CHIANG MAI, Thailand -- Quite often the terms "seniority" and "meritocracy" are used -- or rather "misused" -- antithetically as if they were in a 16th-century arena of charging helmeted knights, where the space occupied by one is totally denied to the other. In such thinking, the former term is usually associated with conservatism, rigidity and immobility, with perhaps an allowance for experience; while the latter connotes reform, dynamism and vigorous forward movement, with an assured abundance of talent.
This being the general perception, I have often wondered whether we really live in such a monolithic world and where lies the legitimacy of such stereotypes. It goes without saying that my personal skepticism in this matter has to be filtered through concepts with different interpretations and levels of acceptance or rejection, according to various societal frameworks: In many Asian countries, for instance, hierarchy and Confucian order are valued more than in the United States, where talent and efficiency assume a primordial role.
Consider these extreme positions: