2.7 Justice and the promise of meritocracy Flashcards
(18 cards)
Why does Justice matter?
Scarce resources (e.g., jobs, money, promotions, awards, developmental opportunities, recognition) => how do you distribute them? => justice offers a framework for assessing the fairness of practices that distribute scarce resources
Not the only value in people management, e.g.:
Non-moral ones => e.g., Efficiency: maximizing performance or economic profit
Moral ones => e.g., Care: responding to needs, etc.
What are the three key forms of justice?
Distributive Justice: focus on outcome of distribution of resources (who should get what and why?) => fair distribution of jobs, pay, recognition, promotions, etc
Procedural Justice: focus on fairness of processes/procedures of decision-making and implementation (how are decisions made)
Even if people get less if principles are fair and transparent people will still perceive it as fair!
Interpersonal Justice: focus on communication and interaction (interpersonal affairs)
Informational justice: focus on communication (how are people informed about procedures and decisions?) => Clear, timely, adequate and correct information
Interactional justice: focus on interactions (How are people treated before, during and after the decision-making process?)
Treat people with dignity and respect
Based on what principles can distributive justice be done?
Can distribute based on different principles:
Equal distribution: everyone gets the same
Needs-based distribution: distribute based on needs (usually under the assumption that being in a situation that leads to more needs is beyond the individuals’ capabilities)
Merit/desert-based distribution: not equal distribution or outcome. Distribute goods, rewards, or opportunities based on merit (what they deserve, talents they have)
What are the core values of procedural justice?
Transparency
Consistency
Impartiality
Accuracy
What concepts pertain to merit/desert based distribution?
Idea: You have a person who wants limited resources (e.g., admission into the conservatorium)
Desert basis: features used to decide who get the limited resources (e.g., performance, effort and talent)
Desert object: the limited resources wanted (e.g., admission to conservatorium)
Fittingness: There needs to be fittingness between the dessert basis and the dessert object (so should not base decision on basis completely separate from the desert object)
Aboutness: the feature you are basing the decision on should be based on the person you are deciding about not someone else’s (own doing, not someone else’s)
E.g.: should not base decision on nepotism (parents went to the conservatorium => kids should go as well)
Merit is the central basis of desert (who deserves what) = Effort (how hard someone works) + talent or ability (natural or developed capacities)
Manifests as: Performance or Contribution
How to distribute resources fairly?
Decide how you would distribute the opportunities
Justify decision
Which understanding of justice (principles) guided your choice?
Reflect => what did you find difficult? Was there disagreement?
What do you need to determine merit?
Need formal equality of opportunity. Its outcome is that the “best” candidate (most qualified/ highest scores) wins!
What is formal equality of opportunity?
Fair competition
Everyone can compete:
No legal restrictions, overt coercion, artificial barriers that prevent people from participating
Example of artificial barriers: high fees of entrance (restricts to rich people when richness is not a relevant basis for decision)
Fair and relevant rules:
Everyone is assessed using the same criteria
Equal access and equal chances to complete without explicit discrimination
Core idea that you are not basing your decision on non-relevant outcomes.
What is the issue with formal equality of opportunity?
Real work has non-ideal circumstances
People’s backgrounds, resources, and life circumstances shape their chances to develop and demonstrate their talent
E.g.: Unequal access to education, healthcare, time, networks, mentorships, etc.
These factors can limit performance (even if conditions of competition are formally equal)
Background conditions are relevant to develop:
Talent (for example, education or financial means) AND Ambition (also shaped by environment, those around you => do they embody ambition?)
Formal equality of opportunity is not enough: those with more opportunities/training etc. will continue winning (similarly to nepotism)
Primary inequalities come from your parents/where you grow up => sometimes school education is not enough (need to intervene earlier)
How do you overcome the issues with formal equality of opportunity?
Through substantive equality of opportunity:
Levelling the playing field: ensuring everyone has genuinely fair access to opportunities
Shift of perspectives: allocative decision => social structures
What is the core idea of substantive equality of opportunity?
Before merit-based distribution can function fairly, there must be substantive equality of opportunity, ensuring that everyone has an equal chance to develop and showcase their abilities and ambitions.
If not distribution of resources based on competition becomes about parents/environment you are born => aboutness is violated (merit is not only you’re doing, but attributed to structural issues)
What are practical implications of substantive equality of opportunity?
