IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/brjirl/v40y2002i2p273-294.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Broad‐based Employee Stock Options in US ‘New Economy’ Firms

Author

Listed:
  • James C. Sesil
  • Maya K. Kroumova
  • Joseph R. Blasi
  • Douglas L. Kruse

Abstract

This paper compares the performance of 229 ‘New Economy’ firms offering broad‐based stock options to that of their non‐stock option counterparts. A simple comparison of these firms reveals that the former have higher shareholder returns, Tobin’s q and new knowledge generation. Multivariate analysis using panel data also suggests that the adoption of a stock option plan results in higher levels of value added per employee. However, we do not find evidence that these plans result in superior growth in Tobin’s q or new knowledge generation.

Suggested Citation

  • James C. Sesil & Maya K. Kroumova & Joseph R. Blasi & Douglas L. Kruse, 2002. "Broad‐based Employee Stock Options in US ‘New Economy’ Firms," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 40(2), pages 273-294, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:brjirl:v:40:y:2002:i:2:p:273-294
    DOI: 10.1111/1467-8543.00232
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8543.00232
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1467-8543.00232?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
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nien-Chi Liu & Ming-Yuan Chen & Mei-Ling Wang, 2016. "The Effects of Non-Expensed Employee Stock Bonus on Firm Performance: Evidence from Taiwanese High-Tech Firms," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 54(1), pages 30-54, March.
    2. Kato, Takao & Kauhanen, Antti, 2013. "Performance Pay and Enterprise Productivity: The Details Matter," ETLA Working Papers 21, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    3. Ahrens, Carolin & Oehmichen, Jana & Wolff, Michael, 2018. "Expatriates as influencers in global work arrangements: Their impact on foreign-subsidiary employees’ ESOP participation," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 53(4), pages 452-462.
    4. Yeongjoon Yoon & Sukanya Sengupta, 2019. "The effect of employee share ownership on employee commitment and turnover: comparing the cases in Britain and South Korea and the role of the economy," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(5-6), pages 486-516, November.
    5. Erik Poutsma & Paul E. M. Ligthart & Roel Schouteten, 2005. "Employee Share Schemes in Europe. The Influence of US Multinationals," management revue - Socio-Economic Studies, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 16(1), pages 99-122.
    6. David Marsden, 2004. "The Network Economy and Models of the Employment Contract: Psychological, Economic and Legal," CEP Discussion Papers dp0620, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    7. Oyer, Paul & Schaefer, Scott, 2005. "Why do some firms give stock options to all employees?: An empirical examination of alternative theories," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 99-133, April.
    8. Shan, Yaping, 2019. "Incentives for research agents and performance-vested equity-based compensation," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 44-69.
    9. Mónica Melle, 2005. "¿Cómo valora el mercado de valores español la adopción de planes de opciones sobre acciones para directivos y consejeros?," Investigaciones Economicas, Fundación SEPI, vol. 29(1), pages 73-115, January.
    10. Joseph R. Blasi & Richard B. Freeman & Christopher Mackin & Douglas L. Kruse, 2010. "Creating a Bigger Pie? The Effects of Employee Ownership, Profit Sharing, and Stock Options on Workplace Performance," NBER Chapters, in: Shared Capitalism at Work: Employee Ownership, Profit and Gain Sharing, and Broad-based Stock Options, pages 139-165, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Geert Braam & Erik Poutsma, 2015. "Broad-Based Financial Participation Plans and Their Impact on Financial Performance: Evidence from a Dutch Longitudinal Panel," De Economist, Springer, vol. 163(2), pages 177-202, June.
    12. Emmanuel Petrakis & Panagiotis Skartados, 2018. "Strategic Profit–Sharing in a Unionized Differentiated Goods Duopoly," Working Papers 1801, University of Crete, Department of Economics.
    13. Chen, Chao-Jung & Hsu, Chung-Yuan & Chen, Yu-Lin, 2014. "The impact of family control on the top management compensation mix and incentive orientation," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 29-46.
    14. David Marsden, 2004. "The ‘Network Economy’ and Models of the Employment Contract," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 42(4), pages 659-684, December.
    15. James C. Sesil & Yu Peng Lin, 2011. "The Impact of Employee Stock Option Adoption and Incidence on Productivity: Evidence from U.S. Panel Data," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(3), pages 514-534, July.
    16. Seng Ratny & Yen Yat & Tian Gaoliang & Feng Hua & Soksamnang Keo, 2019. "The Impact Of Managerial Stock Option On Firm Performance: Evidence From China," Noble International Journal of Business and Management Research, Noble Academic Publsiher, vol. 3(3), pages 62-72, March.
    17. Fang, Hongyan & Nofsinger, John R. & Quan, Juan, 2015. "The effects of employee stock option plans on operating performance in Chinese firms," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 141-159.
    18. Tariq Javed* & Mohd Faizal Basri, 2019. "Employee Ownership and Financial Performance of State-Owned Entities: A Mediating Role of Employee Loyalty," The Journal of Social Sciences Research, Academic Research Publishing Group, vol. 5(3), pages 640-645, 03-2019.
    19. Koustubh Kanti Ray, 2016. "Employee stock option plan and firm performance: A quantile regression approach," Asian Journal of Empirical Research, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 6(6), pages 152-166, June.

    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:bla:brjirl:v:40:y:2002:i:2:p:273-294. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    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.