Refugees as a distinct diversity dimension: workplace experiences and inclusion of Ukrainian refugees in Polish organizations

On February 24, 2022, as Russia invaded the Ukraine and the world we knew changed. The nightmares of the past, we thought were gone have returned and Europe and Poland faced the largest stream of war refugees since the end of the 2nd World War. Over the next couple of weeks Poland welcomed over 1,4 million refugees. By the end of 2022, the estimated number of refugees from the Ukraine has been about 1 million.

Before the war, the influx of immigrants from the Ukraine was already significant and steadily growing. There were about 2 million economic migrants in Poland and according to estimates 1,35 million were people from Ukraine, mainly men (Duszczyk and Kaczmarczyk, 2022). They became an important part of the Polish labour market, working in blue-collar and white-collar jobs (Maj et al., 2020). Studies show that a growing percentage of global workforce consists of immigrants (OECD, 2023) and we dealt with refugee crises before like the “global refugee crisis” relating to refugees from Syria and Afghanistan (Guo et al., 2020).

It is being estimated that among the international migrants, whose number has reached over 280 million by the end of 2020 (World Migration Report 2022, 2021), around 10% are forced migrants, which include “refugee and other forcibly displaced populations, which may be primarily due to war and conflict, but also can be due to political, religious, and other persecution; natural or man-made disasters; development-induced displacement; smuggling and human trafficking; and environmental displacement” (Reed, 2018, p. 2). Forced migration has been declared as one of the most pressing issues of our time (Salehyan, 2019).

Although this is not the first refugee crisis, there is a surprising gap in the diversity and inclusion literature in connection with the refugee status and refugee experience. The literature on managing refugees in the workplace is rather sparse and it focuses mostly on how to predict and enable the transition of refugees into employment (Correa-Velez et al., 2015), how to assist them in integrating into the workplace and developing positive work attitudes (Newman et al., 2018; Adamovic and Cooney-O'Donoghue, 2025) or on structural inequalities in employment (Ranabahu et al., 2025). Ravn (2022) analysed employers having refugee employees and created an employer typology. His focus was however rather on the organization and not necessarily the refugee. As stated by Schaubroeck et al. (2022), the human capital refugees provide is promising in case of potential to growth (use of skills) and economic contribution (contribute to the industries facing labour shortages) but the refugee employees may face and thus create for the organization’s unique challenges. Therefore, we believe it is necessary to analyse them as a separate diversity dimension.

Ethnic diversity and cultural diversity of employees have been subject of research for decades now (Carter et al., 2010; Cox, 1994; Cox and Blake, 1991; McLeod et al., 1996; Stahl et al., 2010). The migrant diversity category has been introduced into the diversity literature just recently (Özbilgin et al., 2024). Özbilgin et al. (2024) argue that migrants have distinct experiences and priorities that may be overlooked when grouped together within the broader category of ethnic and racial diversity. In line with this, existing research often treats various migrant groups – such as skilled migrants, expatriates and refugees – as a single, homogeneous category (e.g. Sinkovics and Reuber, 2021), which risks obscuring the specific challenges and needs faced by the refugee community (Ranabahu et al., 2025). However, as stated by Newman et al. (2018), refugees differ from other migrants, as they have often been subject to major challenges resulting from threats to their life, internal displacements but also discrimination due to their ethnicity and social status. Even after obtaining the legal status of an refugee, they may still suffer discrimination (Colic-Peisker and Tilbury, 2006). Thus, we believe that these unique experiences will have an impact on their psychological state, defined as mental and emotional condition of refugee employees, which shapes their workplace perceptions and behaviours.

The case of Ukrainian refugees in Poland also differs from the previously described cases, in that Ukrainians who fled to Poland from the war do not have a legal refugee status, because then they would not be able to take advantage of the rights granted by the Law of March 12, 2022 and thus could not immediately enter the labour market. However, this raises another issue. These people were deprived of the legal protection afforded by refugee status, which as proven by Akkan et al. (2025) mitigates the negative effects of perceived discrimination including business performance. Despite the lack of the legal refugee status, these individuals meet all the criteria for “being a refugee” and will therefore be described by that term in this article.

The paper aims to contribute to the diversity and inclusion literature by analysing the refugee status as a potential new diversity dimension. Its purpose is to explore the unique challenges and contributions of Ukrainian refugees in the Polish workforce post-2022 invasion, focusing on their integration and organisational impact. This research aims to understand the workplace experiences of Ukrainian refugees in Polish companies, analyse their unique challenges and contributions and develop a framework for treating refugee experience as a distinct dimension of workforce diversity.

As pointed out by Post et al. (2021), diversity requires further analysis and more complex theorizing as it is at a critical juncture in management studies (Nkomo et al., 2019). Most of the categories of diversity that are covered under the banner of diversity management historically emanate from social movements that promote human rights and civil liberties (Özbilgin and Erbil, 2021). Including the perspective of refugees offers a fresh lens through which to analyse traditional diversity dimensions. This paper seeks to provide new insights into the employment experiences of refugees in countries lacking adequate experience in addressing their needs. These findings should be of interest not only to management researchers but also to scholars in refugee studies and related fields. The main goal of the study is to provide a comprehensive understanding of the experiences of refugees and contributions within the workplace, highlighting both the challenges they face and the unique strengths they bring to the organization from their own perspective but also from the perspective of their immediate supervisors. The research questions that guides the paper is: How do Ukrainian refugees experience workplace inclusion in Polish organizations and what factors shape their inclusion and functioning? The paper presents a case study of an organization operating in the food industry, which specializes in the production of food products for infants and children.

The following paper adopts a relational approach to examine the specific circumstances of refugees in the workplace. This approach highlights the interconnectedness of various levels that influence the experiences of refugees within an organization (Al Ariss and Syed, 2011). The relational approach considers the micro-level of individual experiences, the meso-level of the organizational context and the macro-level, encompassing broader societal and institutional factors. By including these levels and analysing the mechanisms through which they interact, this approach provides a more comprehensive understanding of how refugees function within organizations, integrating the complexities of individual experiences with the wider social and institutional contexts in which they occur. This approach recognized the agency of refugees, allowing them to mobilize different forms of capital to navigate barriers to their inclusion and integration (Özbilgin, 2006; Syed and Özbilgin, 2009). It acknowledges that while individuals have the power to act and change their circumstances, they are also shaped by structural and institutional influences (Al Ariss and Syed, 2011).

