-
Establishment-Level Life Cycle and Analysts' Forecasts
February 2026
Working Paper Number:
CES-26-12
This paper examines how multi-unit firms' life-cycle stages affect analyst forecast accuracy. While prior studies focus on the firm-level life cycle, we utilize the Census data and focus on the establishment level. We find that analyst forecast accuracy is lower for multi-unit firms whose establishments are in different life-cycle stages than those in the same life-cycle stage. This finding suggests that the forecasting difficulty of more diversified firms can be attributed to the different life-cycle stages of each establishment. We also find that for firms whose units are in different stages, analyst forecast accuracy is lower if the establishments in earlier stages are larger (i.e., generate more revenue) than those in later stages. As a comparison, we estimate the life-cycle stages using firms' segment classifications in their 10-K filings. We find that analysts' forecast accuracy is lower when firms report fewer segments than the number of establishments, suggesting that aggregating more establishments for segment reporting could complicate analysts' forecasting. To our knowledge, this is the first study that focuses on the establishment-level life cycle. This study highlights that firm-level life cycles should not be taken without caution, as aggregating multiple units' life cycles may be misleading. In order to provide better forecasts to investors, analysts should have a deeper understanding of firms' subunits, especially when the establishments are in different life-cycle stages.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Investigating the Effect of Innovation Activities of Firms on Innovation Performance: Does Firm Size Matter?
January 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-04
Understanding the relationship between a firm's innovation activities and its performance has been of great interest to management scholars. While the literature on innovation activities is vast, there is a dearth of studies investigating the effect of key innovation activities of the firm on innovation outcomes in a single study, and whether their effects are dependent on the nature of firms, specifically firm size. Drawing from a longitudinal dataset from the Business Research & Development and Innovation Survey (BRDIS), and informed by contingency theory and resource orchestration theory, we examine the relationship between a firm's innovation activities - including its Research & Development (R&D) investment, securing patents, collaborative R&D, R&D toward new business areas, and grants for R&D - and its product innovation and process innovation. We also investigate whether these relationships are contingent on firm size. Consistent with contingency theory, we find a significant difference between large firms and small firms regarding how they enhance product innovation and process innovation. Large firms can improve product innovation by securing patents through applications and issuances, coupled with active participation in collaborative R&D efforts. Conversely, smaller firms concentrate their efforts on the number of patents applied for, directing R&D efforts toward new business areas, and often leveraging grants for R&D efforts. To achieve process innovation, a similar dichotomy emerges. Larger firms demonstrate a commitment to securing patents, engage in R&D efforts tailored to new business areas, and actively collaborate with external entities on R&D efforts. In contrast, smaller firms primarily focus on securing patents and channel their R&D efforts toward new business pursuits. This nuanced exploration highlights the varied strategies employed by large and small firms in navigating the intricate landscape of both product and process innovation. The results shed light on specific innovation activities as antecedents of innovation outcomes and demonstrate how the effectiveness of such assets is contingent upon firm size.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Competition, Firm Innovation, and Growth under Imperfect Technology Spillovers
July 2024
Working Paper Number:
CES-24-40
We study how friction in learning others' technology, termed 'imperfect technology spillovers,' incentivizes firms to use different types of innovation and impacts the implications of competition through changes in innovation composition. We build an endogenous growth model in which multi-product firms enhance their products via internal innovation and enter new product markets through external innovation. When learning others' technology takes time due to this friction, increased competitive pressure leads firms with technological advantages to intensify internal innovation to protect their markets, thereby reducing others' external innovation. Using the U.S. administrative firm-level data, we provide regression results supporting the model predictions. Our findings highlight the importance of strategic firm innovation choices and changes in their composition in shaping the aggregate implications of competition.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Incidence and Performance of Spinouts and Incumbent New Ventures: Role of Selection and
Redeployability within Parent Firms
September 2021
Working Paper Number:
CES-21-27
Using matched employer-employee data from 30 U.S. states, we compare spinouts with new ventures formed by incumbents (INCs). We propose a selection-based framework comprising idea selection by parents to internally implement ideas as INCs, entrepreneurial selection by founders to form spinouts, and managerial selection to close ventures. Consistent with parents choosing better ideas in the idea selection stage, we find that INCs perform relatively better than spinouts, and more so with larger parents. Regarding the entrepreneurial selection stage, we find evidence consistent with resource requirements being a greater entry barrier to spinouts and greater information asymmetry promoting spinout formation. Parents' resource redeployment opportunities are associated with lower relative survival of INCs, consistent with their being subject to greater selection pressures in the managerial selection stage.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
The Reallocation Myth
April 2018
Working Paper Number:
CES-18-19
There is a widely held view that much of growth in the U.S. can be attributed to reallocation from low to high productivity firms, including from exiting firms to entrants. Declining dynamism ' falling rates of reallocation and entry/exit in the U.S. ' have therefore been tied to the lackluster growth since 2005. We challenge this view. Gaps in the return to resources do not appear to have narrowed, suggesting that allocative efficiency has not improved in the U.S. in recent decades. Reallocation can also matter if it is a byproduct of innovation. However, we present evidence that most
innovation comes from existing firms improving their own products rather than from entrants or fast-growing firms displacing incumbent firms. Length: 26 pages
View Full
Paper PDF
-
How Wide Is the Firm Border?
