Man in economic relations briefly. Economic man - brief description. Model of economic man. II. Model of an economic man

Man is an extremely complex creature that combines the biological and the social.
As a biological phenomenon, man is a unique product of nature, a thinking being, endowed with a set of physical and mental abilities that allow him to interact with nature and live according to its laws.
A person as a social being acts as a part of society, lives in society, has multifaceted relationships with other people (economic, political, national, family), fulfills and obeys legal laws, observes certain moral norms and rules of social behavior accepted in society, etc. .e. is a reasonable person (Homo sapiens). In the dialectical interaction of the biological and social sides of man, the ability to use natural and economic laws in his activities lies the deep essence of man as a biosocial being (Fig. 3.14).

Man is studied by many sciences, including economics, which studies the economic essence of man, his place and role in the economic system, needs, interests, economic behavior, that is, economic man (Homo economicus).
Economic man is the main creative subject of a market economy, who has freedom of choice and adopts economically rational and optimal zeal, taking into account all available opportunities and conditions, according to his personal
interests, goals and priorities.

At all stages of the development of society, man was at the center of all economic processes and phenomena. In the economic system, a person acts as a worker, as a subject of economic relations, as a consumer, as a bearer of the ultimate goal social production(Fig. 3.15).

A human worker in an economic system acts as labor force.
Labor power is a person’s ability to work.
The success of production at all levels is determined primarily by the people involved in the production process. All other factors of production do not act on their own; they are set in motion by man. Man, his work, has a central place in production, not only as the most active factor of production, but also as the source, creator of other factors of production - material, research and organizational and managerial.
In historical terms, the human producer passed through in his development the stage of an individual (single-person) worker and the stage of a collective worker.
In the early stages of the development of society, when the social division of labor and ho-

economic CONNECTIONS (in conditions of subsistence farming and small-scale production), when things were manufactured from start to finish by one worker, the latter acted as an individual worker.
In the future, as the social division of labor deepens, specialization and cooperation of production develop, the labor of each producer acts less and less as the individual labor of an independent, economically isolated commodity producer, but is part of the total labor, and the individual worker is part of the total worker.
An aggregate worker is a collection of workers of different specialties who are participants in the joint production of a certain product based on the division of labor between them.
IN modern conditions The main figure of economic life is not the individual, but the collective worker, who is involved in the social production process thanks to the cooperation of labor. Nowadays, almost any economic benefit is the result of the work of not one, but tens, hundreds and thousands of workers employed in different areas of production. A modern car is assembled on average from 15 thousand parts, the production of which employs thousands of workers from a huge number of large and small supplier enterprises. The American Boeing 748 aircraft consists of 4.5 million different parts, which are produced by workers of 16 thousand companies.
The collective worker is a new productive force of cooperative labor, capable of solving problems that are beyond the power of the sum of isolated individual workers.
The level of development of the total workforce can be characterized by certain quantitative and qualitative indicators (Figure 3.16).
In the context of the development of scientific and technological progress, the requirements for the level of training of workers are increasing. Without a constant increase in the level of education, cultural qualifications, health promotion, maintaining psycho-

logical state, workers are not able to effectively interact with other progressive elements of the productive forces - new technology, advanced technologies, management systems and production organization. Therefore, in a modern developed society, investments in “human capital”, i.e. in the development of knowledge, abilities, in strengthening human health, are considered the most effective and humane investments.
In Ukraine at the present stage, the number of workers with higher professional education has become significant (Table 3.2). It is these workers who are the main

Table 3.2. Level of education of employees in Ukraine by type of economic activity (at the beginning of 2006)

types of economic activities	Number of full-time employees, thousand people.	Of these have higher education
		incomplete and basic higher education \| full higher education
		Total, thousand people		Total, thousand people	To the number of employees, %
Total	11 574,5	2 855,6	24,7	3 154,1	27,3
Agriculture, hunting and forestry	892,1	133,5	14,9	77,6	8,7
Fishing, fish farming	13,8	2,5	18,2	1.7	12,6
Industry	3 370,9	806,3	23,9	594,4	17,6
Construction	477,0	89,7	18,8	75,6	15,9
Trade and repair services	820,7	221,7	27,0	231,6	28,2
Activities of hotels and restaurants	84,6	23,9	28,2	14,5	17,1
Transport and communications	1 000,7	220,5	22,0	166,4	16,6
Financial activities	278,3	71,3	25,6	158,2	56,8
Real estate operations, rental, engineering, provision of services to entrepreneurs	603,6	123,0	20,4	227,3	37,7
Public administration	610,7	148,3	24,3	362,2	59,3
Education	1 705,1	330,1	19,4	861,2	50,5
Health and social care	1 329,6	566,7	42,6	267,1	20,1
Providing utility and individual services; activities in the field of culture and sports	387,4	118,1	30,5	116,3	30,0