The article analyses the findings of a qualitative case study conducted within a company in the food industry, incorporating insights from in-depth interviews with refugees and managers. The paper has been organized in the following way. In the next section, we present an overview of the traditional diversity dimensions and on how refugees differ from other immigrants. Then we present the research design, give a short introduction into the analysed organization as well as the data types and sources and data analysis approach. Then we move on to the discussion section, where we discuss the results considering the current state of art and present the implications the research has to the ongoing debate on diversity management and inclusion. The paper ends with a conclusion section.

The research on workforce diversity has led to the identification of different types and dimensions including the differentiation into the “deep-level” and “surface-level” diversity. “Deep-level” diversity traits include attitudes, opinions, knowledge and values, which are revealed gradually through verbal and nonverbal interaction and “surface-level” diversity, include traits such as race and gender, which are instantly noticeable in groups, contrasts (Phillips et al., 2006). Researchers have studied the impact of those two types of diversity on different organizational outcomes (Coetzee and Veldsman, 2016; Kaufmann and Wagner, 2017; Triana et al., 2021). However, as stated by Post et al. (2021), some diversity dimensions remain understudied like i.e. the refugee status.

Another, very impactful differentiation of diversity understandings was presented by Harrison and Klein (2007). They presented a diversity typology including separation, variety and disparity. Diversity as separation refers to differences between people among a single continuous attribute like e.g. attitudes, beliefs, opinions, etc. Diversity as variety refers to qualitative differences on a categorical attribute like functional background, industry expertise, professional experience, content expertise, etc. Finally, diversity as disparity refers to differences in access to, share of socially valued and desired resources like power, pay and prestige. As each type of diversity may lead to different results, this is necessary to establish which form we are analysing. Diversity as separation and disparity will have negative consequences and diversity as variation may lead amongst others to greater creativity, innovation and higher decision quality.

The third important typology divides diversity into functional and demographical diversity. Demographical diversity is very often equated with surface-level diversity (Wang, 2021) and includes a range of dimensions like, e.g. gender, age, ethnicity, nationality, marital status (Lin et al., 2014; Peters and Karren, 2009). Functional diversity refers to differences in job functions (Zhang, 2016) but also educational level or background, professional tenure and expertise domain (Dahlin et al., 2005; Lin et al., 2014). Bunderson and Sutcliffe (2017) divided functional diversity further into dominant functional diversity (functional areas, where individuals spend the majority of their careers), functional background diversity (diversity in the work history of team members), functional assignment diversity (diversity in team member functional assignment considering the job title and/or responsibility) and intra-personal functional diversity (the extent to which a team member is a narrow specialist or a broad generalists with a range of functional domains). Functional diversity captures differences in knowledge, skills, beliefs and values (Wang, 2021). It may lead to positive consequences like better problem-solving (Cummings, 2004), but also disadvantages like irreconcilable divisions among team members (Horwitz and Horwitz, 2007). However, it also needs to be acknowledged that demographic diversity contributes and influences functional diversity and variety. Demographic diversity dimensions are used as proxies for more abstract diversity dimensions like intellectual diversity, as they reflect the variety of experiences of individuals (Morrison and Steltzer, 2021). Although demographic or surface-level diversity has been extensively studied, the refugee status or experience has received limited attention as a distinct diversity dimension within existing literature.

The existing diversity literature fails to adequately address the specific needs and experiences of migrants and refugees (Özbilgin et al., 2024; Kadam et al., 2021). Studies often prioritize the demands of indigenous groups over those of migrants, leading to a lack of tailored interventions for the latter (Özbilgin et al., 2024). Including the perspective of migrants and refugees into the diversity literature is an important area of inquiry, particularly in the context of workplace inclusion and the management of ethnic diversity (Groutsis et al., 2023). Research on inclusion has traditionally focused on social inclusion that addresses the marginalization and discrimination of individuals based on their sociodemographic differences (Ng and Lam, 2020; Fitzsimmons et al., 2023; Palalar et al., 2022), leaving however refugees out. Accordingly, it is argued that “full economic and social inclusion of disadvantaged groups remains an elusive goal” of EDI research (Fitzsimmons et al., 2023) that is preoccupied with social justice, power, and privilege issues of disadvantaged groups (Saba et al., 2021). Therefore, inclusion means “providing opportunities for people from all backgrounds to participate, learn, work, engage, and have a voice,” by ensuring they have the resources, opportunities and capabilities to do so (Collins et al., 2016).

As stated by Özbilgin et al. (2024), the ethnicity and race categories are often used as an umbrella to examine the experiences of indigenous majority and minority ethnic and racial groups, as well as the working and living conditions of migrants and refugees. Consequently, the race and ethnic diversity category often encompasses both local/indigenous ethnic and racial diversity and the diversity associated with migrants and refugees. Additionally, while ethnicity and migration are undoubtedly connected (Pio, 2005; Syed and Murray, 2009; D'Netto et al., 2014), the relationship between migrants and ethnicity is underexplored in diversity literature (D'Netto et al., 2014). All that leads to the situation, where the unique challenges faced by migrants and refugees are very often overlooked (Özbilgin et al., 2024). Additionally, in countries like Poland, France and Germany, where ethnicity is not a straightforward topic of discussion or a readily available data point, the experiences of migrants’ risk become even more overlooked in academic research (Karakas and Özbilgin, 2019).

The complexity of migrant experiences and the limited solidarity among different migrant groups complicate their representation in diversity management literature. As suggested by Syed and Pio (2010), migration intersects with ethnicity, gender and religion, making an intersectional approach essential for understanding the challenges and discrimination migrants face.

