Stock options were originally intended to tighten the link between executive pay and performance. In practice, however, they've proven to be a clumsy tool. In the bull market of the 1990s, options enriched many a mediocre CEO, while the economic slump that opened this decade has punished weak and strong performers alike.Conventional options have that effect because they focus on absolute performance. As a result, they both reward and punish managers for factors, such as market movements, that are beyond their control. In order to filter out these effects, many analysts have suggested that companies scrap their existing programs in favor of indexed options. Under one such proposal, companies would reset the price of their options each year in order to reflect changes in a market benchmark, such as the S&P 500. If the index rose 10%, for example, the exercise price would also increase by 10%, allowing a CEO to cash in only if his share price had grown by even more.The idea behind indexed options is to reward executives who outperform the market or industry peers. But as Harvard Business School finance professor Lisa K.
