Understanding 'Diversity in Organizations' Paradigmatically and Methodologically

Abstract

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. In this dissertation project, which is planned to be completed by the first half of 2006, I have attempted to describe, understand and analyse a process of diversity production at a large manufacturing company, which is located in Sweden and owned by a large American company (for the reason of confidentiality the name of the studied company, which is a large, technical-oriented company, has been changed and some of the information is modified, while another cannot be offered because it would expose the company. The studied manufacturing company will from now be called Diversico). Terms of use: Documents inMy ambition with this paper is to call attention to different paradigmatical and methodological ways of understanding and studying "diversity in organizations". A starting-point for my discussion here is an assumption that researchers, by exploring different social phenomena (including "diversity in organizations"), bring their different sets of assumptions to what the studied phenomenon is (or could be) but also at the same time make assumptions on what organizations are (or could be). In other words, researchers, by studying "diversity in organizations" (as well as other social phenomena) construct ideas of diversity by positioning this phenomenon differently, asking different questions or designing research projects differently. In that sense I try to actively engage in both showing some benefits and limits in the present literature and searching for new theoretical and methodological possibilities. In that sense, I give some empirical illustrations inspired by one of these other possibilities. More concretely, I show how my study fulfils images of diversity as actively produced and positioned significant issues, and as domination of particular sectional interests. Furthermore I give illustrations of universalization and naturalization of some aspects of diversity, as identified in the studied process of diversity production at the manufacturing company.

Regulation of diversity through discipline: Practices of inclusion and exclusion in boxing

“…Foucault moved away from the assumption that power seemed to constitute individuals, without there being much opportunity to resist power, to an assumption that individuals have room to refuse the regulation of apparatuses of power (Moss, 1998: 5). Construction and management of diversity should therefore be studied as ‘a process of struggle over conflicting ideas and interests’ (Omanovic, 2006: 84). The regulation of diversity can therefore be seen as the incorporation of a continuum of ‘unity and diversity’ that are influenced by existing power relations.…”

Constructing diversity in a multicultural workgroup

“…Against to that positivistic perspective of diversity, scholars in critical (e.g. Janssens and Zanoni, 2005;Zanoni et al, 2010;Omanovic, 2006;Tatli and Özbilgin, 2012) and social constructionism (e.g. Brannen and Salk, 2000;Ely and Thomas, 2001;Ailon-Soudan and Kunda, 2003) take an anti-essentialist perspective: they argue that people's identity is a dynamic and not static concept, and categories of differences constituting the diversity are social constructed, context-specific and time-dependent (Triandis, 1996;Nkomo and Cox, 1996).…”

“…Homan et al, 2010). This research on diversity effects is linked with the conceptualization of diversity as a static and stable concept (Omanovic, 2006;Zanoni et. al., 2010).…”

“…The inquiry aim in positivistic research is to make predictions. This aim lead researchers to operationalize and objectify diversity because they want to be able to measure the effects of diversity in workrelated outcomes and processes (Omanovic, 2006). Scholars in positivistic research, therefore, view diversity as static, fixed concept.…”

“…The dynamic view of diversity appears in two paradigms: social constructionism and critical realism. Although social constructionism and critical realism have different ontology (see section 1.2 of thesis for a discussion on this), they share the same non-positivistic, non-static view of diversity because they both see diversity as a concept with dynamic nature (Omanovic, 2006;Zanoni et al, 2010). In the dynamic perspective of diversity scholars do not focus on the effects of diversity but on the ways in which diversity is constructed in a specific social context (Omanovic, 2006).…”