Where has all the skewness gone? The decline in high-growth (young) firms in the U.S.

The pace of business dynamism and entrepreneurship in the U.S. has declined over recent decades. We show that the character of that decline changed around 2000. Since 2000 the decline in dynamism and entrepreneurship has been accompanied by a decline in high-growth young firms. Prior research has shown that the sustained contribution of business startups to job creation stems from a relatively small fraction of high-growth young firms. The presence of these high-growth young firms contributes to a highly (positively) skewed firm growth rate distribution. In 1999, a firm at the 90th percentile of the employment growth rate distribution grew about 31 percent faster than the median firm. Moreover, the 90−50 differential was 16 percent larger than the 50−10 differential reflecting the positive skewness of the employment growth rate distribution. We show that the shape of the firm employment growth distribution changes substantially in the post-2000 period. By 2007, the 90−50 differential was only 4 percent larger than the 50−10, and it continued to exhibit a trend decline through 2011. The overall decline reflects a sharp drop in the 90th percentile of the growth rate distribution accounted for by the declining share of young firms and the declining propensity for young firms to be high-growth firms.     

The effects of mergers and acquisitions on the firm size distribution

This paper provides new empirical evidence on the effects of mergers and acquisitions (M&As) on the shape of the firm size distribution, by using data of the population of manufacturing firms in the Netherlands. Our analysis shows that M&As do not affect the size distribution when we consider the entire population of firms. When we focus on the firms involved in an M&A event, we observe a shift of the firm size distribution towards larger sizes. Firm size distribution becomes more concentrated around the mean, less skewed to the right hand side, and thinner at the tails as a whole. The shift toward higher sizes due to M&A is not uniform but affects firms of different sizes in different ways. While the number of firms in the lower tail decreased, the number of firms in the central size classes increased substantially and outweighed the increase in the number (and mean size) of firms in the upper tail of the distribution (consequently the overall market concentration measured by the Herfindahl index declines). M&As lead to a departure from log-normality of the firm size distribution, suggesting that external growth does not follow Gibrat’s law. Our counterfactual analysis highlights that only internal growth does not affect the shape of the size distribution of firms. On the contrary, it suggests that the change in the size distribution is almost entirely due to the external growth of the firms.

The Determinants of Firm’s Growth in the Telecommunication Services Industry: Empirical Evidence from India

The growth and evolution of the industry has an important bearing on the economic development of a country. The extant literature on firm growth provides valuable insights into firm behavior and factors influencing the evolution of the industry over time. The topic becomes even more relevant in the context of the telecommunication industry because of its positive impact on economic growth and productivity, which has been well documented in both the developed and developing country context. Based on the firm-growth literature, this study analyzes the factors influencing the growth of the Indian telecommunication industry using an unbalanced panel of 204 firms across two decades from 2000 to 2020. Dynamic Panel estimation technique (System GMM) is used to take care of endogeneity issues caused by the dynamic nature of firm growth models. Results indicate that the growth of firms in the Indian telecom services industry is explained by systematic factors like size, age, profitability, financial leverage, and trade orientation. The study finds that the larger firms grow at a decreasing rate compared to small firms. The firm's age negatively impacts the growth rate of firms, i.e., younger firms have a faster growth rate than the older ones supporting the case of convergence of firm growth in the Indian telecom services sector. Factors such as lagged R&D intensity, financial leverage, and profitability negatively impact the firms’ growth rate. Export intensity is found to have a negative and significant impact on the growth rate of the firms. The findings have important policy implications in the context of the growth of the telecommunication industry in India, which has witnessed intense competition, steep decline in profitability, and high debt structure over a period of time.

