The evolution and allocation of employee stock options: adapting US-style compensation to the Swedish business model

Abstract

From 1998 to 2002 the Sweden‐based telecommunications equipment company, Ericsson, instituted a series of stock option plans, thus emulating a distinctly American mode of compensating high‐tech personnel. Then in 2003, Ericsson did not renew its stock option program. Instead Corporate HR developed a unique employee stock purchase plan that made central use of an HR tool inherited from the 2001 and 2002 stock option plans to reward a subgroup of outstanding non‐executive employees. The Ericsson experience with stock options shows that corporate HR managers can graft an alien mode of compensation onto a well‐developed organizational structure without undermining the integrity of that structure. Our close examination of the transfer of US‐style stock options to Ericsson shows why convergence to the latest US business model is not an inevitable outcome, and how in global competition in the ICT industries alternative business models can still result in competitive success.

From Financialisation to Innovation in UK Big Pharma

“…In the merger that created AZN, the involvement of Investor AB, the longstanding industrial foundation of the Wallenberg family, held out the potential for a company that was much less financialised than AZN in fact would become in the 2000s. Investor's general orientation was what we call 'retain-and-reinvest': it retained corporate profits within the industrial companies in which it held large stakes (typically reinforced by voting power from dual-class shares) and reinvested in productive capabilities (see, e.g., Glimstedt et al 2006). In the 'merger of equals' that created AZN, however, Investor had to share power; the directorships were split evenly between Astra and Zeneca, with the UK-based company securing four out of seven non-executive positions, including that of the CEO McKillop.…”

Executive compensation: the role of Shari'a compliance

“…Another investigation found that executive compensation increased by 276 percent adjusted for inflation (Economic Policy Institute, 2006). Glimsted et al (2006) discuss the internationalization of stock options for both executives and non-executive employees. Lansing and Knoedgen (2007) go one-step further and describe how stock options as a component of executive compensation are on the rise in Europe.…”

The US stock market and the governance of innovative enterprise

“…From the 1960s, however, high-tech startups based in what would become known as Silicon Valley began to use stock options to lure technical and administrative personnel away from secure careers with established companies, and subsequently to compete for these employees among themselves. By the 1980s and 1990s broad-based employee stock option plans had become widespread among newer technology companies, and in the late 1990s diffused to many older corporations, not only in the United States but also abroad, that competed for this highly mobile labor (Carpenter et al 2003;Glimstedt et al 2006). While top executives continued to get highly disproportionate shares of the stock options that a company allocated, a broad base of the high-tech labor force, especially in high-tech industries, acquired an interest in corporate policies aimed at "maximizing shareholder value".…”