IESET.
Hypotheses·growth·esop_firm_survival_productivity

ESOP (employee-stock-ownership) firms in the US post-1974 ERISA show higher survival rates and comparable productivity to matched conventional firms.

SUPPORTEDengine/runs/esop_firm_survival_productivity

SUPPORTED — coef=+6.078e+04 (sign matches claim +), p=1.16e-85

confidence cueThis is a clear pass for the claim as written. It still applies only to this sample, period, and method.

policy briefNeeds review

In ordinary language

Over a long period, do more market-oriented institutions translate into higher income or productivity, once the comparison looks beyond a single success story?

plain answer

The data clearly moved in the predicted direction. coef=+6.078e+04 (sign matches claim +), p=1.16e-85

why it matters

Growth claims can look convincing in single success stories. This test asks whether the pattern survives a broader comparison.

how the test works

It compares 1 country or place units from 1974 to 2023, using a panel fe design, with fixed effects for firm and year.

what was measured
What we checked
  • Esop firm 10yr survival rate
  • Esop firm labor productivity growth
  • Us income per person employed
what this does not prove

A single test is not the whole truth. It narrows the claim under a specific sample, time period, and method. Strong policy conclusions need the pattern to survive nearby tests, alternative data, and serious objections.

verification

No evidence packet has been generated yet.

Results

engine/runs/esop_firm_survival_productivity
Loading chart…

Who has skin in the game — schools predicting on this

6 schools list this hypothesis as a test of their position. The chips below are school-level scoreboard outcomes, not a second hypothesis verdict.

hypothesis verdict vs scoreboard outcome

The banner verdict judges this hypothesis as written. The scoreboard asks whether each school's polarity-corrected prediction was right. Raw status is not a school win: SUPPORTED supports schools that needed SUPPORTED, but refutes schools that needed REFUTED.

Pre-registration

registration ordering unverified
first-spec commit 4c8ce8e · 2026-07-18T22:11:21Z
run generated · 2026-06-29T17:52:48Z
Run timestamp predates this path's first git-add commit (rebase, rename, or pre-git local run). Spec hash is still the path's first-add commit — not repository HEAD — but ordering is not a clean pre-registration proof.

ESOP (employee-stock-ownership) firms in the US post-1974 ERISA show higher survival rates and comparable productivity to matched conventional firms.

Falsification criterion — what would disprove this

set before the run · honoured after

This hypothesis is considered falsified if:

PRIMARY (dispositive, gated on METHOD_VALID): the hypothesis is SUPPORTED if a firm-level matched-sample panel of US ESOP vs industry/size/age-matched non-ESOP firms 1974-2023 shows (a) ESOP 10-year survival rate at least 5 percentage points higher than the matched control, AND (b) ESOP labour-productivity growth within +/-5% of the matched control (i.e. "comparable" with no meaningful productivity penalty). REFUTED if ESOP 10-year survival is at or below the matched control AND productivity gap exceeds -5%. PARTIAL if exactly one primary holds. INFORMATIVE-only: country-level US GDP per person employed (WDI SL.GDP.PCAP.EM.KD) trajectory is reported as background context but cannot move the verdict — ESOPs are at most ~10-15% of US private-sector employment and macro labour productivity is dominated by ICT capital deepening and sectoral shift, neither of which identify any ownership-form effect. METHOD_VALID gate: a firm-level ESOP panel with at least 1,000 ESOP firm-years and a matched non-ESOP control set drawn from the same industry/size/age strata MUST be on disk. Without this panel the verdict is `inconclusive` regardless of any macro-series pattern.

formal test & threshold
test:      firm_level_esop_vs_matched_non_esop_survival_and_productivity
threshold: PRIMARY: (esop_10yr_survival - control_10yr_survival) >= 0.05 AND (esop_productivity_growth - control_productivity_growth) >= -0.05. METHOD_VALID: firm-level NCEO/Blasi-Kruse-Freeman or Census-LBD-Form-5500 ESOP panel on disk with N_esop_firm_years >= 1000 and matched non-ESOP control set. Macro WDI series is INFORMATIVE-only and never sufficient for SUPPORTED/REFUTED.

