The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/2040-7149.htm

Inclusion as
The making of inclusion as structuration
structuration: empirical evidence
of a multinational company
Renate Ortlieb 235
Department of Human Resource Management, School of Business,
Received 25 June 2012
Social and Economic Sciences, University of Graz, Graz, Austria, and Revised 28 February 2013
7 May 2013
Barbara Sieben Accepted 2 December 2013
Department of Humanities and Social Sciences,
Helmut Schmidt University – University of the Federal Armed Forces Hamburg,
Hamburg, Germany

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to theoretically and empirically analyse the question how
organizations become inclusive – with special regard to migrants – and the potential limits to inclusion.
Design/methodology/approach – The paper develops a theoretical framework based on Giddens’
structuration theory. By a firm-level case study, the paper empirically examines the theoretical propositions.
Findings – The paper proposes that inclusion bears specific kinds of the structural dimensions
signification, domination and legitimation on which organizational actors draw to reproduce the
inclusive organization. The empirical case reveals three areas of organizational practices – personnel
recruitment and selection; training and development; meals and parties – in the making of inclusion.
But the interplay of specific rules and resources also contains social practices of differentiation and
hierarchization that limit inclusion.
Research limitations/implications – Future studies would benefit from considering additional
socio-demographic characteristics and intersectionalities. An ethnographic approach on the basis of
participant observation is also recommendable. A longitudinal empirical design focusing on causal
relationships would expand the papers descriptive approach.
Practical implications – The findings suggest that organizational actors can shape the structural
dimensions corresponding to an inclusive organization by acting themselves accordingly and inciting
others to do so. They should be aware of processes of differentiation and hierarchization that go along
with practices of inclusion.
Originality/value – Applying key arguments of structuration theory, the paper develops a
comprehensive framework that considers corresponding rules and resources in detail. The empirical
case study demonstrates the fruitfulness of the theoretical framework and reveals the ambivalence of
organizational practices that promote inclusion.
Keywords Ethnic minorities, Qualitative research, Inclusion, Migrants, Structuration theory
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
All over the world, migration processes and demographic shifts bring about that
business companies increasingly depend on migrant employees (OECD, 2012; Ortlieb
and Sieben, 2013). In view of pertinent labour and skill shortages, European
governments initiated immigration policies to facilitate companies the recruitment of Equality, Diversity and Inclusion:
An International Journal
Vol. 33 No. 3, 2014
The authors wish to thank the editors and the anonymous reviewers for their constructive pp. 235-248
r Emerald Group Publishing Limited
comments. The research project from which this paper originates was granted by the European 2040-7149
Social Fund. DOI 10.1108/EDI-06-2012-0052
EDI people from abroad. Also, the enhancement of equal opportunities at work and the
33,3 inclusion of immigrants got new socio-political impetus in view of the rising workforce
diversity. Yet still, empirical findings show that the employment opportunities of
migrants are far from equal to those of native-born individuals without a foreign
background. Migrants earn lower wages (e.g. Fertig and Schurer, 2007), are more often
assigned to low-skill jobs for which they are over-qualified (Holgate, 2005; Turner,
236 2010), get lower scores in job performance ratings (Roth et al., 2003), face stronger
barriers in their career development (Kamenou and Fearful, 2006) and experience
multifaceted discrimination (Ogbonna and Harris, 2006).
The explicit aim of diversity initiatives is to alter this situation by creating more
inclusive workplaces (e.g. Holvino et al., 2004; Roberson, 2006). In the “ideal” inclusive
organization, the variety of employees’ skills and perspectives shape organizational
strategies and work processes, basic values and norms. In addition, fairness and equal
opportunities are realized, all employees – including members of minority groups – feel
integrated and they are represented on all hierarchical levels. However, although
diversity scholars consent in the relevance of inclusion, a sound theoretical grounding
is still lacking (Shore et al., 2011). Also, empirical studies on organizational practices of
inclusion are rare (exceptions are Bilimoria et al., 2008; Janssens and Zanoni, 2008;
Zanoni and Janssens, 2007).
In this paper we propose to apply an established sociological theory, Giddens’ theory
of structuration, to the question how organizations become inclusive and what
ambivalences are associated with corresponding organizational practices. Structuration
theory’s core concept of the “duality of structure” is particularly well suited to carve
out social practices of inclusion in organizations and to highlight the dynamics,
contradictions and tensions within “the making of inclusion”. We illustrate such
ambivalent practices on the empirical basis of a case study of a multinational company.
This company appears on the one hand as a highly inclusive organization with regard
to its international workforce. On the other hand, the very organizational practices
that contribute to inclusion are intermeshed with social practices of differentiation
and hierarchization that (re)produce a particular social order among the multiethnic
workforce. With both, the theoretical framework and the empirical analysis we
contribute to diversity and inclusion literature by enhancing understanding of the
ambivalences and contradictions within so called “inclusive organizations”.

