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

Do Some Firms Persistently Outperform ?

  • Marco Capasso
  • Elena Cefis
  • Koen Frenken

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.

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

Paper provided by Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy in its series LEM Papers Series with number 2009/15.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 27 Oct 2009
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ssa:lemwps:2009/15
Contact details of provider: Postal: Piazza dei Martiri della Liberta, 33, 56127 Pisa
Phone: +39-50-883343
Fax: +39-50-883344
Web page: http://www.lem.sssup.it/
Email:


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. 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.
  2. Bettina Peters, 2005. "Persistence of Innovation: Stylised Facts and Panel Data Evidence," Development and Comp Systems 0511021, EconWPA.
  3. Giulio Bottazzi & Giovanni Dosi & Marco Lippi & Fabio Pammolli & Massimo Riccaboni, 2001. "Innovation and Corporate Growth in the Evolution of the Drug Industry," LEM Papers Series 2001/02, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
  4. 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.
  5. Elena Cefis & Luigi Orsenigo, 1998. "The Persistence of Innovative Activities. A Cross-Countries and Cross-Sectors Comparative Analysis," Department of Economics Working Papers 9804, Department of Economics, University of Trento, Italia.
  6. Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 1995. "Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(1), pages 47-65, February.
  7. Singh, Ajit & Whittington, Geoffrey, 1975. "The Size and Growth of Firms," MPRA Paper 51715, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  8. 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.
  9. Wladimir Raymond & Pierre Mohnen & Franz Palm & Sybrand Schim van der Loeff, 2009. "Innovative Sales, R&D and Total Innovation Expenditures: Panel Evidence on their Dynamics," CESifo Working Paper Series 2716, CESifo Group Munich.
  10. Robert H Mcguckin & Bradford J Jensen, 1996. "Firm Performance And Evolution Empirical Regularities In The U.S. Microdata," Working Papers 96-10, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
  11. 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.
  12. 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.
  13. 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.
  14. Chad Syverson, 2004. "Market Structure and Productivity: A Concrete Example," NBER Working Papers 10501, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  15. 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.
  16. Heckman, James J, 1979. "Sample Selection Bias as a Specification Error," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(1), pages 153-61, January.
  17. Roger Koenker & Kevin F. Hallock, 2001. "Quantile Regression," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(4), pages 143-156, Fall.
  18. Winter, Sidney G., 1984. "Schumpeterian competition in alternative technological regimes," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 5(3-4), pages 287-320.
  19. 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 115-40, June.
  20. 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.
  21. 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.
  22. Geroski, Paul A & Jacquemin, Alexis, 1988. "The Persistence of Profits: A European Comparison," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 98(391), pages 375-89, June.
  23. Alex Coad, 2006. "A Closer Look at Serial Growth Rate Correlation," LEM Papers Series 2006/29, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
  24. 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.
  25. 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.
  26. 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.
  27. 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.
  28. Bottazzi, Giulio & Secchi, Angelo, 2003. "Why are distributions of firm growth rates tent-shaped?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 80(3), pages 415-420, September.
  29. 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.
  30. 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.
  31. Chesher, Andrew, 1979. "Testing the Law of Proportionate Effect," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(4), pages 403-11, June.
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: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: ()

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.