Abstract Organizational research has come a long way in understanding and dealing with inequalities in the workplace. Despite this, there has not been enough progress toward equality. The reason for the stymied progress, we argue, is in large part due to the conceptual gaps in our understanding of equality. This has not been clear enough to prevent previous imbalances in power, interests and domination from re‐manifesting themselves in new ways. Because organizations are complex, there needs to be a clear definition and goal of equality that can account for these mechanisms. In this article, we present a conceptual approach we call intersectional equality. To develop this approach, we build on Kimberlé Crenshaw's intersectionality and Joan Acker's inequality regimes that are useful for understanding the presence and persistency of inequality in organizations, but these do not define solutions for equality. At this point, we turn to equality and justice theory and examine Amartya Sen's capabilities approach for incorporating organizations and organizational responsibilities to pursue equality. In light of the conceptual gaps in intersectionality, the inequality regimes, and the capabilities approach, we present intersectional equality as a conclusive alternative concept and approach. Intersectional equality sharpens the feminist definition and vision of equality for organizations and provides a practical path forward for building coalitions and capabilities across four dimensions of organizational disparities (procedural, discursive, material, and affective).
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 61 citations exist upstream.