ABSTRACT Although the extant literature provides a comprehensive account of workplace gender inequalities, the mechanisms that produce inequalities, and the underlying assumptions and principles of those mechanisms, remain opaque. The concept of “merit,” although morally persuasive and ubiquitous in organizational contexts, is a significant point of tension in redressing gender inequality. This article firstly identifies three significant critiques of merit/ocracy identified in the literature, challenging assumptions that merit is objective, impartial and unbiased; independent of social, historical, and organizational contexts; and a reflection of individual circumstances and choice. Based on these three critiques, the paper then develops a framework that articulates the discourse, praxis and outcomes of meritocratic systems which undermine gender equity principles and practices. Finally, the paper draws on strategies that have attempted to redress gender inequality in order to illustrate how meritocratic systems can be imbued with, and hence directly confront, the current and historical reality of unequal gender outcomes.
McDonald et al. (Thu,) studied this question.