4 ms·
But it is exactly what you said. "Human capital" was conceived in analogy with physical capital as the stock of knowledge and technical ability embodied in huma
by tpeo 9y ago
But it is exactly what you said. "Human capital" was conceived in analogy with physical capital as the stock of knowledge and technical ability embodied in human workers which can be used to produce wealth.
What else you wanted it to be?
- TheAdamAndChe 9y ago> What else you wanted it to be? Human Resources sounds much better. It accomplishes the same thing while not making the workers sound like cash cows. Corporations dehumanize their workers, but there's no reason to make it blatant.
- tpeo 9y agoOddly, how I feel towards the expression "human resources" is more like what you feel towards "human capital", because human capital is merely attached to the workers but doesn't fully constitute them, and it only exist in so far people are workers. "Human resources", on the other hand, makes me think of Soylent Green. About language, I don't think it's an issue that impersonal bureaucratic organizations treat their members in a impersonal way. I'm not sure even if there's another way, because there doesn't seem to be much going for the alternatives either, which so far have been: to turn the firm into a cult by having it establish itself as a surrogate identity or as a substitute for an actual social environment for it's workers; or, to establish itself as a manipulative corporation which insists that their workers are "special", even though they're clearly not treated as such. It's best if people have realistic expectations regarding their employers. Everything else just seems lead to creepiness.