• Agenda
  • Initiatives
  • Reports
  • Events
  • About
    • Our Mission
    • Leadership and Governance
    • Our Members and Partners
    • Communities
    • History
    • Klaus Schwab
    • Media
    • Contact Us
    • Careers
    • World Economic Forum USA
    • Privacy and Terms of Use
  • EN ES FR 日本語 中文
  • Login to TopLink

We use cookies to improve your experience on our website. By using our website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our updated Cookie Notice.

I accept
    Hamburger
  • World Economic Forum Logo
  • Agenda
  • Initiatives
  • Reports
  • Events
  • About
  • TopLink
  • Search Cancel

Report Home

  • Report Highlights
  • Competitiveness Rankings
  • Interactive Heatmap
  • Competitiveness Dataset (XLS)
  • Blogs and Opinions
  • Top 10 Infographics
  • Videos
  • Press Releases
  • [ — Divider — ]
  • Preface
  • Chapter 1.1 Reaching Beyond the New Normal: Findings from the Global Competitiveness Index 2015–2016
    • Introduction
    • Methodology
    • The Global Competitiveness Index 2015–2016
    • Results overview
    • Country highlights
    • Conclusions
    • References
    • Box 1: The Inclusive Growth and Development Report
    • Box 2: The Case for Trade and Competitiveness
    • Box 3: The most problematic factors for doing business: Impacts of the global crisis
    • Box 4: China’s new normal
    • Appendix: Methodology and Computation of the Global Competitiveness Index 2015–2016
  • Chapter 1.2 Drivers of Long-Run Prosperity: Laying the Foundations for an Updated Global Competitiveness Index
    • Introduction
    • What competitiveness is and why it matters
    • Institutions
    • Infrastructure and connectivity
    • Macroeconomic environment
    • Health
    • Education
    • Product and service market efficiency
    • Labor market efficiency
    • Financial market efficiency
    • Technological adoption
    • Market size
    • Ideas ecosystem
    • Ideas implementation
    • Conclusions
    • Bibliography
    • Appendix A: Measurement of Key Concepts and Preliminary Index Structure
    • Appendix B: Acknowledgments
  • Chapter 1.3 The Executive Opinion Survey: The Voice of the Business Community
    • Introduction
    • The Survey in numbers
    • Survey structure, administration, and methodology
    • Data treatment and score computation
    • Conclusions
    • Box 1: Example of a typical Survey question
    • Box 2: Insights from the Executive Opinion Survey 2015
    • Box 3: Score calculation
  • Competitiveness Practices
  • FAQs
  • Partner Institutes
  • Downloads
  • Competitiveness Library
  • About the Authors
  • Contact Us
Global Competitiveness Report 2015 Home
  • Report Home
  • Report Highlights
  • Competitiveness Rankings
  • Interactive Heatmap
  • Competitiveness Dataset (XLS)
  • Blogs and Opinions
  • Top 10 Infographics
  • Videos
  • Press Releases
  • [ — Divider — ]
  • Preface
  • Chapter 1.1 Reaching Beyond the New Normal: Findings from the Global Competitiveness Index 2015–2016
    • Introduction
    • Methodology
    • The Global Competitiveness Index 2015–2016
    • Results overview
    • Country highlights
    • Conclusions
    • References
    • Box 1: The Inclusive Growth and Development Report
    • Box 2: The Case for Trade and Competitiveness
    • Box 3: The most problematic factors for doing business: Impacts of the global crisis
    • Box 4: China’s new normal
    • Appendix: Methodology and Computation of the Global Competitiveness Index 2015–2016
  • Chapter 1.2 Drivers of Long-Run Prosperity: Laying the Foundations for an Updated Global Competitiveness Index
    • Introduction
    • What competitiveness is and why it matters
    • Institutions
    • Infrastructure and connectivity
    • Macroeconomic environment
    • Health
    • Education
    • Product and service market efficiency
    • Labor market efficiency
    • Financial market efficiency
    • Technological adoption
    • Market size
    • Ideas ecosystem
    • Ideas implementation
    • Conclusions
    • Bibliography
    • Appendix A: Measurement of Key Concepts and Preliminary Index Structure
    • Appendix B: Acknowledgments
  • Chapter 1.3 The Executive Opinion Survey: The Voice of the Business Community
    • Introduction
    • The Survey in numbers
    • Survey structure, administration, and methodology
    • Data treatment and score computation
    • Conclusions
    • Box 1: Example of a typical Survey question
    • Box 2: Insights from the Executive Opinion Survey 2015
    • Box 3: Score calculation
  • Competitiveness Practices
  • FAQs
  • Partner Institutes
  • Downloads
  • Competitiveness Library
  • About the Authors
  • Contact Us

Labor market efficiency

Share

Efficient labor markets match workers with the most suitable jobs for their skillset. Efficient labor markets also incentivize both employees and employers to act in ways that promote the productivity of human capital: workers to work as efficiently as possible and employers to provide the right incentives.