a fundamental basis for effective economic development and an important element of the country’s national wealth.
Man as a subject of economic relations
Economic man realizes himself in the economic system thanks to certain economic relations into which he enters with other subjects in the process of production, distribution, exchange and consumption of goods.
The subjects of economic relations are the individual, family, collective, and state. The basis of economic relations is property relations, which characterize the way the worker connects with the means of production.
The organic combination of two characteristics of a person: a person as a worker and a person as an owner forms the economic essence of a modern economic person.
Individual private property, which forms a single whole of the human worker and the human owner, corresponds to human nature to the greatest extent. It is the basis of his economic independence and freedom. Other forms of ownership (collective, cooperative, corporate, etc.) to a greater extent reflect the social essence of a person, revealing his place and role in society.
Today at developed countries Around the world, corporate (associated) forms of ownership are becoming increasingly widespread, which combine individual and collective principles of production management and income distribution.
The role of man as a subject of economic relations also lies in the fact that objective economic laws are identified and implemented through his economic activities.
Man as a consumer
In this role, a person realizes himself through the satisfaction of his various needs. Human needs can be varied

divided into the needs of a human worker and the needs of a human entrepreneur.
The needs of a human worker are related to the reproduction of his labor power, i.e., personal consumption.
In the process of working, a person consumes labor that needs to be restored. To do this, he must have a set of economic benefits to satisfy his physiological, spiritual and other needs. By satisfying these needs, a person recreates himself as a worker.
The needs of a human entrepreneur lie in the reproduction of material factors of production. In order to restore the machines, machines, equipment, raw materials, materials, fuel, electricity, etc. consumed during the production process, the entrepreneur must purchase them on the resource (factors of production) market.
The needs of a human worker and a human entrepreneur are closely intertwined, forming the common needs of people, the satisfaction of which ensures the restoration of personal and material factors of social production.
Man as the ultimate goal of social production
Man in his integral essence is the main criterion for the development of social production and its main goal. The social product, passing through the phases of production, distribution and exchange, completes its cycle in the consumption phase. Without consumption, production cannot exist; it has no meaning. Satisfying the diverse needs of a person is the purpose of any production. In this aspect, a person with his needs is the natural and ultimate goal of social production and at the same time the main factor in its functioning.
thus, the functioning and development of any economic system it is impossible to evaluate outside the existence of a person, his work activity, relationships,
needs, interests, motivations. Man is the central element of the economy, an active participant in economic activity as a hired worker, and also as a consumer subject entering into economic relations for the sake of production and consumption of vital goods.

The main vector of development of modern economy and society, which in last years increasingly referred to as the economy and knowledge society, the movement of man to the center of the economic system, the growing attention to the human factor, the dominance of humanitarian goals and values in all spheres of social production are advocated. Researchers and specialists note that the leading idea of socio-economic transformations is changes in the person himself, rethinking his place and role in the system of public institutions, the priority of his personal, professional, social development.

Research allows us to identify three main characteristics of the economy and knowledge society, which scientists consider as determinants of their transformation and development.

Firstly, expansion of the sphere of intellectual work, the emergence and growth in value of the so-called knowledge workers (a term coined by Peter Drucker in 1959), who are distinguished from all other workers by two important features:

1) he “himself, and undividedly, owns his own “means of production”: inextricably his intellect, memory, knowledge, initiative, personal experience;
2) regardless of qualifications, can work effectively only as part of a team...".

Secondly, dominance of the service sector over the manufacturing sector, where knowledge is increasingly beginning to act as a market commodity.

Thirdly, ubiquitous implementation of information and communication technologies, which significantly change the content and nature of work.

The new economy requires new workers. At the same time, the cost of highly qualified labor is increasing, resulting in a stable trend: most of the cost (price) of the created product is accounted for by labor costs and is paid to the employee in the form of wages. In developed countries, its share reaches 80-85% of the cost of a newly created product. In the economic system, this indicates the predominant role of the human factor in relation to the material base of production.

In developed economies at the present stage, the image of a “new worker” is being actively formed with the following main features:

1) high professional qualities, skills and creativity, manifested in a sense of the new, the ability to critically evaluate achieved results, see problems and find ways to eliminate them, in the desire to constantly improve the level of professional skills, education and qualifications;
2) economic thinking, evidence of which is the ability to demonstrate rational economic behavior, find optimal options increasing labor efficiency, mastering technological development techniques, high technical and technological culture, environmental consciousness and orientation towards the rational use of natural and other types of resources;
3) readiness to participate in organizational and managerial activities, the ability to work in a team, implement project activities, organize group work, build effective communications with other employees;
4) psychological qualities: determination, conscientiousness, responsibility, etc.