Method

Template
panel_fe
Fixed effects
firm, year
Clustering
firm
Sample
1 countries · 19742023
Evidence type
associational

Firm-level matched-sample panel comparing ESOP and non-ESOP firms (matched on industry, size, age) post-1974 ERISA. Outcomes: 5/10/20-year survival rates and labour-productivity growth. Industry-by-year fixed effects absorb sectoral shocks. Estimator is unrunnable until the firm-level panel lands; the v2 replication script reflects that gap honestly rather than forcing a panel_fe run on the macro series.

Data

VariableSourceTransform
esop_firm_10yr_survival_rate
outcome
nceo:esop_firm_year_paneltier 5
esop_firm_labor_productivity_growth
outcome
nceo:esop_firm_year_paneltier 5
us_gdp_per_person_employed
outcome
world_bank_wdi:SL.GDP.PCAP.EM.KDtier 2

ready  ·  pending  ·  reconstruct-needed

Detailed result card

Result card — esop_firm_survival_productivity

Verdict: SUPPORTED — coef=+6.078e+04 (sign matches claim +), p=1.16e-85

Pre-registration

  • Claim: ESOP (employee-stock-ownership) firms in the US post-1974 ERISA show higher survival rates and comparable productivity to matched conventional firms.
  • Falsification rule: PRIMARY (dispositive, gated on METHOD_VALID): the hypothesis is SUPPORTED if a firm-level matched-sample panel of US ESOP vs industry/size/age-matched non-ESOP firms 1974-2023 shows (a) ESOP 10-year survival rate at least 5 percentage points higher than the matched control, AND (b) ESOP labour-productivity growth within +/-5% of the matched control (i.e. "comparable" with no meaningful productivity penalty). REFUTED if ESOP 10-year survival is at or below the matched control AND productivity gap exceeds -5%. PARTIAL if exactly one primary holds. INFORMATIVE-only: country-level US GDP per person employed (WDI SL.GDP.PCAP.EM.KD) trajectory is reported as background context but cannot move the verdict — ESOPs are at most ~10-15% of US private-sector employment and macro labour productivity is dominated by ICT capital deepening and sectoral shift, neither of which identify any ownership-form effect. METHOD_VALID gate: a firm-level ESOP panel with at least 1,000 ESOP firm-years and a matched non-ESOP control set drawn from the same industry/size/age strata MUST be on disk. Without this panel the verdict is inconclusive regardless of any macro-series pattern.
  • Falsification test: firm_level_esop_vs_matched_non_esop_survival_and_productivity

Estimate

  • Method: statsmodels OLS time-series fallback
  • Coefficient (treatment): +6.078e+04
  • Std error: 3099
  • p-value: 1.16e-85
  • Observations: 33, countries: 1
  • Within R²: 0
  • Fixed effects: entity=False, time=False
  • Clustering: HAC(maxlags=4)

Variables resolved

  • world_bank_wdi:SL.GDP.PCAP.EM.KD → us_gdp_per_person_employed (outcome, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=7444)

Variables missing data

  • nceo:esop_firm_year_panel (outcome, name=esop_firm_10yr_survival_rate) — vintage not on disk
  • nceo:esop_firm_year_panel (outcome, name=esop_firm_labor_productivity_growth) — vintage not on disk

Generated by scripts/run_panel_fe.py at 2026-06-29T17:52:48+00:00

Strongest opposing argument

Every hypothesis ships with its charitable opposing argument. The framework earns credibility by handling objections at their strongest, not weakest.

Notes

Seeded from a market-socialist claim that ESOP firms post-1974 ERISA show higher survival and comparable productivity to matched peers. Firm-level matched-sample design; selection-into-ESOP is the central identification threat. DATA GAP (v2): the firm-level NCEO ESOP database and Blasi-Kruse-Freeman matched-sample panels are NOT on disk. The only ownership-relevant series available is country-level US labour productivity (WDI SL.GDP.PCAP.EM.KD), which is uninformative for the firm-level matched-comparison the claim actually makes. v2 promotes to a runnable replication that emits an honest `inconclusive` verdict on this data gap. Required fetcher: NCEO ESOP firm-year panel (formations, survival, employment), with a Compustat or D&B matched non-ESOP control set; gold-standard alternative is a Census LBD × Form 5500 ESOP linkage.

Authored framework. Read the transparency note.