2. A structurational perspective on the making of inclusion

In the growing body of literature on inclusion, several models of inclusiveness are
discussed. Mor Barak (2000) proposes a model that distinguishes between a personal
dimension, i.e. individual norms and values associated with diversity, and an
organizational dimension, i.e. the type of organizational culture. The interplay of the
personal and organizational dimensions and their perceived fit determine employees’
perceptions of inclusion. The degree of perceived inclusion in turn impacts various
outcomes such as individual well-being, job satisfaction, organizational commitment
and task effectiveness. Similar to this approach, Shore et al. (2011) emphasize
individual perceptions and collective norms. These authors conceptualize inclusion as
employees’ perceptions of belongingness and uniqueness within the work group. They
discuss antecedents of inclusion, namely, an inclusive climate (involving fairness
systems and diversity climate), inclusive leadership (expressed by management
philosophy and values, strategies and decisions) and inclusive practices (that promote
the satisfaction of belongingness and uniqueness needs).
 As to the nature of inclusive practices, Roberson (2006) stresses the importance of Inclusion as
“identity-blind” practices such as participatory systems and conflict resolution processes structuration
that involve all employees regardless of (identity) group memberships. Janssens and
Zanoni (2008) empirically demonstrate that inclusive organizations combine same-
treatment practices with “identity- and diversity-conscious” practices. The latter
valorizes migrants’ competences and allows them to express their cultural identity.
A key element of all conceptualizations – being most salient in the frameworks of 237
Mor Barak (2000) and Shore et al. (2011) – is the notion of inclusion and exclusion
as representing different values of specific dimensions and different outcomes of
organizational practices. That is, inclusion and exclusion resemble two sides of the
same coin.
This interwovenness of inclusion and exclusion is a key issue of this paper, in terms
of the ambivalent effects of practices that aim at equality and inclusion, but at the same
time produce differentiations and hierarchizations. In line with critical diversity
scholars we elaborate on the ambivalences and contradictions inherent to inclusive
practices in organizations. Like Boogaard and Roggeband (2010) as well as Zanoni
and Janssens (2004), we suppose the historical and societal context of an organization
to be important for its degree of inclusiveness. But contrary to these authors who
analyse all kinds of practices and their contribution to inequalities in organizations,
we concentrate on organizational practices that actually aim at inclusion. We examine
the ambivalences of theses inclusive practices, especially regarding the (re)production
of the organization’s social order. Further, different from previous studies on inclusion
that typically focus on either structural elements or individual agency, we are
interested in both, structure and agency. Therefore, and similar to Boogaard and
Roggeband (2010), we apply Giddens’ theory of structuration to theorize more
specifically on the making of inclusion and its inherent ambivalences.
Giddens’ (1984) theory of structuration addresses the recursive interplay of
structure and agency. Social systems are characterized by structural properties that
enter into the practices and the agents’ memories in an implicit, trans-temporal and
trans-situational fashion. Individuals are conceptualized as “knowledgeable agents”
whose reflexive interpretation of the world, thinking and acting are enabled and
limited by the system’s structures. Recursively, agents mobilize and reinforce
structures by applying rules and resources in their actions. These rules and resources
refer to three structural dimensions: signification, legitimation and domination. Both,
day-to-day interactions of “lower” organizational members as well as more strategic
managerial decisions contribute to the reproduction of the structural dimensions – and
therewith also to the reproduction of the organization itself. This interplay between
structure and interaction is at the core of Giddens’ concept of the “duality of structure”,
as presented in Figure 1.
Against the background of this conceptualization, an inclusive organization can be
characterized as follows: rules of signification are the basis for interpretative schemes
to which individuals refer during communication. For example, to make sense of
something that happens in an inclusive organization, actors draw on metaphors, myths
and symbols related to an organization in which all employees have a voice and access
to all hierarchical positions.
Regarding domination, Giddens distinguishes between two kinds of resources that
enable the exertion of power. Allocative resources refer to material objects. They enable
the control over products, production processes or money. For example, language and
cultural skills associated with a foreign background lend migrants power if they can
EDI Structure Signification Domination Legitimation
33,3

Interpretative
(Modality) Facility Norm
scheme

238
Interaction Communication Power Sanction
Figure 1.
Dimensions of the
duality of structure
Source: According to Giddens (1984, p. 29)

apply these skills to facilitate access to an international customer base. Authoritative

