IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/22327.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Management as a Technology?

Author

Listed:
  • Nicholas Bloom
  • Raffaella Sadun
  • John Van Reenen

Abstract

Are some management practices akin to a technology that can explain firm and national productivity, or do they simply reflect contingent management styles? We collect data on core management practices from over 11,000 firms in 34 countries. We find large cross-country differences in the adoption of management practices, with the US having the highest size-weighted average management score. We present a formal model of “Management as a Technology”, and structurally estimate it using panel data to recover parameters including the depreciation rate and adjustment costs of managerial capital (both found to be larger than for tangible non-managerial capital). Our model also predicts (i) a positive impact of management on firm performance; (ii) a positive relationship between product market competition and average management quality (part of which stems from the larger covariance between management with firm size as competition strengthens); and (iii) a rise in the level and a fall in the dispersion of management with firm age. We find strong empirical support for all of these predictions in our data. Finally, building on our model, we find that differences in management practices account for about 30% of total factor productivity differences both between countries and within countries across firms.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicholas Bloom & Raffaella Sadun & John Van Reenen, 2016. "Management as a Technology?," NBER Working Papers 22327, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:22327
    Note: CF DEV EFG IO LS PR
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w22327.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Luis Garicano & Claire Lelarge & John Van Reenen, 2016. "Firm Size Distortions and the Productivity Distribution: Evidence from France," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(11), pages 3439-3479, November.
    2. Kalemli-Ozcan, Sebnem & Sorensen, Bent E. & Villegas-Sanchez, Carolina & Volosovych, Vadym & Yesiltas, Sevcan, 2015. "How to construct nationally representative firm level data from the ORBIS global database," CEPR Discussion Papers 10829, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    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. Miguel Almunia & David López-Rodríguez & Enrique Moral-Benito, 2018. "Evaluating the macro-representativeness of a firm-level database: an application for the Spanish economy," Occasional Papers 1802, Banco de España.
    2. Criscuolo, Chiara & Andrews, Dan & Gal, Peter N., 2019. "The best versus the rest: divergence across firms during the global productivity slowdown," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 103405, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Matthias Breuer, 2021. "How Does Financial‐Reporting Regulation Affect Industry‐Wide Resource Allocation?," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 59-110, March.
    4. Simone Lenzu & Francesco Manaresi, 2019. "Sources and implications of resource misallocation: new evidence from firm-level marginal products and user costs," Questioni di Economia e Finanza (Occasional Papers) 485, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    5. Alam, M. Jahangir, 2020. "Capital misallocation: Cyclicality and sources," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    6. Cristina Fernández & Roberta García & Paloma Lopez-Garcia & Benedicta Marzinotto & Roberta Serafini & Juuso Vanhala & Ladislav Wintr, 2017. "Firm growth in Europe: An overview based on the COMPNET labour module," BCL working papers 107, Central Bank of Luxembourg.
    7. Daniel A. Dias & Carlos Robalo Marques & Christine Richmond, 2020. "A Tale of Two Sectors: Why is Misallocation Higher in Services than in Manufacturing?," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 66(2), pages 361-393, June.
    8. Bachas, Pierre & Fattal Jaef, Roberto N. & Jensen, Anders, 2019. "Size-dependent tax enforcement and compliance: Global evidence and aggregate implications," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 203-222.
    9. Luis Medrano-Adán & Vicente Salas-Fumás & J. Sanchez-Asin, 2015. "Heterogeneous entrepreneurs from occupational choices in economies with minimum wages," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 597-619, March.
    10. Peter Gal & Alexander Hijzen, 2016. "The short-term impact of product market reforms: A cross-country firm-level analysis," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1311, OECD Publishing.
    11. Da-Rocha, José-María & Restuccia, Diego & Tavares, Marina Mendes, 2019. "Firing costs, misallocation, and aggregate productivity," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 60-81.
    12. Ram Upendra Das, 2015. "Trade and Investment Liberalization in India: Implications for Productivity Gains," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Khee Giap Tan & Kong Yam Tan (ed.), Foreign Direct Investment and Small and Medium Enterprises Productivity and Access to Finance, chapter 3, pages 35-55, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    13. Liang, Yan, 2022. "Impact of financial development on outsourcing and aggregate productivity," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    14. Sharon Belenzon & Victor Manuel Bennett & Andrea Patacconi, 2019. "Flexible Production and Entry: Institutional, Technological, and Organizational Determinants," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 4(3), pages 193-216, September.
    15. Klein, Daniel & Ludwig, Christopher A. & Nicolay, Katharina, 2020. "Internal digitalization and tax-efficient decision making," ZEW Discussion Papers 20-051, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    16. Bottasso, Anna & Conti, Maurizio & Sulis, Giovanni, 2017. "Firm dynamics and employment protection: Evidence from sectoral data," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 35-53.
    17. Ravi Kanbur, 2017. "Informality: Causes, consequences and policy responses," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(4), pages 939-961, November.
    18. Milan Zafirovski, 2022. "Some dilemmas of economic democracy: Indicators and empirical analysis," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 43(1), pages 252-302, February.
    19. Neira, Julian, 2019. "Bankruptcy and cross-country differences in productivity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 359-381.
    20. Karen GEURTS & Johannes VAN BIESEBROECK, 2014. "Job creation, firm creation, and de novo entry," Working Papers of Department of Economics, Leuven ces14.25, KU Leuven, Faculty of Economics and Business (FEB), Department of Economics, Leuven.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • L2 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior
    • M2 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Economics
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:nbr:nberwo:22327. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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: (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.