Marjolein Dennissen

125 Discussion seen as effective when they successfully increase the number of historically marginalized social groups in the higher organizational echelons (e.g., Dobbin & Kalev, 2016; Kalysh, Kulik & Perera, 2016; Tonidandel, Avery, & Phillips, 2007; Verbeek & Groeneveld, 2012). Despite their valuable insights in terms of effectiveness, this field of research presents a rather one-sided picture of equality in organizations. Although the emphasis on numbers in management ranks may be an effective strategy to change representation, more is needed to establish equality on a broader organizational level. This requires that organizational practices and discourses that maintain and reproduce inequalities are addressed (Prasad & Mills, 1997; De Vries & Van den Brink, 2016; Zanoni et al., 2010). The effectiveness of diversity management practices is also dependent on the organizational setting and its context-specific processes (Ahonen, Tienari, Meriläinen & Pullen, 2014; Benschop et al., 2015; Zanoni et al., 2010). This means that there is no one-size-fits-all approach, and different practices cannot be implemented in similar ways in different organizational contexts without critical reflection. Due to the narrow focus on the numerical representation of marginalized groups and the inattention to organizational context, the actual contribution of diversity management to organizational equality remains largely uncharted terrain (Benschop et al., 2015). To address these limitations, I developed an overarching theoretical framework for organizational equality, reconceptualizing organizational equality on multiple levels. In this dissertation, I distinguished three levels of equality in organizations: the individual level, the group level, and the organizational level. In line with the majority of diversity management studies, I first conceptualized equality effects at the individual level, which pertains to the contribution of networks to individual career development. Second, equality effects at the group level were conceptualized as the contribution of networks to community building. Networks can bring their members together to reduce their isolation in majority groups: members can connect, share experiences, and build social support and cohesion between them (Colgan & McKearney, 2012; Friedman, 1996, 1999). Third, equality at the organization level was conceptualized as a contribution of networks to inclusion, that is, the full participation of all employees in all formal and informal organization processes (Dobusch, 2014; Mor Barak, 2015; Roberson, 2006; Shore, Cleveland & Sanchez, 2018). Based onmy study of diversity networks, I further elaborated on the three-level framework by showing on which level(s) diversity networks address organizational inequalities. For example, my analysis of the legitimating discourses of diversity network board members (Chapter 2) illustrated that the board members primarily focus on the individual and group levels of equality. In addition, how organizational inequalities were addressed during the events organized by diversity networks (Chapter 4) varied considerably. Most events were geared toward either socializing (e.g., drinks) or workshops that empower and support members individually in their career development. Although some discourses on the organizational level (i.e., discourses of ability and possibilities) questioned restrictive organizational practices, as well as some events that challenged implicit organizational norms, the predominant focus