resources refer to immaterial objects, and enable the control over individuals, for
example, via granting income and status. In an inclusive organization managerial
actors use authoritative resources to compensate for structural disadvantages. For
instance, they provide training and development opportunities for migrants.
Finally, the aforementioned rules and resources are linked to rules of legitimation.
Individuals apply them to sanction or reward social actions. That is, actors draw on
legal, societal or organizational norms which determine whether to judge something as
suitable vs inappropriate or allowed vs forbidden. In an inclusive organization rules of
legitimation refer to strong principles of fairness and equality, the sanctioning
of prejudice and discrimination, and the justification of a preferable treatment of
minority employees such as migrants.
Giddens’ structuration theory has been criticized for several points (Clark et al., 1990;
Craib, 1992). Above all, critics state that the key notions are rather fuzzy and difficult
to study empirically. However, many studies also prove its fruitfulness for the
understanding of organizations. Nearest to our study are the critical analyses of diversity
management and the inclusion of ethnic minority employees by Boogaard and
Roggeband (2010) as well as Zanoni and Janssens (2007). Both studies highlight
structuration processes within the (re)production and the potential reduction of
inequalities in organizations. These applications demonstrate that structuration theory
is especially apt for our purpose. Structuration theory highlights the recursive interplay
of the organizations’ social structure with the reflexive, knowledgeable agent. Thereby, it
accounts for the embeddedness of organizations into the wider society which also
provides a background for interpretative schemes, power facilities and norms.
To summarize, following Giddens we propose the socio-structural fabric of an
inclusive organization to be formed by the perpetual application of rules and resources
within social practices of individual and collective agents. However, these practices
will not always conform to each other and not every social practice will contribute
to increased inclusion. In contrast, we claim that even in organizations whose
management fosters inclusion policies, social practices of differentiation and
hierarchization will be enacted. That is, while the examples described above refer
to rules and resources in an inclusive organization, the making of inclusion is
accompanied by manifold social practices that create and maintain a hierarchical social
order within the workforce.
Social orders shaped by ethnicity, nationality or race can be conceived as
historically grown patterns of societal power relations that are reproduced in the
workplace (Proudford and Nkomo, 2006). In particular, social orders are made up of Inclusion as
concurrent social practices of differentiation and hierarchization. Practices of structuration
differentiation ground on interpretative schemes that guide the identification
of others’ ethnicity, nationality or race and respective ascriptions of particular traits
and behaviours (Prasad, 1997). Moreover, patterns of differentiation are connected
with evaluations and practices of hierarchization (Kalonaityte, 2010), typically
resulting in rank orders in which western/European ethnicity, nationality or race is the 239
dominant norm. Thus, we propose that in inclusive organizations ambivalences
and tensions will arise from social practices of differentiation and hierarchization and
that these practices may counteract “official” inclusion policies and practices. In the
following, we empirically examine these propositions on the basis of a case study.

3. Method
In this study we analyse empirical material that originates from a broader research
project on the employment of migrants in German companies (Anders et al., 2008;
Ortlieb and Sieben, 2010). Through a combined quantitative and qualitative
approach we investigated into the reasons for the (non)employment of first- and
second-generation immigrants, for workplace diversity and related organizational
practices. Out of the six companies considered by the project’s qualitative part we
chose for this paper the most “critical” case in the sense of Yin (2009). This case
promises particularly rich insights into the practices of inclusion, since the company
employs a particularly high proportion of migrants, spread over all hierarchical levels.
In addition, the company strategically recruits migrants for particular jobs. It is the
only company in our sample that can be characterized as highly international and
inclusive in terms of its philosophy of valuing diversity and striving for equal
opportunities. Thus, this single case is especially well suited for a description and an
in-depth analysis of the ambivalences of organizational practices of inclusion.
We first collected text and video material from the company’s web site and several
company brochures. These media convey an image of the employer brand, the
company’s customer and human resource policies and the business philosophy. Second,
with the support of the human resource department we distributed a short structured
questionnaire amongst the employees. This survey aimed at gathering information on
the workplace diversity in terms of occupational rank, gender, age, educational and
foreign background. Third, we conducted nine in-depth interviews with the following
persons: the head of the human resource department and the head of the customer
support department (both native-born German men), four staff members of the human
resource department (one German woman and one German man, one woman from
Bulgaria and one man with a Turkish background), two staff members of the customer
support department (one women with a French background, one women from Poland)
and the head of the works council (man from the USA). The interviews were
semi-structured and covered topics such as workforce demography and basic company
data, human resource management practices, informal and structural integration of
migrants, and organizational practices addressing equal opportunities. We conducted
the interviews in German in a location close to the interviewees’ workplaces. On
average, the interviews lasted one hour, ranging from 40 to 90 minutes.
The interviews were transcribed and coded according to Giddens’ categories of
rules and resources as described above. That is, in contrast to procedures informed
by grounded theory that begin with an open view on the texts to be analysed and aim
at building theory (e.g. Bryant and Charmaz, 2007), we applied given theoretical
EDI categories to our empirical material to tease out particular practices and their
33,3 consequences within preset theoretical categories. Both authors coded the data in a
reiterative process to achieve communicative validity (Sandberg, 2005). We then
searched for recurring topics that were tightly related to processes of inclusion and to
processes of differentiation and hierarchization along the lines of ethnicity, nationality
or race. This search yielded three areas of organizational practices associated with
240 particular powerful processes that (re)produce the inclusive organization: personnel
recruitment and selection, training and development and meals and parties as parts
of the company’s social life. Before we describe these practices in detail, in the next
paragraph we introduce into the company under investigation.

