Disability as Constructed Difference: A Literature Review and Research Agenda for Management and Organization Studies
Jannine Williams
Newcastle Business School, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 8ST, UK. Email: [email protected] ; [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorSharon Mavin
Newcastle Business School, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 8ST, UK. Email: [email protected] ; [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorJannine Williams
Newcastle Business School, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 8ST, UK. Email: [email protected] ; [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorSharon Mavin
Newcastle Business School, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 8ST, UK. Email: [email protected] ; [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorThe authors wish to thank Dr Ron Beadle, Dr Sandra Corlett and the anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments and suggestions.
Abstract
Disability theory and disabled people's voices have remained marginal in attempts to include a wider range of theoretical perspectives and voices in organization studies. This includes studies of the normative assumptions underpinning socially constructed categories of difference. This paper addresses this gap by reviewing the literature on social categories of difference, intersectional studies and studies across human resource management and diversity literatures. The argument here is that, while research has begun to move from an individualized discourse of disability, disability remains inadequately theorized as a constructed difference. The paper reviews the disability studies literature to identify the relevance of conceptualizing disability for work organizations, problematizes the concepts of disability and impairment and differentiates competing discourses of disability. The contribution of this paper is threefold. First, it offers an alternative social interpretation discourse which argues that disability is constructed as a negated difference through assumed ableism, which is a normative expectation of non-disability. Second, it presents impairment effects as legitimate organizing requirements rather than individualized problems. The paper argues impairment effects, the effects of bodily and cognitive variation, have legitimate implications for how disabled people negotiate organizing contexts. Third, it develops a disability studies lens to advance theoretical approaches to the study of social categories of difference in the field of management and organization studies.
References
- Abberley, P. (1987). The concept of oppression and the development of a social theory of disability. Disability, Handicap and Society, 2, pp. 5–19.
10.1080/02674648766780021 Google Scholar
- Abberley, P. (2002). Work, disability, disabled people and European social policy. In C. Barnes, M. Oliver and L. Barton (eds), Disability Studies Today. Cambridge: Polity Press, pp. 120–138.
- Acker, J. (2006). Inequality regimes: gender, class, and race in organizations. Gender & Society, 20, pp. 441–464.
- Alvesson, M. and Billing, Y.D. (2002). Beyond body-counting. A discussion of the social construction of gender at work. In I. Aaltio and J. Mills (eds), Gender, Identity and the Culture of Organizations. London: Routledge, pp. 72–91.
- Alvesson, M. and Billing, Y.D. (2009). Understanding Gender and Organizations, 2nd edn. London: Sage.
10.4135/9781446280133 Google Scholar
- Alvesson, M., Hardy, C. and Harley, B. (2008). Reflecting on reflexivity: reflexive textual practices in organization and management theory. Journal of Management Studies, 45, pp. 480–501.
- Armer, B. (2004). In search of a social model of disability: marxism, normality and culture. In C. Barnes and G. Mercer (eds), Implementing the Social Model of Disability: Theory and Research. Leeds: The Disability Press, pp. 48–64.
- Ashcraft, K.L. (2004). Gender, discourse and organization: framing a shifting relationship. In D. Grant, C. Hardy, C. Oswick and L.L. Putnam (eds), The Sage Handbook of Organizational Discourse. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 275–298.
10.4135/9781848608122.n13 Google Scholar
- Barnes, C. (1992). Disability and employment. Personnel Review, 21, pp. 55–73.
- Barnes, C. (1998). The social model of disability: a sociological phenomenon ignored by sociologists? In T. Shakespeare (ed.), The Disability Reader: Social Science Perspectives. London: Cassell, pp. 65–78.
- Barnes, C. (2000). A working social model? Disability, work and disability politics in the 21st century. Critical Social Policy, 20, pp. 441–457.
- Barnes, C. (2003). What a difference a decade makes: reflections on doing ‘emancipatory’ disability research. Disability & Society, 18, pp. 3–17.
- Barnes, C. (2004). Disability, disability studies and the academy. In J. Swain, S. French, C. Barnes and C. Thomas (eds), Disabling Barriers, Enabling Environments. London: Sage, pp. 28–33.
- Barnes, C. and Roulstone, A. (2005). ‘Work’ is a four letter word: disability, work and welfare. In A. Roulstone and C. Barnes (eds), Working Futures? Disabled People, Policy and Social Inclusion. Bristol: The Polity Press, pp. 315–328.