At the same time, the development of the employee’s personality, the formation of new properties and qualities in him is accompanied by the growth and elevation of his needs. At the same time, the nature and structure of needs undergo a significant transformation. Simple needs are replaced by complex ones, biological ones by social ones. Among the latter, there is also an ascent to their highest forms - the needs for self-realization, self-affirmation, self-actualization.

The modern economic system is characterized by the fact that the traditional production of material goods, while remaining the basis of the economy of developed countries, ceases to be its central element. These qualitative changes also leave an imprint on a person’s position in the economic system. The emergence of the economy and knowledge society has clearly led to an understanding of the need for the formation and development of human capital.

Human capital is understood as a set of intellectual abilities, knowledge, professionally significant competencies, motivations and value systems acquired in the process of education and practical activities of a person.

According to E. G. Skibitsky and L. Yu. Tatarinova, human capital is represented in its most complete form in the theories and concepts of the school of behavioral sciences, which focuses on the individual as a priority resource and on the interaction of individuals in the process of work. The specificity of this resource is determined by its complex nature and the ability of the individual:

to change your properties and behavior;
setting your own goals, initiating and demonstrating activity in various areas of activity;
adaptation to changing conditions;
learning, self-regulation, self-control, self-development, cooperation, self-organization.

Human capital theory has been developed in the United States since the late 1950s. The impetus for its emergence was the work of the American scientist T. Schultz, who, in search of a source of growth in labor productivity, identified an unknown parameter as an independent factor, calling it a “residual factor”, and which was subsequently identified as the ability to work acquired and developed by a person.

The concept of “human capital” is considered in a narrow and broad sense. In a narrow sense, human capital is education, the professional and life experience accumulated by a person. According to G. Becker, human capital is understood as a complex of acquired and inherited qualities such as education, knowledge acquired in the workplace, health and many others. T. Schultz adhered to a similar point, noting that “education is one of the forms of human capital. It is human because it becomes part of a person, and it is capital because it represents a source of future satisfaction or future earnings, or both.” At the same time, this interpretation seems insufficiently comprehensive: firstly, human capital is a multifaceted phenomenon and cannot be reduced only to education, and secondly, it is necessary to separate the possibility of participation in labor activity and actual participation in it. For example, the unemployed also have a readiness to work; they can have as much labor potential as they like, but they cannot use it in any way, without having an impact on the economy.

All this forces us to consider the concept of human capital in a broader sense. Thus, D. Grayson defines human capital as the most important social resource: “...human capital is the most valuable resource, much more important than natural resources or accumulated wealth. It is human capital, not factories, equipment and inventories, that is the cornerstone of competitiveness, economic growth and efficiency." Some researchers include in the concept of human capital not only the ability of individuals to work productively and generate income, but also the social, psychological, ideological, and cultural qualities of people. Thus, according to L. Thurow, “human capital... includes such human properties as respect for political and social stability, which is acquired mainly as a result of appropriate upbringing and education... All societies want to create an individual with certain future preferences.. Society can expect to obtain certain benefits from various projects of investment in people precisely because they change future or current preferences in such a way that the latter become compatible with the aspirations of the society (or the majority in society). Such changes in preferences have value for society, but not necessarily for the individual."

In relation to a specific organization, these qualities can manifest themselves through the labor potential and loyalty of the employee, which, if there is an appropriate level of human capital components (professional knowledge and skills, physical and psychological capabilities of a person, etc.) will significantly increase the value of a particular employee for the organization.

According to the World Bank, the main elements that form the structure of human capital include:

capital of education (knowledge, abilities, skills - general and special);
capital for training in production and advanced training in the process of work (qualifications, skills, practical experience);
scientific and innovation capital (innovation, research work);
health capital and healthy image life (and more broadly - quality of life);
possession of economically significant information (knowledge about the state of markets, prices, incomes);
capital of worker mobility (labor migration);
cultural capital (education, self-education, self-development);
work motivation.

Many researchers note that the human dimension in modern economy and society manifests itself in two main forms: human and social capital. The concept of “social capital” was proposed in the 1990s. R. Putnam to designate those personal qualities and characteristics (trust, empathy, obedience to the law, etc.) that are inseparable from the individual, but appear only in collective activity. According to P. Bourdieu, the social position of an individual is the totality of his statuses in social space - “an ensemble of invisible connections” that form “a space of positions external to each other, defined one through the other, by their proximity, neighborhood or distance between them... ". These “invisible connections” form social capital.

The concept of social capital was first introduced by G. Lurie and developed by J. Coleman. Social capital is understood as “the contribution of the social organization of society to social production.” Social capital increases the return on investment in physical and human capital, and these investments complement each other rather than being competing alternatives.

