This study investigates the impact of perceived inclusion practices at the supervisor and team levels on employee job satisfaction, with a specific focus on LGBT+ employees in a Central European context. It addresses gaps in diversity and inclusion research by examining whether job position and LGBT+ identification moderate the inclusion–job satisfaction relationship.

A mixed-methods approach was employed, combining survey data from 282 employees of a Czech manufacturing company with qualitative interviews from a purposive subsample. Multiple linear regression was used to assess the effects of supervisor- and team-level inclusion on job satisfaction and to test for moderation by LGBT+ identification (vs non-LGBT+) and working position. Thematic analysis complemented these findings with narrative insights.

Supervisor-level inclusion was a significant predictor of job satisfaction, whereas team-level inclusion did not reach statistical significance. The moderating effects of LGBT+ identification (vs non-LGBT+) and working position were not statistically supported. Qualitative data revealed that inclusion was often experienced through direct interactions with supervisors, while formal diversity initiatives were met with scepticism. LGBT+ employees described frequent microaggressions and a heightened need for identity management, which constrained the impact of institutional inclusion efforts.

The relatively small number of LGBT+ respondents limits the generalisability of subgroup analysis. Future research should consider longitudinal designs and larger samples to explore intersectional dynamics in inclusion processes.

The study contributes to the inclusion literature by disentangling multi-level effects of inclusion practices and by offering empirical insights from a post-socialist, under-researched region. It integrates Social Exchange Theory (SET) and Social Identity Theory (SIT) to explain the potential conditionality (tested via moderation) of inclusion effects on job satisfaction.