Reconceptualising merit in the public sector: Introducing a new typology

Abstract The merit principle is used by governments to ensure fairness and transparency in recruitment, promotion, and career development to safeguard capability and political neutrality. Merit is traditionally conceptualised as characteristics an individual possesses, which typically include education, work experience, and achievements. Other characteristics, such as diversity and lived experience, are excluded. However, recent legislative amendments move towards a collective construction of merit, underpinned by aims to increase diversity. We compare merit protection frameworks in Aotearoa New Zealand, and Queensland and the Australian Capital Territory in Australia, as they offer different conceptions of the merit principle. We assess these frameworks through a diversity and equity lens to show how individual, group, and collective ideas of merit are represented. We find a distinct shift from merit as an individual characteristic, to one based more on collective notions, underpinned by diversity. We present this analysis within a new typology to aid understanding of the profound shift currently occurring, which can shape the implementation of the merit principle and how recruitment and promotion processes are undertaken in public sectors. Points for practitioners Conceptions of the merit principle are changing, from exclusively assessing individual skills, experience, and achievements to recognising that a ‘meritorious’ candidate can be assessed across a continuum of individual characteristics, fit (suitability), organisational workforce needs, and social outcome concerns. ‘Suitability’ is an emerging concept which complements the merit principle. This concept recognises that the traditional ‘best qualified person’ based on individual skill may not be the most suitable when considered in the context of fitting into the organisation and achieving its service goals. Recruiting for suitability is dependent on changing human resource processes, which include assessing candidates more holistically, undertaking workforce planning, developing new ways of assessing candidates, and changing understandings of merit.