- Baxter, J. and Hughes, C. (2004). Tongue sandwiches and bagel days: sex, food and mind–body dualism. Gender, Work & Organization, 11, pp. 363–380.
- de Beauvoir, S. (1972). The Second Sex. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
- Begum, N. (1992). Disabled women and a feminist agenda. Feminist Review, 40, pp. 70–84.
- Bendl, R. (2008). Gender subtexts – reproduction of exclusion in organizational discourse. British Journal of Management, 19, pp. S50–S64.
- Borgerson, J. and Rehn, A. (2004). General economy and productive dualisms. Gender, Work & Organization, 11, pp. 455–474.
- Burr, V. (2003). Social Constructionism, 2nd edn. Hove: Routledge.
- Butler, J. (1999). Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity, 2nd edn. London: Routledge.
- Butler, J. (2004). Undoing Gender. New York: Routledge.
10.4324/9780203499627 Google Scholar
- Calás, M.B. (1992). An/other silent voice? Representing ‘hispanic woman’ in organizational texts. In A. Mills and P. Tancred (eds), Gendering Organizational Analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, pp. 201–221.
- Calás, M.B. and Smircich, L. (1992). Re-writing gender into organizational theorizing. In M. Reed and M. Hughes (eds), Rethinking Organization. New Directions in Organization Theory and Analysis. London: Sage, pp. 227–254.
- Calás, M.B. and Smircich, L. (1999). Past postmodernism? Reflections and tentative directions. Academy of Management Review, 24, pp. 649–671.
- Calás, M.B. and Smircich, L. (2006). From the ‘woman's point of view’ ten years later: towards a feminist organization studies. In S. Clegg, C. Hardy, T.B. Lawrence and W.R. Nord (eds), The Sage Handbook of Organization Studies. London: Sage, pp. 284–346.
10.4135/9781848608030.n9 Google Scholar
- Campbell, F.K. (2005). Legislating disability: negative ontologies and the government of legal identities. In S. Tremain (ed.), Foucault and the Government of Disability. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press, pp. 108–130.
- Campbell, F.K. (2008). Refusing able(ness): a preliminary conversation about ableism. MC Journal, 11. Available at: http://journal.media-culture.org.au/index.php/mcjournal/article/viewArticle/46 (accessed 28 August 2009).
- Campbell, F.K. (2009a). Studies in Ableism: Partnerships, Divorce or Realignment with Disability and Cultural Studies? Paper presented at the Social Change and Wellbeing Research Seminar, 7 April, Research Institute for Health and Social Change. Manchester Metropolitan University.
- Campbell, F.K. (2009b). Contours of Ableism. The Production of Disability and Abledness. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
10.1057/9780230245181 Google Scholar
- Carlile, P., Nicolini, D., Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H. (2011). Call for papers. How matter matters: objects, artifacts and materiality in organization studies. Paper presented at the 3rd International Symposium on Process Organization Studies, 16–18 June, Corfu, Greece. Available at: http://www.process-symposium.com/documents/2012cfp.pdf (accessed 17 December 2010).
- Chia, R. (1995). From modern to postmodern organizational analysis. Organization Studies, 16, pp. 579–604.
- Chouinard, V. (1997). Making space for disabling differences: challenging ableist geographies. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 15, pp. 379–387.
- Cockburn, C. (1991). In the Way of Women. Men's Resistance to Sex Equality in Organizations. London: Macmillan.
- Connell, R. (2009). Accountable conduct: ‘doing gender’ in transexual and political retrospect. Gender & Society, 23, pp. 104–111.
- Corker, M. (1999a). Differences, conflations and foundations: the limit to ‘accurate’ theoretical representation of disabled people's experience? Disability & Society, 14, pp. 627–642.
- Corker, M. (1999b). New disability discourse, the principle of optimization and social change. In M. Corker and S. French (eds), Disability Discourse. Buckingham: Open University Press, pp. 192–210.
- M. Corker and T. Shakespeare (eds) (2002). Disability/Post Modernity: Embodying Disability Theory. London: Continuum.
- Cox, T. (2004). Problems with research by organizational scholars on issues of race and ethnicity. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 40, pp. 124–145.
