BP » Topics » Annual bonus result

This excerpt taken from the BP 20-F filed Mar 4, 2008.
Annual bonus result
Performance measures and targets were set at the beginning of the year and formed the main basis for determining the 2007 bonus. Financial measures accounted for 50% weighting and focused on EBITDA, cash costs and capital expenditure. Non-financial measures carried 30% weight and centred on HSE performance, growth and reputation. Individual performance, including segment deliverables and living the values of the group, made up the final 20%.
     Financially, underlying EBITDA results reflected a favourable price environment but also some performance shortfall, related largely to reduced refining availability at Whiting and Texas City, as well as delays in start-up of some major exploration and production projects. Overall it was below expectation. Cash costs were marginally above plan, largely due to higher expenditures in refining, especially Texas City. Capital expenditure was near plan, despite higher than expected sector inflation.
     On the non-financial side, safety was maintained as the highest priority of the executive top team. Significant progress was made on many aspects of process safety, ranging from development and testing of a process safety index, addressing specific recommendations of the Baker Panel, implementing a holistic operating management system (OMS) and ensuring clear accountability. Personal safety metrics and greenhouse gas emissions were also good.
     Growth was led by upstream, which had the strongest year of resource access since the early 1990s and reserves replacement in excess of 100%. Refinery throughput was below target, due to reduced availability at Texas City and Whiting. BP Alternative Energy met plan targets, achieving some 40% growth compared with 2006.
     External assessments indicate that significant progress has been made to rebuild the company’s reputation.
     In terms of individual performance during a transition year, the committee recognized very high levels of personal and team effort to produce results, resolve past issues and position the company for future success.
     The strong individual performances, combined with above-target non-financial and near-target financial performance, led the committee to award bonuses generally around or just above target, as set out in the summary table on page 64.

2005-2007 share element result
Performance for the 2005-2007 share element was assessed relative to the TSR of the company compared with the other oil majors –ExxonMobil, Shell, Total and Chevron. BP’s TSR result, reflecting past operating problems, was last relative to the other majors. The committee also reviewed the underlying business performance relative to competitors, including financial (ROACE, EPS, cash flow etc.) and non-financial (HSE etc.) indicators. While this showed some areas of strong performance, the committee’s overall assessment, considering both the TSR result and the underlying performance, was that performance failed to meet satisfactory levels and consequently no shares will vest in the Plan for 2005-2007.
     Lord Browne also held an award under the 2005-2007 share element related to long-term leadership measures. These focused on sustaining BP’s financial, strategic and organizational health. Performance relative to the award was assessed by the chairman’s committee and, based

on this assessment, 80,000 shares vested, representing about 15% of the award.

Remuneration policy 
Our remuneration policy for executive directors aims to ensure there is a clear link between the company’s purpose, its business plans and executive reward, with pay varying with performance. In order to achieve this, the policy is based on these key principles: 
–  The majority of executive remuneration will be linked to the achievement of demanding performance targets, independently set to support the creation of long-term shareholder value. 
–  The structure will reflect a fair system of reward for all the participants. 
–  The remuneration committee will determine the overall amount of each component of remuneration, taking into account the success of BP and the competitive environment. 
–  There will be a quantitative and qualitative assessment of performance, with the remuneration committee making an informed judgement within a framework approved by shareholders. 
–  Remuneration policy and practice will be as transparent as possible. 
–  Executives will develop a significant personal shareholding in order to align their interests with those of shareholders. 
–  Pay and employment conditions elsewhere in the group will be taken into account, especially in setting annual salary increases. 
–  The remuneration policy for executive directors will be reviewed regularly, independently of executive management, and will set the tone for the remuneration of other senior executives. 
–  The remuneration committee will actively seek to understand shareholder preferences. 
     Executive directors’ total remuneration consists of salary, annual bonus, long-term incentives, pensions and other benefits. The remuneration committee reviews this structure regularly to ensure it is achieving its aims and did so in 2007. 
     The main part of the review centred on the share element of the EDIP. The committee investigated alternative and additional measures to TSR, in particular those representing underlying operational performance, and also considered the inclusion of non-financial measures, most notably those relating to HSE. 
     In the process of the review, input was sought from key institutional investors and their representative bodies. 
     After thorough review, the committee concluded that, for the long-term metrics, there was no ‘perfect’ measure and, on balance, no strong reason for change. TSR remains an appropriate measure to reflect long-term shareholder value. The detailed rationale behind the current scoring system, as set out in the notes to the resolution in 2005 that was approved by shareholders, still remained relevant and valid. The committee felt that this system gives an optimal balance of quantitative assessment relative to oil major performance as well as the ability of the committee to make qualitative evaluation of underlying business performance, including non-financial factors (such as HSE). Finally, the committee felt that, in BP’s current circumstances, there is merit in maintaining the stability of the plan. 

