Managing Diversity in the Military

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Managing Diversity in the Military

This edited book examines the management of diversity and inclusion in the military. Owing to the rise of asymmetric warfare, a shift in demographics and labor shortfalls, the US Department of Defense (DoD) has prioritized diversity and inclusion in its workforce management philosophy. In pursuing this objective, it must ensure the attractiveness of a military career by providing an inclusive environ ment for all personnel (active and reserve military, civilian, and contrac tors) to reach their potential and maximize their contributions to the organiza tion. Research and practice alike provide substantial evidence of the benefits associated with diversity and inclusion in the workplace. Diversity and inclusion programs are more strategic in focus than traditional equal opportunity programs and strive to capitalize on the strengths of the workforce, while minimizing the weaknesses that inhibit optimal organizational performance. This new book pro vides vital clarification on these distinct but inextricably linked concepts, in addition to offering concrete best practices for the successful management of diversity and inclusion in the workplace. Written by scholars and practitioners, each chapter addresses major areas, raises crucial issues, and comments on future trends concerning diversity and inclusion in the workplace. The book will be of great interest to students of military studies, war and con flict studies, business management/HRM, psychology, and politics in general, as well as to military professionals and leaders.

Daniel P. McDonald is the Executive Director of Research, Development, and Strategic Initiatives for the Department of Defense, Defense Equal Opportunity Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Management Institute (DEOMI), has supported the US DoD for nearly 20 years, and was Adjunct Professor at the University of Central Florida, USA, teaching Research and Statistical Methods in Psychology.

Kizzy M. Parks is the President of K. Parks Consulting, Inc., and is Adjunct College Professor for Brevard Community College (BCC) and DeVry Univer sity, USA. Cass Military Studies

Intelligence Activities in Ancient Leaders in War Rome West Point remembers the 1991 Trust in the Gods, but Verify Gulf War Rose Mary Sheldon Edited by Frederick Kagan and Christian Kubik Clausewitz and African War Politics and strategy in Liberia and Khedive Ismail’s Army Somalia John Dunn Isabelle Duyvesteyn Yugoslav Military Industry Strategy and Politics in the Middle 1918–1991 East, 1954–60 Amadeo Watkins Defending the Northern Tier Michael Cohen Corporal Hitler and the Great War 1914–1918 The Cuban Intervention in Angola, The List Regiment 1965–1991 John Williams From Che Guevara to Cuito Cuanavale Edward George Rostóv in the Russian Civil War, 1917–1920 Military Leadership in the British The key to victory Civil Wars, 1642–1651 Brian Murphy ‘The Genius of this Age’ Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Stanley Carpenter The Tet Effect, Intelligence and the Public Perception of War Israel’s Reprisal Policy, 1953–1956 Jake Blood The dynamics of military retaliation Ze’ev Drory The US Military Profession into the 21st Century Bosnia and Herzegovina in the War, peace and politics Second World War Edited by Sam C. Sarkesian and Enver Redzic Robert E. Connor, Jr. Civil–Military Relations in Europe Cultural Diversity in the Armed Learning from crisis and institutional Forces change An international comparison Edited by Hans Born, Edited by Joseph Soeters and Marina Caparini, Karl Haltiner and Jan van der Meulen Jürgen Kuhlmann Railways and the Russo-Japanese Strategic Culture and Ways of War War Transporting war Lawrence Sondhaus Felix Patrikeeff and Harold Shukman War and Media Operations Military Unionism in the Post Cold The US Military and the Press from War Era Vietnam to Iraq A future reality? Thomas Rid Edited by Richard Bartle and Lindy Heinecken Ancient China on Postmodern War Enduring ideas from the Chinese Warriors and Politicians strategic tradition U.S. civil–military relations under Thomas Kane stress Charles A. Stevenson Special Forces, Terrorism and Strategy Warfare by other means Military Honour and the Conduct of Alasdair Finlan War From Ancient Greece to Iraq Imperial Defence, 1856–1956 Paul Robinson The old world order Greg Kennedy Military Industry and Regional Defense Policy Civil–Military Cooperation in India, Iraq and Israel Post-Conflict Operations Timothy D. Hoyt Emerging theory and practice Christopher Ankersen Managing Defence in a Democracy Military Advising and Assistance Edited by Laura R. Cleary and From mercenaries to privatization, Teri McConville

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 1815–2007 Donald Stoker Gender and the Military Women in the armed forces of western Private Military and Security democracies Companies Helena Carreiras Ethics, policies and civil–military relations Social Sciences and the Military Edited by Andrew Alexandra, An interdisciplinary overview Deane-Peter Baker and Edited by Giuseppe Caforio Marina Caparini Military Cooperation in Managing Military Organisations Multinational Peace Operations Theory and practice Managing cultural diversity and crisis Edited by Joseph Soeters, response Paul C. van Fenema and Edited by Joseph Soeters and Robert Beeres Philippe Manigart Modern War and the Utility of The Military and Domestic Force Politics Challenges, methods and strategy A concordance theory of civil-military Edited by Jan Angstrom and relations Isabelle Duyvesteyn Rebecca L. Schiff Democratic Citizenship and War Conscription in the Napoleonic Edited by Yoav Peled, Era Noah Lewin-Epstein and A revolution in military affairs? Guy Mundlak Edited by Donald Stoker, Frederick C. Schneid and Military Integration after Civil Harold D. Blanton Wars Multiethnic armies, identity and Modernity, the Media and the post-conflict reconstruction Military Florence Gaub The creation of national mythologies on the Western Front Military Ethics and Virtues 1914–1918 An interdisciplinary approach for the John F. Williams 21st century American Soldiers in Iraq Peter Olsthoorn McSoldiers or innovative professionals? The Counter-Insurgency Myth Morten Ender The British experience of irregular warfare Complex Peace Operations and Andrew Mumford Civil Military Relations Winning the peace Europe, Strategy and Armed Forces Robert Egnell Towards military convergence Sven Biscop and Jo Coelmont Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Strategy and the American War of Independence Managing Diversity in the Military A global approach The value of inclusion in a culture of Edited by Donald Stoker, uniformity Kenneth J. Hagan and Edited by Daniel P. McDonald and Michael T. McMaster Kizzy M. Parks Managing Diversity in the Military The value of inclusion in a culture of uniformity

Edited by Daniel P. McDonald and Kizzy M. Parks Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 First published 2012 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada by Routledge 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2012 Selection and editorial matter, Daniel P. McDonald and Kizzy M. Parks; individual chapters, the contributors The right of the editors to be identified as the authors of the editorial material, and of the authors for their individual chapters, has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Managing diversity in the military: the value of inclusion in a culture of uniformity/edited by Daniel P. McDonald and Kizzy M. Parks. p. cm. – (Cass military studies) Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. United States–Armed Forces–Personnel management. 2. United States–Armed Forces–Minorities. 3. Diversity in the workplace–United States. I. McDonald, Daniel P. II. Parks, Kizzy M. UB417.M37 2012 355.6 '1080973–dc22 2011016360

ISBN: 978-0-415-58636-8 (hbk) ISBN: 978-0-203-60692-6 (ebk)

Typeset in Times by Wearset Ltd, Boldon, Tyne and Wear Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Contents

List of illustrations ix List of contributors x Preface xvi Acknowledgments xvii

1 Introduction and chapter integration 1 Kizzy M. Parks and Daniel P. McDonald

Part I Foundation of diversity: policy and strategy 7

2 Reframing the diversity discussion: the need for internal dialogue 9 Brenda J. Sherrer

3 Diversity policies across the Department of Defense 33 Christina L. Stevens

4 2K10 and beyond: diversity, inclusion, and respect for others in the US culture 55

William Gary Mc Guire Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016

5 Leading across diversity 72 Renée Yuengling

6 Lessons learned on diversity across military organizations 108 Grazia Scoppio viii Contents 7 Getting to “ground truth” in the military: conducting diversity assessments 129 B rian A le j andro S andoval and Renée Yuengling

Part II Special topics in diversity and inclusion 147

8 Status, power, and diversity in the military 149 Jeffrey W. Lucas and David R. Segal

9 Diversity and inclusion: an equal opportunity practitioner’s perspective 162 Gregory jenkins

10 Generational diversity: removing barriers to building bridges 174 Patrice Reid

11 Exploring the management of religious diversity within the US military 188 Charlotte E. Hunter and Lyman M. Smith

12 Wounded warriors: an inclusive culture for all in the workplace 219 Lyndsay S. Baines, Eric A. Elster, Edward M. Falta, and Rahul M. Jindal

13 LGB and possible challenges that will happen now that “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” has been repealed 231 J. Goosby Smith, Katherine A. Miller, and

Mandy Mc Bain Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 14 A new angle on the US military’s emphasis on developing cross-cultural competence: connecting in-ranks’ cultural diversity to cross-cultural competence 248 Remi M. Hajjar

Index 263 Illustrations

Figures 2.1 The observations 19 2.2 The four lenses 25 3.1 Stages of military personnel life cycle affecting composition of the military 42 7.1 A “pie chart” description of the workforce 136 7.2 DoD new hires have outpaced voluntary separations since 2005 137 7.3 “Waterfall” and “geyser” effects of race and gender across GS ranks 139

Tables 2.1 Selected diversity program character istics 16 2.2 Ways of thinking about diversity 20 3.1 Race/ethni city and gender demographics in the total armed forces and US population 36 3.2 Definitions of diversity utilized across the DoD 38 5.1 Culturally compet ent leadership behaviors 81 7.1 DoD definitions of diversity 144 11.1 Religious identification by denomination or belief category 196 11.2 Race, ethni city, and gender and the import ance of religion among service members 200 Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016

Boxes 2.1 Motivation lens 26 2.2 Mindset lens 28 2.3 Methods lens 29 2.4 Measures lens 29 Contributors

Editors Daniel P. McDonald, PhD, is the Executive Director of Research, Development, and Strategic Initiatives for the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI). Under his leadership, the research and development func tions at DEOMI have expanded tremendously in depth and scope which now include vital work in the areas of cultural capabilities, diversity management, and strategic planning. He has authored over one hundred reports, articles, or book chapters that examine equal opportunity, diversity, human, team, or organizational performance topics. He has worked nearly 20 years in support of the US DoD, to include being Research Fellow for the Army Research Institute, a Research Psychologist for the Naval Aviation Enterprise; and in his current capacity as a Senior Social Scientist at DEOMI in support the US office of the Secretary of Defense. Kizzy M. Parks, PhD, is the President of K. Parks Consulting, Inc. She has publications in psychology and business journals, as well as two tentative book chapters scheduled for release in summer 2011 (Sage) and fall 2012 (Taylor and Francis). Her areas of research include military diversity, inclusion, organizational effectiveness, and workplace wellness. She is also Adjunct College Professor at Brevard Community College and DeVry University.

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Authors Lyndsay S. Baines, PhD, is a psychotherapist, medical sociologist, and case manager, and works for the Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advance ment of Military Medicine, contracting to the United States Army, based at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Washington, DC. Her clinical work at Walter Reed Army Medical Center is focused on the Combat Wounds Team and warriors returning from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Previously she worked in the United Kingdom, specializing in trauma and organ transplant, where she set up one of the first ward-based psychotherapy services for Contributors xi transplant patients, and has published extensively on these topics. She has also worked as a senior lecturer at the University of London. She received her PhD in Psychotherapy from Goldsmith’s University of London. Eric A. Elster, MD, FACS, CDR MC USN, is deployed as a surgeon and Director of Surgical Services at the NATO Role 3 Military Medical Unit in Kandahar, Afghanistan. Dr. Elster’s clinical practice is as an attending gen eral and transplant surgeon at the National Naval Medical Center and Walter Reed Army Medical Center, as well as an Associate Professor at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences. Dr. Elster completed a general surgery residency at the National Naval Medical Center in Bethesda, MD. During Operation Iraqi Freedom, Dr. Elster served as ship’s surgeon aboard the USS Kitty Hawk while stationed in the Persian Gulf. Upon returning, Dr. Elster completed a solid organ transplantation fellow ship at the National Institutes of Health. Edward M. Falta, MD, FACS, is the Integrated Chief of the Army Navy Organ Transplant Services at Walter Reed Army Medical Center. He also serves on the teaching faculty at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sci ences and as consultant to the Army Surgeon General. Remi M. Hajjar, Lt. Col., has served as a commissioned officer in the US Army since 1993. He is a graduate of the US Military Academy at West Point, New York, and he holds a Master’s Degree in Sociology from North western University in Evanston, Illinois. He is currently attending North western University in pursuit of his PhD (Sociology), and will return to West Point to serve as an Assistant Professor in the Department of Behav ioral Sciences and Leadership in 2013. He has published numerous articles in the areas of culture, military sociology, and leadership. He has served at Schofield Barracks, Hawaii; Fort Huachuca, Arizona; the US Military Academy at West Point, New York; the International Security Assistance Force in Kabul, Afghanistan; and the Multi-National Security Transition Command in Baghdad, Iraq. Charlotte E. Hunter, PhD, retired from the Navy Chaplain Corps in 2010 after serving on active duty for 22 years. She earned a PhD from Salve Regina University, and in 2005 was selected as a Senior Fellow at the US Institute of Peace, Washington, DC, where her research focused on religious diversity’s Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 impact upon US military operations. As resident authority on religion and other aspects of culture at the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Insti tute (DEOMI), Dr. Hunter advises the Principal Director on diversity and accommodation issues within Department of Defense and federal workplaces, emphasizing religion’s role as a critical component of effective mission accomplishment. She is co-author of DEOMI’s ground-breaking Religious Identification and Practices Survey, conducts research, and teaches seminars on the complexities of religious diversity at DEOMI and throughout the fed eral government. xii Contributors Gregory Jenkins, SGM, is currently an Equal Opportunity Advisor (EOA) with the Diversity & Leadership, Army Diversity Office in Arlington, VA. During his 28-year Army career assignments and missions include those in Missouri, TX, Washington, DC, Germany, South Korea, and Iraq. He has served as a Squad Leader, Platoon Sergeant, Drill Sergeant, Instructor, Operations Ser geant, and First Sergeant. Sergeant Major Jenkins is a graduate of the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI) and has an MA in Human Resources Development from Webster University. Rahul M. Jindal, MBBS, MS, PhD, is currently a Transplant Surgeon at Walter Reed AMC and a Clinical Professor at George Washington Univer sity, Washington, DC. Dr. Jindal received a Transplant Fellowship at the University of Oxford, UK, followed by Clinical Fellowships at the Boston University and Mt Sinai Medical Center, New York. Dr. Jindal is the author or co-author of 150 manuscripts in peer-reviewed medical journals and has made presentations at national and international medical meetings. Dr. Jindal is currently a recipient of a National Institute of Health award to improve the quality of life in patients with colo-rectal cancer. He is also on the steering committee of The Quality of Cancer Care Committee, a trans- governmental agency committee with members from federal depart ments. Based on his experi ence in working with psychosocial issues in this group of patients, Dr. Jindal co-authored a book entitled The Struggle for Life: A Psychological Perspective of Kidney Disease and Transplantation (Baines and Jindal) that deals with psychosocial issues patients face when on dialy sis and after transplantation. Jeffrey W. Lucas, PhD, is Associate Professor of Sociology and Research Asso ciate in the Center for Research on Military Organization at the University of Maryland. His research, which is largely experimental, focuses on basic social processes including power, status, legitimacy, and leadership. His research has been funded from sources including the National Institute of Mental Health, the National Science Foundation, and the Spencer Foundation. Mandy McBain, Lt. Cdr. Royal Navy, is an Equality & Diversity Policy Officer in the Navy Command HQ in Portsmouth, UK. Mandy joined the Royal Navy in 1986 and was selected for officer training attending Britannia Royal Naval

