Making DEI accessible, actionable, and sustainable requires rethinking meritocracy
Making DEI accessible, actionable, and sustainable requires rethinking meritocracy
Here are two ideas from my book, Reconstructing Inclusion: Making DEI Accessible, Actionable, and Sustainable and other texts I leaned on in writing it. In addition, I’ve included one quote, a book recommendation, and a video or article that has inspired or influenced me and hopefully will resonate with you, too. (That’s ✌🏿+ 💡📚➕).
Page 113-114
"In 2001, about a year prior to his death, Michael Young, [author of The Rise of the Meritocracy, 1870-2033: an essay on education and equality, where he coined the term, “meritocracy”] wrote an essay reinforcing the fact that his 1958 original text was satire and that what he feared would happen had come to fruition. He wrote the essay in protest to the contemporary British system, at the time under the leadership of Prime Minister Tony Blair, whose cabinet Young described as being full of meritocrats—elites who uniformly believed that their advancement was the result of their own merits and not disproportionally influenced by elite educational advantages and reinforced proportionally to the “amazing battery of certificates and degrees at its disposal,” as Young stated.
He saw the perpetuation of the ideal of meritocracy gripping the minds of the country’s citizens in a way that caused inherent inequality, as articulated in his satirical narrative.
Related post: The ideal of meritocracy is flawed
“I expected that the poor and the disadvantaged would be done down, and in fact they have been . . . ,” Young said. “In the new social environment, the rich and the powerful have been doing mighty well for themselves. They have been freed from the old kinds of criticism from people who had to be listened to. This once helped keep them in check . . . The business meritocracy is in vogue.
If meritocrats believe, as more and more of them are encouraged to, that their advancement comes from their own merits, they can feel they deserve whatever they can get . . . [They] believe they have morality on their side.
So, Young’s resistance related to his term “meritocracy” and his sense of its insidiousness is dismissed by those who benefit the most from perpetuating his original satire as a contemporary, moral truth.
During the past fifty years, many organizations have been simultaneously working toward establishing meritocracy and committing to increased "representation of underrepresented groups. The conflict here is obvious. If you have worked in an organization for any period, you have heard someone say, “We just want the best candidate.” In this regard, people are dealing with a false dichotomy: best versus different. If the best candidate happens to be different than the predominant archetype, the default is often that difference seems like it is not in alignment with the narrative of a meritorious value system."
Related video: Lived Experience + Toxicity
Page 114-115
"Few people (including Young and myself) would resist a truly merit-based system. The problem is that there is no such thing. If there were, I imagine all of us would be inquiring about how to construct it. And if it had been created prior to Young’s death, without a doubt he would have written a follow-up to his satire, proclaiming that it was indeed possible to create an untainted meritocratic structure for an organization or institution.
In a story about Young, writer and scholar Kwame Anthony Appiah states: “We go wrong when we deny not only the merit but the dignity of those whose luck in the genetic lottery and in the historical contingencies of their situation has left them less rewarded.” He continued articulating that wealth and status rewards will always be unequal. However, the idea that all children should have access to a decent education and exposure to opportunities suitable to their talents and choices; and ultimately that all this should be done with the idea that all children should be able to regard themselves with self-respect [is possible and achievable].
While we are far from this dynamic in most parts of the world, resistance to the ideal of meritocracy must persist and remain a sociological myth that instructs us on what not to do rather than what we can hold onto as reflective of an egalitarian principle.
Related post: Mindset, Expectations, and Clarity Overcome Meritocracy's Limitations
Reconstructing Inclusion S1E7: Quantifying Intersectional Identity: The Value of Inclusive Data
Conversely, there will be those who believe in the mythological idea and oppose those who champion equity while perpetuating the adverse impact of an erroneous ideal.
Making DEI accessible, actionable, and sustainable requires rethinking meritocracy. It means resisting the idea that it benefits everyone. One may explain [as does the fictional CEO who appears in chapters seven (7) through ten (10) of the book]:
I resist the notion of meritocracy being complete. My resistance lies in
the historical and present-day potential for harm to be done when organizations
are overconfident “meritocracies.” I resist inherently inequitable
notions of meritocracy because everyone has merit, and everyone deserves
dignity. I resist because of the potential for harm when influential actors in
organizations insist on their preferences for a particular job candidate profile
(often similar to theirs) or pedigree. And these individuals do so while
organizations publicly pronounce that equity is a desired outcome. I resist
because we are likely doing the same and that is unacceptable. Holding on
to this notion doesn’t serve us. Rather than anchor on meritocracy, we will
anchor on developing our people. We will anchor on the boundless potential
of one another.
Sincerely, Your CEO
Related post: The role of DEI in the development and implementation of organizational strategy
💡A Quote
“You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.”
― R. Buckminster Fuller
📚A Book
Photo Credit: Amazon.com
by Alex Edmans
➕A Video
The Vision of the Anointed – with Thomas Sowell (1995)
I hope this was helpful. . . Make it a great day! ✌🏿
In this episode of the ‘Reconstructing Inclusion’ podcast, let’s discuss the current state and “the attacks” on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) and the need to redefine its contemporary frame. I talk about the concept of iatrogenic effects, drawing from the work of Ivan Illich, and its relevance in the DEI space. Why are self-reflection, intentional broadening, greater contact, and the promotion of agency in mitigating iatrogenic effects important in advancing the potential of DEI work?