Marjolein Dennissen

29 Introduction However, the observations, interviews, and documents complemented each other to provide a more fine-grained analysis of the phenomenon under study. For example, in Chapter 3, the observation material complemented the interviews and allowed me to build a more accurate account of political intersectionality. In Chapter 4, the interview material and documents complemented the observation material to connect what happened during network events and meetings to what was said in the interviews. I started every analysis by reading through all empirical material that was relevant for the analysis. The coding process was conducted either by hand (Chapter 3 and 4) or with the help of Atlas-ti coding software (Chapter 2). Additional rounds of coding differed per analysis. When possible, I formulated analytical questions that guided my data analysis. For example, conducting a discourse analysis, I explored what was said, how it was said, what was not said, and the patterns of variation within the texts. Analyzing structural and political intersectionality in Chapter 3, I asked questions about the data such as where do individual network members talk about their multiple identities, how do they talk about their multiple identities in relation to diversity network membership, where do diversity networks collaborate or talk about collaborating, what does this collaboration entail and what hampers collaboration. These analytical questions helped to identify fragments that were central to answering the research question of each chapter. During the data analysis, I engaged in mutual discussions with my supervisors to develop a consensual understanding of the data (cf. Gioia et al, 2013; Nemeth, Brown & Rogers, 2001). In addition, comments and feedback from other diversity scholars during conferences and seminars helped deepen and sharpen my analysis and crystalize my theoretical contributions. In each of the subsequent chapters, I present a selection of the material that is central to the particular research question. These empirical fragments were chosen due to “their evocative content, their ability to highlight the complexity and richness of experience” rather than their statistical representativeness (Poggio, 2006, p. 230). In addition, I used fictitious names to secure anonymity of my respondents throughout this dissertation. Outline of the dissertation This dissertation consists of three main chapters. In each chapter, I take a different critical perspective to study diversity networks. Chapter 2 starts with exploring what the histories, goals, and activities of diversity networks are as described by the diversity network board members. I develop a theoretical framework to reconceptualize organizational equality. Subsequently, I use this framework to show how the board members of diversity networks discursively construct the value of their networks against the backdrop of discourses on diversity and equality. In Chapter 3, intersectionality is the central concept. By theorizing both structural and political intersectionality, insight is given into how the complex reality