This article uses a discursive institutionalist approach to explain the different responses of Swedish and German trade unions to diversity management and their involvement in its institutionalization. It is argued that the institutionalization of diversity management is more likely to be based on social dialogue where it is introduced primarily as a solution to a socio-political crisis (as in Sweden). However, where its introduction is motivated primarily by a drive for softer regulation (as in Germany), it may undermine social dialogue.
CampbellJPedersenO (2001) Introduction and conclusion. In: CampbellJLPedersenO (eds) The Rise of NeoLiberalism and Institutional Analysis. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1–24, 249–282.
5.
DiMaggioPJ (1988) Interest and agency in institutional theory. In: ZuckerLG (ed.) Institutional Patterns and Organizations: Culture and Environment. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger, 3–22.
6.
De los ReyesP (2001) Diversity and differentiation: Discourse, difference and construction of norms in Swedish research and public debate. National Institute for Working Life and the Swedish Trade Unions in Co-operation.
7.
Due BillingYSundinE (2006) From managing equality to managing diversity: A critical Scandinavian perspective on gender and workplace diversity. In: KonradAPrasadPPringleJ (eds) Handbook of Workplace Diversity. London: SAGE, 95–120.
8.
EbbinghausBEichhorstW (2006) Employment Regulation and Labor Market Policy in Germany, 1995–2005. Institut zur Zukunft der Arbeit Discussion Paper 2505.
9.
EdelmanLBRiggs FullerSRMara-DritaI (2001) Diversity rhetoric and the managerialization of the law. American Journal of Sociology106: 1589–1641.
10.
EntorfHMinoiuN (2004) PISA Results: What a Difference Immigration Law Makes. Institut zur Zukunft der Arbeit Discussion Paper No. 1021.
GreeneA-MKirtonG (2009) Diversity Management in the UK: Organizational and Stakeholder Experiences. London: Routledge.
13.
GreeneAMKirtonGWrenchJ (2005) Trade union perspectives on diversity management: A comparison of the UK and Denmark. European Journal of Industrial Relations11(2): 179–196.
14.
HansenJ (2000) The Duration of Immigrants’ Unemployment Spells: Evidence from Sweden. IZA Discussion Paper 155.
15.
HornC (2008) Neue Konzepte, alte Widersprüche: Der Mühsame Weg zu einer Politik der Vielfalt. Berlin: Heinrich Böll Stiftung.
16.
HunnK (2005) “Nächstes Jahr kehren wir zurück…” Die Geschichte der türkischen Gastarbeiter in der Bundesrepublik. Göttingen: Wallstein.
17.
Invandrarpolitiska kommittén (1996) Sverige, framtiden och mångfalden: från invandrarpolitik till integrationspolitik. Stockholm: SOU.
KampAHagedorn-RasmussenP (2004) Diversity management in a Danish context: Towards a multicultural or segregated working life?Economic and Industrial Democracy25(4): 525–554.
20.
KellyEDobbinF (1998) How affirmative action became diversity management. American Behavioral Scientist41(7): 960–984.
21.
KindermannD (2003) Pressure from Without, Subversion from Within: The Two-Pronged German Employer Offensive. Working Paper Series 6, Canadian Centre for German and European Studies/Centre canadien d’études allemandes et européennes.
22.
KjærPPedersenOK (2001) Translating liberalization: Neoliberalism in the Danish negotiated economy. In: CampbellJLPedersenO (eds) The Rise of NeoLiberalism and Institutional Analysis. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 219–248.
23.
KlarsfeldA (ed.) (2010) International Handbook on Diversity Management at Work: Country Perspectives on Diversity and Equal Treatment. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
24.
KüçükcanT (2002) Turks in Germany: Between inclusion and exclusion. Turkish Journal of Islamic Studies7: 97–118.
25.
LanzS (2007) Welcher Multikulturalismus darf’s denn sein? Zur Debatte um das vorgebliche ‘Scheitern von Multikulti’ am Beispiel von Berlin. Heinrich Böll Stiftung. Available at: http://www.migration-boell.de/web/integration/47_1405.asp.
26.
MeyerJW (1994) Rationalized environments. In: ScottWRMeyerJW (eds) Institutional Environments and Organizations: Structural Complexity and Individualism. London: SAGE, 28–54.
27.
MichalowskiI (2005) What is the Dutch Integration Model, and has it Failed?Focus Migration Policy Brief1, April.
Regeringen (2007) Mångfald är framtiden. Stockholm: SOU.
30.
RunblomH (1994) Swedish multiculturalism in a comparative European perspective. Sociological Forum9(4): 623–640.
31.
SahlinKWedlinL (2008) Circulating ideas: Imitation, translation and editing. In: GreenwoodR.OliverC.Sahlin-AndersenK.SuddabyR. (eds) Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism, pp.218–242. CA: Sage.
32.
SchmidtV (2010) Taking ideas and discourse seriously: Explaining change through discursive institutionalism as the fourth ‘new institutionalism’. European Political Science Review2(1): 1–25.
33.
SuchmanMC (1995) Localism and globalism in institutional analysis: The emergence of contractual norms in venture finance. In: ScottWRChristensenS (eds) The Institutional Construction of Organizations: International and Longitudinal Studies. London: SAGE.
34.
SüßSKleinerM (2007) Diversity management in Germany: dissemination and design of the concept. International Journal of Human Resource Management18(11): 1934–1953.
35.
Utredningen om makt, integration och strukturell diskriminering (2006) Integrationens svarta bok. Agenda för jämlikhet och social sammanhållning. Stockholm: SOU.
36.
Utredningen om strukturell diskriminering på grund av etnisk eller religiös tillhörighet (2005) Det blågula glashuset: strukturell diskriminering i Sverige. Betänkande av Utredningen om strukturell diskriminering på grund av etnisk eller religiös tillhörighet. Stockholm: SOU.
37.
WestinC (2003) Striking a balance between diversity and social cohesion: Examples from Sweden. Paper to conference The Challenges of Immigration and Integration in the European Union and Australia, University of Sydney, February.
