The increasingly complex economic systems require increasingly larger and more elaborate businesses deliver results, according to the complexity of the system. The modern consumer increasingly demands of the system. And companies, charge more and more of its employees, demanding excellence and quality always.
Several methods to measure the results and the performance of an individual have been tested extensively in the search for the best method to evaluate what the individual actually is and how it can produce results for a company.
The Meritocracy is a widely used system, including within the government and the state. Combined with Performance Management, Meritocracy emerges as an interesting tool to measure performance and results, especially those related to the promotion and career development.
LEARN HOW TO IMPLEMENT THE MODEL meritocratic IN YOUR COMPANY WITH Mereo CONSULTING
Meritocracy is the Mereo Latin and its meaning is related to merit, to obtain something through own merits. Involves being worthy of something, make something legitimately. Thus, meritocracy drift merit, value, something positive, admirable, desirable.
The aristocratic society designated positions and functions based on blood and flesh, in return for favors, not favoring merit. The system based on the bureaucracy favored strict compliance with the rules when it is convenient to those who comply with the rules is therefore a system that can make things difficult at certain times due to excessive rules, while can facilitate some situations if there is interest to those in paper compliant with the rules.
The Meritocracy was first introduced in Brazil by the state itself, the emergence of public procurement to fill vacancies in the public spheres. The aim was to combat the heredity of positions and nepotism, giving precedence attributes and skills that were not related to the influences of power or exchange of favors and blood relations. With the emergence of open, it was thought that the company would focus more on the merits of a person than their blood and political forefathers.
With the increasing number of vacancies in companies, it was noticed that the Meritocracy should also be used as a system of evaluation and recruitment, not exclusive of public spheres. Many companies today have adopted these criteria for recognition and appreciation of their employees, leaving bureaucratic and aristocratic systems. Globalization has brought to market a never expected dynamics, making people would claim their rights and to begin to value more just and coherent systems, which forces companies to adopt assessment criteria increasingly transparent and humanized.
Still, you can see the bureaucratic system operating in many places, especially in public spheres, causing dissatisfaction to customers and work difficulties for servers. In some private companies is also possible to observe striking features of bureaucracy and aristocracy, which is a hardening in relations between co-workers and the relationship between the customer and the company.
2. SOCIAL CONTEXT
The Meritocracy is closely linked with historical and cultural concepts of a nation. The concept of substance varies from system to system. The criteria attached to merit evaluation are variable and depend on historical and cultural aspects. Something that is considered fair and equitable in a given place may not have the same prestige elsewhere. The differences are obvious.
In Brazil, the culture and history have always valued people who had power, money and social prestige. Created a culture of slaves, where all – slaves, free blacks and whites – have learned to value their “planters”, giving them more honor than it deserved, valuing even your most cruel and unscrupulous acts, greatly devaluing humans.
The Brazilian has become accustomed to be the doormat of another person to do the minimum necessary in every situation, because their efforts would never be noticed or rewarded, to be content with the least, to conform to the situations of life. However, something began to change at the time of the abolition of slavery, although the Brazilian had not noticed. The new winds of freedom aired the minds of a few Brazilians who understood that they were no longer slaves and that from that moment on, would have to stand out to survive.
It is true that today many people live under slave culture, without viewing prospects for improvement or opportunities for your future. But there is a large crowd of people who know their worth and fight for systems to be increasingly flexible and value more and more the human being, whether employee or customer of a company.
3. PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT
Assess a person is a difficult task. People are different and can not be compared with each other, a metric measure, rigid and impersonal. As already mentioned, the merit evaluation criteria vary. Thus, the big question is: How to set merit evaluation criteria or adequate performance? What criteria will be used to assess the merits of the people?
Each company brings with it a culture, a history, its values, its mission, its vision. These factors directly influence the concept of evaluation, as outline what are the characteristics and qualities valued by the company.
It is a fact that the assessment – especially when it is not well conducted – cause discomfort and bargaining among colleagues of the same company. Often the evaluation criteria reveal not be meritocratic and yes, aristocratic. Several times the reviews seem to favor some over others. The competition through meritocracy thus acquires an uneven contour, in which people are different, bring stories of different lives, different creations and are forced to compete – or be assessed – as equals.
Given this context, it is necessary to establish clear criteria, objectives and feasible, in order to make a truly meritocratic evaluation. In addition, it is necessary for the system to provide an equal shared by all its members because otherwise meritocracy will eventually turn into aristocracy, in that not all system components are equal basis to compete broadly to certain posts or functions, which favors only some components of the system at the expense of other less privileged, thus creating an undercover aristocratic framework of meritocratic.
At the organizational level, however, you can evaluate people as equals because the environment is the same, the tools are the same, the opportunities that the company offer are the same. However, people often have fear of organizational assessments, particularly for cultural issues of inequality of opportunity. We need to unlink the company to review the idea of punishment, where someone will be promoted and the other will be punished. The assessment should be seen as a tool to better allocate – or relocate – people in their proper functions, besides being a self tool and personal and professional growth, regardless of whether promotion to a hierarchical position higher or not.
An egalitarian system is one that provides all individuals the same conditions and tools for their development. Although this picture is not currently possible in today’s society, it is possible within companies. Companies are systems that can provide training and equal opportunities to all its members, with each individual task to take what the company offers or not. Bureaucratic and aristocratic models should be abandoned because they generate discomforts both for employees and for customers.
The methods of organizational assessments adopted by the company are part of its Performance Management framework and should always be based on meritocracy, in valuing human beings and their qualities. However, care must be taken so that the evaluation methods do not become methods of punishment.
The new economic and social models suggest that assessment techniques are adopted increasingly clear, dynamic, individualized and transparent, as a way to highlight the Meritocracy and the enhancement of individual and collective skills. That in the near future, people are increasingly valued for what they are, by their qualities, for their efforts, for their merits!