We reward people based on meritâŠ
We want to hire the best person for the jobâŠ
Sounds great, right? It makes sense. Why wouldnât you reward people based on pure performance and talent?
Meet John & Dave
In the top 100 companies in the London Stock Exchange in 2016:
7 were run by a woman.
17 were run by a man named John.
14 were run by a man named Dave.
My gripe is not with John or Dave (Iâm sure you guys are doing a great job). But do you really think if we were living in a meritocracy, we would have 17 Johns and 14 Daves at the helm of the worldâs leading companies? Surely, thereâs a Robert somewhere whoâs available and perfectly capable? (Just kidding.)
The Paradox of Meritocracy
As you may have guessed, the main culprit here is bias.
In their research on âthe paradox of meritocracy,â Emilio Castilla (MIT) and Stephen Benard (Indiana University) found that merit-based processes actually increase, not decrease, bias.
Across their three experiments, Castilla and Benard found that:
When an organization is explicitly presented as meritocratic, individuals in managerial positions favor a male employee over an equally qualified female employee by awarding him a larger monetary reward.
One reason behind this is what the researchers call âmoral credentialingâ â meaning when an organization and its managers explicitly endorse meritocracy, they believe they are more impartial, which can ultimately blind them to their own biases and prejudices. In other words:
An organizational culture that prides itself on meritocracy may encourage bias by convincing managers that they themselves are unbiased, which in turn may discourage them from closely examining their own behaviors for signs of prejudice.
The False Narrative of Meritocracy vs. Diversity
Now, this doesnât mean you should engage in positive discrimination and build diverse teams for diversityâs sake.
Know that meritocracy and diversity are not mutually exclusive â and the notion that they are at odds with each other suggests that you need to sacrifice performance to increase diversity.
Organizations that use meritocracy as an excuse for lack of diversity are insinuating that hiring people in those underrepresented groups is somehow lowering the bar.
I refer back to John and Dave (our BFFs). Was there really not an equally talented and qualified Naomi or Maya to fill those roles?
A Starting Point for Solutions
At the end of the day, itâs not about hiring the best person for the job. Itâs about getting the right person for your team and organization.
Here are a few ways we can start building meritocratic, diverse organizations:
Acknowledge your bias by taking Harvardâs Implicit Association Test (IAT).
Find out what skills and qualities are missing from your current team or organization. Look for culture add, not culture fit.
Review every stage of your recruitment process. Use these diversity metrics as a baseline:
How diverse is your candidate pool?
How diverse are the candidates being interviewed?
Who is moving through each stage?
Who is doing the interviewing?
Who is getting hired?
When it comes to reward and performance, Deloitte recommends organizations focus on increasing accountability and transparency by asking three questions:
How is merit-based pay decided and distributed?
What rewards are employees getting and who is analyzing and collecting the data?
Who will have the visibility of the processes and outcomes and who is responsible for ensuring the practices are fair?