Close
Learning Methods
Classroom
A traditional classroom couples on-site learning with the added value of face-to-face interaction with instructors and peers. With courses and exams scheduled worldwide, you will be sure to find a class near you.
Interaction
Highly Interactive
On-going interaction with instructor throughout the entire classroom event
Interaction with peers/professionals via face-to-face
Components (May Include)
Onsite
On-site instructor-led delivery of course modules, discussions, exercises, case studies, and application opportunities
Supplemental learning elements such as: audio/video files, tools and templates, articles and/or white papers
E-course materials available two weeks prior to the course start date; printed course materials ship directly to the event location
Duration
One + Days
Varies by course ranging from one to multiple days
Technical Needs
Specific requirements are clearly noted on the course page
Virtual Classroom
Ideal for those who appreciate live education instruction, but looking to save on travel. A virtual classroom affords you many of the same learning benefits as traditional–all from the convenience of your office.
Interaction
Highly Interactive
On-going interaction with instructor throughout the entire virtual classroom event
Interaction with peers/professionals via online environment
Components (May Include)
Live online instructor-led delivery of course modules, discussions, exercises, case studies, and application opportunities
Supplemental learning elements such as: audio/video files, tools and templates, articles and/or white papers
E-course materials available up to one week prior to the course start date. Recorded playback and supplemental materials available up to seven days after the live event.
Duration
Varies by course ranging from one to multiple sessions
Technical Needs
Adobe Flash Player
Acrobat Reader
Computer with sound capability and high-speed internet access
Phone line access
E-Learning
A self-paced, online learning experience that allows you to study any time of day. Course material is pre-recorded by an instructor and you have the flexibility to view content modules as desired.
Interaction
Independent Learning
Components (May Include)
Pre-Recorded
Pre-recorded course modules
Supplemental learning elements such as: audio/video files, online quizzes
E-course materials start on the day of purchase
Optional purchased print material ships within 7 business days
Duration
120 Days - Anytime
120-day access starts on the day of purchase
Direct access to all components
Technical Needs
Adobe Flash Player
Acrobat Reader
Computer with sound capability and high-speed internet access
Close
Contact Sponsor
E-Reward
Online
Paul Thompson
Phone: 1 44 01614322584
Contact by Email | Website
Close
Sorry, you can't add this item to the cart.
You have reached the maximum allowed quantity for purchase in your cart or the item isn't available anymore.
Product successfully added to your cart!
Price
View your cart
Continue shopping
Please note our website will be down this Friday, November 5 from 9pm ET – 11pm ET for routine maintenance. We apologize for any inconvenience.
WORKSPAN
REWARDING READS |

RSUs vs. Stock Options: Intel and Airbnb Executive Compensation

“Rewarding Reads” is a space for articles and personal essays meant to be thought-provoking and informative for human resources professionals, from sharing the “human” perspectives on workplace issues to book reviews of business titles we find inspiring. Have an essay or blog post to share? Contact us at workspan@worldatwork.org.

Intel and Airbnb recently disclosed restricted stock unit (RSU) grants to CEOs that vest based on meeting aggressive stock price hurdles ranging from 3x (Intel) to about 10x (Airbnb). It is surprising to note that these companies set very aggressive stock price hurdles but decided to use RSUs and not stock options under these grants.

Image

Generally, when selecting between RSUs and stock options, it makes sense to use RSUs when a company is trying to manage inherent risk with stock options. Stock options are not attractive if stock price does not grow in a meaningful way after the grant date. As a background, most stock options vest based on lapse of time and most RSUs vest based on lapse of time and/or satisfaction of performance conditions (e.g., earnings-per-share [EPS] goals, relative stock performance, etc.).   

If a company plans to give long-term incentives that vest based on aggressive stock price hurdles, it should seriously consider using stock options instead of RSUs. Otherwise, from the recipients’ point of views, they are leaving a lot of value on the table. Let’s use semiconductor giant Intel as an example.

Intel’s RSUs:

  • Grant value: $20 million
  • Assumed grant date stock price: $50
  • Number of RSUs granted: 400,000 ($20 M/$50)
  • RSUs vest at 3x grant date price (i.e., $150) during the next five years
  • Projected payout if the stock price hurdle is met: $60 million (400,000 RSUs x $150) – see technical notes below
  • Projected payout if stock options were used:

Image








Technical Notes:

  • Intel is using the 30-day average price to convert $20M into number of RSUs
  • The accounting cost of RSUs is likely to be different than $20M due to accounting rules. Intel is required to use a Monte Carlo model to estimate the accounting cost. The accounting cost is likely to be more than $20 million.
  • Generally, companies use a Monte Carlo model to determine the accounting cost of stock options when options vest based on stock price hurdles. The same accounting cost is also used to determine the number of stock options in this example. The exchange ratio used earlier provides a reasonable range for our analysis to estimate the number of stock options Intel would have granted if this was a stock option grant.
  • Dividends on RSU have been excluded from the analysis to keep it simple, but dividends are not going to impact conclusions.

The analysis shows that Intel’s CEO could have earned significantly more for exactly the same performance if he would have received stock options instead of RSUs. I do not know Intel’s reasoning for using RSUs instead of stock options, but let’s discuss potential reasons along with my thoughts:

  • Cost of RSUs versus stock options. Both awards cost the same from accounting cost (P&L point of view), but stock options are more dilutive than RSUs. Dilution is not a good reason to forgo stock options because higher dilution cost also provides higher benefits (compensation) to the CEO and an additional dilution level is negligible in this case (less than 0.01%).
  • Limit the level of compensation. I doubt this is a valid reason considering Intel’s overall compensation package (more than $100M at grant date) and potential future value of these awards. Generally, companies look at total compensation value as of grant date and not as of payment or vesting date.
  • Limit risk taking. Stock options could encourage imprudent risk-taking activities. I think this rationale is not valid considering that the RSU grant vests only if the stock price reaches $150.
  • Philosophical reasons. It is difficult to imagine any philosophical reasons due to the design of the RSU program and overall compensation package, including award types and sizes.

We get similar results when reviewing Airbnb data. For example, Airbnb’s CEO vest is 1.2 million shares if the company’s stock price reaches $485. (The stock price was about $50 at the time of grant.)  The projected Airbnb payout if stock options were used instead of RSUs:

Image








Interesting note: In the case of Airbnb, the loss of value is society’s loss because the CEO intends to donate proceeds from this award.

I understand that the Intel and Airbnb RSU values are large numbers even under the current design. I am not suggesting that the companies should have paid more compensation. My main point is that RSU is an inefficient vehicle considering the performance level required to earn these shares. The conclusions in this article apply at all employee levels, not just CEOs. If a company expects significant growth (e.g., in case of a pre-IPO company) in stock price, it should consider granting stock options and not RSUs. The table below provides the sample future stock price growth required to make stock options more attractive than RSUs.

Image







In conclusion, companies should consider using stock options and not RSUs when they expect significant stock price growth. Similarly, when a company ties long-term incentive vesting to aggressive stock price hurdles, stock options should be the preferred vehicle.

About the Author

Anil Agarwal Bio Image

Anil Agarwal is a multifaceted total rewards professional with broad industry and consulting experience. 


About WorldatWork

WorldatWork is a professional nonprofit association that sets the agenda and standard of excellence in the field of Total Rewards. Our membership, signature certifications, data, content, and conferences are designed to advance our members’ leadership, and to help them influence great outcomes for their own organizations.

About Membership

Membership provides access to practical resources, research, emerging trends, a professional network, and career-building education and certification. Learn more and join today.