The concept of social capital also finds application at the organizational level. For example, O. Nordhaug notes that the use of the concept of social capital makes it possible to characterize a conglomerate of social relations and informal connections between various divisions of the company. Social capital is characterized, in particular, by such a concept as “organizational socialization,” meaning the degree to which employees’ values, attitudes and norms coincide with the average values for the organization as a whole. Strong social ties between employees and organizational units create social control, which reduces the need for direct management and excessive regulation of employee activities.

Social capital relates to such elements of social organization as social structure, social norms, connections and interactions, social relationships that create conditions for the coordination and cooperation of people to achieve common goals. The contribution of human capital to the results of an organization's activities can be quite high, but the low social significance of these results will negatively affect the amount of social capital. Insufficient social orientation and social responsibility of the organization, and sometimes the frankly inhumane focus of its activities also lead to different assessments of human and social capital.

Social capital, embodied in norms and various forms of civic participation, is recognized an important condition economic prosperity and effective self-government. J. Coleman comes to the conclusion that “like other forms of capital, social capital is productive, making it possible to achieve goals that are otherwise unattainable.”

Just like physical and human capital, social capital has the ability to reproduce and accumulate. Consequently, successful cooperation and interaction of an organization’s employees generate new social assets that stimulate the development of human capital not only in their own organization, but also in partner organizations. Unlike physical capital, social capital is a resource that increases in quantity rather than decreases when used, and which is depleted if not used.

Thus, the concept of social capital allows us to include into consideration the factor of “social organization”, “social order”, “social responsibility” along with other factors of production.

Another concept interconnected with human capital is the concept of “intellectual capital”, also conceptualized in terms relationship capital(relationship capital), organizational(organizational capital), structural(structural capital), innovation capital(innovation capital), process capital(process capital), economic(economic capital), information capital, capital, determined by organizational culture(cultural capital), etc. These components of intellectual capital serve as the main source of sustainable competitive advantage and affect such characteristics of the organization as:

organizational boundaries, formally serving the role of organizational identification and strategic initiatives;
goals that determine the economic, social and historical significance of the organization;
management structure that specifies forms of division of labor, management systems and procedures, mechanism for distribution of functions, etc.;
mechanisms of adaptation to changes in the external and internal environment;
system of relationships (organizational culture and social psychological climate);
system of motivation and stimulation of labor activity;
leadership, which allows you to keep the organization and its subsystems in balance (power and authority, decision-making methods, leadership styles, etc.).

According to V. Goylo’s definition, “the material essence of intellectual capital is the intangible, but real creative property of an individual, teams and the whole society. The social essence here is the nature of ownership, disposal and use of these assets. That is, in other words, intellectual capital is knowledge, information.” The specificity of intellectual capital, according to the author, is that knowledge is not subject to physical alienation or expropriation, and information can be brought to the market countless times.

A number of authors argue that the concept of “intellectual capital” as a component of human capital includes the amount of knowledge and information accumulated by a person, however, a more broad interpretation of it, which includes in its structure:

market assets (brand, trademark, order portfolio);
intellectual property(patents, copyrights, know-how

human assets (human capital as the collective knowledge and creativity of employees);
cumulative competencies as forms of manifestation of human capital of employees;
infrastructure assets (technology, Information Systems and databases, management know-how, organizational structure, information networks and electronic resources, etc.).

According to L. Edvinsson and M. Malone, the concept of intellectual capital is beginning to dominate in methods of valuing organizations, since it reflects the dynamics of organizational development and value creation. Only it takes into account the fact that changes in modern enterprises occur so quickly that all that can be relied on is the talent and dedication of company employees. This simple statement leads to a paradoxical conclusion: human capital cannot be attributed not only to the organization’s own funds, but also, contrary to popular belief, can only conditionally be considered as its assets. It should be classified as a temporary fund held as a liability like debt or issued shares. This largely explains the reluctance of organizations to invest in the human capital of their employees (for example, in upgrading their qualifications, internships), since the return on these investments may be appropriated by another organization.

There is also the problem of irrational use of human capital in an organization, associated with the excessive workload of the most valuable employees who are capable of solving a wide range of tasks and, therefore, more quickly and efficiently cope with the ever-increasing flow of work assignments. As a result of irrational workload, the health capital of a given employee decreases, which, in turn, affects his performance.

Thus, in modern conditions, the problem of human capital reflects the reorientation of economic science from issues use labor resources to problems creation a qualitatively new workforce that meets the growing requirements imposed by the knowledge economy on the level of competence, mobility, creativity and work motivation of the employee.

