The role of management practices in closing the productivity gap

1
The role of management practices in closing the
productivity gap

• Uwe Aickelin (Nottingham)
• Giuliana Battisti (Aston)
• Chris Clegg (Sheffield),
• Xiaolan Fu (Cambridge)

29th September 2005
2
Objectives

• Assess the role of management practices in the
  productivity gap in selected parts of the service
  sector in the UK
• Identify key aspects of management activity for
  productivity
• Develop multi-level models of relevant variables,
  and use them to understand and predict practice
• Generate ideas on good practice for productivity
  improvements.

3
Rationale

• Continuing productivity gap, e.g., cf USA
• Varied explanations
• Emerging interest at the level of the firm
• True also for service sectors
• Likely to be multi-level and multi-disciplinary

4
Research stages

• Stage 1 Review literatures from range of
  disciplines (months 0-3)
• Stage 2 Examine existing databases (months 0-6)
• Stage 3 Identify service sectors in which
  empirical work will be undertaken (months 3-6)
• Stage 4 Review different modelling approaches to
  select the most appropriate (months 0-12)

5
Research stages cont.

• Stage 5 Use existing datasets and theory to
  develop first draft multi-level model (months
  3-9)
• Stage 6 Undertake case studies in relevant
  service sector companies to gain insights
  (months 6-15)
• Stage 7 Develop and refine second draft of model
  (months 12-15)
• Stage 8 Operationalise variables in model for
  survey (months 15-18)

6
Research stages cont.

• Stage 9 Collect data using large-scale survey
  of relevant companies in UK (months
  18-21)
• Stage 10 Analyse data and refine model
  months 21-27)
• Stage 11 Identify lessons learned and good
  practice implications (months 24-30)

7
Outputs Best case

• An inter-disciplinary literature review of the
  area
• An understanding of the role of management
  practices
• A valid multi-level model for use in
  understanding and predicting practice
• A set of lessons learned
• Ideas on what represents good practice for
  closing the productivity gap

8
Outputs Worst case

• An inter-disciplinary literature review
• Better insights into, and understanding of, the
  role of management practices
• Experience of modelling in this area including
  the difficulties involved
• A set of comparative empirical findings
• A set of lessons learned
• Preliminary ideas on what represents good
  practice for closing the productivity gap

9
Progress

• Held meetings
• Staff in place at three Universities from
  01.10.05
• Staff in Sheffield from 01.01.06
• Include PhD students?
• Links with Nick Bloom, CEP
• Met John Lewis

10
What next

• Identify and discuss key issues, as raised today
• Eg comparisons across companies or within
  companies (and across branches)

11
Literature review (1)

• What do we mean by productivity?
• How is it currently measured?
• What do we mean by management practices?
• How do we measure and assess them?
• Which ones to include in the study?
• What evidences is there of the productivity gap?
  How is it measured?
• What are the current explanations for this gap?

12
Literature Review (2)

• At which levels has the gap been investigated?
• What models currently exist?
• Are there any multi-level and / or
  multi-disciplinary models?

13
Levels

• Departmental (eg. Supervisory style)
• Branch / store (eg. Empowerment of staff)
• Firm / company (eg. Supply chain partnering)
• External (eg. Availability of skilled labour)

14
Models

• Mathematical Model
• Fix Relax (Decision Variables vs. Constraints)
• Simulation
• Heuristic Optimisation
• Stochastic frontier analysis
• Statistical multi-level model

15
Regular meetings

• October 11 Cambridge
• November 15 Nottingham
• December 6 Aston
• STAFF
• China, Italy, Germany, UK, Nigeria, Vietnam,
  Australia, Mexico, Brazil, Thailand