Will Meritocracy Undermine the Knowledge-Based Economy?

Abstract

Anyone concerned about how to enhance the effectiveness of a knowledgebased economy would certainly be attracted to a paper with an eye-catching title like "Is meritocracy outmoded in a knowledge-based economy?". After all, there is a consensus, even as we enter the new millennium, that job allocation and rewards should be based on merit, and not seniority or social connections. The rationale being that the merit criterion, tempered by equality of opportunity and social justice, can satisfy both equity and efficiency considerations, resulting in motivated individuals and effective organizations.However, in his paper, Appold proposes that the usefulness of meritocracy is context-bound. He argued that in the more stable and predictable environment of the 20th century industrial societies, meritocracy had contributed to economic growth, but not so in the knowledge-based economy where "tasks and needs rapidly shift", thereby rendering it more difficult to define beforehand what constitutes good job performance; and to know with certainty what qualities would bring about good job performance.My contention is that while it is true that economies and businesses encounter a more turbulent, complex, and uncertain environment in the age of globalization, and that the skills and motivation expected of employees may be qualitatively quite different from that required in the old economy, these do not at all warrant our ushering out meritocracy. Indeed, just as organizations need to be flexible in order to survive and thrive in the new millennium, there are good reasons to keep meritocracy, as a principle, intact, while ensuring that whatever meritocratic systems adopted remain flexible and open to revisions corresponding to environmental and organizational changes. The bottom-line is that business organizations do need people with appropriate skills and expertise, even personality, to stay competitive. On logical grounds alone, it is difficult to figure out how organizations could survive and thrive without having a structure and people who could adapt to changes. In short, some notion of good performance is inevitable, and organizations do need to 275 Singapore Econ. Rev. 2001.46:275-278. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com by UNIVERSITY OF SASKATCHEWAN on 02/03/15. For personal use only.

Influence of Cultural Values on Singapore School Leadership

“…These conceptions eventuated in differentiated instruction and compromised learning opportunities for these students. In another study, Tan and Dimmock (2015) cautioned that low-socioeconomic status students might be disadvantaged and urged Singapore school leaders to act as agents of social change, recalibrate their leadership to emphasize educational quality and equity, re-examine the definition of educational success, and transform schools into future-oriented learning organizations.…”

Excellence and equity in high-performing education systems: policy lessons from Singapore and Hong Kong / Excelencia y equidad en sistemas educativos de alto rendimiento: lecciones de las políticas educativas en Singapur y Hong Kong

“…Así, ambos sistemas tratan de identificar y seleccionar sus élites de manera imparcial para una gobernanza más eficaz. No obstante, estas élites de la meritocracia, una vez alcanzado el éxito, invertirán aún más en la educación de sus hijos para que estos tengan mayores posibilidades de éxito en un sistema educativo competitivo y, por tanto, mayor probabilidad de llegar a ser beneficiarios de ese sistema meritocrático que, a su vez, contribuye a un ciclo de estratificación y reproducción social a través de distintas generaciones (Tan & Dimmock, 2015). Además, dado el coeficiente de Gini relativamente elevado de Singapur y Hong Kong, es comúnmente aceptado que el problema de la desigualdad de ingresos y de las diferencias y estratificación de las clases sociales es más grave en ambos lugares que en otros países desarrollados.…”

“…Thus both places seek to identify and select elites impartially for effective governance. Nevertheless, these meritocratic elites, once successful, will invest even more in their children’s education so that they are advantaged to succeed in a competitive education system and thus more likely to become beneficiaries in the meritocratic system, which in turns contributes to a cycle of social stratification and reproduction across generations (Tan & Dimmock, 2015). Moreover, with the relatively high Gini coefficient in Singapore and Hong Kong, it is widely accepted that the problem of income inequality and social class difference and stratification is more serious in both places than other developed economies.…”

Work-integrated (adult) learning: Un-stigmatizing blue-collar adult learners in Singapore by embracing visibility

“…Regardless of socioeconomic background and ethnicity, governments in many countries aim to provide high quality education and foster an inclusive learning environment for all students to flourish and achieve their full potential. Therefore, it is important to consider how various stakeholders' perceptions and actions could shape the translation of the concept of continuous meritocracy and the recognition of nonacademic competencies in workplaces (Tan & Dimmock, 2015). In Singapore, the challenge is that the concept of meritocracy has been deeply rooted in the society.…”