10.1177/0021886304263851 Google Scholar
- Cox, T. and Nkomo, S. (1990). Invisible men and women: a status report on race as a variable in organization behavior research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 11, pp. 419–431.
- Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: a black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum: Feminism in the Law: Theory, Practice and Criticism, 1989, pp. 139–167.
- Crenshaw, K. (1997). Intersectionality and identity politics: learning from violence against women of color. In M. Shanley and U. Narayan (eds), Reconstructing Political Theory. Feminist Perspectives. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, pp. 179–193.
- Crow, L. (1996). Including all of our lives: renewing the social model of disability. In J. Morris (ed.), Encounters with Strangers: Feminism and Disability. London: Women's Press, pp. 206–222.
- Danieli, A. and Woodhams, C. (2005). Disability frameworks and monitoring in local authorities. In A. Roulstone and C. Barnes (eds), Working Futures? Disabled People, Policy and Social Inclusion. Bristol: The Polity Press, pp. 91–105.
- Deetz, S. (1992). Democracy in An Age of Corporate Colonization. Developments in Communication and the Politics of Everyday Life. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
- Essers, C. and Benschop, Y. (2009). Muslim businesswomen doing boundary work: the negotiation of Islam, gender and ethnicity within entrepreneurial contexts. Human Relations, 62, pp. 403–423.
- Fawcett, B. (2000). Feminist Perspectives on Disability. London: Prentice Hall.
- S. Fenstermaker and C. West (eds) (2002). Doing Gender, Doing Difference. Inequality, Power and Institutional Change. London: Routledge.
- Ferguson, K. (1994). On bringing more theory, more voices and more politics to the study of organization. Organization, 1, pp. 81–99.
10.1177/135050849400100112 Google Scholar
- Fisher, P. (2007). Experiential knowledge challenges ‘normality’ and individualized citizenship: towards ‘another way of being’. Disability & Society, 22, pp. 283–298.
- Foster, D. (2007). Legal obligation or personal lottery? Employee experiences of disability and the negotiation of adjustments in the public sector workplace. Work, Employment & Society, 21, pp. 67–84.
- Foster, D. and Fosh, P. (2010). Negotiating ‘difference’: representing disabled employees in the british workplace. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 48, pp. 560–582.
- Foucault, M. (1978). The History of Sexuality. Harmondsworth: Penguin, p. 1.
- French, S. (1993). Disability, impairment or something in between? In J. Swain, V. Finklestein and M. Oliver (eds), Disabling Barriers – Enabling Environments. London: Sage, pp. 17–25.
- French, S. (2001). Disabled People and Employment. A Study of the Working Lives of Visually Impaired Physiotherapists. Aldershot: Ashgate.
- French, S. and Swain, J. (2006). Telling stories for a politics of hope. Disability & Society, 21, pp. 383–396.
- Frosch, K.H. (2011). Workforce age and innovation: a literature survey. International Journal of Management Reviews, 13, pp. 414–430.
- Gabel, S. (2005). Introduction: disability studies in education. In S. Gabel (ed.), Disability Studies in Education. Readings in Theory and Method. New York: Pete Lang, pp. 1–20.
- Gabel, S. and Peters, S. (2004). Presage of a paradigm shift? Beyond the social model of disability toward resistance theories of disability. Disability & Society, 19, pp. 585–600.
- Gatrell, C. (2011). Managing the maternal body: a comprehensive review and transdisciplinary analysis. International Journal of Management Reviews, 13, pp. 97–112.
- Germon, P. (1998). Activists and academics: part of the same or a world apart. In T. Shakespeare (ed.), The Disability Reader. London: Cassell, pp. 245–255.
- Gherardi, S. (2003). Feminist theory and organization theory. In H. Tsoukas and C. Knudsen (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Organization Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 210–236.
- Goffman, E. (1968). Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. Harmondsworth: Pelican Books.
- Goodley, D. (2001). ‘Learning difficulties’, the social model of disability and impairment: challenging epistemologies. Disability & Society, 16, pp. 207–231.
- Goodley, D. (2009). Foreword. In F.K. Campbell (ed.), Countours of Ableism. The Production of Disability and Abledness. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. ix–xiv.
- Goodley, D. and Lawthom, R. (2005). Epistemological journeys in participatory action research: alliances between community psychology and disability studies. Disability & Society, 20, pp. 135–151.
