Download Ableism in management, organizations and employment relations

Ableism in management, organizations and employment relations: Challenging
dominant ideas of ‘ideal’ employees, ‘ideal’ bodies and ‘ideal’ capabilities
Convenors:
Koen Van Laer (Hasselt University, Belgium – lead convenor); Jannine Williams (University
of Bradford, UK); Eline Jammaers (Hasselt University, Belgium); Deborah Foster (Cardiff
Business School, UK); Stefan Hardonk (University of Iceland, Iceland)
In recent years, an ableism lens has been advanced in different scientific fields to expose and
critique socially accepted images of ‘ideal’ bodies, minds and capabilities. Ableism refers to
‘a network of beliefs, processes and practices that produce a particular kind of self and body
(the corporeal standard) that is projected as the perfect, species-typical and therefore essential
and fully human’ (Campbell, 2001: 44). Ableist discourses, processes and practices thereby
normatively promote a specific understanding of what it means to be ‘able’ and, as such,
which bodies, capabilities, and intelligences are deemed ‘normal’ and (economically)
valuable. In doing so, they create a strong binary opposition between ‘able’ bodies,
capabilities and intelligences, and ‘others’ who are constructed as ‘inferior’, ‘deviant’ or
‘abnormal’ (Campbell, 2001; 2014). The lens of ableism was originally developed within the
field of critical disability studies (e.g. Campbell, 2001; 2009; Goodley, 2014; Shildrick,
2009). In this literature, it has served as a conceptual lens to not only expose the way ableist
discourses, processes and practices disadvantage, oppress and exclude those perceived as
disabled, but also focus on those assumed to be ‘able’ and on the processes and practices
involved in reproducing and enforcing norms of ‘abledness’. In this way, it created new ways
to de-naturalize dominant ideas of corporeal, intellectual and mental (dis)ability and expose
the way non-disability acts as an organizing normative principle (Campbell, 2009). However,
the framework of ableism has also been used to explore issues of gender and race (e.g.
Wolbring, 2012) and of what it fundamentally means to be ‘normal’ (e.g. Goodley, 2014).
More recently, the concept of ableism has also been introduced into management and
organization studies (MOS), where it has been used to explore the organizational experiences
of disabled employees and expose and challenge ableist assumptions in contemporary
workplaces (e.g. Foster & Wass, 2013: Jammaers, et al., 2015; Williams & Mavin, 2012).
Studies on ableism however, are not the only ones to highlight and challenge notions
of ‘ideal’ employees, ‘ideal’ bodies and ‘ideal’ capabilities in the workplace and labour
market. Critical MOS in general have also focused on how organizational (identity regulatory)
discourses, practices and material arrangements produce, promote and value particular kinds
of employees, bodies and capabilities (e.g. Alvesson & Willmott, 2002; Dale & Burrell,
2008). Different streams within critical MOS have, in turn, shown how these dominant ideas
of ‘ideal’ employees, ‘ideal’ bodies and ‘ideal’ capabilities are infused with different social
identities. For instance, critical gender studies in MOS have exposed the gendered nature of
organizations. This literature has for example shown how organizational processes reflect
ideas of ‘ideal’ ‘disembodied’ employees, which infused with particular understandings of
masculinity. In other words, how accepted conceptions of ‘ideal’ employees, bodies and
capabilities are gendered and (re)produce gender divisions and inequalities (e.g. Acker, 1990;
2006; Benschop & Doorewaard, 1998). Similarly, MOS working in the tradition of queer
theory have exposed the heteronormative assumptions underlying formal and informal
organizational processes, which are involved in (re)producing the homosexual/heterosexual
binary and constructing a specific connection between sex, gender and sexuality as ‘normal’.
This, in turn, causes employees and bodies which deviate from the heteronormative ideal to
be marginalized, perceived to be unsuitable to perform particular jobs or required to adapt to
dominant (heteronormative) standards (e.g. Rumens & Broomfield, 2014; Rumens & Kerfoot,
2009). Similarly, postcolonial and other critical studies on race and ethnicity have aimed to
expose how whiteness is infused in organizations. In doing so, they have shown how takenfor-granted organizational practices, discourses and norms on ‘ideal’ employees, bodies and
capabilities are not ‘race-less’, but rather reflect a white subject who is implicitly assumed to
have no race (e.g. Janssens & Zanoni, 2014; Nkomo & Al Ariss, 2014; Van Laer & Janssens,
2014). Finally, studies on age in MOS have exposed how ageing and dominant discourses of
decline can cause older individuals to become marginalized and seen as inferior in relation to
‘young’ understandings of ‘ideal’ employees, ‘ideal’ bodies, and ‘ideal’ capabilities (e.g.
Ainsworth & Hardy, 2008; Riach, 2007)
Building on these debates, this stream has two main goals. First, we hope to further
discussions on ableism within critical studies on management, organizations and employment
relations. Second, we hope to advance debates on ‘ideal’ employees, ‘ideal’ bodies and ‘ideal’
capabilities between different streams in CMS. Related to the first ambition, we are interested
in exploring how the concept of ableism can allow us to further understand organizational
processes, dynamics and experiences, especially in the context of disabled employees.
However, we also welcome different perspectives on disability, including those critical of the
concept of ableism. Related to the second ambition, we aim to stimulate debates between the
different perspectives used in MOS to explore, expose and challenge ideas of corporeal,
intellectual and mental ‘normalcy’. In other words, this streams aims to contribute to a
dialogue which transcends the boundaries between different streams focusing on different
social identities, and thereby stimulate a mutual exchange of ideas between scholars interested
in exposing and challenging organizational norms related to ‘ideal’ employees, ‘ideal’ bodies
and ‘ideal’ capabilities.
Potential research topics that could be addressed by submissions include (but are not limited
to):

