So what does it tell us about organizational behavior? Are these firms' managers "profit maximizers" as the official neoclassical mantra goes, or are they "satisficers" doing as everyone elese does and performing the roles sanctioned by corporate culture, as institutionalists (an endangered species in the US) claim.
The outrageous largesse firms spent on computer-related products that do not bring any measurable output seems to be the prima facie evidence of managerial herd instinct and jumping as everyone else does -- and then explaining what they did in the profit maximization lingo. Are there any economists out there to tell that it ain't so?
Of course this is not just a theoretical controversy. If corporate schmucks do not have to maximize to remain 'competituve' but just hold their hands and do what they think is politically correct - it seems that wages and salaries are set not by "market forces" but by managerial perceptions what is politically correct. Thus, it is not necessary to change the entire "capiatlist system" to get a better deal for the workers - kicking some executive asses should suffice.
wojtek