Although migrants often possess unique skills, experiences and perspectives that can significantly enhance organizational performance (Alkan and Kamasak, 2024), they are in general, migrants are perceived as a vulnerable group in the workplace (Hakak and Al Ariss, 2013). They are very often subject to work insecurity, underemployment or employment under precarious work conditions (Farivar et al., 2022; Hira-Friesen, 2018). However, little is known about the factors that make them vulnerable in the workplace. Hakak and Al Ariss (2013) established that the country context, networks, discrimination in employment relationships and the individual attributes and acculturation affect career development and opportunities in the labour market. Understanding the intersection of migration experiences and diversity management practices can reveal how discrimination and biases manifest in organizational settings, leading to more effective interventions (Alkan and Kamasak, 2024; Yavuz et al., 2019; Turchick and Al Ariss, 2013).

Refugees differ from migrants in several ways. First and foremost, refugees and other forced migrants were forced to leave their homes, while other international migrants (due to various reasons) chose to leave their home countries (Erdal and Oeppen, 2020). Studies have shown that forced and voluntary migrants differ in terms of determinants of well-being (Greyling, 2016). Refugees very often deal with trauma, suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and major depression (Fazel et al., 2005). Other research showed that they suffer anxiety, emotional-related problems (Kien et al., 2019) or other forms of psychological distress (Schlechter et al., 2021). This may have consequences in terms of their resilience (Lewtak et al., 2022). Refugees want to work in order to develop some semblance of a normal life and they want to give back and contribute to the country that has taken them in (Wassenhove Boufaied, 2015). Many of the refugees are also highly qualified, although they may face difficulties to have their qualifications recognized and their language skills are very often a significant hurdle for employment (Wassenhove and Boufaied, 2015). As pointed out already in the mid-70s of the twentieth century by Bernard (1976), voluntary migrants are in most cases un-skilled or semi-skilled employees, while refugees come from all segments or classes of a society (including all educational and occupational levels, different age groups, etc.). Although the contemporary situation regarding the educational backgrounds of migrants has changed somewhat, these two categories can still be observed in the cases of migrants and refugees from Ukraine arriving in Poland. According to various studies, among economic migrants from Ukraine (prior to the war), about a dozen to several tens of percent had tertiary education (Górny et al., 2021; Pędziwiatr et al., 2022), whereas among Ukrainian refugees, the proportion of those with tertiary education is even about 60% (Kubiciel-Lodzińska and Solga, 2023). Voluntary migrants are being perceived as more knowledgeable and better prepared for the new country, while for forced migrants the very often sudden decision to flee the country leaves them less prepared, more vulnerable to cultural shock, with non-existent or underdeveloped networks (Bernard, 1976; Un et al., 2022).

Furthermore, when analysing any kind of diversity dimensions, it is important to remember about intersections between different dimensions. There is a need to understand the unique challenges and contributions of refugees in the workplace, highlighting that their experiences are often overlooked in diversity discussions (Knappert et al., 2020). Another important point is gender. As suggested by Newman et al. (2018), female refugees may face additional barriers as it is harder for them to build psychological resources and show a positive response to climates supporting diversity than it is for male refugees. This may be of special importance in the analysed case, as most of the refugees from the Ukraine were women, as men were obliged to stay in their home country and fight.

Building upon Özbilgin et al. (2024) argument, about the need to recognize migrants as a separate group within diversity management, we argue that the refugee experience should also be recognized as a separate dimension or sub-dimension of diversity.

For understanding the experiences of refugees and contributions within the workplace, highlighting both the challenges they face and the unique strengths they bring to the organization, we chose an exploratory single-case study (Yin, 2009). We decided on an exploratory approach in order to utilize empirically rich and very detailed data on an understudied issue (Edmondson and McManus, 2007). It also allowed flexibility and openness given that there were no hypotheses to guide the research (Swanborn, 2010). The idea behind choosing the exploratory approach was also the aim to look for cause-and-effect relationships (Eisenhardt, 1989; Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007). The single case study approach can be used to analyse largely inaccessible phenomena (Yin, 2009) and it allows for a better understanding of organizational processes (Doz, 2011; Langley et al., 2013) and can be the basis for making generalizations and thus may contribute to scientific development (Flyvbjerg, 2006).

Empirical material was collected from June till November 2022. The empirical material includes primary and secondary data. Secondary data used for the purpose of this paper included internal documents provided by the organization, the webpage of the XYZ and the MNC and job advertisements posted on their webpage but also on external job announcements web portals. Primary data include data collected within a contest organized in 2023 and 2024, by two of the co-authors for a “Foreigner friendly Company”, which was designed to recruit companies that employ foreigners and refugees, and as a competition to popularize good practices in the field of hiring migrants. To participate in this contest, the organizations had to fill out a questionnaire, where we asked for certain information on the employment of migrants and refugees including the number and job positions of employed migrants and refugees, the motives for employing refugees, practices regarding team building (whether refugees work in homogenous or heterogenous teams, the equality, diversity and inclusion documents implemented in organizations, etc). Only information coming from the XYZ organization has been included in this paper. The participants agreed that the data may be used for scientific reasons. The rationale for using the data was the relevance of the data to the research objective. The data directly pertained to the employment of migrants and refugees, which aligned with the study’s focus on understanding hiring practices and the inclusion and integration of these groups into the workforce. The questionnaire gathered comprehensive information on various aspects of migrant and refugee employment, providing a rich dataset for analysis. It also helped to identify the secondary sources, which were then used as secondary data.

The second source of primary data was in-depth interviews conducted with employees from the organization. The interviews were conducted with employees – refugees, who fled Ukraine after the beginning of the war, their immediate supervisors and a representative of the HR department – a senior HR Business Partner, dealing with diversity, inclusion and CSR issues. All interviewees agreed to the participation in the study. We used pseudonyms to ensure the confidentiality of the research. The structure of the sample has been presented in Table 1.

One interviewee in our sample, Olena, is a refugee who left Ukraine in 2014. This individual differs from the rest of the participants, who entered the host country after 2022, in terms of their adaptation as her experience offers valuable insights into the longer-term adaptation process of refugees, though their data are not directly comparable to those of post-2022 refugees. Her perspective was used for illustrative purposes, not for drawing conclusions about post-2022 refugees.

Table 2 provides additional socio-demographic information on the refugees, which may be important for a deeper understanding of their situation.