Ableist assumptions and ideas of ‘ideal’ employees, ‘ideal’ bodies, and ‘ideal’ capabilities
in MOS (e.g. in studies on leadership, HRM, job design and accommodations, careers,
work-life balance, sickness absence).

The way organizational processes, practices, policies and cultures (re)produce or
challenge ableism and ideas of ‘ideal’ employees, ‘ideal’ bodies, and ‘ideal’ capabilities.

The way organizational spaces, artefacts and materiality (re)produce or challenge ableism
and ideas of ‘ideal’ employees, ‘ideal’ bodies, and ‘ideal’ capabilities.

The various manifestations of ableism and disability in organizations.

Ableism and ideas of ‘ideal’ employees, ‘ideal’ bodies and ‘ideal’ capabilities in critical
gender studies, critical studies on race and ethnicity, critical studies on age, queer
studies,…

The interplay between identity regulation and identity work, power and resistance, or
structure and agency, in the context of ableism and ideas of ‘ideal’ employees, ‘ideal’
bodies, and ‘ideal’ capabilities.

The connection between ableism (or conceptions of ‘ideal’ employees, ‘ideal’ bodies, and
‘ideal’ capabilities) and neoliberalism (e.g. neoliberal concepts of meritocracy,
entrepreneurship, independence and autonomy).

The connection between neoliberalism and the emergence of the health, well-being,
happiness and resilience at work industry.

The connection between ableism and concepts and ideas such as transhumanism,
morphological freedom and cyborgs in organizations.

Ableism and embodiment, the lived experience of being in a body that is different from
the ‘ideal’ body, and abject, monstrous or leaky bodies in organizations.

Ableism, questions of disclosure and (in)visibility in organizations.

The connection between ableism in organizations and broader societal discourses (e.g.
disability pride, body positive movements) and/or institutional frameworks (e.g.
legislation, welfare programs)