To assess the effectiveness of the process of reproduction of human capital, a number of well-known models are used. What they have in common is a statement of the fact that the formation of human capital involves physical capital, natural resources and previously accumulated human capital, which are considered in these models as the main factors of production. Models differ in the main factor of reproduction. Some researchers (L. Turow, S. Bowles) put forward human time and natural abilities as it, while others (for example, T. Schultz, G. Becker) put forward human activity.

L. Thurow proceeds from the premise that individuals represent the main source of resources when forming investments in human capital. They invest human time and financial resources and have some initial reserve of this time. Due to the presence of this resource (human time), an individual can acquire other human capital assets. Thurow's model assumes that investments in the production of human capital are similar to investments in any other production process, and the processes of production of human capital themselves are similar to the processes of production of goods and services and show quantitative relationships between factorial investments and the volume of human capital produced. Consequently, within the framework of the Thurow model, it is possible to evaluate the effectiveness of investments in human capital, taking into account the probabilistic behavior of personnel in the accumulation and use of this capital.

T. Schultz suggested that not all economic abilities are given to people from birth; many of them are developed through certain types of activities, through specific investments. The category of time is considered by him as a unit of accounting for human activity, but not as an investment itself.

J. Hackman and O. Aldrin, when assessing human capital, proposed taking into account such an asset as the “motivational potential” of a person, which, in their opinion, is closely correlated with productivity gains.

Later, other models were developed, but what is common to all of them is that they all emphasize the active role of a person in the formation of human capital, and this activity largely depends on the motivation of work.

The diversity of the human personality, the various motives of its activities and behavior necessitate the development of conceptual human models, i.e. unified ideas about an individual acting in a certain system of socio-economic relations. A human model, like any other, includes the main parameters that characterize an individual: needs, motives, goals, forms of activity, as well as the potential and capabilities of a person used by him to achieve his goals. Economic science proceeds from the rational behavior of subjects of labor activity, i.e. from their desire to achieve maximum results at the lowest cost.

Economic man (homo economicus, economic man)- this is a typical rationally acting subject of economic relations, focused on the maximum satisfaction of personal needs through the profitable investment of one’s own capital, including intellectual and human capital.

Reasonable economic man (rational economic man) - an individual who uses his labor and (or) his resources in market conditions in his own interests. In the narrow sense, this is a reasonable egoist; in the broad sense, he is man of sense, but not necessarily an egoist, acting in accordance with the generally accepted principles of conformist economic theory.

An economic person, as a rule, acts in a situation where the amount of resources available to him is limited. He cannot satisfy all his needs at the same time and therefore is forced to make a choice. Among the factors that determine this choice are preferences and restrictions. Preferences characterize the subjective needs and desires of the individual, limitations characterize his objective capabilities. The main limitations of an economic person are the amount of his income and the cost of individual goods and services, as well as the actions of other market participants. An economic person is endowed with the ability to evaluate his possible choices from the point of view of how their results correspond to his preferences (K. Brunner and W. Meckling - “evaluating man”). Economic man's preferences are more stable than his constraints, so economics views them as relatively constant and focuses on the individual's reactions to changing constraints.

The choice of an economic person is rational in the sense that, from the available (and known) options, the one that, according to his opinion or expectations, will most closely meet his preferences (maximize his objective function) is chosen.

Let's consider evolution of the model of economic man.

Adam Smith. Understanding the economic benefits of investing in human capital is characteristic of the model of economic man proposed by A. Smith. The main element of this model is a specific motivation: self-interest or the desire for wealth as the main motive of behavior. At the same time, in “The Wealth of Nations,” A. Smith emphasizes that human behavior is guided by “sympathy,” i.e. the ability to put oneself in the place of another and the desire to earn the approval of an “impartial observer”, i.e. Smith emphasizes the limitation of self-interest within certain social boundaries.

Thus, on the one hand, A. Smith argues that we do not expect to get our lunch from the benevolence of the butcher, brewer or baker, but from their observance of their own interests, precisely because the developed system of division of labor puts a person in relationships with other people, for which he may not feel sympathy, on the other hand, the rationality of economic behavior does not extend to relationships that are not consistent with universal ethical values. Honesty, decency, hard work, responsibility to society, and moderation in consumption are the moral basis of Smith's economic model.

Smith does not reduce people's own interests solely to obtaining monetary income, such as maximizing profits: the choice of occupations, in addition to earnings, is also influenced by the pleasantness or unpleasantness of the occupation, the ease or difficulty of learning, the constancy or inconstancy of occupations, greater or lesser prestige in society, and, finally, greater or lesser probability of success.

Jeremy (Jeremy) Bentham. Bentham proceeds from the fact that the interests of society are the sum of the interests of citizens, therefore, if a conflict of interests of different social groups arises, priority is given to those who have a greater potential amount of welfare if their interests are satisfied, and if these amounts are equal, the more numerous group should be preferred group. Unlike Smith, Bentham believes that the harmonization of individual “aspirations for welfare” is not the prerogative of the market and competition, but of legislation, which should reward those who promote the public good and punish those who interfere with it.

