USA 
United Kingdom
Attention, HR-related acronym enthusiasts!
There’s a new kid on the block: ‘MEI,’ short for “merit, excellence, and intelligence.”
The acronym, coined by Alexandr Wang, co-founder and CEO of Scale AI, more or less boils down to the first letter. According to Wang, meritocracy is at the heart of his company’s hiring decisions.
“That means we hire only the best person for the job, we seek out and demand excellence, and we unapologetically prefer people who are very smart,” he writes in a blog post about MEI.
Wang says this approach to talent has pushed the company to its achievements including partnerships with OpenAI and the Department of Defense. The acronym has also been hailed by the usual crowd of anti-DEI proponents, including Elon Musk and Brian Armstrong, CEO of Coinbase.
High praise indeed, for the hiring strategy summarized succinctly by a neat play on the infamous DEI contraction. Unfortunately, despite (some) valuable points, Wang’s MEI model has missed the point.
M for missing the point?
Wang does not explicitly describe MEI as an alternative to DEI – and points out that Scale AI does not “unfairly stereotype, tokenize, or otherwise treat anyone as a member of a demographic group rather than as an individual.”
He also states that there is a common misconception that meritocracy conflicts with diversity. “A hiring process based on merit will naturally yield a variety of backgrounds, perspectives,” he adds.
Where Wang, Musk, and other critics miss the point is their staunch belief that meritocratic hiring could be achieved without DEI. That before the acceleration of diversity and inclusion in corporate America, hiring was based entirely on merit. That there is an Eden of unbiased hiring waiting just over the horizon, if we can only rid ourselves of this infernal DEI discourse.
But the very reason for the existence of DEI programs, designed to create a business environment where everyone has an equal opportunity to work, thrive, and progress, is that without these considerations our hiring practices are unmeritocratic.
For example, Wang believes that replacing DEI with MEI allows companies to hire select the best candidates “without bias in any direction.”
But whether Wang likes it or not, humans do carry bias, and it’s worrying that the CEO of a company powering the AI revolution does not appear to recognize that.
AI in Hiring: Trends, Insights and Predictions
Meritocracy can’t exist without DEI
Wang’s pursuit of a meritocratic future is honorable, and one that all employers should aspire to. It is, as he says “good for business and the right thing to do,” and much of his blog contains the same rationale shared by many HR and DEI leaders.
However, he has fallen short at the final line of reasoning—mistaking DEI for a (political) agenda that will only benefit a handful of demographic groups and disadvantage others, rather than creating a level playing field for all.
There is no escaping the fact that certain demographic groups have undoubtedly had it better than others throughout corporate American history.
Take Wang and Scale AI’s belief that “people should be judged by the content of their character — and, as colleagues, be additionally judged by their talent, skills, and work ethic.”
It’s completely valid, but removing DEI will, if anything, work against creating this valuable goal. For those groups who have been systemically disadvantaged not because their talents, skill, and work ethic, but because of their demographics, scrapping DEI would only reinstate these biases.
Perhaps it can be attributed to a simple misconception about what DEI actually means, and what companies who embrace DEI are trying to achieve. If MEI instead stood for meritocracy, equity, and inclusion, it wouldn’t be a far cry from DEI itself.
But one thing Wang did get right is his rebuttal of the notion that meritocracy conflicts with diversity. MEI cannot replace DEI – it needs to exist.
John