4. Empirical findings
4.1 The company
The company under consideration is the German subsidiary of a US-headed online
trading corporation. Established in 1999, its main activity is the support of
international customers within Europe. The company employs several hundreds of
people, thereof migrants amounting to estimated 50 per cent of the total company
and to almost 100 per cent in the non-German countries’ customer service. The fraction
of women is about 50 per cent and the average age about 35 years (between 20 and
45 years). The top management consists above all of German, British and US-American
white men.
The company presents itself as young, dynamic and inherently international,
being proud of employing people from over 40 countries. This image is also conveyed
by our interviewees. For instance, they describe the workforce as diverse and colourful,
as “a good blend”, youthful and unconventional. Moreover, the company is described as
being American, as opposed to a “typical” German company. This attribution rests
mainly on the perception of flat hierarchies, a focus on individual performance and
prevalent unconventionality. Regardless of their hierarchical position, all employees
are on first-name terms (and the informal German pronominal form “du”) with each
other. Having fun together on the job is another social norm.
Altogether, the empirical material based on videos, brochures and other texts as
well as the interviewees paint the image of a modern, highly inclusive organization
where diversity is valued. Fairness and anti-discrimination are taken as a given, the
respective laws are strictly adhered to and their compliance is monitored. Our
interviewees pointed to many rules of signification and legitimation and to many
allocative and authoritative resources that are clearly related to an inclusive
organization. However, when we dig deeper into these rules and resources, the
thoroughly created painting of a colourful, inspiring, fair and inclusive company starts
to crumble and quite converse processes and structures become apparent.

4.2 Personnel recruitment and selection

Since recruitment practices are crucial for the inclusion of minorities, an examination
of this domain is particularly important. The company’s business – providing
customer services via telephone or internet to international customers – is organized
according to the geographical regions in which customers reside. That is, one team is
responsible for German speaking countries (Germany, Austria and Switzerland),
one for Spain, one for France, one for Italy and one for the remaining countries,
named “Rest of Europe”. As a result of previous labour market shortages and
corresponding recruiting processes, many team members have the corresponding
foreign background – i.e. the Spanish work in the Spain team, the French in the France Inclusion as
team and so on. structuration
Many jobs require only low skills. As to the customer service, the most important
requirements are foreign language skills, intercultural sensitivity and (basic) IT
experience. Also, the adaptation to the company’s culture is seen as a necessity. The
company’s recruitment practices reflect these needs: usually, job advertisements
are posted in different media, above all on the company’s web site. Additionally, 241
recruitment and temporary employment agencies in Germany and abroad are
consulted and network recruitment is encouraged through the donation of financial
bonuses to current employees. Hence, the area of personnel recruitment consists of
particularly inclusive practices: managerial actors use their authoritative resources
to hire migrants. Network recruiting further facilitates the access and integration of
migrants into this company.
In addition, migrant applicants can use their particular foreign language skills as
important allocative resources, as the head of customer support posits:
Since we are a European customer service, we simply need native speakers [y] one or two
years [of language course] at school is not enough (Head of Customer Support, native-born
German).
Nevertheless, migrants may use their foreign language skills only to a certain extent as
an allocative resource. First, the company needs to have both German and the foreign
language skills on a native speaker level. Second, interesting rules of signification and
legitimation are related to foreign applicants, as stated by the head of the customer
support:
It is always pleasant to work abroad for a time. And many people with a university degree go
abroad for one or two years, search for a job there [y]. Especially in our European country-
focused groups we have many university graduates [y] more than for instance in our
German area. [y] For somebody from abroad, the company then is an entrance option (Head
of Customer Support, native-born German).
That is, recruitment from abroad is praised as a gift of opportunities and well-being to
foreigners. They are indeed valued as possessing critical resources, namely, their
native language. And they are valued as highly skilled people – higher than domestic
employees. Yet, their inclusion comes at the expense of being over-qualified for the
assigned jobs in the customer service. The university degrees they hold would well
qualify them for higher ranks.