In the sphere of motivation - ego hedonism, i.e. reduction of all human motives to achieving pleasure and avoiding grief. A necessary consequence of such labor behavior is a passive consumer orientation.I. Bentham emphasizes that any reality interests a person only when it can be used to his advantage. “The desire for work,” writes Bentham, “cannot exist on its own; it is a pseudonym for the desire for wealth, while work itself can only cause disgust.”

Marginalists. The goal of work for each of its participants for marginalists is to obtain maximum pleasure or the greatest satisfaction of needs. However, the very nature of needs is specified in accordance with the law of decreasing marginal utility(Gossen's first law).

In the field of motivation for work activity, one can note the limitation of egoism: an economic person, according to Alfred Marshall, not only exposes himself to deprivation in a selfless desire to ensure the future of his family, he is also characterized by other altruistic motives of activity. Describing the diversity of human motives and needs, A. Marshall names among them the desire for diversity, the desire to attract attention, the needs satisfied by one or another activity (sports, travel, scientific and artistic creativity, striving for recognition and excellence). However, at the same time, he concludes that economic theory should mainly deal with the motives that most strongly and persistently influence human behavior in the economic sphere of his life.

Thus, there is no single, classical model of man in modern economic science. In general terms, it can be argued that each model of economic man contains three groups of factors representing goals person, facilities to achieve them (both real and ideal) and information(knowledge) about the processes through which means lead to the achievement of goals (the most important of these processes are production and consumption).

conclusions

1. The main vector of development of the economy and knowledge society is the movement of man to the center of the economic system, increasing attention to the human factor, while the cost of skilled labor increases.
2. The main characteristics of a “new employee” are: high professional and personal qualities, creativity, readiness for continuous education, developed economic thinking, environmental awareness, social activity.
3. Node human capital is understood as the totality of intellectual abilities, knowledge, professionally significant competencies, motivations and value systems acquired in the process of education and practical activities of a person.
4. Social capital is a product of social production, a means of achieving group solidarity, it is not only and not so much the cause of economic benefits, but rather a manifestation of socio-economic conditions and circumstances, it is a group resource and cannot be measured at the individual level.
5. Intellectual capital is the knowledge, skills and production experience of specific people, as well as intangible assets of the organization.
6. The diversity of the human personality, the various motives of its activities and behavior determine the need to develop conceptual models of man, i.e. unified ideas about an individual acting in a certain system of socio-economic relations.
7. Most existing models of economic man remain committed to the average approach to the worker as a bearer of rational economic behavior, whose actions are determined by the preferences of the person and his desire to maximize the goal under existing restrictions.

Workshop

Test questions and tasks for independent work

1. What trends determine the nature of the modern economy? Expand in detail each of the highlighted characteristics.
2. What factors determine the requirements for a modern employee? Name these requirements. Are they equally relevant for different areas of production?
3. Define human capital. What is included in the structure of human capital? How does this concept differ from the concepts of “human resources”, “labor resources”, “labor force”? Explain your answer.
4. Define social capital, intellectual capital. What is the relationship between these concepts and the concept of “human capital”?
5. How do you understand what an “economic person” is? What is the rationality of economic behavior? Why do people sometimes behave irrationally? Give examples.
6. List the main areas of research into the model of economic man. What are the similarities between the different models? What are their specifics? What significance do these models have for building a system of motivation and stimulation of work activity?

Situational tasks and assignments

A. Biological and social essence of man

Man is the main subject of economic relations that are studied by economic theory. However, man is a biosocial being, that is, on the one hand, biological, on the other, social (public).

The biological essence of a person is expressed in his continuous reproduction: birth, development, aging, dying. A person has certain health, physical and spiritual abilities and needs, etc. It is as a biological being that a person has individuality.

By biological essence, man is inextricably linked with nature (he is part of it), with the natural habitat, which is the basis of all his life activities. Habitat includes climatic and soil conditions, quantity and quality of food, water, shelter, etc.

Resources and living space are limited. The area of the globe is 510.2 million km2, with most of it (3/4) being seas. Soil fertility, flora and fauna, minerals, and climatic conditions in certain regions of the Earth are different. Yes, hot belt earth's surface is 49.3%, moderate – 38.5, and cold – 12.2%, which determines the duration of crop growth. In Europe it ranges from 4 to 11 months, including in Russia and the Republic of Belarus - 4 months, Germany - 7, Italy, Spain - 11 months.

