On 07/13/2016 09:03 AM, Laura Hilliger wrote: > Although, I have pointed out diversity and inclusion issues in > Meritocracies, I’d always been a believer in the ideal.
I actually think this particular phrasing underscores one of the most pressing issues for people involved in meritocracy discussions: An assumption that an "ideal" meritocracy is somehow diametrically opposed to (or in some way precludes emphasis on) diversity and inclusion. The first step to reclaiming, reconfiguring, or redefining "meritocracy" might be pressing for new associations and new presumptions here, such that "diversity" becomes something more like a prerequisite for meritocracy than an after-the-fact corrective to it. Put another way: If "the best ideas" are the ones that "work" best, and "working best" is always a matter of embeddedness in a concrete context where solutions can't be divorced from the particular, unique problems that give rise to them, then those "best ideas" are always the ones that "work best" for precisely those people most affected by those ideas/solutions. _______________________________________________ Openorg-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/openorg-list