4.3 Training and development

Training plays an important role in the studied company. Every newly hired employee
gets an introductory training. Later on employees receive trainings that address
the idiosyncratic nature of the company’s international services, its dependency on
ever-changing IT technology and the quite complex, often changing legal framework.
The company offers various internal seminars and workshops to the employees. Two
departments conceptualize and co-ordinate the training. One department is responsible
for management training which addresses current and future managerial staff. The
other department offers training mainly to non-managerial staff, thereby focusing on
IT, language, law and social skills.
Generally, training and development should contribute to inclusion. Trainings give
employees the opportunity to acquire knowledge, skills and abilities that they can use
as allocative resources. Also, they increase the range of employees’ resources and open
EDI up career options. Yet, a closer look at the actual organizational structures and
33,3 practices reveals that training and development are in this case not as inclusive as they
could be. For example, the split of responsibilities between the two departments is
a differentiating practice that creates a frontier line between managerial staff and
training tailored to their needs on the one hand, and lower-level employees and their
presumed training needs on the other hand. Associated with this structural aspect
242 are allocative and authoritative resources of the human resource management decision
makers: they decide who may participate in what kind of training or career
development programme. If certain employees are excluded from training, this
demonstrates management’s power resting on authoritative resources. In addition,
management’s domination over the excluded employees continues, because human
resource managers restrict their opportunities of acquiring valuable resources.
Although our interviewees stated that migrants participate in trainings to the
same extent as their native-born German colleagues, the respective organizational
practices can be characterized as restricting inclusion: as migrants are heavily
under-represented in higher level positions, they usually do not benefit from higher
level training and development programmes. Thus, opportunities for personal
development and career advancement are structurally withheld from migrants.
Of particular interest is that our interviewees take this differentiation as a matter
of course: neither do they state a need for higher level employees to participate in
“simple” training courses that address intercultural or diversity skills, nor do they
question the indirect exclusion of migrants from more advanced training and career
development activities. Moreover, this mutual consent coincides with the ascription of
migrants’ motivation to participate in trainings, as the following description by the
head of customer support illustrates:
I guess that the participation frequency [in trainings] is higher, because the employees with a
foreign background very, very often lack social contacts outside of the company, but they
strongly search for their social contacts inside the company and of course make friends and
therefore probably participate more frequently at such programmes (Head of Customer
Support, native-born German).
This quote reflects a rule of signification, namely, the implicit assumption that
domestic employees do not search for friends inside. Hence, their motivation would be
to acquire skills to improve their career prospects. In addition, this assumption carries
aspects of legitimation, as those colleagues would view the training as a “serious”
institution that aims at organizational and individual effectiveness, whereas migrant
colleagues would (mis-)use them to fulfil their individual social needs. The experience
of one interviewee with foreign background fits with the statement that training
courses do not always foster the career advancement of migrants:
I already passed through all of them and it doesn’t pay. One is just hanging around and
somebody tells something, one is sitting sometimes two days in a training [y] it is helpful,
but not as to my vocational development (Customer Support Staff Member, Bulgarian
background).
This employee suffers from not having been promoted for many years and is still stuck
at the bottom of the company’s socio-structural fabric.

