Measuring Productivity: Lessons from Tailored Surveys and Productivity Benchmarking
Amit Khandelwal and
AEA Papers and Proceedings, 2019, vol. 109, 444-49
We use tailored surveys and benchmarking in the flat-weave rug industry to better understand the shortcomings of standard productivity measures. Quantity-based productivity (TFPQ) performs poorly because of variation in product specifications across firms. Controlling for specifications aligns TFPQ with lab benchmarks. We also collect quality metrics to construct quality productivity (the ability to produce quality given inputs) and find substantial dispersion across firms. This motivates interest in multidimensional productivity, or capability. As quality productivity is negatively correlated with TFPQ, revenue-based productivity (TFPR) may perform better at capturing capabilities in settings where better firms make products with more demanding specifications that have greater input requirements.
JEL-codes: D24 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Note: DOI: 10.1257/pandp.20191005
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
Access to full text is restricted to AEA members and institutional subscribers.
Working Paper: Measuring Productivity: Lessons from Tailored Surveys and Productivity Benchmarking (2019)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:aea:apandp:v:109:y:2019:p:444-49
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
Access Statistics for this article
AEA Papers and Proceedings is currently edited by William Johnson and Kelly Markel
More articles in AEA Papers and Proceedings from American Economic Association Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Michael P. Albert ().