Marginal-productivity theory functions as claims-making discourse rather than wage science

Evidence

We believe the marginal productivity thesis is therefore best identified as a special case of the general claims-making process in shaping and reproducing compensation practices rather than a general theory of wage determination. That is, we consider it to be one of the discourses widely adopted by actors to make claims about their contribution and worthiness to the organization and to negotiate against other sets of actors. — Ken-Hou Lin & Donald Tomaskovic-Devey, Financialization and U.S. Income…, 180

Categorization

• XREF: Echoes the institutional/sociological critique of neoclassical wage theory familiar from Bourdieu and Granovetter; parallels the reader’s theoretical sources on how discourse legitimates distribution. — connects to: Marginal productivity accounts of executive pay are tautological and mask political power — Ken-Hou Lin & Donald Tomaskovic-Devey, Financialization and U.S. Income…, 175; Marginal-productivity explanations of executive pay are tautological and misattribute organizational outcomes — Ken-Hou Lin & Donald Tomaskovic-Devey, Financialization and U.S. Income…, 175; The marginal-productivity theory of wages is itself a discursive claim-making tool. (+3 more)

Broader Connections

• The marginal-productivity theory of wages is itself a discursive claim-making tool. #corroborates (0.95)
• Economics functions as conflict over belief rather than objective science #expands (0.82) — Yanis Varoufakis, Technofeudalism, 779
• Marginal-productivity explanations of executive pay are tautological and misattribute organizational outcomes #qualifies (0.80) — Ken-Hou Lin & Donald Tomaskovic-Devey, Financialization and U.S. Income…, 175
• Corporate outsourcing and CEO pay inflation stem from neoliberal theory, not efficiency #qualifies (0.78) — Philip Mirowski, Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste, 175