Search results

The purpose of this paper is to answer the question of workforce diversity and efficiency. It departs from the rather ad hoc approach used in most recent empirical papers exploiting firm-level evidence, and suggests focusing on the estimation of the degree of concavity of the production function.

Workforce diversity is optimal when the technology displays concavity in the share of workers considered (e.g. decreasing marginal contribution of rising shares of more productive/skilled workers). What is also shown in this paper is that a generalised version of the production function à-la-Hellerstein-Neumark (HN) – where workforce diversity is captured via an index of labour shares – is suitable for estimating the concavity of the technology, and thus for assessing the case for/against workforce diversity.

The paper contains an application to two panels of Belgian firms covering the 1998-2012 period. The main empirical result is that of an absence of strong evidence that age, gender or educational diversity is good or bad for efficiency.

The key idea of the paper is that the degree of convacity/convexity in the share of workers considered of firm-level technology and the desirability/efficiency of workforce diversity are intrinsically connected. It is also that a non-linear/CES version of the HN labour-quality index can be used in empirical work to assess the degree of concavity/convexity of the technology and quantify the efficiency gains/losses of workforce diversity.

There is plenty of individual-level evidence, based on the estimation of Mincerian equations, showing that better-educated individuals earn more. This is usually interpreted as a proof that education raises labour productivity. Some macroeconomists, analysing cross-country time series, also support the idea that the continuous expansion of education has contributed positively to growth. Surprisingly, most economists with an interest in human capital have neglected the level of the firm to study the education-productivity-wage nexus. And the few published works considering firm-level evidence are lacking a proper strategy to cope with the endogeneity problem inherent to the estimation production and wage functions. The purpose of this paper is to aim at providing estimates of the causal effect of education on productivity and wage labour costs.

This paper taps into a rich, firm-level, Belgian panel database that contains information on productivity, labour cost and the workforce’s educational attainment to deliver estimates of the causal effect of education on productivity and wage/labour costs. Therefore, it exclusively resorts to within firm changes to deal with time-invariant heterogeneity bias. What is more, it addresses the risk of simultaneity bias (endogeneity of firms’ education-mix choices in the short run) using the structural approach suggested by Ackerberg et al. (2006), alongside more traditional system-GMM methods (Blundell and Bond, 1998) where lagged values of labour inputs are used as instruments.

Results suggest that human capital, in particular larger shares of university-educated workers inside firms, translate into significantly higher firm-level labour productivity, and that labour costs are relatively well aligned on education-driven labour productivity differences. In other words, the authors find evidence that the Mincerian relationship between education and individual wages is driven by a strong positive link between education and firm-level productivity.

Surprisingly, most economists with an interest in human capital have neglected the level of the firm to study the education-productivity-pay nexus. Other characteristics of the workforce, like gender or age have been much more investigated at the level of the firm by industrial or labour economists (Hellerstein et al., 1999; Aubert and Crépon, 2003; Hellerstein and Neumark, 2007; Vandenberghe, 2011a, b, 2012; Rigo et al., 2012; Dostie, 2011; van Ours and Stoeldraijer, 2011). At present, the small literature based on firm-level evidence provides some suggestive evidence of the link between education, productivity and pay at the level of firms. Examples are Hægeland and Klette (1999); Haltiwanger et al. (1999). Other notable papers examining a similar question are Galindo-Rueda and Haskel (2005), Prskawetz et al. (2007) and Turcotte and Whewell Rennison (2004). But, despite offering plausible and intuitive results, many of the above studies essentially rely on cross-sectional evidence and most of them do not tackle the two crucial aspects of the endogeneity problem affecting the estimation of production and wage functions (Griliches and Mairesse, 1995): first, heterogeneity bias (unobserved time-invariant determinants of firms’ productivity that may be correlated to the workforce structure) and second, simultaneity bias (endogeneity in input choice, in the short-run, that includes the workforce mix of the firm). While the authors know that labour productivity is highly heterogeneous across firms (Syverson, 2011), only Haltiwanger et al. (1999) control for firm level-unobservables using firm-fixed effects. The problem of simultaneity has also generally been overlooked. Certain short-term productivity shocks affecting the choice of labour inputs, can be anticipated by the firms and influence their employment decision and thus the workforce mix. Yet these shocks and the resulting decisions by firms’ manager are unobservable by the econometrician. Hægeland and Klette (1999) try to solve this problem by proxying productivity shocks with intermediate goods, but their methodology inspired by Levinsohn and Petrin (2003) suffers from serious identification issues due to collinearity between labour and intermediate goods (Ackerberg et al., 2006).

The purpose of this paper is to estimate the impact of fixed-term contracts (FTCs) on labour productivity, wages (i.e. labour cost), and productivity-wage gaps (i.e. profits).

The authors apply dynamic panel data techniques to detailed Belgian linked employer-employee panel data covering the period 1999-2006.

Results indicate that FTCs exert stronger positive effects on productivity than on wages and (accordingly) that the use of FTCs increases firms’ profitability.

This paper is one of the first to examine the FTC-productivity-wage nexus while addressing three important methodological issues related to the state dependency of the three explained variables, to firm time-invariant heterogeneity, and to the endogeneity of FTCs.

Institutions, social norms and the nature of industrial relations vary greatly between Latin American and Western European countries. Such institutional and organizational differences might shape firms’ operational environment in general and the type of competition in product and labor markets in particular. The purpose of this paper is to identify and quantify industry differences in product and labor market imperfections in Chile and France.

The authors rely on two extensions of Hall’s econometric framework for estimating price-cost margins by nesting three labor market settings (LMS) (perfect competition (PC) or right-to-manage bargaining, efficient bargaining (EB) and monopsony). Using an unbalanced panel of 1,737 firms over the period 1996-2003 in Chile and 14,270 firms over the period 1994-2001 in France, the authors first classify 20 comparable manufacturing industries in six distinct regimes that differ in the type of competition prevailing in product and labor markets. The authors then investigate industry differences in the estimated product and labor market imperfection parameters.

Consistent with differences in institutions and in the industrial relations system in the two countries, the authors find regime differences across the two countries and cross-country differences in the levels of product and labor market imperfection parameters within regimes.

This study is the first to compare the type and the degree of industry-level product and labor market imperfections inferred from consistent estimation of firm-level production functions in a Latin American and a Western European country. Using firm-level output price indices, the microeconomic production function estimates for Chile are not subject to the omitted output price bias, as is often a major drawback in microeconometric studies of firm behavior.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the impact of wage dispersion on sickness absenteeism observed in Belgian firms.

The authors use detailed linked employer-employee panel data for the period 1999-2006 that allow the authors to compute a conditional wage dispersion indicator following the Winter-Ebmer and Zweimüller (1999) methodology and to estimate the relationship between sickness absenteeism and wage dispersion while controlling for time-invariant workplace characteristics.

The authors find a positive and hump-shaped relationship between intra-firm wage dispersion and sickness absenteeism, the turning point of this relation being extremely high. In addition, the magnitude of the influence of wage dispersion on sickness absenteeism is found to be stronger in firms employing a larger share of blue-collar workers.

The results could therefore suggest that wage dispersion, suggestive of larger pay-for-performance mechanisms, decreases worker satisfaction and the workplace climate in general. Only a minority of workers, who are less sensitive to equity and cohesion considerations, would be less absent as pay-for-performance increases.

While numerous approaches analyse the link between wage dispersion and firm productivity, very few studies we are aware of are devoted to the relationship between wage dispersion and sickness absenteeism. Yet, the outcomes in terms of productivity and sickness absenteeism may be different. Furthermore, the influence of wage dispersion on sickness absenteeism does not seem unambiguous from a theoretical point of view. To the authors knowledge, it is the first time that this relation is analysed with Belgian data.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate changes in the economic importance of performance-related-pay (PRP) in Britain through the 2000s using firm-level data.