4.4 Meals and parties

Another domain that we found to be closely related to processes of inclusion, but also
to practices of differentiation and hierarchization are the daily lunches and social
events such as work outings and parties. On the part of the organization, we observe a Inclusion as
range of inclusive practices. With regard to meals, top management responded to the structuration
multiethnic needs by establishing a cafeteria with international cuisine. Moreover, the
employees self-organize meals. For that purpose, every floor is equipped with cooking
facilities – which apparently are mostly used by migrant employees.
Eating habits play an important role for inclusion, because joint meals are a key
opportunity for getting into contact with colleagues, and also because of the 243
essentiality of eating. Yet, here we observe an interesting interplay of rules and
resources reproducing the organization’s social order. Eating habits are seldom
described in a neutral way, but rather associated with an evaluation. Moreover, the
(assumed) self-concept of the “others” is vital, as demonstrated by the following quote
of the works council’s head:
That [culture-related eating habits] must play a role! Here we have Italians, French people
even worse, yes [laughing]. First of all, each meal is evaluated [y] There has to be a certain
flavour, and the Italians [y] the pasta have to be al dente and all that (Head of Works Council,
US-American background).
Nevertheless, this is also a field where migrant employees use allocative resources to
negotiate good working conditions. After they insistently requested for international
cuisine the management established the cafeteria to satisfy these needs. Several
interviewees praise the variety of the menu – however, connected with another form of
differentiation, as stated by the head of human resources:
Sometimes, the German colleagues are nagging [about the meals], but I think this is also
a bit up to that the Germans always need something to nag (Head of Human Resources,
native-born German).
Moreover, joint meals reflect the official image of the vivid international company.
As a member of the human resource department describes it enthusiastically:
[The international mixture is] a very special air which you also notice [y] in summer for
instance [when y] the different culture groups are having [y] their lunch outside (Human
Resources Staff Member, French background).
Another related topic is the development of a sense of social community which is
associated with rules of signification and legitimation. For instance, several
interviewees describe the ethnically mixed groups that usually have lunch or a
coffee together. However, there is a clear line of separation between Germans and “the
others”, as pointed out by a customer support employee:
Because we are a small international team we love to go all together. But there is, frankly
spoken, one German in the whole team, and it is well mixed and funny, but [y] in other teams
where there are more Germans, only Germans and the “Rest of Europe” go [y] not only
Europeans, but from all countries, also South America and Asia (Customer Support Staff
Member, Bulgarian background).
The following quote by the same person illustrates that this separation line is
legitimated by current stereotypes ascribing certain stiffness to Germans:
I don’t know where this comes from [y] the Germans may not be on the loose, they regard it
as pertly and not funny, and generally they are [y] very restricted in terms of [y]
celebrating and frolicking (Customer Support Staff Member, Bulgarian background).
Company parties appear to be an additional important area of inclusive practices.
Every year the company arranges a Christmas party and a summer party. The summer
EDI party is praised as open minded, colourful and joyful – as a symbol of the
33,3 unconventional organizational culture. Here one notices that “it is just a motley crew so
to say” (Human Resources Staff Member, French background). Also, informality
seems to rule and existing organizational hierarchies are partly offset, as described by
a member of the human resource department:
Yet especially at a party one feels no hierarchy in a way. [y] Thus, in our company
244 you don’t see neck tie wearers [y] I think most people are happy not to have to get
uniformed [y] At least at the summer party or so, also the Germany head is sitting
on the bench eating his steak and so on (Human Resources Staff Member, native-born
German).
Moreover, the arrangement of parties is used as an authoritative resource by the
management to produce a sense of community and – hopefully – to compensate for
the social separation caused by the organizational structure of the country teams, as
another member of the human resource department puts it:
Of course, there are accompanying measures like summer party, Christmas party [y] where
more joint activities may emerge again (Human Resources Staff Member, Turkish
background).
Several interviewees describe these events as enhancing a sense of community.
Nevertheless, a particular social order is reproduced, as a third member of the human
resource department describes in detail:
Thus, mostly, it is really mixed. Very, very seldom it happens that [y] it is separated in [y]
cultures, so to say, but it would probably be the level of hierarchy. Thus, managers prefer to
sit with managers, and there are sitting two Germans, two Spanish people, three Italians, but
I don’t think that it is [y] that the single tables are of one nationality so to say (Human
Resources Staff Member, French background).
A different picture is painted of the Christmas party. This event is commonly perceived
as being entirely German, lacking international flair and altogether reproducing
structural barriers. For example, the customer support employee characterizes them
as follows:
The way the “Rest of Europeans” celebrate their parties – this way the [Christmas] parties are
not. They are only organized by certain people, and I admit to say, I don’t like the music, it is
not international enough. At the end they always play the German pop songs and the music
of the 80 s. The food is not international and, generally, I don’t perceive the barriers as being
lower, because, again you go to the parties with the people you are together here and you
communicate with, and then you are again sitting together at the table, you dance together
[y] Thus there is nothing, the ice is not broken (Customer Support Staff Member, Bulgarian
background).
To sum up, meals and parties on the one hand contribute to the inclusive organization.
On the other hand they provide many clues for differentiating and hierarchizing
practices. Together with other organizational practices, a certain social order is created
and maintained. At the same time, particularly meals and parties approve the organic
and multifaceted anatomy of social orders, as also reversed rankings arise: here, those
people with the finest dishes and the most fun – i.e. the French, the Italian and the
Spanish – are assigned to positions at the top, while leaving the reserved and boring
colleagues – i.e. the German, especially those holding management positions – for the
lower rungs. Hence, meals and parties are a domain where migrants can quite easily
“ascend” in the company’s social order.
5. Discussion and conclusions Inclusion as
This paper aimed at describing the socio-structural fabric of an inclusive organization structuration
and its inherent tensions and ambivalences. Applying structuration theory, we focused
on the recursive interplay of structure and agency born by organizational practices.
For instance, the preferential recruitment of migrants for jobs in the customer support
is an inclusive practice. Migrants can use their specific skills as resources to get access
to the organization. Training and development as opportunities to augment resources 245
also can contribute to the inclusion of migrants. Finally, meals and other social
events are an area where migrants can use their resources effectively.
While practices in these areas contribute to the (re)production of the inclusive
organization, at the same time they include practices of differentiation and
hierarchization that restrict the inclusion of migrants. Albeit shifting and pulsating
to some extent, the social fabric can be described as made up of native-born Germans
and some American and British employees at the top, the Spanish, French and Italian
in the middle rungs and all other migrants – from about 40 other countries – at the
bottom. As such, the social order does not reflect the ideal type of an inclusive
organization.
Interestingly, our interviews point to only rudimentary activity of the employees to
alter the company’s social order. Although the interviewees unanimously appreciate all
forms of cultural diversity, migrant employees do not seem to initiate any kind of
practices that promote inclusion. They only minimally engaged in micro-emancipation
(in the sense of Alvesson and Willmott, 1992) and scarcely used the space that the
application of rules and resources might open for their agentic reconstruction of
the inclusive organization.
One domain indeed seems to provide opportunities to migrants not only for
inclusion but also for an assignment to a high position in the company’s social order:
somewhat off-work, nevertheless part of the organizational life and the work
experiences of the employees, both meals and parties are associated with rules and
resources from which especially migrants can benefit. For instance, while informal
seating arrangements lead to patterns of differentiations between “Germans at the top”
and migrants, the hierarchizing processes seem to work the other way around: to be
assigned to the top of the social order, one (simply) has to be more relaxed and funnier
than the Germans. This “being at the top” might serve as a source of recognition and
joy, and thus balance the poor conditions and status associated with other domains.
However, having fun during lunch neither results in better working conditions nor in
higher income or similar resources. That is, rather than reversing the established order,
an order parallel to the “real”, work-related and hierarchical organizational order
emerges. This parallel order reinforces the other that is structured by “heavier”
material rules and resources.
Some limitations of our empirical case study have to be mentioned. First, as we did
not deploy a complete ethnographic design, we must rely on the answers given by the
selected interviewees and the documents we analysed. Participant observation over
a longer period could have revealed other organizational fields to be more critical for
inclusion. Second, although we were aware of the problems related to essentializing
ethnicity, nationality or diversity that accompany interview methods, we could not
eliminate all possible signs and amplifiers in our questions. Finally, we concentrate on
the inclusion of migrants. Yet, the theoretical framework is equally suited to be applied
to other diversity dimensions and to account for intersectionalities between social
categories like ethnicity and gender (e.g. Kamenou and Fearful, 2006). Considering
EDI these points in future research promises a richer picture of the complexity of social
33,3 processes and relations.
Notwithstanding these methodological shortcomings, the case study admirably
demonstrates how organizational practices and individual actions contribute to
the making of an inclusive organization. In addition, the deeper look into the
organizational practices following Giddens’ structuration theory demonstrates the
246 usefulness of this theory. Accordingly, we would recommend structuration theory
to similar fields of inquiry. Moreover, organizational decision makers and migrant
employees themselves can benefit from the key propositions of Giddens’ concept of
the duality of structure: equipped with knowledge on the recursive relation of
structure and action, they can apply inclusive practices in order to shape and
reinforce the structural dimensions of signification, legitimation and domination in
such a way that the dimensions correspond to the inclusive organization and that
individual or collective agents act in the desired way by drawing on respective
rules and resources. At the same time organizational actors should be aware of
processes of differentiation and hierarchization that go along with practices
of inclusion. That is, the differentiating and hierachizing effects of human
resource practices should be accounted for in all attempts to make organizations
more inclusive.

