Marjolein Dennissen

106 The Herculean task of diversity networks the front soldiers, that is certain”. A network member responds: “We also notice that there is a difference in who delivers the message. If the LGBT network communicates something, or if the management does that. When the management underscores our importance and joins events, then a whole other image will develop. Now we get a bad evaluation, because we do a lot for the LGBT network, or we are called party-people because we participate in the [Pride Parade]”. CEO: “It is important for you to know that you can always fall back on the [middle management of the organization]. Onme if they are absent. Most definitely in cases of urgency. I would like to emphasize this. We have to keep having these conversations. I want to be able to say something about this. Feed me with these kind of stories. Help me to say the right things. I want to be your captain. Email me. You can fall back on me day and night. Such as the story of Ethan, that can never happen again. You are the front soldiers who need support of the top [management] of the organization. Regard me as your partner.” [Meeting minutes LGBT network - Govt] This fragment illustrates how the members of the LGBT network make the struggles they encounter in their daily work environment clear and tangible. By presenting forthright screenshots, the network members leave little to the imagination and demonstrate the blunt discrimination and exclusion practices that occur in the organization. This makes it almost impossible for the CEO to displace the attention by changing the topic. Nevertheless, I observe that the first inclination of the Govt CEO is to “cop out” (cf. Ahmed, 2009, p. 44) by specifically calling on the network to take responsibility for addressing diversity- and inequality-related issues. The CEO refers to the network members as “front soldiers”, making them first and foremost responsible to deal with the organizational inequalities they encounter. However, in this instance I see how the network members redirect responsibility to the organizational management. Members counter that they have been the front soldiers, they have fought their battles, which left them weary with no results. They explicitly argue that the actions of the network would be more effective if they are supported and underlined by the management. Analyzing the two presented fragments, I note that there is a remarkable difference in preparation prior to the meeting. In contrast to the meeting of the ethnic minority network, the meeting of the LGBT network was thoughtfully organized. While the ethnic minority network stated to only have posted an announcement on the intranet, the LGBT network conveyed how they strategically prepared for their meeting. They invited the CEO to small-scale meeting, in which they were very selective who would attend the meeting. They selected a smaller sized room to create a safe environment that would facilitate trust and a dialogue between the management and the network, instead of a monologue by the network and a passive role of the management. The LGBT network had a clear goal in mind when organizing this meeting. Their endeavor was to get the unequivocal support from the CEO to counter the organizational inequality experienced by LGBT employees. The meeting