
Stay Packages - kylebragger
http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2010/04/stay-compensation.html
======
imp
Makes sense. It's no more of a bribe than the "bribe" your employer gives you
to come into work everyday.

------
hga
_Excellent_.

This sage advice (which is obvious, but I've never seen it elsewhere ...
granted, it's now more of an issue since the IPO market is _dead_ ) plus some
other things he's said in this general area of technical (or at least non-
founder) talent, suggests to me that Fred Wilson really gets it. Too bad he
loves NYC ^_^.

------
TotlolRon
Stay! Good dog.

~~~
TotlolRon
Youv'e been downvoted. Give hand. Good dog.

------
jamesshamenski
Money is a poor motivator and has been countlessly documented as such.

If a (sinking) company (like palm) relies on this to keep their talent, then
they are clearly drowning.

IMHO, Most employees are in this to see if they get a significant job title
increase (status).

~~~
gojomo
Impending sale is a unique situation where some of the other motivators are in
serious doubt (control, status, etc.). No one can be credibly offered the
other motivators when there's a chance of complete ownership change in the
near future. ("The new owner might promote you; they might fire you. We can't
guarantee either outcome because what we're selling is the option value.")

None of the studies of motivation I've seen have specifically addressed such a
situation. They concern motivating _good_ work, not _sticking around through a
foreseen ownership discontinuity_.

A stay package may not make people happy and productive, but it does
_contractually_ keep them around, giving the new owners a reasonable chance of
receiving the knowhow and functioning business, before eventually making their
own personnel/motivation decisions.

(That's why even though Fred Wilson is right about the stay packages'
propriety and value, I don't think there's anything wrong with calling them
'bribes'. That's a vivid analogy for the sort of purchased-but-not-
necessarily-enthusiastic compliance they can achieve.)

~~~
jamesshamenski
agreed on all points.

