PROXY SUMMARY

PROXY SUMMARY

PROXY SUMMARY

As permitted under SEC rules, we are making this Proxy Statement and our 2014 Annual Report on Form 10-K (which is our Annual Report) available to shareholders elecronically via the internet. We believe electronic delivery expedites receipt of our proxy materials by shareholders, while lowering the costs and reducing the environmental impact of the Meeting. If you receive a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials (the “Notice”) by mail, you will not receive a printed copy of the proxy materials by mail

unless you specifically request them. Instead, the Notice will provide instructions as to how you may review the proxy materials and submit your voting instructions over the internet. If you receive the Notice by mail and would like to receive a printed copy of the proxy materials, you should follow the instructions in the Notice for requesting a printed copy. In addition, the proxy card contains instructions for electing to receive proxy materials over the internet or by mail in future years.

Most holders of our common stock hold their shares beneficially through a broker, bank or other nominee rather than of record directly in their own name. As summarized below, there are some differences in the way to vote shares held of record and those owned beneficially.

If your shares are registered directly in your name with our transfer agent, you are considered the shareholder of record of those shares, and the Notice or proxy materials are being sent directly to you. As a shareholder of record, you have the right to grant your voting proxy directly to the persons named as proxy holders or to vote in person at the Meeting. If you received or requested printed copies of the proxy materials, Dover has enclosed a proxy card for you to use. You may also submit your proxy on the internet or by telephone as described in the proxy card.

If your shares are held in a brokerage account or by a bank or other nominee, you are considered the beneficial owner of the shares held in “street name,” and these proxy materials are being forwarded to you by your broker or nominee who is considered the shareholder of record of those shares. As the beneficial owner, you have the right to direct your broker on how to vote and are also invited to attend the Meeting. However, since you are not the shareholder of record, you may not vote those shares in person at the Meeting unless you have a proxy, executed in your favor, from the holder of record of your shares. Your broker or nominee has enclosed a voting instruction card for you to use in directing your broker or nominee as to how to vote your shares. We strongly encourage you to instruct your broker or nominee how you wish to vote.

A majority of the votes cast at the Meeting is required to elect directors. This means that the number of votes cast “FOR” a director must exceed the number of votes cast “AGAINST” that director in order for that director to be elected. Our organizational documents do not provide for cumulative voting.

Proposals 2 and 4 will require the affirmative vote of at least a majority of shares present in person or by proxy and entitled to vote at the Meeting. Proposal 4 is a shareholder advisory resolution that will not itself affect any amendment to our charter or bylaws. Proposal 3 is a nonbinding, advisory resolution so its ultimate adoption is at the discretion of the Board. The

affirmative vote of a majority of shares present in person or by proxy and entitled to vote at the Meeting will be deemed to be approval by the shareholders of the resolution.

If you are a shareholder of record and you sign and return your proxy card or vote electronically without making any specific selection, then your shares will be voted FOR all director nominees listed in Proposal 1, FOR Proposals 2 and 3, and AGAINST Proposal 4.

If you specify that you wish to “ABSTAIN” from voting on an item, then your shares will not be voted on that particular item. Abstentions will not affect the outcome of the vote on Proposal 1. However, they will have the same effect as a vote against Proposals 2, 3, and 4.

If you are a beneficial owner and hold your shares through a broker or other nominee and do not provide

your broker or nominee with voting instructions, the broker or nominee will have discretionary authority to vote your shares on routine matters only and will not vote your shares on non-routine matters. This is generally referred to as a “broker non-vote.” Only Proposal 2 will be considered a routine matter for the Meeting. Accordingly, broker non-votes will not affect the outcome of the vote on Proposal 1 but will have the same effect as a vote against Proposals 3 and 4 as they will be counted as being present.

For purposes of the Meeting, there will be a quorum if the holders of a majority of the outstanding shares of our common stock are present in person or by proxy. Abstentions and broker non-votes will be counted for purposes of determining if a quorum is present.

If you are a shareholder of record, you may vote in person at the Meeting or submit your proxy or voting instruction form over the internet, by telephone or by mail by following the instructions provided in our Notice, in the proxy materials or in the voting

instruction form. If you hold your shares beneficially in “street name” through a broker or other nominee, you must follow the instructions provided by your broker or nominee to vote your shares.

If you are a shareholder of record, whether you give your proxy over the internet, by telephone or by mail, you may revoke it at any time before it is exercised. You may enter a new vote by using the internet or the telephone or by mailing a new proxy card bearing a later date so long as it is received before the Meeting. You may also revoke your proxy by attending the

Meeting and voting in person, although attendance at the Meeting will not, by itself, revoke your proxy. If you hold your shares beneficially in “street name” through a broker or other nominee, you must follow the instructions provided by your broker or nominee as to how you may change your voting instructions.

SEC rules permit us to deliver one copy of the Proxy Statement or a notice of internet availability of the Proxy Statement to multiple shareholders of record who share the same address and have the same last name, unless we have received contrary instructions from one or more of such shareholders. This delivery method, called “householding,” reduces our printing and mailing costs. Shareholders who participate in householding will continue to receive or have internet access to separate proxy cards.