From the standpoint of modern science about human life, when speaking about the habitat, it is necessary to take into account the connection between man and the cosmos, which was discussed back in the 17th century. Dutch scientist H. Geygens in his work “Cosmoteoros”, emphasizing that life is a cosmic phenomenon. This idea was developed in the works of the Russian scientist V.I. Vernadsky about the noosphere - the kingdom of the human mind, a new state of the earth's biosphere.

According to Vernadsky's theory, a person can rebuild his life with his work and thought. The power of man on Earth is not in physical strength, but in his mind and work, which is guided by the mind. The brain is a natural product of matter and the Universe. Human activity (initiative) requires thought and deed, and the economic system as a whole must be managed, otherwise disorder (chaos) sets in in society, loss of energy and decay occur. The earth and other planets are interconnected. The breath of the earth - the result of human life - goes into outer space, and cosmic matter, falling on the Earth, affects human life. Thus, the state of the Earth's biosphere and its noosphere depend on human life.

People as biological beings are equal to each other. This is the law of nature. Apparently, from here follows the ideal of equality and brotherhood in various teachings, and in economic activity - the principle of social justice. At the same time, each person has individuality, he is a person.

In the 21st century humanity has entered into a level of civilization (especially with the help of the media) where people on Earth become one. There is a process underway called the globalization of the world socio-economic system. This is expressed in the strengthening of the interdependence of the national economies of the countries of the world, in the qualitative acceleration on a global scale of the processes of exchange of goods, services, capital, information, etc.

P. As a result, there is a convergence (bringing together) of national economic systems, the emergence of a single world economic complex, developing according to unified socio-economic laws.

Similar processes occur with a person as a biological being, distinguished by individuality. Globalization unifies personality and deprives it of individuality. This is facilitated not only by the media, which can instill in a person any views, morals, ethics, but also by some teaching methods, for example, testing, which does not allow a person to reason or express his point of view.

These processes are based on the globalization of property, when the further increase in the financial and production power of large firms and corporations occurs mainly due to acts outside national borders. The main forms of property globalization are the creation of transnational banks (TNB) and transnational corporations (TNCs).

For the emerging world system of the global economy, it is necessary to manipulate consciousness on a global scale; the presence of individuals capable of systemic analysis is unacceptable, since the global system is fundamentally a highly organized socio-economic mechanism, built on the principles of one hundred percent predictability and controllability of the behavior of each individual in production and consumption. A person becomes a cog in a system with needs dictated to him through the media, advertising, training, etc.

Globalization of the socio-economic system is an objective process in which the richest groups of people on Earth are interested. At the same time, the biological essence of a person with its individuality is also an objective phenomenon. Thus, a conflict is brewing, a contradiction between the biological essence of man and the processes of unification of the individual as a social being.

Economic theory is more interested in the social essence of man. In this sense, a person is the embodiment of social relations. He can exist only by being included in a social connection (relationship) with other people. These are a wide variety of relationships: family, love, religious, legal, political, national, economic, social, etc.

Of the entire system of relations, the main ones are economic and social, since they determine the type of socio-economic system of the society in which a person lives.

The economic relations into which a person enters are connected with his economic activity on the production, distribution, exchange and consumption of goods and services. Moreover, people are included in the content of economic relations themselves simultaneously as subjects of both economic and social relations. And at the basis of these relations are property relations. Therefore, in order to understand the social essence of a person, it is necessary to study him in inextricable connection with the socio-economic environment in which he lives and works.

If economic relations are relations between people in the process of production, distribution, exchange and consumption of goods and services, then social relations are relations with each other, the status of people in society, the possibility of obtaining benefits, income, rights, personal freedom, equality, etc. d.

Economic relations develop according to objective economic laws, social relations are influenced by institutional structures: legal laws, norms, rules, traditions, social and political organizations and institutions. The balance of economic and social relations affects the social essence of a person.

In economics, there is such a thing as socially sustainable economic development society within which sustainable human development is formed. This problem is being studied within the UN. According to the theory of human development, sustainable development is that which leads not only to economic growth, but also to an equitable distribution of its results, which restores the environment rather than destroys it; increases people's responsibility, rather than turning them into soulless performers. Such development gives priority to the poor, increasing their opportunities. Such development is development for people, for nature, to increase the number of jobs and improve the position of women in society.

This is the modern view of the place and role of man in the economic system.

B. Man as a subject of economic relations

As a subject of economic relations, a person is both a producer and a consumer of goods and services.

As a producer of material goods, man is the main element of the productive forces, the main driving force of scientific and technological progress. When studying a person from this point of view, two questions (aspects of analysis) arise:

1. What does a person create, how (with what resources, technology), for whom, i.e. who consumes the goods created?

2. How much does everything that is created cost, what are the costs and what does a person receive; what is his reward for his work, in what form is he rewarded; what are driving forces his activities?