References
Alvesson, M. and Willmott, H. (1992), “On the idea of emancipation in management and
organization studies”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 432-464.
Anders, V., Ortlieb, R., Pantelmann, H., Reim, D., Sieben, B. and Stein, S. (2008), Diversity und
Diversity Management in Berliner Unternehmen. Im Fokus: Personen mit
Migrationshintergrund. Ergebnisse einer quantitativen und qualitativen empirischen
Studie (Diversity and Diversity Management in Berlin Companies – Focused on Persons
with a Migration Background. Results of a Quantitative and Qualitative Empirical Study),
Hampp, München and Mering.
Bilimoria, D., Joy, S. and Liang, X. (2008), “Breaking barriers and creating inclusiveness: lessons
of organizational transformation to advance women faculty in academic science and
engineering”, Human Resource Management, Vol. 47 No. 3, pp. 423-441.
Boogaard, B. and Roggeband, C. (2010), “Paradoxes of intersectionality: theorizing inequality
in the Dutch police force through structure and agency”, Organization, Vol. 17 No. 1,
pp. 53-75.
Bryant, A. and Charmaz, K.C. (Eds), (2007), The Sage Handbook of Grounded Theory, Sage,
London.
Clark, J., Mogdil, C. and Mogdil, S. (Eds), (1990), Anthony Giddens: Consensus and Controversy,
Falmer Press, London.
Craib, I. (1992), Anthony Giddens, Routledge, London and New York, NY.
Fertig, M. and Schurer, S. (2007), “Earnings assimilation of immigrants in Germany: the
importance of heterogeneity and attrition bias”, No. 30, SOEP papers on multidisciplinary
panel data research, DIW, Berlin.
Giddens, A. (1984), The Constitution of Society. Outline of the Theory of Structuration, Polity
Press, Cambridge.
Holgate, J. (2005), “Organizing migrant workers: a case study of working conditions and
unionization in a London sandwich factory”, Work, Employment and Society, Vol. 19 No. 3,
pp. 463-480.
Holvino, E., Ferdman, B.M. and Merrill-Sands, D. (2004), “Creating and sustaining diversity and Inclusion as
inclusion in organizations: strategies and approaches”, in Stockdale, M.S. and Crosby, F.J.
(Eds), The Psychology and Management of Workplace Diversity, Blackwell, Malden, MA, structuration
pp. 245-276.
Janssens, M. and Zanoni, P. (2008), “What makes an organization inclusive? Organizational
practices favouring the relational inclusion of ethnic minorities in operative jobs”,
presented at the 21st IACM Conference, Chicago, IL, 3-6 July.
247
Kalonaityte, V. (2010), “The case of vanishing borders: theorizing diversity management as
internal border control”, Organization, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 31-52.
Kamenou, N. and Fearful, A. (2006), “Ethnic minority women: a lost voice in HRM”, Human
Resource Management Journal, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 154-172.
Mor Barak, M.E. (2000), “Beyond affirmative action: toward a model of diversity and
organizational inclusion”, Administration in Social Work, Vol. 23 Nos 3-4, pp. 47-68.
OECD (2012), International Migration Outlook 2012, OECD Publishing, Paris.
Ogbonna, E. and Harris, L.C. (2006), “The dynamics of employee relationships in an ethnically
diverse workforce”, Human Relations, Vol. 59 No. 3, pp. 379-407.
Ortlieb, R. and Sieben, B. (2010), “Migrant employees in Germany: personnel structures and
practices”, Equality, Diversity & Inclusion, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 364-379.
Ortlieb, R. and Sieben, B. (2013), “Employment strategies and business logic: why do companies
employ ethnic minorities?”, Group & Organization Management, Vol. 38 No. 4, pp. 480-511.
Prasad, P. (1997), “The Protestant ethic and the myths of the frontier: cultural imprints,
organizational structuring, and workplace diversity”, in Prasad, P., Mills, A.J., Elmes, M.
and Prasad, A. (Eds), Managing the Organizational Melting Pot: Dilemmas of Workplace
Diversity, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 129-147.
Proudford, K.L. and Nkomo, S.M. (2006), “Race and ethnicity in organizations”, in Konrad, A.M.,
Prasad, P. and Pringle, J. (Eds), Handbook of Workplace Diversity, Sage, London, pp. 323-344.
Roberson, Q.M. (2006), “Disentangling the meanings of diversity and inclusion in organizations”,
Group Organization Management, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 212-236.
Roth, P.L., Huffcutt, A.I. and Bobko, P. (2003), “Ethnic group differences in measures of job
performance: a new meta-analysis”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 4, pp. 694-706.
Sandberg, J. (2005), “How do we justify knowledge produced within interpretive approaches?”,
Organizational Research Methods, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 41-68.
Shore, L.M., Randel, A.E., Chung, B.G., Dean, M.A., Ehrhart, K.H. and Singh, G. (2011), “Inclusion
and diversity in work groups: a review and model for future research”, Journal of
Management, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 1262-1289.
Turner, T. (2010), “The jobs immigrants do: issues of displacement and marginalisation in the
Irish labour market”, Work, Employment and Society, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 318-336.
Yin, R.K. (2009), Case Study Research, Design and Methods, 4th ed., Sage, Newbury Park, CA.
Zanoni, P. and Janssens, M. (2004), “Deconstructing difference: the rhetorics of HR managers’
diversity discourses”, Organization Studies, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 55-74.
Zanoni, P. and Janssens, M. (2007), “Minority employees. Engaging with (diversity) management:
an analysis of control, agency, and micro-emancipation”, Journal of Management Studies,
Vol. 44 No. 8, pp. 1371-1397.