The interviews with the refugee employees were conducted in Ukrainian. The interview questions for the three groups of employees were included in appendix. In order to minimize any potential negative effects, the interviews were conducted by two of the co-authors, who are also Ukrainian refugees (fled the country after the first invasion in 2014), thus are native-speakers and also have the best possibility to understand the mental state of the interviewees and therefore create a feeling of psychological safety. The interviews were then translated back and forth to English and were then compared in order verify the quality of the translation. The interviews with the managers and the HR representative were conducted in Polish by a Polish native-speaker and then were translated into English. The interviews lasted an average about 50 min. All interviewees verbally agreed to record the interviews and then for them to be used for the purpose of this study.

Finally, we used secondary data for the purpose of this paper: we analysed internal documents provided by the organization, the webpage of the XYZ and the MNC and job announcements posted on their webpage as well as on external job announcements web portals.

The analysis of the data has been done using a qualitative approach (Eisenhardt, 1989; Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007). After the completion of the transcription of the interviews and their translation, data reduction (on the whole dataset) has been conducted to remove unnecessary data, including overly sensitive and confidential information, which did not add value to the study (Ojala et al., 2018). After the data reduction, we conducted data analysis. A combination of deductive and inductive coding was used. We analysed the data using a modified Gioia et al.'s (2013) approach and using open and axial coding (Charmaz, 2006; Corbin and Strauss, 2008). We used theoretical memos to highlight the emerging themes using MAXQDA software and open and thematic coding. The open coding method allowed us to analyse each interview line by line and create a new code for a marked segment of text for the purpose of analysing the data. This stage was iterative as we switched between analysing data from the interviews and the data obtained from other sources. We appraised theoretical saturation as sufficient when we came upon frequent repetitions of codes and therefore stopped coding and generating new information. The data structure has been presented in Figure 1.

To ensure the quality of the analysis, an audit trail, collaboration and disconfirming evidence validity procedures were used (Creswell and Miller, 2000). In the final phase, we followed the guidelines of Eisenhardt and Graebner (2007) to present the empirical evidence in as faithful as possible. We wrote down the cases story, with quotations and data supporting the narrative. We used the data structures developed during the coding phase to link the empirical evidence with the emerging theory.

The XYZ organization, operating in a multicultural and diverse environment, faced new challenges after the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022. The organization is a Polish subsidiary of a multinational corporation (MNC) operating in the food production sector. XYZ specializes in the production of food products for children and infants. Therefore, it has very high quality, sanitary and security standards. The company was established in the 1940s and in the 1960s, it specialized in baby formula production. In 2007, it joined the MNC. The XYZ organization has over 700 employees. In 2012, the XYZ signed the Polish Diversity Charter, officially committing to implement diversity management. What is also of importance for this case is that the MNC had another subsidiary in Kherson (Ukraine) as the war began. Due to the war, the company suspended operations at its subsidiaries in the Ukraine. The people employed there were offered the opportunity to relocate to Poland and commence work with the Polish branch. Some employees took up this opportunity, allowing them to effectively continue working for their former company, albeit in a different country. Unfortunately for the employees, this transition involved a change in job position, often shifting from office roles to warehouse work.

The Ukrainian workforce at XYZ comprises economic migrants, foreign students and refugees. By the end of 2022, the organization employed 721 individuals, from which 45 were Ukrainians. The organization employed 18 refugees. The organization employed three Ukrainian workers in administrative positions, and the rest were physical workers. All refugees were employed as physical workers. Most of the Ukrainian workers (38) were employed based on a contract of employment for an indefinite period and the rest was working based on a contract of mandate or fixed-term contract. By the end of 2023, the numbers slightly changed. The general number of employees fall to 683, but the number off Ukrainians employed in the organization has risen to 76, including 30 refugees. Three Ukrainians were holding managerial positions. Most of the Ukrainian workers (64) were employed based on a contract of employment for an indefinite period and the rest was working based on a contract of mandate or fixed-term contract. As already mentioned, as the war began, the XYZ organization was already committed to diversity management for years. Since 2013, it also employed many foreign workers. By the end of 2021, the XYZ employed 45 foreigners (mostly from the Ukraine but also from the Belarus and Georgia), 3 of them were employed on administrative positions, the rest on job positions in the production.

The organization had several diversity management-related practices and policies in place. Already before the war, due to the lack of workforce and the influx of Ukrainian economic migrants, the company started to translate the most important documents into Ukrainian. However, this trend has been significantly intensified after the first refugees were employed.

First, the organization published an official declaration condemning the Russian aggression on the Ukraine on February 26, 2022. The statement also included information that first steps to ensure safety of their Ukrainian employees and their family members have already been taken. This was also strongly emphasized during the interviews, where the interviewees described different ways that they themselves but also the organization tried to help – by organizing transport, helping to get the families out of Ukraine, sending food, money, finding housing, etc.

The war outbreak also brought several structural changes to the organization. From one day to another, Ukrainian men quit their jobs, as they were summoned to go back to their homeland and fight, and women started coming in. Within the company, several changes have also been made. As already mentioned, the MNC had also a subsidiary in Kherson. To help those employees, the XYZ developed an app which was aimed at helping the Kherson employees find job positions in XYZ. 10 employees (women and men) used this internal transfer possibility. Furthermore, an internal taskforce “Ukraine” was created, which was aimed at finding possibilities to help, increase inclusion, facilitate the adaptation and onboarding process of refugee employees and conduct risk analysis. This group includes foremost Ukrainian employees. The organization translated amongst others all contracts, rules and regulations, instructions for the job positions and the production line, personnel documents, substance safety data sheets, in-house communications, programs and systems. The most important, and repeatedly mentioned new solution were the bilingual mentors as a part of the onboarding process. The introduction of those mentors was aimed at helping the new hires who did not have any Polish skills to enter their new position more smoothly. The organization hired also Ukrainian HR Department employees, which were meant to be a “go-to person”, build a feeling of psychological safety, somebody who the refugees could relate to, trust. Also, at the very beginning open webinars conducted by psychologists were organized, where topics like “how to speak about the war” were discussed.

