IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/annopr/v262y2018i2d10.1007_s10479-016-2127-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are employee stock option exercise decisions better explained through the prospect theory?

Author

Listed:
  • Hamza Bahaji

    (University of Paris Dauphine)

Abstract

In this paper, we introduce a new framework for the analysis of employee stock options exercise decisions. We develop a distorted lattice model where the exercise decision obeys a policy that maximizes the expected value of the exercise outcomes under the Cumulative Prospect Theory. Using a large US dataset of exercise transactions, we show that our framework broadly outperforms the Expected Utility Theory framework in explaining empirical exercise decisions. Interestingly, our empirical estimates of probability weighting are consistent with those from the experimental literature. We argue that this analysis provides a unifying stream for thinking about issues related to the exercise and the valuation of stock options.

Suggested Citation

  • Hamza Bahaji, 2018. "Are employee stock option exercise decisions better explained through the prospect theory?," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 262(2), pages 335-359, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:262:y:2018:i:2:d:10.1007_s10479-016-2127-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s10479-016-2127-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10479-016-2127-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10479-016-2127-2?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ulrike Malmendier & Geoffrey Tate, 2005. "CEO Overconfidence and Corporate Investment," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 60(6), pages 2661-2700, December.
    2. Bahaji, Hamza & Casta, Jean-François, 2016. "Employee stock option-implied risk attitude under Rank-Dependent Expected Utility," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 52(PA), pages 144-154.
    3. Polkovnichenko, Valery & Zhao, Feng, 2013. "Probability weighting functions implied in options prices," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(3), pages 580-609.
    4. Chip Heath & Steven Huddart & Mark Lang, 1999. "Psychological Factors and Stock Option Exercise," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(2), pages 601-627.
    5. Detemple, Jerome & Sundaresan, Suresh, 1999. "Nontraded Asset Valuation with Portfolio Constraints: A Binomial Approach," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 12(4), pages 835-872.
    6. Hemmer, Thomas & Matsunaga, Steve & Shevlin, Terry, 1996. "The influence of risk diversification on the early exercise of employee stock options by executive officers," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 45-68, February.
    7. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    8. Arkes, Hal R. & Hirshleifer, David & Jiang, Danling & Lim, Sonya, 2008. "Reference point adaptation: Tests in the domain of security trading," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 105(1), pages 67-81, January.
    9. M. Abdellaoui & B. Munier, 1998. "The risk-structure dependence effect:Experimenting with an eye to decision-aiding," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 80(0), pages 237-252, January.
    10. Elyès Jouini & Clotilde Napp, 2012. "Behavioral biases and the representative agent," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 73(1), pages 97-123, July.
    11. Hamza Bahaji, 2011. "Incentives from stock option grants: a behavioral approach," Review of Accounting and Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 10(3), pages 200-227, August.
    12. Quiggin, John, 1982. "A theory of anticipated utility," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 323-343, December.
    13. Ingolf Dittmann & Ernst Maug & Oliver Spalt, 2010. "Sticks or Carrots? Optimal CEO Compensation when Managers Are Loss Averse," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 65(6), pages 2015-2050, December.
    14. Brenner, Menachem & Sundaram, Rangarajan K. & Yermack, David, 2000. "Altering the terms of executive stock options," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 103-128, July.
    15. Sautner, Zacharias & Weber, Martin, 2005. "Stock Options and Employee Behavior," Sonderforschungsbereich 504 Publications 05-26, Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Universität Mannheim;Sonderforschungsbereich 504, University of Mannheim.
    16. George Wu & Richard Gonzalez, 1996. "Curvature of the Probability Weighting Function," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(12), pages 1676-1690, December.
    17. Grasselli, Matheus & Henderson, Vicky, 2009. "Risk aversion and block exercise of executive stock options," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 109-127, January.
    18. Hamza Bahaji, 2011. "Incentives from stock option grants: a behavioral approach," Post-Print halshs-00681607, HAL.
    19. repec:dau:papers:123456789/9896 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. repec:dau:papers:123456789/14116 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Carpenter, Jennifer N., 1998. "The exercise and valuation of executive stock options," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 127-158, May.
    22. Bettis, J. Carr & Bizjak, John M. & Lemmon, Michael L., 2005. "Exercise behavior, valuation, and the incentive effects of employee stock options," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 445-470, May.
    23. Huddart, Steven & Lang, Mark, 1996. "Employee stock option exercises an empirical analysis," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 5-43, February.
    24. repec:dau:papers:123456789/7289 is not listed on IDEAS
    25. Hamza Bahaji, 2011. "Incentives from stock option grants: a behavioral approach," Post-Print halshs-00681611, HAL.
    26. repec:dau:papers:123456789/10046 is not listed on IDEAS
    27. Nicholas C. Barberis, 2013. "Thirty Years of Prospect Theory in Economics: A Review and Assessment," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 173-196, Winter.