- Goodley, D. and Van Hove, G. (2005). Disability studies, people with learning difficulties and inclusion. In D. Goodley and G. Van Hove (eds), Another Disability Studies Reader?: People with Learning Disabilities. Antwerpen-Apeldoorn: Garant, pp. 15–25.
- Gray, C. (2009). Narratives of disability and the movement from deficiency to difference. Cultural Sociology, 3, pp. 317–332.
- Hardy, C. and Phillips, N. (1999). No joking matter: discursive struggle in the Canadian refugee system. Organization Studies, 20, pp. 1–24.
- Hardy, C., Phillips, N. and Clegg, S.R. (2001). Reflexivity in organization and management theory: a study of the production of the research ‘subject’. Human Relations, 54, pp. 531–560.
- Harlan, S.L. and Robert, P.M. (1998). The social construction of disability in organizations: why employers resist reasonable accommodation. Work and Occupations, 25, pp. 397–435.
- Healy, G., Bradley, H. and Forson, C. (2011). Intersectional sensibilities in analysing inequality regimes in public sector organizations. Gender, Work & Organization, 18, pp. 467–487.
- Hearn, J. and Parkin, W. (1993). Organizations, multiple oppressions and postmodernism. In M. Parker and J. Hassard (eds), Postmodernism and Organizations. London: Sage, pp. 148–162.
- Hirst, M., Thornton, P., Dearey, M. and Campbell, S. (2004). The Employment of Disabled People in the Public Sector: A Review of Data and Literature. Philadelphia, PA: Disability Rights Commision.
- Holvino, E. (2010). Intersections: the simultaneity of race, gender and class in organization studies. Gender, Work & Organization, 17, pp. 248–277.
- Hughes, B. (1999). The constitution of impairment: modernity and the aesthetic of oppression. Disability & Society, 14, pp. 155–172.
- Hughes, B. (2002). Disability and the body. In C. Barnes, M. Oliver and L. Barton (eds), Disability Studies Today. Cambridge: Polity Press, pp. 58–76.
- Hughes, B. (2007). Being disabled: towards a critical social ontology for disability studies. Disability & Society, 22, pp. 673–684.
- Hughes, B. and Paterson, K. (1997). The social model of disability and the disappearing body: towards a sociology of impairment. Disability & Society, 12, pp. 325–340.
- Jackson, N. and Carter, P. (2007). Rethinking Organisational Behaviour. A Poststructuralist Framework, 2nd edn. London: Prentice Hall.
- Kelan, E.K. (2010). Gender logic and (un)doing gender at work. Gender, Work & Organization, 17, pp. 174–194.
- Kitzinger, C. (2009). Doing gender: a conversation analytic perspective. Gender & Society, 23, pp. 94–98.
- Knights, D. and Kerfoot, D. (2004). Between representations and subjectivity: gender binaries and the politics of organizational transformation. Gender, Work & Organization, 11, pp. 430–454.
- Lamont, M. and Molnár, V. (2002). The study of boundaries in the social sciences. Annual Review of Sociology, 28, pp. 167–195.
- Lawthom, R. and Goodley, D. (2006). Conclusions: making enabling alliances between disability studies and psychology. In D. Goodley and R. Lawthom (eds), Disability and Psychology: Critical Introductions and Reflections. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 187–204.
- Leach, B. (1996). Disabled people and the equal opportunities movement. In G. Hales (ed.), Beyond Disability, Towards An Enabling Society. London: Sage, pp. 88–95.
- Linstead, A. and Thomas, R. (2002). ‘What do you want from me?’ A poststructuralist feminist reading of middle managers' identities. Culture and Organization, 8, pp. 1–20.
10.1080/14759550212106 Google Scholar
- Linstead, S. and Brewis, J. (2004). Editorial: beyond boundaries: towards fluidity in theorizing and practice. Gender, Work & Organization, 11, pp. 355–362.
- Linstead, S. and Pullen, A. (2008). Un-gendering organization. In D. Barry and H. Hansen (eds), The Sage Handbook of New Approaches in Management and Organization. Los Angeles, CA: Sage, pp. 540–551.
10.4135/9781849200394.n93 Google Scholar
- Marsden, R. and Townley, B. (1996). The owl of Minerva: reflections on theory in practice. In S. Clegg, C. Hardy and W.R. Nord (eds), Handbook of Organization Studies. London: Sage, pp. 659–675.