The first way in which efficient labor markets promote productivity—allocating a country’s human resources to its most productive sectors—points to the importance of labor market flexibility. Employment protection policies, such as rules and regulations for firing workers, have been shown to lead to a decrease in employment, consumption, and productivity.66 Flexible labor markets allow workers to shift from declining firms and enable companies and the economy as a whole to respond to external shocks.67

Greater labor market flexibility also increases the ability of a country to reallocate production to emerging segments and adapt the workforce to the new needs of high-tech sectors.68 As technology advances, firms that fall behind the technological frontier have to reduce their workforce—and if firing costs are high, entrepreneurs will be more inclined to invest in sectors with a slower pace of technological change.69 This implies that countries with more flexible labor market legislation would tend to specialize more in industries with a faster pace of technological change.

Flexibility works best when complemented by some form of unemployment insurance, because workers who benefit from unemployment insurance are more patient in their job searches and tend to look for riskier, more productive, and higher-wage jobs; employers also tend to create more of these good-quality jobs. Acemoglu and Shimer (2000) find that, while moderate levels of unemployment insurance benefits—such as those in the United States—may slightly increase the level and duration of unemployment, they could boost productivity overall by improving the quality of jobs. Recent research has also pointed to active labor market policies as a means to improve the matching between workers and vacant jobs and reduce long-term unemployment.70 The importance of these policies is not captured in the current Index but will be taken into account in the updated GCI.

The second way in which efficient labor markets can stimulate productivity is by promoting the accumulation of human capital and the use of talent at its full potential. This means attracting and retaining the best talent in the country, increasing workers’ efforts, and increasing employers’ willingness to train employees. Performance-related pay is one policy with proven benefits for productivity.71

Beyond monetary rewards, dualities in labor markets—when some permanent employees enjoy strong labor protection, while others are on flexible temporary contracts—have been shown to reduce productivity in two ways: by demotivating workers and by reducing firms’ investments in training.72

66
66 Hopenhayn and Rogerson 1993.
67
67 Mortensen and Pissarides 1994 were the first to provide a model to analyze the matching process between jobs and workers and to study the impact of labor market policies on adjusting to shocks.
68
68 Bassanini et al. 2009 found that firing restrictions affect the TFP of industries with a higher rate of job turnover more negatively.
69
69 Samaniego 2006.
70
70 See, for example, Pissarides 1992; Camfors 1994.
71
71 For example, Lazear 2000 finds that in one company, performance-related pay boosted average output per worker by about 44 percent, through both increasing the productivity of existing workers and attracting new and more qualified employees. Booth and Frank 1999 found that performance-related pay raised earnings in firms, in line with net productivity gains.
72
72 Boeri and Garibaldi 2007 show how the presence of such dualities negatively affects the productivity of labor. Dolado et al. 2012 show that duality leads employees to decrease their efforts and firms to reduce investments in training.
Back to Top
Subscribe for updates
A weekly update of what’s on the Global Agenda
Follow Us
About
Our Mission
Leadership and Governance
Our Members and Partners
The Fourth Industrial Revolution
Centre for the Fourth Industrial Revolution
Communities
History
Klaus Schwab
Our Impact
Media
Pictures
A Global Platform for Geostrategic Collaboration
Careers
Open Forum
Contact Us
Mapping Global Transformations
Code of Conduct
World Economic Forum LLC
Sustainability
World Economic Forum Privacy Policy
Media
News
Accreditation
Subscribe to our news
Members & Partners
Member login to TopLink
Strategic Partners' area
Partner Institutes' area
Global sites
Centre for the Fourth Industrial Revolution
Open Forum
Global Shapers
Schwab Foundation for Social Entrepreneurship
EN ES FR 日本語 中文
© 2021 World Economic Forum
Privacy Policy & Terms of Service