What role does new firm entry play in economic growth? Are entrants and young firms more or less productive than incumbents, and how are their relative productivity dynamics affected by financial constraints and the business environment? This paper uses comprehensive manufacturing firm data from seven economies (United States, Georgia, Hungary, Lithuania, Romania, Russia, and Ukraine) to measure new firm entry and the productivity dynamics of entrants relative to incumbents in the same industries. We contrast hypotheses based on 'leapfrogging,' in which entrants embody superior productivity, with an 'experimentation' approach, in which entrants face uncertainty and incumbents can innovate. The results imply that leapfrogging is typical of early and incomplete transition, but experimentation better characterizes both the US and mature transition economies. Improvements in financial markets and the business environment tend to raise both the entry rate and productivity growth, but they are associated with negative relative productivity of entrants and smaller contributions of reallocation to growth among both entrants and incumbents.
-
Does Higher Productivity Dispersion Imply Greater Misallocation?A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis
January 2016
Working Paper Number:
CES-16-42
Recent research maintains that the observed variation in productivity within industries reflects resource misallocation and concludes that large GDP gains may be obtained from market-liberalizing polices. Our theoretical analysis examines the impact on productivity dispersion of reallocation frictions in the form of costs of entry, operation, and restructuring, and shows that reforms reducing these frictions may raise dispersion of productivity across firms. The model does not imply a negative relationship between aggregate productivity and productivity dispersion. Our empirical analysis focuses on episodes of liberalizing policy reforms in the U.S. and six East European transition economies. Deregulation of U.S. telecommunications equipment manufacturing is associated with increased, not reduced, productivity dispersion, and every transition economy in our sample shows a sharp rise in dispersion after liberalization. Productivity dispersion under central planning is similar to that in the U.S., and it rises faster in countries adopting faster paces of liberalization. Lagged productivity dispersion predicts higher future productivity growth. The analysis suggests there is no simple relationship between the policy environment and productivity dispersion.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Nature Versus Nurture in the Origins of Highly Productive Businesses: An Exploratory Analysis of U.S. Manufacturing Establishments
September 2011
Working Paper Number:
CES-11-26
This paper investigates the origins of productivity leaders, those that operate close to and help push out the production frontier. Do such businesses emerge as top performers from the very beginning of their lives, for example as the consequence of an outstanding founding idea, technology, or location? Or, at the other extreme, do they appear initially as completely average (or even underperformers) that exhibit gradual improvement as they learn and develop with age? To answer this question we draw upon five decades of U.S. Census of Manufacturing (CM) establishment-level data, tracing the productivity leaders of the most recent CM (2007) back over their observed life spans. We also examine possible industry-level correlates of variation in the extent of nature versus nurture that are suggested by theories of industry dynamics and economic growth.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Where Has All the Skewness Gone? The Decline in High-Growth (Young) Firms in the U.S.
November 2015
Working Paper Number:
CES-15-43
The pace of business dynamism and entrepreneurship in the U.S. has declined over recent decades. We show that the character of that decline changed around 2000. Since 2000 the decline in dynamism and entrepreneurship has been accompanied by a decline in high-growth young firms. Prior research has shown that the sustained contribution of business startups to job creation stems from a relatively small fraction of high-growth young firms. The presence of these high-growth young firms contributes to a highly (positively) skewed firm growth rate distribution. In 1999, a firm at the 90th percentile of the employment growth rate distribution grew about 31 percent faster than the median firm. Moreover, the 90-50 differential was 16 percent larger than the 50-10 differential reflecting the positive skewness of the employment growth rate distribution. We show that the shape of the firm employment growth distribution changes substantially in the post-2000 period. By 2007, the 90-50 differential was only 4 percent larger than the 50-10, and it continued to exhibit a trend decline through 2011. The reflects a sharp drop in the 90th percentile of the growth rate distribution accounted for by the declining share of young firms and the declining propensity for young firms to be high-growth firms.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Innovation, Productivity Dispersion, and Productivity Growth
February 2018
Working Paper Number:
CES-18-08
We examine whether underlying industry innovation dynamics are an important driver of the large dispersion in productivity across firms within narrowly defined sectors. Our hypothesis is that periods of rapid innovation are accompanied by high rates of entry, significant experimentation and, in turn, a high degree of productivity dispersion. Following this experimentation phase, successful innovators and adopters grow while unsuccessful innovators contract and exit yielding productivity growth. We examine the dynamic relationship between entry, productivity dispersion, and productivity growth using a new comprehensive firm-level dataset for the U.S. We find a surge of entry within an industry yields an immediate increase in productivity dispersion and a lagged increase in productivity growth. These patterns are more pronounced for the High Tech sector where we expect there to be more innovative activities. These patterns change over time suggesting other forces are at work during the post-2000 slowdown in aggregate productivity.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
High-Growth Firms in the United States: Key Trends and New Data Opportunities
March 2024
Working Paper Number:
CES-24-11
Using administrative data from the U.S. Census Bureau, we introduce a new public-use database that tracks activities across firm growth distributions over time and by firm and establishment characteristics. With these new data, we uncover several key trends on high-growth firms'critical engines of innovation and economic growth. First, the share of firms that are high-growth has steadily decreased over the past four decades, driven not only by falling firm entry rates but also languishing growth among existing firms. Second, this decline is particularly pronounced among young and small firms, while the share of high-growth firms has been relatively stable among large and old firms. Third, the decline in high-growth firms is found in all sectors, but the information sector has shown a modest rebound beginning in 2010. Fourth, there is significant variation in high-growth firm activity across states, with California, Texas, and Florida having high shares of high-growth firms. We highlight several areas for future research enabled by these new data.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Decomposing Aggregate Productivity
July 2022
Working Paper Number:
CES-22-25
In this note, we evaluate the sensitivity of commonly-used decompositions for aggregate productivity. Our analysis spans the universe of U.S. manufacturers from 1977 to 2012 and we find that, even holding the data and form of the production function fixed, results on aggregate productivity are extremely sensitive to how productivity at the firm level is measured. Even qualitative statements about the levels of aggregate productivity and the sign of the covariance between productivity and size are highly dependent on how production function parameters are estimated. Despite these difficulties, we uncover some consistent facts about productivity growth: (1) labor productivity is consistently higher and less error-prone than measures of multi-factor productivity; (2) most productivity growth comes from growth within firms, rather than from reallocation across firms; (3) what growth does come from reallocation appears to be driven by net entry, primarily from the exit of relatively less-productive firms.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
REALLOCATION IN THE GREAT RECESSION: CLEANSING OR NOT?
