Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/2440/62351
Citations
Scopus Web of ScienceĀ® Altmetric
?
?
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorCanil, J.-
dc.contributor.authorRosser, B.-
dc.date.issued2010-
dc.identifier.citationCorporate Board: role, duties and composition, 2010; 6(1):6-18-
dc.identifier.issn1810-8601-
dc.identifier.issn2312-2722-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2440/62351-
dc.description.abstract<jats:p>This study tests the Hall and Murphy (2000, 2002) propositions using a dataset wherein in-the money and out-of-the-money option grants are just as prevalent as at-the-money option grants. The choice of grant size and exercise price in determining optimal pay-performance sensitivity, reveals an over prescription of at-the-money options at the expense of in-the-money options, particularly for high risk-averse CEOs. Also, pay-performance sensitivity is found unexpectedly negatively related to the exercise price, which is attributed to an equally unexpected inverse relation between risk aversion and grant size.</jats:p>-
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityJean M. Canil and Bruce A. Rosser-
dc.language.isoen-
dc.publisherVirtus Interpress-
dc.rightsCopyright 2010 Virtus Interpress. All rights reserved.-
dc.source.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.22495/cbv6i1art1-
dc.titleIs there an optimum grant size and exercise price for incentivizing executives?-
dc.typeJournal article-
dc.identifier.doi10.22495/cbv6i1art1-
pubs.publication-statusPublished-
dc.identifier.orcidCanil, J. [0000-0002-3646-4320]-
Appears in Collections:Aurora harvest
Business School publications

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.