stdClass Object ( [id] => 7893 [paper_index] => EW201811-13-002601 [title] => EMPLOYEE STOCK OPTION SCHEME (ESOP) AND ITS EFFECT ON PRODUCTIVITY: A COMPARATIVE STUDY IN THE INDIAN INFRA SECTOR [description] =>
  1. Aggarwal, S. C. (2001). Stock options as a system of reward: theory and evidence. Indian School of Political Economy< Poona>: Journal of Indian School of Political Economy, 13(4), 595.
  2. Blasi, J., Conte, M., & Kruse, D. (1996), Employee stock ownership and corporate performance among public companies, ILR Review, 50(1), 60-79.
  3. Brick, I. E., Palmon, O., & Wald, J. K. (2006), CEO compensation, director compensation, and firm performance: Evidence of cronyism?, Journal of Corporate Finance, 12(3), 403-423.
  4. Bulan, L., Sanyal, P., & Yan, Z. (2010). A few bad apples: An analysis of CEO performance pay and firm productivity. Journal of Economics and Business, 62(4), 273-306.
  5. Craig, B. (1993). The objectives of worker cooperatives. Journal of Comparative Economics, 17, 288–308.
  6. Cui, H., & Mak, Y. T. (2002), The relationship between managerial ownership and firm performance in high R&D firms, Journal of Corporate Finance, 8(4), 313-336.
  7. Cheng, Q., & Farber, D. B. (2008), Earnings restatements, changes in CEO compensation, and firm performance, The Accounting Review, 83, 1217–1250.
  8. Conte, M., Tannenbaum, A. S., & McCulloch, D. (1981), Employee ownership.
  9. Conyon, M., Gregg, P., & Machin, S. (1995). Taking care of business: Executive compensation in the United Kingdom. The Economic Journal, 105(430), 704-714.
  10. Hall, B. J., & Liebman, J. B. (1998). Are CEOs really paid like bureaucrats?. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113(3), 653-691.
  11. Hallock, D. E., Salazar, R.J., & Venneman, S., (2004), ―Demographic and attitudinal correlates of employee satisfaction with an ESOP‖, British Journal of Management, 15, 4, 321-333.
  12. Ichniowski, C., Shaw, K., & Prennushi, G. (1997), The effects of human resource management practices on productivity: A study of steel finishing lines, The American Economic Review, 291-313.
  13. Jensen, M. C., & Murphy, K. J. (1990), Performance pay and top-management incentives. Journal of Political Economy, 98(2), 225-264.
  14. Jensen, M. C. (1986), Agency costs of free cash flow, corporate finance, and takeovers, The American economic review, 76(2), 323-329.
  15. Jensen, M. C., & Murphy, K. J. (1990), Performance pay and top-management incentives. Journal of Political Economy, 98(2), 225-264.
  16. Kumbhakar, S.C., & Dunbar, A.E., (1993), ―The elusive ESOP productivity link: Evidence from U.S. firm-level data‖, Journal of Public Economics, 52, 273-283.
  17. Kruse, D. L. (1993), “Profit sharing: Does it make a difference?”, Books from Upjohn Press.
  18. Kramer, B., (2008), ―Employee ownership and participation effects on firm outcomes‖, A dissertation submitted to the Graduate Faculty in Economics in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, The City University of New York, 126 pp.
  19. Kim, E. H., & Ouimet, P. (2009), “Employee capitalism or corporate socialism?”, Broad-based employee stock ownership, Discussion Papers, US Census Bureau Center for Economic Studies.
  20. Kala, K.N., & Poornima, S., (2012), ―A study on the impact of ESOP on corporate productivity‖, International Journal of Research in Management, Economics and Commerce, 11, 614-621.
  21. Marsh, T. ,& McAllister, D. (1981). ESOP tables: Asurvey of companies with ESOPs. Journal of Corporation Law, 6, 551-624.
  22. Murray, D. Smithers, A., and Emerson, J. (1998). USA: The impact of employee stock options. 'Smithes Report', Report No.l 17. London: Smithers & Co. Ltd.
  23. Rosen, C., & Klein, K. (1983), Job-creating performance of employee-owned firms, Monthly Lab. Rev., 106, 15.
  24. Sesil, J. C., & Kroumova, M. K. (2005), The Impact of Broad-Based Stock Options on Firm Performance: Does Firm Size Matter?
  25. Weitzman, M., Kruse, D., & Blinder, A. (1990), Profit sharing and productivity, 1990, 95-142.
  26. Annual Reports of Larsen & Toubro Limited from years 2014 to 2018.
  27. Annual Reports of Hindustan Construction Company Limited from years 2014 to 2018.
  28. www.moneycontrol.com
  29. www.investopedia.com
[author] => Parviz Hajizadeh [googlescholar] => https://scholar.google.co.in/citations?user=KeqZGcIAAAAJ&hl=en [doi] => [year] => 2018 [month] => November [volume] => 6 [issue] => 11 [file] => eprapub/EW201811-13-002601.pdf [abstract] =>

Employee Stock Option Plans (ESOPs) have been utilized by many successful companies across the world. A Research on the relation between ESOPs and productivity has attracted considerable attention in this study. This study analyzed the ESOP utilized by L&T and Hindustan Construction Company (HCC) operating in the construction business. The results from both the companies shall be analyzed to detail out the ESOPs as a powerful tool for achieving corporate efficiency and growth. Studying and analyzing data from the annual reports of both L&T and HCC, it was claimed that ESOPs play a positive role in enhancing employee productivity.

KEYWORDS: Employee Stock Option Scheme, Employee Productivity, Indian Infrastructure sector

[keywords] => [doj] => [hit] => 1865 [status] => [award_status] => P [orderr] => 20 [journal_id] => 4 [googlesearch_link] => [edit_on] => [is_status] => 1 [journalname] => EPRA International Journal of Economic and Business Review(JEBR) [short_code] => IJES [eissn] => 2347-9671 (O), 2349-0187(P) [pissn] => [home_page_wrapper] => images/products_image/12.JEBR.png ) Error fetching PDF file.