Dilemmas of Microaggressive Exclusion at Work. A Positioning Analysis of a “Small Story” of Double Victimization by an International Employee

What the paper says

This study employs small story positioning analysis to illustrate how highly qualified migrants experience subtle workplace discrimination, particularly when such experiences are reported through corporate whistleblowing mechanisms. Drawing on Gerald W. Sue and coauthors’ conceptualization of microaggressions and reporting dilemmas, the article examines a single narrative from a former employee of a Danish company. Combining content and positioning analysis, the study investigates how the employee constructs her identity and positions other organizational actors in her account of repeated microaggressions and the subsequent escalation following her whistleblowing. The analysis reveals that reporting microaggressions carries severe psychological and professional consequences. The former employee experienced four reporting dilemmas: invisibility, clash of realities, perceived minimal harm, and the reporting trap. Notably, the whistleblowing function—intended as a protective mechanism—exacerbated her marginalization, resulting in what we term double victimization. The findings show that corporate whistleblowing measures are largely symbolic and fail to foster structural change. The study contributes a theoretical approach to identity-oriented organizational research by demonstrating how everyday communication performs exclusionary boundary work and how individual discrimination can escalate into institutional discrimination. It also contributes to practice by emphasizing the need to improve organizational whistleblowing processes and enhance employee training on recognizing discrimination.