Abstract
This study compares the corporate performance in 1990/91 of two groups of public companies: those in which employees owned more than 5% of the company's stock, and all others. The results of the analysis, which looks at profitability, productivity, and compensation, are consistent with neither negative nor highly positive views of employee ownership, but where differences are found, they are favorable to companies with employee ownership, especially among companies of small size. The circumstances in which employee ownership was used—specifically, whether it was part of a wage/benefit concession package and whether it was involved in a takeover threat—do not appear to have had a significant effect on the 1990 performance levels or 1980–90 performance growth of the firms. Although the authors caution that the data do not permit clear tests of causality, these results are broadly consistent with those of past studies.