SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
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: 2) by c0lo on Friday October 17 2014, @01:11PM
Most of the time (and always on the long run) they are doing society a favour.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Friday October 17 2014, @09:47PM
How is that a benefit to society?
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday October 17 2014, @11:19PM
Invariably, when a company becomes big enough to justify an MBA graduate, it becomes big, bureaucratic and arthritic (as opposed to mobile/flexible). Give it enough time, it becomes a hindrance for "saplings" (new growth, better adapted to newer conditions).
Put shortly: letting aside global extinction events, it takes parasites/illnesses to kill a dinosaur.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Friday October 17 2014, @11:57PM
I thought keeping good companies, is good?
But MBA as the decision maker in management is likely a warning sign of doom.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Saturday October 18 2014, @06:59AM
A good company is a small company (unless you happen to like group sex, that is).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Saturday October 18 2014, @12:56PM
How would you handle something like a space launch operation of asteroid mining? it will take huge resources both in terms of materials and people. But I guess the optimum is when the corporate size is at parity with the core business task. Giving no room for chaff people.