Salary
The remuneration committee reviews salaries annually, taking into account other large Europe-based global companies and companies in the US oil and gas sector. These groups are each defined and analysed by the committee’s independent remuneration advisers. The committee makes a judgement on salary levels based on its assessment of market conditions and the external advice.

Annual bonus
All executive directors are eligible to take part in an annual performance-based bonus scheme. The remuneration committee sets bonus targets and levels of eligibility each year.
     The target level for 2008 is 120% of base salary. In normal circumstances, the maximum payment for substantially exceeding performance targets will continue to be 150% of base salary.



Back to Contents

66    

 
     Annual bonus awards for 2008 will be based on a mix of demanding financial targets, based on the annual plan and the leadership objectives set at the beginning of the year. The target-level bonus of 120% of base salary is split as follows: 
  50% financial metrics from the annual plan, principally EBITDA, cash costs and capital expenditure. 
–    25% safety performance, including satisfactory and improving key metrics as well as progress on OMS implementation. 
  25% people, including behaviour, values and culture. 
–    20% individual performance, principally on relevant operating results and personal leadership. 
     The remuneration committee will also review carefully the underlying performance of the group in light of company business plans and will look at competitors’ results, analysts’ reports and the views of the chairmen of other BP board committees when assessing results. 
     In exceptional circumstances, the remuneration committee can decide to award bonuses moderately above the maximum level. The committee can also decide to reduce bonuses where this is warranted and, in exceptional circumstances, bonuses could be reduced to zero. We have a duty to shareholders to use our discretion in a reasonable and informed manner, acting to promote the success of the company, and also to be accountable and transparent in our decisions. Any significant exercise of discretion will be explained in the subsequent directors’ remuneration report. 

This excerpt taken from the BP 20-F filed Mar 6, 2007.
Annual bonus result
The 2006 annual bonus was based on performance relative to measures and targets set at the beginning of the year, as well as other factors the remuneration committee determined were relevant. Financial and operational metrics from the annual plan carried a 50% weighting and focused on earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA), return on average capital employed (ROACE) and safety, environment and production targets. Strategic milestones, including those relating to technology, operations and business development, accounted for 30%. Individual performance, including both leadership objectives and living the values of the group, accounted for 20%.
     On the financial side, underlying EBITDA was marginally below target. There were negative effects from US operating issues and positive effects from improvements in operating performance. ROACE was marginally above target. Cash costs and capital expenditure came in around target levels. Planned divestments of non-strategic assets achieved premium prices. Targets were met for personal safety, greenhouse gas emissions, oil and gas discovered volumes and proved reserves. Average production rate was below target.
     With respect to milestones, seven of nine major projects were completed as planned. However, the Thunder Horse development was delayed. Good progress was achieved to define and sanction a further 18 major projects. The alternative energy business exceeded its objectives. Good progress was made in developing and implementing a major six-point plan for improving safety and operational integrity.

     In terms of individual performance, in a period of significant challenges, the executive directors demonstrated commitment, determination and unity to address issues and improve performance.
     While the quantitative assessment generated a near-target score, the remuneration committee also considered broader qualitative factors. These included the findings of internal and external reports on operational and safety issues in the US business. On balance, the committee judged that bonus levels should be reduced by 50% from the level they would otherwise have been. The resulting annual bonuses are set out in the table above.

EXCERPTS ON THIS PAGE:

20-F
Mar 4, 2008
20-F
Mar 6, 2007
Wikinvest © 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012. Use of this site is subject to express Terms of Service, Privacy Policy, and Disclaimer. By continuing past this page, you agree to abide by these terms. Any information provided by Wikinvest, including but not limited to company data, competitors, business analysis, market share, sales revenues and other operating metrics, earnings call analysis, conference call transcripts, industry information, or price targets should not be construed as research, trading tips or recommendations, or investment advice and is provided with no warrants as to its accuracy. Stock market data, including US and International equity symbols, stock quotes, share prices, earnings ratios, and other fundamental data is provided by data partners. Stock market quotes delayed at least 15 minutes for NASDAQ, 20 mins for NYSE and AMEX. Market data by Xignite. See data providers for more details. Company names, products, services and branding cited herein may be trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. The use of trademarks or service marks of another is not a representation that the other is affiliated with, sponsors, is sponsored by, endorses, or is endorsed by Wikinvest.
Powered by MediaWiki