The answer to the first question boils down to the following. A person creates goods and services to satisfy his own needs and the needs of other members of society.

All goods and services are created by labor and means of production.

The need for labor for a person is due to two reasons.

Firstly, he cannot live without consuming, and for this he must produce. Back in the 18th century. D. Ricardo noted that if you force a person to give up consumption, he will refuse to produce. And K. Marx wrote that every child knows that any nation would die of starvation if it suspended production not only for a year, but even for a few weeks.

Secondly, the need for labor is explained by human nature itself. Man has a mind that he acquired during a long evolution. Darwin believed that the world was undergoing a process of development with the improvement of species. Although there is another opinion - we are aliens from outer space and the mind was created by someone, there is a process of involution, i.e. simplification of the species.

In any case, a person has a mind, so work for him is a vital necessity (for some, for a number of reasons, a painful necessity). In the process of work, starting from infancy, a person improves himself and develops as a person.

Labor is a natural condition of human existence. The happiest person is the one who is engaged in his favorite, creative work, waking up with the thought that he will continue the work he has started.

Labor is the exclusive property of man, although if you watch animals, they also work (bee, ant, spider, beaver, etc.). However, human labor is different from the so-called animal labor. Firstly, meaningfulness, expediency. A person sets a goal in advance, outlines a plan for his actions and necessarily controls them, compares the result of work with an ideal model (plan) previously constructed in his head. A person will not continue to work if a positive result is not expected, which cannot be said about animals. Secondly, only man creates perfect tools and at the same time improves himself. A modern worker must not only be literate (be able to read, write), he must own the latest equipment and technologies. Therefore, we say that man is the criterion of scientific and technological progress.

Everything that a person creates is distributed differently, depending on the economic system of society. The principle of distribution can be different: equally between members of society, by labor, by factors of production, etc.

The second aspect of studying a person as a producer of material goods requires answering the questions of how much it costs to create goods and how labor costs are rewarded.

Creating goods and services costs a certain amount of labor and other resources. Man always strives to minimize costs. Even primitive man, while obtaining food and realizing that it required some effort, sought to minimize it. To do this, he invented tools: an ax, a shovel, a wheel, an excavator, washing machine etc.

Labor is a type of cost that a person bears when creating goods. In a world of limited resources, nothing comes for free.

If a person works, he wants to receive a reward. The greater the reward, the more active and better the person works. Although the slogan of communist society is the principle “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs,” under socialism people were brought up with labor enthusiasm, which was encouraged not only materially, but also morally (by awarding honorary titles, awarding diplomas, being included on the honor board, etc.). d.).

How much should labor be rewarded? Let us assume that we are talking about hired labor. Another representative of the physiocrats, A.R. Turgot, spoke about the minimum means of subsistence. Everyone should receive enough to reproduce their ability to work, i.e., labor power. To do this, it is necessary to have funds to satisfy a number of needs: material - food, clothing, housing; spiritual - literature, cinema, theater, sports, etc.; professional - education, advanced training, as well as to cover expenses associated with the birth and upbringing of children.

A person must fully satisfy these needs, which is recognized by representatives of all schools in economic science, and in practice, for this, the cost of the consumer basket, the cost of living, the consumer minimum budget, etc. are calculated.

Man, as a producer of material goods, always compares production costs and the income he receives.

What are the driving forces that motivate a person to engage in work?

The history of the formation and development of civilization knows two main incentives for work: non-economic and economic.

A non-economic incentive operates when the worker is physically and legally dependent (slave, serf, prisoner).

An economic incentive presupposes a material interest in work, when a person is legally free, but he either does not have his own business and is forced to sell his ability to work, or has his own business and is personally interested in receiving entrepreneurial income (hired employee, entrepreneur). An entrepreneur has the highest motivation for activity, since the amount of his income depends entirely on him personally, on his ability and activity.

In addition, the incentive to work may be interest related to the labor process itself, its content, prestige, conditions, a person’s inclination to this activity, etc.

Man, as a producer of material goods, is always the bearer of certain socio-economic relations and always carries out his life activities within the framework of a certain social system, and therefore represents a certain socio-economic type (slave and slave owner, serf and feudal lord, hired worker and entrepreneur, merchant, moneylender, clergyman, collective farmer, landowner, tenant, etc.).

A person as a consumer is discussed in more detail in the “Microeconomics” section. The ultimate goal of production is consumption. Therefore, production must serve consumption, and its content (quantity and quality) is determined by consumers. A person as a consumer strives to satisfy his needs as much as possible and obtain maximum utility.

Man in economic relations briefly. Economic man - brief description. Model of economic man. II. Model of an economic man - a materialist with limited rationality

More on topic 1. Man in the system of economic relations: