Postal Ballots-For home voting step by step process 2024.pptx
Developments in measuring management practices among British businesses
1. Developments in measuring
Management Practices among British
Businesses
ESRC-ONS workshop
BEIS Conference Centre, London
28th February 2018
Gaganan Awano
Office for National Statistics
1
2. Outline
• Motivation
• Purpose of the management practices survey pilot
• Initial results
• What’s new on the management and expectations
survey
• Next steps
2
3. UK productivity growth
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
1971 1974 1977 1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010 2013 2016
Q4 2007-Q4 2016:
0.00%
UK Output per hour worked, 2013=100 and average quarterly growth rates
Q1 1971-Q1 1990:
0.58%
Q1 1990-Q4 2007:
0.55%
Source: ONS
4. UK’s productivity performance compared to
the G7
Source: ONS (International Comparisons of Productivity)
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
Japan Canada UK=100 Italy G7exUK US France Germany
Index, UK=100 2015 2016
Current Price GDP per hour worked, G7
5. Management and Firm Performance - USA
Source: Bloom et al, 2013,“Management in America”, Center for Economic Studies Working Paper, US Census Bureau
Productivity Operating Profit Output Growth
Decile of Management Practice Score
Low High Low High Low High
6. Purpose of MPS pilot
Feasibility
• Are UK businesses willing to answer the management
practice questions in a voluntary survey?
• Can we find a long term approach for collecting data
on management practices?
Results
• How much do responses vary?
• Do we see an association between management
practices and productivity?
6
7. Purpose of MPS pilot
Feasibility
• Are UK businesses willing to answer the management
practice questions in a voluntary survey?
• Can we find a long term approach for collecting data
on management practices?
Results
• How much do responses vary?
• Do we see an association between management
practices and productivity?
7
8. 1. In 2015, what generally best describes what happened at this business when a
production problem arose?
2. In 2015, how many key performance indicators were monitored at this business?
3. In 2015, how frequently were the key performance indicators reviewed at this business?
4. In 2015, what best describes the time frame of production targets at this business?
5. In 2015, how easy or difficult was it for this business to achieve its production targets?
6. In 2015, how were employees usually promoted at this business?
7. In 2015, when was an under-performing employee moved from their current role?
8. In 2015, who made decisions over the hiring of permanent full-time employees?
8
What are these management practices?
9. Survey Design - Sample
• 1,026 businesses from the Annual Business Survey’s sample for
2015
• Coverage:
• Great Britain, i.e. excluding Northern Ireland
• Reporting Units (enterprise) with employment of at least 10, where
employment is employees plus working proprietors
• Manufacturing (SIC 2007 section C, divisions 10-33)
• Stratified using employment and industry
• Employment bands of 10-49, 50-99, 100-249 and 250+
• Industry at division level (two digit SIC code)
• Final response rate of 68% (702 businesses)
9
10. Purpose of MPS pilot
Feasibility
• Are UK businesses willing to answer the management
practice questions in a voluntary survey?
• Can we find a long term approach for collecting data
on management practices?
Results
• How much do responses vary?
• Do we see an association between management
practices and productivity? 10
11. Purpose of MPS pilot
Feasibility
• Are UK businesses willing to answer the management
practice questions in a voluntary survey?
• Can we find a long term approach for collecting data
on management practices?
Results
• How much do responses vary?
• Do we see an association between management
practices and productivity?
11
12. Purpose of MPS pilot
Feasibility
• Are UK businesses willing to answer the management
practice questions in a voluntary survey?
• Can we find a long term approach for collecting data
on management practices?
Results
• How much do responses vary?
• Do we see an association between management
practices and productivity?
12
13. Individual MPS scores - survey population
13
.00 .10 .20 .30 .40 .50 .60 .70 .80 .90
Employee underperformance (7)
KPI monitoring (3)
All Questions
Hiring decision-making (8)
Target timelines (4)
Stretching targets (5)
Employee Promotion (6)
Number of KPIs (2)
Continuous improvement (1)
All manufacturing includes all manufacturing businesses with employment of at least 10 in Great Britain
Source: ONS
14. Average score by business type
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
All manufacturing
Not family-owned
Family-owned
Family-owned and managed
Family-owned, not family-managed
Domestic
Multinationals
UK Multinationals
Non-UK Multinationals
Management Score (2015)
14All manufacturing includes all manufacturing businesses with employment of at least 10 in Great Britain
Source: ONS
100%
36%
64%
55%
9%
84%
16%
6%
10%
Population
distribution
15. Average score by employment size band
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
All
manufacturing
Family owned Family owned
and managed
Family owned,
not family
managed
Multinationals
10 to 49 employment 50 to 99 employment 100 to 249 employment 250+ employment
Management Score (2015)
15All manufacturing includes all manufacturing businesses with employment of at least 10 in Great Britain
Source: ONS
74%Population
distribution
14% 7% 5%
16. Average management score by business age
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
All
manufacturing
Not family-
owned
Family-owned Domestic Multinational
Up to 5 years Over 5 years, up to 10 years Over 10 years, up to 20 years Over 20 years
Management Score (2015)
16All manufacturing includes all manufacturing businesses with employment of at least 10 in Great Britain
Source: ONS
46%Population
distribution
36%9%9%
17. Multivariate analysis of management
score – Ordinary Least Squares
Management
score (1)
Management
score (2)
Management
score (3)
Management
score (4)
Management
score (5)
Log(employment) 0.110***
(0.015)
0.107***
(0.014)
0.108***
(0.016)
0.105***
(0.014)
0.108***
(0.014)
Family owned
business
0.004
(0.049)
0.001
(0.051)
-0.005
(0.054)
-0.010
(0.056)
-0.006
(0.058)
Family-owned and
non-family-run
0.047
(0.032)
0.057
(0.033)
0.053
(0.033)
Multinational 0.016
(0.032)
0.013
(0.032)
0.008
(0.043)
0.003
(0.042)
0.004
(0.043)
UK Multinational 0.002
(0.026)
0.002
(0.026)
0.002
(0.028)
Age (years) -0.000
(0.012)
Age squared -0.000
(0.000)
Industry dummies No Yes No Yes Yes
R2 0.299 0.328 0.303 0.332 0.337
Observations 694 694 694 694 694
Standard errors in parentheses, clustered by size band and industry. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001
Source: Office for National Statistics
17
18. Multivariate analysis by employment size bands
– Ordinary Least Squares
Small businesses
(10-49 employment)
Medium businesses
(50-99 employment)
Medium businesses
(100-249 employment)
Large businesses
(250+ employment)
Log(employment) 0.201***
(0.034)
0.149***
(0.011)
0.117***
(0.015)
0.102***
(0.007)
Family owned
business
-0.006
(0.072)
-0.033
(0.039)
-0.082
(0.067)
0.011
(0.038)
Family-owned and
non-family-run
0.035
(0.045)
0.058
(0.026)
0.104
(0.069)
0.037
(0.032)
Multinational 0.056
(0.080)
-0.059
(0.068)
0.018
(0.034)
0.020
(0.035)
UK Multinational -0.001
(0.081)
0.055
(0.059)
0.021
(0.053)
-0.038
(0.025)
Age (years) 0.002
(0.016)
0.014
(0.009)
0.012
(0.014)
0.024*
(0.008)
Age squared -0.000
(0.001)
-0.000
(0.000)
-0.000
(0.001)
-0.001*
(0.000)
Industry dummies Yes Yes Yes Yes
R2 0.902 0.959 0.972 0.982
Observations 190 178 172 154
Standard errors in parentheses, clustered by size band and industry. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001
Source: Office for National Statistics
Full results are available on request.
18
19. Purpose of MPS pilot
Feasibility
• Are UK businesses willing to answer the management
practice questions in a voluntary survey?
• Can we find a long term approach for collecting data
on management practices?
Results
• How much do responses vary?
• Do we see an association between management
practices and productivity? 19
20. Purpose of MPS pilot
Feasibility
• Are UK businesses willing to answer the management
practice questions in a voluntary survey?
• Can we find a long term approach for collecting data
on management practices?
Results
• How much do responses vary?
• Do we see an association between management
practices and productivity?
