Rationalization of labor as a function of systemic economic thinking under the modern social and labor relations

Objective: to define the content of concepts that formalize the problem area of the modern social and labor relations (SLR) and to offer a solution to the problem of SLR regulation from the viewpoint of rationalization factor.

Methods: content analysis and systematization of scientific publications, including logical, comparative and contextual analysis; methods of dialectical cognition, system analysis and synthesis, SWOT-analysis, and modeling; structural and system-functional approach.

Results: based on the analysis of foreign and Russian publications on various aspects of the SLR definition and development, the author formulated the content of concepts reflecting the said phenomenon in the logic of changes, problems and solutions. The problem area of the modern SLR interpretation was outlined, within which the rationalization potential of the labor subjects activity is not differentiated, which makes it difficult both to formalize certain modern problem aspects and to formulate relevant corrective proposals. A solution was developed that takes into account the resource of economic thinking of individuals with bounded rationality; this allows supplementing the essential construction of the rationalization concept in the context of labor activity. Using the established theoretical and methodological toolkit, the author reveals the possibilities to improve the labor agents’ adaptability under the changes in SLR and to promote the constructive interaction of SLR subjects in general. The article shows potential directions of scientific search concerning the activity of labor actors as subjects of rationalization under the changes.

Scientific novelty: the article develops the concept of labor rationalization as a function of systemic economic thinking, which allows compensating for limited rationality and thus increasing constructive interaction of SLR subjects.

Practical significance: the provisions developed in the article can be used in research work when considering the issues of SLR and labor rationalization and in educational activities from the viewpoint of the established competence model.

1. Ahmedov, F. K., & Shubenkova, E. V. (2024). Labor market infrastructure: typology and the impact of its elements on social and labor relations in the labor market. Russian Journal of Labor Economics, 11(1), 11–24. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.18334/et.11.1.120139

2. Arhipova, S. M., & Pulyavina, N. S. (2022). Post-COVID world. The pandemic impact on the market of professions and professional competencies. Journal of Economics, Entrepreneurship and Law, 12(3), 1145–1158. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.18334/epp.12.3.114331

3. Arif, I. (2021). Productive knowledge, economic sophistication, and labor share. World Development, 139, 105303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105303

4. Bandurin, A. V. (2023). Fuzzy competence model in modern startups. Russian Journal of Innovation Economics, 13(2), 1005–1018. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.18334/vinec.13.2.117778

5. Barany, Z. L., & Siegel, С. (2020). Biased technological change and employment reallocation. Labour Economics, 67, 101930. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2020.101930

6. Battisti, M., & Gravina A. F. (2021). Do robots complement or substitute for older workers? Economics Letters, 208, 110064. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2021.110064

7. Belloc, F., Burdin, G., Cattani, L., Ellis, W., & Landini, F. (2022). Coevolution of job automation risk and workplace governance. Research Policy, 51(3), 104441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2021.104441

8. Berg, A., Buffie, E. F., & Zanna, L. (2018). Should we fear the robot revolution? (The correct answer is yes). Journal of Monetary Economics, 97, 117–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmoneco.2018.05.014

9. Bock, D. D., Reeth, D. V., Minne, J., & Dooren, W. V. (2014). Students’ overreliance on linearity in economic thinking: An exploratory study at the tertiary level. International Review of Economics Education, 16(Part B), 111–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iree.2014.04.004

10. Bogunov, L. A. (2011). Analysis of economic thinking structure in the aspect of modern innovative industrial development. Actual Problems of Economics and Law, 4, 126–130. (In Russ.).

11. Bogunov, L. A. (2012). Innovative aspects in individual economic thinking: content, formation and development aspects. Actual Problems of Economics and Law, 3, 5–10. (In Russ.).

12. Bogunov, L. A. (2016). Special Features of Economic Thinking of a Manager. Upravlenets, 1(59), 32–36. (In Russ.).

13. Bogunov, L. A. (2017). Development of the competence of managerial economic thinking in the conditions of modern competition (on the example of managers of the North-Kazakhstan region). Journal of Modern Competition, 11(6), 102–114. (In Russ.).

