`

Coporate Performance

  1. In June 2008, Brent Kramer, a doctoral candidate at the City University of New York, now Ph.D., submitted a study, Employee Ownership and Participation Effects on Firm Outcomes, that “provides strong evidence that majority employee-owned businesses have a significant advantage over comparable traditionally-owned businesses in sales per employee.”  The average advantage, $44,500, means that a typical 200 person ESOP firm could be expected to have an almost $9 million annual sales advantage over its non-ESOP counterpart.  Sales per employee is the total of a company’s sales divided by the number of employees, and is a commonly used measure of a company’s productivity.  Highlights of the study include: 1.) Using standard statistical methods, it was found that the average sales advantage for the ESOP firms in the study was $44,500, or an average of an 8.8% sales per employee advantage over their non-ESOP counterparts in the same industry and of the same size; 2.) It was found that firms that ask for non-management employee input into innovation in work processes have a greater employee-owned advantage in sales per employee; 3.) Kramer’s research indicates the sales per employee advantage for the 50% plus ESOP companies compared to non-ESOP companies is less for larger employers.  The Employee Ownership Foundation providing funding for the research and The ESOP Association contributed membership information to the study.  A total of 328 ESOP firms and over 2,000 matching non-ESOP firms were included in the study.
  2. In January 2007, the co-operative relationship between The ESOP Association and the University of Pennsylvania’s Center for Organizational Dynamics led to an important new and “fresh” study of the effectiveness of ESOPs and employee ownership as uncovered in 30 years of scholarly research on the issue.  The study, “Effects of ESOP Adoption and Employee Ownership: Thirty Years of Research and Experience,” authored by Dr. Stephen F. Freeman, Affiliated Faculty and Visiting Scholar in the Center for Organizational Dynamics, Graduate Division, School of Arts and Sciences at the University of Pennsylvania, confirms what the Association has been saying for years, that employee-owned companies experience increased productivity, profitability, and longevity.  To download the study, “Effects of ESOP Adoption and Employee Ownership: Thirty Years of Research and Experience,” please visit the University of Pennsylvania’s Library Digital Archive - http://repository.upenn.edu/od_working_papers/2/.  The research was possible thanks to a generous, unrestricted donation to the University by ESOP Association member company, Alliance Holdings Inc. of Willow Grove, PA.  Alliance is also a significant donor to the Employee Ownership Foundation, which gives significant donations to the University of Pennsylvania’s Center for Organizational Dynamics Program. 
  3. In 2008, the Employee Ownership Foundation, conducting its 17th Annual Economic Performance Survey, found that a very high percentage of companies, 92.4%, declared that creating employee ownership through an ESOP (employee stockownership plan) was “a good decision that has helped the company.” In addition, the EPS asked companies to indicate their performance in 2007, relative to 2006. Approximately 66% of respondents indicated a better performance in 2007 than 2006, 13% indicated a nearly identical performance, and 21% indicated a worse performance. Around 71% indicated that revenue increased while 29% indicated revenue did not increase. In terms of profitability, 66% indicated that profitability did increase and 34% indicated that profitability did not increase in 2007. This survey was conducted in the summer of 2008 among corporate members of The ESOP Association.  The results are based on 421 responses.
  4. The most comprehensive and significant study to date of ESOP performance in closely held companies was conducted by Dr. Joseph R. Blasi and Dr. Douglas L. Kruse, professors at the School of Management and Labor Relations at Rutgers University, and funded in part by the Employee Ownership Foundation.  The study, which paired 1,100 ESOP companies with 1,100 comparable non-ESOP companies and followed the businesses for over a decade, reported overwhelmingly positive and remarkable results indicating that ESOPs appear to increase sales, employment, and sales/employee by about 2.3% to 2.4% over what would have been anticipated, absent an ESOP.  In addition, Drs. Blasi and Kruse examined whether ESOP companies stayed in business longer than non-ESOP companies and found that 77.9% of the ESOP companies followed as part of the survey survived as compared to 62.3% of the comparable non-ESOP companies.  According to Drs. Blasi and Kruse, ESOP companies are also more likely to continue operating as independent companies over the course of several years.  Also, it is substantially more probable that ESOP companies have other retirement-oriented benefit plans than comparable non-ESOP companies, such as defined benefit plans, 401(k) plans, and profit sharing plans.
  5. Research done by the Washington State Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development of over 100 Washington not publicly-traded ESOP companies compared to 500 not publicly-traded non-ESOP companies showed that the ESOP companies paid better benefits, had twice the retirement income for employees, and paid higher wages than their non-ESOP counterparts. Wealth and Income Consequences of Employee Ownership: A Comparative Study from Washington State, Kardas,  Peter A., Scharf, Adria L., Keogh, Jim, November, 1998.
  6. Research conducted by Professor Hamid Mehran, while he served on the faculty of the J.L. Kellogg Graduate School of Management, Northwestern University, of nearly 400 publicly traded companies with significant ESOPs both before and after the adoption of the ESOP, compared to non-ESOP companies in similar lines of businesses, showed that the rate of return for the ESOP companies was 2.7% higher, 60% of the ESOP companies experienced share price increases upon announcement of the ESOP program, and 82% indicated that the ESOP had a positive impact on business results.
  7. In 1995, Douglas Kruse of Rutgers University examined several different studies between ESOPs and productivity growth.  Kruse found through an analysis of all studies that "positive and significant coefficients [are found] much more often than would be expected if there were no true relation between ESOPs and productivity."  Kruse concludes that "the average estimated productivity difference between ESOP and non-ESOP firms is 5.3%, while the average estimated pre/post-adoption difference is 4.4% and the post-adoption growth rate is 0.6% higher in ESOP firms.  Kruse cites two studies as part of his research: Kumbhakar and Dunbar's 1993 study of 123 public firms and Mitchell's 1990 study of 495 U.S. business units in public firms.  Both reports found significant positive effects of greater productivity and profitability in the first few years after a company adopted an ESOP.
  8. In 1995, the U.S. Department of Labor released a study entitled "The Financial and Non-Financial Returns to Innovative Workplace Practices: A Critical Review."  This study found that companies that seek employee participation, give employees company stock, and train employees, can positively affect American corporations' bottom lines.  In addition, the report cited three studies that analyzed "the market reaction to announcements of ESOPs which found significant positive returns to firms which implemented ESOPs as part of a broader employee benefit or wage concession plan."  The three studies are: Chang's 1990 "Employee Stock Ownership Plans and Shareholder Wealth: An Empirical Investigation," Dhillon and Ramirez' 1994 "Employee Stock Ownership and Corporate Control," and Gordon and Pound's 1990 "ESOPs and Corporate Control." citation at (202) 293-2971 or E-mail: esop@esopassocation.org.

For additional information about ESOP or The ESOP Association, visit the website at www.esopassociation.org, call 1-866-366-3832, or email esop@esopassociation.org.