I wanted to pose the question that's the title of this post to you because I noticed something interesting when I pored over data from Winning Workplaces' 2010 Top Small Company Workplaces award applicants and finalists today.

The table below shows how the average share of a company owned by the CEO, and the share owned by non-management employees, compare among all our applicants (497 firms) and our 40 finalists that we announced last month:

We see, at least in our total survey sample of just under 500, that as CEO ownership goes down, ownership by non-management employees goes up.  And when compared to this year's entire applicant pool, our finalists posted better outcomes including lower turnover, longer employee tenures, and greater overall profitability (see this post for more on how our finalists edged out the other applicants).

As the post mentioned above shows, the finalists enjoy more productive workplaces on the whole due in part to their greater investment in employee benefits including medical insurance and flex practices.  But their (again, overall) stronger culture of ownership seems to also play a role in their impressive business results.

Is it true that turning over more ownership to employees, and a CEO involving employees to a greater degree in key business decisions, improves productivity and the bottom line?  What do you think?