     

Stylised facts and other empirical evidence on firm dynamics,business cycle and growth

In this paper, we bring together, in a systematised fashion, the scattered empirical evidence relating firm dynamics with both short-run and long-run macroeconomic dynamics. There are numerous studies that focus on firm-level data while controlling for macroeconomic conditions. From these studies a fairly robust set of empirical regularities pertaining to entry, exit, growth and the size distribution of firms has emerged. However, the literature that focuses explicitly on the interplay between firm dynamics and the business cycle is roughly confined to the US experience and to the cyclical properties of firm entry and exit, while the studies about the relationship between firm dynamics and economic growth are limited and unsystematic. We also give a brief account of the most recent theoretical literature on firm dynamics and macroeconomic dynamics, and try to relate it to the empirical findings.     

The impact of new goods and service products on firm growth: evidence from Austrian-linked firm-level data

Using a matched innovation survey and structural business statistics, we investigate the impact of the introduction of new service products and other types of technological innovations on firm growth measured as subsequent two-year employment growth. Results, based on median and robust regression methods for manufacturing firms, show that, on average, both the introduction of new goods and process innovations have a significant and positive impact on subsequent firm growth. In contrast, the introduction of new services does not, on average, have a significant impact on firm growth for both manufacturing and service firms. However, quantile regressions show that the introduction of new service products has a significant and positive impact on firm growth for high-growth service firms. Finally, in manufacturing, the introduction of product innovations has a positive impact on firm growth at both the lower and higher ends of distribution (i.e. for both high-growth and shrinking firms).     

The puzzle on the causality of the productivity and employment growth: evidence from firm-level data

This article analyses the causality between the firm’s employment and productivity growth based on the population of manufacturing firms registered in Slovenia in the 1994–2003 period. By using the system GMM estimator, we show that the employment–productivity growth trade-off does not exist. Moreover, we find significant complementarities between employment and productivity growth, mostly driven by SMEs and firms from high-tech industries. Accordingly, we argue that the job-creation policy and productivity-promoting policy are complementary rather than trade-offs and that policymakers should focus on the optimal policy mix that provides the highest aggregate effect with regard to all growth aspects. Further, significant differences among the factors of employment and productivity growth suggest that job-creation policy measures are most successful when targeted at younger export-oriented firms with high total factor productivity levels and capital-intensive production. Meanwhile, the outcome of policy measures aimed at promoting productivity increases with a firm’s capital intensity and size up to the threshold employment level and with the intensity of market competition.     

Are corruption and taxation really harmful to growth? Firm level evidence

Exploiting a unique data set containing information on the estimated bribe payments of Ugandan firms, we study the relationship between bribery payments, taxes and firm growth. Using industry-location averages to circumvent potential problems of endogeneity and measurement errors, we find that both the rate of taxation and bribery are negatively correlated with firm growth. A one-percentage point increase in the bribery rate is associated with a reduction in firm growth of three percentage points, an effect that is about three times greater than that of taxation. This provides some validation for firm-level theories of corruption which posit that corruption retards the development process to an even greater extent than taxation.     

Firm heterogeneity,credit constraints,and endogenous growth

This paper is in general concerned with the role of firm heterogeneity for economic growth. We focus on heterogeneous productivity in innovation and credit constraints of firms within a semi-endogenous growth model reflecting recent empirical findings on firm heterogeneity. Our model allows for an explicit solution for transitional growth and for the balanced growth path level of innovations or ideas. The model predicts an optimal degree of heterogeneity in the presence of an endogenous firm distribution. This enables us to draw inference about the impact of key policy parameters of the model on these quantities and to draw conclusions about firm and capital market related policies.     

R&D subsidies in a model of growth with dynamic market structure

This paper presents the effects of an R&D subsidy in a Schumpeterian general equilibrium model with rich industry dynamics. R&D subsidies raise the long-run growth rate, but they also raise the level of industry concentration. In the model firms compete for market share through process R&D endogenously determining the market structure within and across industries. Endogeneity of the market structure allows for analysis of changes in the moments of the firm size distribution in response to policy. R&D subsidies primarily benefit large incumbent firms who increase their innovation rates creating a greater technological barrier to entry. Concentration increases with fewer firms and a higher variance in the market shares. In general equilibrium, the greater distortions in the product market cause the wage rate to fall which leads to increased turnover rates. In addition, the analysis demonstrates that the model captures a large number of empirical regularities described in the industrial organization literature, but absent from most endogenous growth models. These features, such as entering firms are small relative to incumbents, the hazard rate of exit is negatively related to firm size, and large firms spend more on R&D than small firms play important roles in understanding the impact of R&D subsidies on the economy.     