The biggest change was made in the recruitment and onboarding process. With recruitment the already mentioned app was developed for internal mobility. New job openings were made also such, which would not normally been made available. The job advertisements used for external recruitment, although they were created like regular advertisements (with standard requirements), have an additional marking with graphics – the flag of Ukraine with the description “the employer is open for employment of Ukrainian citizens”. They were also bilingual, and they were intentionally distributed in the temporary refugee support centre and temporarily housing for refugees.

Also, after couple of weeks and noticing that employees disappear without notice and struggle with the new responsibilities, the organization decided to show the actual production process (and the production line) to the candidates so that they may fully realize what will be expected of them.

The influx of refugees and the war outbreak forced the organization to adopt certain processes. The process of planning work organization and schedules has been modified to include diversity:

The employment of refugees brought also changes at the management level; however, as stated by Helena and Jan, the change was rather a personal than an organizational initiative. The change included for example a longer period for adaptation and a higher acceptance of mistakes during the learning period. However, as stated by the interviewees, the employees finally developed the same skills and worked on the same level as other employees.

The biggest and still unanswered question is whether to ask and inform about the refugee experience. In the analysed case, the organization and its representatives never officially ask about it. For the employees hired just after the war outbreak and transferred from Kherson, it was sort of obvious, but the more time passes, the more blurred this issue will become. In most cases, the refugees shared their stories at some point, in private conversations. There is however an ethical and legal dilemma whether the organization should ask about the status. Not being able to identify workers with refugee experience will limit the possibilities to manage them in the most appropriate way.

The Ukrainian workforce in the analysed organization is a mosaic of diverse individuals, ranging from economic migrants seeking better opportunities, foreign students pursuing educational goals to refugees, who fled their homes after the Russian invasion in 2022. While these groups may share some commonalities as non-native workers, we found distinct differences in their experiences, challenges and needs that organizations must recognize and address. In our analysis, we found that due to their lived experiences, refugees have certain special characteristics, which distinguish them from other workers working at the company.

When the war broke out, life for many Ukrainian refugees turned upside down. Forced to leave their homes, they arrived at the XYZ organization carrying not just their belongings but also the heavy burden of uncertainty and loss. Their journey had a significant impact on their psychological state, marked by a sense of “suspension” – as one manager described it – shaped their experiences in the organization.

During the interviews interviewees and their managers signalled, more or less explicit, that the refugee employees are in a specific suspension and a state of uncertainty. They do not know how long they will stay in Poland, whether they will be able to go back home, how long the situation in the Ukraine will stay this way or how it will evolve. This becomes also visible in a lack of willingness to commit. Even if offered traditional employment contracts, refugees prefer more flexible job contracts, which are easier to terminate. This has however significant implications for managers and the organization as pointed out by Anna, a line manager in the company:

The analysis showed that some of the refugees are still in a very fragile psychological state. Anastasiya, a mother of three young children, stated that she is so worried about the family left behind, that it is impossible for her to think about the future: “I’m very worried about the family that stayed in Ukraine. I miss the life that I left behind there. I can’t organize the thoughts-for me, it is hard to focus on the future” (Anastasiya). Julia, the HR Business Partner, also said that she has the impression that the refugee employees have not yet fully accepted the new situation they have found themselves in.

However, the interviewees pointed also to positive traits of the refugee employees, which may be a result of their unique experiences namely a determination, persistence and a willingness to fight and refusal to give up. Helena, another line manager at the organization summarized it in a following way:

Imagine starting a new job in a foreign country, where the language is unfamiliar, and the work culture is different. For many refugees at XYZ, this was their reality. Although the organization emphasized that Polish skills were not a requirement, the refugees' lack of fluency often led them to jobs far below their qualifications, in simple production jobs. Managers also stated that the refugees lack knowledge and preparation regarding the Polish social system, tax system and labour laws which in combination with a different work culture in the Ukraine creates an additional barrier to their inclusion in the organization. Even Julia, the HRBP admitted that:

Nataliya admitted “I am not using my potential here at all. In Ukraine, I worked in a biological laboratory, but here I have a physical job. I don’t have the opportunity to use my potential, because I don’t speak Polish.”

The third group of traits is related to the perception of work and is again, especially after the psychological state, unique for refugees. For refugees at XYZ, work became more than just a means to earn money – it was a way to survive both emotionally and physically. The analysis of interviews showed that first work itself it treated as psychological surviving mechanisms. Managers emphasized that refugees frequently attended work as a coping mechanism, allowing them to avoid dwelling on their personal situations.

Furthermore, refugees perceive work as a mechanism for physical survival, using their earnings to adapt and survive in their new reality. What is also important is how they approach the issue of employment – the refugees want to work, they are proud of working and not only relying on help but also contributing. The refugees accept jobs below their qualifications. They (together with Ukrainian economic migrants) also very often outnumber Polish workers in certain jobs, which Poles perceive as not attractive enough; however, there are certain jobs which they are too proud to do. This may be connected to the fact the many of the refugees are highly qualified and used to work in higher, administrative positions. Pride came also up when the interviewees were asked about special treatment. Especially, the refugees clearly stated that they do not want and do not need special treatment.

At first, managers at XYZ noticed that some refugees disappeared without explanation. It was a challenge – one that frustrated other employees. Yet over time, these same refugees started showing trust, communicating their plans and even taking initiatives to help others. Managers also stated that they have observed different reactions for example to conflict of refugees in comparison to the other employees (also economic migrants). It has also been emphasized that they have different needs than other employees. Interviewees mentioned that it has been the refugee employees who showed an initiative to volunteer and help other refugees in the Ukraine, in temporary housing or refugee help centres. They also wanted the organizations help in this regard. Nevertheless, there are also some problems, which affect the functioning of refugee employees at work. Some of the interviewees pointed towards signs of substance abuse, violence but also explicit information about conflict between family members on whether to stay in Poland or go back to the Ukraine, like Julia admitted: “We have situations where, for example, we know that a man has come to be with a woman and wants to take her back to Ukraine–but she doesn’t want to go, and the employees are trying to help her”. This may be a challenge typical more for refugees than other migrants and secondly a challenge which may become more pressing for the organizations as the situation in the Ukraine will stabilize.

