The research project GeHoch (Gerechte Hochschulen. Mechanisms of inclusion in the context of university excellence) focuses on processes and mechanisms of the institutionalisation of diversity and inclusion concepts in three research universities (Frankfurt/Main, Nuremberg-Erlangen, Luxembourg). Specifically, the project analyses the implementation of four politically framed pillars at the organisational level: Diversity management, inclusion, anti-discrimination, and equity. The project reconstructs conceptual understandings of diversity, equity, inclusion, and justice in universities evidenced in relevant domains: research, teaching, campus accessibility, personnel development, complaints/ombudsman offices, continuing education, committee participation, among others). The comparative project first analyses official documents to identify the tensions between recommendations and legal obligations, on one hand, and organizational commitments, on the other. Second, expert interviews are conducted with various stakeholders, from university faculty and staff members to students.

The theoretical background of the project is a cultural perspective on institutions and organizations and their internal sense making, understood as 'blasphemic' procedures (Bhabha 2004). To understand the ideational, normative, and regulative change dynamics, the project utilizes Scott's (2013) neo-institutional approach. To highlight the impact of rules, routines, regulations, practices, and values, we leverage the sociology of values (Boltanski & Thevenot 2007, see also Powell 2018, Alvesson & Spicer 2019).

First, relevant official documents of all three universities have been analyzed in a comparative perspective: How are the agendas of inclusion, anti-discrimination, equity, and diversity management presented within the three universities? What strategies do they follow in advancing these goals (obligations vs. recommendations); towards which organizational level are they directed (research, teaching, campus accessibility, personnel, etc)? How do these strategies and commitments interact and what conflicts of interests are found? Then, expert interviews with stakeholders help to make sense of the impact of these institutional agendas within the organizations.

While the comparative document analyses show similar agendas, numerous differences in organizational priorities and activities have been found. All three universities address competitive agendas with their policies. Most policies remain at the level of recommendations rather than organizational obligations (these findings are in line with those of Hark & Hofbauer 2023). The document analyses show that, in path-dependent fashion, the three research universities follow different strategies in (re-)organizing these four agenda areas. For example, the University of Luxemburg pays attention to equity policies, especially for recruitment reasons. The University of Frankfurt has policy agendas that reflect its tradition of being a university of its city, founded by citizens, who are increasingly diverse, and diversity is particularly important for the university’s “third mission”. Diversity plays a significant role also for the University of Nuremberg-Erlangen, which chooses to address diversity as a signal of modernization. The interviews, taking place in Spring 2025, aim to further our understanding of these differences. The study is a comparative empirical study on the agenda of diversity management, inclusion, anti-discrimination, and equity. While the study is not yet completed, the findings on document analysis as well as some interviews with stakeholders will be presented. Understanding the conflicts of inclusiveness, anti-discrimination, and equity policies within competitive universities calling for excellence is central to define the power and the reach of political strategies calling for more justice in organizations. The status of DEI, embattled in numerous countries worldwide, needs to be discussed critically and comparatively, which we attempt to do.

Alvesson, M. & Spicer, A. (2019). Neo-Institutional Theory and Organization Studies: A Mid-Life Crisis? Organization Studies, 40(2), pp. 199-218. doi: 10.1177/0170840618772610 Bhabha, H. K. (2004): The Location of Culture. New York: Routledge. Boltanski, L. & Thevenot, L. (2007). Über die Rechtfertigung. Eine Soziologie der kritischen Urteilskraft. Hamburg: Hamburger Edition. Hark, S. & Hofbauer, J. (2023). Die ungleiche Universität. Diversität, Exzellenz und Anti-Diskriminierung. Wien: Passagen. Powell, J.J.W. (2018). Higher Education and the Exponential Rise of Science: Competition and Collaboration. In R. Scott & M. Buchmann (Hrsg.): Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1-17. onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/book/10.1002/9781118900772 Scott, W.R. (2013). Institutions and Organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage.