Meritocracy, Education and Occupational Attainment: What Do Employers Really See as Merit?

Sociological research consistently demonstrates that in modern industrial societies significant inequalities remain in opportunity chances for members of different social classes. The Merit Selection (MS) hypothesis predicts that the allocation of occupational positions in modern post-industrial societies should be based increasingly on meritocratic principles: ‘merit’ is defined as IQ plus effort, and educational qualifications are seen to provide a useful proxy measure of these characteristics. However, merit variables can only partially explain the inequalities in chances of access to occupational positions. This paper is an attempt to find out what employers are really looking for when they hire employees, in addition to merit as proxied by educational qualifications. Instead of assuming that IQ and effort, whether in themselves or as mediated through educational qualifications, are the only things of importance to employers, I ask just what other factors are involved in ‘merit’ as employers define it. This paper presents results from a content analysis of 955 British newspaper job advertisements. While formal educational qualifications are important to employers, other ‘non-meritocratic’ criteria also have a significant role. Some of these non-meritocratic characteristics may relate more to ascribed characteristics than achieved, and in many cases may be more accessible to particular people or groups in society. Overall, this research suggests that in some cases other types of characteristics may be as important as educational qualifications. This is consistent with recent results that suggest that while there may have been a ‘tightening bond’ between educational attainment and occupational attainment in the mid twentieth century, the role of education is now, if anything, becoming less important.