IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/gender/v33y2026i5p1997-2006.html

Integrating Merit and Equality to Address Gender Inequality at Work

Author

Listed:
  • Paula McDonald
  • Gill Kirton
  • Diane van den Broek

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Paula McDonald & Gill Kirton & Diane van den Broek, 2026. "Integrating Merit and Equality to Address Gender Inequality at Work," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(5), pages 1997-2006, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:gender:v:33:y:2026:i:5:p:1997-2006
    DOI: 10.1111/gwao.70139
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.70139
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/gwao.70139?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:gender:v:33:y:2026:i:5:p:1997-2006. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0968-6673 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.