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.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 17 2014, @11:49AM
Though not exactly what you were referring to, I would suggest that something like that is at work on this very site.
Some users, through their comments here, have earned my respect with their insight and knowledge. Others I've come to recognize as generally more prone to bias and willingness to incite reactions.
Notwithstanding that, I still try to keep an open mind to whatever is posted here, no matter who posts it. And, I still browse at -1 so as to not miss anything.
In my opinion, civility goes a long way to bolster a point; the use of profanity and/or ad hominem attacks diminishes my estimation of a poster's comment. The comment should stand on its own merits.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 17 2014, @11:52AM
And failing to close an tag doesn't help, either. =)
(Score: 2) by fadrian on Friday October 17 2014, @09:55PM
Did you mean ?
That is all.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 17 2014, @11:55AM
I resemble that remark.
-- gewg_