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

Abstract

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.