In 2003 Harry Pearson and James Daye established - along with three other equity partners - a boutique investment banking firm with an entrepreneurial, informal office culture that delivered high quality customer service. In so doing, they offered a streamlined compensation plan that, in their view, would directly and fairly reward their employees' performance. However, as the firm grew, some members of their staff sought a more transparent process by which to measure their progress and the associated financial benefits - as well as the possibility to acquire equity in the firm. What compensation scheme would allow Pearson and Daye to reward their valued employees without losing sight of their initial goals? And how much would the five original partners consider diluting their holdings?

Case id: 090330
Supplemental Material: Teaching Note