Marjolein Dennissen

15 Introduction Next to the inadequate theorization of power and power processes, critical diversity scholars have criticized the mainstream diversity literature for making a number of rather naïve assumptions about why particular social groups are marginalized in organizations (Dick & Cassell, 2002; Zanoni et al., 2010). Relying heavily on social psychological theories, organizational diversity management largely draws on the psychological mechanisms behind discrimination and exclusion. As a consequence, there is a prime focus on the role of the individual, and diversity management practices remain firmly entrenched in identity-based initiatives, such as training, mentoring, and networks (Lorbiecki & Jack, 2000; Nkomo & Hoobler, 2015). Critical diversity scholars have articulated their concern that organizational inequality is not exclusively the result of individual discriminatory acts (Kirton & Greene, 2000; Zanoni et al., 2010). Particular social groups may already be disadvantaged by wider social inequalities as a result of “historically determined, structurally unequal access to and distribution of resources between socio-demographic groups” (Zanoni et al., 2010, p. 14). Thus, the role of organizational and societal processes is important and should not be downplayed in organizational diversity management. A related point of critique is that diversity management practices are predominantly aimed at increasing the numerical representation of historically marginalized social groups (Lorbiecki & Jack, 2000; Nkomo & Hoobler, 2015). As such, these historically marginalized social groups are juxtaposed with the dominant majority group, or the ideal worker , which is often the white, able-bodied, heterosexual man (Acker, 2006; Kirton & Greene, 2000). Consequently, white, able-bodied, heterosexual male models of employment and career success are taken for granted and implicitly serve as the norm for all employees (Benschop, 2011; Hoobler, 2005). This means that historically marginalized social groups are assessed against this invisible norm and constructed as lacking (Benschop, 2011; Zanoni & Janssens, 2004). To get them on par with the majority, diversity management practices focus on providing minority employees with the proper tools to equip them to do so. Thus, the onus is placed on the individuals themselves to succeed. Critical diversity scholars challenge these practices for their emphasis on “fixing” individuals, rather than changing organizational processes that contribute to complex patterns of inequalities in organizations. Critical diversity studies call for attention to organizational equality as a key goal for diversity management that goes beyond individual approaches and numerical diversity. Although helpful to a certain extent, these individual approaches do not address the organizational practices that maintain and (re)produce inequalities (Benschop et al., 2015; Meyerson & Kolb, 2000; Zanoni et al., 2010). By leaving organizational power processes intact, organizational practices may even reinforce the disadvantaged position of historically marginalized social groups and militate against organizational equality. Drawing on critical diversity studies, my dissertation contributes to the literature on diversity management studies by analyzing diversity networks as instruments for greater organizational equality conceptualized as the absence of systematic disparities in power and