In the present research, we introduced a conceptual framework of inclusion and subsequently used this as a starting point to develop and validate a scale to measure perceptions of inclusion. Departing from existing work on inclusion and complementing this with theoretical insights from optimal distinctiveness theory and self‐determination theory, we proposed that inclusion is a hierarchical two‐dimensional concept consisting of perceptions of belonging and authenticity. In addition, we posed that in the process of inclusion, it is the group rather than the individual that has primary agency. From this conceptualization, we developed and validated the 16‐item perceived group inclusion scale (PGIS). Data from two samples supported our proposed configuration of inclusion. In addition, the PGIS appeared to be a reliable measure of inclusion and was demonstrated to possess both nomological and predictive validity. Taken together, this research contributes to the conceptual refinement of the inclusion construct and offers researchers a reliable and valid tool to conduct future inclusion research. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

In two experiments we tested how explicitly including the cultural majority group in an organization's diversity approach (all-inclusive multiculturalism) affects the extent to which majority members feel included in the organization and support organizational diversity efforts. In Study 1 we focused on prospective employees. We found that an all-inclusive diversity approach, compared with the "standard" multicultural approach in which the majority group is not explicitly made part of organizational diversity, led to higher levels of anticipated inclusion for those with a high need to belong. In Study 2 we turned to sitting organizational members. Here, we again found that an all-inclusive multicultural approach increased perceptions of inclusion, but now the effect was present regardless of individual levels of need to belong. Perceived inclusion, in turn, was positively related to majority members' support for organizational diversity efforts. Together, these findings underline the effectiveness of an all-inclusive multicultural approach towards diversity.

We examined how perceived organizational diversity approaches (colorblindness and multiculturalism) relate to affective and productive work outcomes for cultural majority and minority employees. Using structural equation modeling on data collected in a panel study among 152 native Dutch majority and 77 non-Western minority employees, we found that perceptions of a colorblind approach were most strongly related to work satisfaction and perceived innovation for majority members, while perceptions of a multicultural approach "worked best" for minority members. Moreover, these effects were fully mediated by the extent to which employees felt socially included in the organization. Thus, while inclusion is an important factor for both groups to enhance work outcomes, it is facilitated by different diversity approaches for majority and minority members.

Having a gender diverse workforce is important to organizations in many respects. Gender diversity can improve internal work processes, may enlarge the organization's external network, and can enhance the moral image of the organization (Jackson & Joshi, 2011; Phillips, Kim-Jun, & Shim, 2011). Yet, while gender diversity may offer organizations a competitive advantage, research suggests that individual employees sometimes struggle with being different from their colleagues in terms of gender (i.e., being gender dissimilar). For example, gender dissimilarity has been found to be negatively related to the extent to which employees identify with their coworkers, resulting in reduced work performance (Guillaume,

Tutors and mentors should pay more attention to the individual perceptions and problems of first and second-year students, both in the classroom and during clinical placements. Knowledge of the students' perceptions from the very beginning could be vital to study success.

Ample experimental evidence shows that negative gossip fosters cooperation in groups by increasing individuals’ reputational concerns. However, recent field studies showed that negative gossip decreases organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) among its targets (i.e., people whom gossip is about). Bridging these findings, we study the role of social inclusion in explaining how negative gossip affects targets’ engagement in OCB. Based on social exchange theory, we predict that targets of negative gossip experience low social inclusion. In turn, we propose that low social inclusion leads to low OCB of gossip targets. Results of three studies, a correlational study ( N = 563), a laboratory experiment ( N = 85), and an online scenario experiment ( N = 597), showed that being the target of negative gossip reduced social inclusion and indirectly decreased OCBs. Our multi-method approach bridges findings from research conducted in organizations and in laboratory experiments and offers a more nuanced understanding of the effects of negative gossip on targets’ behavior. We show that due to its detrimental effect on targets’ social inclusion, negative gossip may not be as effective for enabling sustainable cooperation as experimental studies claim it to be.

Many organizations have diversity statements in place in which they publicly declare their appreciation of and commitment to workforce diversity. These statements can either contain moral motives (e.g., “diversity reduces social inequalities”), business motives (e.g., “diversity enhances innovation”), or a combination of moral and business motives. In a desk study involving 182 Dutch organizations, we found that (a) private sector organizations more often than public sector organizations communicate business motives, (b) that public and private sector organizations are equally likely to communicate moral motives, and (c) that public sector organizations more frequently than private sector organizations communicate a combination of moral and business motives. Next, we used an experimental design to examine the causal influence of communicating different diversity motives on organizations' employment image (i.e., perceptions of organizational morality, competence, and attractiveness) among prospective employees (n = 393). Here, we used a scenario in which a healthcare organization was portrayed as either a public or a private sector organization and communicated either only moral motives, only business motives or a combination of moral and business motives for diversity. We found that for a public sector organization communicating moral instead of business motives for valuing diversity induced a more favorable employment image. For a private sector organization, there were no differences in employment image depending on the motive communicated. Together, these two studies shed new light on the role of diversity motives in establishing a positive employment image.

We investigated how the perception of being dissimilar to others at work relates to employees’ felt inclusion, distinguishing between surface-level and deep-level dissimilarity. In addition, we tested the indirect relationships between surface-level and deep-level dissimilarity and work-related outcomes, through social inclusion. Furthermore, we tested the moderating role of a climate for inclusion in the relationship between perceived dissimilarity and felt inclusion. We analyzed survey data from 887 employees of a public service organization. An ANOVA showed that felt inclusion was lower for individuals who perceived themselves as deep-level dissimilar compared to individuals who perceived themselves as similar, while felt inclusion did not differ among individuals who perceived themselves as surface-level similar or dissimilar. Furthermore, a moderated mediation analysis showed a negative conditional indirect relationship between deep-level dissimilarity and work-related outcomes through felt inclusion. Interestingly, while the moderation showed that a positive climate for inclusion buffered the negative relationship between deep-level dissimilarity and felt inclusion, it also positively related to feelings of inclusion among all employees, regardless of their perceived (dis)similarity. This research significantly improves our understanding of how perceived dissimilarity affects employees by distinguishing between surface-level and deep-level dissimilarity and by demonstrating the importance of a climate for inclusion.