If you are a shareholder of record and wish to receive a separate copy of the Proxy Statement, now or in the future, at the same address or if you are currently receiving multiple copies of the Proxy Statement at

the same address and wish to receive only a single copy, please write to or call the Corporate Secretary, Dover Corporation, 3005 Highland Parkway, Downers Grove, Illinois 60515, telephone: (630) 541-1540.

Beneficial owners sharing an address who are currently receiving multiple copies of the proxy materials or notice of internet availability of the proxy materials and wish to receive only a single copy in the future, or who currently receive a single copy and wish to receive separate copies in the future, should contact their bank, broker or other holder of record to request that only a single copy or separate copies, as the case may be, be delivered to all shareholders at the shared address in the future.

We will pay the reasonable and actual costs of printing, mailing and soliciting proxies, but we will not pay a fee to any of our officers or employees or to officers or employees of any of our subsidiaries as compensation for soliciting proxies. We have retained

Morrow & Co., LLC to solicit brokerage houses and other custodians, nominees or fiduciaries, and to send proxies and proxy materials to the beneficial owners of such shares, for a fee of approximately $12,000 plus expenses.

The Chairman of our Board is an independent director. We believe that having a chairman independent of management provides strong leadership for the Board and helps ensure critical and independent thinking with respect to our Company’s strategy and performance. Our Chief Executive Officer is also a member of the Board as the management representative. We believe this is important to make information and insight directly available to the directors in their deliberations. In our view, this board leadership structure gives us an appropriate, well-functioning balance between non-management and management directors that combines experience, accountability and effective risk oversight.

Our Board believes that risk oversight is the responsibility of the Board as a whole and not of any one of its committees. The Board periodically reviews the processes established by management to identify and manage risks and communicates with management about these processes. We have established a risk assessment team consisting of senior executives, which annually, with the assistance of a consultant, oversees a risk assessment made at the segment and operating company levels and, with that information in mind, performs an assessment of the overall risks our company may face. Each quarter, this team reassesses the risks at the Dover level, the severity of these risks and the status of efforts to mitigate them and reports to the Board on that reassessment.

Our Board has determined that each of the current members of the Board, except for Robert A. Livingston who is the current management representative on our Board, has no material relationship with Dover and satisfies all the criteria for being “independent” members of our Board. This includes the criteria established by the SEC and the New York Stock Exchange Listing Standards, as well as our standards for classification as an independent

director which are available on our website at www.dovercorporation.com. Our Board makes an annual determination of the independence of each nominee for director prior to his or her nomination for (re)election. No director may be deemed independent unless the Board determines that he or she has no material relationship with Dover, directly or as an officer, shareholder or partner of an organization that has a material relationship with Dover.

Under our by-laws and corporate governance guidelines, the voting standard in director elections is a majority of the votes cast. Under the majority standard, a director must receive more votes in favor of his or her election than votes against his or her election. Abstentions and broker non-votes do not count as votes cast with respect to a director’s election. In contested director elections (where there are more nominees than available seats on the board), the plurality standard will apply.

For an incumbent director to be nominated for re-election, he or she must submit an irrevocable, contingent resignation letter. The resignation will be

contingent on the nominee not receiving a majority of the votes cast in an uncontested election and on the Board’s acceptance of the resignation. If an incumbent director fails to receive a majority of the votes cast in an uncontested election, the Governance and Nominating Committee will make a recommendation to our Board concerning the resignation. Our Board will act on the resignation within 90 days following certification of the election results, taking into account the committee’s recommendation. The Board will publicly announce its decision and, if the resignation is rejected, the rationale for its decision.

The primary functions of the Audit Committee include:

The Audit Committee holds regular quarterly meetings at which it meets separately with each of our

independent registered public accounting firm, PwC, our internal audit function, financial management and our general counsel to assess certain matters including the status of the independent audit process, management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting and the operation and effectiveness of our compliance program. In addition, the Audit Committee, as a whole, reviews and meets to discuss the contents of each Form 10-Q and Form 10-K (including the financial statements) prior to its filing with the SEC.

Our Board has determined that all members of the Audit Committee qualify as “audit committee financial experts” as defined in the SEC rules.

The Audit Committee’s responsibilities, authority and resources are described in greater detail in its written charter.

The Compensation Committee, together with our independent directors, approves compensation for the Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) of Dover. The functions of Compensation Committee also include:

The Compensation Committee’s responsibilities, authority and resources are described in greater detail in its written charter.

The Governance and Nominating Committee’s functions include:

The Governance and Nominating Committee’s responsibilities, authority and resources are described in greater detail in its written charter.

Our Board long ago adopted written corporate governance guidelines that set forth the responsibilities of our Board and the qualifications and independence of its members and the members of its standing committees. In addition, our Board has a long-standing code of business conduct and ethics setting forth standards applicable to all of our

companies and their employees, a code of ethics for our CEO and senior financial officers, and charters for each of its standing committees. All of these documents (referred to collectively as “governance materials”) are available on our website at www.dovercorporation.com.

