Four approaches to accounting for diversity in global organisations

Özbilgin, Mustafa F.; Tatlι, Ahu; Ipek, Gulce; Sameer, Muhammad

doi:10.1016/j.cpa.2015.05.006

Cited by 31 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 72 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Should these threats be realized, diversity will be left in a toxic context? We define the toxic triangle of diversity as the macro, meso and micro environment of the organization which (a) lacks supportive legal mechanisms at the macro national level, as cautioned by Klarsfeld et al (2012), (b) relies on voluntarism, in which organizations are trusted for diversity interventions at the meso organizational level (Özbilgin & Tatli, 2011), and (c) lacks supportive discourses for diversity, as highlighted by Özbilgin, Tatli, İpek and Sameer (2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most theoretical frames that shape our understanding of DM are developed in contexts where there are strong equality regulations and laws and normative pressures, such as business case arguments or social pressures, to recognize and manage diversity. Even in these virtuous contexts, scholars identify a gap between organizational discourses and practices of DM (Tatli, Vassilopoulou, Al Ariss, & Özbilgin, 2012; Özbilgin, Tatli, Ipek, & Sameer, 2016). As such, there is a need for studies focussing on the differences between practices and discourses of workforce diversity in different regulatory contexts of diversity (Tatli, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What happens to diversity at work in the context of a toxic triangle? Accounting for the gap between discourses and practices of diversity management

Küskü

Araci

Özbilgin

2020

Human Res Mgmt Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With liberalization, the responsibility for the management of diversity has shifted internationally from the state to organizations. Countries that are prepared for this transition have developed legal measures and supportive discourses to hold organizations responsible for diversity.We provide evidence from a country that has not undertaken such a transition and has neither protective laws nor supportive arguments for diversity. Drawing on a survey with 792 employees from Turkey, our field study examines the awareness and embeddedness of diversity, by considering the gap between discourses and diversity practices in organizations. In this study, we introduce the concept of the toxic triangle, which includes (a) hyperderegulation of diversity, where the legal measures of equality are absent, (b) voluntarism without responsibilization of organizations, and (c) lack of supportive discourses for diversity. Our study shows that diversity is left unattended in the context of a toxic triangle. K E Y W O R D S deregulation, discourse-practice gap, diversity management, human resource management, toxic triangle of diversity, Turkey, voluntarism, workforce diversity Abbreviations: CEDAW, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women; DM, diversity management; HRM, human resource management.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What happens to diversity at work in the context of a toxic triangle? Accounting for the gap between discourses and practices of diversity management

Küskü

Araci

Özbilgin

2020

Human Res Mgmt Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since diversity developed as an autonomous research field in the 1990s, a polarisation has emerged between mainstream approaches to diversity and critical approaches (Tatli, 2011). The mainstream approaches focus on the business case arguments about the positive performance outcomes of diversity, and they see diversity management as the relatively straightforward and uncontroversial application of ‘tools’ and best practice initiatives to unleash potential (Cox and Blake, 1991; Özbilgin et al, 2014). By contrast, critical approaches argue that the diversity management practices and guides recommended by the mainstream diversity literature have not proved to be effective in achieving greater inclusion of disadvantaged groups, mainly because the practice of diversity management is problematic, contested and throws up many dilemmas (Ghorashi and Sabelis, 2013; Janssens and Zanoni, 2014; Wrench, 2005; Zanoni et al, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dominant, hidden and forbidden sensemaking: The politics of ideology and emotions in diversity management

Mikkelsen

Wåhlin

2019

Organization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An important but understudied issue in the study of organisational sensemaking concerns how power and politics influence sensemaking processes, specifically the political struggles immanent in collective processes of meaning construction and organising. When people are located at different areas and levels in the organisational hierarchy and they draw on different experiences and areas of knowledge, they often develop conflicting interpretations, which may compete for legitimacy. To capture the dimension of power in sensemaking, we combine the sensemaking perspective with a poststructuralist feminist conception of power, as this allows us to explore the mechanisms through which some sensemaking becomes legitimate whereas others remain marginalised. We specifically explore the ideological resources that shape the terrain within which a diverse workforce interpret, enact and emotionally experience diversity management in a local branch of a global retail chain store. The study used in-depth interviews and participant observations to provide insight into the complex mechanisms that are employed to control the definition of a specific situation, mapping out a hierarchical system of dominant, hidden and forbidden sensemaking of diversity management. The article concludes that the political processes of sensemaking deeply implicate emotions as a central force that facilitates the ongoing reproduction of social order. Our study, therefore, highlights the need to conceive of sensemaking, power and emotions as a complex nexus of the micro-political practices in which certain terrains of action unfold, allowing collective organising to occur.

show abstract

“…Attitudes to, and perceptions of, atypicality vary across institutional fields, which explains why an atypical leader may have more opportunities in certain institutional fields, such as the artistic field in the UK (McRobbie ), which has more female leaders and leaders from unprivileged backgrounds, compared to the field of politics which is male‐dominated (Özbilgin et al . ). Inequalities have institutional origins which can be traced in the formation of institutional fields, especially when power structures and control mechanisms are designed and controlled by privileged groups in order to ensure their dominance and to reinforce perceptions about their high status and authority (Ridgeway ).…”

Section: The Emergence Of An Atypical Leadermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…More broadly, organizations which are committed to diversity practices can enjoy benefits in terms of: organizational performance (Özbilgin et al . , , ); creativity and competitive advantage (Bassett‐Jones ); job satisfaction and work‐group performance (Pitts ); and reductions in employee absenteeism and turnover (Peretz et al . ).…”

Section: The Emergence Of An Atypical Leadermentioning

confidence: 99%

The Duality of an Atypical Leader in Diversity Management: The Legitimization and Delegitimization of Diversity Beliefs in Organizations

Samdanis

Özbilgin

2019

Int J Management Reviews

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An atypical leader is often celebrated as an individual who is likely to support workforce diversity in organizations. Yet the verity of the assumption that an atypical leader will invariably promote workforce diversity remains underexplored. In this paper, we question this assumption and demonstrate the dualities of an atypical leader in legitimizing and delegitimizing workforce diversity. We define and examine the concept of atypicality among leaders, in terms of how they emerge, who they are (dispositions), what they say (discourses) and what they do (performative acts). We introduce a conceptual framework that maps out the emergence and constitution of an atypical leader, as well as their impact on diversity management within an organization. Our analysis incorporates the concept of habitus (class-specific and reflexive), in order to reveal the dualities of an atypical leader which determine the management of diversity within an organization and cause continuity and change in diversity beliefs.This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

show abstract

Four approaches to accounting for diversity in global organisations

Cited by 31 publications

References 72 publications

What happens to diversity at work in the context of a toxic triangle? Accounting for the gap between discourses and practices of diversity management

What happens to diversity at work in the context of a toxic triangle? Accounting for the gap between discourses and practices of diversity management

Dominant, hidden and forbidden sensemaking: The politics of ideology and emotions in diversity management

The Duality of an Atypical Leader in Diversity Management: The Legitimization and Delegitimization of Diversity Beliefs in Organizations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About