In 2003 Harry Pearson and James Daye established - along with three other equity partners - a boutique investment banking firm with an entrepreneurial, casual office culture that delivered high quality customer service. In so doing, they offered a streamlined compensation plan that, in their own perspective, would pretty and directly reward their workers' performance.
However, as the company grew, some members of their staff sought a transparent procedure by which to measure their progress as well as the associated monetary advantages - along with the chance to acquire equity in the company. What compensation scheme would enable Daye and Pearson to reward their valued workers without losing sight of their initial aims? And how much would the five original associates consider diluting their holdings?
PUBLICATION DATE: July 21, 2011 PRODUCT #: CU28-HCB-ENG
This is just an excerpt. This case is about ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Related Case Solutions & Analyses:
Mirae Asset: Koreas Mutual Fund Pioneer
Telemedicine Opportunity or a Distraction
Netegrity and the CEO’s New Dilemma
GT Nexus: Leader in Cloud Computing Supply Chain Management
Crowdsourcing-Based Business Models: How to Create and Capture Value
Knowlton Roberts II (A)
Merck: Investing in Science-Based Business (Abridged)
Fate of the Vasa
AT&T’s Transmission Systems Business Unit (A)
Beech-Nut Nutrition Corp. (D)
