|
|
![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
This excerpt taken from the DVN DEF 14A filed Apr 27, 2007. Compensation
Guiding Principles
The following principles influence the design and administration
of our executive compensation program and are consistent with
our compensation philosophy.
Attracting
and Retaining Executive Talent Over the Long-Term
We believe that the attraction and long-term retention of
executive officers contributes significantly to our
Table of Contents
success. When executives remain with us over the long-term, they
cultivate meaningful, long-term relationships with key
employees. This enables them to positively impact our
performance by continually developing our personnel, fine-tuning
business processes, and creating a high-performance, effective
culture. In addition, stability at the executive level helps us
attract and retain managers and other employees who possess
valuable technical expertise and an understanding of the oil and
gas industry.
In order to attract and retain key executives who will
successfully manage the business over the longer-term, we must
compensate executives in a manner that is competitive with the
market for executive talent. Annually, the Committee reviews
peer group compensation information prepared by the Compensation
Consultant to ensure that our total executive compensation
program is competitive. The survey data used by the Committee as
a guide in determining our executive compensation includes
information from companies in the energy industry and the
broader market in which we compete for key executive talent.
Companies against which our executive compensation is measured
include Anadarko Petroleum Corporation, Apache Corporation,
Baker Hughes Incorporated, Chesapeake Energy Corporation,
Chevron Corporation, ConocoPhillips, Dominion Resources, Inc.,
Duke Energy Corporation, El Paso Corporation, EnCana
Corporation, Enterprise Products Partners, L.P., EOG Resources,
Inc., Halliburton Company, Hess Corporation, Kerr-McGee
Corporation (now a part of Anadarko Petroleum Corporation),
Marathon Oil Corporation, Murphy Oil Corporation, Nabors
Industries Ltd., Occidental Petroleum Corporation, Schlumberger
Limited, Tesoro Corporation, Transocean Inc., Valero Energy
Corporation and Williams Companies, Inc. A significant portion
of the long-term compensation awarded to our executives is
subject to a vesting schedule, which, in addition to attracting
executive officers and aligning them with the goal of maximizing
stockholder value, motivates executives to remain with us over
the long-term.
Pay
for Performance
We believe that an executive officers compensation should
be tied to a combination of our overall performance, performance
of his or her business function or area and individual
performance, with the primary driver of value being our
financial success and long-term value creation for stockholders.
Generally, we try to reward executives with incentive pay when
we are successful and stockholder value is created.
With respect to individual performance, our operating strategy
requires a goal-setting and performance management process that
promotes and rewards executive behaviors and decision-making
methods that help the organization achieve its near-term and
longer-term objectives. The goal-setting and performance
management process consists of setting:
This approach to compensation not only motivates executives to
deliver near-term financial and operating results, but also
provides incentives for them to develop internal talent,
cultivate key relationships with managers, ensure positive
relationships with regulators, landowners and other
stakeholders, refine business processes and build a culture of
mutual respect and teamwork focused on creating long-term
stockholder value.
Compensation
Weighted Toward Incentive Pay
We believe that the proportion of an employees total
compensation that varies based on performance should increase as
the scope of the individuals ability to influence our
results increases. Since executive officers have the greatest
influence over our results, a significant portion of their
overall compensation consists of incentive pay that is at
risk, and the potential value of incentive awards provided
to executives increases at higher levels of responsibility. In
2006, for example, approximately 90% of the total direct
compensation (the sum of salary, bonus and long-term incentive
compensation awards granted in 2006) of our Chief Executive
Officer was at risk against near-term and long-term performance
goals. The total direct compensation at risk against near-term
and long-term performance goals in 2006 for all other named
executive officers
Table of Contents
ranged from approximately 81% to 86% of their total direct
compensation. This approach also helps to align our compensation
expenses with the cyclical nature of the oil and gas industry.
Balancing
Pay for Near-Term and Longer-Term Performance
To reinforce the importance of balancing the goals of delivering
near-term results and creating long-term stockholder value,
executive officers regularly are provided both annual and
long-term incentives. We believe that properly allocating
near-term and longer-term incentives is critical in motivating
executives to effectively carry out our two-pronged operating
strategy. Overall, the value of an executives total
compensation opportunity is weighted in favor of long-term
incentives.
Consideration
of Tax Implications
Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code (the
Code) disallows, with certain exceptions, a federal
income tax deduction for compensation over $1,000,000 paid to
the Chief Executive Officer or any other named executive
officer. One exception applies to performance-based
compensation paid pursuant to stockholder-approved
employee benefit plans (essentially, compensation that is paid
only if the individuals performance meets pre-established
objective performance goals based on performance criteria
approved by our stockholders). Although we have generally
attempted to structure executive compensation so as to preserve
deductibility, we also believe that there are circumstances
where our interests are best served by maintaining flexibility
in the way compensation is provided, even if it results in the
non-deductibility of certain compensation under the Code. A
portion of the payments made under our current annual cash
compensation program are not deductible in accordance with the
provisions of Section 162(m). However, the Committee has
determined that the benefit of enhanced flexibility in program
design outweighs the value of the lost deduction.
A portion of the stock options we granted to our executives are
incentive stock options, which allow the executives to defer the
payment of certain taxes upon exercise of the options and
provide for the characterization of certain gains as long-term
capital gains. These tax advantages can be partly offset by the
alternative minimum tax.
Section 422 of the Code limits the amount of incentive
stock options that may vest for any one employee each year.
Section 422 provides that, to the extent the aggregate fair
market value of stock with respect to which incentive stock
options become exercisable each year exceeds $100,000, such
stock options will be treated as nonqualified stock options. We
take this $100,000 limit into consideration when granting
incentive stock options to our employees, so that their
incentive stock options will not be recharacterized as
nonqualified stock options.
|
| |||||||