- Mavin, S. and Grandy, G. (2011). Doing gender well and differently in dirty work: a case of exotic dancing. Gender, Work and Organization.Online 4 August 2011. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-0432.2011.00567.x.
- McCall, L. (2005). The complexity of intersectionality. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 30, pp. 1771–1880.
- McDonald, P. (2011). Workplace sexual harassment 30 years on: a review of the literature. International Journal of Management Reviews, 14, pp. 1–14.
- Meekosha, H. (2004). Drifting down the gulf stream: navigating the cultures of disability studies. Disability & Society, 19, pp. 722–733.
10.1080/0968759042000284204 Google Scholar
- Messerschmidt, J. (2009). ‘Doing gender’: the impact and future of a salient sociological concept. Gender & Society, 23, pp. 85–88.
- Mills, A., Simmons, T. and Helms Mills, J. (2005). Reading Organization Theory. A Critical Approach to the Study of Organizational Behaviour and Structure, 3rd edn. Aurora, Ont.: Garamond Press.
- Moloney, M. and Fenstermaker, S. (2002). Performance and accomplishment: reconciling feminist conceptions of gender. In S. Fenstermaker and C. West (eds), Doing Gender, Doing Difference. Inequality, Power and Institutional Change. New York: Routledge, pp. 189–204.
- Morris, J. (1991). Pride Against Prejudice: Transforming Attitudes to Disability. London: The Women's Press.
- Morris, J. (1993a). Feminism and disability. Feminist Review, 43, pp. 57–70.
- Morris, J. (1993b). Gender and disability. In J. Swain, V. Finklestein, S. French and M. Oliver (eds), Disabling Barriers – Enabling Environments. London: Sage Publications in association with the Open University, pp. 85–92.
- Morris, J. (1996). Encounters with Strangers: Feminism and Disability. London: The Women's Press.
- Mumby, D.K. (2008). Theorizing the future of critical organization studies. In D. Barry and H. Hansen (eds), The Sage Handbook of New Approaches in Management and Organization. Los Angeles, CA: Sage, pp. 27–28.
10.4135/9781849200394.n4 Google Scholar
- Mumby, D.K. and Clair, R.P. (1997). Organizational discourse. In T.A. Van Dijk (ed.), Discourse as Social Interaction. London: Sage, pp. 181–205.
- Newton, R., Ormerod, M. and Thomas, P. (2007). Disabled people's experiences in the workplace environment in England. Equal Opportunities International, 26, pp. 610–623.
10.1108/02610150710777079 Google Scholar
- Nielsen, S. (2010). Top management team diversity: a review of theories and methodologies. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12, pp. 301–316.
- Nkomo, S.M. (1992). The emperor has no clothes: rewriting race in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 17, pp. 487–513.
- Oliver, M. (1983). Social Work with Disabled People. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
10.1007/978-1-349-86058-6 Google Scholar
- Oliver, M. (1986). Social policy and disability: some theoretical issues. Disability & Society, 1, pp. 5–17.
10.1080/02674648666780021 Google Scholar
- Oliver, M. (1990). The Politics of Disablement. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
10.1007/978-1-349-20895-1 Google Scholar
- Oliver, M. (1996). Understanding Disability: From Theory to Practice. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
10.1007/978-1-349-24269-6 Google Scholar
- Oliver, M. (2009). Understanding Disability: From Theory to Practice, 2nd edn. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
10.1007/978-1-137-05492-0 Google Scholar
- Orlikowski, W. and Scott, S. (2008). Sociomateriality: challenging the separation of technology, work and organization. Academy of Management Annals, 2, pp. 433–474.
- Overboe, J. (1999). Difference in itself: validating disabled people's lived experience. Body & Society, 5, pp. 17–29.
10.1177/1357034X99005004002 Google Scholar
- Özbilgin, M.F., Beauregard, T.A., Tatli, A. and Bell, M.P. (2011). Work–life, diversity and intersectionality: a critical review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 13, pp. 177–198.
- Polzer, J., Gulati, R., Khurana, R. and Tushman, M. (2009). Crossing boundaries to increase relevance in organizational research. Journal of Management Inquiry, 18, pp. 280–286.
- Pullen, A. and Knights, D. (2007). Editorial: undoing gender: organizing and disorganizing performance. Gender, Work & Organization, 14, pp. 505–511.