The authors utilise nationally representative, monthly data on the total wage bill and employment of around 8,500 firms. Using these data, the authors decompose the share of the total economy-wide wage bill accounted for by bonuses into the shares of employment in the PRP and non-PRP sectors, the ratio of base pay between the two sectors, and the gearing of bonus payments to base pay within the PRP sector.

The growth in the economic importance of bonuses in Britain in the mid-2000s – and subsequent fluctuations since the onset of recession in 2008 – can be almost entirely explained by changes in the gearing of bonus to base pay within the PRP sector. There has been no substantial change in the percentage of employment accounted for by PRP firms; if anything it has fallen over time. Furthermore, movements in the gearing of bonuses to base pay in the economy are heavily influenced by changes in Finance: a sector which accounts for a large proportion of all bonus payments in Britain.

The paper demonstrates the importance of understanding further how firms decide the size of bonus payments in a given period.

This is the first paper to present monthly firm-level data for Britain on the incidence and size of bonus payments in the 2000s.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the role of performance-related pay (PRP) on productivity and wages of Italian firms.

A unique data set for the Italian economy, obtained from the ISFOL Employer and Employee Surveys (2005, 2007, 2010), is used to estimate the relationship between PRP, labour productivity and wages, also controlling for an ample set of covariates. The authors performed standard quantile regressions (QRs) to investigate heterogeneity in associations of PRP with labour productivity and wages. In a second stage, the endogeneity of PRP was taken into account by using instrumental variable QR techniques.

The econometric estimates suggests that PRP are incentive schemes that substantially lead to efficiency enhancements and wage gains. These findings are confirmed for firms under union governance and suggest that well-designed policies, that circumvent the limited implementation of PRP practices, would guarantee productivity improvement and wage premiums for employees.

The main limitation of the findings concerns PRP data, that do not offer statistical information on different types of schemes, at group or individual level.

This paper is the first to investigate, on a national scale for the Italian economy, the role of PRP on both productivity and wages, in order to shed light on the efficiency and distributive implications, whereas most of the studies of related literature are restricted to one of those aspects.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the role wage dispersion across establishments has played in recent increases in total wage inequality in Germany and compares it to inequality changes at the individual level. It is queried whether the contribution of establishment heterogeneity to the rise of wage inequality stems from changes of institutional settings or from structures such as establishment size and the composition of the workforce.

Applying regression-based decompositions of variance to German linked employer-employee panel data for the years 2000-2010 it is analysed to what extent changes associated to firm structures contribute to the rise of total wage inequality.

Results show that the rise in wage inequality in Germany to a great extent is associated to rising wage variance across establishments, implying that establishment specific wage premiums have grown. By further decomposing across firm components of wage inequality, it is found that changes in across establishment wage inequality related to collective bargaining, worker co-determination and internal labour markets together account for about 3 per cent of the rise in total inequality. Inequality changes related to establishments’ skill and occupational composition account for about 11 per cent and establishment size alone accounts for about 18 per cent of the rise in total inequality.

The main contribution is to quantify the relation of specific establishment characteristics to the rise in total wage inequality over time. Conclusions are drawn about the importance of mechanisms of rent sharing at the firm level in comparison to the determination of wages by individual qualification.

Many contributions to the educational mismatch literature address the productivity effects of both excess and deficit educational attainments for workers at the individual level. Due to the limited transferability of their results to establishment-level performance, especially when allowing for the possibility of spillover effects from mismatched workers to their well-matched colleagues, from an employer’s point of view, it is highly important to know the net effect of educationally mismatched employees on productivity at the establishment level. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

This paper analyses the impact of overeducated and undereducated workers among an establishment’s workforce on its productivity, providing first representative evidence for Germany. Using linked employer-employee data from Germany, the author estimates dynamic panel production functions using a system GMM estimator.

The author finds that undereducated workers among an establishment’s workforce impair its (establishment-level) productivity, implying that an establishment’s HR management should avoid the recruitment of undereducated workers, at least if they follow a short-term personnel policy. The effect for overeducated employees is also negative, albeit small and insignificant.

The consideration of the phenomena of over and undereducation from the employer’s point of view provides further insight into the consequences of educational mismatch.