Diversity as Resistance and Recuperation: Critical Theory, Post-Structuralist Perspectives and Workplace Diversity

La diversité, un levier de performance : plaidoyer pour un management innovateur et créatif

“…A savoir, la reconnaissance d'identités considérées comme étant centrales ou marginales (Meyerson & Scully, 1995). A cet égard, la diversité peut être « résistée » et le pouvoir récupéré ou retiré par les personnes le détenant au travers de stratégies telles que la cooptation, la marginalisation ou la « poudre aux yeux » (Jones & Stablein, 2006). Ce mouvement constant de résistance entre individus centraux détenteurs du pouvoir et individus marginalisés amène à inscrire l'appréhension des différences au sein des organisations dans une dimension politique (par le biais de pratiques de management proches des théories radicales du post-colonialisme ou des problématiques anti-racistes ou féministes).…”

Diversity Research and Policy : A Multidisciplinary Exploration

“…In line with their observations and recommendations, some diversity scholars took a ' critical turn' and started exploring and questioning some of diversity management's practices, assumptions and objectives (Lorbiecki & Jack 2000, Nkomo & Stewart 2006. Underlying a large number of these critical accounts is the concern that diversity management -despite its commitment to hire and value ' diverse people' and its appearance of concern with issues such as fairness and equality -will not lead to real, fundamental change (Ahmed 2007, Jones & Stablein 2006, Lorbiecki & Jack 2000, Nkomo & Stewart 2006. Rather, di-versity management aims to use people seen as ' diverse' and their ' diversity' in an economic way, and welcomes diversity as long as it serves its instrumental goals and enriches the (dominant centre of the) organisation.…”

“…As already mentioned, some authors question whether diversity approaches and practices, inspired by demographic evolutions and cultural assumptions from the US, can be simply transferred to other (cultural or national) contexts with different diversity issues (Cassell & Biswas 2000, Jones et al 2000, Kossek et al 2006, Nyambegera 2002. Consequently, they argue for an approach that studies diversity while acknowledging the wider social, political and historical context ( Jones & Stablein 2006, Nkomo & Cox 1996) and how such elements affect the identities that become salient, the meanings attached to them, individuals' positions within organisations and power differences between them ( Jones & Stablein 2006, Kersten 2000, Litvin 1997, Nkomo & Cox 1996, Siebers 2009a, 2009b. At the meso level, some critical scholars have worked on embedding understandings of diversity and unequal power relations in organisation-specific productive contexts, exploring the way work processes influence an organisation's understanding of diversity and the way it is managed ( Janssens & Zanoni 2005, Zanoni & Janssens 2004.…”

“…Despite this, critical authors have argued that this approach is problematic for several reasons. First, they point to the fact that identified categories are not homogeneous and that there are within-group differences and between-group similarities that should not be overlooked ( Janssens & Zanoni 2005, Jones & Stablein 2006, Liff & Wajcman 1996, Litvin 1997, Nkomo & Cox 1996. Second, by privileging certain differences or dimensions (e.g., ethnicity) as the basis for category formation and as essential contents, this perspective ignores the influence of social, political and economic forces and other possible differences (e.g., capital versus labour) that might be more relevant in a specific situation (Boje & Rosile 1994, Litvin 1997.…”

“…Such an approach allows a better understanding of the complexity of individuals' identities, which are influenced by, yet transcend, the stereotyped identities of historically subordinated groups. Others have started conceptualising diversity as context-specific discourses of difference to which meanings are attached and through which a context-bound reality, categories and identities are constructed ( Janssens & Zanoni 2005, Jones & Stablein 2006, Kirby & Harter 2003, Litvin 1997, Zanoni & Janssens 2004.…”