Governing Through Diversity 2015
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-137-43825-6_5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Paradoxes of (E)quality and Good Will in Managing Diversity: A Dutch Case in the Philanthropic Sector

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

3
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Non-private sector actors who have been part of the welfare system (e.g. mediators) may be strongly normalized by the moral component of the discourse of lack (helping the weak; Ghorashi et al , 2015). Yet, private sector actors’ (e.g.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Non-private sector actors who have been part of the welfare system (e.g. mediators) may be strongly normalized by the moral component of the discourse of lack (helping the weak; Ghorashi et al , 2015). Yet, private sector actors’ (e.g.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The prominence of this line of thinking, earlier referred to as the deficit approach, is strongly situated within the founding elements of the Dutch welfare state (Ghorashi et al , 2015). The welfare state developed with an increasing tendency towards the principle of equality, which resulted in discontent about existing inequalities (Lucassen, 2006).…”
Section: The Normalising Power Of the Dutch Discoursementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The reification of difference and sameness was based on a simplistic understanding of cultural diversity in which difference was equated with minority workers, or those "culturally diverse," and constituted a static, essentialized cultural Other inherently different from the "normal" Dutch Self (i.e., those qualifying as same). Thus, the reification of difference and sameness springing from the limited understanding of cultural diversity implied not only a dichotomy but also a hierarchical ordering of professionals at the workplace (Ghorashi & Sabelis, 2013;Ghorashi et al, 2015;Nkomo & Cox, 1996;Ostendorp & Steyaert, 2009;Zanoni et al, 2010). As this fundamental hierarchy formed the core of being (considered) professional, professionals had little space to criticize it or its consequences and, moreover, worked to normalize and reproduce it.…”
Section: Understanding a Structural Hierarchy Between Difference And Samenessmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The lack of diversity in Dutch academic hospitals may be due to two factors: the Dutch culture's self-image as a society of equal opportunities, a tradition of social justice rhetoric combined with the "celebration" of tolerance for diversity (Ahmed, 2007;Essed, 2002;Heres & Benschop, 2010); and, more recently, the occurrence of polarized discourses that openly show racist tendencies (Essed & Hoving, 2014). Ghorashi, Carabain, and Szepietowska (2015) observed a general paradox in Dutch society of an expressed willingness to include diversity but the incapability to do so in practice, which they attribute to deeply rooted assumptions about cultural minorities as "the Other," who are seen as not only different but also not competent enough to meet the profile of the "normal employee." Thus, the Netherlands is an appropriate context for studying the empirical workings of structural factors for inclusion.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%