Send us Fan Mail

Is engineering really a meritocracy?

We’re taught that hard work, strong performance, and clear metrics determine who advances. But what if the system isn’t as objective as it seems?

In this episode of ENGINEERING CH∆NGE®, I break down how “merit” is often interpreted, or even manufactured, not measured and how the systems we trust to evaluate performance can actully distort it.

In this episode:

•  Why performance without context is incomplete and often misinterpreted.
• How shifting standards and uneven scrutiny reshape who advances.
• What happens when metrics become targets and start driving behavior instead of reflecting impact.

Through real-world examples - from internship decisions to NSF review panels - this episode reveals how evaluation systems can manufacture merit instead of measure it.

If you’ve ever questioned how decisions really get made in academia, engineering, or leadership, this conversation will change how you see performance, potential, and fairness.

Ask yourself:
Are we rewarding true impact, or just what’s easiest to measure?

Grab a latte and listen.

If this conversation resonates with you, follow ENGINEERING CH∆NGE® and leave a five-star review to help more engineers and leaders join the conversation.

Visit the ENGINEERING CH∆NGE® podcast website to learn more and to request a free copy of my new brief, Engineering for Society.

Support the show

ENGINEERING CHΔNGE® is a registered trademark held by Dr. Yvette E. Pearson for producing and providing podcasts.