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 College in 1989. Mandy established the first support network for LGBT per sonnel in the naval service, which now has official recog nition within the ser vice. Often interviewed by the media, she has also spoken at the Stonewall Annual Workplace Conference at Oxford University; taken part in a debate at the Cambridge Union Society at Cambridge University; and been a panel member at an InterLaw Diversity Forum event at the Law Society in London. William Gary McGuire, PhD, is currently the Deputy Dean for the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI). He entered the US Army following high school and, after serving in various assignments and three Contributors xiii combat tours around the world, he retired in 1996. Dr. McGuire has in-depth knowledge of the US Hyphenated Cultures as they might relate to Equity and Diversity and with respect to awareness and sensitivity for the military and federal govern ment employees and senior-level leadership. Katherine A. Miller is a Yale University student, 2011 Truman Scholar, and board member for OutServe, the association of actively serving LGBT mili tary personnel. Miller spent the first two years of her undergraduate education at the US Military Academy (West Point), where she was ranked seventeenth in her class of over 1,000 cadets. In August 2010 she resigned from the acad emy, citing the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. She has made appearances on The Rachel Maddow Show and Anderson Cooper 360; been featured in The New York Times, USA Today, and The Wall Street Journal; and been inter viewed by NPR and the BBC. She continues to advocate on behalf of LGBT military members and looks forward to rejoining the service following the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Patrice Reid, PhD, serves as the Director of Research, Simulation and Learn ing at the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI) at Patrick Air Force Base in Melbourne, Florida. Under the auspices of the Defense Language Office (DLO) in Arlington, Virginia, Dr. Reid also serves in the capacity of research psychologist. She is primarily respons ible for the execution of research initiatives, and the development of programs related to cross-cultural proficiency and regional expertise, emo tional intelligence, and cultural diversity in the Department of Defense. Dr. Reid is also responsible for the design and evaluation of psychometric research, as well as providing expert advice and assistance in support of contracted research tasks. Brian Alejandro Sandoval, PhD, is a Specialist Senior in the human capital group at Deloitte Consulting. His professional work and research focus on examining and improving processes that help organizations recruit, develop, and retain the most talented and diverse workforce possible. He obtained his doctorate in organizational psychology at the University of Michigan, and his bachelor’s degree in psychology at Harvard University. David R. Segal, PhD, is a Professor of Sociology and Distinguished Scholar- Teacher at the University of Maryland, where he directs the Center for Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Research on Military Organization and the graduate program in Leadership Education and Development. He received his PhD at the University of Chi cago, and began his career at the University of Michigan, where he was asso ciate chair of the Sociology Department and Director of the Center for Research on Social Organization. He directed the sociological research pro gram at the US Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sci ences (ARI) during the first years of the all-volunteer force, before joining the faculty at Maryland. He has published widely on military manpower, person nel, and operational issues. xiv Contributors Grazia Scoppio, PhD, heads a research section in the Directorate of Learning Innovation of the Canadian Defence Academy (CDA). She is cross-appointed at the Royal Military College as Associate Professor. Her multi-disciplinary research interests include: diversity in organiza tions, multiculturalism, migra tion, comparative education, and program evaluation. She has co-authored several technical reports on education and training in the Canadian Forces. Her own research appears in the follow ing publications: Canadian Military Jour- nal, UNESCO-UNEVOC International Handbook of Technical and Vocational Education and Training, International Journal of Diversity in Organisations, Communities and Nations: Connections, Quarterly Journal of the Partnership for Peace Consortium, Current Issues in Comparative Education (CICE), and Refuge, Centre for Refugee Studies, York University, Toronto. Brenda J. Sherrer, PhD, is assigned to the Diversity & Leadership, Army Diver sity Office in Arlington, VA. Her responsibilities include developing the Army Diversity Training and Education strategy for levels of training that include pre- commission, entry, mid-career, senior executive, and professional development for soldiers and civilians. Her non-government service includes serving as an Adjunct Professor of Cultural Diversity for Audiologist, Gallaudet University, Washington, DC, 2007 (summer); Adjunct Professor of Finite Mathematics (for non-math majors), Methodist College in Fayetteville, North Carolina, 1986; and the Coordinator of Minority Student Affairs at the University of Wisconsin- Oshkosh, Oshkosh, WI from September 1980 through July 1983. J. Goosby Smith, PhD, is an Associate Professor of Management at Pepperdine University in Malibu, California. She is passionate about improving organiza tional life by supporting the creation and maintenance of inclusive, genera tive, diversity-friendly organizational climates. She regularly publishes, presents, and facilitates workshops regarding organizational diversity, group dynamics, management education, and diversity in higher education. She is a member of the Moorpark Chamber of Commerce, Alpha Kappa Alpha Soror ity, the National Society of Black Engineers, the National Alumnae Associ ation of Spelman College, the Academy of Management, the Organizational Behavior Teaching Society, the Association of American Colleges and Uni versities, and Mensa America. Lyman M. Smith is a minis ter of the Presbyterian Church, retired from the Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Navy Chaplain Corps after serving on active duty for 23 years. He holds degrees in Civil Engineering, Education, Theology, Public Administration, and Strategic Studies, and currently he is completing a PhD in Political Sci ence at the University of Florida. He is co-author of DEOMI’s ground- breaking Religious Identification and Practices Survey, and continues to support military chaplaincy through research conducted at the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute and through active support of the National Conference on Ministry to the Armed Forces. Contributors xv Christina L. Stevens, JD, is completing her PhD in the Jurisprudence and Social Policy Program at the UC Berkeley School of Law, where she also received her law degree in 2010. Her research interests lie at the intersection of Law and Psychology, focusing particularly on issues of judgment and decision- making, diversity, race, prejudice and discrimination, and accountabil ity. Some of her recent work has focused on diversity ideologies and organiza tional climate within the military. Renée Yuengling, PhD, is a seasoned executive and thought leader in the diversity arena, blending expertise in creating inclusive environments with experience in organizational behavior and the strategic management of human capital. She has over 30 years’ perspective working with leaders in the private and govern ment sectors in the United States and Europe to create change that makes last ing impact for her clients and their businesses. She is also a guest speaker at the Naval Postgraduate School. She is also a published author on the leadership competencies required to lead a diverse workforce effectively, as well as how to conduct rigorous diversity analyses and development of appropriate metrics for accountability. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Preface

The genesis of this book comes from the lack of edited volumes on the topic of diversity management in the military. There are several books on the subject of demographic diversity, but very few provide a comprehensive overview of the topic and/or focus on the US Department of Defense (DoD) or global militaries. Our book seeks to fill this void. Each chapter is the work of researchers, leaders, and practitioners who have valuable perspectives and/or unique research to con tribute to the successful management of diversity and inclusion in the DoD and beyond. In line with the theme of this book, the authors address major areas of discussion, raise crucial issues, and comment on future trends concerning diver sity and inclusion in the DoD and armed forces around the world. The breadth of the chapters makes this volume relev ant to a diverse array of professionals, researchers, and practitioners, including those in the military, private industry, and academia. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Acknowledgments

The editors wish to acknowledge and thank the many individual contributors for the success of this book. We are grateful for the contributions of Felicia Mokuolu, who served as an external reviewer, and Jan Herndon, technical writer and editor. Jan read, edited, and formatted every chapter in this volume. Her dedication and superior performance helped bring this book to fruition. We also want to thank editors Andrew Humphrys, Rebecca Brennan, and Isabel Jones, as well as their staff within the Military, Strategic and Security Studies depart ment at Routledge. A special thanks is extended to Adele Hutchinson, permissions editor at Sage Publications, Inc. for granting permis sion to republish: A New Angle on the U.S. Military’s Emphasis on Developing Cross-Cultural Compe- tence: Connecting In-Ranks’ Cultural Diversity to Cross-Cultural Competence. Finally, we would like to extend our sincere gratitude and appreciation to all of the authors. The effort and passion exuded by these authors will help assist in the advancement of diversity and inclusion in the armed forces.

Disclaimer The views expressed in Chapter 12 are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy of the Department of the Army, Department of the Navy,the Department of Defense or the United States Government. We are military service members (or employees of the U.S. Government). This work was prepared as part of our official duties. Title 17 U.S.C. 105 provides the “Copyright protection under this title is not available for any work of the United States Government.” Title 17 U.S.C. 101 defines a U.S. Government Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 work as a work prepared by a military service member or employee of the U.S. Government as part of that person’s official duties. I/We certify that all individuals who qualify as authors have been listed; each has participated in the conception and design of this work, the analysis of data (when applicable), the writing of the document, and the approval of the submis sion of this version; that the document represents valid work; that if we used information derived from another source, we obtained all necessary approvals to use it and made appropriate acknowledgments in the document; and that each takes public responsibility for it. 1 Introduction and chapter integration