The findings presented in the previous section highlight the unique experiences, challenges and traits of refugees in the organization, particularly in the context of psychological state, competencies, perception of work and motivation. To better understand and interpret these findings, it is essential to situate them within relevant theoretical frameworks. This section links the empirical observations to established theories, providing a deeper understanding of the underlying mechanisms shaping refugee experiences in the workplace. Analysing the above-described traits led us to the development of proposition of a framework, which could further help to analyse the influence of the refugee experience on their workplace inclusion and the required actions an organization should undertake. The model has been presented in Figure 2.

We observed that the psychological state of refugees plays a central role in shaping how they perceive work, as well as their motivation and behaviour within the organization. This psychological state appears to affect their ability to function effectively in the workplace, highlighting the complexity of their experience. Additionally, competencies – both individual skills and broader qualifications – seem to interact with this psychological state, either amplifying or mitigating its impact on motivation and workplace behaviour. This interplay suggests that addressing both psychological well-being and skill alignment is essential for fostering a supportive and inclusive work environment for refugee employees.

To better understand and frame the findings, the concept of the psychological contract offers a valuable theoretical perspective, highlighting the mutual, often unspoken expectations between refugees and the organization (as represented in our study by managers and HR). To explore this, we examined interviewees' expectations towards each other and analysed job advertisements for indications of the psychological contract in practice. This lens provides deeper insight into the implicit agreements shaping relationships, trust and workplace dynamics for refugee employees. The results have been presented in Table 3.

The analysis showed that most importantly there is a barrier regarding expressing the expectations on the side of the refugees. Svitlana and Nataliya stated that they did not tell anyone about their expectations, and Svitlana added: “No, I am afraid to talk about, it and I don’t know the Polish language”. This shows that there is still a need to build trust and a feeling of psychological safety, which could also help not only to express but also to formulate those expectations. What needs to be acknowledged is that the organization is open and actively searching for ways to learn about those expectations.

Refugees, individuals forced to flee their homes, present unique challenges and experiences that distinguish them from other migrant worker groups. In this, we argue that refugees should be viewed as a separate diversity dimension in the workplace, with their distinct psychological states, competencies, work perception as well as motives and behaviours, necessitating tailored organizational support and strategies for workplace inclusion.

As the case demonstrates, refugees face a profound state of psychological disruption arising from their forced displacement and ongoing conflicts. They often lack control over their circumstances and the ability to envision a clear future, resulting in a persistent state of uncertainty and suspension that profoundly impacts their mental well-being, decision-making and commitment to work. Their experiences fundamentally shape their workplace behaviours and consequently affect workplace inclusion. Also, their perception of work as a survival tool sets them apart from other employee groups. Their motives and behaviour evolve in ways that reflect their resilience and adaptability. Recognizing refugees as a separate dimension allows organizations to develop more targeted policies and practices, ultimately enhancing inclusion, trust, and organizational performance.

Researchers have long been exploring ways to create a more inclusive work environment (Mor Barak, 2010; Shore et al., 2018), as it has been recognized that under certain circumstances, diversity may have positive effects for the organization. The impact of employee diversity on organizational (Choi et al., 2017; Kundu et al., 2019) and team performance (Qi et al., 2022) has been subject of many studies (Horwitz and Horwitz, 2007). Multiple analysis on the influence of diversity on, e.g. employee satisfaction (Creek et al., 2019), work engagement (Tuan et al., 2019), organizational citizenship behaviour (Moon, 2016), financial performance (Beraki et al., 2022) and innovation (Abiew et al., 2022; Mothe and Nguyen-Thi, 2021; Ostergaard et al., 2011) has been conducted. However, none of this researched included the refugee experience as a separate dimension.

As refugees face unique challenges and experiences in the workplace, which distinguish them from other migrant worker groups (Ortlieb et al., 2020; Guo et al., 2020; Segrest et al., 2021), they represent a distinct diversity dimension that requires tailored organizational support and strategies (Ortlieb et al., 2020; Guo et al., 2020).

Building on the identified concepts – psychological state, competencies, work perception, motives and behaviours – we have proposed a framework that explains the interactions between these factors. Specifically, we posit that refugees' psychological state serves as a foundational factor affecting their perception of work and behaviour at work. Competencies affect this relationship, either mitigating or exacerbating its effects. Furthermore, the psychological contract between refugees and the organization shapes long-term functioning outcomes, emphasizing the need for open communication and trust-building. This integrated framework contributes to diversity management and inclusion research by highlighting the distinct dynamics of refugee inclusion in the workplace and thus builds the rationale for distinguishing refugees as a separate diversity group. Refugees represent a distinct and often overlooked dimension of workforce diversity. Unlike economic migrants, refugees are forced to flee their homes due to conflict or persecution. Their lived experiences result in profound psychological, social and economic challenges that influence their inclusion into host organizations. These challenges, combined with their unique lived experiences, differentiate refugees from other non-native workers, such as economic migrants or international students. However, refugees are not a monolithic group; their experiences are shaped by multiple intersecting factors, with gender playing a particularly critical role. As Maj et al. (2024) emphasize, female refugees face additional challenges during the integration process, including vulnerabilities related to safety, family responsibilities and access to employment opportunities. These gendered barriers warrant further attention both in management studies and in organizational practice.

Refugees often experience a profound state of psychological disruption arising from their forced displacement and ongoing conflicts (Ortlieb et al., 2020; Lenette et al., 2012; Alamdari, 2022). This results in a persistent state of uncertainty and suspension that profoundly impacts their mental well-being, decision-making and commitment to work (Ortlieb et al., 2020; Lenette et al., 2012; Alamdari, 2022), which became very clear in the conducted study, where refugees were described as being in a state of constant suspense. Their perception of work as a survival tool, which was emphasized by the interviewees, sets them apart from other employee groups (Ortlieb et al., 2020; Lenette et al., 2012).

However, refugees also demonstrate resilience and adaptability, as their motivation and behaviour evolve in response to their experiences (Lenette et al., 2012; Alamdari, 2022; Denzongpa and Nichols, 2019). Recognizing refugees as a separate dimension allows organizations to develop more targeted policies and practices, articulate the unique psychological contract, ultimately enhancing workplace integration, inclusion, trust and organizational performance (Ortlieb et al., 2020; Guo et al., 2020).

