Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Does management matter?: evidence from India

By Nick Bloom, Ben Eifert, Aprajit Mahajan, David McKenzie and John Roberts

Abstract

A long-standing question in social science is to what extent differences in management cause differences in firm performance. To investigate this we ran a management field experiment on large Indian textile firms. We provided free consulting on modern management practices to a randomly chosen set of treatment plants and compared their performance to the control plants. We find that adopting these management practices had three main effects. First, it raised average productivity by 11 per cent through improved quality and efficiency and reduced inventory. Second, it increased decentralization of decision making, as better information flow enabled owners to delegate more decisions to middle managers. Third, it increased the use of computers, necessitated by the data collection and analysis involved in modern management. Since these practices were profitable this raises the question of why firms had not adopted these before. Our results suggest that informational barriers were a primary factor in explaining this lack of adoption. Modern management is a technology that diffuses slowly between firms, with many Indian firms initially unaware of its existence or impact. Since competition was limited by constraints on firm entry and growth, badly managed firms were not rapidly driven from the market

Topics: HD28 Management. Industrial Management
Publisher: International Growth Centre
Year: 2010
OAI identifier: oai:eprints.lse.ac.uk:36366
Provided by: LSE Research Online

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (1887), ‘The source of business profits’, doi
  2. (2010a), ‘Impact Assessments in Finance and Private Sector Development: What have we learned and what should we learn?’ World Bank Research Observer, doi
  3. (2010b) ‘Beyond Baseline and Follow-up: The Case for More T in Experiments,’ Mimeo, doi
  4. (2004). Avital Cnaan doi
  5. (2008). Bootstrap-Based Improvements for Inference with Clustered Errors,’ doi
  6. (1961). Empirical Production Function Free of Management doi
  7. Greg Fischer and Antoinette Schoar (2010), ‘Financial literacy training and rule of thumbs: evidence from a field experiment,’ mimeo.
  8. (2005). Growth Through the Lens of Development Economics’, doi
  9. (2000). Hierarchies and the Organization of Knowledge in Production’, doi
  10. (1994). How Common Is Workplace Transformation and Who doi
  11. (1995). Human Resource Bundles and Management Performance: Organizational Logic and Flexible Production Systems,’ doi
  12. (2010). Incentives and Hierarchy,’ doi
  13. (2001). India: The Growth Imperative. doi
  14. (2002). Information Technology, Workplace Organization and the Demand for Skilled Labor: Firm-level Evidence,’ doi
  15. (2010). Learning about a New Technology: Pineapple in doi
  16. (2003). Managing with Style: The Effects of doi
  17. (2004). Market Structure and Productivity: A Concrete Example’, doi
  18. (2007). Measuring and Explaining Management Practices across Firms and Countries’, doi
  19. (1996). Modes of Theorizing in Strategic Human Resource Management: Test of Universalistic, Contingency and Configurational Performance Predictions’, doi
  20. (2009). Nudging farmers to use fertilizer: theory and experimental evidence from Kenya,’ Harvard mimeo. doi
  21. (1911). Principles of Scientific Management, Harper and Brothers,
  22. (1987). Productivity, Technology, and Industrial Development: A Case Study in Textiles,
  23. (2008). Reallocation, Firm Turnover, and Efficiency: Selection on Productivity or doi
  24. Reenen (2009a) ‘Americans do IT Better: American Multinationals and the Productivity Miracle,’ forthcoming American Economic Review. doi
  25. Reenen (2009b) ‘The organization of firms across countries,’ doi
  26. (2000). Reputation Effects and the Limits of Contracting: a doi
  27. (2008). Returns to Capital in Microenterprises: Evidence from a Field Experiment,’ doi
  28. (2009). t-statistic Based Correlation and Heterogeneity Robust Inference,’ doi
  29. (1997). The Effects of Human Resource Management: A Study of Steel Finishing Lines’, doi
  30. (2006). The Flattening Firm: Evidence from Panel Data on the Changing doi
  31. (2010). The impact of offering consulting services to small and medium enterprises: evidence from a randomized trial in Mexico,’ mimeo. doi
  32. W.K and Vadim Marmer,(2008) ‘Exactly Distribution-free Inference in Instrumental Variables Regression with Possibly Weak Instruments,’ doi
  33. (2010). What determines productivity at the micro level?’, draft manuscript for the Journal of Economic Literature. doi
  34. (2004). What’s Driving the New Economy? doi
  35. (1987). Why isn’t the Whole World Developed?’ doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.