwood forfeited by separating from his prior employer to join the Company, the Danaher Compensation Committee awarded Mr. Underwood a non-recurring, new-hire grant prior to the Separation consisting of time-based RSUs and options as well as an annual equity award.

		2017 Proxy Statement		35

Table of Contents

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

The 2016 annual equity awards to our NEOs by Danaher prior to the Separation consisted of the following:

For Mr. Lico’s award of PSUs, the Danaher Compensation Committee translated the target dollar value for the PSUs into a target number of PSUs, established threshold, target and maximum performance levels and established a payout percentage curve that relates each level of performance to a payout expressed as a percentage of the target PSUs as follows:

The payout percentages for performance between threshold and target, or between target and maximum, respectively, would be determined by linear interpolation. Notwithstanding the above, if Danaher’s absolute TSR performance for the period were negative, a maximum of 100% of the target PSUs would vest (regardless of how strong Danaher’s performance was on a relative basis), and if Danaher’s absolute TSR performance for the period were positive a minimum of 25% of the target PSUs would vest.

Any PSUs that vest following the three-year performance period would be subject to an additional two-year holding period and paid out in shares of Danaher common stock following the fifth anniversary of the commencement of the performance period.

Consistent with Danaher’s equity grant practices corresponding to their positions at Danaher prior to the Separation, Mr. Gafinowitz’s and Ms. Hulit’s performance-based RSUs require four consecutive quarters of positive net income as a performance condition to vesting.

Treatment of Equity-Based Compensation Awards upon the Separation

In connection with the Separation, all Danaher equity awards held by our NEOs were adjusted using the following principles:

Table of Contents

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

The following table provides additional information regarding the adjustments that were made to each type of outstanding Danaher equity award.

Instead of being converted into Fortive RSUs and PSUs, the Danaher Performance-Based RSUs and PSUs for which the respective performance period had not concluded at the time of the Separation were cancelled and replaced with restricted shares of our common stock of comparable value and with continued performance requirement for purposes of qualifying the awards as performance-based compensation under Internal Revenue Code Section 162(m). The performance measures for the restricted shares issued by us as replacement for Danaher Performance-Based RSUs were met as of December 31, 2016 as certified by our Compensation Committee on February 23, 2017. However, such awards are still subject to time-vesting requirements.

At the time of the Separation, Mr. Lico had outstanding awards of stock options, time-based RSUs, performance-based RSUs and PSUs. Our Other NEOs had outstanding awards of stock options, time-based RSUs and, with respect to Mr. Gafinowitz and Ms. Hulit, performance-based RSUs. The number of shares subject to awards shown in the table below titled “Outstanding Equity Awards at 2016 Fiscal Year-End” reflects the adjustments described in the table above.

		2017 Proxy Statement		37

Table of Contents

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

Post-Separation Equity Awards

Promotion Equity Grant for Mr. Lico

In connection with the Separation, our Compensation Committee approved an increase in Mr. Lico’s target total direct compensation for 2016 (consisting of base salary, target bonus and target long-term incentive compensation) from $6,412,000 to $8,000,000 to reflect his new role as President and CEO of our Company. The Committee based the increase on its desire to more closely align Mr. Lico’s compensation arrangements with the objectives of our overall compensation philosophy and business strategy and with the CEO compensation practices of comparable companies, and to reflect the increase in the scope of responsibilities in his new role following the Separation. The majority of the increase in Mr. Lico’s target total direct compensation was an increase in his target long-term incentive compensation from $4,500,000 (last granted in February 2016) to $5,750,000. To effectuate this increase, our Compensation Committee approved an additional equity award for Mr. Lico with a target value of $1,250,000 consisting of the following:

The number of performance shares earned is determined as follows:

The payout percentages for performance would be determined by linear interpolation. In addition, if TSR is negative, the maximum number of shares that may be earned is 100% of target irrespective of the relative TSR. If TSR is positive, a minimum of 25% of target shares will be earned irrespective of the relative TSR.

