Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Friday October 17 2014, @09:35AM   Printer-friendly
from the how-do-you-rate? dept.

From Wired Innovation Insights:

In 1958, Michael Young coined the term "meritocracy" in his book, The Rise of the Meritocracy. Young used the term satirically to depict a United Kingdom ruled by a system that favored intelligence and merit above all else, including past personal achievements.

However:

Who decides who is listened to? Who decides which ideas are the best? At my company, Red Hat, the people who are listened to are the ones who have earned the right. They have built a reputation and history of contributing good ideas, going beyond their day jobs, and achieving stellar results.

In many technology companies that employ a meritocracy — Red Hat being one example — people forge their own path to leadership, not simply by working hard and smart, but also by expressing unique ideas that have the ability to positively impact their team and their company. Entire paths have been paved at Red Hat because a single person spoke up when it mattered, had gained enough trust and respect from teammates so people truly listened, and, as a result, was able to influence direction of an initiative (or start a new one).

For example, I think back to a Red Hat associate who, as we were developing our virtualization business at Red Hat, spoke up in a meeting when he thought myself, his boss's boss, his boss and others, were making a wrong decision. While we didn't follow his guidance that day, eventually we did because we valued his opinion, and frankly, because he was right.

Of course, this doesn't happen overnight. It takes time and a consistent track record to begin to earn respect and influence in a meritocracy. As you can imagine, given the right vehicles for communication and encouragement, the natural thought leaders emerge.

The article also includes some fairly standard advice about decision making.

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by kaszz on Friday October 17 2014, @10:14PM

    by kaszz (4211) on Friday October 17 2014, @10:14PM (#107170) Journal

    Red Hat is a company, which means "merit" is what's best for the profit in the short or long term. What's best for products or customers is secondary, or Linux in this case. This company seems to have utilized the complexity injection attack and making the case that new is better because it's new and of course comes from their company.

    All systems in an organization that decides the distribution of power will be gamed.

    Actors in an environment that has absolute demands like getting space probes to other planets has to get their act together or have them proved wrong in a spectacular and public way. There's an absolute measurement of accomplishment, or failure. This also applies to doctors and their patient that either get cured or not, corporations that are profitable or not etc.

    Two tips: If the top boss like the CEO doesn't had any direct experience in what the organization produces then there might too much disconnect to make the right decisions. And when the decision makers stop to listen to others, it will be like having a nail in your foot an let it result in sepsis and then do nothing about it.

    Oh, and individual persons may also get into the delusions by believing in stuff that doesn't have an anchor in reality.

    (have a look t List of eponymous laws [wikipedia.org] for suitable principles in an organization)

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2