Testing Gibrat's legacy: A Bayesian approach to study the growth of firms

Gibrat's law is a referent model of corporate growth dynamics. This paper employs Bayesian panel data methods to test Gibrat's law and its implications. Using a Pharmaceutical Industry Database (1987–1998), we find evidence against Gibrat's law on average, within or across industries. Estimated steady states differ across firms, and firm sizes and growth rates do not converge within the same industry to a common limiting distribution. There is only weak evidence of mean reversion: initial larger firms do not grow relatively slower than smaller firms. Differences in growth rates and in steady state size are persistent and firm-specific, rather than size-specific.     

Firms’ growth: Does the innovation system matter?

The paper investigates the effects of external sources of knowledge on firm growth. In line with the knowledge spillovers literature, we focus on the relationship between firms and universities, considered as a crucial source of knowledge. To this purpose, we analyse a sample of UK public companies in the period 1995 to 2006. Our findings confirm that both universities’ knowledge input and output are important determinants of the growth of entrepreneurial firms.     

Firm growth and R&D: Evidence from the Portuguese manufacturing industry

This work studies the effects of R&D activities and investment, both physical and R&D, on the growth of firms by considering a dynamic firm growth model with serial correlation. The main hypotheses maintain that firms with a strong commitment to R&D have a higher growth rate, and investment has a positive effect on firm growth. We investigate such relations with reference to an unbalanced panel data set of Portuguese manufacturing firms over the period of 1990 to 2001. We find that a systematic tendency for smaller firms to grow more quickly is the main reason why firm growth is not entirely stochastic.     

What are good R&D investment strategies for leaders and followers?

Research and development (R&D) investment affects the growth of firms in the same industry differently according to their technological positions. This study empirically investigates differences in how R&D investment influences firm growth between technological leaders and followers. Additionally, this study investigates the moderating effects of complementary assets and market competition on the relationship between R&D investment and firm growth. Using a sample of 2322 observations from 492 firms in the U.S. chemical and allied products industry for the period 2000–2009, we show that an increase in R&D investment leads to greater firm growth for technological followers than for technological leaders. We also find that the moderating effects of complementary assets and market competition vary depending on whether a firm is a technological leader or follower.     

The within-distribution business cycle dynamics of German firms

In this article, we analyse stylized facts for Germany's business cycle at the firm level. Based on longitudinal firm-level data from the Bundesbank's balance sheet statistics covering, on average, 55 000 firms per year from 1971 to 1998, we estimate transition probabilities of a firm in a certain real sales growth regime switching to another regime in the next period, e.g. whether a firm that has witnessed a high growth rate is likely to stay in a regime of high growth or is bound to switch to a regime of low growth in the subsequent period. We find that these probabilities depend on the business cycle position.     

Firm‐Specific Learning and the Investment Behavior of Large and Small Firms*

We examine a model of size distribution and growth of firms where firms learn about idiosyncratic productivity parameters through their production experience. Aggregate shocks, by adding noise to learning at the firm level, can produce different responses across firms. In particular, young firms, which are smaller on average than older firms and more uncertain about their productivity, can “overreact” to aggregate shocks. Such differences across firm sizes and ages, which arise here in a model with perfect financial markets, are often attributed to financial frictions that hit small and large firms differently.     

Firm selection and industry evolution: the post-entry performance of new firms

A dynamic framework based on the process of firm selection and industry evolution is used to analyse the post-entry performance of new firms. In particular, it is hypothesized that, based on the stylized fact that virtually all new firms start at a very small scale of output, firm growth and survival are shaped by the need to attain an efficient level of output. The post-entry performance of more than 11,000 U.S. manufacturing firms established in 1976 is tracked throughout the subsequent tenyear period. Firm growth is found to be negatively influenced by firm size but positively related to the extent of scale economies, capital intensity, innovative activity, and market growth. By contrast, the likelihood of survival is identified as being positively influenced by firm size, market growth, and capital intensity, but negatively affected by the degree of scale economies in the industry. When viewed through the dynamic framework of firm selection and industry evolution, the empirical results shed considerable light on several paradoxes in the industrial organization literature, such as the continued persistence over time of an asymmetrical firm-size distribution consisting predominantely of suboptimal scale firms, and the failure of capital intensity and scale economies to substantially deter the entry and start-up of new firms.     

Edith Penrose and economics

This paper contains a constructive critique of the Penrose pictureof firm, comparing it with, on the one hand the Coase-Williamsontransactions-cost picture, and on the other with the author'sown growth model. It concludes that the Penrose theory doesnot at the end of the day quantitatively determine the growthrate of the firm and that the transactions-cost story does notat the end of the day determine the size of the firm. The author'sown model determine's the growth rate of the firm, but not thesize. If married to a stochastic process, the author's modelcontributes to the determinate, but the quantitative parametersin any one society at any one time, are not. As there is, however,a strong case that the administrative efficiency of firms hasno robust relationship to absolute size this indeterminacy maynot be economically significant. In other words, the staticefficiency of an economy is not sensitive to either the absolutesize distribution of firms or to their growth processes. Instead,the key contribution of firms' growth processes to social welfareprobably lies mainly in the realm of competitive dynamics. Interfirmcompetition for growth is also competition to innovation, àla Schumpeter.     

PRECAUTIONARY DEMAND FOR LABOUR AND FIRM SIZE

This paper studies firms' job creation decisions in a labour market with search frictions. A simple labour market search model is developed in which a firm can search for a second employee while producing with a first worker, and this creates the equilibrium size distribution of firms. A firm expands employment even if the instantaneous payoff to a large firm is less than that of staying small – a firm has a precautionary motive to expand its size. In addition, this motive is enhanced by a greater market tightness. Because of this effect, firms’ decisions become interdependent – a firm creates a vacancy if it expects other firms to do the same, creating strategic complementarity among firms and thereby self‐fulfilling multiple equilibria. An increase in productivity can cause a qualitative change in labour market tightness and the rate of unemployment.     

Regulating away competition: the effect of regulation on entrepreneurship and employment

Many scholars have worried that regulation deters entrepreneurship because it increases the cost of entry, reduces innovation in the regulated industry, and benefits large firms because they can overcome the costs of complying with regulations more easily than smaller firms. Using novel data on the extent of US federal regulations by industry and data on firm births and employment from the Statistics of US Businesses, we run fixed effects regressions to show that more-regulated industries experienced fewer new firm births and slower employment growth in the period 1998–2011. Large firms may even successfully lobby government officials to increase regulations to raise their smaller rivals’ costs. We also find that regulations inhibit employment growth in all firms and that large firms are less likely to exit a heavily regulated industry than small firms.     

The productivity trend in Iran Evidence from manufacturing firms

Iran has been experiencing slow growth for the past ten years. Using plant‐level information, we show that on average firm‐specific productivity in manufacturing sectors declined at the rate of 2.6% annually, while large top decile firms experienced a modest growth in productivity between 2005 and 2011. We decompose this trend and find that within‐plant variation is its main driving force while the between firms and industries component is insignificant. We test several alternative explanations that may contribute to these negative trends. We show that the subsidy reform had a negative effect, while privatization seems to have had no effect. Private management not affected productivity growth, while firm size is associated with higher productivity growth. Also, we find that productivity growth decreases with the energy intensity of the firm. We also find that R&D expenditures significantly increase productivity growth, while the R&D sales ratio is about 0.5% in manufacturing sectors, which is about one‐fifth of the world average. A one‐percent point increase in R&D expenditures increases productivity growth by 0.5%.