-
Plant-Level Productivity and the Market Value of a Firm
June 2001
Working Paper Number:
CES-01-03
Some plants are more productive than others ' at least in terms of how productivity is conventionally measured. Do these differences represent an intangible asset? Does the stock market place a higher value on firms with highly productive plants? This paper tests this hypothesis with a new data set. We merge plant-level fundamental variables with firm-level financial variables. We find that firms with highly productive plants have higher market valuations as measured by Tobin's q ' productivity does indeed have a price.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Are Some Firms Better at IT? Differing Relationships between Productivity and IT Spending
October 1999
Working Paper Number:
CES-99-13
Although recent studies have found a positive relationship between spending on information technology and firm productivity, the magnitude of this relationship has not been as dramatic as one would expect given the anecdotal evidence. Data collected by the Bureau of the Census is analyzed to investigate the relationship between plant-level productivity and spending on IT. This relationship is investigated by separating the manufacturing plants in the sample along two dimensions, total factor productivity and IT spending. Analysis along these dimensions reveals that there are significant differences between the highest and lowest productivity plants. The highest productivity plants tend to spend less on IT while the lowest productivity plants tend to spend more on IT. Although there is support for the idea that lower productivity plants are spending more on IT to compensate for their productivity shortcomings, the results indicate that this is not the only difference. The robustness of this finding is strengthened by investigating changes in productivity and IT spending over time. High productivity plants with the lowest amounts of IT spending tend to remain high productivity plants with low IT spending while low productivity plants with high IT spending tend to remain low productivity plants with high IT spending. The results show that management skill, as measured by the overall productivity level of a firm, is an additional factor that must be taken into consideration when investigating the IT "productivity paradox."
View Full
Paper PDF
-
IT Spending and Firm Productivity: Additional Evidence from the Manufacturing Sector
October 1999
Working Paper Number:
CES-99-10
The information systems (IS) "productivity paradox" is based on those studies that found little or no positive relationship between firm productivity and spending on IS. However, some earlier studies and one more recent study have found a positive relationship. Given the large amounts spent by organizations on information systems, it is important to understand the relationship between spending on IS and productivity. Beyond replicating positive results, an explanation is needed for the conflicting conclusions reached by these earlier studies. Data collected by the Bureau of the Census is analyzed to investigate the relationship between plant-level productivity and spending on IS. The relationship between productivity and spending on IS is investigated using assumptions and models similar to both studies with positive findings and studies with negative findings. First, the overall relationship is investigated across all manufacturing industries. Next, the relationship is investigated industry by industry. The analysis finds a positive relationship between plant-level productivity and spending on IS. The relationship is also shown to vary across industries. The conflicting results from earlier studies are explained by understanding the characteristics of the data analyzed in each study. A large enough sample size is needed to find the relatively smaller effect from IS spending as compared to other input spending included in the models. Because the relationship between productivity and IS spending varies across industries, industry mix is shown to be an important data characteristic that may have influenced prior results.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Productivity Races II: The Issue of Capital Measurement
January 1997
Working Paper Number:
CES-97-03
This paper explores the role of capital measurement in determining the productivity of individual textile plants. In addition to gross book value of capital, we experiment with a perpetual inventory measure of capital and implicit (estimated) deflator associated with the age of the plant. Following the methodology of the earlier paper (Productivity Races I), we find that measures of productivity constructed from different measures of capital are highly correlated. Further, their association with alternative measures of economic performance is approximately the same. Nevertheless, the perpetual inventory measure of capital -- the most desirable measure from a theoretical perspective -- does consistently outperform the other two measures.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Productivity Races I: Are Some Productivuty Measures Better Than Others?
