Para estilhaçar alguns paradigmas obsoletos sobre a produtividade

Hoje em dia, todo o bicho careta fala sobre produtividade.
.
Como é que Mourinho disse?
.
"Antes de escrever, investigas, estudas, dp ja podes opinar"
.
Encontrei um interessante artigo sobre a produtividade "Labor Market Models of Worker and Firm Heterogeneity" de Rasmus Lentz e Dale T. Mortensen.
.
Primeiro, como é que os políticos e as associações empresariais lidam com a produtividade e com os salários? Jogam o jogo do rato! Os salários comem o aumento da produtividade!!!
.
Quanto mais estudo sobre a produtividade, quanto mais percebo o truque alemão, quanto mais entro no modelo de Marn e Rosiello e no de Dolan e Simon, mais me convenço que quem fala sobre de  produtividade não faz a mínima ideia das conclusões que se tiram da investigação científica e, por isso, continuam na fase dos mitos.
.
Alguns trechos para reflectir muito a sério:
.
"Firms come in all shapes and sizes. Some are huge but all but a few are tiny. Cross firm dispersion in size, labor productivity and average wages paid are large and the all three are positively correlated.
...
A majority of the most productive firms at any point in time will still be among the best performers five years later. Within industry differences in productivity swamp cross industry differentials. (Moi ici: Nunca esquecer este ponto, sobretudo quando alguém pensar em medidas homogéneas top-down)
...

Perhaps the most important fact for a labor economist observed in these data is the extent of the dispersion of productivity measures, a similar dispersion in the average wage bill per employee, and the positive correlation between the two. (Moi ici: É possível fugir ao jogo do gato e do rato)
...
Why do firms differ with respect to productivity? Obviously, at the core of this question is whether productivity differences are characteristic of the individual establishment or firm or whether they simply reflect differences in the quality of inputs, particular the labor force.
...
Fox and Smeets find that the weights on the "human capital" variables are significant, well determined and of the expected signs. However, including them explains relatively little of the variance in firm productivity in any of the industries. Averaging over the six manufacturing industries, the ratio of the 90th percentile to the 10th percentile of the Danish distribution of the standard TFP measure is large, 3.74. The ratio is reduced but only to 3.36 when the human capital variables are included. They obtain similar results using the wage bill, a wage weighted measure of employment, to correct for labor input quality. They conclude that the observable component of "input quality" explains very little of the dispersion in firm productivity observed in Danish data. (Moi ici: I rest my case)
...
Irarazabal et al. include measures of labor force age, education, and tenure as well as the capital stock of each firm. Using either the actual worker characteristics or the wage bill in the analysis, they conclude that labor input quality explains at most 25% of the average productivity differential between exporting an non-exporting firms in Norway. Although they conclude that the potential for "gains from trade" are overstated by the measured TFP differences, it is clear that labor input quality differentials fail to explain the bulk of the differences in productivity." (Moi ici: Isto quebra uma série de paradigmas politicamente correctos e superficiais que passam em programas como o Prós e Contras da RTP)