20
21. Management Practices and Productivity
21
Key:
All: All manufacturing
NF: Non-family owned
F: Family owned
FM: Family owned and
managed
FNM: Family owned but
not-family managed
D: Domestic
M: Multinational
MUK: UK multinational
MNUK: Non-UK
multinational
Source: ONS
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
All NF F FM FNM D M MUK MNUK
Management
score
GVA per worker
(£000s)
OPW by multinational status (LHS) OPW by family ownership type (LHS)
OPW - all manufacturing (LHS) Management score (RHS)
22. Management Practices and Productivity
22
Source: ONS
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
All manufacturing Small (10 to 49
employment)
Medium (50 to 99
employment)
Medium (100 to
249 employment)
Large (250+
employment)
Management scoreOutput per worker
(£000s)
OPW - All manufacturing (LHS) OPW - Employment size (LHS) Management score (RHS)
23. Multivariate Analysis of Management Score and
Productivity
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
Log(OPW) Log(OPW) Log(OPW) Log(OPW) Log(OPW)
Management score 0.855** 0.608** 0.609** 0.629** 0.669***
(0.312) (0.290) (0.223) (0.239) (0.226)
Log(employment) 0.049* 0.060 0.060 0.047
(0.027) (0.038) (0.037) (0.042)
Family-owned business -0.188***
(0.051)
Family-owned and family-
managed business
-0.162*** -0.184***
(0.055) (0.067)
Family-owned and non-
family-managed business
-0.271*** -0.265***
(0.094) (0.095)
Multinational (MPS data) -0.136 -0.086 -0.090
(0.124) (0.112) (0.105)
UK Multinational (MPS
data)
-0.072 -0.080
(0.114) (0.115)
Age (years) 0.017
(0.068)
Age squared -0.000
(0.002)
Industry dummies No Yes Yes Yes Yes
R
2
0.079 0.184 0.203 0.205 0.216
Adjusted R
2
0.077 0.171 0.188 0.187 0.195
Observations 591 591 591 591 591
Source: Office for National Statistics
Notes:
1.Standard errors in parentheses are clustered by industry and employment size band,
*
p < 0.1,
**
p < 0.05,
***
p < 0.01
23
24. Purpose of MPS pilot
Feasibility
• Are UK businesses willing to answer the management
practice questions in a voluntary survey?
• Can we find a long term approach for collecting data
on management practices?
Results
• How much do responses vary?
• Do we see an association between management
practices and productivity? 24
25. Management and Expectations Survey
• The ONS has teamed up with the ESCoE to run an expanded
survey covering management and organisational practices
and expectations (uncertainty)
• Wider coverage of Manufacturing and Services, excluding
Agriculture and Finance
• Sample size of 25,000 businesses (enterprise level)
• Sample stratified by size, industry and region
• Survey despatch in July 2017, and initial analysis planned for
April 6 2018 25
26. New to the management and expectations survey
• 2 additional management practice questions covering:
Performance reviews
Training and development – (on- and off-the job)
• A section on organisational practices, measuring
decentralization of decision-making relating to:
Recruitment
Introduction of new products and services
Financial autonomy
• A section on business uncertainty covering:
Projections for turnover, employment, expenditure and capital
investment growth for 2017 and 2018
5-bin projections and probabilities for 2018 growth
• Asked for practices of managers and non-managers
26
27. Response rates
27
Count Percent
Total sample 25006 100%
Non-response 15325 61%
Of which:
No reply 14432 58%
Opt outs 893 4%
Responded 9681 39%
Of which:
Also responded to ABS 8222 33%
Met management score threshold 7874 31%
28. Response rates by employment size
28
65%
56%
53%
54%
6%
3%
2%
2%
29%
41%
45%
43%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
250+
100 to 249
50 to 99
10 to 49
No reply Refused Replied
29. Response rates by industry group
29
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Construction
Services: Other
Services: Distribution, hotels & restaurants
Manufacturing
Non-Manufacturing Production
Real Estate & Finance and Insurance
Services: Business
Services: Transport, storage, & communication
Non-response Response
30. Next steps
• Initial results of the MES to be published on 6 April
• Further analysis and papers out later in the year and
in coming years
• Data to be made available in the Secure Research
Service (VML) and UKDA’s Secure Data Service
30
31. • Any questions?
Contact details:
Gaganan.Awano@ons.gsi.gov.uk
Productivity@ons.gsi.gov.uk
31
Thanks for listening !
