Marjolein Dennissen

127 Discussion identities (intersectional marginalization). This shows that diversity networking practices are inextricably linked to processes of both disadvantage and privilege. Thus far, the single category structure of diversity management practices has informed research that only examines the impact on disadvantaged identity groups. The predominant focus on disadvantage and oppression leaves the role of privilege underexposed and unmarked (McIntosh, 2012; Tatli & Özbilgin, 2012; Verloo, 2009). As such, the notion of structural intersectionality is a useful concept when analyzing single category diversity management practices as it can reveal subordination and hitherto silenced privileges. While intersectionality scholars have applied the concept of political intersectionality to examine the policies and political strategies of disadvantaged groups and social movements (Carastathis, 2013; Cole, 2008; Crenshaw, 1991; Verloo, 2006), this dimension of intersectionality is largely overlooked in management and organization studies (Rodriguez et al., 2016), as well as in policy analysis (Hankivsky & Cormier, 2011; Verloo, 2006). Considering that diversity management is a political endeavor, political strategies of disadvantaged groups are most relevant here. As Verloo (2006) recognized, political strategies on one axis of inequality are almost never neutral toward other axes. My analysis of political intersectionality in single category diversity networks corroborated Verloo’s argument. Highlighting a political competition between diversity networks, my analysis revealed how a politics of preserving privilege can leave organizational inequalities intact. As such, the concept of political intersectionality is most promising for diversity management research because it can shed light on the ways that “the interests of social identity groups defined by multiple axes of subordination may be overlooked by organizations that frame their agendas based on the experience of those who, but for one type of disadvantage, are otherwise privileged” (Cole, 2008, p. 450). Theorizing political intersectionality, I showed how the single category focus of diversity management practices, such as diversity networks, obscures the intersection of different forms of inequality and inadvertently contributes to the perpetuation of inequality in organizations. Overall, very little attention is paid to both structural and political intersectionalities in research on diversity management practices such as diversity networks. As argued before, organizational inequalities cannot be dismantled separately because they entail multiple intersecting identities that mutually reinforce each other. By disregarding intersectionality in research on diversity management, scholars have overlooked, how single identity categories are preserved, how privileged categories remain unmarked and how organizational inequalities are maintained. Applying an intersectionality lens to study diversity networks as exemplars of current single category diversity management practices, I contributed to the literature by showing how such practices that set out to foster diversity can actually sustain intersectional inequalities in organizations. Calling attention to the complex reality of multiple differences and inequalities, an intersectionality perspective supports a fine-grained analysis of the dynamic processes of privilege and disadvantage in organizations.