August 2013
Working Paper Number:
CES-13-42
The high pace of output and input reallocation across producers is pervasive in the U.S. economy. Evidence shows this high pace of reallocation is closely linked to productivity. Resources are shifted away from low productivity producers towards high productivity producers. While these patterns hold on average, the extent to which the reallocation dynamics in recessions are 'cleansing' is an open question. That is, are recessions periods of increased reallocation that move resources away from lower productivity activities towards higher productivity uses? It could be recessions are times when the opportunity cost of time and resources are low implying recessions will be times of accelerated productivity enhancing reallocation. Prior research suggests the recession in the early 1980s is consistent with an accelerated pace of productivity enhancing reallocation. Alternative hypotheses highlight the potential distortions to reallocation dynamics in recessions. Such distortions might arise from many factors including, for example, distortions to credit markets. We find that in post-1980 recessions prior to the Great Recession, downturns are periods of accelerated reallocation that is even more productivity enhancing than in normal times. In the Great Recession, we find the intensity of reallocation fell rather than rose (due to the especially sharp decline in job creation) and the reallocation that did occur was less productivity enhancing than in prior recessions.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Productivity Dispersion, Entry, and Growth in U.S. Manufacturing Industries
August 2021
Working Paper Number:
CES-21-21
Within-industry productivity dispersion is pervasive and exhibits substantial variation across countries, industries, and time. We build on prior research that explores the hypothesis that periods of innovation are initially associated with a surge in business start-ups, followed by increased experimentation that leads to rising dispersion potentially with declining aggregate productivity growth, and then a shakeout process that results in higher productivity growth and declining productivity dispersion. Using novel detailed industry-level data on total factor productivity and labor productivity dispersion from the Dispersion Statistics on Productivity along with novel measures of entry rates from the Business Dynamics Statistics and productivity growth data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics for U.S. manufacturing industries, we find support for this hypothesis, especially for the high-tech industries.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Differences in Job Growth and Persistence in Services and Manufacturing
March 2000
Working Paper Number:
CES-00-04
Employment flows in services have greatly exceeded those in manufacturing over the recent decade. We examine these differences and their variation over establishment sizes and types. We test three hypotheses which have been offered to explain these differences: (1) that the difference in behavior of single and multi-unit establishments accounts for much of the difference in the net and gross growth rates of jobs in services and manufacturing; (2) that relative wage differences have a disparate effect on employment growth for services and manufacturing, and (3) that the rates of persistence (or retention) of new jobs are higher in multi-unit establishments than in single unit firms, and similar between the sectors after controlling for this. We find that it is primarily the underlying differences in establishment age and size distributions that account for the substantial differences in the average gross and net job flow rates of the two sectors, and that relative wage differences have a similar effect on employment growth in services and manufacturing.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
MEASURES OF JOB FLOW DYNAMICS IN THE U.S.*
January 1999
Working Paper Number:
CES-99-01
This paper uses the new Longitudinal Establishment and Enterprise Microdata (LEEM) at CES to investigate gross and net job flows for the U. S. economy. Much of the previous work on U.S. job flows has been based on analysis of the Longitudinal Research Database (LRD), which is limited to establishments in the manufacturing sector. The LEEM is the first high-quality, nationwide, comprehensive database for both manufacturing and non-manufacturing that is suitable for measuring annual job flows. We utilize the LEEM data to measure recent gross and net job flows for the entire U. S. economy. We then examine the relationships between firm size, establishment size, and establishment age, and investigate differences resulting from use of two alternative methods for classification of job flows by size of firm and establishment. Cell-based regression analysis is used to help distinguish among the effects of age, firm size, and establishment size on gross and net job flows in existing establishments. We find that gross job flow rates decline with age, and with increasing establishment size when controlling for age differences, whether initial size or mean size classification is utilized. Firm size differences contribute little or nothing additional when establishment size and age are controlled for. However, the relationship of net job growth to business size is very sensitive to the size classification method, even when data and all other methodology are identical. When mean size classification is used, the coefficient on establishment size for net job growth is generally positive, but when initial size is used, this coefficient is negative. These results shed light on some of the apparently conflicting findings in the literature on the relationship between net growth and the size of businesses.
View Full
Paper PDF