During 2014, the Board met 11 times. No director attended less than 75% of the board and standing committee meetings held while he or she was a member of the Board and relevant standing committee. Average board attendance was 97% in 2014. Our independent directors meet at regularly

scheduled executive sessions at least quarterly without management representatives or non-independent directors present. Mr. Cremin, as Chairman of the Board, presides at these sessions.

Our directors are expected to attend the annual shareholders meeting. All of the directors then on the Board attended the Annual Meeting of Shareholders held on May 1, 2014.

Our Board and its committees conduct annual self-evaluations of their performance.

The Audit Committee has established procedures for (i) the receipt, retention and treatment of complaints regarding accounting, internal accounting controls or auditing matters (“accounting matters”), and (ii) the confidential, anonymous submission by employees of concerns regarding questionable accounting matters. Such complaints or concerns may be submitted to Dover, care of our Corporate Secretary or through the communications coordinator, an external service provider, by mail, fax, telephone or via the internet as published on our website. The communications

coordinator forwards such communications to Dover without disclosing the identity of the sender if anonymity is requested.

Shareholders and other interested persons may also communicate with our Board and the non-management directors in any of these same manners. Such communications are forwarded to the chair of the Governance and Nominating Committee.

We generally do not engage in transactions in which our senior executive officers or directors, any of their immediate family members or any of our 5% shareholders have a material interest. Should a proposed transaction or series of similar transactions involve any such persons and an amount that exceeds $120,000, it would be subject to review and approval by the Governance and Nominating Committee in accordance with a written policy and the procedures adopted by our Board, which are available with the governance materials on our website.

Under the procedures, management determines whether a proposed transaction requires review under the policy and, if so, presents the transaction to the Governance and Nominating Committee. The Governance and Nominating Committee reviews the relevant facts and circumstances of the transaction

and approves or rejects the transaction. If the proposed transaction is immaterial or it is impractical or undesirable to defer the proposed transaction until the next committee meeting, the chair of the committee decides whether to (i) approve the transaction and report the transaction at the next meeting or (ii) call a special meeting of the committee to review and approve the transaction. Should the proposed transaction involve the CEO or enough members of the Governance and Nominating Committee to prevent a quorum, the disinterested members of the committee will review the transaction and make a recommendation to the Board, which disinterested members of the Board then approve or reject the transaction. No director may participate in the review of any transaction in which he or she is a related person.

The Compensation Committee has the authority and discretion to retain external compensation consultants as it deems appropriate. The Compensation Committee has adopted a policy to ensure the continuing independence and accountability to the committee of any advisor hired to assist the committee in the discharge of its duties. The policy formalizes the independent relationship between the committee’s advisor and Dover, while permitting management limited ability to access the advisor’s

knowledge of Dover for compensation matters. Under the policy, the committee will annually review and pre- approve the services that may be provided by the independent advisor without further committee approval. Compensation Committee approval is required prior to Dover retaining the independent advisor for any executive compensation services or other consulting services or products above an aggregate annual limit of $50,000.

Since February 2010, the Compensation Committee has retained Semler Brossy Consulting Group, LLC (“Semler Brossy”) as its advisor. Semler Brossy does no other work for and has no other relationships with Dover. Semler Brossy focuses on executive compensation and does not have departments, groups or affiliates that provide services other than those related to executive compensation and benefits.

The Compensation Committee looks to its consultant to periodically review and advise regarding the adequacy and appropriateness of our overall executive compensation plans, programs and practices and, from time to time, to answer specific questions raised by the Compensation Committee or management. Compensation decisions are made by, and are the responsibility of, the Compensation Committee and our Board, and may reflect factors

and considerations other than the information and recommendations provided by the Compensation Committee’s consultant.

To ensure independence of the compensation consultant, the consultant reports directly to the chair of the Compensation Committee and works specifically for the committee solely on compensation and benefits.

Semler Brossy’s fees (including expenses) for executive compensation consulting to the Compensation Committee in 2014 were approximately $235,000. Semler Brossy did not engage in any projects for management for 2014. The Compensation Committee has assessed the independence of Semler Brossy and concluded that its work for the Compensation Committee does not raise any conflict of interest.

The Board, in part through its delegation to the Governance and Nominating Committee, seeks to recommend qualified individuals to become members of the Board. The Board selects individuals as director nominees who, in the opinion of the Board, demonstrate the highest personal and professional integrity as well as exceptional ability and judgment, who can serve as a sounding board for our CEO on planning and policy, and who will be most effective, in connection with the other nominees to the Board, in collectively serving the long-term interests of all our shareholders. The Board prefers nominees to be independent of the Company, but believes it is desirable to have on the Board a representative of

current management. In considering diversity in selecting director nominees, the Governance and Nominating Committee gives weight to the extent to which candidates would increase the effectiveness of the Board by broadening the mix of experience, knowledge, backgrounds, skills, ages and tenures represented among its members. The Governance and Nominating Committee may also consider such other factors as it may deem to be in the best interests of Dover and its shareholders. Given the global reach and broad array of the types of businesses operated by Dover companies, the Board considers multi-industry and multi-geographic experience a significant plus.

Whenever the Governance and Nominating Committee concludes that a new nominee to our Board is required or advisable, it will consider recommendations from directors, management, shareholders and, if it deems appropriate, consultants retained for that purpose. In such circumstances, it will evaluate individuals recommended by shareholders in the same manner as nominees recommended from other sources. Shareholders who wish to recommend an individual for nomination

should send that person’s name and supporting information to the committee, care of the Corporate Secretary at our principal executive offices, 3005 Highland Parkway, Downers Grove, Illinois, 60515, or through our communications coordinator. Shareholders who wish to directly nominate an individual for election as a director, without going through the Governance and Nominating Committee or using our proxy material, must comply with the procedures in our by-laws.

The Audit Committee has appointed the independent registered public accounting firm of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLC (“PwC”) to audit the annual accounts of Dover and its subsidiaries for 2015. PwC has audited the financial statements for the Company for more than three years. Representatives of PwC are not expected to be present at the Meeting.

Although shareholder ratification of PwC’s appointment is not required by Dover’s by-laws or otherwise, our Board is submitting the ratification of PwC’s appointment for the year 2015 to Dover’s shareholders. If the shareholders do not ratify the appointment of PwC, the Audit Committee will reconsider whether or not to retain PwC as Dover’s independent registered public accounting firm for the

year 2015 but will not be obligated to terminate the appointment. Even if the shareholders ratify the appointment of PwC, the Audit Committee in its discretion may direct the appointment of a different independent registered public accounting firm at any time during the year if the Audit Committee determines that such a change would be in Dover’s interests.

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS RECOMMENDS A VOTE “FOR” RATIFICATION OF THE APPOINTMENT OF PWC AS OUR INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM FOR THE YEAR 2015.

Audit Fees. Audit fees include fees for audit or review services in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and fees for services that generally only independent auditors provide, such as statutory audits and review of documents filed with the SEC. Audit fees also include fees paid in connection with services required for compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. The aggregate fees, rounded to the nearest thousand dollars, paid to, or accrued for, PwC for consolidated auditing services to us and our subsidiaries for 2014 and 2013 were $9,558,000 and $14,675,000 (including reimbursable expenses), respectively.

Audit-Related Fees. Audit-related fees include fees for assurance and related services that are reasonably related to the audit of our financial statements, such as due diligence services pertaining to potential business acquisitions and dispositions and consultations concerning the accounting and disclosure treatment of events and the impact of final or proposed rules and standards. The aggregate fees, rounded to the nearest thousand dollars, paid to, or

accrued for, PwC for audit related services to us and our subsidiaries for 2014 and 2013 were $0 and $5,000, respectively.

Tax Fees. Tax fees include fees for services that are performed by professional tax staff other than in connection with the audit. These services include tax compliance services. The aggregate fees, rounded to the nearest thousand dollars, paid to, or accrued for, PwC for tax services to us and our subsidiaries for 2014 and 2013 were $978,000 and $804,000, respectively.

All Other Fees. Other fees include fees for non-audit services not listed above that do not impair the independence of the auditor and are not prohibited by the SEC or Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. The aggregate fees, rounded to the nearest thousand dollars, paid to, or accrued for, PwC for all other non-audit related services to us and our subsidiaries for 2014 and 2013 were $9,000 and $9,000, respectively.

Consistent with its charter and applicable SEC rules, our Audit Committee pre-approves all audit and permissible non-audit services provided by PwC to us and our subsidiaries. With respect to certain services which PwC has traditionally provided, the Audit Committee has adopted specific pre-approval policies and procedures. In developing these policies and procedures, the Audit Committee considered the need to ensure the independence of PwC while recognizing that, in certain situations, PwC may possess the expertise and be in the best position to advise us and our subsidiaries on issues and matters other than accounting and auditing.

The policies and procedures adopted by the Audit Committee allow the pre-approval by the Audit Committee of permissible audit-related services, non-audit-related services and tax services. Under the policies and procedures, pre-approval is generally provided for up to one year and any general pre- approval is detailed as to the particular services or category of services and is subject to a specific budget for each of them. The policies and procedures

require that any other services be expressly and separately approved by the Audit Committee prior to such services being performed by the independent auditors. In addition, pre-approved services which are expected to exceed the budgeted amount included in a general pre-approval require separate, specific pre-approval. For each proposed service, the independent auditors and management are required to provide detailed information to the Audit Committee at the time of approval. The Audit Committee considers whether each pre-approved service is consistent with the SEC’s rules and regulations on auditor independence.

All audit-related and non-audit-related services of PwC during 2014 listed above under “Fees Paid to Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” were pre-approved specifically or pursuant to the procedures outlined above. With respect to any tax services provided by PWC, PWC provided to the Audit Committee the communications required under PCAOB Rule 3524.

Dear Dover Shareholders:

The executive compensation programs at Dover are designed to attract and retain top tier talent and align their interests with those of our shareholders.

When making executive pay decisions, we consider both annual financial performance and the long-term success of Dover. We ensure our compensation levels and programs are competitive, while being consistent with market practices. We also ensure that compensation awards recognize the performance and contributions of each executive.

Thank you for being a Dover Shareholder and we are pleased to share the results of a successful year of financial and strategic performance.

Sincerely,

Richard K. Lochridge (Chair), Robert W. Cremin, Jean-Pierre M. Ergas, Peter T. Francis, Kristiane C. Graham

This Compensation Discussion and Analysis (“CD&A”) describes Dover’s executive compensation programs in 2014. It describes Dover’s pay philosophy, how the Board, Compensation Committee (“Committee”) and the Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) have applied that philosophy to Dover’s executives, the process the Committee uses to make executive pay decisions, performance goals and results, and updates to our compensation program. There are five officers who are a Named Executive Officer (“NEO”):

In 2014, Dover continued to execute numerous strategic initiatives that create long-term value for shareholders. Some of these initiatives include:

Our compensation programs are designed to support the primary objective of creating sustained, long-term value for our stockholders. To achieve this objective, management is required to execute Dover’s strategy, resulting in sustainable revenue and earnings growth. The Committee believes that a strong pay for performance philosophy aligns our executives’ goals with long-term value creation for our shareholders.

The primary elements of our philosophy include a clear pay strategy, emphasis on incentive-driven pay based on metrics that align with value creation for our shareholders and goals that support the attainment of our strategy. The following represent key elements of our program:

Dover’s executive compensation programs are designed to do the following:

The pay packages of Dover executives consist predominantly of incentive-based pay, both annual and long-term focused. The ratio between fixed and variable pay varies by executive level, but for the CEO and his direct reports, including the NEOs, we feel it is appropriate that the vast majority of the pay package

should be “at risk” incentive-based pay as shown in the chart below. Additionally, we believe that their incentive pay should be heavily weighted toward long-term performance and tied to share performance, with the annual incentives focused on key short-term drivers and milestones of shareholder value creation.

Each of the compensation components has a specific role in the overall design of our executive pay program. While each component is designed to be mutually reinforcing with the other components, care

is taken to minimize overlap between them. The table below shows how each element fits into the overall executive pay programs.

We pay executives an annual base salary in cash that is benchmarked against the median for salaries of executives in comparable positions at our peer group companies based on both proxy and survey data. Salaries are reviewed annually and changes are driven by changes in the market and the individual executive’s responsibility. We believe paying a

competitive base salary is important to attract and retain talented executives, although it is only a small component of their overall compensation. The majority of an executive’s compensation is performance based and provides an executive with the opportunity to earn significant payouts based upon business performance.

An annual bonus may be earned each year based on an individual’s performance against both financial and individual strategic goals. For each NEO, the AIP bonus target amount is determined according to an executive’s business/function complexity, size, and overall impact on Dover’s results, as well as strategic leadership and managerial responsibility.

For 2014, 50% of an NEO’s annual bonus was based on the achievement of financial performance criteria based on earnings from continuing operations, revenue and/or operating earnings for segment executives. The other 50% of the annual bonus was based on the achievement of individual strategic

objectives related to long-term value creation for Dover shareholders. For this part of the incentive, the CEO’s objectives cascade to his direct reports as appropriate based on their business portfolio.

Executives can achieve anywhere between 0% and 200% of their target bonus. However, above target payout is only earned for performance that is significantly above the targeted performance. Dover believes that balancing the measurement of performance for the AIP between financial and strategic objectives is an important factor in mitigating risk and to reinforcing the execution of Dover’s long-term strategy to create value for our shareholders.

The following table summarizes the components of our LTIP and the related performance criteria for awards granted in 2014. Note that all components are

paid in stock rather than cash to encourage shareholder alignment through stock ownership.

In 2014, we eliminated the Cash Performance Program for our NEOs and changed the metric of the performance shares to iTSR, a measure of core enterprise value, from relative total shareholder return (“TSR”). iTSR is a measure of the change in an entity’s value plus the free cash flow generated by the entity over the three-year time period. In the case of iTSR, entity value is determined by using a multiple of the entity’s EBITDA. We believe increasing the entity value as measured by iTSR creates long-term shareholder value.

After a thorough review, we concluded that iTSR is highly correlated with long-term shareholder value creation for a multi-industry company such as Dover. We believe iTSR is more effective in driving behaviors than relative TSR because it measures outcomes that are more within management’s control, and is a better metric for three-year performance periods because stock price and underlying financial performance are not always aligned during the measurement period. It focuses executives on the financial drivers of long-term shareholder value.

Since iTSR is an absolute measure, we have implemented safeguards to substantially eliminate large payouts resulting solely from economic cycles. Further, the payouts under the program are in shares, and our shareholding requirements ensure

that executives are still exposed to the same stock price change effects as our shareholders, including the external stock market factors. Dividends are not accrued or paid on performance shares during the performance period.

Payouts for specific level of iTSR were set to tie performance share payouts with comparable relative TSR performance levels used for previous awards. Awards are earned three years after the grant,

provided iTSR exceeds a threshold level. Payouts of performance shares are made on a sliding scale using the following formula:

Prior to 2014, performance shares represented potential payments of common stock based on our TSR relative to our peer group over the three-year performance period. The grant for the performance period that ended in 2014 and the grant for the

performance period that will end in 2015 were made using this version of the performance program.

Actual payments may range from 0% to 200% of target grant, as follows:

Similar to stock options, SSARs are granted to align executive interests with shareholder interests for stock price growth for several years into the future. They are granted to focus executives on increasing the stock price over the long term. SSARs give our NEOs the ability to participate in the price appreciation of a set

number of shares of Company stock. Once SSARs vest, an NEO may exercise them any time prior to the expiration date. The proceeds from the exercise are paid to the NEO in the form of shares of Dover common stock to encourage continued share ownership and shareholder alignment.

RSU grants are designed to attract and retain NEOs by providing them some of the benefits associated with stock ownership during the vesting period. It is the smallest portion of an NEO’s LTIP grant. Executives do not actually own the shares underlying the units, nor enjoy the benefits of ownership such as

dividends and voting, until the vesting conditions are satisfied. Once vested, the NEO receives shares of Dover stock equivalent in number to the vested units and receives a cash amount equal to accrued dividends during the vesting period, net of withholding taxes.

Prior to 2014, executives were eligible for a three-year performance program that paid cash awards at the end of the performance period. The grant for the performance period that ended in 2014 and the grant for the performance period that will end in 2015 were made using the CPP.

At grant, each award was assigned a target value denominated in the executive’s home currency. Over three years, the iTSR performance of the executive’s

unit is measured and a payout percentage determined using the scale below. Like the performance shares, iTSR must exceed a threshold performance level before any CPP awards are earned. Once the threshold has been surpassed, iTSR performance is measured straight line between three performance points, each of which has been set based on the relative TSR performance that each point historically represents. The performance scale is as follows:

No payouts will be made unless iTSR equals or exceeds 6%. The payout to any individual may not exceed $5,000,000 and total payouts for all participants

for a business unit may not exceed 1.75% of the value created at that business unit over the three-year performance period.

The Committee references two, overlapping peer groups in making executive compensation decisions: a smaller, more tightly clustered group for assessing executive pay levels and practices, and a broader group for assessing Dover’s financial performance and total shareholder return. For assessing executive pay programs and levels, the Committee selected a

group of companies that are similar to Dover in terms of end market, complexity, revenues, and market capitalization. We believe this group (listed below), in combination with survey-reported information, provides an appropriate representation of our market for executive talent.

Management and the Committee consider both market benchmarks (i.e., external equity), as well as the impact each executive role has relative to internal

peers (i.e., internal equity) in establishing the executive pay structures used to govern pay.

For measuring relative total shareholder return – the measurement basis for payouts of the pre-2014 performance shares – the Committee concluded that an expanded group of companies (building from the 20 above) would better represent the range of alternatives for our shareholders’ capital and help to mitigate the impact of any single company events on relative performance measurements.

Company size was not explicitly considered in developing the expanded performance benchmarking group, as it is less of a direct consideration when comparing shareholder returns. Other than size, each of the previously mentioned criteria was utilized in determining the performance benchmarking peer group.

The process for making variable executive compensation decisions for 2014 began with goal setting at the beginning of the year and concluded with the actual compensation payout decisions in early 2015. The process is designed to allow the Committee, the Board, and management time to reflect on and discuss information before being asked to approve a proposal or make decisions. The Committee receives information 1-2 meetings in

advance of the meeting where a decision is to be made, wherever possible, so that the Committee can provide feedback and revisions can be made, as necessary. As the Committee sets its meeting agendas for the coming year, issues are highlighted that the Committee and/or management believe should be covered, allowing for planning as to when information should be brought forward in line with the desired process.

The compensation awarded to our NEOs for 2014 reflects Dover’s financial performance and continued progress along its strategic path. However, actual

compensation varies widely based upon performance of Dover as a whole or each NEO’s business unit.

Annual Incentive Plan Award

AIP is designed to reward our NEOs for the achievement of financial and strategic objectives that are linked to Dover’s longer term goals. The AIP is funded for Section 162(m) purposes by the achievement of an EPS goal, as determined under the plan. Achievement of our EPS target allows maximum bonuses to be paid, subject to the negative discretion of the Committee in determining the final bonuses. Achievement below the target reduces the bonus pool by 1% for every 1% below target; achievement above target does not increase the bonus pool. For purposes of the annual incentive plan, our 2014 EPS target was

$4.70, which reflects adjustments that include any businesses acquired during the year. We achieved adjusted EPS (including Datamax-O’Neil and Sargent), determined on the basis described above, of $4.76 so bonuses were available to be paid at maximum. The actual bonuses paid for the year were less than the maximum. Under the AIP, 50% of each NEO’s target annual incentive is tied to the achievement of financial results and 50% is tied to the achievement of individual strategic objectives. The financial targets listed below were utilized to determine the 50% of each NEO’s bonus tied to financial results.

Each of the NEOs had unique strategic objectives that were utilized to determine the remaining 50% of their annual incentive. The individual NEO strategic goals were linked to the overall success of Dover as it continues to move forward on its strategic pathway to achieve consistent long-term success. The strategic goals for the CEO are developed by the Compensation Committee and approved by the Board. They are intended to focus on a limited and measurable set of goals which, if accomplished, will benefit the shareholders of Dover over the long term. The CEO in turn develops strategic goals for his direct reports which focus on measurable accomplishments in their individual areas of responsibility that will also benefit our shareholders over the long term. Listed below is a summary of each NEO’s performance against his strategic objectives.

Mr. Livingston (President & Chief Executive Officer) continued to shape our business profile by driving both organic and acquisition growth. He took significant steps in driving key acquisitions in our energy and fluids businesses and announced the sale of our non-core assets (Datamax-O’Neil and Sargent Aerospace). He successfully completed the on-boarding of two new segment CEOs.

Mr. Cerepak (Senior Vice President & Chief Financial Officer) continued to work with the segments to align long-term segment strategy with the strategy of the entire organization and set the overall direction. He continued to improve the effectiveness of the Finance and Information Technology functions throughout Dover.

Mr. Fincher (President & CEO of Dover Engineered Systems) led the development of a five-year segment strategy and developed a product roadmap for key technology and innovations. He led the successful integration of a key acquisition during the year. He improved overall productivity leading to margin improvements.

Mr. Johnson (President & CEO of Dover Refrigeration & Food Equipment) led the development of a five-year segment strategy. He achieved improvements in growth margin and productivity gains. He expanded the business in key focus areas and international markets.

Mr. Spurgeon (President & CEO of Dover Fluids) led the development of a five-year segment strategy and outlined a roadmap for strategic goals deployment to achieve objectives. He expanded the business outside of North America while driving productivity gains across the business.

Overall, we were slightly below our financial targets in 2014 but made progress on our strategic objectives, including key acquisitions and divestures. Actual compensation varies widely based on the individual’s business unit and performance against specific strategic objectives.

The three-year CPP rewards our executives for improving iTSR through earnings growth and cash flow generation over a three-year period. During the most recent three-year plan period (2012-2014), Dover generated $4.3 billion in EBITDA and $2.4

billion of free cash flow. The payout methodology and details of the plan can be found in the section entitled “Performance-Based Compensation”. The payouts from the plan for each of the three-year periods ending December 31, 2012, 2013 and 2014 were:

In February 2012, we issued performance share awards to be earned over three years based on the TSR of Dover’s stock relative to its peer group over that time period. For the three-year period ending

December 31, 2014, Dover had a TSR of 57.8%, placing it at the 26th percentile of its peer group. This resulted in no payout for performance shares.

We are continuously reviewing all components of our compensation program and encourage shareholder comment. Our consistent focus on pay for performance were reflected in our strong 2014 say-on-pay voting results. Our 2014 say-on-pay vote received 94% support of the shareholders voting on the matter at the meeting.

We considered that vote to be an expression of approval and support of our general compensation practices and philosophy. As a result, we focused our 2014 review of our compensation practice on ways we could continue to improve both our pay for performance alignment and market competitiveness.

Changes in Salary

Mr. Fincher and Mr. Johnson received salary increases for 2015 of 3.0%, to recognize each executive’s contributions and pay relative to comparable positions at peer group companies. No other NEOs received a salary increase in 2015.

Changes in Target Bonus

There were no changes to target bonus opportunity in 2015 for the NEOs.

Changes in Long-term Incentive Target

Mr. Livingston’s long-term incentive target did not change for 2015. All other NEOs received an increase of $100,000 to their long-term incentive target to better align their pay for performance opportunity with our peer group.

Our executive officers do not have employment contracts. All of our NEOs are eligible to participate in the severance plan. Under the plan, if we terminate an NEO’s employment without cause (as defined in the severance plan), the NEO will generally be entitled to

receive twelve months of salary and healthcare benefits continuation; a prorated bonus for time worked during the year; and the next payable CPP award through 2015. Beginning in 2016, the CPP award payments will be replaced with the

Performance Share grant. See “Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change-in-Control.”

Senior Executive Change-in-Control Severance Plan

We have a senior executive change-in-control (“CIC”) severance plan. The CIC severance plan establishes the severance benefits payable to eligible executives if they are involuntarily terminated following a change-in-control. All of our NEOs are eligible to participate in the CIC severance plan. An executive eligible to participate in the CIC severance plan as of the date of a change-in-control will be entitled to receive severance payments under the plan if, within 18 months after the change-in-control, either the executive’s employment is terminated by the Company without “cause” or he or she terminates employment for “good reason” (as such terms are defined in the plan). The severance payments and benefits will consist of: a lump sum payment equal to 2.99 times their annual salary and target bonus, reduced to 2.0 for a termination date that occurs after December 31, 2015; and a lump sum payment equal to the cost of COBRA health care benefit continuation of the executive and covered family members for twelve months. See “Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change-in-Control.”

No executive may receive severance benefits under more than one plan or arrangement. Dover does not provide tax gross-ups in the senior executive change-in-control severance plan.

Benefits

401(k), Pension Plan and Health & Wellness Plans.

Our executive officers are able to participate in retirement and benefit plans generally available to our employees on the same terms as other employees. Dover and most of our businesses offer a 401(k) plan to substantially all U.S.-based employees and provide a Company matching contribution denominated as a percentage of the amount of salary deferred into the plan by a participant during the course of the year. Some of our U.S.-based employees also participate in a tax-qualified defined benefit pension plan. Effective December 31, 2013, we closed both our qualified and non-qualified defined benefit retirement plans to new employees. We intend to freeze any future benefit

accruals in both plans – effective December 31, 2023. All of our U.S.-based employees are offered a health and wellness plan (including health, term life and disability insurance). NEOs do not receive enhanced health and wellness benefits.

Non-Qualified Retirement Plans.

We offer two non-qualified plans with participation generally limited to individuals whose annual salary and bonus earnings exceed the IRS limits applicable to our qualified plans: our pension replacement plan (“PRP”) and our deferred compensation plan.

After December 31, 2009, benefits under the PRP before offsets are determined using the benefit calculation and eligibility criteria as under the pension plan, except that U.S. Internal Revenue Code limits on compensation and benefits do not apply. Prior to December 31, 2009, the participants in the PRP accrued benefits greater than those offered in the pension plan. Effective January 1, 2010, we modified this plan so that executives subject to U.S. Internal Revenue Service compensation limits will accrue future benefits that are substantially the same as benefits under the pension plan. Individuals who participated in the PRP prior to January 1, 2010 will receive benefits calculated under the prior benefit formula through December 31, 2009 and benefits calculated under the lower PRP benefit formula on and after January 1, 2010. Amounts receivable by the executives under the PRP are reduced by any amounts receivable by them under the pension plan, any qualifying profit sharing plan, Company-paid portion of social security benefits, and the amounts of the Company match in the 401(k) plan.

Effective December 31, 2013, the PRP was closed to new employees. All eligible employees as of December 31, 2013 will continue to earn PRP benefits through December 31, 2023 as long as they remain employed by Dover and its affiliates. Effective December 31, 2023, Dover intends to eliminate any future benefit accruals consistent with the freezing of benefit accruals under the pension plan.

We offer a deferred compensation plan to allow participants to elect to defer their receipt of some or all of their salary, bonuses and any payout of a cash performance award. The plan permits executive officers to defer receipt of part of their compensation to later periods and facilitates tax planning for the participants. Effective January 1, 2014, the deferred

compensation plan was amended to provide for certain matching and additional contributions for participants who do not also participate in the PRP. Our NEOs are participants in the PRP and are not eligible for matching or additional contributions under the deferred compensation plan. Accordingly, we do not consider the deferred compensation plan to play a major role in our compensation program for our NEOs as we do not match any amounts deferred or guarantee any particular return on deferrals.

Clawback Policy

Currently, our PRP includes clawback provisions for termination for cause and the severance plan and CIC severance plan provide for clawback of benefits for breaches of the plan. Our 2012 Plan provides that awards will be subject to such clawback requirements and policies as may be required by applicable law or Dover policies in effect from time to time. We intend to adopt a broader recovery policy once the SEC finalizes the rules in this area.

Anti-hedging and Anti-pledging Policy

Currently, all employees who receive an award under our long-term incentive plan, including all NEOs, are prohibited from hedging or pledging their position in Dover stock.

Perquisites

We provide substantially no executive perquisites, nor does the Company own or operate any corporate aircraft. Management and the Committee believe that providing significant perquisites to executive officers would not be consistent with our overall compensation philosophy. As a result, we do not provide executive officers with social club memberships, Company cars or car allowances, financial counseling, or the like. We limit the executives’ participation to the programs generally available to Dover employees.

Shareholding Guidelines

We believe that our executives will most effectively pursue the long-term interests of our shareholders if they are shareholders themselves. In 2009, the Compensation Committee adopted formal share ownership guidelines (subject to exceptions that may be granted by the Committee for significant personal events or retirement planning). Based on current share ownership, all NEOs currently meet the guidelines.

The Committee reserves the right to provide a portion of annual bonus and/or cash performance awards in stock for any officer who fails to meet or make satisfactory progress toward satisfying the guidelines within the required time.

Risk Assessment

In 2014, Dover, with the assistance of Towers Watson, conducted a fresh review of the formal risk assessment for all our incentive compensation programs that have material impact on our financial statements. Towers Watson inventoried incentive compensation programs across the operating

companies, segments, and corporate globally. Towers Watson then collected key information about each program including the number of participants, target annual awards or expected spend, income statement and balance sheet accounts tied to the program, performance metrics, and summary design features. Towers Watson used selection criteria developed with Dover management to choose individual programs for in-depth review. No programs were found to present a material adverse risk to the financial statements of Dover.

Independent Compensation Committee Advisor Policy

The Compensation Committee has an independence policy to ensure the continuing independence and

accountability to the Committee of any advisor hired to assist the Committee in the discharge of its duties. The policy formalizes and fosters the independence of the Compensation Committee’s advisor from management, while permitting management limited ability to access the advisor’s knowledge of Dover for compensation matters. Under the policy, the Committee will annually review and pre-approve the services that may be provided to management by the independent advisor without further Committee approval. Committee approval is required prior to management retaining the independent advisor for any executive compensation services or other consulting services or products above an aggregate annual limit of $50,000. In 2014, the independent advisor did no work for management.