    28. Jonathan Ingersoll, 2008. "Non‐Monotonicity of the Tversky‐Kahneman Probability‐Weighting Function: A Cautionary Note," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 14(3), pages 385-390, June.
    29. Spalt, Oliver G., 2013. "Probability Weighting and Employee Stock Options," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 48(4), pages 1085-1118, August.
    30. Hamza Bahaji, 2011. "Incentives from stock option grants: a behavioral approach," Post-Print halshs-00618478, HAL.
    31. Mohammed Abdellaoui, 2000. "Parameter-Free Elicitation of Utility and Probability Weighting Functions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(11), pages 1497-1512, November.
    32. Huddart, Steven, 1994. "Employee stock options," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 207-231, September.
    33. repec:dau:papers:123456789/2319 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Lei Chen & Ying-Ming Wang & Yan Huang, 2020. "Cross-efficiency aggregation method based on prospect consensus process," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 288(1), pages 115-135, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. repec:dau:papers:123456789/13098 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. repec:dau:papers:123456789/9550 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Bahaji, Hamza & Casta, Jean-François, 2016. "Employee stock option-implied risk attitude under Rank-Dependent Expected Utility," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 52(PA), pages 144-154.
    4. Jean-François Casta & Hamza Bahaji, 2014. "Juste Valeur Et Risque De Modele : Le Cas De La Valorisation Des Stock-Options," Post-Print hal-01899601, HAL.
    5. Lim, Terence & Lo, Andrew W. & Merton, Robert C. & Scholes, Myron S., 2006. "The Derivatives Sourcebook," Foundations and Trends(R) in Finance, now publishers, vol. 1(5–6), pages 365-572, April.
    6. Martin Widdicks & Jinsha Zhao, 2014. "A Model of Equity Based Compensation with Tax," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(7-8), pages 1002-1041, September.
    7. Sautner, Zacharias & Weber, Martin, 2005. "Stock options and employee behavior," Papers 05-26, Sonderforschungsbreich 504.
    8. Grasselli, Matheus & Henderson, Vicky, 2009. "Risk aversion and block exercise of executive stock options," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 109-127, January.
    9. Hamza Bahaji, 2009. "Contribution à l'analyse des déterminants du comportement d'exercice des porteurs de stock options : une étude empirique sur le marché Américain," Working Papers halshs-00512840, HAL.
    10. Izhakian, Yehuda & Yermack, David, 2017. "Risk, ambiguity, and the exercise of employee stock options," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(1), pages 65-85.
    11. Sun, Lei & Widdicks, Martin, 2016. "Why do employees like to be paid with Options?: A multi-period prospect theory approach," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 106-125.
    12. Arjun Chatrath & Rohan A. Christie‐David & Hong Miao & Sanjay Ramchander, 2019. "Losers and prospectors in the short‐term options market," Journal of Futures Markets, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(6), pages 721-743, June.
    13. Hamza Bahaji, 2011. "Incentives from stock option grants: a behavioral approach," Post-Print halshs-00681611, HAL.
    14. Sautner, Zacharias & Weber, Martin, 2005. "Subjective Stock Option Values and Exercise Decisions: Determinants and Consistency," Sonderforschungsbereich 504 Publications 05-31, Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Universität Mannheim;Sonderforschungsbereich 504, University of Mannheim.
    15. Hamza Bahaji, 2011. "Incentives from stock option grants: a behavioral approach," Post-Print halshs-00681607, HAL.
    16. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten, 2017. "On the applicability of maximum likelihood methods: From experimental to financial data," SAFE Working Paper Series 148, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2017.
    17. Tim Leung & Ronnie Sircar, 2009. "Accounting For Risk Aversion, Vesting, Job Termination Risk And Multiple Exercises In Valuation Of Employee Stock Options," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(1), pages 99-128, January.
    18. Hamza Bahaji, 2011. "Incentives from stock option grants: a behavioral approach," Review of Accounting and Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 10(3), pages 200-227, August.
    19. Brian J. Hall & Thomas A. Knox, 2002. "Managing Option Fragility," NBER Working Papers 9059, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Alex Markle & George Wu & Rebecca White & Aaron Sackett, 2018. "Goals as reference points in marathon running: A novel test of reference dependence," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 56(1), pages 19-50, February.
    21. Brian J. Hall & Thomas A. Knox, 2004. "Underwater Options and the Dynamics of Executive Pay‐to‐Performance Sensitivities," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(2), pages 365-412, May.
    22. Carpenter, Jennifer N. & Stanton, Richard & Wallace, Nancy, 2010. "Optimal exercise of executive stock options and implications for firm cost," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(2), pages 315-337, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Stock options; Exercise decisions; Cumulative Prospect Theory; Option valuation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • G13 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Contingent Pricing; Futures Pricing
    • G30 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - General
    • J33 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Wages, Compensation, and Labor Costs - - - Compensation Packages; Payment Methods
    • M41 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Accounting

    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:spr:annopr:v:262:y:2018:i:2:d:10.1007_s10479-016-2127-2. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.