The role of regulatory and temporal context in the construction of diversity discourses: The case of the UK, France and Germany

Abstract

Despite growing interest in how the concept of diversity management is reinterpreted as it crosses national boundaries, there has been little study of this process in Europe. To bridge this knowledge gap, this article explores the construction of diversity discourses in the context of the UK, France and Germany. We use the discursive politics approach to investigate the ways in which the meaning of diversity is shrunk, bent and stretched. We demonstrate that the concept of diversity has no universal fixed meaning but is contextual, contested and temporal. Temporarily fixed definitions and frames of diversity are path-dependent and shaped by the regulatory context. Thus unique national histories and the context of regulation are key determinants of the ways in which the concept is redefined as it crosses national and regional borders.

How National Institutions Limit Turnaround Strategies and Human Resource Management: A Comparative Study in the Airline Industry

“…United Kingdom institutions give executives high discretion, as they are entitled to be autonomous over collective decision-making in order to enhance shareholders' wealth Hambrick, 2007, 2011). Despite various consultation processes, in liberalmarket economies such as this one (Tatli et al, 2012) there is not a partnership between management and unions (Bamber et al, 2009). Despite various consultation processes, in liberalmarket economies such as this one (Tatli et al, 2012) there is not a partnership between management and unions (Bamber et al, 2009).…”

Four approaches to accounting for diversity in global organisations

“…The second approach emphasises the impact on a wider range of stakeholders, such as the employees, communities, consumers, the environment, i.e. the triple bottom line (see also Healy, Kirton & Noon, 2010;Tatli, Vassilopoulou, Al Ariss, & Ö zbilgin, 2012). The triple bottom line approach considers not only simple profitability measures but also diversity's impact on people and the planet.…”

Universities’ pursuit of inclusion and its effects on professional staff: the case of the United Kingdom

“…On the one hand, the widening of access to HE became increasingly important, with the participation rate increasing from about 6% in 1963 to 49% by 2016 (Wyness 2010; Department for Education 2017). On the other hand, the pursuit of inclusion was expanded to cover university staff as diversity management became widely used in order to enhance egalitarian conditions in the labour market (Tatli et al 2012). More recently, the rise of public sector equality duties (the race equality duty in 2001, the disability equality duty in 2006 and the gender equality duty in 2007) have acted as purveyors of legitimacy for universities' strategising for the pursuit of demographic inclusion.…”