Kizzy M. Parks and Daniel P. McDonald

As a nation, the United States is immersed in two raging wars. These two wars revolve around terrorism in all its forms, including attacks executed in cyber space. To combat this threat, the federal govern ment has appointed a senior gen eral to oversee cyber warfare, and has devoted resources to support multinational military operations and humanitar ian efforts in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Djibouti (Beaumont 2010). Most recently, the congressional Military Leadership Diver sity Commission (MLDC) has called for the rescinding of the “combat exclusion policy” for women (Jelinek 2010), the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” policy has been repealed, and the US Navy now allows women to serve on submarines. Given the pivotal proposed and actual policy changes that have transpired in recent times, these pieces of legislature have reaffirmed the relevance of managing diversity in the military and the need for continu ous focus on the topic. Subsequently, the current combat situation in the Middle East and policy modifications are indicat ive of the importance of military leaders excelling in operational adaptability or “the ability to link policy goals and strategic object ives” (TRADOC 2009). To achieve this goal in addition to meeting current and future national security challenges, it is imperative for the military to foster an inclusive environment for all its service members. Based on observation, it is evident that the inherent hierarchical leadership structure of the military may deter crucial operational adaptability (Soeter et al. 2010: 1–6). In light of this notion, an inclusive environment will enable the military to effectively capitalize on the diverse talents and strengths of the current workforce members, while simultan eously identifying and rectifying any weaknesses that diminish their contribution to the mission. This volume, Diversity Management in the Military: Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 The Value of Inclusion in a Culture of Uniformity, is reflective of the current times and offers guidance to balance the needs of both. The goal of this book is to provide opportun ities for learning by focusing on two major topic areas: (1) “Foundation of diversity: policy and strategy,” and (2) “Special topics in diversity and inclusion.” In essence, this volume provides a contemporary perspective that will assist leaders and professionals in meeting the challenges associated with emerging trends, changes in policy, and future armed conflict. In Chapter 2, “Reframing the diversity discussion: the need for internal dialogue,” Sherrer provides a descriptive methodology to begin the 2 K. M. Parks and D. P. McDonald diversity dialogue; discusses examples of how we think, talk, and act with regard to diversity; and presents an approach to begin internal discourse on diversity that reframes current discussions centered on race and gender. Inherent in this discussion is the need to develop a well-defined diversity strategy, with measur able outcomes that are linked to the organiza tion’s strategic initiatives. It is understood that the US military is engaged in concerted efforts to achieve and manage diversity. Going beyond the requirements of equal opportunity laws, diversity is viewed as critical to mission readiness and national security. In Chapter 3, “Diversity policies across the Department of Defense,” Stevens reviews current understandings of diversity, factors driving concerns about diversity, and existing diversity policies and practices. In Chapter 4, “2K10 and beyond: diversity, inclusion and the respect for others in the US culture,” McGuire examines the terms diversity and inclusion, and the long history of application to the US military and society in general. The original uses of these terms have been channeled today to refer to equal opportunity and affirmative action programs. In recent years, the focus of diversity and inclusion initiatives has been to justify and rationalize that the programs are, in fact, differ ent. Given this, such programs are merely another way of excluding various groups of people from employment, while seeking more of one particular group over another to meet the goals of diversity. Organizations such as the military and com mercial businesses throughout the United States struggle to keep up with defining and applying diversity and inclusion, to the point that the actions are leveraging talent to simply another complicated way of managing people. As predicted by the US Census Bureau, the population shifts of various groups of people should lead to more diversity in the United States by 2025. Consequently, this chapter answers the following questions: Does this mean that race and ethnic identity differences increase diversity? In addition, is this where we are heading beyond 2010? In Yuengling’s “Leading across diversity” (Chapter 5), the Army officers who contributed their stories and leadership philosophies to the chapter are all 30-year veterans of the military. Collectively, their careers span the Vietnam War and the associated racial strife of that time to today’s all-volunteer, highly diverse Army. These individuals not only witnessed the Army’s integration of people of color, but also saw people of color rise to positions of power and authority, unmatched in the private sector. They were senior officers during a time of pro found change in the role of women in the military. Their leadership skills suc cessfully guided the Army through these difficult demographic changes, and Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 their stories illustrate the challenges and skills required to lead across race and gender. This chapter examines, in the words of these tested leaders, the leader ship competencies necessary to lead in the face of racial, ethnic, and gender dif ferences. These factors, if not managed with sensitivity and integrity, could create misunderstanding and lowered productivity in our organizations. As a result, Chapter 5 applies these successful military leadership techniques to busi ness environments, with fully supported business applications. In Chapter 6, “Lessons learned on diversity across military organizations,” Scoppio builds on a previous research project conducted in 2007, which involved Introduction and chapter integration 3 benchmarking between military organiza tions in Canada, Australia, the United Kingdom, the United States, and select police forces. Using a lessons-learned approach, this chapter follows up on the previous research study by providing an updated overview of recent diversity strategies carried out across select military organizations in Canada and the United States. In Chapter 7, “Getting to ‘Ground Truth’ in the military: conducting diver sity assessments,” Sandoval and Yuengling recommend that we move beyond solely counting the number of women and minorities. Instead, new efforts should focus on in-depth statist ical analysis, policy reviews, climate assess ments, interviews, and focus groups. These methods, when applied sys tematically, provide thorough and focused results that enable leaders to understand the reality on the ground. In best practice, any diversity interven tion is preceded by a diversity assessment. Assessments help organizations identify potential barriers that may prevent individuals from participating equally in an organization because of their race, color, religion, age, sex, national origin, parental status, sexual orientation, or disability. A diversity assessment can help an organiza tion examine any underlying causes and chal lenges facing the agency; assess the relative impact of agency policies and practices on diversity issues; formulate strategies and tactics that are likely to create a culture of inclusion; and assess areas of cultural competency that need improvement. Therefore, this chapter explores the experience of several branches of the military and the Department of Homeland Security as they assess the “ground truth” of diversity in their organizations. Segal and Lucas’ “Status, power, and diversity in the military” (Chapter 8) summarizes group process treatments of power and status, and discusses their implications for diversity in the military. Power, as treated in the group pro cesses literat ure, is the ability to get what one wants, even when others resist. It results from a position in a social structure, such as military rank. Status is a position in a group based on respect or esteem. Both power and status result in compliance, but in different ways. Most notably, the use of status avoids the resentment produced by the use of power. When persons in social categories accorded low status rise to positions of power, their power is met with resist ance, and they must use their power more overtly to show they have it. Such actions tend to result in increased resentment, lowering their status further. Thus, although the military services have made great strides in increasing the repres entation of women and minority group members in powerful positions, status Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 processes represent a more insidious challenge. They propose that in an increas ingly diverse society, a military leadership calling for increased diversity, and a recognition that operational needs benefit from increased diversity, will all con tribute to increasing the diversity of the military services. Furthermore, we propose that an institutional climate that treats as proper and legitimate women and minority group members in leadership positions will reduce the time until the contributions of all group members receive proper recognition. Chapter 9, “Diversity and inclusion: an equal opportun ity practitioner’s per spective” (Jenkins), illustrates the results of the author’s equal opportun ity 4 K. M. Parks and D. P. McDonald education, and how that education forced him to look inward and reflect upon his career and life, and to the future of the Army in terms of diversity and inclu sion. His introspection leads to three main topics: A reflection of his experi ence as a soldier in military culture prior to his equal opportunity education; his experience as a practicing equal opportun ities advisor; and his realization that the Army must embrace diversity and inclusion if it is determined to continue leading as a national change agent and be reflective of the people it serves. Reid’s “Generational diversity: removing barriers to building bridges” (Chapter 10) seeks to address the different generational work styles and charac teristics that each cohort brings to the workforce. The chapter explores intergen erational dynamics by examining similar ities between generations and discussing key management strategies that can help organizations leverage top talent while engaging, motivating, and retaining different generations. The chapter surveys issues that pertain to the strategic optimization of the generations by identifying and proactively utilizing the strengths of each generation to achieve competitive advantage. Finally, the chapter examines the challenges of generational diversity in the military. Despite the fact that generational characteristics may possibly transcend one type of employer, the military culture may subjugate the manifes tation of such tendencies. Hence, Reid examines practical considerations for the military in this area. In Hunter and Lyman’s “Exploring the management of religious diversity within the US military” (Chapter 11) the authors address leadership knowledge and appreciation of religious diversity as an asset to the military mission. In so doing, the authors briefly examine histor ical changes in religious diversity in the US military (to the extent that statistically reliable data are available), and sub sequently focus on the dynamics of this diversity in today’s military. Addition ally, the authors raise the question: “How has religious diversity manifested itself in measurable terms?” In an attempt to answer this question, Hunter and Lyman refer to the ground-breaking survey on religious identification and prac tices conducted by the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI) in June 2009, which asked military members such questions as: What do you believe? How stable are these beliefs and prefer ences? How do these beliefs and preferences affect your attitudes and behaviors toward authority, the mission, the socially and religiously inclusive arena of the DoD, and other issues of social and military consequence? Furthermore, in this chapter considerable attention is given to ways in which religious diversity has manifested itself in Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 other military arenas, such as disciplinary cases, lawsuits, and policy decisions. In “Wounded warriors: an inclusive culture for all” (Chapter 12), Baines et al. discuss the elements necessary to foster an inclusive work culture for wounded warriors and ensure that veterans are treated with dignity and respect, while recognizing their individual differences. These authors discuss the import ance of ensuring that workplaces are inclusive and allow veterans to thrive and feel appreciated and respected as they return to the US workforce. The authors also address several pertinent areas for employers to consider, such as: Creating a pathway to an inclusive work culture; wounded warriors’ potential in the Introduction and chapter integration 5 workplace; promoting posit ive community-based attitudes toward wounded war riors through specific outreach activities; cultivating inclusive opportunities between wounded warriors and their civilian counterparts; and the role for employers to create an inclusive work environment. Chapter 13 (Smith et al.), “LGB and possible challenges that will happen now that “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” has been repealed,” targets an issue that has been at the heart of contempor ary policy change and political discourse. The chapter addresses organizational-level recommendations for the repeal of the US “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, Don’t Pursue” (DADT) policy, which is the well-known policy that prohibits inquiry or disclosure regarding a soldier’s status as a lesbian, gay, or bisexual (LGB) service member. After briefly summarizing this 1993 policy using a social psychology framework, the authors explicate why the existing policy likely harms the unit cohesion and operational effectiveness it initially sought to protect. The chapter concludes with 11 recommendations to support the smoothest possible transition to a post-DADT military environment. In Hajjar’s “A new angle on the US military’s emphasis on developing cross- cultural competence: connecting in-ranks’ cultural diversity to cross-cultural competence” (Chapter 14) he argues that a link exists between the armed forces’ internal cultural diversity issues and the military’s objective to heighten its abil ity to work effectively in foreign cultures. Cross-cultural competence means the knowledge, attitudes, and behavi oral repertoire and skill sets that military members require in order to accomplish all given tasks and missions involving cultural diversity (Abbe et al. 2007). Despite the military’s noteworthy historic progress in the area of building a diverse and cohesive force, it possesses some ongoing cultural diversity problems. The chapter examines three concerns within the ranks of the US military: signs of religious intolerance; some ongoing resist ance towards women service members; and anti-homosexual attitudes and conduct. This piece explores these concerns, and also argues that ameliorating these cultural diversity issues will contribute to building cross-cultural compe tence in the military.

References Abbe, A., Gulick, L. M. V., and Herman, J. L. (2007) “Cross-Cultural Competence in Army Leaders: A Conceptual and Empirical Foundation,” United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences Study Report 2008-01 (October). Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Beaumont, P. (2010) US Appoints First Cyber Warfare General. Online, available at: www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/may/23/us-appoints-cyber-warfare-general (accessed January 17, 2010). Jelinek, P. (2010) Military Commission: Lift Ban, Allow Women in Combat. Online, avail able at: www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41083172/ns/us_news-life (accessed January 17, 2010). Soeter, J., van Fenema, P., and Beeres, R. (2010) Managing Military Organizations: Theory and Practice, Abingdon: Routledge. TRADOC Pam 525-3-0 (2009) “Operational Adaptability: Operating Under Conditions of Uncertainty and Complexity in an Era of Persistent Conflict,” The Army Capstone Concept (December 21). Part I Foundation of diversity Policy and strategy Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 2 Reframing the diversity discussion The need for internal dialogue

Brenda J. Sherrer

R. Roosevelt Thomas (1996) tells us that, nearly every decade or so, people who concern themselves with the racial and/or ethnic demography of the United States and its impact on business functions fasten onto a particular word or phrase that surfaces from a general, wide-ranging issue. For a time, this “buzz word” is extremely popular. Before long, the word begins to take on a more symbolic meaning, serving as a simple verbal code for the complex problem from which it originated. This is true of the word “diversity.” It appears that individuals use the word to designate a complex situation; however, there is often no consensus on what the word “diversity” actually represents. For the public, diversity is verbal shorthand for a workforce that is multi-racial, multicultural, and multi-ethnic, which means that it comes preloaded with people’s own individual perceptions and biases. For those organizations concerned for the wellbeing of their employees, diversity has become a kind of semantic umbrella that encompasses an assortment of programs emanating from within the organ ization. Therefore, it is evident that there is a need for a new understanding and discourse on diversity. The diversity of American society is reflected in the men and women who serve in the US Army. Dimensions of diversity among those serving include, but are not limited to: race, culture, religion, gender, age, profession, organizational or functional area tenure, personality type, functional background, education level, political party, and other demographic, socioeconomic, and psychographic character istics (Loden and Rosner 1991). These dimensions represent the mul tiple personal identities that one negotiates daily, and become the foundation upon which discussions about difference in the work environment should be Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 based. The Army must access and recruit people with the right skills, talents, and abilit ies, who meet the requirements to serve. A critical component of the diversity process is soldier and civilian retention. Army leaders, who are cognizant of soldier and civilian differences beyond race and gender, can create a work envir onment that establishes a set of behaviors, practices, and attitudes that form a system in aggregate, which allows each employee to work in a multi-ethnic, plu- ralistic, and linguistically diverse environ ment. In order to incorporate this new knowledge into an organization’s strategic planning and thinking processes, 10 B. J. Sherrer senior leaders must develop diversity processes that transcend race and gender. Diversity, from this perspect ive, extends legally protected attributes such as race/ ethnicity, gender, and age to a much broader definition that includes the entire spectrum of individual differences. Research findings from industrial and organizational psychology and other disciplines cast doubt on the simple assertion that a diverse workforce inevitably improves business performance (Thomas and Ely 1996). Instead, research and theory suggest several conditions necessary to manage diversity successfully and reap organizational benefits (Dobbs 1998a; Jayne and Dipboye 2004). Diversity means inclusion, hiring, developing, promoting, and retaining employees of all races, ethnic groups, religions, and ages, including able-bodied and disabled men and women. Through diversity we are exposed to different points of view and approaches to problem-solving. Consequently, diversity and inclusion are the prerequisites to excellence and high-performance (Dobbs 1998b, p. 163). Although diversity research casts doubt on the argument that diversity will yield an abundance of benefits, there are at least three general conclusions that have important implications for the discussion of diversity within the Army. They are:

1 The benefits of diversity are contingent on the situation; there is unlikely to be “one best way” with regard to how the diversity process is implemented. 2 Successful diversity processes are based on specific goals with feedback provided on how well these goals are framed and achieved. 3 The diversity process is more likely to succeed when employees identify with and are committed to the goals and mission of their organiza tion.1

While there are many positive aspects to the Army’s effort to eradicate personal, cultural, and occupational biases, there is sufficient work to be accomplished before that vision is achieved. The belief that diversity-related solutions result from our understanding of the nature and impact of differences within and between individuals is overly simplistic. Even if managers and employees understood and managed their reactions to individual differences, there still would be challenges left for the Army to address. These challenges occur because diversity and related issues are parts of a dynamic process that requires continual reflection, internal negotiation of identity, and simultaneous self-definition and reconciliation. The success of the diversity process is dependent upon estab Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 lishing a connection between diversity and other organizational processes (e.g., strategic planning, business processes). This linkage provides a mechan ism to institutionalize diversity and formulate a tangible return on investment. Diversity is not a program; it is a multi-dimensional process intrinsically linked to organizational strategic processes as well as individual growth and development. Diversity is about positively responding to change, and if these positive reactions become a part of the routine activities of the person or the organization, it may transform both for the better. From an organizational per spective, the diversity process means that the organization must first examine Reframing the diversity discussion 11 internal reasons for responding to diversity, however it is defined. At the same time, it is import ant to understand how the organization’s response is regarded by external stakeholders and the general public. The plan to effectively address diversity-related issues must communicate that the Army may be a good place to work because it values differ ences. Framing that response begins by applying four “lenses” that apply to the individual or the organization. There are no “right” answers or one best way to begin the diversity process. The “right” responses are specific to the person or organization. The first lens, motivation, examines the reasons the organization wants to begin a diversity process. These are the questions that must be answered by the leadership, and include an examination of why the organization needs or wishes to respond to diversity and make the necessary changes in policy, practice, or procedures. Inherent in this lens is accepting that diversity must be broadly defined beyond race, gender, or ethnicity. It is also important to know if there are internal and/or external pressures to make the identified changes. These questions are without limit, but they begin the internal diversity dialogue. The second lens, mindset, is an examination of current initiatives. Are the programs, practices, and procedures accomplishing their intended purpose? Are these activities relevant in a global economy? Will current activ ities lead to higher performance or allow the organiza tion to adapt to demographic or other changes in American society? Are these changes relevant to the mission, vision, and strategic goals of the organization? Again, these questions begin the dialogue and expand as that dialogue increases. The third lens, methods, represents the actual changes to pol icy, programs, procedures, and practices and is considered a core element of the diversity process. The final lens, measures, holds the organization leaders accountable for its response to diversity, broadly defined. Since the early 1970s, federal agencies have been required to increase repres entation of women and people of color at all levels. The federal government was a serious and successful equal opportunity employer long before such policies were widespread in the private sector. The bedrock of federal diversity policy since the 1970s has been equal employment opportunity/affirmative action (EEO/AA) training (Cox 1994; Thomas 1996; Mathews 1998). Many public managers operate under an EEO/AA or legal model as a way of addressing diversity. Managers who operate from this approach often implement elaborate recruitment and training strategies. While this may increase the number of women and people of color, it does nothing to change the workplace climate. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 The implementation of a diversity process is not easy or natural for highly structured, bureaucratic organiza tions like the Army. Evidence exists that old and outdated strategies are being used in organiza tions that fail to keep pace with current recruitment/reten tion needs of a diverse workforce (ICF International 2008). Effectively coexisting and working together in organiza tions requires taking personal responsibility to identify individual biases and making a commitment to acknowledge past inequities without dwelling on them. It is essential to let go of guilt and feelings of historical injustice, but this requires that we look at 12 B. J. Sherrer ourselves first, identify who we are, and apply that perspective to relate to those who are different. This provides a creative way to expand the sphere of understanding beyond the social constructs of race and gender. These constructs tend to create barriers and divide people according to racial and ethnic characteristics. Race and ethnicity are flexible and evolving, yet there is a tendency to regard and treat them as fixed, stable, and scientifically grounded entities (Yanow 1996). Creating a pleasant work environment for all employees is essential for the success of a diversity process, particularly during an era in which organizations must operate with less fiscal resources, fewer people, and larger missions. However pedestrian the idea, people are the most import ant bottom-line cost for most organizations. Public and private organiza tions have to develop management practices that respect diversity, and leverage organizational needs against those of their employees. Managers need to unlearn practices rooted in the old hierarchical mindset, change the way their organizations operate, shift the organ izational culture, revamp policies, create new structures, and redesign human resource systems. Employers who understand the need to create an environment that reflects the collective mixture of our human difference may discover unique problem-solving strategies. An accepted part of this challenge is the need to develop military and civilian leaders who will serve in both operational and institutional capacities, who become aware of their personal diversity or multiple definitions of self, and the need to be valued as a person. This insight allows one to recognize the personal diversity and value needs of others. Mary C. Gentile (1998) provides organizations with a strategy to define diversity as a resource and a process. This strategy reveals a motivation for responding to differences in the workplace, moving beyond moral and competit ive drivers toward learning, personal, and organiza tional growth, and innovation. Gentile adopts a multi-dimensional perspective, rather than an oppositional and dualistic one. A multi-dimensional perspective is one that can accommodate alternative viewpoints and refuse to justify oppression, but rather clarifies it and exposes the pain of one individual group without denying that of another. Consequently, organizations should approach diversity from both internal and external perspectives. These perspectives help formulate what motivates an organization to act on diversity-related issues and subsequently develop its definition of diversity. Reframing the diversity discussion is informed by both internal and external dialogue and inquiry about diversity. It provides a way to Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 think and talk about diversity as a learning process in which everyone can engage (Gentile 1998). Gentile (1995) reminds us that the discussion should emphasize self-definition or awareness, respect, and recognition of other differences rather than a definition of self in opposition to someone else. Self-definition through oppositionality can be problematic as it causes a chain reaction, which means that a sense of self is built upon the ability to distinguish the self from the other. Valuing the way one is different from another individual often leads to devaluation of the traits that make one distinct from others. When we encounter differ ences, we may Reframing the diversity discussion 13 experience feelings of anxiety, fear, anger, guilt, mistrust, and hopelessness, which block communication and learning.