Although the focus of the study was to determine if being a refugee should be a separate diversity dimension, we acknowledge that it should not be analysed in isolation from the other dimensions. Refugees must not only be analysed based on their status but also through the lens of gender, which shapes their integration experiences (Maj et al., 2024).

By establishing that the refugees competencies affect the workplace inclusion, the conducted research confirms also the findings of Wassenhove and Boufaied (2015) that one of the main barriers for the functioning of refugees in the organization is the language. The research showed that refugee women mostly work below their qualifications and thus are also examples of brain waste (Farivar et al., 2022).

The paper shows that the diversity and inclusion framework may be used to address the situation of refugees in organization. Hakak and Al Ariss (2013) suggested using a human resource management framework to assess the vulnerability of migrants in the workplace. However, we believe that it is necessary to look not only at the vulnerability of refugees but also at their unique capabilities and traits such as willingness to fight, determination, adaptability. Thus in our opinion the diversity and inclusion framework is more fitting. Organizational practices shaping everyday normality at work influence how migrants are treated and influence their inclusion (Risberg and Romani, 2022) and if managed effectively, they can enable refugees to use their skills, knowledge and experience effectively in the workplace, contributing positively to organizational success (Adamovic and Cooney-O'Donoghue, 2025).

Furthermore, we established, that the psychological contract between refugees and the organization is currently tainted by mismatched expectations. Thus, the need for open communication is essential to bridge gaps between what organizations expect and what refugees perceive as expected.

The main goal of the paper was to provide new insight into the employment experiences of refugees in countries and organizations without previous experience in handling refugees and their needs. Therefore, we analysed the functioning of refugees in an organization from their own perspective, but also from the perspective of their immediate supervisors, and the organization. Although limited research exists on the refugee experience within diversity and organizational inclusion frameworks, our study contributes novel insights by examining this intersection in depth. The issue of migration and refugees has been overlooked by the management scholars, but as the conducted analysis showed, the refugee experience has implications for the psychological state of employees, their motivation, behaviour at work, their perception of work itself or the psychological contract. Our study contributes to the literature about refugees’ employment by considering the mezzo-level of organizations. Therefore, the paper contributes not only to the diversity and inclusion literature but also to the discourse within organizational behaviour and human resources management research. The contribution lies in showing that the refugee experience (and not necessarily only the refugee legal status, as the Polish context shows) needs to be acknowledged as a separate diversity dimension. While acknowledging that the case study is only exploratory, we proposed a simple framework for the analysis of factors, which may influence the behaviour of refugees in an organization, which is another theoretical contribution of this paper.

Our findings also contribute to the discussion of organizational inclusion by highlighting the importance of recognizing refugees’ unique challenges, such as their psychological state and competencies, and addressing them through tailored support mechanisms. By fostering trust and aligning mutual expectations (e.g. psychological contract), organizations can create inclusive environments where refugees feel valued and engaged.

The conducted research shows that organizations can play an important and constructive role in building an inclusive society by building an inclusive workplace. As suggested by Naccache and Al Ariss (2018), this may help to recover the social importance of business and start a new, positive relationship with the global society.

As stated by Naccache and Al Ariss (2018), so far the majority of forced migrants have been male. The specificity of the Ukrainian refugee was that because they were forbidden to leave the country, it was mostly women and children who fled their homes. As pointed out by Newman et al. (2018), female refugees face additional challenges to the integration process. Thus, it is important that businesses but also scholars remember and analyse refugees not only in terms of their status but also in terms of gender, developing a gender perspective on forced migration in management studies and in practice.

The research also showed that there is a significant social potential in this group of employees. There volunteer initiative and willingness to help may be transformed into internal, organizational volunteering and organizational citizenship behaviour, as there is potential for it.

Furthermore, the analysis of the psychological contract between the refugees and their organization shows that there are discrepancies between the organization’s expectations and what the refugees expect and believe is expected from them. This shows an ongoing need for open communication between both parties.

As the findings presented in the paper derive from a single organizational case study and are therefore most applicable within this specific context, we acknowledge the need to caution, when drawing broad, external generalizations from our findings. The findings presented here reflect the dynamics and experiences within the specific organizational context of XYZ Company. These internal generalizations, while robust within this case, should be interpreted with caution when applied to other organizational setting.

Another limitation of the study is the fact that the sample included only one woman, who came to Poland after the first invasion of Russia on Ukraine in 2014. As the interviews have shown she has different experiences than the other, more recent refugees. She is the only one who speaks Polish and already has a wide network of family and friends. While their perspective provides valuable insights into the long-term adaptation process of refugees, it differs significantly from the experiences of post-2022 refugees, who are in the early stages of integration into their host country. This discrepancy may introduce a potential bias in the analysis, as their context, duration of adaptation and challenges differ from those of the primary study group. To mitigate this potential bias, we ensured that this individual’s responses were carefully contextualized and, where necessary, excluded from direct comparisons with post-2022 refugees. To ensure wider comparison, future research should include a wider range of 2014 refugees and compare their experiences. It would be also very interesting to conduct a panel study and try to interview the women after some period, to see how their situation has changed. Having this in mind and having the contact information of these women, we plan on conducting a second wave of interviews with them.

Another limitation of our study was the fact that we only analysed Ukrainian refugees in a Polish company, thus the cultural proximity between the refugees and the incoming country was relatively close. De Coninck (2022) showed that Europe’s responses to Ukrainian refugees were far more positive than to refugees from Afghanistan. Ukrainian refugees received a more welcoming response, which could imply that European societies or governments are more receptive to refugees who are perceived as ethnically or culturally similar (as opposed to refugees from Somalia or Afghanistan) (Moise et al., 2024). Therefore, cultural proximity should be taken into account as a mediator, when analysing the influence of the refugee status on diverse outcomes. We believe that an analysis including refugees in an organization situated in a culturally more distant setting would make their distinctiveness even more visible. Another important factor that may have contributed to greater openness towards Ukrainian refugees was the predominance of women and children within this group – individuals perceived as in need of care (Hargrave, Homel and Dražanová, 2022).

