Search for: All records

Analyzing data on all US employers in a cohort of entering firms, we document a highly skewed size distribution, such that the largest 5% account for over half of cohort employment at firm birth and more than two-thirds at firm age 7. Analyzing linked survey-administrative data, we find that female, African–American, and younger founders are initially less likely to start large firms. The gender gap persists through firm age 7, while racial and age gaps do not. Education is positively associated with start-up size, except for graduate degrees. Prior entrepreneurship and founding team size are positively associated, but team diversity is not. Specifications with capital and industry controls illuminate roles of financial constraints and sectoral choice.

 

We document the smaller average employment size and lower financial access of Black-owned businesses compared to White-owned businesses. Controlling for other characteristics, we find that observed differences in finance account for 60 percent of the 11.3 percent racial gap in number of employees; differences in returns account for 103 percent. The results imply that if both the levels and returns on finance were equalized across races, then Black-owned firms would be 18.4 percent larger than their actual size. Equalizing financial factors alone would reverse the firm size gap so that Black-owned firms would be larger than White-owned firms by 7.1 percent. 

Recent research maintains that the observed productivity variation across firms reflects resource misallocation and concludes that large GDP gains may be obtained from market-liberalizing polices. Our theoretical analysis examines the impact on productivity dispersion of reallocation frictions in the form of costs of entry, operation, and restructuring, and shows that reforms reducing these frictions may raise dispersion of productivity across firms. Contrary to conventional wisdom, the model does not imply a negative relationship between aggregate productivity and productivity dispersion. Our empirical analysis focuses on episodes of liberalizing policy reforms in the US and six East European transition economies. We find that deregulation of US telecommunications equipment manufacturing is associated with increased, not reduced, productivity dispersion, and that every transition economy in our sample shows a sharp rise in dispersion after liberalization. Productivity dispersion under communist central planning is similar to that in the US, and it rises faster in countries liberalizing more quickly. We also find that lagged productivity dispersion predicts higher future productivity growth, likely because dispersion reflects experimentation by both entering and incumbent firms. The analysis suggests there is no simple relationship between the policy environment and productivity dispersion. 

We estimate differences in innovation behavior between foreign versus U.S.-born entrepreneurs in high-tech industries. Our data come from the Annual Survey of Entrepreneurs, a random sample of firms with detailed information on owner characteristics and innovation activities. We find uniformly higher rates of innovation in immigrant-owned firms for 15 of 16 different innovation measures; the only exception is for copyright/trademark. The immigrant advantage holds for older firms as well as for recent start-ups and for every level of the entrepreneur’s education. The size of the estimated immigrant-native differences in product and process innovation activities rises with detailed controls for demographic and human capital characteristics but falls for R&D and patenting. Controlling for finance, motivations, and industry reduces all coefficients, but for most measures and specifications immigrants are estimated to have a sizable advantage in innovation.