- Reed, M. (2006). Organization theorizing: a historically contested terrain. In S. Clegg, C. Hardy, T.B. Lawrence and W.R. Nord (eds), The Sage Handbook of Organization Studies. London: Sage, pp. 19–54.
10.4135/9781848608030.n2 Google Scholar
- Rhodes, C. (2009). After reflexivity: ethics, freedom and the writing of organization studies. Organization Studies, 30, pp. 653–672.
- Riach, K. and Loretto, W. (2009). Identity work and the ‘unemployed’ worker: age, disability and the lived experience of the older unemployed. Work, Employment & Society, 23, pp. 102–119.
- Risman, B. (2009). From doing to undoing: gender as we know it. Gender & Society, 23, pp. 81–84.
- Roulstone, A. (1998a). Enabling Technology. Disabled People, Work and New Technology. Buckinhgam: Open University Press.
- Roulstone, A. (1998b). Researching a disabling society: the case of employment and new technology. In T. Shakespeare (ed.), The Disability Reader. Social Science Perspectives. London: Cassell, pp. 110–128.
- Roulstone, A., Gradwell, L., Price, J. and Child, L. (2003). Thriving and Surviving at Work. Disabled People's Employment Strategies. Bristol: The Policy Press.
- Scott-Hill, M. (2004). Collectivising experience and rules of engagement: close(d) encounters in disability research. In C. Barnes and G. Mercer (eds), Implementing the Social Model of Disability: Theory and Research. Leeds: The Disability Press, pp. 157–171.
- Sealy, R.H.V. and Singh, V. (2010). The importance of role models and demographic context for senior women's work identity development. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12, pp. 284–300.
- Shah, S. (2005). Career Success of Disabled High-Flyers. London: Jessica Kingsley.
- Shakespeare, T. (1996). Disability, identity and difference. In C. Barnes and G. Mercer (eds), Exploring the Divide. Leeds: The Disability Press, pp. 94–113.
- Shakespeare, T. (1999). Art and lies? Representations of disability on film. In M. Corker and S. French (eds), Disability Discourse. Buckingham: Open University Press, pp. 164–172.
- Shakespeare, T. (2006). Disability Rights and Wrongs. London: Routledge.
10.4324/9780203640098 Google Scholar
- Simmons, B., Blackmore, T. and Bayliss, P. (2008). Postmodern synergistic knowledge creation: extending the boundaries of disability studies. Disability & Society, 23, pp. 733–745.
- Simons, M.A. (2000). Beauvoir and the Second Sex: Feminism, Race, and the Origins of Existentialism. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.
- Simpson, R. and Lewis, P. (2005). An investigation of silence and a scrutiny of transparency: re-examining gender in organization literature through the concepts of voice and visibility. Human Relations, 58, pp. 1253–1275.
- Simpson, R. and Lewis, P. (2007). Voice, Visibility and the Gendering of Organizations. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
- Smith, D.N. (2009). Categories are not enough. Gender & Society, 23, pp. 76–80.
- Swain, J. and Cook, T. (2001). In the name of inclusion: ‘we all, at the end of the day, have the needs of the children at heart’. Critical Social Policy, 21, pp. 185–207.
10.1177/026101830102100203 Google Scholar
- Swain, J. and French, S. (2000). Towards an affirmation model of disability. Disability & Society, 15, pp. 569–582.
- Swain, J., French, S. and Cameron, C. (2003). Controversial Issues in a Disabling Society. Buckingham: Open University Press.
- Symon, G. and Pritchard, K. (2011). Performing and resisting the ‘connected’ worker as sociomaterial identity. Paper presented at the Critical Management Studies Conference, 11–13 July, Naples, Italy, pp. 1–10.
- Tanenbaum, S.J. (2009). Psychiatrist–consumer relationships in US public mental health care: consumers' views of a disability system. Disability & Society, 24, pp. 727–738.
- Thanem, T. (2008). Embodying disability in diversity management research. Equal Opportunities International, 27, pp. 581–595.
10.1108/02610150810904292 Google Scholar
- Thomas, C. (1999). Female Forms: Experiencing and Understanding Disability. Buckingham: Open University Press.
- Thomas, C. (2001). Feminism and disability: the theoretical and political significance of the personal and the experiential. In L. Barton (ed.), Disability, Politics and the Struggle for Change. London: David Fulton, pp. 48–58.
