IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Does the Firm Size Matter? An Empirical Enquiry into the Performance of Indian Manufacturing Firms

  • Bhattacharyya, Surajit
  • Saxena, Arunima

The Law of Proportionate Effect depicts that firm’s growth rate is independent of its size; Gibrat (1931). Some of the existing studies support the Gibrat’s Law: Hymer and Pashigian (1962), Mansfield (1962), among others. However, Gale (1972), Shepherd (1972) and recently Punnose (2008) report a positive relationship, while Haines (1970) and Evans (1987) observe an inverse relationship between firm size and profitability. Baumol (1959) opined that rate of return increases with firm size. Therefore, the extant empirical research on the firm size – performance relationship provides inconclusive results. Manufacturing firms’ data from the Steel and Electrical & Electronics (EE) industries are taken from CMIE Prowess database for the period 2004-05 to 2006-07. Results show that firm size affects current profitability: positively in the Steel and negatively in the other. Some more determinants of firm performance are explored. Retained earnings have negative impact on profitability in Steel but, positive in EE. Bank credit is found negatively significant in both the industries. Market share of firms and industry concentration ratio (CR4) although inconsistently are the other significant determinants of firms’ performance. Firms’ market value (Q) is found positively significant for both the industries. This signifies that high market value of firms reflects their goodwill, knowledge stock and prospective investment opportunities which positively influence the firms’ performance. The significance of having high brand equity which the corporate firms thrive for becomes apparent. Interestingly, the impact of size is affected by firms’ market value: firm size positively affects profitability both in Steel and EE. Furthermore, ineffectiveness of Law of Proportionate Effect is strengthened when tested over the combined data of Steel and EE firms. The short-run dynamism in firm performance is also impacted by presence of Tobin’s Q.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/13029/1/MPRA_paper_13029.pdf
File Function: original version
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 13029.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 09 Jan 2009
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:13029
Contact details of provider: Postal: Schackstr. 4, D-80539 Munich, Germany
Phone: +49-(0)89-2180-2219
Fax: +49-(0)89-2180-3900
Web page: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Evans, David S, 1987. "The Relationship between Firm Growth, Size, and Age: Estimates for 100 Manufacturing Industries," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(4), pages 567-81, June.
  2. Saleh Amirkhalkhali & Arun K. Mukhopadhyay, 1993. "The Influence of Size and R&D on the Growth of Firms in the U.S," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 19(2), pages 223-233, Spring.
  3. Bronwyn H. Hall, 1986. "The Relationship Between Firm Size and Firm Growth in the U.S. Manufacturing Sector," NBER Working Papers 1965, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  4. Roy Thurik & Enrico Santarelli & David Audretsch & Luuk Klomp, 2002. "Gibrat's Law: Are the Services Different?," Scales Research Reports H200201, EIM Business and Policy Research.
  5. Gale, Bradley T, 1972. "Market Share and Rate of Return," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 54(4), pages 412-23, November.
  6. Chesher, Andrew, 1979. "Testing the Law of Proportionate Effect," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(4), pages 403-11, June.
  7. Breusch, T S & Pagan, A R, 1979. "A Simple Test for Heteroscedasticity and Random Coefficient Variation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(5), pages 1287-94, September.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:13029. 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: (Ekkehart Schlicht)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.