Marjolein Dennissen

39 Networking for equality? Although networks are overall seen as beneficial, studies also highlighted that networks can generate inequalities (Konrad, 2007; Ibarra 1997; Rothstein, Burke & Bristor, 2001). For example, Rothstein, Burke and Bristor (2001) found that women have fewer links to senior managers in the organization, who were predominantly men. In addition, Konrad (2007) found that black women have limited access to informal networks. Likewise, Kalev, Dobbin and Kelly (2006) showed that black women and black men do not benefit from networks in the same way that white women do. Thus, networks can create inequalities in job opportunities, access to information, status, and support when social groups such as women and ethnic minorities are excluded from white, male dominated networks and cannot tap into the same resources, such as strategic network relations, powerful sponsors, and higher status connections (Burt, 1998; Forret & Dougherty, 2004; Ibarra, 1997; McDonald, 2011). Diversity networks were initiated to counteract these inequalities. Diversity networks in organizations Based on the beneficial effects of networks in general, diversity networks would present a strategy for advancing the positions of historically excluded groups within organizations (Foldy, 2002; Tomlinson, 1987). Emanating from the US, the first diversity networks in organizations addressed women and ethnic minorities, aiming for their social inclusion and increasing their numerical representation in the higher organizational echelons (Friedman, 1996; Gremmen & Benschop, 2011; Pini et al., 2004). Currently, different diversity networks exist for a much wider range of employee groups, focusing for instance on sexualities, disabilities, religion, or age (Kaplan et al. , 2009). The existent literature mainly focuses on women’s networks, ethnic minority networks and LGBT networks. To my knowledge, there is no literature available on networks for disabled or young employees 1 . The dominant discourse about diversity networks lauds these networks for being an effective instrument in promoting organizational equality. Although organizations initiate diversity networks to manage their diverse workforce (Bierema, 2005; Kaplan et al. , 2009), research has yielded ambiguous results. On the one hand, studies show that women’s networks are effective in fostering a collective identity and decreasing feelings of isolation (Pini et al. , 2004), offering access to information and opportunities for upward career development (Cross & Armstrong, 2008), and enhancing member’s visibility, leadership skills and confidence (O’Neil et al., 2011). Likewise, ethnic minority networks can have a positive effect on members’ perceived career advancement (Friedman, Kane & Cornfield, 1998), reduced turnover intentions and social embeddedness (Friedman & Craig, 2004; Friedman & Holtom, 2002), and provide a safe space without the need to conform to the dominant organizational culture (Friedman, 1996, 1999). On the other hand, studies showed counterproductive effects (Kalev et al., 2006). For 1 Even though the young do not constitute a marginalized group, networks for young employees are diversity networks in the sense that they are organized on the social category of age.