IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v9y2022i1d10.1057_s41599-022-01123-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How to improve SME performance using iterative random forest in the empirical analysis of institutional complementaritty

Author

Listed:
  • Atsushi Sannabe

    (Ryutsu Keizai University)

Abstract

Empirically investigating the workings of institutional complementarity in organisations has been a challenge in the social sciences domain for a long time. This paper examines data from the World Management Survey (WMS) using a new machine learning method termed as iterative random forest (iRF), which is used in the field of biostatistics. An empirical study of complementarity was conducted in small and medium-sized enterprises using WMS data. The effects of 18 management quality indicators on profitability, growth and viability were examined using machine learning methods (i.e. random forest [RF] and iRF). The analysis revealed the relative importance of whether high performers are properly rewarded, poor performers are reassigned and retrained and the criteria for high and low performance are well established. Furthermore, the study results revealed that the ability to set short-term goals based on a long-term perspective is complementary to many other indicators. These findings are consistent with the findings of a survey study that examined many empirical studies on the workings of institutional complementarity. This indicates that iRF is a credible and promising method for empirical research on institutional complementarity.

Suggested Citation

  • Atsushi Sannabe, 2022. "How to improve SME performance using iterative random forest in the empirical analysis of institutional complementaritty," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-9, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:9:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-022-01123-6
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-022-01123-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-022-01123-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-022-01123-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nicholas Bloom & Benn Eifert & Aprajit Mahajan & David McKenzie & John Roberts, 2013. "Does Management Matter? Evidence from India," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 128(1), pages 1-51.
    2. Edward P. Lazear, 2000. "Performance Pay and Productivity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(5), pages 1346-1361, December.
    3. Burdin, Gabriel & Kato, Takao, 2021. "Complementarity in Employee Participation Systems," GLO Discussion Paper Series 968, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    4. Burdin, Gabriel & Kato, Takao, 2021. "Complementarity in Employee Participation Systems: International Evidence," IZA Discussion Papers 14694, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    5. Athey, Susan. & Stern, Scott, 1969-, 1998. "An empirical framework for testing theories about complementarity in orgaziational design," Working papers WP 4022-98., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    6. Nicholas Bloom & Christos Genakos & Raffaella Sadun & John Van Reenen, 2011. "Management Practices Across Firms and Countries," CEP Discussion Papers dp1109, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bloom, Nicholas & Van Reenen, John, 2011. "Human Resource Management and Productivity," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 19, pages 1697-1767, Elsevier.
    2. Natalie Chun & Soohyung Lee, 2015. "Bonus compensation and productivity: evidence from Indian manufacturing plant-level data," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 47-58, February.
    3. Jason J Sandvik & Richard E Saouma & Nathan T Seegert & Christopher T Stanton, 2020. "Workplace Knowledge Flows," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 135(3), pages 1635-1680.
    4. Maloney, William F. & Sarrias, Mauricio, 2017. "Convergence to the managerial frontier," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 284-306.
    5. Casey Ichniowski & Kathryn L. Shaw, 2009. "Insider Econometrics: Empirical Studies of How Management Matters," NBER Working Papers 15618, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Francesco Amodio & Miguel A. Martinez-Carrasco, 2023. "Workplace Incentives and Organizational Learning," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 41(2), pages 453-478.
    7. Guido Friebel & Matthias Heinz & Miriam Krueger & Nikolay Zubanov, 2017. "Team Incentives and Performance: Evidence from a Retail Chain," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(8), pages 2168-2203, August.
    8. Miriam Bruhn & Dean Karlan & Antoinette Schoar, 2018. "The Impact of Consulting Services on Small and Medium Enterprises: Evidence from a Randomized Trial in Mexico," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(2), pages 635-687.
    9. repec:cep:stieop:49 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Oriana Bandiera & Renata Lemos & Andrea Prat & Raffaella Sadun, 2018. "Managing the Family Firm: Evidence from CEOs at Work," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 31(5), pages 1605-1653.
    11. Stefan Bender & Nicholas Bloom & David Card & John Van Reenen & Stefanie Wolter, 2018. "Management Practices, Workforce Selection, and Productivity," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 36(S1), pages 371-409.
    12. Bryan Hong & Lorenz Kueng & Mu-Jeung Yang, 2015. "Estimating Management Practice Complementarity between Decentralization and Performance Pay," NBER Working Papers 20845, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Petri Böckerman & Alex Bryson & Pekka Ilmakunnas, 2013. "Does high involvement management lead to higher pay?," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 176(4), pages 861-885, October.
    14. Christopher Cornwell & Ian M. Schmutte & Daniela Scur, 2021. "Building a Productive Workforce: The Role of Structured Management Practices," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(12), pages 7308-7321, December.
    15. Katarzyna Bilicka & Daniela Scur, 2021. "Organizational capacity and profit shifting," CEP Discussion Papers dp1795, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    16. Iain Cockburn & Rebecca Henderson & Scott Stern, 1999. "Balancing Incentives: The Tension Between Basic and Applied Research," NBER Working Papers 6882, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Yuki Higuchi & Vu Hoang Nam & Tetsushi Sonobe, 2023. "Do Management Interventions Last? Evidence from Vietnamese SMEs," Working Papers DP-2022-42, Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA).
    18. Andreas Menzel, 2017. "Knowledge Exchange and Productivity Spill-overs in Bangladeshi Garment Factories," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp607, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    19. Thomas Triebs & Subal C. Kumbhakar, 2012. "Management Practice in Production," ifo Working Paper Series 129, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    20. Sickles, Robin C. & Song, Wonho & Zelenyuk, Valentin, 2018. "Econometric Analysis of Productivity: Theory and Implementation in R," Working Papers 18-008, Rice University, Department of Economics.
    21. Böckerman, Petri & Bryson, Alex & Ilmakunnas, Pekka, 2012. "Does high involvement management improve worker wellbeing?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 660-680.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:9:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-022-01123-6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.