Diversity process and definition A commitment to the diversity process means that an organiza tion has:

• a clearly articulated justification for implementing diversity methods; • an understanding of the organization’s embedded systems, policies, and practices; • a working knowledge of how the organizational mindset or culture either enhances or hinders the development of diversity methods; • an appropriate outcome-based evaluation or measure ment mechanism.

The implementation of a diversity process helps senior leaders:

• continually assess the impact of internal and external pressures on business processes; • institute a continued reflective posture of their organizational mindset/ culture which impacts the type and reach of the methods the organization develops; • perform the planning, implementing, and measuring aspects that show the benefits of its diversity.

Getting in touch with personal multiple perspectives makes it easier to imagine a similar range of responses in others. Such thinking discourages the painting of one’s own or others’ points of view with a single brush, and allows for the con sideration of diversity-related issues as both an individual situation facing managers and as a representative action on the part of a given organization. The diversity process involves personal and group responsibility to recognize differ ences (Gentile 1998). Accepting that recognition or the lack thereof shapes indi vidual identity, leading one to believe that it is not a courtesy owed. Recognition fulfills a vital human need. Therefore, creating a work environment where all employees are treated fairly can be achieved through the dynamics of recognizing the contributions of groups of people, respecting their cultural differ ences, lifestyle preferences, age, gender, sexual orientation, or disability. One of the Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 barriers to fresh and unbiased thinking about diversity is the tendency to present equivocal concepts as if they were clear, solid, and singular in meaning. Diver- sity literat ure reports the lack of a standard definition for diversity (Taylor 1994). Unfortunately, this weakness leads us to believe that diversity has no real meaning. By defining diversity in broad and varied terms that encompass both internal and external feedback, the organization gains an advantage. The education pro cess that begins within the organiza tion helps it frame diversity in proactive terms, and encourages all employees to believe that the diversity process has 14 B. J. Sherrer valuable benefits for each of them. Diversity defined in this manner is not presented as a problem to be solved. Some diversity researchers (Gentile 1998; Leach 1995; Loden and Rosner 1991; Soni 2000; Thomas 1996) define diversity broadly, and include the differ ences among people based on gender, race/ethni city, age, religion, physical or mental disability, sexual orientation, and socioeconomic class. Diversity can also consist of the ways we are different in other respects, such as personal ity, job function, class, educational level, marital status, whether or not one has children, where one lives, where and how one was raised. It includes other human dimensions such as inconspicuous disability, education, work style, lifestyle, culture, and all of our less visible differences. Those engaged in the diversity discussion must acknowledge that diversity, in its broadest meaning, exists within the organization. Once this fact is accepted, the discussion can move beyond a sole emphasis on race and gender. Ultimately, this leads to a discussion of inclusion in which every person has value and contrib utes to the successful execution of the organization’s mission. The appropriate answer to the diversity definition question is contingent upon a thorough needs analysis that includes a review of what motivates an organiza tion to begin a diversity process. Internal or external stimuli determine the focus of the diversity process; whether it is due to employee pressure, or the organiza tion’s desire to respond to the changing workforce demographics. Hence, the formulation of a definition becomes unique to that particular organization. What- ever the reason, the organiza tion determines why there is need to respond to diversity and what that response entails. Response to the diversity process is dependent upon the acceptance and commit ment to some primary organizational objectives.

Federal agency response to workforce changes In 1999, Vice President Gore’s National Partnership for Reinventing Govern- ment (NPR) established the Diversity Task Force. The NPR Diversity Task Force adminis tered a survey to 160 federal agencies and departments. The survey asked federal organizations about the compon ents of, and resources devoted to, any diversity initiatives they might have. Responses were obtained from 137 (86 percent) of the organizations surveyed. These included compon ents from the 23 largest departments and agencies, as well as the US Postal Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Service and many of the smaller agencies. Collectively, these agencies employ more than 80 percent of the federal government’s civilian workforce. Examina- tions of differences among federal agencies on various dimensions previously had had to rely on information aggregated at the full agency or department level, overlooking the dissimilar ities among sub-agencies within larger departments. It is evident that federal agencies vary in their approach to meeting the needs of a diverse workforce. The NPR Diversity Task Force stated that federal diversity programs histor ically have focused on EEO/AA. It suggested that the federal government broaden its view of diversity, and embrace the business, cultural, Reframing the diversity discussion 15 and demographic dimensions of diversity as well as the legal dimension. The Diversity Task Force recognized the multiple frameworks underpinning diversity, and emphasized that it is important to shape and pursue the missions and goals of federal agencies (Naff and Kellough 2004). The NPR survey asked those agencies with diversity initiatives whether their diversity programs differed from their internal EEO/AA programs in terms of whether they addressed diversity issues previously not addressed in the organ ization’s EEO/AA programs. The purpose of this question was to determine the extent to which agencies may have relabeled or renamed their EEO/AA programs in an effort to embrace the diversity movement. One-quarter (26 percent) indicated that their programs reflected EEO/AA efforts. The remaining 70 percent of organiza tions with diversity programs indicated that their initiatives were broader in scope than their EEO/AA programs, given that they addressed workplace issues that had not received signific ant attention earlier. Previously unaddressed issues could include a focus on non-traditional demographic attributes, such as organizational role or geographic origin, or the development of advocacy groups such as a diversity council. Additionally, the survey asked specific questions about the content, organization, and structure of diversity initiatives. Table 2.1 shows diversity program character istics found in participating organizations. With regard to diversity programs, Naff and Kellough (2001) reported inter esting observations about the presence of various programmatic elements. For example, the program character istics that are most frequently included in federal agency efforts are those that address traditional dimensions (i.e., race, gender, national origin, and handicap status) of diversity. More than 90 percent of agencies report that their programs specifically address race/color, ethnicity/national origin, and/or gender. In addition, 85.5 percent address disability status and 72.5 percent address religion. A popular compon ent of many federal sector diversity programs is the provision of training (Cox 1994; Mathews 1998; Thomas 1996). When the US Merit Systems Protection Board surveyed federal agencies in 1991 about their diversity programs, 20 of the 33 agencies that responded reported that they provided diversity-related training. Many agencies disclosed that they had a diversity-related training requirement for all of their employees, or at least those enrolled in supervisory development programs. Eighty-five percent of the responding organizations examined in the NPR survey also indicated that they typically include diversity training for employees as a component Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 of their diversity initiatives. The remaining 15 percent of the surveyed organiza tions, which claimed to have diversity programs in place, chose not to provide diversity training for their employees. As Table 2.1 illustrates, there is no uniformity in the presence of items perceived to be important to diversity initiative success or development. The program character istic found in the smallest number of organiza tions was the inclusion of a diversity-related element in the performance plans of non- supervisory employees. Naff and Kellough (2001) state that by 1999, most federal agencies appeared to have heeded the call to develop a program for the 16 B. J. Sherrer Table 2.1 Selected diversity program characteristics

Characteristic Percentage

Diversity initiative specifically addresses race 95.0 Diversity initiative specifically addresses ethnic/racial/national origin 90.8 Diversity initiative specifically addresses gender 89.2 Diversity initiative specifically addresses disability status 85.5 Diversity training is provided for employees 85.0 Diversity initiative specifically addresses one or more non-traditional 81.7 demographic characteristics Diversity initiative specifically address age 80.0 Other employees, such as a diversity council or diversity trainer, perform 79.2 significant duties related to the diversity initiative in addition to any single individual with day-to-day operational responsibilities Diversity training is designed to accomplish specific objectives 78.3 The agency evaluates the effectiveness of diversity training provided to 74.2 employees Training objectives are communicated to employees 73.3 Diversity initiatives specifically address religion 72.5 Diversity initiative is linked to the organization’s strategic plan or 72.5 performance plan Diversity initiative specifically addresses sexual orientation 68.3 Diversity is an element in performance plans of supervisors and managers 67.5 Diversity is an element in performance plans for members of the senior 66.7 executive service Diversity initiative is incorporated into the organization’s vision or mission 46.7 statement The agency has conducted an organizational culture/diversity audit or 46.7 survey in designing or implementing the diversity plan Diversity council/group charter is in place 44.2 Formal mentoring program is in place 34.2

Source: adapted from Naff, K. C. and Kellough, J. E. (2001).

increasingly diverse workforce. Some had done little more than rename their traditional EEO efforts, while others had expanded the demographic character istics recognized by the program, linked diversity with the organization’s strategic plan, and/or issued specific diversity policies or orders. Naff and Kellough (2001) classify the 160 surveyed agencies as either having a well-developed diversity program, a moderately developed program, or no program at all. The Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 study examined each agency for a description of the nature of their diversity program; the structure and resources of the diversity program; the agency training and awareness perspect ives; and how each agency evaluated its diversity program. In their research to understand the dynamics of diversity programs in the federal government sector, Naff and Kellough (2004) remark that the govern ment should make a clear distinction between diversity programs and traditional EEO and AA programs created to address illegal discrimination in the workplace. The authors provide insight on federal agencies’ response to a rapidly Reframing the diversity discussion 17 changing workforce. They suggest that these agencies create diversity programs that fit organizational resources, mission, and unique needs. They found that no federal agency had completed a systemic evaluation of its diversity program, despite the government’s emphasis on measuring program performance and input. Therefore, their recommendation entails federal agencies making a clear distinction between diversity management and traditional EEO and AA programs. Finally, federal agencies should gather baseline data to guide diversity program efforts and serve as a means for continu ous evaluation of the impact of their diversity programs. Naff and Kellough (2004) stress that it is useful to identify the activities that comprise federal agency diversity programs, but even more essential to assess whether these programs are accomplishing their intended purpose of creating a more equitable work environment than previously existed. Evidently, diversity defined in broad terms includes a number of factors, but in the context of American public agencies, race, ethni city, and gender are among the most salient demographic variables. Inequities that manifest themselves along racial, ethnic, and gender lines are still common. When agencies described the measures of effectiveness for their programs, many referred to measures tradition ally used in EEO/AA programs, such as a comparison of agency workforce demographics with the civilian labor force. Employee perception of an equitable work environment provides a good measure of diversity pro cess effectiveness. The difficulty with this measure is that stable or increased dissatisfaction with the work environment may reflect heightened expectations due to the diversity process. Many other factors can affect employee perceptions of their work environment, including a potential or imminent reduction in workforce, or adverse publicity in the press resulting from employee advocacy groups’ efforts to draw attention to perceived inequities. Given that diversity initiatives have a broader impact on the work environment than traditional EEO programs, it would seem that measures that are more dynamic are required to assess their success. Naff and Kellough (2004) recommend that agencies examine various types of personnel actions and their effects on women and minorities, for example. These authors believe that measures that focus on pro motions, dismissals, and voluntary turnover are appropriate.

Reframing the diversity discussion Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Everyday life is dynamic and takes a particular shape and form as we try to create order and make sense of the situation in which we find ourselves. Sense- making combines several conceptually distinct processes. A cognitive, behavi oral, and social process occurs at several levels of consciousness (Trice and Beyer 1993). The process becomes active and conscious when people need to cope with uncertainty arising in non-routine or unexpected situations, such as incorporating diversity into the day-to-day activities of an organization. An attempt to understand issues surrounding differ ences in the work environment often results in the development of overly simplified programs and/or processes 18 B. J. Sherrer designed to increase awareness of different groups, provide skill-building techniques to deal with differ ences, or create education-centered programs (Thomas 1996). An argument can be made that the more pronounced our differ ences, the more easily we tend to make sense of situations by creating hierarchies, stereo types, and categories for exclusion or oppression (Gentile 1998). Through our interactions and confrontations with differences of perspect ive, prior experi ence, style, and identity in the workplace, we come to recognize the limits of our own perspectives, experi ences, and styles. The ability to remain open to new points of view allows us to grow, learn, and adapt. Fernandez (1991) acknow ledges that those organiza tions that are unwilling to take into account their employees’ dif ferences will be unable to attract a sufficient number of workers because these workers will gravitate, by preference, to organizations that appreciate and value human differences. Gentile contends that in the workplace, we see ourselves as fair, open-minded, intellectually honest, self-aware, and empathetic. Yet, when we encounter differ ences, many times our actions contradict this self-perception. We are unaware that the way we interact with those who are different is sometimes negative and unproductive. We fail to realize that how we interact, think, and talk about our individual differences often limits the discussion of diversity-related issues and inhibits creative solutions. Most people believe that every human being is of equal worth, entitled to privileges and opportunities, without regard to race, gender, disability, or age. This fundamental belief has led to changes in management practices, primarily relating to the recruitment, training, and reten tion of employees who reflect the changing face of the American workforce. Recognizing that the pool of potential employees is more diverse than it was 25 years ago has generated activity among leaders in business, government, and academe. Managers who operate under an EEO/AA or legal model as a way of addressing diversity (Naff and Kellough 2004) often implement elaborate recruitment and training strategies. While this may increase the numbers of women and people of color in the organization, it does nothing to change the workplace climate. By the late 1970s and into the 1980s, there was a growing recognition within the private sector that, while the legal mandates were neces sary, they were not sufficient for ensuring the effective management of diversity within organizations. A systemic approach and long-term commitment are prere quisites for successfully working with and gaining value from a diverse workforce. Success is made possible by a perspective that considers diversity to be an Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 opportunity for everyone to learn from each other regard ing better ways to accomplish their work. It requires a supportive and cooperative organizational culture, as well as group leadership and process skills (Gentile 1998). Self-awareness is the necessary first step in the diversity process. This search for self-awareness is a personal journey, which makes it possible to respond appropriately when faced with diversity issues in the workplace. If we continu ally over-simplify our observations by limiting them to binary oppositions instead of complex and multiple perceptions, we block creative problem-solving and learning (Gentile 1998). The diversity process places an emphasis on the Reframing the diversity discussion 19 value of continual learning – the desirability of pursuing knowledge about oneself and others. It acknow ledges that in a diverse and interdependent world, understanding and communicating across differ ences are most valuable.