Further reading
Cox, T.H. Jr (1993), Cultural Diversity in Organizations: Theory, Research and Practice,
Berret-Koehler, San Francisco, CA.
EDI About the authors
Renate Ortlieb has been a Full Professor of Human Resource Management at the University of
33,3 Graz, Austria, since 2009. She completed her doctoral thesis on employee sickness absences in
2002 and her “habilitation” in 2009 at the Freie Universität Berlin. After graduation in business
administration and economics at the Technische Universität Berlin in 1995 she worked as a
research and teaching assistant at the universities of Konstanz, Essen, Flensburg and at the Freie
248 Universität Berlin. She was an assistant professor at the Freie Universität Berlin, a visiting
lecturer at the Berlin School of Economics, Fern-Universität in Hagen, the Institute of Electronic
Business Berlin and the Hamburg Media School and an interim full professor at the University
Konstanz. Renate Ortlieb’s publications appeared in journals such as Journal of the Royal
Statistical Society – Applied Statistics, Management Revue, Schmalenbach Business Review,
International Journal of Human Resource Management, Feminist Economics and Group &
Organization Management. Her research interests are in human resource strategies, especially
with a focus on migrant employees, the interplay of firm’s internationalization strategies with
human resource strategies, especially with a focus on South Eastern Europe, gender and power
relations in organizations, employee absenteeism, and empirical methods of management
research. Professor Renate Ortlieb is the corresponding author and can be contacted at:
[email protected]
Dr Barbara Sieben has been a Full Professor of Human Resource Management at the Helmut
Schmidt University in Hamburg, Germany, since October 2013. After graduation in business
administration and economics, Spanish and Pedagogy in 2001 she worked as a research assistant
and lecturer at the Freie Universität Berlin and earned her doctorate in business administration
in 2006 with a dissertation on management and emotions. From 2007 onwards she was assistant
professor of Human Resource Management focused on Diversity at the Freie Universität
Berlin, visiting lecturer at the University of Innsbruck, visiting scholar at the University
of Massachusetts Boston, and “Teaching Equality” – Guest Professor at the University of
Tübingen. Barbara Sieben published papers in journals such as Managementforschung,
Management Revue, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Group &
Organization Management and Human Relations, and is co-editor of a volume on “Diversity
Studies”. Her research is based on multiparadigmatic approaches, informed by critical
management perspectives. Main research topics are human resource strategies with special foci
on migrant employees, older workers and the retention of specialists and executives; gender,
diversity and equal opportunities in organizations; emotions in organizations and the
management of service work.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected]

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without
permission.