IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ssa/lemwps/2009-15.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Do Some Firms Persistently Outperform ?

Author

Listed:
  • Marco Capasso
  • Elena Cefis
  • Koen Frenken

Abstract

This study analyses persistence in growth rates of the entire population of Dutch manufacturing firms. Previous literature on firm growth rates shows that extreme growth events are likely to be negatively correlated over time. A rebound effect following an extreme growth event questions the existence of persistent outperformers, indicated by a positive correlation over time. By supplementing the quantile regression analyses with transition probability matrices, our study shows that ?bouncing? firms co-exist with persistent outperformers. This result is robust if we exclude firms involved in acquisitions or spin offs. Differentiating among different size classes, we find that the existence of persistent outperformers is especially pronounced in micro firms. We interpret this finding as supporting the notion of a Schumpeter Mark I regime, with small firms displaying strong heterogeneity in their growth patterns, versus a Schumpeter Mark II regime, with large firms displaying less heterogeneity of growth.

Suggested Citation

  • Marco Capasso & Elena Cefis & Koen Frenken, 2009. "Do Some Firms Persistently Outperform ?," LEM Papers Series 2009/15, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
  • Handle: RePEc:ssa:lemwps:2009/15
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.lem.sssup.it/WPLem/files/2009-15.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cefis, Elena & Orsenigo, Luigi, 2001. "The persistence of innovative activities: A cross-countries and cross-sectors comparative analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(7), pages 1139-1158, August.
    2. Jensen, J Bradford & McGuckin, Robert H, 1997. "Firm Performance and Evolution: Empirical Regularities in the US Microdata," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(1), pages 25-47.
    3. 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 567-581, June.
    4. Karl Wennberg, 2009. "Knowledge combinations and the survival of financial services ventures," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 259-276, April.
    5. Geroski, Paul A & Jacquemin, Alexis, 1988. "The Persistence of Profits: A European Comparison," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 98(391), pages 375-389, June.
    6. Bettina Peters, 2009. "Persistence of innovation: stylised facts and panel data evidence," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 226-243, April.
    7. Bottazzi, Giulio & Dosi, Giovanni & Lippi, Marco & Pammolli, Fabio & Riccaboni, Massimo, 2001. "Innovation and corporate growth in the evolution of the drug industry," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(7), pages 1161-1187, July.
    8. Winter, Sidney G., 1984. "Schumpeterian competition in alternative technological regimes," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 5(3-4), pages 287-320.
    9. Chesher, Andrew, 1979. "Testing the Law of Proportionate Effect," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(4), pages 403-411, June.
    10. Raymond Wladimir & Mohnen Pierre & Palm Franz & Schim van der Loeff Sybrand, 2009. "Innovative Sales, R&D and Total Innovation Expenditures: Panel Evidence on their Dynamics," Research Memorandum 028, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    11. C. Praag & Peter Versloot, 2007. "What is the value of entrepreneurship? A review of recent research," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 29(4), pages 351-382, December.
    12. Ho, Vivian, 2002. "Learning and the evolution of medical technologies: the diffusion of coronary angioplasty," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(5), pages 873-885, September.
    13. Baldwin, John R. & Rafiquzzaman, Mohammed, 1995. "Selection versus evolutionary adaptation: Learning and post-entry performance," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 501-522, December.
    14. Francesca Lotti & Enrico Santarelli & Marco Vivarelli, 2001. "The relationship between size and growth: the case of Italian newborn firms," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(7), pages 451-454.
    15. Junfu Zhang, 2009. "The performance of university spin-offs: an exploratory analysis using venture capital data," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 255-285, June.
    16. Chad Syverson, 2004. "Market Structure and Productivity: A Concrete Example," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(6), pages 1181-1222, December.
    17. Keller, Wolfgang, 2002. "Trade and the Transmission of Technology," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 5-24, March.
    18. Mark Doms & Eric J. Bartelsman, 2000. "Understanding Productivity: Lessons from Longitudinal Microdata," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(3), pages 569-594, September.
    19. Koenker,Roger, 2005. "Quantile Regression," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521845731, December.
    20. Krugman, Paul, 1991. "Increasing Returns and Economic Geography," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 99(3), pages 483-499, June.
    21. Geroski, P. A. & Van Reenen, J. & Walters, C. F., 1997. "How persistently do firms innovate?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 33-48, March.
    22. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 71-102, October.
    23. Alex Coad & Werner Hölzl, 2009. "On the Autocorrelation of Growth Rates," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 139-166, June.
    24. Alex Coad, 2007. "A Closer Look at Serial Growth Rate Correlation," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 31(1), pages 69-82, August.