January 2017
Working Paper Number:
CES-17-35
We quantify the normally unobservable forces that determine the boundary of the firm; that is, which transactions are mediated by ownership control as opposed to contracts or markets. To do so, we examine the shipment decisions of tens of thousands of establishments that produce and distribute a variety of products throughout the goods-producing sector. We examine how a firm's willingness to ship over distance varies with whether the recipient is owned by the firm. Because shipping costs increase with distance for many reasons, a greater volume of internal transactions at any given distance reveals the size of the firm's perceived net cost advantage of internal transactions. We find that the firm boundary is notably wide. Having one more vertically integrated downstream establishment in a location has the same effect on transaction volumes to that location as does a 40 percent reduction in distance between sender and destination. We further characterize how this 'internal advantage' varies with observable attributes of the transaction or product being shipped. Finally, we conduct a calibration of a multi-sector general equilibrium trade model and find that costs associated with transacting across firm boundaries also have discernible economy-wide implications.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
How Destructive is Innovation?
January 2017
Working Paper Number:
CES-17-04
Entrants and incumbents can create new products and displace the products of competitors. Incumbents can also improve their existing products. How much of aggregate productivity growth occurs through each of these channels? Using data from the U.S. Longitudinal Business Database on all non-farm private businesses from 1976'1986 and 2003'2013, we arrive at three main conclusions: First, most growth appears to come from incumbents. We infer this from the modest employment share of entering firms (defined as those less than 5 years old). Second, most growth seems to occur through improvements of existing varieties rather than creation of brand new varieties. Third, own-product improvements by incumbents appear to be more important than creative destruction. We infer this because the distribution of job creation and destruction has thinner tails than implied by a model with a dominant role for creative destruction.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Data in Action: Data-Driven Decision Making in U.S. Manufacturing
January 2016
Working Paper Number:
CES-16-06
Manufacturing in America has become significantly more data-intensive. We investigate the adoption, performance effects and organizational complementarities of data-driven decision making (DDD) in the U.S. Using data collected by the Census Bureau for 2005 and 2010, we observe the extent to which manufacturing firms track and use data to guide decision making, as well as their investments in information technology (IT) and the use of other structured management practices. Examining a representative sample of over 18,000 plans, we find that adoption of DDD is earlier and more prevalent among larger, older plants belonging to multi-unit firms. Smaller single-establishment firms adopt later but have a higher correlation with performance than similar non-adopters. Using a fixed-effects estimator, we find the average value-added for later DDD adopters to be 3% greater than non-adopters, controlling for other inputs to production. This effect is distinct from that associated with IT and other structured management practices and is concentrated among single-unit firms. Performance improves after plants adopt DDD, but not before ' consistent with a causal relationship. However, DDD-related performance differentials decrease over time for early and late adopters, consistent with firm learning and development of organizational complementarities. Formal complementarity tests suggest that DDD and high levels of IT capital reinforce each other, as do DDD and skilled workers. For some industries, the benefits of DDD adoption appear to be greater for plants that delegate some decision making to frontline workers.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
WHAT DO I TAKE WITH ME?: THE MEDIATING EFFECT OF SPIN-OUT TEAM SIZE AND TENURE ON THE FOUNDER-FIRM PERFORMANCE RELATIONSHIP
April 2013
Working Paper Number:
CES-13-17
Our study examines the mediating effect of spin-out team characteristics on the relationship between founder quality and parent and spin-out performance. Since the ability to transfer or recreate complementary assets is a critical determinant of performance, we theorize and show that founders with greater ability impact both parent firm and spin-out performance by assembling teams that represent strong complementary human capital. Using linked employee-employer US Census data from the legal services industry, we find founding team size and tenure mediate the founder quality effect. Our findings have practical implications for both managers of existing firms and aspiring founders as it relates to their human resource strategies: the factor most salient to performance is not the individual quality per se, but the manner in which it impacts the transfer and spillover of complementary human capital.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Growth Through Heterogeneous Innovations
June 2012
Working Paper Number:
CES-12-08
We study how exploration versus exploitation innovations impact economic growth through a tractable endogenous growth framework that contains multiple innovation sizes, multiproduct firms, and entry/exit. Firms invest in exploration R&D to acquire new product lines and exploitation R&D to improve their existing product lines. We model and show empirically that exploration R&D does not scale as strongly with firm size as exploitation R&D. The resulting framework conforms to many regularities regarding innovation and growth differences across the firm size distribution. We also incorporate patent citations into our theoretical framework. The framework generates a simple test using patent citations that indicates that entrants and small firms have relatively higher growth spillover effects.
View Full
Paper PDF