It is also important to stress that the war resulted not only in the influx of refugees but also changed the psychological state of the former migrants. As emphasized by the interviewees, the regular Ukrainian workers are also victims of the war, suffer from its consequences and became “co-refugees” to their families whom they tried to evacuate form Ukraine. Therefore, the analysis of the influence of war (or a difficult, life-threatening situation) in the homeland on migrant workers is also an important research area.

This study highlights the importance of treating refugees as a distinct diversity dimension, emphasizing their unique challenges and contributions to organizations. By addressing psychological barriers, aligning competencies and fostering organizational inclusion, companies can create environments where refugees can thrive. Future research should explore long-term refugee integration and the role of gender in shaping refugee experiences.

1. From your company’s perspective, how did the outbreak of war in Ukraine in February 2022 unfold, and what consequences did it bring?

2. How would you describe your company’s attitude towards diversity (e.g. how important is diversity to you, and how has it been supported in the past and present)?

3. How would you assess the level of inclusion within your organization?

4. Can you estimate how many Ukrainian refugees have been employed by your company? (This includes individuals who fled the war to Poland, not necessarily those with formal refugee status.)

   • What is the turnover rate among these employees?

5. What did the recruitment and selection process for these employees look like?

   • Were they mainly “referred” candidates, or did the company post open job advertisements?

   • What criteria did these individuals need to meet for specific positions, and to what extent do you think they fulfilled these requirements?

6. From a formal perspective, what are the employment conditions for these individuals? What kind of contracts do they have (are they the same as for Poles and other foreigners)? What benefits are offered as part of the social package, and does this differ from what is offered to Poles and other foreigners?

7. What was the onboarding process for these employees?

8. Were other employees informed or prepared to work with refugee employees? (Please justify your response.)

9. Were managers and employees trained to work with refugees? If yes, what did this training entail?

10. In your opinion, do Ukrainian refugees possess any specific qualities that make them a unique group of employees?

11. What expectations do you think refugees have of the company, managers, and colleagues?

12. What expectations do you think the company, managers, and colleagues have of refugee employees?

13. Were these expectations explicitly communicated, or are they more implicit?

14. Does your company have any special programs or CSR activities specifically for refugees? If yes, please describe them. If not, are there programs more broadly aimed at foreigners?

15. What does your HR department do to ensure that refugee employees feel included in the company and their teams?

16. How would you describe the overall atmosphere in your company?

1. How would you describe your company’s attitude towards diversity (e.g. how important is diversity to you, and how has it been supported in the past and present)?

2. How would you assess the level of inclusion within your organization?

3. How would you describe the overall atmosphere in your company?

4. How would you describe your relationships with refugee employees you work with?

5. How do you evaluate your behaviour towards refugees? Do you treat them the same as other employees, or differently? Please explain.

6. Did the company provide you with any support to help you manage refugee employees?

   • If yes, what kind of support?

   • If not, do you think such support would be useful? What should it include?

7. In your opinion, do Ukrainian refugees possess any specific qualities that make them a unique group of employees? Do they behave differently compared to other employees (or foreigners you’ve worked with)?

8. To what extent do you think their skills or backgrounds are key to the work they do?

9. What expectations do you think refugees have of the company, managers, and colleagues?

10. What expectations do you think the company, managers, and colleagues have of refugee employees?

11. Were these expectations explicitly communicated, or are they more implicit?

12. Were other employees informed or prepared to work with refugee employees? (Please justify your response.)

13. How do you think other employees treat refugees? How would you describe this behaviour?

14. Do you spend time with refugees as a team outside of work or discuss non-work-related matters?

    • If yes, please give an example.

    • If not, why not?

15. Did you provide any help to refugees regarding their situation? Please provide an example.

16. As a manager, what do you do to ensure that refugee employees feel included in the company and your team?

1. How would you describe your company’s attitude towards diversity (To what extent is diversity important for the company, and how has it been supported in the past and present)?

2. How would you assess the level of inclusion in your organization?

3. How would you describe the atmosphere in your company?

4. How did you learn about the opportunity to work at this company?

5. Do you plan to stay in this region, and in this company, for a longer period?

6. To what extent do you feel you are utilizing your potential (qualifications, skills, and knowledge) in your current position? Please justify your answer.

7. In your opinion, what expectations do the company, managers and colleagues have of you as an employee?

8. What expectations do you have of the company, managers, and colleagues?

9. Were these expectations expressed directly, or not necessarily?

10. Do you believe Ukrainian refugees have any characteristics that particularly distinguish them, making them a unique group of employees? Do they behave differently compared to other employees?

11. Have you encountered any stereotypes about Ukrainians in the workplace?

    • If so, what stereotypes? Please provide an example.

12. Have you experienced different treatment because of being a refugee?

    • If so, please provide an example.

    • If not, what do you think is the reason for this?

13. Do you believe that colleagues, managers, and the company should treat you like ordinary employees, or would you prefer some special treatment? Please justify your answer.

14. Have you ever felt like an outsider in your company (someone from the outside/not included)?

    • If so, please provide an example.

15. Do you feel that you are able to fully integrate with the team and become its equal, rightful member? Please justify your answer.

16. Can you recall a situation where coworkers did not show you respect? Please describe an example of a situation where you felt this way.

17. Can you describe a situation where you felt that others treated you with respect or demonstrated that they value you? Please describe an example of a situation where you felt this way.

18. To what extent can you say that you can be yourself at work, without pretending to be someone else? Can you recall a situation where you could fully be yourself at work, and how did people react?

19. Can you recall a situation where you disagreed with your supervisor? If so, could you describe this situation, how you felt, and how the situation was resolved?

20. Before the war, had you heard of Opole? Did you have any contacts here? Or did you arrive here by coincidence?

21. How many friends and family members do you currently have here?

22. What expectations do you have of working in Poland (the job, not the employer)?

Demographic Information:

Gender.

Age.

Position held.

Additional questions for refugees:

Knowledge of the Polish language.

Did you know anyone previously employed in this organization?

Level of education.

Field of education/learned profession.