> you only contributed to creating $20,000 of that
That's an interesting way to think about it, but as long as the employee is getting a base salary, the employer couldn't justify granting enough options to achieve this goal of compensation being equal to (theoretical) value added.
If we consider base salary fixed, then options are more leveraged, but a similar reward structure could be achieved by granting the same number of RSUs and reducing base salary by the exercise cost.
Sorry, I didn't mean to suggest that the goal was for compensation to be equal to value added. I think the goal is for it to be proportional, or at least more proportional than a pure stock grant would be.
That's an interesting way to think about it, but as long as the employee is getting a base salary, the employer couldn't justify granting enough options to achieve this goal of compensation being equal to (theoretical) value added.
If we consider base salary fixed, then options are more leveraged, but a similar reward structure could be achieved by granting the same number of RSUs and reducing base salary by the exercise cost.