<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:rssFeedStyles="http://www.lerougeliet.com/ns/rssFeedStyles#"

	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Even a taste of ownership motivates employees.	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://berkonomics.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=3154" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://berkonomics.com/?p=3154&#038;utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=even-a-taste-of-ownership-motivates-employees</link>
	<description>Dave Berkus&#039; business insights</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 29 Oct 2017 18:51:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Dave Berkus		</title>
		<link>https://berkonomics.com/?p=3154&#038;cpage=1#comment-112261</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dave Berkus]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Oct 2017 18:51:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://berkonomics.com/?p=3154#comment-112261</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://berkonomics.com/?p=3154&#038;cpage=1#comment-112251&quot;&gt;Robert Webber&lt;/a&gt;.

Rob,
There are formulas for startups:  CEO= 5-8%, CFO=1.5%, VP=1-1/14%, manager 1/2%, clerical 1/10 to 1/5%.   In a larger company it depends much more upon the cap table, especially how much of a percentage of the stock option plan shares have been issued and outstanding as options.  If the pool remains at 20% for a larger company, then you must look at the remaining option percent available. Your investors will not let you expand the pool beyond 20% in most every case, so your ability to grant larger options is limited.  And in a larger, later stage company, you are probably closer to the liquidity event and with less risk of dilution and failure.  That warrants a lower option grant.  BUT it always depends upon how competitive your recruiting effort is as to what you must offer.  Give away too many options early and your choices are fewer later... Hope this helps.
Dave]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://berkonomics.com/?p=3154&#038;cpage=1#comment-112251">Robert Webber</a>.</p>
<p>Rob,<br />
There are formulas for startups:  CEO= 5-8%, CFO=1.5%, VP=1-1/14%, manager 1/2%, clerical 1/10 to 1/5%.   In a larger company it depends much more upon the cap table, especially how much of a percentage of the stock option plan shares have been issued and outstanding as options.  If the pool remains at 20% for a larger company, then you must look at the remaining option percent available. Your investors will not let you expand the pool beyond 20% in most every case, so your ability to grant larger options is limited.  And in a larger, later stage company, you are probably closer to the liquidity event and with less risk of dilution and failure.  That warrants a lower option grant.  BUT it always depends upon how competitive your recruiting effort is as to what you must offer.  Give away too many options early and your choices are fewer later&#8230; Hope this helps.<br />
Dave</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Robert Webber		</title>
		<link>https://berkonomics.com/?p=3154&#038;cpage=1#comment-112251</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Webber]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Oct 2017 02:53:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://berkonomics.com/?p=3154#comment-112251</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Your posts are always insightful.   What percentage ownership in stock options would you recommend for different employees (by position, e.g., CEO, CFO, VP, Manager, Clerical/Admin) at (i) a pre-revenue start-up; and (ii) a $30 million to $50 million revenue company with positive EBITDA?
Thanks,
Rob]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your posts are always insightful.   What percentage ownership in stock options would you recommend for different employees (by position, e.g., CEO, CFO, VP, Manager, Clerical/Admin) at (i) a pre-revenue start-up; and (ii) a $30 million to $50 million revenue company with positive EBITDA?<br />
Thanks,<br />
Rob</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Dave Berkus		</title>
		<link>https://berkonomics.com/?p=3154&#038;cpage=1#comment-112171</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dave Berkus]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Oct 2017 22:45:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://berkonomics.com/?p=3154#comment-112171</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://berkonomics.com/?p=3154&#038;cpage=1#comment-112163&quot;&gt;Robby Moore&lt;/a&gt;.

Robby,

Thanks for your comment.  I should have limited this insight to tech companies and others where the race to find good employees is most difficult.  I do believe that any company can benefit from employee ownership, but this is a question of degrees.  In the tech world, there are lots and lots of stories of people taking a salary reduction to jump to a startup with promise and stock options.  The best programmers, for example, can command 1-1.5% in options, which could have real value.  Hope this limiting of the issue helps.

Dave]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://berkonomics.com/?p=3154&#038;cpage=1#comment-112163">Robby Moore</a>.</p>
<p>Robby,</p>
<p>Thanks for your comment.  I should have limited this insight to tech companies and others where the race to find good employees is most difficult.  I do believe that any company can benefit from employee ownership, but this is a question of degrees.  In the tech world, there are lots and lots of stories of people taking a salary reduction to jump to a startup with promise and stock options.  The best programmers, for example, can command 1-1.5% in options, which could have real value.  Hope this limiting of the issue helps.</p>
<p>Dave</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Robby Moore		</title>
		<link>https://berkonomics.com/?p=3154&#038;cpage=1#comment-112163</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robby Moore]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Oct 2017 17:11:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://berkonomics.com/?p=3154#comment-112163</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[This is something that economists who specialize in the relatively new applied field of personnel economics do not understand very well, so I&#039;m interested in your experience here.  Your &quot;plan&quot; of shared equity to all employees provides incentives to workers as long as the company is small enough so any one individual&#039;s effort can affect the stock price.  But I would guess that for many lower level employees in many firms their efforts cannot have such an effect.  An example would be a teller at Bank of America.  Yet, I believe B of A along with many other firms did provide a few shares to all employees at some point.  Perhaps this works because of &quot;peer effects&quot;, i.e., employees monitor each other because they know they are &quot;owners&quot;?  I think there&#039;s still a lot I&#039;m still missing something here as to why this works.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is something that economists who specialize in the relatively new applied field of personnel economics do not understand very well, so I&#8217;m interested in your experience here.  Your &#8220;plan&#8221; of shared equity to all employees provides incentives to workers as long as the company is small enough so any one individual&#8217;s effort can affect the stock price.  But I would guess that for many lower level employees in many firms their efforts cannot have such an effect.  An example would be a teller at Bank of America.  Yet, I believe B of A along with many other firms did provide a few shares to all employees at some point.  Perhaps this works because of &#8220;peer effects&#8221;, i.e., employees monitor each other because they know they are &#8220;owners&#8221;?  I think there&#8217;s still a lot I&#8217;m still missing something here as to why this works.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
