The im-/possibility of hybrid inclusion: Disrupting the ‘happy inclusion’ story with the case of the Greenlandic Police Force

Abstract

The notion of uniqueness, as articulated at the centre of most organisational inclusion literature, is inextricably tied to Western-centric idea(l)s of the autonomous, individual and self-sufficient subject, stripped of historical inequalities and relational embeddedness. Following a critical inclusion agenda and seeking alternatives to this predominant view, we apply a Bhabhaian postcolonial lens to the ethnographic study of organisational efforts to include indigenous Kalaallit people in the Greenlandic Police Force. Greenland has home rule, but is still part of the Kingdom of Denmark and is subject to Danish defence policy and the police force. With Bhabha’s notion of mimicry, we explore how police officers, through performing ‘Danish’ (Western) culture and professionalism, both confirm and resist colonial stereotypes and even open up pathways towards hybridity. Building on the officers’ experiences, we introduce the term ‘hybrid inclusion’ by which we emphasise two interrelated dimensions necessary for advancing critical inclusion studies: first, a certain understanding of the to-be-included subject as fluid, emergent and thus ontologically singular but at the same time relationally embedded in a collective colonial past and present; second, organisational practices for inclusivity that address and work with the actual impossibility of a ‘happy inclusion story’, free of contradictions and conflicts.

Doing inclusion as counter-conduct: Navigating the paradoxes of organizing for refugee and migrant inclusion

“…We propose this perspective to complement existing theory on the dynamics of power and resistance in organizational practices of inclusion, particularly in the context of refugee and migrant inclusion (Ghorashi and Ponzoni, 2014; Ponzoni et al, 2017; Romani et al, 2018; Tomlinson and Egan, 2002). Theorizing the doing of inclusion as counter-conduct draws attention to the non-discursive, micro-physical, and practical dimensions of normalizing power in the “asymmetrical includer-included relationships” (Dobusch et al, 2021: 313) that refugee and migrant inclusion arguably involves. Prior research has largely attributed the paradoxical outcomes of contemporary western refugee inclusion programs to the normalizing effects of discursive power that operates through culturalist and assimilationist discourses on refugees and migration as “structures of dominance” (Ghorashi and Ponzoni, 2014: 161) that constitute hierarchical power relations between refugees and the host population.…”

“…In building our theoretical perspective, we position our article within the emerging literature on critical diversity and inclusion studies (Adamson et al, 2021; Dobusch et al, 2021; Ghorashi and Sabelis, 2013), engaging particularly with the emerging research on power asymmetries in refugee and migrant inclusion that examines the unintended, paradoxical, and ambiguous outcomes of inclusion programs as discursive effects of normalizing power (Ghorashi and Ponzoni, 2014; Ortlieb et al, 2021; Ponzoni et al, 2017). Our aim is to advance knowledge within this literature by proposing a theoretical perspective on “doing inclusion” as counter-conduct (Foucault, 2007: 193) and resistance against the pastoral government of individualization that is practiced within the “asymmetrical includer-included relationships” (Dobusch et al, 2021: 313) that refugee and migrant inclusion involves. In the following sections, we elaborate on this perspective.…”

“…Though a broad consensus seems to exist on the importance of promoting inclusion in organizations, critical diversity and inclusion scholars have recently called attention to the ambivalent or paradoxical effects of diversity and inclusion programs, arguing that many well-intended efforts that aim at equality and inclusion in organizations simply fail or end up perpetuating exclusion and inequality in the workplace (Dobusch et al, 2021; Ortlieb et al, 2021; Ponzoni et al, 2017). Specifically, initiatives that aim to promote the inclusion of refugees and migrants seem to risk being complicit in what Romani et al (2018: 371) called benevolent discrimination : well-intended efforts to address discrimination that constructs migrants and refugees as inferior, dependent, and non-autonomous, and in need of help within a hierarchical order that is taken for granted.…”

“…We argue that despite the increasing scholarly disquiet about the power asymmetries that migrant and refugee-related inclusion programs and efforts seem to be plagued with, we still know relatively little about how power and resistance operate in these contexts. Hence, in this article, our aim is to advance knowledge of the practices and micro-mechanisms through which power relations within the “asymmetrical includer-included relationships” (Dobusch et al, 2021: 313) are produced, problematized, and altered. More specifically, our aim is to better understand how individuals and organizations try to do things differently and struggle with the mechanisms of pastoral power through which the unintended and paradoxical outcomes of organizational inclusion efforts, such as benevolent discrimination, are brought about.…”

Creating inclusivity through boundary work? Zooming in on low-wage service sector work

“…Thereby – one would assume – a win–win situation for minority as well as majority employees can be created, as everyone is able to develop their full potential (e.g. Ferdman and Deane, 2014; Mor Barak, 2016; Nishii, 2013; Shore et al, 2011, 2018; compare to Dobusch et al, 2021).…”