Concerned centrally with African American women’s emancipation, this early work shows that oppression cannot be reduced to one axis of gender or race, but is produced through multiple, intersecting axes (Collins, 2000 2012). In the academy, the work of black feminists poignantly articulated that additive single-axis approaches were inadequate to understand and account for the experiences of African American women, where for example, their experiences are seen as the combination of static experiences of blackness and femaleness (Davis, 1981 hooks, 1981 Lorde, 1984 The Combahee River Collective, 1977). As an analytical sensibility, intersectionality emerged in social activism from the 1960s (Chun et al., 2013 Collins, 2000 2012).
Intersectionality is an evolving concept and tool that broadly refers to a recognition of the ‘complex, irreducible, varied and variable effects which ensue when multiple axes of differentiation – economic, political cultural, psychic, subjective and experiential – intersect in historically specific contexts’ (Brah and Phoenix, 2004: 76). The de-radicalisation of intersectionality In doing so, I hope to generate a dialogue of how intersectionality may help organisation scholars to interrogate power relations in work and organisations as well as help their subjects transform them (Dhamoon, 2011). Demonstrating through examples from my own study of Chinese Australian leaders in government and business, I show how two methodological considerations – biography and history – can respectively help align researchers’ standpoints with the politics of their marginalised subjects and contextualise subjects’ struggles towards equality and justice. I suggest in this article that future organisational research need to re-radicalise intersectionality to protect against its misappropriation. Perhaps even more problematic is a rising tendency to use intersectionality to showcase multiple identities like gender, race and class without any commitment to the social justice aims of intersectionality’s Black feminist roots. Organisation studies in particular have had a tendency to engage superficially with intersectionality focusing on identities and categories of difference, but overlooking processes of differentiation and systems of domination (Dhamoon, 2011). However, emerging critiques have illuminated some potential limitations and problems with which intersectionality is adopted in recent research.
#Besiege intersection professional
Its application to organisational research spans across analyses of professional identities (Essers et al., 2010 Johansson and Śliwa, 2014 Kelan, 2014), career progression (Kamenou et al., 2013 Sang et al., 2013), leadership (Jean-Marie et al., 2009 Richardson and Loubier, 2008), entrepreneurship (Knight, 2016 special issue of Ethnic and Racial Studies, Romero and Valdez, 2016), diversity management (Syed and Özbilgin, 2009 Tatli and Özbilgin, 2012 Zanoni et al., 2010) and organisational inequality regimes (Acker, 2012 Healy et al., 2011 Holvino, 2010). Despite its long tradition in the social sciences, intersectionality has only in more recent years begun to inform theoretical and methodological advances in organisation studies.
0 kommentar(er)