Internal discourse The diversity dialogue begins with a focus on how the individual internalizes differences, and provides insight that serves as a tool for promoting understanding of, and conversation about, diversity in the organiza tion. An examination of some of the habitual ways of thinking and talking about diversity reveals a way to understand behavior – not the thoughts and beliefs themselves, but the way we put them together (Table 2.2). The ways of thinking and talking provide insight into our human tendency to perceive and understand experiences as dualities or binary oppositions. We define ourselves in opposition to, or as distinct from, others. This kind of self- definition is called “oppositionality.” Gentile (1998) believes that a sense of self builds upon the ability to distinguish one’s self from another. When the indi vidual values the ways in which she or he is different from others, the traits that distinguish one from others begin to be devalued. Diversity viewed from this perspective focuses on that duality, and as a result, definitional models of differ ence are formed (Figure 2.1). This means that the definition of self is in opposi tion to or distinct from others. We identify with our multiple identities more strongly at different moments in our lives, and in different contexts. At times, we stress one identity over others, and sometimes these identities conflict. This internalization of our own diversity allows us to begin to formulate a definitional model of difference that preserves the recognition of historical, personal, and power distinctions, even as it allows for acknowledgment of the common experi ence among all. The multiple identity components help one to realize that everyone has experienced positions of relat ive privilege and relative exclusion in different

IDENTITY GROUP Internal RACE GENDER AGE CLASS negotiation DEFINITIONAL MULTIPLE RELIGION ETHNIC ORIGIN MODEL OF IDENTITIES SEX ORIENTATION EDUCATION DIFFERENCE Feelings of Situational Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 being special costs Effective Continual COST AND response SALIENCE reconciliation BENEFITS to diversity Process of Foundation self-definition for empathy SHARED REDEFINITION CHOICE GOALS AND CHANGE

Figure 2.1 The observations. 20 B. J. Sherrer Table 2.2 Ways of thinking about diversity

Method Researched by Definition Result Rights talk Mary Ann Emphasizes “absolute Promotes unrealistic Glendon (1991) rights” versus an expectations, heightens emphasis on balancing social conflict, and responsibilities inhibits dialogue Self-definition Michelle Fine Perceives and Defines self in through understands experience opposition to or as oppositionality as dualities or binary distinct from others Cultural Deborah Tannen Values one pole of a Affirms differences, but generalizations (1990) dichotomy over gets lost in another generalizations and stereotypes Seeing for Shelby Steel Promotes feelings of Offers an analysis of innocence (1990) essential goodness in racial dynamics built relation to others upon the concepts of power and innocence Racial reasoning Cornel West Promotes race as a Underscores the (1994) whole at the expense of diversity that exists many within its ranks within identity groups Defensive Chris Argyris Encourages individuals Demonstrates how reasoning (1991) to keep private the values that guide actions premises, inferences, makes one fearful of and conclusions that new information/ shape behavior perspectives How we know Thomas Gilovich Recognizes how the Provides examples of what isn’t so (1991) reasoning flaws in the corrective cognitive human thinking tactics to minimize process help generate human reasoning errors and reinforce counterproductive thinking Parento Stanley Fischer No one in the economy Assumes a limited pie to optimality/ and Rudiger can be made better off be divided among all scarcity thinking Dornbusch (1983) without someone else comers . . . being made worse off

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Masking and Mary C. Gentile Exposes cherished Points out contradictions over-determined (1995) assumptions about and inconsistencies in terminology organizations and concepts and perceptions of self terminology that acquire meaning over time Reframing the diversity discussion 21 contexts. This internal negotiation of identity can be a model for understanding the negotiation of a group identity and interactions, in social contexts, or in business settings. Seeing our own multiple identities can be the beginning of seeing others in more complex, less stereotypical, and ultimately more realistic ways, and may result in the development of a shared insight (Gentile 1995). Gentile acknowledges that in some contexts, the emphasis on ethnic diversity, for example, allows one to feel unique or special. In other contexts such as family gatherings, emphasizing shared ethni city helps one feel part of the group. These conflicting urges can trigger complicated reactions of loyalty, rejection, pride, and guilt within the individual and between different individuals. Under- standing what may seem to be a contradict ory need to belong, and at the same time a desire for uniqueness, can give insight into what may appear to others as a yearning to have it both ways. This means that everyone wants to have his or her particular history of achievement and perhaps oppression recognized, while simultan eously desiring to be treated just like everybody else. At times, one of our multiple identities may feel more salient. It is normal behavior to want it both ways, as long as we are realistic about the treatment we expect to receive. For instance, in the United States, the historical experi ence of African- Americans has had very real implications for access to education, information, and financial resources. In a scenario that involves a lone Caucasian individual in a group of African-Americans, it is import ant to realize that he or she may experience a temporary situational cost for being/feeling different, which if understood and explored can serve as a foundation for empathy for all present. Treating this lone white’s experience as if it is the same as or somehow equival ent to the experience of African-Americans is not accurate, but it is also inaccur ate and counterproductive to insist that whites have never experienced the pain of exclusion. It is a different pain, without the historical, institutional, and cultural weight of the African-American’s experience of racism, but it may serve as the beginning of shared insight. It suggests an appeal to empathy rather than guilt (Gentile 1995). Individual differences that are not visible allow an individual to make a choice in which identity will be revealed. The individual has a choice of identities (Table 2.2). However, identities such as gender, race, and age tend to be immediately evident. Other identities such as religion or sexual orientation can be less evident. Therefore, there is an inherent choice associated with these identities. A gay or lesbian person often may not choose to reveal their orientation. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 This choice gives them control over the impression they make on others, but at the same time, their choice could create a personal and/or political dilemma. They may judge that openly revealing their sexual orientation could be unsafe, professionally, socially, or even physically. On the other hand, they may wonder if their discre tion is actually a manifestation of internalized homophobia and a lack of self-confidence. Understanding the advantages and the burdens of having a “choice” about how diversity is perceived is critical to thinking about and addressing questions of diversity. Individual and group identities are not static. We continually negotiate, define, and redefine our values, experiences, and 22 B. J. Sherrer multiple identities. The continual reconciliation of multiple identities enhances the self-definition process, and allows people to be more open to the same pro cess in others. It is the foundation for empathy, and identity differences do not preclude the development and pursuit of shared goals among and across identities (Gentile 1995). Gentile (1995) maintains that the ways of thinking and talking about differ ences reveal the dichotomies that shape and constrain how we formulate our thoughts. The objective of exploring these cognitive strategies or reasoning behind overt behaviors is to make visible the habitual but unconscious thought patterns that frequently contrib ute to ineffective and destructive behaviors. It is important to remember that the cognitive strategies do not explain the origins of racism, sexism, or any form of oppression. They entail fundamental questions about human potential, drive, and the need for learning and growth. Leaders and managers who fail to acknowledge the ways in which past perspect ives, values, and assumptions remain embedded, maintained, and reproduced in organiza tional structures, systems, and culture cannot provide the kind of leadership required for diverse soldiers and civilians (Gentile 1998).

Habitual ways of thinking Psychologists contend that when we are considering change, it is necessary to target our beliefs, feelings, and actions. The most difficult target is belief. There- fore, the most feasible approach to change is through action (or behavior), where changes will in turn affect our feelings and finally our beliefs. Too often, this way of thinking and talking about diversity permeates the organizational mindset, and forms the rationale for training programs aimed at increasing awareness. They become the primary focus of an organization’s diversity initiative. The expectation is that the individual’s way of thinking, acting, and drawing conclusions about diversity-related issues will change. When this occurs, training affects feelings and beliefs (Gentile 1995). The first cognitive strategy or reasoning behavior shown in Table 2.2 is taken from Mary Ann Glendon’s Rights Talk: The Impoverishment of Political Dis- course (Gentile 1995). Glendon explains the distinctive ways in which thinking and talking about rights have developed in the United States. There is a tendency among people to view rights as an “all or nothing” affair. People claim that they have the “right to do and live as they choose,” and attempts to place limits Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 around that assumption are perceived as dangerous assaults on freedom that will result in repression. We are inclined to emphasize the protection of individual rights, without a balancing emphasis on our responsibility. Our rights talk, in its absoluteness, promotes unrealistic expectations, heightens social conflict, and inhibits dialogue that might lead toward consensus, accommodation, or at least the discovery of shared goals. In its silence concerning responsibility, it seems to condone acceptance of the benefits of living in a democratic social welfare state, without accepting the corresponding personal and civil obligations. The impact of this reasoning behavior on the diversity dialogue leads to dichotomous Reframing the diversity discussion 23 thinking, feeds divisiveness, and limits our reasoning and problem-solving repertoire. It results in the propensity to view individual rights as an entitlement without concomitant responsibilities, promotes unrealistic expectations, heightens social conflict, and inhibits dialogue on diversity-related issues. Through the cognitive strategy of cultural generalization, we affirm that there are differences between groups, but we get lost in generalizations and stereo types that keep us from seeing the distinctiveness of individuals, and the commonalities between these same groups. This promotes feelings of superiority over others, reinforces stereotypes, and validates our discriminatory behavior The “seeing for innocence” cognitive strategy offers an analysis of racial dynamics created by the conflict between races. If one is different from another, that makes the different one bad, and this “badness” justifies, even demands, the pursuit of power over another. Shelby Steel, author of this strategy, asserts that the human animal never pursues power without first being convinced of personal entitlement, and this feeling of entitlement has its own precondition. To be entitled, one must first believe in one’s innocence, at least in the area where one wishes to be entitled. Innocence is defined as a feeling of essential goodness in relation to others and, therefore, superiority over others. He explains that while whites in America have historically defended their subjection of blacks with claims of innocence, in the 1960s blacks began to use this same equation to their own advantage. This comes from being the victims of racism, and allows blacks the rights to power of their own. Thus, both blacks and whites invest in seeing themselves as innocent, and base their innocence on the other’s guilt. Each group claims the status of victim, a status that makes them powerless to disman- tle racism, and discourages individual initiative to negotiate these issues. There are several dichotomous thought patterns embedded in Steel’s cognitive strategy. First, individuals see themselves or others in terms of single identification, such as black or white, as opposed to possessing multiple identities. Second, individuals appear and regard themselves as existing in a state of guilt or innocence, thereby limiting their options for learning, change, and identity- related complexity. Cornel West’s contribution to the cognitive strategies of racial reasoning describes a particular way of thinking that he believes is prevalent (Gentile 1995). The premise is that it promotes a race of people as a whole, at the expense of many within its ranks. West believes that African-Americans must close ranks for survival in a hostile country. However, this closing-ranks mentality depends Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 upon the individual’s ability to lay claim to racial authenticity, because if one were not black, or black enough, she or he would be a threat to the group as a whole. As soon as one bases the sense of security and legitimacy on racial authenticity, numerous reasons for exclusion emerge. Consequently, West advocates a different approach to this limiting and separatist form of thinking that attempts to correct one form of oppression while participating in another. His antidote is a new form of reasoning that bases its claims to moral authority not on black authenticity, but on a mature black self-love and self-respect, which replaces exclusivity and closed ranks with a coalition strategy. The impact of 24 B. J. Sherrer this cognitive strategy on the diversity dialogue underscores the diversity that exists within identity groups. Defensive reasoning, as a strategy, encourages individuals to keep private the premises, inferences, and conclusions that shape their behavior, and avoid testing them in a truly independent, objective fashion. By our unwillingness to reveal the sources of, and assumptions behind, our conclusions, we unwittingly reinforce others’ tendencies to hear and understand us in terms of their pre-existing stereotypes. This cognitive strategy demonstrates how values that guide actions make one fearful of new informa tion or being open to different perspectives. Recognizing how the reasoning errors in the human thinking process help generate and reinforce counterproductive thinking, “how we know what isn’t so,” illustrates a series of common reasoning errors. Thomas Gilovich’s work (cited in Gentile 1995) examines individual preference for clear dichotomies when considering options. Examples of the dichotomies include yes or no, right or wrong, and all or nothing. Experiences tend to be over-simplified in an effort to categorize them into these dualities, and then to analyze them with excessive confidence. Within this habitual way of thinking about diversity is a preference for believing that all experi ences are controllable, a preference that may lead to attributing causality or personal choice in situations where there is none, and to see structure and consistency in experiences rather than pure randomness. In essence, we are impressed more by what has happened, rather than by what has failed to happen, and we draw conclusions from what occurred under present circumstances, without comparing it to what could occur under altern ative circumstances. We have talent for ad hoc explanations and can explain a vast range of outcomes in terms of our pre-existing theories and beliefs. A tactic to correct this reasoning error is to ask how someone who does not believe the way we do would explain the result. For example, if a female is given the job, the question then should be: “Is the outcome also supportive of what we believe?” Although diversity issues involve emotional, political, historical, and economic levels, an understanding of these reasoning errors aids us in our attempt to unravel their complexity (Gentile 1995). The economic-centered cognitive strategy, “Parento optimality,” or “scarcity thinking,” maintains that “no one is made better off without someone else being made worse off.” This mode of economic reasoning is a kind of all-or-nothing, “me or you,” quality that can predefine possible options for a particular problem. A preoccupation with resource scarcity, the assumption of a “limited pie” to be Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 divided among all comers, is an example of an economic-based approach to thinking about the choices that diversity presents. The point is not that scarcity does not exist, but rather that the assumption of scarcity limits our creativity and sense of possibility. This preoccupation with scarcity ill positions us for the redefinition of goods and resources that diversity-related issues require (Gentile 1995). Gentile suggests that discussions about personal differences might be intimidating; respecting another point of view and being sensitive to others’ experi ences and feelings might be disconcerting. Many people are suspicious of things Reframing the diversity discussion 25 they do not understand, and are threatened by differ ences of race, gender, culture, sexual orientation, and religion or lifestyle preference. When forced to think about these differ ences, the level of anxiety increases and there is a struggle to make them fit a preconceived notion of reality. The diversity process addresses how individual and organiza tional motivation, mindset, method, and measures provide a systematic approach to develop, implement, and measure diversity within organiza tions (Gentile 1998).