14. Borodkina, O. I., Starshinova, A. V., & Arhipova, E. B. (2022). Social investment: Problems and development strategies. Terra Economicus, 2, 99–110. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.18522/2073-6606-2022-20-2-99-110

15. Bylkov, V. G. (2021). Features of the labour potential transformation amid integration of graduates into the labour market. Russian Journal of Labor Economics, 8(3), 275–294. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.18334/et.8.3.111859

16. Christenko, A. (2022). Automation and occupational mobility: A task and knowledge-based approach. Technology in Society, 70, 101976. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.101976

17. Cortes, G. M., Jaimovich, N., & Siu, H. E. (2017). Disappearing routine jobs: Who, how, and why? Journal of Monetary Economics, 91, 69–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmoneco.2017.09.006

18. Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. (1992). Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Wiley-Blackwell.

19. Decker, M., Fischer, M., & Ott, I. (2017). Service Robotics and Human Labor: A first technology assessment of substitution and cooperation. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 87, 348–354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2016.09.017

20. Dengler, K., & Matthes, B. (2018). The impacts of digital transformation on the labour market: Substitution potentials of occupations in Germany. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 137, 304–316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.09.024

21. Eleskin, S. E., & Kuvakova, I. M. (2022). Innovative economy and humanization of social and labor relations: problems and courses of development. Labour and Social Relations Journal, 33(5), 124–136. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.20410/2073-78152022-33-5-124-136

22. Ermakova, M. L. (2021). Modern trends in the development of labor relations in Russia. Herald of Omsk University. Series “Economics”, 19(2), 38–47. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.24147/1812-3988.2021.19(2).38-47

23. Gallipoli, G., & Makridis, C. A. (2018). Structural transformation and the rise of information technology. Journal of Monetary Economics, 97, 91–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmoneco.2018.05.005

24. Gardberg, M., Heyman, F., Norbäck, P., & Persson, L. (2020). Digitization-based automation and occupational dynamics. Economics Letters, 189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2020.109032

25. Gazizullin, F. G., Gazizullin, N. F., & Gazizullin, T. N. (2012). Инновационное мышление – непреложное условие модернизации современной экономики России. Problems of Modern Economics, 3, 25–26. (In Russ.).

26. Genqiang, L., Yueying, T., Yong, M., & Min, L. (2024). Change or paradox: the double-edged sword effect of organizational crisis on employee behavior. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 37(2), 439–462. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-032023-0088

27. Glazyev, S. Y. (2016). A New Paradigm of Economic Science. Public Administration. E-journal (Russia), 56, 5–39. (In Russ.).

28. Goos, M., Rademakers, E., Salomons, A., & Willekens, B. (2019). Markets for jobs and their task overlap. Labour Economics, 61, 101750. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2019.101750

29. Guerini, M., Napoletano, M., & Roventini, A. (2018). No man is an Island: The impact of heterogeneity and local interactions on macroeconomic dynamics. Economic Modelling, 68, 82–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2017.05.004

30. Guilmi, C. D., & Fujiwara, Y. (2022). Dual labor market, financial fragility, and deflation in an agent-based model of the Japanese macroeconomy. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 196, 346–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2022.02.003

31. Holm, J. R., Lorenz, E., & Nielsen, P. (2020). Work organization and job polarization. Research Policy, 49(8), 104015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2020.104015

32. Kalyakulin, R. V. (2021). Independent examination of working conditions as an effective tool of the regulation of social and labor relations. Labour and Social Relations Journal, 32(6), 73–82. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.20410/2073-7815-2021-32-6-73-82

33. Klarl, T. (2022). Fragile robots, economic growth and convergence. Economic Modelling, 112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2022.105850

34. Klejner, G. B. (2004). Evolution of institutional systems. Moscow: Nauka. (In Russ.).

35. Kolennikova, N. D. (2023). Occupational structure in Great Russia and Little Russia: Outline, dynamics, and peculiarities. Terra Economicus, 21(3), 88–101. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.18522/2073-6606-2023-21-3-88-101

36. Liseev, I. K., & Sadovskij, V. N. (2004). System approach in modern science: to the 100th anniversary of L. von Bertalanffy.

37. Moscow: Progress-Tradiciya. (In Russ.).

38. Lu, C. (2018). Social status, compulsory education, and growth. Economic Modelling, 68, 425–434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2017.08.013

39. Makekadyrova, A. S., & Kravtsevich, S. V. (2021). Developing the Conceptual Model of Imperfect Competition Impact on Labour Reproduction and the System of Measures Aimed at its State Regulation. Vestnik of the Plekhanov Russian University of Economics, 18(1), 59–72. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.21686/2413-2829-2021-1-59-72

40. Nikulina, Yu. N. (2023). Career development of young people in the university staff partnership ecosystem. Leadership and Management, 10(2), 561–578. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.18334/lim.10.2.117238

41. Otto, J. (2016). Participation constrained: Generating buy-in and rationalizing carbon forestry labor through participatory mapping in Southern Mexico. Geoforum, 76, 28–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2016.08.009

42. Pesaro, G. (2018). The contribution of the economic thinking to innovate disaster risk reduction policies and action. Smart, Resilient and Transition Cities, 31, 249–256. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-811477-3.00031-6

43. Polovinko, V. S. (2020). Contradictions of professional selfdetermination: classification and forms of manifestation. Herald of Omsk University. Series “Economics”, 18(1), 111–125. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.24147/1812-3988.2020.18(1).111-125

44. Ray, D., & Mookherjee, D. (2022). Growth, automation, and the long-run share of labor. Review of Economic Dynamics, 46, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.red.2021.09.003

45. Sadovaya, E. S. (2022). Features of regulation of social and labor relations in the conditions of the digital economy. Labour and Social Relations Journal, 33(5), 37–51. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.20410/2073-7815-2022-33-5-37-51

46. Saveleva, E. A. (2018). Digital organization of labor: directions, principles, approaches. Russian Journal of Labor Economics, 5(4), 935–950. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.18334/et.5.4.39642

47. Sequeira, T. N., Garrido, S., & Santos, M. (2021). Robots are not always bad for employment and wages. International Economics, 167, 108–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inteco.2021.06.001

48. Simon, H. A. (1959). Theories of decision-making in economics and behavioral science. The American Economic Review, 3, 253–283.

49. Tutov, L. A., & Shastitko, A. E. (2005). Limited rationality: problems of a systemic definition in the interdisciplinary context. Social Sciences and Contemporary World, 2, 117–127. (In Russ.).

50. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science, 185(4157), 1124–1131. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.185.4157.1124

51. Vedekhin, A. Yu. (2022). Young professionals in the labor market: improving support measures under the employment promotion program. Labour and Social Relations Journal, 33(4), 60–70. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.20410/2073-7815-2022-33-4-60-70

52. Vlasov, N. S., & Kartashov, S. A. (2022). Analysis of the factors influencing the growth of incomes and the increase in savings of employees of organizations in the course of digital transformation of the economy. Labour and Social Relations Journal, 33(3), 22–30. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.20410/2073-7815-2022-33-3-22-30

53. Vukolov, V. L. (2023). Digital economy and labor market, digital technologies and labor relations: Mutual Influence, features and development trends. Social and labor research, 50(1), 24–30. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.34022/2658-3712-2023-50-1-24-30

54. Wang, J., Hu, Y., & Zhang, Z. (2021). Skill-biased technological change and labor market polarization in China. Economic Modelling, 100, 105507. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2021.105507

55. Williamson, O. E. (1985). The Economic Institutions of Capitalism. Firms, Markets, Relational Contracting. N.Y.: The Free Press.

56. Yarkova, S. A., Melnikova, E. V., Yakimova, L. D., & Lubnin, A. O. (2022). Assessing the target competence model amidst technological changes. Journal of Economics, Entrepreneurship and Law, 12(8), 2295–2318. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.18334/epp.12.8.115103

57. Yu, J., & Cho, S. (2018). An evolutionary agent-based framework for modeling and analysis of labor market. Neurocomputing, 271, 84–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neucom.2017.01.111

58. Zhang, F., Meng, L., Sun, W., & Si, Y. (2021). Information technology and the labor market in China. Economic Analysis and Policy, 72, 156–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.2021.06.015