|
|
 | | | |
- close
- close
- close
- close
This excerpt taken from the DVN DEF 14A filed Apr 24, 2009. Benchmarking
To successfully compete for executive talent, the Committee,
working with the Compensation Consultant, annually compares the
compensation of its executives against the compensation of
similarly-situated executives at peer companies. The Company
establishes a peer group consisting of oil and gas and energy
services companies with similar revenue levels and asset and
market values as the Company. The Company also considers the
enterprise value of companies — calculated as the
market value of a company plus (i) long-term debt
and preferred stock, minus (ii) cash and cash
equivalents — in establishing a peer group. The
Committee believes these metrics are appropriate for determining
peers because they provide a reasonable point of reference for
comparing executives with similar positions and responsibilities.
For 2008, the Committee approved a peer group consisting of the
21 companies listed below:
Anadarko Petroleum Corporation*
Apache Corporation* Baker Hughes Incorporated Chesapeake Energy Corporation* Chevron Corporation* ConocoPhillips* Dominion Resources, Inc. El Paso Corporation EnCana Corporation* EOG Resources, Inc.* Halliburton Company Hess Corporation* Marathon Oil Corporation* Murphy Oil Corporation* Nabors Industries Ltd. Occidental Petroleum Corporation* Schlumberger Limited Tesoro Corporation Transocean Inc. Valero Energy Corporation The Williams Companies, Inc.
The companies designated with an asterisk (*) are included in a
subset of peer companies focused on oil and gas exploration and
production (E&P). The Committee referred to compensation
from these peers to evaluate industry-specific executive roles.
The Committee’s benchmarking analysis consists of all
components of total direct compensation, including base salary,
annual bonus and long-term incentives. The Compensation
Consultant collected and summarized compensation data from the
Proxy Statements of the peer group and the Compensation
Consultant’s proprietary databases. The compensation data
are typically from the prior year. Thus, when setting current
compensation, the Committee works with the Compensation
Consultant to adjust the data to account for known or expected
changes in the market between the effective date of the data and
the current date. Additionally, the Committee typically excludes
from its benchmarking analysis those companies whose
compensation far exceeds the compensation found at a majority of
the peer group.
This excerpt taken from the DVN DEF 14A filed Apr 28, 2008. Benchmarking
To successfully compete for executive talent, the Company
annually compares the compensation of its executives against the
compensation of comparable executives. The Company
21
Commitment Runs Deep
Table of Contents
establishes a peer group consisting of oil and gas and energy
services companies having similar asset, revenue and enterprise
value profiles as the Company. The Committee believes these
metrics are appropriate for determining peers because they
provide a reasonable point of reference for comparing similar
positions and scope of responsibility.
For 2007, the Committee approved a peer group of
21 companies listed below:
Anadarko Petroleum Corporation
Apache Corporation Baker Hughes Incorporated Chesapeake Energy Corporation Chevron Corporation ConocoPhillips Dominion Resources, Inc. El Paso Corporation EnCana Corporation EOG Resources, Inc. Halliburton Company Hess Corporation Marathon Oil Corporation Murphy Oil Corporation Nabors Industries Ltd. Occidental Petroleum Corporation Schlumberger Limited Tesoro Corporation Transocean Inc. Valero Energy Corporation The Williams Companies, Inc.
The Company’s benchmarking analysis consists of all
components of total direct compensation, including base salary,
annual bonus and long-term incentives. The Compensation
Consultant collected and summarized compensation data from the
proxy statements of the peer group and the Compensation
Consultant’s proprietary databases. The information
available in comparing compensation paid by the Company in the
past as well as setting current compensation typically is from
the prior year. Thus, when setting current compensation, the
Committee works with the Compensation Consultant to adjust the
data to account for known or perceived changes in the market
between the effective date of the data and the current date.
For 2007, the named executive officers were included in the
benchmarking analysis. The Committee did not place any
particular emphasis on the market benchmark data for
Mr. Smette, as he has a unique role relative to other
executives in the peer group. Please see the “Material
Differences in Pay Decisions for Named Executive Officers”
section for additional information.
| EXCERPTS ON THIS PAGE:
|
| |||||||
