Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
Alternativ können Sie versuchen, selbst über Ihren lokalen Bibliothekskatalog auf das gewünschte Dokument zuzugreifen.
Bei Zugriffsproblemen kontaktieren Sie uns gern.
In: Philosophy & public affairs, Band 7, Heft 3, S. 206-223
ISSN: 0048-3915
Sometimes a person has abilities & interests enabling him or her to fill a given job, position, or office better than other available persons. Do such abilities & interests constitute a basis for claiming the more capable person merits the job? Does the fact that someone has the special abilities & interests needed for superior performance of a job of considerable social importance allow the person to lay legitimate claim to greater rewards for the job? These questions are discussed by examining the notion of a meritocracy, a social order built around a particular notion of merit. A meritocracy is taken to be a society whose basic institutions are governed by a job placement principle, a principle specifying conditions of opportunity, & reward schedule. It is argued that a macroproductivity principle (job assignments made by selecting a member of an equivalence class of maximally productive arrays of job assignments) fits better with the rationale for looking at the connection between abilities & job performance than a microproductivity principle (selecting the applicant who can best perform the given job from among those desiring the job). The macro- & microprinciples both give rise only to weak claims on job placement, contrary to the mode of argument of most meritocrats. This consequence has implications for the issue of affirmative action: merit claims, since they are based on efficiency, may be more readily overridden by claims of justice. Merit claims to jobs do not imply merit claims to particular rewards, & meritocratic job placement coupled with inegalitarian reward schedules gives rise to serious objections based on considerations of justice. Meritocracy can avoid these objections only if it is coupled with egalitarian reward principles. AA.
In: The political quarterly, Band 85, Heft 1, S. 37-42
ISSN: 1467-923X
Meritocracy has become the creed of all three British political parties. There is a consensus that progress towards it has stalled. In fact, it is doubtful how widespread the advance to meritocracy ever was and how far short of achieving it Britain fell. In any case, meritocracy, if it is not accompanied by greater equality of outcome, would not promote a happier society. It would make the rich more unrestrained in their greed and the poor more miserable thinking their poverty their own fault.
In: Haus Curiosities
Intro -- ESTABLISHMENT AND MERITOCRACY -- Prologue -- Contents -- The Twin Themes -- Revival and Rise -- A New Landscape? -- A Secret Establishment? -- The Power of a Word -- Catching a Mood -- An Enduring Impact -- Did the Meritocracy Rise? -- The Prototype Meritocracy in Trouble? -- The Pursuit of a 'Well-Tempered Meritocracy' -- A Very British Pursuit -- Conceptual Vitality? -- Notes -- By the same Author
In this book Jo Littler argues that meritocracy is the key cultural means of legitimation for contemporary neoliberal culture - and that whilst it promises opportunity, it in fact creates new forms of social division. Against Meritocracy is split into two parts. Part I explores the genealogies of meritocracy within social theory, political discourse and working cultures. It traces the dramatic U-turn in meritocracy's meaning, from socialist slur to a contemporary ideal of how a society should be organised. Part II uses a series of case studies to analyse the cultural pull of popular 'parables of progress', from reality TV to the super-rich and celebrity CEOs, from social media controversies to the rise of the 'mumpreneur'. Paying special attention to the role of gender, 'race' and class, this book provides new conceptualisations of the meaning of meritocracy in contemporary culture and society
In: forthcoming in: Journal of Economic Literature
SSRN
In: Dissent: a journal devoted to radical ideas and the values of socialism and democracy, Band 47, Heft 2, S. 113-116
ISSN: 0012-3846
Phillips-Fein reviews 'The Big Test: The Secret History of the American Meritocracy' by Nicholas Lemann.
SSRN
In: Journal of Economic Theory, Volume 201, April 2022, 105414
SSRN
Working paper
In: The political quarterly, Band 91, Heft 2, S. 373-378
ISSN: 1467-923X
AbstractSixty years after its publication, Michael Young's The Rise of the Meritocracy remains one of the most important texts for understanding the changing intellectual politics of postwar Britain. Young's fictional vision of a meritocratic society explores the consequences of a society where each citizen is judged according to the formula 'I.Q. + Effort = Merit'. The successful meritocrats hoard ever‐greater rewards for themselves, crystallising into a rigid and repressive elite who rule over an increasingly powerless and depressed underclass. While the concept has evolved and adapted, the language of meritocracy is one of the great survivors of postwar British politics. In an age characterised by the rise of populist leaders and movements, as well as a backlash against educated 'liberal elites', revisiting, reinterpreting and re‐evaluating Young's influential satire and the central place the concept of meritocracy occupies in the history of postwar Britain has never been more important.
Cover -- Contents -- I. Introduction -- II. Literature Review -- III. Baseline Model -- A. Set-Up -- B. Equilibrium -- C. Limits of Meritocracy -- D. Multiple Prize Levels -- IV. Heterogeneous Contestants -- V. Discrete Number of Contestants -- A. 2-Player Lazear-Rosen Contests -- B. n-Player Tullock Contests -- VI. Conclusion -- References -- Appendix -- A Online Appendix: -- 1. Proofs -- A. Baseline Model -- B. Heterogeneous Contestants -- C. Discrete Number of Contestants -- 2. Allowing for Concave Costs and ɳ[sub(c"/c")] [omitted] [sup(-1)] -- A. Model and Results -- B. Proofs -- Figures -- 1. Marginal Benefit versus Marginal Cost -- 2. Best Response as Function of σ -- 3. Equilibrium as Function of σ -- 4. Locus of Optimal Meritocracy and Number of Prizes -- 5. Example 2 -- 6. Interior Best Responses.
We study career choice when competition for promotion is a contest. A more meritocratic profession always succeeds in attracting the highest ability types, whereas a profession with superior promotion benefits attracts high types only if the hazard rate of the noise in performance evaluation is strictly increasing. Raising promotion opportunities produces no systematic effect on the talent distribution, while a higher base wage attracts talent only if total promotion opportunities are sufficiently plentiful.
BASE
SSRN