26.12.2012 Views

Transocean Proxy Statement and 2010 Annual Report

Transocean Proxy Statement and 2010 Annual Report

Transocean Proxy Statement and 2010 Annual Report

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Peer Group <strong>and</strong> Competitive Positioning<br />

Peer Group<br />

We compete for executive talent across many different sectors around the world. Our primary<br />

competitive market generally includes other companies in the energy industry (oil <strong>and</strong> gas companies,<br />

offshore drilling companies <strong>and</strong> other energy services companies). In making compensation decisions for<br />

the Named Executive Officers, each element of their total direct compensation is compared against<br />

published compensation data.<br />

For <strong>2010</strong>, we used a group of peer companies to compare each component of our executive<br />

compensation program to the competitive marketplace. This group (the ‘‘Peer Group’’) was comprised of<br />

the following companies:<br />

Anadarko Petroleum Corporation Hess Corporation<br />

Apache Corporation Marathon Oil Corporation<br />

Baker Hughes Incorporated National-Oilwell Varco Inc.<br />

Devon Energy Corporation Noble Corporation<br />

Diamond Offshore Drilling Inc. Pride International, Inc.<br />

ENSCO plc Rowan Companies Inc.<br />

EOG Resources, Inc. Schlumberger Limited<br />

Halliburton Company Weatherford International Ltd.<br />

The Peer Group or a smaller group may be used for performance comparisons as determined by the<br />

Committee. In August <strong>2010</strong>, the Committee removed Smith International, Inc. from the Peer Group due<br />

to Smith International, Inc.’s merger with Schlumberger Limited.<br />

Competitive Positioning<br />

Generally, we set the target compensation for our executive officers, including the Named Executive<br />

Officers, at the market median to remain competitive <strong>and</strong> avoid contributing to the ‘‘ratcheting-up’’ of<br />

executive compensation that occurs when a large number of companies all target their executive<br />

compensation at above-median levels. In <strong>2010</strong>, we determined the market median based on data from the<br />

Peer Group <strong>and</strong> market surveys analyzed by the compensation consultant, each weighted at 50%.<br />

Our approach to setting executive compensation, which is periodically reviewed <strong>and</strong> updated by the<br />

Committee, is as follows:<br />

Element Targeted Position Comments<br />

Base Salary Market median. Individual circumstances can allow for<br />

certain positions to be above or below the<br />

median.<br />

<strong>Annual</strong> Bonus Opportunity to earn total Actual payout based on performance.<br />

cash compensation Metrics include both financial <strong>and</strong><br />

competitive with market, operational results that drive long-term<br />

with upside/downside value. Current award potential ranges from<br />

based on performance 0% to 200% of target.<br />

against financial <strong>and</strong><br />

operating metrics.<br />

P-40

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!