Marjolein Dennissen

64 The Herculean task of diversity networks challenges by introducing three approaches to study intersectionality. First, the anticategorical approach that completely rejects the use of categories. Second, the intracategorical approach that focuses on one single identity category and analytically unravels the influences of other categories. And third, the intercategorical approach that focuses on the relationships between multiple categories (Kelan, 2014; McCall, 2005). Previous studies of structural intersectionality predominantly take an intracategorical approach. Most studies use narratives and interviews to explore the lived experiences of individuals at the intersection of multiple identities (e.g., Adib & Guerrier, 2003; Essers & Benschop, 2007). Empirical studies on political intersectionality are few and rely mainly on historical case studies and documents (e.g., Carastathis, 2013; Cole, 2008; Verloo, 2006). As political intersectionality focuses on the dynamics of both difference and sameness, it allows analyzing intra group and inter group differences simultaneously (Cho et al., 2013). In my exploration of structural and political intersectionality in diversity networks, I thus adopt an intracategorical as well as an intercategorical approach. In this study, I relied on a qualitative methodology to thoroughly investigate structural and political intersectionality. I conducted a multiple case study with different diversity networks as cases (see below). A case study facilitates the analysis of complex and little understood phenomena (Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007; Yin, 2009) and is well suited to examine the how and why of intersectional dynamics in real-life organizational contexts. Compared to a single case study, a multiple case study yields a broader and more comprehensive exploration (Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007) of intersectionality in diversity networks. Cases and data collection I collected my empirical material in ten diversity networks in two Dutch organizations, a financial service organization (Finance) and a governmental service organization (Govt). I selected these organizations because they are well known for their diversity management, and because they accommodate various diversity networks. I briefly introduce the two organizations and the ten networks studied. The first organization is a financial service organization (Finance), situated throughout the Netherlands. Finance has six different diversity networks: a network for women in senior management positions ( Women at the top ), a network for women in middle management positions ( Ladies with ambition ), an ethnic minority network, an LGBT network, a disability network and a young employee network (age 18-35). The networks are organized nationally, are officially acknowledged by the organization and receive financial support. The second organization is a large governmental service organization (Govt). The diversity networks of Govt are organized on a national level as well as on local levels. I focus on four diversity networks that are organized nationally: a women’s network, an LGBT network, a disability network and a network for “young” employees (all ages; employees can join if they support the ideas of this network).