The diversity lenses Reframing the diversity discussion provides a strategy to define diversity as a resource and a process. The descriptive framework for recognizing and understanding the range of responses to different forms of diversity has four lenses: motivation, mindset, methods, and measures (Figure 2.2). The approaches outlined in this chapter, when taken together, provide a set of observations, cognitive strategies, and lenses that focus on how the individual internalizes differences. The observations and cognitive strategies discussed above represent

MOTIVATORS MINDSET METHODS MEASURES

• LAWSUIT EXAMINING WHAT USED BY THE EVALUATION • ILLEGAL MOTIVATES AN ORGANIZATION OF TANGIBLE BUSINESS ORGANIZATION TO RESPOND OUTCOMES PRACTICES TO BEGIN TO ONE OR • GOVERNMENT THINKING ABOUT MORE OF THE RULINGS DIVERSITY CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES OF DIVERSITY Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016

ORGANIZATIONAL DIVERSITY INITIATIVE

Figure 2.2 The four lenses. 26 B. J. Sherrer ways to examine the individual response to diversity, and provide insight that serves as a tool for promoting understanding of, and conversation about, diversity in organizations. The prerequisite is that diversity must be broadly defined. The approach offers a way to understand the behaviors and dynamics of groups and individuals within them that is descriptive, rather than judgmental. It places emphasis on the value of learning – the desirability of pursuing knowledge about oneself and others. An organization’s ability to accommodate new ideas and different kinds of employees allows it to foresee necessary changes and to embody the continuous learning that management scholars assert is required for organizational survival. The lenses offer a way to recognize and understand the range of responses to different forms of diversity. In applying the motiva tion lens, the organization must identify what motivates it to define diversity. The organization links its response to diversity based on internal workforce pressures, or the need to have more diversity within its workplace to address future needs. This lens, shown in Box 2.1, explores the motivation to develop a diversity process. Often, legal and regulatory pressures motivate the organiza tion to develop a diversity process. In many organizations, workforce demographics, employment availability, changing political environment, cultural norms, values, and traditions catalyze attention to diversity-related issues. Complaints of racial discrimination in hiring, compensation, promotion practices, wrongful discharge, and harassment charges are a few examples of legal and regulatory pressures that might motivate an organization to develop a diversity process. Sometimes this takes the form of a government investigation of suspected illegal business practices, or charges filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

Box 2.1 Motivation lens Organization’s reason for diversity:

• demographics • political environment • employee availability • lawsuits by individuals or groups • illegal business practices

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 • government rulings • globalization of business • diversification of customer base • external pressures from community groups • internal employee pressures • personal commit ment of senior leaders Reframing the diversity discussion 27 Motivation lens A number of issues can trigger a reluctant compliance or an adversarial mindset in organizations, resulting in game playing and a focus on the “letter of the law” only. In reaction to AA initiatives, some organizations have tried to take the easy path by adopting short-term measures to address numerical goals, without attack- ing the systemic barriers to equal opportunity that may exist, or by looking for ways to locate or develop new sources of qualified employees. Such actions reinforce stereotypes, feed resentment, and fail to address professional development issues. In contrast, pressures can trigger creative, constructive responses on the part of an organization. Legal and regulatory pressures on organizations can result in an ambiguous or mixed commitment to diversity, both because laws and their enforcement change with the political climate, and vary across various countries, and even among states in the United States. An organization’s failure to attempt to think through the conflicting points of view and build communication among its own members will limit its ability to address diversity-related issues. This failure might contribute to cynicism and resentment. There may not be easy answers, but a reliance on minimal compliance ensures that the debate never occurs. To understand the ways in which demographics have and can serve as a motivator for attention to diversity, one must review the key predictions and challenges associated with the changing workforce. The Hudson Institute Report (Johnston and Parker 1987) predicted a shrinking labor pool, due mainly to slower population growth and an aging workforce, as the baby-boomer generation grows older and fewer young workers enter the pool. The report predicted that more women and minorities would enter the workforce. There would be an increased number of immigrants and changes in the nature of jobs available, from manufactory to service and information sectors, and from lower to higher skill requirements, largely because of new technologies. In an effort to tie organ izational diversity to tangible and quantifiable business concerns, many managers, educators, policymakers, and journal ists have seized upon demographic trends as a useful tool. The over-simplified and generic use of predicted demographic shifts in the labor pool as the motiva tion for organizational attention to diversity can trigger a backlash effect, thereby triggering feelings of anxiety, cynicism, and/or denial. The availability and cost of quality childcare and elder care, the flexibility of employees’ work schedules and location, the availability of affordable health care, and changes in pension practices and social security

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 rules are all inputs to participa tion rates for various segments of the potential workforce. This focuses diversity beyond the simplistic reli ance on race and gender as indicators of an inclusive and welcoming workplace.

Mindset lens The second lens, mindset (Box 2.2), relates to the organization’s culture and the examination of answers to questions of motive. The choices, decisions, and attitudes reflected in what motivates the organization to develop a diversity process 28 B. J. Sherrer

Box 2.2 Mindset lens Organization’s view of diversity:

• a way to find employees needed; • a way to attract different customers; • a way to protect the organiza tion from lawsuits; • a way to thrive in a diverse labor market; • tries to change the way people view those who are different; • a way to bring more women and minorit ies on board; • offered as a “one time” training session; • incorporated into the organiza tion’s mission and vision statement.

are actually the choices, decisions, and attitudes of those with decision-making powers. Diversity defined as a competitive opportunity occurs if the organization desires to attract another market to its products and services. If the organization defines diversity as a potential threat to avoid, then the organization would aim to protect itself from potential liability. The answers to questions of motive identify the goals embedded in the organization and complete the organization mindset toward diversity. The personal commit ment of individual leaders at all levels of the organiza tion is another motivator. These leaders can focus attention and resources on diversity issues. However, their personal commitment may conflict with other commitments just as deeply held by others. The motivation that causes indi viduals to take a leadership stance with regard to diversity in an organization may vary greatly. Understanding these differences can enhance the effectiveness of the organization’s diversity process.

Methods lens “Methods” refers to the programs, practices, and policies developed by the organization to respond to diversity. It represents what actually happens in the organization. Again, each response raises its own set of challenges when implemented. These methods include, but are not limited to:

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 • cultural audits • training • recruiting/hiring initiatives • networks • discussion groups • task forces • performance development/career management • working conditions • benefits and external programs. Reframing the diversity discussion 29 Box 2.3 shows some of the methods that organizations use to respond to motivation and mindset toward diversity.

Measures lens The final lens, measures (Box 2.4), indicates what the organization believes sends a strong message about its commit ment to diversity. Essentially, it follows the adage that “what gets measured gets done.” However, many of the methods

Box 2.3 Methods lens Ways to evaluate diversity in the organization:

• offer diversity training for managers; • offer diversity training for employees; • add diversity to the mission and/or vision statement; • provide a mentoring program for women and/or minorities; • establish recruiting and/or hiring practices for women/minorities; • establish a diversity taskforce; • develop networks and/or discussion groups; • provide flexible work schedules; • provide choices in benefits policy; • establish internship/scholarship projects with outside agencies; • provide no special program.

Box 2.4 Measures lens Ways to evaluate diversity in the organization:

• number of women/minority new hires; • promotions by demographic category; • retention rates for women and minorities; • individual performances on management object ives related to diversity; • number of senior level managers involved in diversity program; • evidence of senior leader commitment; • implementing changes in policy/structure to reflect diversity;

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 • number of employees who take advant age of new policy/structure; • existence of employee networks, advisory and/or discussion groups and number who participate; • existence of internal/scholarship programs; • number of diversity training programs offered; • costs associated with diversity training program; • determination of satisfac tion levels at the end of diversity program training; • reevaluating satisfac tion levels after several weeks; • outside recognition of diversity program. 30 B. J. Sherrer organizations use are difficult to evaluate in terms of tangible and immediate outcomes. Due to this difficulty, diversity initiatives pick easier, albeit ineffect ive measures. They concentrate on the number and reach of the interven tion rather than the behavioral change or productivity outcomes. The measures lens is the most difficult to achieve because many of the methods used by organiza tions are hard to evaluate in terms of immediate and/or tangible outcomes. Train- ing is the most frequently selected method for responding to diversity in organizations. For this reason, diversity measure ment is usually in terms of the number and reach of interventions (e.g., 12 full-day training sessions that reached 30 managers each), rather than in terms of behavior changes or productivity outcomes (Gentile 1998).

Conclusion Diversity is an opportun ity to develop greater personal and organizational success, not a problem to solve. The reality is that we all confront and respond, more or less well, to various forms of diversity every day. Even in homogen eous groups, there are distinctions among individuals, and some fit in more easily than others. The more pronounced the differ ences, and the less powerful the indi viduals with those differ ences are perceived to be, the more easily hierarchies tend to be created, along with stereotypes and categories for exclusion or oppression. It is through interaction and confrontation with differences of perspective, prior experience, style, and identity that it is possible to recognize the limits of one’s own perspectives, experiences, and styles. Understanding and responding to the differences between individuals is most effective if one understands and responds to diversity within oneself (Gentile 1995). The ability to recognize and voluntarily respond to diversity of all kinds is a critical skill for success, both today and in the future. The challenge for public managers who acknowledge the reality of diversity, broadly defined, becomes not whether to address and adapt to diversity, but how individuals and organiza tions can do so effectively. Diversity, as discussed in this chapter, is about people and the need to recognize the innate potential of each employee. It is about maximizing that potential for the greater good of the employee and the organization. The motiva tions, mindset, methods, and measures discussed above are the architecture upon which to build a public sector diversity process. The diversity Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 process, framed correctly to match the organization’s internal and external needs, will reflect the needs of the individual and the organization. This properly framed process will attract the best employees from a diverse and limited pool. It is essential to let go of the guilt and feelings of historical injustice. The diversity process requires that we look at ourselves first, identify our multiple identities, accept the cognitive dissonance that an internal negotiation of our identity and self-definition entail, and reconcile those identities. This undoubtedly provides a creative way to expand the sphere of understanding beyond the social constructs of race and gender. Reframing the diversity discussion 31 Note 1 These conclusions were modified to meet the needs of the US Army, and were taken from Jayne, M. E. and Dipboye, R. L. (2004) “Leveraging Diversity to Improve Busi- ness Performance: Research Findings and Recommendations for Organizations,” Human Resource Management 43 (4): 411–414.

Bibliography Cox, T., Jr. (1994) Cultural Diversity in Organizations: Theory, Research and Practice, San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Dobbs, M. F. (1996) “Managing Diversity: Lessons from the Private Sector,” Public Per- sonnel Management, 25 (3): 351–363. Dobbs, M. F. (1998a) “Managing Diversity in Public Organizations,” Public Personnel Management, 27 (2): 133–135. Dobbs, M. F. (1998b) “Managing Diversity: The Department of Energy Initiative,” Public Personnel Management, 27 (2): 161–174. Fernandez, J. P. (1991) Managing a Diverse Work Force: Regaining the Competitive Edge, Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath and Company. Gentile, M. C. (1995) Ways of Thinking About and Across Differences, Concord, MA: Harvard Business School. Gentile, M. C. (1998) Managerial Excellence Through Diversity: Text & Cases, Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, Inc. Gentile, M. C. (ed.) (2000) Differences that Work: Organizational Excellence through Diversity, Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, Inc. ICF International (2008) Final Diversity Workforce Assessment Report (August, 29), Fairfax, VA. Jayne, M. E. and Dipboye, R. L. (2004) “Leveraging Diversity to Improve Business Per- formance: Research Findings and Recommendations for Organizations,” Human Resource Management, 43 (4): 409–424. Johnston, W. B. and Parker, A. H. (1987) Workforce 2000: Work and Workers in the Twenty-First Century, Indianapolis: Hudson Institute. Leach, J. B. (1995) A Practical Guide to Working with Diversity: The Process, the Tools, the Resources, New York: AMACOM. Loden, M. and Rosener, J. (1991) Workforce America! Managing Employee Diversity as a Vital Resource. Homewood, IL: Irwin. Mathews, A. (1998) “Diversity: A Principle of Human Resource Management,” Public Personnel Management, 27 (2): 175–185. Naff, K. C. (1998) “Progress Toward Achieving a Representative Federal Bureaucracy: Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 The Impact of Supervisors and Their Beliefs,” Public Personnel Management, 27 (2): 135–150. Naff, K. C. and Kellough, J. E. (2001) A Changing Workforce: Understanding Diversity Programs in the Federal Government, New York: Pricewaterhouse-Coopers Endow- ment for the Business of Government. Naff, K. C. and Kellough, J. E. (2004) “Responding to a Wake-Up Call: An Examination of Federal Agency Diversity Management Programs,” Administration & Society, 36 (1): 62–90. Soni, V. (1999) “Morality vs. Mandate: Affirmative Action in Employment,” Public Per- sonnel Management, 28 (4): 577–594. 32 B. J. Sherrer Soni, V. (2000) “A Twenty-First Century Reception for Diversity in the Public Sector: A Case Study,” Public Administration Review, 60 (5): 395–408. Taylor, C. (1994) Multiculturalism: Examining the Politics of Recognition, Princeton: Princeton University Press. Thomas, D. A. and Ely, R. J. (1996) “Making Differences Matter: A New Paradigm for Managing Diversity,” Harvard Business Review, 74: 79–90. Thomas, R. R., Jr. (1991) Beyond Race and Gender: Unleashing the Power of Your Total Work Force by Managing Diversity, New York: AMACOM. Thomas, R. R., Jr. (1996) Redefining Diversity, New York: AMACOM. Trice, H. M. and Beyer, J. M. (1993) The Cultures of Work Organizations, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall. US Department of Commerce. (1999) Best Practices in Achieving Workforce Diversity: US Department of Commerce and Vice President Al Gore’s National Partnership for Reinventing Government Benchmarking Study, Washington, DC: United States Gov- ernment Printing Office. Yanow, D. (1996) “American Ethnogenesis and Public Administration,” Administration & Society, 27 (4): 483–509. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 3 Diversity policies across the Department of Defense