(ideal vs non-ideal world)
Non-ideal world: Mechanism to compensate for past injustices => structural adjustments (compensate for historical, socio-economic disadvantages)
Ideal world: equal access to resources, opportunities and support necessary for the development of talent and ambition, especially in childhood and youth.
But shouldn’t you continue to give opportunities past childhood? (those who messed up/ were unlucky)
Describe the “realistic utopia of meritocracy”.
To achieve justice (perceived and in actuality) in the economic realm need to:
- First, we establish equal opportunity,
- Judge people strictly on their merits.
When this is done – when we live in a meritocracy – citizens will have their just deserts, and we would have achieved justice
What is the core idea (and steps) of meritocracy
Core idea: Meritocracy is the system that distributes resources based on merit – performance, effort, and talent – once equal opportunities have been provided
Two steps:
1. Establish substantive equality of opportunity
2. Distribute resources based on desert, particularly, merit
What does meritocracy assume?
Substantive equality of opportunity: Everyone is given the chance to develop their talents and follow their ambitions, independent of background and features such as class, race, gender, or sexual orientation.
Formal equality of opportunity: People with equal access to resources and opportunities can be evaluated on their abilities and achievements.
Fair competition: People with equal access to resources and opportunities are evaluated on their abilities and achievements.
Rewarding merit: Individuals who demonstrate exceptional talent, hard work, or results should receive resources (e.g., promotions, funding, recognition).
Justified hierarchy: Meritocracy justifies social hierarchies that are based on merit, while excluding other factors as inappropriate
Give an example of meritocracy
The american dream: opportunities for everyone based on ability and achievement (merit based rewards). Be able to fulfill their innate capabilities regardless of the circumstances in which they were born (substantive equality of opportunity)
What are the promises of meritocracy?
Moral promise: justice
Conceptual claim: Treating people fairly means giving them what they deserve which means rewarding them based on their performance, effort, and talent rather than factors like background wealth, or social status.
Principle of equal treatment: same opportunities to develop talent and ambitions + freedom to compete and be judged by same, relevant criteria.
Moral promise: autonomy and personal responsibility
Respecting autonomy and personal responsibility: Aligns with liberal values of autonomy and personal responsibility, respecting individuals’ right to pursue their own path based on their abilities and effort
Treats people as responsible agents, not as recipients of fortune or misfortune
Affirms people’s freedom to take control of their own destiny
Respects people as moral agents and citizens
Psychological promise: motivation and self-actualization
Success is linked to one’s efforts and abilities (control fate and self-worth)
Efforts and abilities => place in society (sense of control)
Higher levels of satisfaction: the sense that one deserves one’s success (Efforts and abilities => place in society => self-satisfaction)
Stimulates motivation and ambition through respect and reward for performance, talent, and effort
Social promise: social mobility and equal opportunity
Enables social mobility: Provides equal opportunities to all individuals, allowing them to rise based on their abilities and effort, regardless of background
Promotes social integration: place is due to effort => do not feel envy or resentment (it is just + it feels just for most)
Promotes social cohesion: Fosters a more inclusive society and Reduces resentment
Fosters excellence: gives resources to people who can make the most out of them.
Place most capable and productive people in positions where they can contribute the most to society => Optimal use of resources (talents, effort) => Benefits society as a whole
Political promise: competence and legitimacy power - Should apply the same principles of merit and desert to those in power => the most talented (intellectual + moral virtues) should be in power
Legitimization of power and authority:
Distributing power and authority based on desert and merit
Increasing competence and virtue of those in power (only the best in power)
Increasing trust in those in power: know they are qualified
Increasing the legitimacy of those in power
Leading to political stability
Economic promise: efficiency and productivity
Incentive to perform: Incentivizing individual and collective productivity through rewarding talent and effort => economic growth and prosperity
(Most) efficient allocation of resources: Most efficient method of resource distribution
Those who are best suited to particular roles will be the ones filling them
Optimizing performance
Based on the moral promise (autonomy and person responsibility) compare meritocracy to other systems
Hereditary aristocracy: not own efforts and talents but social features such as class or gender determine fate
Radical egalitarianism: irrelevance of own efforts and talents
