If we take a 3 person company and use a simple system to measure value added, how do you break down the value added by A who is +100k, B who is x2, and C who is x2?
If you remove either B or C, half he value of the company is gone, so they each add half. But if you remove A then the entire value of the company disappears. So they add 50%, 50%, and 100% of the value of the company respectively?
This is a pretty simple example, modeling real world would involve much more complex interactions, yet even with this simple one it would be hard to create a universal way of measuring value that is universally applicable.
Is the notion that a person contributes a set amount of value something like set theory, in that it sounds pretty good and usable for many things but with enough analysis there is a flaw underlying the entire system that requires some creative work to get around, enough so the common mental model no longer applies and thus the original concept can be said to not be possible?