January 1997
Working Paper Number:
CES-97-02
In this study we construct twelve different measures of productivity at the plant level and test which measures of productivity are most closely associated with direct measures of economic performance. We first examine how closely correlated these measures are with various measures of profits. We then evaluate the extent to which each productivity measure is associated with lower rates of plant closure and faster plant growth (growth in employment, output, and capital). All measures of productivity considered are credible in the sense that highly productive plants, regardless of measure, are clearly more profitable, less likely to close, and grow faster. Nevertheless, labor productivity and measures of total factor productivity that are based on regression estimates of production functions are better predictors of plant growth and survival than factor share-based measures of total factor productivity (TFP). Measures of productivity that are based on several years of data appear to outperform measures of productivity that are based solely on data from the most recent year.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
ARE FIXED EFFECTS FIXED? Persistence in Plant Level Productivity
May 1996
Working Paper Number:
CES-96-03
Estimates of production functions suffer from an omitted variable problem; plant quality is an omitted variable that is likely to be correlated with variable inputs. One approach is to capture differences in plant qualities through plant specific intercepts, i.e., to estimate a fixed effects model. For this technique to work, it is necessary that differences in plant quality are more or less fixed; if the "fixed effects" erode over time, such a procedure becomes problematic, especially when working with long panels. In this paper, a standard fixed effects model, extended to allow for serial correlation in the error term, is applied to a 16-year panel of textile plants. This parametric approach strongly accepts the hypothesis of fixed effects. They account for about one-third of the variation in productivity. A simple non-parametric approach, however, concludes that differences in plant qualities erode over time, that is plant qualities f-mix. Monte Carlo results demonstrate that this discrepancy comes from the parametric approach imposing an overly restrictive functional form on the data; if there were fixed effects of the magnitude measured, one would reject the hypothesis of f-mixing. For textiles, at least, the functional form of a fixed effects model appears to generate misleading conclusions. A more flexible functional form is estimated. The "fixed" effects actually have a half life of approximately 10 to 20 years, and they account for about one-half the variation in productivity.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Whittling Away At Productivity Dispersion
March 1995
Working Paper Number:
CES-95-05
In any time period, in any industry, plant productivity levels differ widely and this dispersion is persistent. This paper explores the sources of this dispersion and their relative magnitudes in the textile industry. Plants that are measured as being more productive but pay higher wages are not necessarily more profitable; wage dispersion can account for approximately 15 percent of productivity dispersion. A plant that is highly productive today may not be as productive tomorrow. I develop a new method for measuring ex-ante dispersion and the percentage of dispersion "explained" by mean reversion. Mean reversion accounts for as much as one half the observed productivity dispersion. A portion of the dispersion, however, appears to reflect real quality differences between plants; plants that are measured as being more productive expand faster and are less likely to exit.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Measuring Total Factor Productivity, Technical Change And The Rate Of Returns To Research And Development
May 1991
Working Paper Number:
CES-91-03
Recent research indicates that estimates of the effect of research and development (R&D) on total factor productivity growth are sensitive to different measures of total factor productivity. In this paper, we use establishment level data for the flat glass industry extracted from the Census Bureau's Longitudinal Research Database (LRD) to construct three competing measures of total factor productivity. We then use these measures to estimate the conventional R&D intensity model. Our empirical results support previous finding that the estimated coefficients of the model are sensitive to the measurement of total factor productivity. Also, when using microdata and more detailed modeling, R&D is found to be a significant factor influencing productivity growth. Finally, for the flat glass industry, a specific technical change index capturing the learning-by-doing process appears to be superior to the conventional time trend index.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Multifactor Productivity And Sources of Growth In Chinese Industry: 1980-85
October 1989
Working Paper Number:
CES-89-08
This paper examines the economic performance of the Chinese industrial sector in the post-reform period 1980-1985. A multifactor productivity model is used to isolate the contributions of labor, capital, and technical efficiency to growth in industrial output. Using information from the National Industrial Census of China (1988) for large and medium-size enterprises, we find that growth in industrial labor productivity in the post-reform period is attributable to increases in capital intensity not technical efficiency. Moreover, collective and other nonstate enterprises show higher partial labor and multifactor productivity gains than do state enterprises. We also find that multifactor productivity gains are closely tied to increases in retained profits and the proportion of total employees that are technical workers. Surprisingly, labor bonuses have a near zero or negative effect on multifactor productivity growth although this result is not very robust.
View Full
Paper PDF
