[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cep/cepdps/dp0318.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Marshalls Trees and the Global Forest: Were Giant Redwoods Different?

Author

Listed:
  • L Hannah
Abstract
This essay examines the fate of the 100 largest industrial firms in the world in 1912 over the period to 1995. Disappearance and decline were the most common outcomes, but a few outstanding performers ù firms like Burmah / BP and Procter & Gamble ù left descendants eight or nine times their initial size, in "real stock exchange price" terms. There were no significant differences between the performance of giant German, British and American firms, other than a slightly greater tendency to disappear among American firms. The convergence of national performance of giant firms is probably related to converging strategies and structures of such firms in advanced industrial countries. Long-run differences in national economic performance in the twentieth century, at least among industrial leaders, are rooted elsewhere: in non-industrial sectors of the economy or smaller industrial firms. The analysis of the long-run evolution of giant firms also suggests that, while firms in "old" industries on average performed worse than those in "new" ones, the 1912 population included equal numbers of each and there was, in any case, greater variability of outcomes within than between industries. No simple formula enables us to discriminate ex ante between long-run corporate success and failure, for reasons inherent in the nature of modern corporate capitalism's success as an economic system.

Suggested Citation

  • L Hannah, 1997. "Marshalls Trees and the Global Forest: Were Giant Redwoods Different?," CEP Discussion Papers dp0318, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    • Handle: RePEc:cep:cepdps:dp0318
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/DP0318.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael C. Jensen, 2010. "The Modern Industrial Revolution, Exit, and the Failure of Internal Control Systems," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 22(1), pages 43-58, January.
    2. Cable, John & Dirrheimer, Manfred J., 1983. "Hierarchies and markets : An empirical test of the multidivisional hypothesis in West Germany," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 43-62, March.
    3. Shaw Livermore, 1935. "The Success of Industrial Mergers," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 50(1), pages 68-96.
    4. Schmalensee, Richard, 1985. "Do Markets Differ Much?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 341-351, June.
    5. Hannah, Leslie, 1974. "Mergers in British Manufacturing Industry, 1880-1918," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 26(1), pages 1-20, March.
    6. Sukkoo Kim, 1995. "Expansion of Markets and the Geographic Distribution of Economic Activities: The Trends in U. S. Regional Manufacturing Structure, 1860–1987," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 110(4), pages 881-908.
    7. Richard P. Rumelt, 1991. "How much does industry matter?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(3), pages 167-185, March.
    8. Broadberry, Stephen N., 1998. "How Did the United States and Germany Overtake Britian? A Sectoral Analysis of Comparative Productivity Levels, 1870–1990," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 58(2), pages 375-407, June.
    9. Daniel Raff & Peter Temin, 1999. "Sears, Roebuck in the Twentieth Century: Competition, Complementarities, and the Problem of Wasting Assets," NBER Chapters, in: Learning by Doing in Markets, Firms, and Countries, pages 219-252, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hannah, L., 1997. "Marshall's 'trees' and the global 'forest': were 'giant redwoods different?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 20363, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Villalonga, Belen, 2004. "Intangible resources, Tobin's q, and sustainability of performance differences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 205-230, June.
    3. Yi-Min Chen, 2008. "How Much Does Country Matter?," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 31(4), pages 404-435, October.
    4. Miguel A. Ariño & Africa Ariño & Roberto Garcia-Castro, 2008. "A model to evaluate transient industry effects," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(8), pages 629-637.
    5. Mercè Sala‐Ríos, 2024. "What are the determinants affecting cooperatives’ profitability? Evidence from Spain," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 95(1), pages 85-111, March.
    6. Raza, Syed Ali & Farooq, M. Shoaib & Khan, Nadeem, 2011. "Firm and industry effects on firm profitability: an empirical analysis of KSE," MPRA Paper 36797, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Chung, Henry F.L. & Kingshott, Russel P.J. & MacDonald, Robyn V.G. & Putranta, Martinus Parnawa, 2021. "Dynamism and B2B firm performance: The dark and bright contingent role of B2B relationships," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 250-259.
    8. Hamblin, David & Iyer, Arun, 1996. "What difference does your industry make?," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2-3), pages 155-174, June.
    9. Changhyun Kim & Richard A. Bettis, 2014. "Cash is surprisingly valuable as a strategic asset," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(13), pages 2053-2063, December.
    10. Markus A. Fitza, 2014. "The use of variance decomposition in the investigation of CEO effects: How large must the CEO effect be to rule out chance?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(12), pages 1839-1852, December.
    11. Christmann, Petra & Day, Diana & Yip, George S., 1999. "The relative influence of country conditions, industry structure, and business strategy on multinational corporation subsidiary performance," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 241-265.
    12. Stefan Hirsch, 2018. "Successful In The Long Run: A Meta†Regression Analysis Of Persistent Firm Profits," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 23-49, February.
    13. Eriksen, Bo & Knudsen, Thorbjorn, 2003. "Industry and firm level interaction: Implications for profitability," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 191-199, March.
    14. Alain Gilles FOKA TAGNE & Nestor Magloire LETSINA & David Claude NOUHOU NKENGANG & Aurélien FOMEKONG NOUBOSSE, 2021. "Rôle des outils de contrôle de gestion dans l’amélioration de la performance organisationnelle des entreprises au Cameroun," Journal of Academic Finance, RED research unit, university of Gabes, Tunisia, vol. 12(2), pages 103-123, December.
    15. Andrew B. Jackson & Marlene A. Plumlee & Brian R. Rountree, 2018. "Decomposing the market, industry, and firm components of profitability: implications for forecasts of profitability," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 1071-1095, September.
    16. Martijn J. Burger & Frank G. Oort & Otto Raspe, 2011. "Agglomeration and New Establishment Survival: A Mixed Hierarchical and Cross-Classified Model," Advances in Spatial Science, in: Karima Kourtit & Peter Nijkamp & Roger R. Stough (ed.), Drivers of Innovation, Entrepreneurship and Regional Dynamics, pages 45-63, Springer.
    17. Beamish, Paul W. & Kachra, Ariff, 2004. "Number of partners and JV performance," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 107-120, May.
    18. Jose G. Vargas-Hernandez, M.B.A., 2014. "Research Methodology Strategies In Strategic Management," Interdisciplinary Management Research, Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek, Faculty of Economics, Croatia, vol. 10, pages 106-147.
    19. Lisa Lechner, 2018. "Good for some, bad for others: US investors and non-trade issues in preferential trade agreements," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 163-187, June.
    20. Dmitry Sharapov & Paul Kattuman & Diego Rodriguez & F. Javier Velazquez, 2021. "Using the SHAPLEY value approach to variance decomposition in strategy research: Diversification, internationalization, and corporate group effects on affiliate profitability," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(3), pages 608-623, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cep:cepdps:dp0318. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://cep.lse.ac.uk/_new/publications/discussion-papers/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.