Understanding the mixed consequences of diversity practices: A typology of migrant employees

Organizational diversity practices are widely implemented to support the workplace integration of international migrants (IMs), yet their outcomes remain inconsistent. Little is known about why IMs respond differently to the same initiatives offered by their organizations or why these practices sometimes fail or backfire. Drawing on signaling and attribution theory, we argue that IMs interpret diversity practices through the lens of two key disadvantages: unfamiliarity with the destination country and exposure to discrimination within this context. We develop a dual disadvantage typology of IMs and theorize how resource and nondiscrimination practices differentially affect organizational commitment depending on migrants’ disadvantage configurations. This typology refines existing diversity frameworks by introducing a configurational view of migrant diversity and explaining why identical practices may produce divergent outcomes. Using survey data from 394 IMs working in Germany, we find that while nondiscrimination practices are consistently positively associated with commitment, the effects of resource practices vary: some IMs view them as empowering, while others interpret them as stigmatizing or misaligned with their needs. In particular, training initiatives can backfire for IMs who are already familiar with the labor market and face discrimination. Our findings demonstrate the importance of tailoring initiatives to different migrant groups. We contribute a theory-driven framework that explains how diversity signals are differentially interpreted across migrant disadvantage configurations and when diversity practices produce intended versus unintended effects.