Equal opportunity

Part of a series on
Liberalism
History
Principles
Philosophers
Politicians
Organizations
Regional variants
Related topics
Schools

Equal opportunity is a state of fairness in which individuals are treated similarly, unhampered by artificial barriers, prejudices, or preferences, except when particular distinctions can be explicitly justified.[1] For example, the intent of equal employment opportunity is that the important jobs in an organization should go to the people who are most qualified – persons most likely to perform ably in a given task – and not go to persons for reasons deemed arbitrary or irrelevant, such as circumstances of birth, upbringing, having well-connected relatives or friends,[2] religion, sex,[3] ethnicity,[3] race, caste,[4] or involuntary personal attributes such as disability, age.[4][5]

According to proponents of the concept, chances for advancement should be open to everybody without regard for wealth, status, or membership in a privileged group.[6][7] The idea is to remove arbitrariness from the selection process and base it on some "pre-agreed basis of fairness, with the assessment process being related to the type of position"[2] and emphasizing procedural and legal means.[4] Individuals should succeed or fail based on their efforts and not extraneous circumstances such as having well-connected parents.[8] It is opposed to nepotism[2] and plays a role in whether a social structure is seen as legitimate.[2][4][9]

The concept is applicable in areas of public life in which benefits are earned and received such as employment and education, although it can apply to many other areas as well. Equal opportunity is central to the concept of meritocracy.[10]

There are two major types of equality:[11] formal equality, the individual merit-based comparison of opportunity, and substantive equality, which moves away from individual merit-based comparison towards group equality of outcomes.

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference twsL19 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ a b c d Cite error: The named reference twsH11 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  3. ^ a b Yo Jackson, ed. (2006), Encyclopedia of multicultural psychology, Sage Publications, ISBN 1-4129-0948-1, retrieved September 12, 2011
  4. ^ a b c d Cite error: The named reference twsL13 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  5. ^ Kamarck, Kristy N. "Diversity, Inclusion, and Equal Opportunity in the Armed Services: Background and Issues for Congress" (PDF). eCommons. Cornell University Library. p. 42. Retrieved November 7, 2021.
  6. ^ John W. Gardner (1984), Excellence: Can we be equal and excellent too?, Norton, p. 47, ISBN 0-393-31287-9, retrieved September 8, 2011
  7. ^ "Gender Equality". www.un.org. December 16, 2015. Retrieved October 4, 2020.
  8. ^ Valentino Dardanoni, University of Palermo, Gary S. Fields, Cornell University, John E. Roemer, Yale University, Maria Laura Sánchez Puerta, The World Bank (2006), "How Demanding Should Equality of Opportunity Be, and How Much Have We Achieved?", Cornell University – Digital Commons ILR, retrieved July 24, 2012, Agreement is widespread that equality of opportunity holds in a society if the chances that individuals have to succeed depend only on their efforts and not on extraneous circumstances.{{citation}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  9. ^ Marjorie Conley (September 9, 2003). "Sciences Po – an elite institution's introspection on its power, position and worth in French society". portfolio. Retrieved September 12, 2011. created new entrance criteria for students coming from less economically favored social strata.
  10. ^ Crossman, Ashley. "Understanding Meritocracy From a Sociological Perspective". ThoughtCo. Retrieved October 4, 2020.
  11. ^ Cite error: The named reference EU was invoked but never defined (see the help page).