Marjolein Dennissen

60 The Herculean task of diversity networks the concept of political intersectionality (Verloo, 2009). Theorizing political intersectionality allows to take into account how intersectionality is important for organizational policies and political strategies of disadvantaged groups. This chapter is based on amultiple case study in twoDutch organizations, a financial service organization and a governmental service organization. These organizations accommodate different diversity networks, i.e., women’s networks, ethnic minority networks, LGBT networks, disability networks and young employee networks. I use the concept of structural intersectionality to analyze how network members negotiate their multiple identities vis-à-vis their membership of diversity networks. The concept of political intersectionality enables the exploration of the political strategies of diversity networks to build coalitions across identity categories. With my intersectional analysis of diversity networks, I contribute to the literature on diversity management practices by highlighting how dynamic processes of privilege and disadvantage play a role in the preservation of single identity categories. Organizational inequalities cannot be dismantled separately because they entail multiple intersecting identities that mutually reinforce each other. I argue that the notion of structural intersectionality challenges inequalities in single category diversity networks by revealing subordination as well as hitherto silenced privileges. By introducing political intersectionality, I reveal a politics of preserving privilege in diversity networks that obscures the intersection of different forms of inequality. Theoretical background Diversity management practices: one size fits all? Despite the proliferation of diversity management, we still know little about which diversity management practices are most effective, and moreover in which organizational settings and contexts (Bendl et al., 2015; Janssens & Zanoni, 2014; Zanoni et al., 2010). Scholars have highlighted that many organizations retain their diversity management practices from the previous century without much reflection on how little progress has been made (Nkomo & Hoobler, 2014). One possible explanation for the limited progress might be that diversity management practices remain firmly entrenched in identity-based initiatives aimed at increasing the number of historically marginalized social groups in organizations (Kalev et al., 2006; Nkomo & Hoobler, 2014). Consequently, the majority of the research on diversity management practices typically concentrates on the effectiveness in terms of numerical outcomes of these identity-based practices such as diversity training, mentoring programs and networks. This predominant focus on single identity categories (i.e., gender, race, ethnicity) as stand-alone phenomenon (Tatli & Özbilgin, 2012) is underpinned by an inaccurate assumption of a certain similarity of various categories of difference (Zanoni et al., 2010). For