Organization capital is a production factor that is embodied in the firm's key talent and has an efficiency that is firm specific. Hence, both shareholders and key talent have a claim to its cash flows. We develop a model in which the outside option of the key talent determines the share of firm cash flows that accrue to shareholders. This outside option varies systematically and renders firms with high organization capital riskier from shareholders' perspective. We find that firms with more organization capital have average returns that are 4.6% higher than firms with less organization capital.

This paper studies the cyclical properties of capital reallocation and the frictions which inhibit such reallocation. We show that the amount of capital reallocation and the benefits to reallocation vary at the business cycle frequency. The amount of capital reallocation is procyclical. In contrast, the benefits to capital reallocation appear countercyclical. We measure the amount of reallocation using data on flows of capital across firms and the benefits to capital reallocation using several measures of the cross sectional dispersion of the productivity of capital. We then study a calibrated model of an economy where capital reallocation is costly and impute the cost of reallocation which is consistent with the amount of and benefits to reallocation in the data. We find that the cost of reallocation needs to be substantially countercyclical to be consistent with the observed joint cyclical properties of reallocation and productivity dispersion. The cyclical variation in this cost is interpreted as variation in the liquidity of capital, broadly defined, since physical costs are unlikely to vary countercyclically.

This paper studies the financing role of leasing and secured lending. We argue that the benefit of leasing is that repossession of a leased asset is easier than foreclosure on the collateral of a secured loan, which implies that leasing has higher debt capacity than secured lending. However, leasing involves agency costs due to the separation of ownership and control. More financially constrained firms value the additional debt capacity more and hence lease more of their capital than less constrained firms. We provide empirical evidence consistent with this prediction. Our theory is consistent with the explanation of leasing by practitioners, namely that leasing "preserves capital," which the academic literature considers a fallacy.

This paper analyzes a model in which long-term risky assets are illiquid due to adverse selection. The degree of adverse selection and hence the liquidity of these assets is determined endogenously by the amount of trade for reasons other than private information. I find that higher productivity leads to increased liquidity. Moreover, liquidity magnifies the effects of changes in productivity on investment and volume. High productivity implies that investors initiate larger scale risky projects which increases the riskiness of their incomes. Riskier incomes induce more sales of claims to high-quality projects, causing liquidity to increase.MARKET LIQUIDITY APPEARS to vary with the state of the economy. This is evident in the variation in spreads between liquid and illiquid assets over the business cycle and in the fact that liquidity crises are associated with economic downturns. 1 Moreover, in the cross section highly productive industries and economies are associated with more liquid asset markets.This paper analyzes a model economy in which long-term risky assets vary in quality and are illiquid due to adverse selection. Investors can realize part of the value of payoffs from long-term assets early by issuing claims against the assets in a pooled market. The equilibrium claims price is determined by the average quality of claims sold. I use "liquidity" to describe the cost of transferring the value of expected future payoffs from long-term assets into current income. A lower cost implies higher liquidity. The claims price is increasing in the fraction of high-quality claims traded thus the market is more liquid when there is less adverse selection.

This paper considers the empirical stylized facts about CEO turnover in the context of a competitive assignment model in which CEOs and firms form matches based on multiple characteristics. CEOs are viewed as hedonic goods with multidimensional skill bundles. Likewise, firms' production functions have heterogeneous weights on CEO skills such as firm-specific knowledge, ability to grow sales, and ability to cut costs. There exists a competitive market for CEOs, whose wages are determined analogously to the prices of the hedonic goods in Rosen (1974). The competitive assignment framework with multiple skill dimensions is able to capture several stylized facts which are not explained by existing theories. For example, in our model, both poor relative performance and poor absolute performance are associated with higher rates of CEO turnover. Relative performance evaluation matters even though there is no agency problem or learning, and overall industry performance affects turnover as well. Our model also makes predictions about the type and pay of the replacement manager conditional on turnover type which are consistent with patterns we document empirically. For example, managers who are fired are more likely to be replaced by industry outsiders than are managers who quit or retire. Moreover, replacement managers in these cases earn significantly more than the incumbent. To document pay and replacement type as a function of the type of turnover event, we construct a large dataset describing turnover events during the period 1992-2006, including the type of turnover event, and the characteristics and pay of the replacement manager.

This paper considers the empirical stylized facts about CEO turnover in the context of a competitive assignment model in which CEOs and firms form matches based on multiple characteristics. CEOs are viewed as hedonic goods with multidimensional skill bundles. Likewise, firms' production functions have heterogeneous weights on CEO skills such as firm-specific knowledge, ability to grow sales, and ability to cut costs. There exists a competitive market for CEOs, whose wages are determined analogously to the prices of the hedonic goods in Rosen (1974). The competitive assignment framework with multiple skill dimensions is able to capture several stylized facts which are not explained by existing theories. For example, in our model, both poor relative performance and poor absolute performance are associated with higher rates of CEO turnover. Relative performance evaluation matters even though there is no agency problem or learning, and overall industry performance affects turnover as well. Our model also makes predictions about the type and pay of the replacement manager conditional on turnover type which are consistent with patterns we document empirically. For example, managers who are fired are more likely to be replaced by industry outsiders than are managers who quit or retire. Moreover, replacement managers in these cases earn significantly more than the incumbent. To document pay and replacement type as a function of the type of turnover event, we construct a large dataset describing turnover events during the period 1992-2006, including the type of turnover event, and the characteristics and pay of the replacement manager.

The research program of the Center for Economic Studies (CES) produces a wide range of theoretical and empirical economic analyses that serve to improve the statistical programs of the U.S. Bureau of the Census. Many of these analyses take the form of CES research papers. The papers are intended to make the results of CES research available to economists and other interested parties in order to encourage discussion and obtain suggestions for revision before publication. The papers are unofficial and have not undergone the review accorded official Census Bureau publications. The opinions and conclusions expressed in the papers are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the U.S. Bureau of the Census. Republication in whole or part must be cleared with the authors.

At least one co-author has disclosed a financial relationship of potential relevance for this research. Further information is available online at http://www.nber.org/papers/w20416.ack NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peerreviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications.