Member-only story
I mostly like Wharton’s website — I have linked it many times over the years — and here’s a new-ish article from them about inclusion. Cool! Now I want you to look at this paragraph within said article:
“An unqualified view of meritocracy is problematic because it perpetuates the injustice that we say we’re trying to fight against,” she said. “We have to account for the complexity of calibrating inputs, outputs, rewards and penalties, especially in light of biases, mind tricks and institutional barriers that undermine the meritorious principles we desire.”
OK, now go show that paragraph to an executive or senior decision-maker. He or she will fall asleep before he/she finishes reading it. Where is a financial acronym? Where is a number? Why are we talking about calibrating inputs and “in light of biases?” Why are discussing meritocracy twice? “Institutional barriers?”
Show me a CAGR reference, a ROI reference, a KPI reference, and by the way, why isn’t this in a deck? Why is this an article?
I’m out. Got a stand-up on Japan strategies.
Herein lies the problem.
First: what is work to a senior decision-maker?
It’s about competition, relevance, control, and markers of success. Most of those are material…
