Introduction: New Directions in Gender, Diversity and Organization Theorizing – Re‐imagining Feminist Post‐colonialism, Transnationalism and Geographies of Power

Abstract

This special issue reviews contemporary gender and diversity insights into management and organization studies (MOS). The purpose of this issue is to critically evaluate key threads and concepts contributing to academic debates in diversity, gender and feminist theorizing. This paper highlights key threads in current scholarship, including relationality, power, intersectionality and social constructionist epistemologies and, in so doing, uncovers new insights and contributions. The paper provides a model which locates different themes and 'moments' in the development of gender and diversity scholarship and acts as a heuristic device which can guide gender and diversity scholarship and assist in conceptualizing the field. Building on the key threads weaving the special issue together, the paper advances new understandings of gender and diversity through integrating feminist post-colonial scholarship, transnationalism and geographies of space and place literatures. The paper argues for scholars to 're-imagine' different possibilities for gender and diversity enquiry so as to encourage interdisciplinarity and align with social science research in contemporary critiques of globalization and global social capital in order to add richness and complexity to current theorizing. Specifically, the authors argue for MOS researchers to engage in dialogue with all global stakeholders, and they encourage cross-fertilization of theories and values between writers from both the Global North and the Global South.

Whiteness, ethnic privilege and migration: a Bourdieuian framework

“…As such this study contributes to the debate on theoretical and methodological expansions of research focusing on migration and diversity at work (Al Ariss, 2010;Al Ariss and Syed, 2011;Al Ariss et al, 2012;Metcalfe and Woodhams, 2012). It also offers new insights for research exploring the relationships between whiteness, migration and work (Dyer et al, 2010;Leonard, 2010b;2010a;McDowell et al, 2007;McDowell, 2008;Wills et al, 2010).…”

Diversity as Polyphony: Reconceptualizing Diversity Management from a Communication-Centered Perspective

“…Diversity management research includes studies from the areas of human resource management (e.g., Alcázar et al, 2013;Bell et al, 2011;Scott et al, 2011), innovation management (e.g., Bassett-Jones, 2005), or organization and management studies more generally (e.g., Cox and Blake, 1991;Francoeur et al, 2007;Siciliano, 1996). Comprehensive overviews on the subject can be found in various recent special issues of academic journals (e.g., Metcalfe and Woodhams, 2012;Nishii and Özbilgin, 2007;Zanoni et al, 2010). In the following literature review, we present and analyze the two primary streams of research on diversity management: the instrumental and the critical…”

“…In contrast to the instrumental tradition, other scholars have proposed a critical approach that takes into account the inherently contested and political character of the concept of diversity management (e.g., Metcalfe and Woodhams, 2012;Syed and Özbilgin, 2009;Tatli, 2011;Tatli and Özbilgin, 2012;Zanoni et al, 2010). Within the critical tradition, we can broadly distinguish between, on the one hand, 'radical-critical' works which tend to reject the manageability of diversity in organizational settings (e.g., Bissett, 2004;Kalonaityte, 2009;Swan, 2009) and, on the other hand, 'constructive-critical' works which follow a more modest approach.…”

The evolving field of entrepreneurial leadership: an overview

“…Elaborating on Metcalfe and Woodhams's (2012) recent review of new directions in gender, diversity and organization theorizing, Harrison et al develop a research agenda for the gendered analysis of entrepreneurial leadership, which is undertaken at three levels. At the micro level, they extend current gender research on social constructionism, critical management studies and intersectionality to contemporary entrepreneurial leadership research.…”