Meritocracy Paradox

What is Meritocracy Paradox?

Meritocracy explained: The term "Meritocracy" comes from the Greek word "mereo," meaning "to earn," combined with the suffix "-cracy," which means "power" or "rule." Aristotle linked merit-based rule with aristocratic and oligarchic power structures, where power was often reserved for those considered most capable due to their status or lineage, rather than their actual abilities.  

The modern concept of "Meritocracy" was introduced by Michael Young in 1958 as a dystopian satire. He used the term ironically to warn about the potential consequences of a society structured on merit-based achievement and how it may reinforce divisions in society.  

Today ‘Meritocracy’ refers to a social system, society, or organisation where people achieve success or power based on their abilities, rather than on wealth, connections or social position.  

The Meritocracy Paradox:  Many organisations now use what they would label ‘merit-based’ systems in their evaluation of employees, ranking them on performance, skills and contributions. Their aim is to create a fair reward system that is based on individual merit.   

However, the ‘Meritocracy Paradox’ emerged from research by E. Castilla & S. Bernard. Their study revealed that when an organisation promotes a culture of meritocracy, managers paradoxically show greater bias favouring men over equally performing women. Women were lower ratings in their performance evaluations, negatively impacting their career progression.  

This paradox occurs because managers strongly believe they are being objective, and merit based in their assessments. This belief reduces their self-scrutiny and actually makes them less aware of their biases, creating an uneven and unregulated playing field. 

Ultimately, while meritocracy aims to reward individuals based on their abilities and achievements, it can paradoxically lead to biased outcomes if systems lack transparency or self -assessment. This paradox reveals the importance of ensuring that merit-based evaluations are truly fair and equitable.