33. What are these management practices?
33
Question Score
1 In 2015, what generally best describes what happened at this business when a production problem arose?
a We fixed it but did not take further action 1/3
b We fixed it and took action to make sure that it did not happen again 2/3
c
We fixed it and took action to make sure that it did not happen again, and had a continuous
improvement process to anticipate problems like these in advance
1
d No action was taken 0
2 In 2015, how many key performance indicators were monitored at this business?
a 1 to 2 key performance indicators 1/3
b 3 to 9 key performance indicators 2/3
c 10 or more key performance indicators 1
d No key performance indicators 0
3 In 2015, how frequently were the key performance indicators reviewed at this business?
a Annually 1/6
b Quarterly 1/3
c Monthly 1/2
d Weekly 2/3
e Daily 5/6
f Hourly or more frequently 1
g Never 0
4 In 2015, what best describes the time frame of production targets at this business?
a Main focus was on short-term (less than one year) production targets 1/3
b Main focus was on long-term (more than one year) production targets 2/3
c Combination of short-term and long-term production targets 1
d No production targets 0
34. What are these management practices? cont’d..
34
Question Score
5 In 2015, how easy or difficult was it for this business to achieve its production targets?
a Possible to achieve without much effort 0
b Possible to achieve with some effort 1/2
c Possible to achieve with normal amount of effort 3/4
d Possible to achieve with more than normal effort 1
e Only possible to achieve with extraordinary effort 1/4
6 In 2015, how were employees usually promoted at this business?
a Promotions were based solely on performance and ability 1
b
Promotions were based partly on performance and ability, and partly on other factors, such as
tenure
2/3
c Promotions were based mainly on factors other than performance and ability, such as tenure 1/3
d Employees are normally not promoted 0
7 In 2015, when was an under-performing employee moved from their current role?
a Within 6 months of identifying employee under-performance 1
b After 6 months of identifying employee under-performance 1/2
c Rarely or never 0
8 In 2015, who made decisions over the hiring of permanent full-time employees?
a Only the owner(s) 0
b Mostly the owner(s) with some input from other employees 1/3
c Jointly the owner(s) and other employees 2/3
d Other employees 1
35. Average score by quintile and size band
35
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
1 2 3 4 5
All manufacturing 10-49 employment 50-99 employment
100-249 employment 250+ employment
Management Score (2015)
Quintile
All manufacturing includes all manufacturing businesses with employment of
at least 10 in Great Britain
Source: ONS
36. Individual MPS scores by firm type
36
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
q1
q2
q3
q4
q5
q6
q7
q8
all manufacturing businesses family-owned businesses family-owned and run business multinational businesses
Continuous improvement
Number of KPIs
How frequent KPIs
were reviewed
Timeframe for production targets
Setting stretching targets
Promotion criteria
Managing underperformance
Hiring decisions
Source: ONS
Population
distribution
100% 64% 55% 16%
37. Manufacturing environment in Great
Britain
37The manufacturing population covers all manufacturing businesses with employment of at least 10 in Great Britain
Source: ONS
Editor's Notes
From ONS publication (Thurs 6 Oct) of International Comparisons of Productivity for 2015, using OECD data
Labour productivity as measured by GDP per hour worked at current prices, indexed to UK = 100. Bars show difference between UK and other countries.
UK has higher productivity than Japan, is now (2015) level with Canada, but has lower productivity than Italy, France, US and Germany.
In particular the gaps between UK productivity and productivity in France, the US and Germany are long-standing.
We would like to explore further whether poorer management in UK explains some of this difference.
Taken from Nicholas Bloom’s MOPS presentation, and taken in turn from Bloom et al 2013 (“Management in America” – analysis of MOPS 2010)
Survey covers manufacturing establishments (single sites, businesses may have more than one site) in the US
Survey questionnaire asks questions on several practices and scores the answers, so more structured practices receive higher scores, between 0 and 1
E.g. use of Key Performance Indicators, targets, Continuous Improvement methods, performance related bonuses.
Establishments are then split into deciles on basis of their management score.
Clear positive correlation between level of structured management practices and establishment performance.
Relationship holds when controlling for number of employees, capital intensity and human capital (in terms of college degrees).
Our sample is a subset of the Annual Business Survey sample for 2015 in Great Britain to allow researchers to link to business level financial information
Great Britain coverage only in line with ONS’s ABS
Restricted to 10+ employment to avoid burden on micro businesses
Manufacturing only for comparability with MOPS 2015
Questionnaire uses a selection of MOPS questions, adjusted for British terminology and attitudes, with additional questions on business characteristics of family ownership and multinational status.
