Entry Instance

HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept

{
    "id": 1493149,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1493149/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 467,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Molo, UDA",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. Kuria Kimani",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": " It is no more than 30 percent, but the argument still surfaces. What happens when you have more than 30 per cent of people from the same community who are qualified for a position and the rest do not? That is why I was talking about the tricky balance between meritocracy and diversity. We were talking about critical mass theory. The author says that corporate boards that govern structures become more effective and innovative when they are diverse enough to allow for a valid perspective. This shows that there is merit in ensuring deliberate action on diversity in our workforce. Even though research has shown that merit is what drives an institution, there is merit in making sure that there is diversity in that workforce. That brings us to a more effective organisation. Meritocracy promotes efficiency by selecting qualified individuals based on skills and achievements, but diversity fosters representation, equity, inclusivity and constitutes innovation and robust decision-making. In this case, research has shown that, in as much as we want to appoint based on merit, there is merit in ensuring diversity in a particular workforce. Therefore, this gives us a balance between the argument that was raised by my colleague, Hon. Kawanjiku, on the population data and how that should reflect in those particular institutions. At the same time, academicians also ask about merit. If I conduct an interview and the person who scores 80 per cent and becomes number one is from a majority community and the person who comes second scores 60 per cent, both of them are qualified. However, the second one is from a minority community. Then, inclusivity and diversity tell us that we should give the opportunity to the person who is number two, although the marks are lower than the first one. This is where we need a lot of wisdom in navigating this complexity. How do we ensure that we reward meritocracy and, at the same time, ensure there is diversity? Once we achieve this thin line, we should ensure that we have efficient workforce, inclusivity in our workforce, and there is ownership by decisions that are made by those institutions. There is nobody who will feel left behind, whether he or she is from majority or minority communities. The electronic version of the Official Hansard Report is for information purposesonly. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor."
}