Vice Chancellors, Presidents, or Rectors occupy elite public positions in universities. A cursory glance of the roll call of names across elite universities ('top 100') globally reveals the dominance of white males. Research has given us some insight into the profiles of these senior leaders and their selection, but not with a particular focus on elite universities. Our theoretical disquiet in this conceptual article is linked with an enduring unease that processes of formal and informal merit work to reproduce, not eradicate, deep inequities in the recruitment and appointment of Vice Chancellors, Presidents, or Rectors at elite universities. In this article, we suggest that we need to rethink and reframe how we approach equality, diversity and inclusion in higher education leadership at elite universities We propose a different set of questions need to be asked; questions about performative understandings of merit and meritocracy. We argue that underpinning rhetoric of meritocracy works as a visible and audible performative tool that offers an appearance of a just, fair, and neutral process, yet reinforces the sameness of leadership. In querying discourses of merit and troubling the façade of diversity we take an intersectional approach, moving beyond single and conventional forms of discrimination. This conceptual paper draws upon a range of literatures and illustrative biographical examples to highlight the critical importance of an intersectional analysis that situates merit as form of advantage/disadvantage precisely because of the way in which these discourses are framed and enacted.