    25. Mueller,Dennis C., 2009. "Profits in the Long Run," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521101592, October.
    26. Toke Reichstein & Morten Berg Jensen, 2005. "Firm size and firm growth rate distributions--The case of Denmark," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 14(6), pages 1145-1166, December.
    27. Breschi, Stefano & Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 2000. "Technological Regimes and Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(463), pages 388-410, April.
    28. Klepper, Steven, 1996. "Entry, Exit, Growth, and Innovation over the Product Life Cycle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 562-583, June.
    29. Goddard, J. A. & Wilson, J. O. S., 1999. "The persistence of profit: a new empirical interpretation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 17(5), pages 663-687, July.
    30. Dunne, Paul & Hughes, Alan, 1994. "Age, Size, Growth and Survival: UK Companies in the 1980s," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(2), pages 115-140, June.
    31. Glen, Jack & Lee, Kevin & Singh, Ajit, 2001. "Persistence of profitability and competition in emerging markets," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 247-253, August.
    32. Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 1995. "Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(1), pages 47-65, February.
    33. Adelina Gschwandtner, 2004. "Evolution of Profit Persistence in the US: Evidence from four 20-years periods," Vienna Economics Papers 0410, University of Vienna, Department of Economics.
    34. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    35. Hall, Bronwyn H, 1987. "The Relationship between Firm Size and Firm Growth in the U.S. Manufacturing Sector," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(4), pages 583-606, June.
    36. Jorge Niosi & Marc Banik, 2005. "The evolution and performance of biotechnology regional systems of innovation," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 29(3), pages 343-357, May.
    37. Giulio Bottazzi & Elena Cefis & Giovanni Dosi, 2002. "Corporate growth and industrial structures: some evidence from the Italian manufacturing industry," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(4), pages 705-723, August.
    38. Bottazzi, Giulio & Secchi, Angelo, 2003. "Why are distributions of firm growth rates tent-shaped?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 80(3), pages 415-420, September.
    39. Zoltan J. Acs & Mark Sanders, 2008. "Intellectual Property Rights and the Knowledge Spillover Theory of Entrepreneurship," Jena Economic Research Papers 2008-069, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    40. Attila Varga, 2006. "The Spatial Dimension of Innovation and Growth: Empirical Research Methodology and Policy Analysis," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(9), pages 1171-1186, July.
    41. Ajit Singh & Geoffrey Whittington, 1975. "The Size and Growth of Firms," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 42(1), pages 15-26.
    42. G. Bottazzi & E. Cefis & G. Dosi & A. Secchi, 2007. "Invariances and Diversities in the Patterns of Industrial Evolution: Some Evidence from Italian Manufacturing Industries," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 137-159, June.
    43. Georgios Fotopoulos & Ioannis Giotopoulos, 2010. "Gibrat’s law and persistence of growth in Greek manufacturing," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 191-202, September.
    44. Lucas, Robert Jr., 1988. "On the mechanics of economic development," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 3-42, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sven-Olov Daunfeldt & Daniel Halvarsson, 2015. "Are high-growth firms one-hit wonders? Evidence from Sweden," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 361-383, February.
    2. Marco Capasso & Elena Cefis & Alessandro Sapio, 2013. "Reconciling quantile autoregressions of firm size and variance–size scaling," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 609-632, October.
    3. Alex Coad & Werner Hölzl, 2012. "Firm Growth: Empirical Analysis," Chapters,in: Handbook on the Economics and Theory of the Firm, chapter 24 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Sven-Olov Daunfeldt & Niklas Elert & Dan Johansson, 2014. "The Economic Contribution of High-Growth Firms: Do Policy Implications Depend on the Choice of Growth Indicator?," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 337-365, September.
    5. Anders Bornhäll & Sven-Olov Daunfeldt & Niklas Rudholm, 2013. "Sleeping Gazelles: High profits but no growth," SPRU Working Paper Series 2013-10, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    6. Alex Coad & Christina Guenther, 2013. "Diversification patterns and survival as firms mature," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 633-649, October.
    7. Cuntz, A.N. & Blind, K., 2010. "Global Diffusion of the Non-Traditional Banking Model and Alliance Networks: Social Exposure, Learning and Moderating Regulatory Effort," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2010-044-LIS, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    firm growth; heterogeneity; persistence; transition probability matrices; quantile regression;

    JEL classification:

    • L11 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Production, Pricing, and Market Structure; Size Distribution of Firms
    • L25 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Firm Performance

    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:ssa:lemwps:2009/15. 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: http://edirc.repec.org/data/labssit.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 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.

    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.