IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/hbhfxx/v18y2017i3p281-303.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Efficiency of Stock-Based Incentives: Experimental Evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Steven Huddart
  • Abdullah Yavas

Abstract

The authors report the results of laboratory experiments in which subjects are offered contracts structured similar to equity compensation packages and result in subjects receiving cash payments that are a function of their effort and random factors. The authors compare the outcomes from alternative contractual forms to theoretical benchmarks and report the efficiency of the contracts to provide evidence on whether options or stocks that have same economic cost to the employer yield the same or different effort levels from the managers. Both contracts elicit lower levels of effort than would be chosen by an expected-payoff-maximizing decision maker. Effort choices under the option contract did not differ significantly from effort choices under the stock contract except for male subjects. The option contract elicits a higher effort level for these subjects and condition than the stock contract. Effort choices reflect loss aversion and regret based on past stock price realizations.

Suggested Citation

  • Steven Huddart & Abdullah Yavas, 2017. "The Efficiency of Stock-Based Incentives: Experimental Evidence," Journal of Behavioral Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(3), pages 281-303, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:hbhfxx:v:18:y:2017:i:3:p:281-303
    DOI: 10.1080/15427560.2017.1340293
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/15427560.2017.1340293
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/15427560.2017.1340293?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:hbhfxx:v:18:y:2017:i:3:p:281-303. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/hbhf .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.