The focus on emerging and varying categories of differences that we see in the critical perspective is also recognized under the label of intersectionality. The goal of the intersectional approach within the critical perspective is to analyse multiple identities in order to “avoid reducing ethnic minority employees to mere representatives of a stigmatized social group” (Janssens & Zanoni, 2014), which risks reproducing the inequality institutionalized in broader society.
Hornsey (2006), defines social theory as those aspects of an individual's self‐image that derive from the social categories to which he/she belongs, as well as the emotional and evaluative consequences of this group membership. As well as Hogg (2016), who agrees that social identity theory is an interactionist social psychological theory of the role of self-conception and associated cognitive processes and social beliefs in group processes and intergroup relations.
Intersectionality’s of social identity dimensions play a significant role in organisational work environments (Pompper, 2014). The concept of social identity offers a means for theoretical prediction and applied understanding of how difference (e.g. age, class, culture, ethnicity, faith/spirituality, gender, physical/psychological ability, sexual orientation, and more) plays out in organisations (Pompper, 2014) and how these combine to shape self-identity perceptions as well as in-group-outgroup treatment by coworkers and managers (Acker, 1999). The social identity theory in context of intersectionality allows stereotyping to emerge into workplaces. Thus, meaning that the theory helps to understand in group favoritism, conformity to group norms and stereotypes in workplaces. Tajfel (1979), argues that humans use social categorisation to categorise humans based on shared characteristics such as race, gender religion and sexual orientation. These characteristics are common in all workplaces.
Intersectionality exists in workplace. However, educating employees, employers and organisations on intersectionality will help to eliminate discrimination on dimensions such as age, gender, ethnicity and more. This will help to get rid of unconscious bias, especially in the recruiting and selecting process. Social identity theory assumes that the perception of oneness with or belonging to a specific social category, such as an organization or a group, can intrinsically motivate individuals to achieve collective good (Tajfel and Turner, 1979). Mooney (2014) proposed a career construct model that identified that factors such as gender, age, ethnicity and class influence the pace of career progression for individual workers. Thus, meaning that teaching the organisation to motivate each other using their intersectionality as it increases productivity and achieves greater outcome. A greater outcome would be for the company to conduct an unconscious bias training. This training is carried out by Diversity Works NZ, who help to manage the issue (Diversity at Work, 2018).
Issues related to intersectionality are illustrated in my experience of a primary student. I had changed schools, despite not wanting too. I was exposed to rich, white kids from a multi diverse school. This was hard for me to adjust too. They were accepting of the “new girl”, however as days past, the terms “curry muncher”, “curry girl” and “bud bud” would come into play especially if I were to get close to the “popular girl”. This experience of discrimination also relates to the social identity theory. Tajel & Turner (1979) research highlights that the social identity theory proposes that individuals are prone to self-categorizing themselves into particular groups. Ojala & Nesdale (2004) research found that the least support for the social identity theory is for the out-group member, hence why bullying was more acceptable. Similarly, Huges, Ambady & Zaki (2016) explain that individuals tend to favor members of their own groups over outsiders and cooperate less with outgroup, when compared with in-group members. Outgroup members are stereotyped as groups to which they don’t belong too (Nawata & Yamaguchi, 2014). In this case, I was the outgroup member, as I was posing a possible threat to the in-group members as I was getting close with the popular girl (Ojala & Nesdale, 2004). I felt that name calling was a way for me to find a new group of friends, as I would feel outnumbered. The in group members perceived outgroup member (myself) as being more homogenous (Nawata & Yamagucchi, 2014). Hence, the name calling to make me feel a negative way and led to moving to a new group who consisted of Indian girls just like myself.
My view on intersectionality has opened me up to a better understanding of what intersectionality is. Before the identity lecture, I had no idea how many aspects were accounted for under intersectionality. I had believed that intersectionality was to do with gender only, however I quickly realised that other attributes were included in intersectionality. As I left high school, I haven’t experience discrimination on social categories, though I had learnt that there are high levels of workplace discrimination in NZ. For example, men in nursing are discriminated by gender as the public image of the nursing profession is that nursing is a female occupation (Zamanzadeh, Valizadeh, Negarandeh, Mondadi & Ali, 2013). This has changed my outlook on NZ’s workplace as being a Kiwi born Indian, I am now afraid of entering the workforce as a full time employee as my skin colour and race may be a barrier to my progression in my career.
Human rights are the basic rights and freedoms that every person in the world should have. NZ takes human rights seriously. The rights became part of NZ law through the Bill of Rights Act in 1990. Human rights under the Act include:” The right to freedom of expression, the right to religious believe, the right to freedom of movement and the right to be free from discrimination”. The Human Rights Act was introduced in 1993 with a focus on protecting NZers against unlawful discrimination (Human Rights Commission, 2018). On the other hand, equity is seen as fairness in every situation (Seo, Hosik, Sul-Seo, Jung, Chung, Yun & Kim, 2017).
Workforce diversity is a public good because the public has invested in educating and developing the quality and the skills of the workforce and because without an educated, skilled workforce that has equal opportunities in employment, a society will invariably be worse off. The social tragedy is induced by non-optimal division of labour and the myriad social problems and unrest that potentially follow from many people being deprived of opportunities to use their talent and to realize their full potential (Jonsen, Tatli, Ozbilgn & Bell, 2014).
Overall, diversity in the workplace can deliver human rights and equity after it manages its diversity by changing how individuals view certain dimensions of diversity, hence organisations educating employees on accepting diversity and how everyone is entitled to be treated in fairness and has equal opportunity. A radical change of perspective would require companies to have multidimensional performance goals including accountability for equality, diversity and inclusion at work to pursue equity in the organisation (Jonsen et al, 2014). Furthermore, Blockman (2003) suggests that to be accepting of diversity in the work environment, solutions must come from those who have authority and influence over businesses and the business environment, and this may take a collective approach including stakeholders such as employees. Pease (2016) agrees that to end issues such as patriarchy, there needs to be social change in accepting dimensions such as gender and women being on the board.