Multinational presence and labour productivity differentials in Indonesian manufacturing, 1975–2001

2005 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 221-242 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sadayuki Takii ◽  
Eric D. Ramstetter
Keyword(s):  
Labour Productivity ◽  
Productivity Differentials

Comparative British and American Productivity in Retailing

1983 ◽  
Vol 104 ◽  
pp. 45-60 ◽  
Author(s):  
A.D. Smith ◽  
D.M.W.N. Hitchens
Keyword(s):  
Service Sector ◽  
Labour Productivity ◽  
The United States ◽  
Productivity Measurement ◽  
Technical Problems ◽  
The Past ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Productivity Differentials ◽  
Service Sectors ◽  
Anglo American

The National Institute recently published a study of comparative labour productivity in the non-service sectors of the British, American and German economies: agriculture, extractive industries, manufacturing, construction, public utilities and transport and communications. The present paper extends this work by measuring and analysing Anglo-American labour productivity differentials in the retail trades. Thus it marks our first step into the service sector proper, which accounts in the United Kingdom for one half of both GDP and employment, and in the United States for nearly three-fifths. The extent and significance of international productivity differences in services have been almost entirely neglected in the past, largely because the technical problems posed by productivity measurement in service sectors are even more complex than those encountered in industrial activities. One exception was a study of comparative productivity in distribution relating to the beginning of the 1950s, the methodology of which is similar to our own.

Link between Exporting and Productivity

2011 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 309-331 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vinish Kathuria ◽  
Anaka Aiyar
Keyword(s):  
Chemical Industry ◽  
Labour Productivity ◽  
The Self ◽  
Factor Productivity ◽  
Selection Hypothesis ◽  
Capital Productivity ◽  
Self Selection ◽  
Learning By Exporting ◽  
Productivity Differentials ◽  
Productivity Differential

The theory that links exporting behaviour and productivity consists broadly of two hypotheses—the ‘self-selection hypothesis’—more productive firms venturing for exports and the ‘learning by exporting hypothesis’—exporting leads to increased productivity. This study measures the productivity differentials between exporters and non-exporters for 120 firms belonging to the Indian chemical industry to investigate if the self-selection hypothesis holds. The productivity differential comparison between exporters and non-exporters show that non-exporters have higher total factor productivity than exporters. Though labour productivity is higher in exporters than non-exporters, the yearly averages show that the labour productivity of exporters is converging to that on the non-exporters. In terms of capital productivity, overall averages show that exporters are more productive, but yearly trend shows that capital productivity of non-exporters has overtaken that of exporters over the years. With respect to self-selection hypothesis, the study does not find any evidence for it for the chemical industry. Prior exporting status, size, being part of a group and age are the only factors that induce a firm to go for exporting.

International Industrial Productivity: a Comparison of Britain, America and Germany

1982 ◽  
Vol 101 ◽  
pp. 13-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
A.D. Smith ◽  
D.M.W.N. Hitchens ◽  
S.W. Davies
Keyword(s):  
Labour Force ◽  
Labour Productivity ◽  
Capital Intensity ◽  
Public Utilities ◽  
Extractive Industries ◽  
Complete Study ◽  
Industrial Performance ◽  
Industrial Productivity ◽  
Productivity Differentials ◽  
Rates Of Growth

This paper presents some results derived from a wider National Institute study of labour productivity differentials in non-service activities in the British, American and German economies, to be published as a NIESR Occasional Paper during the autumn 1982. For the most part the present paper focuses on the international labour productivity differentials which emerge at the major sector level—for agriculture, extractive industries, manufacturing, construction, public utilities and transport. The complete study will also consider productivity differentials for component activities in these sectors and seek some explanation of contrasts in international industrial performance in terms of such factors as capital intensity, market size, rates of growth, labour force quality etc.

Productivity Growth, Structural Change and Informality: The Case of Russia

2015 ◽  
pp. 30-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
I. Voskoboynikov ◽  
V. Gimpelson
Keyword(s):  
Structural Change ◽  
Productivity Growth ◽  
Labour Productivity ◽  
Alternative Methods ◽  
Industry Effects ◽  
Labour Productivity Growth ◽  
Russian Economy ◽  
Negative Effect ◽  
Total Labour

This study considers the influence of structural change on aggregate labour productivity growth of the Russian economy. The term "structural change" refers to labour reallocation both between industries and between formal and informal segments within an industry. Using Russia KLEMS and official Rosstat data we decompose aggregate labour productivity growth into intra-industry (within) and between industry effects with four alternative methods of the shift-share analysis. All methods provide consistent results and demonstrate that total labour reallocation has been growth enhancing though the informality expansion has had a negative effect. As our study suggests, it is caused by growing variation in productivity levels across industries.

Improving management as a way to increase labour productivity

Upravlenie ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 24-30
Author(s):  
A. O. Ivanov
Keyword(s):  
Productivity Growth ◽  
Labour Productivity ◽  
Production Costs ◽  
Managerial Practices ◽  
Industrial Enterprises ◽  
Labour Productivity Growth ◽  
Period 2 ◽  
Main Factors ◽  
The Moment

The article gives an overview, performs analysis and classification of successful managerial practices applied at Russian industrial enterprises in the framework of the national project “Labour productivity and employment support”. The paper emphasizes the main factors of labour productivity growth as follows: investment policy, growth of human capital, and efficient use of managerial capital of enterprise. In order to determine the need of enterprises to increase labour productivity, the author proposes four universal criteria that signal the existing inefficiency even before the loss of competitiveness: 1) the dynamics of labour productivity in the company is not positive during a given period; 2) the company is behind competitors by labour productivity indicator; 3) the company is behind competitors by labour productivity growth rates indicator for a certain period; 4) unit production costs rise. These criteria allow you to take into account the situation both within the enterprise and in comparison with other enterprises. Each criteria can be considered separately or in combination with the others, applied to enterprises of different industries, specialization, and scale. Criteria indicate the direction of development in which the company is experiencing difficulties at the moment, or may experience them in the future.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document