In line with US MOPS, we score businesses, with higher scores for more structured practices.
Each question is scored between 0 and 1, and an average is taken across questions with non-missing answers. Only observations with no more than 3 (out of 8) missing answers are used.
Average for whole survey population of interest is 0.56.
Higher for businesses which are not family owned,
Among family owned there is a divergence between those which are both family-owned and family-managed and those with non-family management (in the form of the Managing director or equivalent). These businesses have an average score of 0.7
Domestic only businesses have slightly less structured practices than the average at 0.54
Multinationals have more structured practices, with an average score of 0.71, very similar to family-owned but not family-managed.
Location of head office within or outside UK has negligible difference.
Scores vary with business size, with larger businesses using more structured practices on average.
There is relatively little difference between the two medium sized business bands (50-99 and 100-249).
The difference in score between small and large businesses is most pronounced for family owned businesses.
It is less pronounced where family businesses are not family-managed,
It is least pronounced for multinationals, due to much higher scores among small businesses.
Least variation in management score among multinationals
There is a less clear relationship with the age of the business, with smaller variation.
For multinationals, age refers to length of operation in the UK, but we cannot observe true business age in our data.
Least variation is scores by age groups among multinational firms
Returning to relationships between characteristics and management score, this is the beginning of the firm-level analysis.
Size, measured by employment, is the only significant regressor.
A 10% increase in employment is associated with an increase of management score of 0.1.
Multinational indicators and family ownership indicators are not jointly significant
Industries are jointly significant.
P-values for joint significance tests:
Family 0.931 0.854 0.011
Multinationals 0.931 0.973 0.966
Industry 0.000 0.000 0.000
I am repeating the richest specification from the previous regression results, but for different size bands.
Note small sample sizes.
Again, size is significant, perhaps unsurprisingly, and has the strongest relationship for the smallest businesses.
Industry dummies are always jointly significant.
Multinational dummies are jointly significant for small businesses.
P-values for joint significance tests:
Family 0.936 0.424 0.256 0.782
Multinationals 0.009 0.664 0.389 0.370
Industry 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Family ownership important as they account for 64% of British Manufacturing firms
Size of business also of importance as 74% of manufacturing businesses are small
We find that a 0.1 increase in management score is associated with an 8.5% increase in labour productivity. This drops slightly but stays robust at 6% across the rest of the models in our regression.
We find family owned firms (irrespective of management type) performing around 20% worse than non-family owned firms.
We find no effects for multinational firms. This suggests it is what multinational do e.g. having more structured management practices that make them more productive.
Work on management practices in service industries is less widespread, but Services are such a significant part of the British economy.
We ran a workshop with the Economics and Social Research Council (ESRC) with key academic experts.
Feedback suggested that there were further management practices of significant interest that we don’t currently cover.
We are also expanding to get better coverage of MOPS questions.
The updated questionnaire will be tested and reviewed.
Further feedback from the workshop prioritised wide industry coverage.
We are aiming to cover Services industries in line with ABS coverage of the non-financial business economy.
Wide coverage necessitates a larger sample.
We will continue to collect data at the Reporting Unit level, to maintain consistency with ONS business surveys.
Dates are subject to change.
Proposed Industry coverage:
G (45-47) Wholesale and Retail Trade; Repair of Motor Vehicles and Motorcycles
H (49-53) Transportation and storage
I (55-56) Accommodation and Food Services
J (58-63) Information and Communication
L (68) Real estate activities
M (69-75) Professional, scientific and technical activities
N (77-82) Administrative and support service activities
R (90-93) Arts, entertainment and recreation
S (94-96) Other services
Not covered and why:
K Finance Very little coverage by ABS
O Public Administration & defence Not covered by ABS
P Education High share of non-market sector activity
Q Human Health and Social Work Activities High share of non-market sector activity
T Activities of Households as Employers Not covered by ABS
U Activities of Extraterritorial Organisations and Bodies Not covered by ABS
How we derive the management score threshold
Answer q 6 q8 and less than 3 others missing
Response rate varies by size band
we find significant negative association between employment and turnover and the probability of firms to respond to the MES survey. Do we want to put actual values?
Axis is %?
Complete rate bars?
These are important in understanding the scale of the results of the Management Practice Survey. We find that within the manufacturing population with 10 or more in employment in GB, most firms are domestic (84%), small (74%) or family owned (64%).