The connection between ableism and ethics
References
Acker J (1990). Hierarchies, jobs, bodies: A theory of gendered organizations. Gender and
Society, 4(2): 139-158.
Acker, J (2006). Inequality Regimes. Gender, Class, and Race in Organizations. Gender &
Society, 20(4): 441-464.
Ainsworth, S. & Hardy, C. (2008). The Enterprising Self: An Unsuitable Job for an Older
Worker. Organization, 15(3): 389-405.
Alvesson, M. & Willmott, H. (2002). Identity Regulation as Organizational Control:
Producing the Appropriate Individual. Journal of Management Studies, 39(5): 619644.
Benschop, Y. & Doorewaard, H. (1998). Covered by Equality: The Gender Subtext of
Organizations. Organization Studies, 19(5): 787-805.
Campbell, F.K. (2001). Inciting Legal Fictions: ‘Disability’s’ Date with Ontology and the
Ableist Body of the Law. Griffith Law Review, 10(1): 42-62.
Campbell, F.K. (2009). Contours of Ableism: The Production of Disability and Abledness.
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Campbell, F.K. (2014). Ableism as transformative practice. In: C. Cocker and T. Hafford
Letchfield (eds) Rethinking anti-discriminatory and anti-oppressive theories for social
work practice. Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 78-92.
Dale, K. & Burrell, G. (2008). The spaces of organisation and the organisation of space:
power, identity and materiality at work. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Foster, D. & Wass, V. (2013). Disability in the labour market: An exploration of concepts of
the ideal worker and organisational fit that disadvantage employees with impairments.
Sociology, 47(4), 705-21.
Goodley, D. (2014). Dis/ability studies: Theorising disablism and ableism. London:
Routledge.
Jammaers, E., Zanoni, P. & Hardonk, S. (2016). Constructing positive identities in ableist
workplaces: disabled employees’ discursive practices engaging with the discourse of
lower productivity. Human Relations, 69(6): 1365-1386.
Janssens, M. & Zanoni, P. (2014). Alternative diversity management: Organizational practices
fostering ethnic equality at work. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 30(3): 317331.
Nkomo, S.M. & Al Ariss, A. (2014). The historical origins of ethnic (white) privilege in US
organizations. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 29(4): 389-404.
Riach, K. (2007). 'Othering' older worker identity in recruitment. Human Relations, 60(11):
1701-1726.
Rumens, N. & Broomfield, J. (2014). Gay men in the performing arts: Performing sexualities
within ‘gay-friendly’ work contexts. Organization, 21(3): 365-382.
Rumens, N. & Kerfoot, D. (2009). Gay men at work: (Re)constructing the self as
professional. Human Relations, 62(5): 763-786.
Shildrick, M. (2009). Dangerous Discourse of Disability, Subjectivity and Sexuality.
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Van Laer, K. & Janssens, M. (2014). Between the devil and the deep blue sea: Exploring the
hybrid identity narratives of ethnic minority professionals. Scandinavian Journal of
Management, 30(2): 186–196.
Williams, J. & Mavin, S. (2012). Disability as constructed difference: A literature review and
research agenda for management and organization studies. International Journal of
Management Reviews, 14(2): 159–79.
Wolbring, G. (2012). Expanding ableism: Taking down the ghettoization of impact of
disability studies scholars. Societies, 2(3): 75-83.
Convenors
lead convenor:
Koen Van Laer is an Assistant Professor at SEIN – Identity, Diversity & Inequality Research,
Hasselt University (Belgium). Drawing on critical perspectives, his works focuses on
ethnicity, disability, sexual orientation, and religion at work, on the way workplace
experiences and careers are connected to power inequalities, and on the way ‘difference’ is
managed and constructed in organizations. His work has appeared in edited volumes as well
as in international journals such as Human Relations, Organization, and Scandinavian Journal
of Management.
Contact details: [email protected]; Hasselt University, Martelarenlaan 42, B-3500
Hasselt, Belgium. +32 (0)11 26 86 77
Jannine Williams is Senior Lecturer in Human Resource Management and Organizational
Behaviour at Bradford University, UK. Her research interests encompass processes of
organizing; categories of social relations and constructions of difference, particularly
disability and gender; women’s intragender relations and friendship at work; career studies
with a focus upon boundaryless careers. She has co-edited a book Deaf Students in Higher
Education and published in Studies in Higher Education, British Journal of Management and
the International Journal of Management Reviews.
Contact
details:
[email protected];
University
of
Bradford
School
of
Management, Emm Lane, Bradford, West Yorkshire, BD9 4JL, UK
Eline Jammaers is a post-doctoral research fellow at the research centre SEIN – Identity,
Diversity & Inequality Research, Hasselt University (Belgium). Carried out in the framework
of the Flemish Policy Research Centre on Equality Policies, her PhD research explored the
workplace experiences of disabled employees through critical theories. Her main research
interests include ableism and disability, diversity (management), inequality, identity work and
power/resistance in organizations.
Contact details: [email protected]; Hasselt University, Martelarenlaan 42, B-3500
Hasselt, Belgium.
Deborah Foster is a sociologist and a Reader in Employment Relations at Cardiff Business
School (UK). She has conducted disability research with Wales TUC, is currently researching
with partners (in Estonia, Hungary and Poland) on an EU funded project examining industrial
relations and disabled and older workers, and is a member of the Welsh National Advisory
Group on Disability Research on Independent Living and Learning (DRILL). Deborah has
published research on disability and employment in the journals Sociology, Work,
Employment and Society, The British Journal of Industrial Relations and Industrial Relations
Journal. She has a current interest in the ways in which neo-liberal ideas are influencing the
health and well-being at work agenda and its particular effects on disabled employees.
Contact details: [email protected]; S46, Aberconway Building, Colum Drive, Cardiff,
CF10 3EU
Stefan Hardonk is a sociologist and post-doctoral researcher who works as a Marie Curie
Fellow at the Centre for Disability Studies, University of Iceland (Iceland). His research is
situated within disability studies, more specifically in the fields of childhood disability,
deafness, and employment, with an emphasis on poststructuralist and critical approaches. As
far as employment is concerned, he has a specific interest in the social construction of work
by disabled people and support professionals, and in aspects of quality of work and
precariousness among disabled people.
Contact details: [email protected]; Oddi - Sæmundargötu 2, 101 Reykjavík, Iceland