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This discussion has been archived.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: 3, Informative) by Magic Oddball on Saturday October 18 2014, @04:33AM

    by Magic Oddball (3847) on Saturday October 18 2014, @04:33AM (#107264) Journal

    Sorry, that's completely inaccurate -- as taken directly from the US Department of Labor's "Myth-busting The Pay Gap" [dol.gov]:

    Despite the evidence, myths that women’s choices or other legitimate factors are the “real” cause of the pay gap persist. So does confusion about how to measure the gap and what figures to use. That’s why today, we are going to bust a few myths.

    MYTH: Saying women only earn 77 cents on the dollar is a huge exaggeration – the “real” pay gap is much smaller than that (if it even exists).

    REALITY: The size of the pay gap depends on how you measure it. The most common estimate is based on differences in annual earnings (currently about 23 cents difference per dollar). Another approach uses weekly earnings data (closer to an 18- or 19-cent difference). ... According to one analysis by the Department of Labor’s Chief Economist, a typical 25-year-old woman working full time would have already earned $5,000 less over the course of her working career than a typical 25-year old man.

    MYTH: Women are responsible for the pay gap because they seek out flexible jobs or choose to work fewer hours. Putting family above work is why women earn less.

    REALITY: Putting aside whether it’s right to ask women (or men) to sacrifice financially in order to work and have a family, those kinds of choices aren’t enough to explain away the gender pay gap. The gender gap in pay exists for women working full time. Taking time off for children also doesn’t explain gaps at the start of a career.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Informative=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3