Christina L. Stevens

It’s not the strength of our arms or the power of our techno logy that gives the United States our military dominance. It’s our people. It’s our Sailors and Marines, Soldiers and Airmen, and Coast Guardsmen who perform brilliantly in every mission we give them. President Barack Obama, United States Naval Academy Graduation and Commissioning, May 22, 2009

Introduction In 2009 the US armed forces could boast over 1.44 million active duty personnel and another 0.8 million in the Reserves (USAF 2009). As one of the largest employers in the United States, managing this now all-volunteer force has proven challenging, as it has throughout the military’s history, particularly in light of constant changes both in the makeup of the military itself and the types and nature of situations the military is called upon to address. At different points in time, the US military has shown itself to be a leader in managing differences within its organization, yet still struggling to complete the transformation to an organization of inclusion. While racial segregation was still the norm in US soci ety, President Harry S. Truman called an end to racial segregation in the military by issuing Executive Order 9981 in 1948, providing “equality of treatment and opportunity for all persons in the armed services.” But the negative effects of failing to adequately manage diversity came to light during the Vietnam era, with inequities at all levels of the military compromising mission success. In their amicus brief submitted to the Supreme Court in the case of Grutter v. Bol- Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 linger (2003), 29 former military and civilian leaders recounted how “the armed forces suffered increased racial polarization, pervasive disciplinary problems, and racially motivated incidents in Vietnam and on posts around the world” because of a lack of diversity in the military leadership (Becton et al. 2003). Lessons from that era illustrate the importance of managing diversity for both the institution and the individuals serving the institution:

African-American troops, who rarely saw members of their own race in command positions, lost confidence in the military as an institution. . . . 34 C. L. Stevens African-American servicemen were looking for African-American officers both for support and as a visible indication that the military recognized African-Americans as valuable contributors. (Becton et al. 2003)

At first glance, recent efforts at fostering and managing diversity within the military might appear as part of a larger diversity movement sweeping across organizations in both the public and private sectors. Indeed, the military has been active in seeking out and working with major corporations and organizations in these sectors to provide advice and exchange ideas and best practices. In some ways, however, current efforts are but a continua tion of a long history of addressing issues of differ ence in the military. Since the end of World War II, three separate deliberative bodies have been established to assess the state of the military with respect to human relations and to make recommendations to create a more inclusive organization. In 1948 President Truman established the President’s Committee on Equality of Treatment and Opportunity (known as the Fahy Com- mittee), which was tasked to “examine into the rules, proced ures, and practices of the armed services” to effect the desegregation of the military (Truman 1948). With unequivocal support from the president, the Fahy Committee was successful in not only moving the armed forces toward desegregation, but also in showing the link between creating inclusive policies and maintaining a more effective fighting force (Military Leadership Diversity Commission [MLDC] 2011). In 1962 President John F. Kennedy established a second investigative body to assess the effectiveness of the armed forces’ policies and procedures with regard to equality of treatment and opportun ity and improve equality of opportunity for members of the armed forces in the civilian community. The Gesell Committee released a report in 1964 calling for “far-reaching proposals for greater institutionalization of the military’s commit ment to equality of treatment and oppor tunity,” though many of these recommendations were never implemented (MLDC 2011). In 2009 Congress established the MLDC to evaluate and make recommendations regarding diversity and policies affecting minority members in the armed forces, particu larly at the senior leadership level. While the MLDC is described in detail later in this chapter, it is important to note what distinguishes the work done over roughly the last decade from previous periods. First, current efforts reflect a different understanding of diversity – as something going beyond equal opportun ity to require a broader culture of Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 inclusion for all members of the armed forces. Second, current efforts to foster, sustain, and manage diversity are being shaped by two goals reflecting the reality of the world in which the military is situated: (1) the rapidly changing demographics of the American population; and (2) new skills and competencies required by the nature of modern warfare. This chapter explores further both the understandings behind the concept of diversity and the concerns shaping diversity initiatives, and includes a description of the policy landscape within the Department of Defense (DoD) as a whole, as well as within each of the five major compon ents of the armed forces.1 Diversity policies across the DoD 35 What’s driving diversity policy? An understanding of diversity policy requires looking at the reasons driving these efforts in the first place. Indeed, the “why” question shapes the types of goals established, as well as the mechanisms formulated to achieve those goals. Two distinct realities seem to be motivating current diversity efforts in the military. The first of these is that military leaders recognize that the composition of the Amer ican population is rapidly changing, with minority groups gaining an ever-greater presence in the popula tion, and the proportion of non-Hispanic whites corres pondingly decreasing (MLDC 2011). Ensuring that the armed forces reflect the nation they serve is an important value in and of itself for military leaders, but several instrumental reasons are of concern as well. First, maintaining an all- volunteer force means that the military must compete with other public and private institutions for a limited pool of talent. Thus, many in the military talk about diversity as a key tool in the “war for talent,” where having an inclusive environment is simply part of being a desirable employer (Love 2009). Among other things, diversity within the armed forces, particu larly at senior levels, serves a role-model function in that minority group members are able to see that the military can offer them a successful career and that they will be valued within the organization. Second, maintaining a diverse force signals institutional legitimacy to the nation the military serves. This legitimacy is import ant in that it builds trust from the American people and is a prerequisite to achieving support from the people regarding the military’s operations (MLDC 2011). Also, related to this, the symbolic function of diversity fulfills geopolitical goals as well, since military forces are often the first ambassadors to developing countries abroad and it is import ant for the United States to show that it is committed in a concrete way to the values of freedom and equality that it espouses (Lim et al. 2008). Finally, diversity serves another important function by enhancing mission readiness and effectiveness, and it does so in two distinct ways. Successfully managing difference within a military unit is thought to affect overall command climate and unit cohesion, which in turn impacts the performance capability of that work unit. The perceived link between diversity and mission effectiveness, and ultimately national security, was apparent in the military’s amicus brief in the Grutter case, in which the racially driven disorder during the Vietnam era was acknowledged to have impacted military performance (Becton et al. 2003). Diversity also enhances mission effectiveness and national security by ensur- Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 ing the military is composed of personnel who possess the skills and knowledge required to face the challenges brought by modern warfare. This brings us to the second motivating force behind current diversity efforts. As the gap grows between conventional and unconventional warfare, the United States faces a wide range of threats (e.g., terrorism, internet security invasions, hostage taking, biological and chemical warfare, and suicide bombing), which requires a milit ary force capable of adaptive and innovative response. A diverse force is better equipped with the skills and knowledge that can be leveraged to successfully meet these challenges. 36 C. L. Stevens In assessing the degree of diversity present within its organiza tion, the milit ary has focused on the demographic representation of different racial, ethnic, and gender groups among its ranks, with group representation in the US general population often serving as a benchmark. Table 3.1 provides a picture of the total composition of the armed forces in 2009, as it compares with the military composition in 1997 and with the general population in 2009. Putting aside some of the questions regard ing the most appropriate set of benchmarks,2 two patterns emerge from looking at the numbers. First, there has been an increase in minor ity group representation since 1997, suggesting that efforts to increase representative diversity over the last decade have been successful to some extent. Second, disparities in representation exist between the officer corps and the general popu lation, as well as between the officer corps and enlisted members. In light of these numbers, one of the primary focuses across the DoD has been on increasing diversity within the senior leadership ranks. Congressman Kendrick Meek (Democrat – Florida) noted: “Mess halls and exchange service stores, shooting

Table 3.1 Race/ethnicity and gender demographics in the total armed forces and US population

Total force 1997 Total force 2009 US population 2009

White Officer 84.2% (197,517) 77.8% (184,752) 74.8% Enlisted 65.0% (795,621) 69.0% (835,432) Black Officer 7.9% (18,455) 9.3% (22,153) 12.4% Enlisted 21.8% (266,658) 18.1% (219,505) Hispanic Officer 3.2% (7,532) 5.4% (12,928) 15.8% Enlisted 7.5% (91,270) 11.7% (141,494) American Indian/Alaska Native Officer 0.5% (1,116) 0.6% (1,362) 0.8% Enlisted 0.8% (9,562) 1.9% (23,539) Asian American/Pacific Islander Officer 2.5% (5,957) 3.7% (8,777) 4.6% Enlisted 3.3% (40,577) 4.2% (50,913) Other/unknown/multi Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Officer 1.7% (3,967) 8.5% (20,351) 7.3% Enlisted 1.7% (21,131) 6.7% (80,818) Women Officer 13.5% (31,581) 15.5% (36,906) 50.7% Enlisted 13.7% (167,270) 14.0% (169,494)

Sources: Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI) Demographic trend: FY 20__ Summary Representation of Race/Ethnic Groups and Women in the Active Armed Forces 1997–2007; DEOMI, FY 2009 Annual Demographic Profile of Military Members in the Department of Defense and U.S. Coast Guard; United States Census Bureau: Hispanic or Latino Origin by Race: 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates. Online, accessed October 24, 2010. Diversity policies across the DoD 37 ranges and training facilities are portraits of diversity. But in the officers’ clubs, a much different picture emerges” (MLDC 2010).

Understandings of diversity within the DoD For decades the military’s understanding of diversity has been synonymous with the values and goals associated with equal employment opportunity (EEO) laws. These laws protect the

right of all covered persons to work and advance on the basis of merit, abil ity, and potential, free from social, personal, or institutional barriers of pre judice or discrimination based unlawfully on race, sex, color, national origin, age, religion, disability, reprisal, marital status, sexual orientation, status as a parent, political affili ation, or other prohibited non-merit factors. (DoD 2009a)

These EEO laws and programs cover civilian employees in the military, while military personnel are covered by separate equal opportun ity (EO) regulations that largely mirror EEO laws (MLDC 2011). EEO/EO policies target certain protected groups, and compliance with these policies is primarily measured by looking at the levels of representa tion of these groups in an organiza tion compared to that in the relev ant general population. In contrast to this historical understanding of diversity, more recent definitions of diversity operational within the DoD and each of the service compon ents suggests a changed vision about the values and goals underlying diversity policy. Table 3.2 provides a list of the different definitions currently utilized across the DoD. As can be seen from these definitions, diversity is understood to include a broad range of categories of difference, including thinking style, occupational background, skill sets, and knowledge bases. In its Diversity Policy Statement, the Coast Guard states that “Diversity is not a program or policy – it is a state of being” (USCG 2011c). Others talk about creating a “culture of inclusion” that pervades the military institution at all command levels. While some service compon ents have defined diversity in the broadest pos sible way (e.g., diversity as variety), other service compon ents have explicitly linked their vision of diversity with more specific attributes relevant to estab Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 lished goals. While “the concept of EO relies on compliance with regulations to elimin ate discrimination, the concept of diversity as inclusion values individual differences because they are critical to the new approaches and practices needed for a successful fighting force” (MLDC 2011). The Army, for example, has identified certain skills (e.g., cultural and language expertise) as critical to performing its missions in the current geopolitical climate, which frequently entails working with foreign civilian and military populations (US Army Diversity Task Force 2009). Similarly, the Navy has honed in on and is targeting some of its diversity initiatives specifically at skills in science, technology, 38 C. L. Stevens Table 3.2 Definitions of diversity utilized across the DoD

Organization Definition

MLDC Recommended Diversity is all the different characteristics and attributes of Definition (2011)a individuals that are consistent with Department of Defense core values, integral to overall readiness and mission accomplishment, and reflective of the nation we serve. DoD Directive The different characteristics and attributes of individuals. 1020.02 (2009) Army (2009)b The different attributes, experiences, and backgrounds of our Soldiers, Civilians, and Family Members that further enhance our global capabilities and contribute to an adaptive, culturally astute Army. Navy (2007)c All the different characteristics and attributes of individual Sailors and Civilians which enhance the mission readiness of the Navy. Marine Corps (2007)d An inclusive culture that recognizes and values the similarities and differences of individuals to effectively meet the goals of the organization. Air Force (2010)e A composite of individual characteristics, experiences and abilities consistent with the Air Force Core Values and the Air Force Mission. Air Force Diversity includes but is not limited to: personal life experiences, geographic background, socioeconomic background, cultural knowledge, educational background, work background, language abilities, physical abilities, philosophical/spiritual perspectives, age, race, ethnicity, and gender. Coast Guard (2010)f Diversity is variety. It includes all the characteristics, experiences, and differences of each individual. Diversity can be identified as physical characteristics such as skin color and gender, or it may be differences in culture, skills, education, personality type, or upbringing.

Sources: a MLDC (2011). b US Army (2009d). c DoN (2007). d Lim et al. (2008). e USAF (2010c). f USCG (2011f) CG-12B. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016

engineering, and mathematics (STEM), because these are the attributes tied to mission success. In general, there is also an understanding that the goals of diversity efforts must go beyond attaining representational diversity. As the Marine Corps has articulated, “diversity is about ‘making heads count’ not counting heads” (USMC 2010). The broader research literat ure has linked diversity to desirable organizational outcomes, thus constituting the “business case” for developing and implementing diversity initiatives. However, this research also indicates that Diversity policies across the DoD 39 increased diversity by itself is not enough. Indeed, without managing differences within the work group, diversity may have no impact or a negative impact on work performance (Tsui and Gutek 1999). It is import ant that diversity within an organization be properly managed to minimize negative consequences of working across differ ences and to leverage people’s differences in ways that enhance organiza tional goals. Despite this understanding of diversity as inclusion, there currently seems to be a disconnect between the diversity rhetoric and the efforts on the ground, which seem to be focused on legally protected groups, mainly race, ethnicity, gender, and (to a lesser extent) persons with disabilit ies (Lim et al. 2008). Current attempts to track the progress of diversity initiatives often rely on head- counting measures, with general climate surveys sometimes used as a supplement. One of the challenges facing the armed forces is developing assessment and accountabil ity systems with metrics that capture this broader understanding of diversity.

Coordinating diversity policy across the DoD In addition to diversity efforts at the level of each service component, several bodies exist to direct and coordinate diversity efforts across the DoD. The efforts of the Office of Diversity Management and Equal Opportunity, the Diversity Working Group, the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute, and the Military Leadership Diversity Committee are each described briefly here.