- Thomas, C. (2004a). How is disability understood? An examination of sociological approaches. Disability & Society, 19, pp. 569–583.
- Thomas, C. (2004b). Developing the social relational in the social model of disability: a theoretical agenda. In C. Barnes and G. Mercer (eds), Implementing the Social Model of Disability. Leeds: The Disability Press, pp. 32–47.
- Thomas, C. (2006). Disability and gender: reflections on theory and research. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 8, pp. 177–185.
10.1080/15017410600731368 Google Scholar
- Thomas, C. (2007). Sociologies of Disability and Illness. Contested Ideas in Disability Studies and Medical Sociology. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
10.1007/978-1-137-02019-2 Google Scholar
- Tong, R. (1989). Feminist Thought: A Comprehensive Introduction. London: Routledge.
- Tregaskis, C. (2004). Constructions of Disability: Researching the Interface Between Disabled and Nondisabled People. London: Routledge.
- Tsoukas, H. and Knudsen, C. (2003). Introduction. The need for meta-theoretical reflection in organization theory. In H. Tsoukas and C. Knudsen (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Organization Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 1–36.
- UPIAS (1976). Fundamental Principles of Disability. London: UPIAS. Available at: http://www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies/archiveuk/UPIAS/UPIAS.pdf (accessed 5 February 2007).
- Üsdiken, B. and Leblebici, H. (2001). Organization theory. In N. Anderson, D.S. Ones, H.K. Sinangil and C. Viswesvaran (eds), Handbook of Industrial, Work and Organizational Psychology. London: Sage, pp. 377–397.
- Valentine, G. (2007). Theorizing and researching intersectionality: a challenge for feminist geography. The Professional Geographer, 59, pp. 10–21.
- Vehmas, S. (2004). Ethical analysis of the concept of disability. Mental Retardation, 42, pp. 209–222.
- Vernon, A. (1998). Multiple oppression and the disabled people's movement. In T. Shakespeare (ed.), The Disability Reader. London: Cassell, pp. 201–210.
- Vidal-Ortiz, S. (2009). The figure of the transwoman of color through the lens of ‘doing gender’. Gender & Society, 23, pp. 99–103.
- West, C. and Fenstermaker, S. (1995a). Doing difference. Gender & Society, 9, pp. 8–37.
- West, C. and Fenstermaker, S. (1995b). (Re)Doing difference. A reply. Gender & Society, 9, pp. 506–513.
- West, C. and Fenstermaker, S. (2002). Reply – (re)doing gender. In S. Fenstermaker and C. West (eds), Doing Gender, Doing Difference. Inequality, Power and Institutional Change. New York: Routledge, pp. 95–101.
- West, C. and Zimmerman, D.H. (1987). Doing gender. Gender & Society, 1, pp. 125–151.
- West, C. and Zimmerman, D.H. (2009). Accounting for doing gender. Gender & Society, 23, pp. 112–122.
- Whetten, D. (1989). What constitutes a theoretical contribution? Academy of Management Review, 14, pp. 490–495.
- Willmott, H. (1995). What has been happening in organization theory and does it matter? Personnel Review, 24, pp. 33–53.
- Wood, G., Wilkinson, A. and Harcourt, M. (2008). Age discrimination and working life: perspectives and contestations – a review of the contemporary literature. International Journal of Management Reviews, 10, pp. 425–442.
- Woodhams, C. and Corby, S. (2007). Then and now: disability legislation and employers' practices in the UK. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 45, pp. 556–580.
- Woodhams, C. and Danieli, A. (2000). Disability and diversity – a difference too far? Personnel Review, 29, pp. 402–416.
- Woodhams, C., Metcalfe, B. and Callahan, J. (2010). Advancements in gender, diversity and management theorising. Special Issue of the International Journal of Management Reviews. Available at: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/pdf/IJMR_advancements_in_gender.pdf (accessed 10 February 2010).
- Zanoni, P. (2011). Diversity in the lean automobile factory: doing class through gender, disability and age. Organization, 18, pp. 105–127.
- Zanoni, P., Janssens, M., Benschop, Y. and Nkomo, S.M. (2010). Unpacking diversity, grasping inequality: rethinking difference through critical perspectives. Organization, 17, pp. 9–29.