Abstract
AbstractOrganizational research has come a long way in understanding and dealing with inequalities in the workplace. Despite this, there has not been enough progress toward equality. The reason for the stymied progress, we argue, is in large part due to the conceptual gaps in our understanding of equality. This has not been clear enough to prevent previous imbalances in power, interests and domination from re‐manifesting themselves in new ways. Because organizations are complex, there needs to be a clear definition and goal of equality that can account for these mechanisms. In this article, we present a conceptual approach we call intersectional equality. To develop this approach, we build on Kimberlé Crenshaw's intersectionality and Joan Acker's inequality regimes that are useful for understanding the presence and persistency of inequality in organizations, but these do not define solutions for equality. At this point, we turn to equality and justice theory and examine Amartya Sen's capabilities approach for incorporating organizations and organizational responsibilities to pursue equality. In light of the conceptual gaps in intersectionality, the inequality regimes, and the capabilities approach, we present intersectional equality as a conclusive alternative concept and approach. Intersectional equality sharpens the feminist definition and vision of equality for organizations and provides a practical path forward for building coalitions and capabilities across four dimensions of organizational disparities (procedural, discursive, material, and affective).
Highlights
Organizational research has come a long way in understanding and dealing with inequalities in the workplace
Amartya Sen's capability approach (Sen, 1980, 1992, 1999) is the third body of thought we draw on for its philosophical method and definition of equality. This approach has potential, we argue, to further clarify the meaning of equality for organizations, its application can only be utilized together with a feminist critical analysis, as we illustrate in the text
While we are certainly indebted to Acker for her theoretical insights into organizational measures of effectiveness and capitalist constraints on organizational equality, we do not find that inequality regimes has accurately operationalized intersectionality nor do we find the inequality regimes' “areas of disparities” as helpful as they could be
Summary
Organizational research has come a long way in understanding and dealing with inequalities in the workplace. The reason for the stymied progress, we argue, is in large part due to the conceptual gaps in our understanding of equality This has not been clear enough to prevent previous imbalances in power, interests and domination from re-manifesting themselves in new ways. We present a conceptual approach we call intersectional equality To develop this approach, we build on Kimberlé Crenshaw's intersectionality and Joan Acker's inequality regimes that are useful for understanding the presence and persistency of inequality in organizations, but these do not define solutions for equality. We build on Kimberlé Crenshaw's intersectionality and Joan Acker's inequality regimes that are useful for understanding the presence and persistency of inequality in organizations, but these do not define solutions for equality At this point, we turn to equality and justice theory and examine Amartya Sen's capabilities approach for incorporating organizations and organizational responsibilities to pursue equality. Intersectional equality sharpens the feminist definition and vision of equality for organizations and provides a practical path forwar
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
