How Bureaucracy Promotes Inclusive Organizing

Diversity literature in general and Feminist in particular have long promoted alternatives to bureaucracy on the premise that this form of governance is far from gender- and race-neutral, and that inclusive organizing necessitate a flatter, decentralized and more ‘organic’ set-up (Ferguson 1984, Martin P.Y 1987, Ashcraft 2001, 2006, 2013, Acker 1990, Ghorashi & Sabelis 2012, Dai 2014). My ethnographic research in two case organizations both championed for their diversity work in a Danish context, shows a different pattern: While the organization characterized by structural flexibility and informality struggle with membership perceptions of partiality and unfairness on the basis of ethnicity and professional background, then the bureaucratic structured organization characterized by structural stability and formality is more successful in generating the necessary membership perception fairness and opportunities conducive to their inclusion. Guided by Ashcraft (2001) concept of organized dissonance, this paper explores how the combination of apparent incongruent elements of stability/flexibility and formality/informality might offer a passage for inclusive organizing.