Research examines human capital in creative work, revealing its implications for neoclassical economic theory.
In the economy of innovations, the human factor combines elements of innovation and high competencies, which means that a creative worker is an owner of human capital. The neoclassical economic theory sees highly intellectual abilities of creative labor as an accumulated economic asset. This research was an attempt to look at the human capital within the subject field of the neoclassical economic theory, i.e., at its specifics from within the subjective economic analysis with its utilitarian essence. It yielded a model of stage-by-stage circulation of human capital of a creative worker. The model considers the metamorphoses of a creative worker, previously described as a marginal concept, but never presented explicitly. These metamorphoses develop quite naturally as the importance of labor creativity grows in the modern innovation economy. The experiment revealed a theoretically substantiated and strategically relevant conclusion: it is possible to continue to develop and defend the key points of the human capital theory only within neoclassicism, with its fragmentary interpretation of social and labor relations and without the advanced achievements of the modern economic theory, e.g., Professor V. Kvint’s methodology of strategizing and the theory of strategy, V. L. Makarov’s social clusterism, S. D. Bodrunov’s concept of noonomy, etc. In any other cases, the interpretation of a creative worker as an owner of human capital objectively contradicts the actual theory and practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zenfira Khabibullina (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: