English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This study tests the Hall and Murphy (2000, 2002) propositions using a dataset wherein in-themoney 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.

Is there an optimum grant size and exercise price for incentivizing executives?