From inclusion to indigenisation: Māori methodologies for diversity scholarship

• Date: 01 July 2024
• Pages: 985-1000
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/EDI-09-2022-0248
• Published date: 01 July 2024
• Author: Nimbus Awhina Staniland,Diane Ruwhiu,Kiri Dell

From inclusion to indigenisation:

M

aori methodologies for

diversity scholarship

Nimbus Awhina Staniland

Department of Management and International Business,

University of Auckland Business School, Auckland, New Zealand

Diane Ruwhiu

Department of Management, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand, and

Kiri Dell

Department of Management and International Business,

University of Auckland Business School, Auckland, New Zealand

Abstract

Purpose –This paper argues for the inclusion of Indigenous research methodologies in diversity scholarship

to (1) adequately account for and value the identity, lived experiences and concerns of Indigenous Peoples and

(2) to enrich diversity theorising and scholarship by proposing new ways to think about and conduct research

on difference, inclusion and belonging. We further highlight the roles non-Indigenous researchers can play in

supporting Indigenous methodologies.

Design/methodology/approach–We introduce EDI readers to Indigenous research methodologies through

explicating two Indigenous (Maori) methodologies from Aotearoa New Zealand and demonstrating points of

convergence and divergence from existing methodologies evident in diversity scholarship.

Findings–The applicationof Eurocentricmethodologies, includingpostcolonial approaches, caninaccurately

theorise Indigenous experience through a Western lens compounding the ongoing impacts of colonialism.

Conversely, drawing primarily from cultural knowledge and traditions, Indigenous methodologies place

considerable value on people and place, relationships and relational accountabilities, each underpinned by an

explicit intent to produce research with positive transformative potential for participant communities. Using

Kaupapa Maori and Mana Wahine research as examples, we highlight how elements of “resistance”aligns with

critical theories, but the “difference”inherent in Indigenous methodologies enables a more authentic

engagement withpeople and place that is critical to understanding issues of significance to Indigenous Peoples.

Originality/value –This paper addresses the lack of engagement with Indigenous research methodologies and

priorities of Indigenous communitieswithin diversity scholarship. We argue that Indigenous priorities make broader

contributions to the diversityagenda by attributing deeper meaning to difference and resistance as enacted through

the contextspecificity of the Indigenous world. We contend Indigenous methodologies illuminate unique perspectives

and priorities that can make powerful contributions to broader discussions of equity, inclusion and belonging.

Keywords Indigenous methodologies, Kaupapa M

aori, Mana W

ahine, Aotearoa New Zealand

Paper type Conceptual paper

Introduction

Diversity scholarship is about difference. Consequently, efforts to understand the

experiences of diverse groups and even imagine alternative structures, relations and

experiences beyond the status quo require different approaches. While the definitions,

dimensions and outcomes of diversity scholarship have been discussed extensively (Jamali

et al., 2010;Nkomo and Hoobler, 2014;Zanoni et al., 2010), comparatively little attention has

Equality,

Diversity and

Inclusion: An

International

Journal

985

© Nimbus Awhina Staniland, Diane Ruwhiu and Kiri Dell. Published by Emerald Publishing Limited.

This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may

reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-

commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of

this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/2040-7149.htm

Received 4 September 2022

Revised 27 January 2023

23 January 2024

28 April 2024

Accepted 12 June 2024

Equality, Diversity and Inclusion:

An International Journal

Vol. 43 No. 6, 2024

pp. 985-1000

Emerald Publishing Limited

2040-7149

DOI 10.1108/EDI-09-2022-0248

been paid to how we approach diversity research (Kamenou, 2007;Nkomo et al., 2019).

Further, diversity literature has been critiqued for being ahistorical (Nkomo and Hoobler,

2014), with calls to pay attention to specific structures and processes that form complex

power relations within locally relevant, culturally specific contexts (Klarsfeld et al., 2019;

Pringle and Ryan, 2015;Zanoni et al., 2010).

The significance of examining culturally specific contexts is critical for Indigenous

Peoples, who remain relatively invisible within diversity and wider management and

organisational scholarship (Dar et al., 2020). Accordingly, discussion or recognition related to

the need for culturally sensitive research of relevance to Indigenous communities is also

limited (Julien et al., 2017;Verbos and Humphries, 2012). While Indigenous methodologies

share some features with existing methodologies, causing them to be problematically

categorised under the umbrella of “critical”or “postcolonial”approaches, we illustrate how

Indigenous methodologies represent distinct ways of seeing and conducting research that

should be accounted for in diversity scholarship.

As Indigenous M

aori, we employ Indigenous methodologies across our diverse research

programmes to give presence to who we are and to represent our place in the world. In this

paper, we identifydiversity scholarship as a key sitewithin which Indigenous methodologies

can be applied to account for and value the priorities and lived experiences of Indigenous

Peoples, as well as offer new waysto think about and conduct research related to difference,

inclusion and belonging. We recognise that many readers of EDI may be unfamiliar with

IndigenousPeoples and knowledgesystems. Thus, the aim of thispaper is to introduce readers

to the nature and purposeof Indigenous methodologiesas well as the transformational impact

they can have both for Indigenous communities andfor diversity scholarship.

We begin by outlining the methodological diversity of diversity scholarship with an

emphasis on its critical traditions before a brief overview of Indigenous methodologies. Then,

we illustrate the significance of place within an Indigenous worldview by presenting the

context of Aotearoa New Zealand as the locale from which the methodology discussed in this

paper emerges. We then explicate two Indigenous (M

aori) methodologies, Kaupapa M

aori

and Mana Wahine. We highlight how elements of “resistance”align Kaupapa M

aori and

Mana Wahine with existing critical theories and also how they go further to enable an

authentic engagement with “difference”that emerges from a specific place, worldview and

experience. Finally, we contend that this “difference”, inherent within Indigenous

methodologies, illuminates unique perspectives and priorities that can make powerful

contributions to broader discussions of equity, inclusion and belonging.

Methodological diversity in diversity research

Diversity scholarship traditionally emph asises how to account for and manage an

increasingly diverse population of potential employees and consumers as critical to

organisational success (Zanoni et al., 2010). The “business case”underpinning “diversity

management”presented a more politically palatable narrative than the legislative approach

of earlier equality attempts, such as affirmative action programs seeking legal solutions to

address historical disadvantage and oppression of African Americans in particular (Nkomo

and Hoobler, 2014). The business case discourse represents a managerial perspective of

diversity that views difference as competitive advantage (Pringle and Ryan, 2015). Critical

diversity scholars have challenged this managerial discourse, pointing to a number of

concerns that include the acontextual and ahistorical nature of diversity scholarship and the

need to recognise context-specific processes that account for multiple facets and expressions

of difference (Klarsfeld et al., 2019;Pringle and Ryan, 2015;Zanoni et al., 2010).

Nkomo and Hoobler (2014) highlight that history is a significant part of context through

which we can analyse political, socio-cultural and economic situations that served to shape

EDI

43,6

986