Founders Grant for Mr. Lico

Our Compensation Committee also approved a one-time equity award as a Founders Grants to Mr. Lico at the time of the Separation to:

Table of Contents

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

The Founders Grant for Mr. Lico consisted of the following components:

Our Compensation Committee determined the amount of Mr. Lico’s Founders Grant based on the following considerations:

The amounts of the equity grants to all of our NEOs, including the grant to Mr. Lico, are shown in the “Fiscal 2016 Grants of Plan-Based Awards” table below.

Annual Incentive Awards

We provide annual incentive awards to our NEOs under our Executive Incentive Compensation Plan (the “Executive Incentive Plan”). The Executive Incentive Plan provides cash bonuses to participants based on the achievement of annual performance metrics relating to our business and the participant’s personal performance. Other than with respect to Mr. Lico, the target annual incentive awards in 2016 as a percentage of base salary for each of the NEOs before and after the Separation were determined by Danaher, and documented in a corresponding offer letter, prior the Separation.

Pre-Separation Awards

Mr. Lico

		2017 Proxy Statement		39

Table of Contents

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

Prior to the Separation, Mr. Lico was a participant in Danaher’s Executive Incentive Compensation Plan. For 2016, the Danaher Compensation Committee assigned Mr. Lico a target bonus percentage representing a percentage of his base salary as of March 31, 2016. Subject to Danaher’s achievement of positive net income for the year, Mr. Lico would be eligible for a bonus equal to the target bonus amount multiplied by the Composite Performance Factor (which was to be the sum of the Danaher Company Performance Factor (weighted 60%) and the Personal Performance Factor (weighted 40%), subject to the Danaher Compensation Committee’s exercise of discretion. The Danaher Compensation Committee exercised its judgment in determining each element of the 2016 formula. Each element of the 2016 performance formula is further described below:

The payout percentages for performance between threshold and target, or between target and maximum, respectively, were determined by linear interpolation. Pursuant to the Employee Matters Agreement between Danaher and Fortive, Mr. Lico continued to be eligible for a bonus under the framework of the Danaher Executive Incentive Compensation Plan following the end of 2016, but the amount of any payout to be made by Danaher under Mr. Lico’s award would be prorated to reflect the portion of time he was employed by Danaher during the year. Accordingly, following the end of 2016, the Danaher Company Performance Factor was calculated as follows:

Table of Contents

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

Other Fortive Named Executive Officers

Prior to the Separation, each of Messrs. McLaughlin, Gafinowitz and Underwood and Ms. Hulit participated in Danaher’s incentive compensation program covering senior leaders of Danaher operating companies (the “Senior Leader Incentive Program”). The Senior Leader Incentive Program provided cash bonuses based on the achievement of objective, annual performance metrics relating to the officer’s business as well as the officer’s personal performance. Under the performance formula effective for 2016, the Other NEOs would be eligible to receive a bonus equal to their respective target bonus amount, multiplied by (i) a Danaher company performance factor determined based on the 2016 performance of the officers’ respective business against the objective business-level financial performance metrics described below (“Senior Leader Business Metrics”), and (ii) a factor determined by the officers’ manager based on a subjective review of the officers’ performance against the officer’s annual personal performance goals and other factors (the “Personal Performance Factor”).

In determining the Personal Performance Factor for the prorated annual incentive award payable for the period prior to the Separation, we used the same Personal Performance Factor determined for the Other NEO in calculating the prorated, post-separation annual incentive award, as discussed below under “—Annual Incentive Awards—Post-Separation Awards.” Because each of the Other NEOs reported to Mr. Lico for all or substantially all of 2016, including during the period prior to the Separation, our Compensation Committee determined that Mr. Lico’s evaluation of performance of the Other NEOs in 2016 would be applicable to both the period prior to, and after, the Separation.

The following table sets forth the Senior Leader Business Metrics that were determined by Danaher prior to the Separation for the Other NEOs.

Based on the Personal Performance Factor determined with respect to each officer after the Separation and the performance level achieved by such officer’s business with respect to the Senior Leader Business Metrics prior to the Separation, the pre-separation period annual cash incentive compensation awards were calculated and are reflected in the “2016 Summary Compensation Table”, along with the post-separation period annual cash incentive compensation awards, which are discussed below under “—Annual Incentive Awards—Post-Separation Awards.”

		2017 Proxy Statement		41

Table of Contents

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

Post-Separation Awards

For the post-separation period in 2016, our Compensation Committee approved Executive Incentive Plan awards for each of our NEOs using a Composite Performance Factor structure similar to the structure of the pre-separation plan in which Mr. Lico participated. Under the post-separation awards, our NEOs were eligible to receive a bonus equal to his or her respective target bonus amount multiplied by the applicable Composite Performance Factor, which would be equal to the sum of the Fortive Company Performance Factor (weighted 60%) and the Personal Performance Factor (weighted 40%), subject to our Compensation Committee’s exercise of discretion.

Pursuant to the terms determined by Danaher prior to the Separation for our Other NEOs, the target annual incentive awards for 2016 as a percentage of base salary increased as follows for the indicated NEOs:

In addition, when establishing the compensation arrangement for Mr. Lico as our President and Chief Executive Officer following the Separation, our Compensation Committee maintained his target annual incentive award as a percentage of his base salary for 2016 at 125% following the Separation.

Table of Contents

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

The threshold, target and maximum potential bonus amounts for each of our NEOs for the post-separation period are set forth in the “2016 Grants of Plan-Based Awards” table. For each of our NEOs, the Fortive Company Performance Factor was determined solely by our Adjusted EPS¹ for the six-month period ended 2016 following our Separation (“Fortive Adjusted EPS”), based on the threshold, target and maximum goal set forth below. The Compensation Committee used the Fortive Adjusted EPS as the performance metric in determining the Fortive Company Performance Factor because it believes that Adjusted EPS correlates strongly with shareholder returns and the Company’s operating performance during the period.

The Fortive Company Performance Factor was interpolated for Fortive Adjusted EPS on a linear basis as follows:

The Executive Incentive Plan also includes a performance hurdle requiring that we achieve positive net income for the performance period in order for any payments to be made. If the performance hurdle is met, then a maximum level of annual incentive award payouts is set from which our Compensation Committee may approve bonus payments based on the Composite Performance Factor.

		2017 Proxy Statement		43

Table of Contents

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

Following the end of 2016, the Compensation Committee used its judgment and determined for each executive officer a Personal Performance Factor between 0% and 150%. Our Compensation Committee has discretion in determining the Personal Performance Factor of each of the executive officers, which discretion the Compensation Committee believes is an important risk-mitigating element to the Company’s compensation program. Without assigning any particular weight to any individual factor, the Compensation Committee took into account the size of the Fortive Company Performance Factor, the executive’s execution against his or her personal performance objectives for the year, the executive’s overall performance for the year and the amount of annual cash incentive compensation that peer companies would offer such executive. The following table summarizes the individual factors the Compensation Committee considered for each NEO in determining the corresponding Personal Performance Factor.

Based on such consideration, the Compensation Committee assigned a Personal Performance Factor of 125% for Mr. Lico.

The payout percentages and corresponding Composite Performance Factor resulted in the payouts set forth in the 2016 Summary Compensation Table.

In addition, the Personal Performance Factor described above was applied for the NEOs in determining the respective prorated annual incentive award for the period in 2016 prior to the Separation.

Additional 2016 Cash Bonus to Messrs. Lico and McLaughlin

Our Compensation Committee has the ability to grant bonus awards outside of the Executive Incentive Plan in its discretion; however, any such bonus payments may not be entitled to the same beneficial tax treatment provided with respect to the non-equity incentive awards under the Executive Incentive Plan. Discretionary bonuses may be awarded in any amount that our Compensation Committee deems appropriate. For 2016, in light of the fact that Separation-related activities were not included in Messrs. Lico’s and McLaughlin’s respective 2016 personal performance goals under the