Meritocracy: looting money and wasting resources!

“Our people are our most important asset”, many organization say this or something close to it, to acknowledging the important role that employees play in organizations success.
Organizations, most of the time are established for profit purpose. Definition of profit depends. It may be cash oriented or attached with the facilitation of society, at large. For maximization of profit, organizations invest in various assets e.g. plant, building, material and human resources etc. Organization, carefully analyze trade-off between investment in any asset and its return. All the investment options are only beneficial and can achieve profit goal, maximization, when processed by Human, technically called human resources. Human Resource Department played (HRD) peremptory role in investing in human resource. In doing so HRD is bound to follow various established theoretical and practical rules and “Equal Opportunity” is one of them.
Unfortunately, in Pakistan, internationally recognized rule of equal opportunity is, deliberately, violated by both, for the sake of merit, public and private institutes. Term “Equal Opportunity” assets that chances for advancement should be open to everybody interested such that they have an equal chances to compete within the framework of individual goals, but present merit policy, mostly followed, is bound to overlook the rule. Why? Professor Kenneth Paul Tan at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, Singapore, answered it. Professor Lee Kuan asserts that "Meritocracy, in trying to 'isolate' merit by treating people with fundamentally unequal backgrounds as superficially the same, can be a practice that ignores and even conceals the real advantages and disadvantages that are unevenly distributed to different segments of an inherently unequal society, a practice that in fact perpetuates this fundamental inequality. In this way, those who are picked by meritocracy as having merit may already have enjoyed unfair advantages from the very beginning, ignored according to the principle of nondiscrimination."
The term “Merit”, constitute a desirable trait or ability to person or (sometime) an object. In quest for desirable trait or ability in prospective employee various organizations adopted putative merit policy consisting of hundred marks. Fifty or sixty marks are assigned to screening test conducting by various prestigious bodies viz. National Testing Service (NTS), Punjab Public Service Commission(PPSC) Federal Public Service Commission(FPSC) etc; rest of the hundred are assigned to academic grades assigned further to each academic degree or certificate. Last month for instance, NTS recruited Assistant Directors and other officer for Lahore Development Authority (LDA). NTS-LDA merit policy only assigned 5% weight-age to Bachelor degree as compare to Metric and F.Sc, assigned with 10% each. Policy makers are really inane. They don’t understand, simply that Matriculation and F.Sc is rudimentary requirement to get enrolled in the degree class. This degree actually makes the person a asset that could be sold or hired to maximize profit.
This putative merit policy also cause financial loss to unemployed and depressed youth. For instance, Punjab Education Department, recently, recruited thousand of educator form BS 9-16, through NTS. Educators merit Policy assigned only 10% weight-age to screening test, 35% weight was assigned to Metric and Fsc, 20% to Bachelor Degree and absurdly only 5% to professional qualification. Basic qualification was second class Bachelor Degree. In the screening test (that was purely academic and professional test) many high first division candidates failed to cross the qualifying threshold. Many candidates with second division or third division in Metric or F.Sc cross the threshold but suddenly, department rejected them clearly deviating from its own eligible condition without compensating for the financial loss sustained by candidates from application submission to attempt the test. Department hired the services of DVM, D-Pharmacy, engineering and agriculture degree holders. But policy makers made a big mistake intentionally to create more money and play with gloomy future of unemployed future of Pakistan. They are well aware that hired people would leave the teaching job without any reluctance, when their genuine field provided them an opportunity sooner or later.
Assigning weight to academic credential is unjustified and may prove fatal to organization and to Pakistan, in the long run. For instance, many candidates, throughout their academic career, secured A+ grades or first division or higher first division, we observed most of the time failed, even, in securing passing score in screening test conducted by prestigious bodies. For Instance last month NTS conducted initial screening test for recruitment of 132 officers in National Accountability Bureau. Many M.Phil and higher first division candidates appeared in test and failed to score, even, 50 marks out of 100. Paper was moderately though and syllabus content was consisted of mostly English grammar, analytical reasoning, IQ, and academic related questions. NTS also conducted test to recruit more than 300 Junior National Saving officers in Central Directorate of National Saving, in recent days. Basic eligibility for this job was bachelor degree with economic, state, or math. Many high first division and M.Sc Economics degree holder appeared in the test but they could not able to race with candidate with lower grade candidates. Failing candidates were good at earlier academics then why they failed at screening test. Only Meritocracy could only answers.
The gap between improved performance in present and lower grades in earlier academic career and better grades in earlier academic career and diminishing performance in present is need to be addressed on fair grounds.
There is only one reason that causes this gap. Education facilities aren’t equally available for all. Mostly people are poor. They could only afford one thing either education are livelihood. If, somehow an ardent couple bet on education for Childs, his child could not compete on grade as they are short of money for tutors, though there are some exceptions. They are simply rejected on eligibility condition, as they have a third or second division in early academic carrier, by many prestigious institute viz. State Bank of Pakistan, Zarai Taraqiati Bank Limited (ZTBL), Sui Northern Gas Pipelines Limited (SNGPL), Young Development Fellow (YDF) Of Pakistan Economic Commission etc. Why didn’t these institutes sign an agreement with Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education (BISE) to fail the lower grade students? I would like to ask a simple question to Minister of Planning Commission specially and other institutes; Sir, only the wealthy class (actually exploiting the poor people before world for gaining grants and funds) has instinct to develop the Pakistan. Are the poor child lack such instinct.
In Pakistani context, term equal opportunity could be delineated besides its general practicability in the following words: if someone has basic qualification required for the job instead of high grades should not be discouraged to apply and compete for employment in prestigious institutes like SBP, SNGPL, ZTBL, YDF etc. At recruitment stage a comprehensive test should be conducted to shortlist the candidates for any job. About 70% weight should allocated to test and 30% weight to Interview; securing highest marks combining test and interview should be inducted in institutes. If this old pathetic and farcical practice continued, this would not be mere injustice, not only once but twice, earlier at the part of government failure in providing equal education to all its citizens, than at the time of recruitment. It is acceptable factor that government is short of fund but it could be compensated by providing some relief at time of recruitment, as provided for most prestigious exam of CSS, in country.


Shafaqat Ali Chowk Sarwar Shaheed (M.Garh)