IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/boh/actaub/v12y2009i2p7-12.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Methodical differences of productivity indicators by international comparison

Author

Listed:
  • Martina Novotná

    (University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice)

  • Tomáš Volek

    (University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice)

Abstract

The productivity is possible measure by different defined type of productivity indicators with considerable differences’ in results. It is impossible to define, which one of definitions of productivities is the best. It depends on purpose and analysis’s range. For comparison productivity at the national level is better to use aggregates at constant prices, which show us the level and growth rate of physical product. For comparison productivity at the international level is better to use aggregates in purchasing power standard. This result is influence not only own performance, but also performances others comparison states. From the point of view employment, is optimal indicator for calculation of productivity working hours. This indicator removes differences at time work in single member states EU.

Suggested Citation

  • Martina Novotná & Tomáš Volek, 2009. "Methodical differences of productivity indicators by international comparison," Acta Universitatis Bohemiae Meridionales, University of South Bohemia in Ceske Budejovice, vol. 12(2), pages 7-12.
    • Handle: RePEc:boh:actaub:v:12:y:2009:i:2:p:7-12
    DOI: 10.32725/acta.2009.017
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.32725/acta.2009.017
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.32725/acta.2009.017?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
    ---><---

    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:boh:actaub:v:12:y:2009:i:2:p:7-12. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Tereza Šťástková (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/efjcucz.html .

    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.