Office of Diversity Management and Equal Opportunity In 1994 the Secretary of Defense directed that the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Equal Opportunity be established to study issues and make recommendations regard ing EO/EEO policy, and provide EO training for all of the department’s senior leaders (Love 2009). In 2006 the Under Secretary for Personnel and Readiness reorgan ized and renamed it the Office of Diversity Management and Equal Opportunity (ODMEO) in order to bring diversity management within its functions. Specifically, the ODMEO “develops policies and plans, issues guidance, conducts analyses, defines strategic direction for DoD- wide equal opportunity, equal employment opportunity, and diversity programs and plans impacting military and civilian personnel” (Love 2009). The office is Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 guided in part by the DoD Directive 1020.02, issued in 2009, which provides an overarching framework and consolidates policy for diversity, military EO, and civilian EEO programs. Thus, the goals of the ODMEO represent not only addressing unlawful discriminatory practices and barriers to employment and advancement, but also creating a culture of inclusion that values diversity (DoD 2009b). The ODMEO has positioned itself to be the center for strategic planning and implementation for diversity policy and to coordinate and mobilize all compon ents of the DoD. In 2007, for example, the ODMEO commissioned the RAND 40 C. L. Stevens Corporation to convene a Diversity Summit that brought together representatives from the DoD compon ents, as well as experts from academia and the public and private sectors, to discuss the current state of diversity policy within the military and to share research and best practices. The DoD Diversity Summit resulted in a research report that outlined several recommendations in the development of a DoD-wide strategic plan to accelerate efforts toward greater diversity. In order to provide an even more concrete action plan, the ODMEO sub sequently developed its Diversity Strategic Planning Framework in 2008, which outlined enabling goals (e.g., leadership engagement, accountability, and culture) to facilitate movement toward the diversity vision, and also process goals to develop the processes to improve diversity outcomes (e.g., operational elements including accessions, development, career assignments, promotion, and reten tion) (Booz Allen Hamilton 2008; Lim et al. 2008). Further efforts to lead the DoD toward a shared vision of diversity and diversity management include the development of a Diversity Measures Strategic Plan and the convening of a second DoD Diversity Summit in 2011 to focus on implementation and communication. Improving the diversity of the force and the diversity of the DoD leadership in particular are two challenges that the ODMEO has sought to address through various avenues, including a strategic outreach initiative to enhance recruitment and the development of an accountability system for measuring and monitoring progress (Love 2009). In addition to concerns about representa tion of targeted groups (e.g., minorit ies, women, and people with disabilit ies) within the force, the ODMEO has as its explicit goal the creation of a corporate culture that values inclusion and is working to improve and standardize the quality and effect iveness of training provided to EO advisors, Flag and General Officers, and Senior Executive Service members.

Defense Diversity Working Group The Defense Diversity Working Group (DDWG) is led by the diversity manager in the ODMEO and meets quarterly, with the diversity managers of each milit ary service as the primary representatives to the DDWG. In 2005, then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld established the DDWG out of a concern for the lack of diversity at the senior levels of the depart ment. The DDWG performs a critical coordination and integration role for the various service components, Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 which, prior to its development, had independently pursued their separate diversity strategies and programs. The DDWG also works with and informs the Defense Human Resources Board (DHRB) of its progress and recom mendations (MLDC 2009). To address the concern that prompted its creation, the DDWG began by examining forecasts for personnel entering senior leadership positions and, finding that a lack of diversity did exist, took steps to increase the representation of women, minorit ies, and persons with disabilit ies in senior positions. Diversity policies across the DoD 41 Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute Currently, the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness oversees the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI), the premier DoD schoolhouse in EO and EEO training, education, and research. DEOMI originated in 1971 as the Defense Race Relations Institute (DRRI) in response to violent and non-violent racially based conflict within the military in the 1960s. Fostering positive human relations through education and training was thought to be essential to unit cohesion, combat readiness, and maintaining a feeling of dignity and worth among all members of the armed forces. To reflect the broader set of issues that the organization took on over time (e.g., sexual harassment, sexism, extremism, religious accommodations, anti-Semitism, etc.), its name was changed to its current form in 1979 (DEOMI 2011). DEOMI offers core EO and EEO education/training courses for selected personnel who, once trained, advise their commanders on EO and EEO matters at various command levels. Among the several ongoing research programs, the diversity management research directorate aids DoD policymakers by conducting basic and applied diversity research, developing/validating/assessing diversity training, and providing diversity-relevant measurements, analytic capability, and diversity management tools. The DEOMI Organizational Climate Survey (DEOCS), for example, is one tool available to commanders to provide information about their organiza tion’s climate, along with in-depth evaluations based on focus groups, interviews, and archival data. As part of developing an accountability structure, the ODMEO is working with the DEOMI to develop a suite of diversity metrics that can be used to track the progress of diversity initiatives (ODMEO 2010).

Military Leadership Diversity Commission The MLDC is an independ ent deliberative body established by Congress through the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2009 (Public Law 110-417, Section 596) (MLDC 2011). Created out of discussions between members of the Congressional Black Caucus and members of the military leadership, the primary focus of the MLDC is the existing lack of sufficient diversity among the officer corps, compared to both relevant population demographics and the level of diversity present within the enlisted ranks (MLDC 2010). Specifically, the commission’s work is Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 described as “a comprehensive evaluation and assessment of policies that provide opportunities for the promotion and advancement of minority members of the Armed Forces, including minority members who are senior officers” (Public Law 110-417, Section 596).

Diversity policy within the five components Before turning to the diversity efforts in each of the five major branches, it is helpful to lay out a basic framework for diversity policy and to note some of the 42 C. L. Stevens commonalities that exist among the service components. Figure 3.1 shows the different stages of the life cycle for military personnel, starting from the general US population and ending at the composition of the military’s senior leadership. Each stage (eligibility, accession, career/field assignment, promotion, and reten tion) helps determine the composition of the force and needs to be examined as a potential barrier to advancement and career success. While the MLDC has assessed and made recommendations regarding each of these critical stages, the service components have taken a less comprehensive approach. By far the most focus has been on accessions, with outreach and recruiting strategies receiving the most attention. With rare exception, little attention is given to the effects that eligibility requirements have on the demographics of the recruiting pool. What is, for the most part, uniform across the different service components is their general strategic approach toward increasing diversity. The strategy tends to include the follow ing steps: (1) developing a clear vision of diversity, including specific goals; (2) assessment of the current state of affairs; (3) design and implementation of a diversity action plan; (4) measurement of progress of diversity efforts; and (5) holding people accountable for progress. Above all else, the necessity of having leadership at the highest levels involved in the diversity effort has been emphasized across the board.

Navy The Navy has the most developed diversity policy agenda and has been nationally recognized and awarded for its diversity efforts. The Navy has separate but aligned offices for diversity and EO issues (Department of the Navy [DoN] 2009). The current diversity structure was formed in 2007 and is aligned under the Chief of Naval Personnel, with 32 total personnel, including five city outreach coordinators in major metropolitan areas (DoN 2010). In 2006 the Navy began a three-phase campaign to address diversity and added a fourth phase in 2008: Phase 1 – Assess- ment of institutional framework; Phase 2 – Decisive actions – making root cause

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Outreach Branching Promotion Military US and and criteria Senior eligibility Retention pop. recruiting assignment and leaders requirements strategies policies policies

Figure 3.1 Stages of military personnel life cycle affecting composition of the military (source: adapted from MLDC (2011)). Diversity policies across the DoD 43 determinations and targeting outreach, training, mentoring, and communication; Phase 3 – Sustainment and accountability – maintenance of diverse force and the visibility of successes and challenges; Phase 4 – Enlightened expansion – focus on accession goals, mentoring, and life–work balance (DoN 2008). The Navy is guided in part by the DoN Human Capital Strategy, a four-point framework created in 2007 to set a baseline for diversity efforts throughout the depart ment (the Navy, Marine Corps, and DoN Office of Civilian Human Resources) (DoN 2008). As with the other branches, the Navy has focused most extensively on its outreach and recruitment. Outreach officers are strategically placed in import ant metropolitan areas with large African-American, Hispanic, and Asian popula tions (e.g., New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, and Houston). Ongoing efforts attempt to establish a wide “influence” base by forming connections with gov ernment officials, educators, business leaders, Navy-friendly groups, and affinity groups in order to promote Navy awareness, build advocacy groups in com munities, and attract top talent (DoN 2008). Particular emphasis has been on developing and recruiting from the STEM fields, including partnering with related affinity groups (e.g., National Society of Black Engineers, Society of Hispanic Professional Engineers, Mexican American Engineers and Scientists, and Society of Women Engineers). Outreach efforts are targeting youth at younger ages in order to gain exposure and foster interest in careers relev ant to the Navy prior to the age of recruitment. For example: Starbase Atlantis is a math and science program that incorporates aviation and space opportunities for fifth graders; the NAVOPS Deep Submergence program works with inner-city schools to simulate submarine operations and help students learn about related technology; and MANA is a leadership development organiza tion for young Hispanic women (DoN 2009). With the explicit goal of being a top-50 employer, the Navy has gone beyond recruitment efforts to develop policies that are more inclusive and better ensure career success for all members. In 2010, the DoN announced a policy change that will allow women to serve on submarines; 19 women have been selected to enter the submarine service (DoN 2010). Work–life policies have received a fair amount of attention in the Navy as a way to accommodate family needs, particu larly for women. Some of the available policies include 21 days of administrative leave for adoptive parents, ten days for paternity leave, a 75 percent funded IVF program, military telework instruction, compressed work schedules, tuition assistance flexibility, and 12-month operational deferment for new mothers Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 (Barrett 2009). The Navy recently piloted a career-intermission program that allows sailors to exit active duty service for up to three years with benefits and a reserve stipend, and pauses the promo tion clock (DoN 2009). In addition to evaluating the inclusiveness of its policies, the Navy also addresses reten tion issues by creating support structures for its current personnel. The Navy recently launched the Navy Women eMentor Leadership program, which connects and facilitates relationships between uniformed Navy women to support their personal and professional development. The Navy engages with affinity groups for African-Americans, Hispanics, Asian Pacific Americans, and women, which not 44 C. L. Stevens only contrib ute to the recruitment effort, but also provide support and resources for current personnel. For example, the National Naval Officers Association (NNOA) works to strengthen a diverse officer corps by providing professional development, mentoring, and support of cultural awareness (NNOA 2011). Similarly, the Associ- ation of Naval Services Officers (ANSO) is an organization dedicated to Hispanic workforce recruitment and retention by providing mentorship, networking, training, and education opportun ities (ANSO 2011). A critical step in creating an organizational climate that values diversity is effectively communicating diversity values and efforts to personnel and fostering dialogue around diversity issues. To this end, the Navy has a strategic communication plan in place that utilizes the Navy’s news service to highlight diversity-related events, achievements, and policies, external news coverage to inform the public about the Navy’s commitment to diversity, and social media (e.g., Facebook) to reach a broader audience. In terms of ensuring accountabil ity, accountabil ity reviews are currently in place to require a person to brief his or her superior on how they are doing on diversity and what steps they plan to take to address problem areas (Lim et al. 2008). As with the other segments of the DoN, the Navy submits a yearly diversity report to the DoN Force Management Oversight Council, a body created in 2003 to oversee human capital management.

Marine Corps Within the Marine Corps (MC), EO and diversity management issues are handled together by one branch under the Manpower Plans & Policy Division, which reports to the Deputy Commandant for Manpower & Reserve Affairs, who in turn reports to the Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps (USMC 2010). As part of the move to a dual-function office, the Equal Opportunity and Diversity Management (MPE) branch completed the first phase of its training plan in 2009 by training six staff members and 43 EO advisors and EO representatives on diversity awareness and management concepts (DoN 2009). As a component of the DoN, the MC is also required to submit a yearly diversity report to the DoN Force Management Oversight Council. In its 2010 report, the MC described its goal that “every Marine must understand that the objective of diversity is not merely to achieve representa tional parity – it is to elevate total capability by leveraging the strengths of all our Marines” (DoN 2010). The MC Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 has laid out three strategies in order to reach this goal: “(1) communicating [its] diversity mission through expanded community outreach and recruit marketing; (2) providing equitable opportunities for professional development and career progression; and (3) optimizing training and education to increase Marine Corps understanding of the value of diversity” (DoN 2010). Among other outreach and recruitment efforts, the Marine Corps Recruiting Command (MCRC) primarily targets people in the 18–24 age group through a multimedia advert ising campaign, which utilizes placements in publications such as Hispanic Network, Ebony, and Diversity Careers (DoN 2010). The MCRC Diversity policies across the DoD 45 also attends certain events and venues to engage influencers, potential applicants, and commun ity members, including the Central Intercollegiate Athletic Associ- ation Tournament, the League of United Latin American Citizens National Con- vention, and the Women in Aviation International Annual Conference. Apart from its outreach and recruiting efforts, the MC has some additional programs in place, many of which are focused on developing strategic plans for diversity management. As one of the sea services, marines particip ate in the events sponsored by the ANSO and NNOA affinity groups, and the Women’s Leadership Symposium. The Diversity Executive Steering Committee (DivESC) was established in 2009 to provide recommendations on diversity management matters to senior leaders and to examine the development of diversity initiatives for implementation throughout the MC. Similarly, the Diversity Review Board (formerly the Officer Requirements Review Board) regularly brings together representatives from key stakeholder organiza tions and conducts in-depth ana lysis of personnel statist ics, trends, and policies (DoN 2010). The Marine Corps Climate Assessment Survey (MCCAS) is periodically used to measure marines’ perceptions about the organiza tional climate, discrimination, and sexual harassment, thus providing leadership some level of feedback and the ability to identify potential problem areas. As an example of leveraging the diversity of its members to enhance mission effectiveness, the MC implemented the Lioness Program in Iraq and the Female Engagement Team in Afghanistan, where female marines were trained to implement culturally sensitive search methods within the local female popula tions (DoN 2010).

Army Based on recommendations from a 2004 study conducted by the Commission on Officer Diversity and Advancement, the Army Diversity Office (ADO) was established in 2006 within the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff. The ADO’s mission was to integrate all department-wide diversity-related issues, including the development and execution of strategic-level diversity management plans (US Army 2008). Shortly afterwards, the Army Diversity Working Group was created and led by the ADO to come up with recommendations for senior leaders on how to execute the Army’s diversity goals (Lim et al. 2008). In 2008 the Army Diversity Task Force was established to make a holistic assessment of the Army’s diversity policies, practices, and progress and report directly to the Sec- Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 retary and Chief of Staff. That same year, the Diversity Task Force transitioned into a revitalized ADO. The Army’s official policy on diversity was signed in 2009. In this policy statement, the Army articulated its vision of becoming:

The national leader in embracing the strengths of a diverse people in an inclusive environment . . . investing in and managing talent, valuing individuals, and developing culturally astute soldiers and civilians who enhance our com munities and are prepared for the human dimension of global engagements. (US Army Diversity Task Force 2009) 46 C. L. Stevens In its draft final report released in 2009, the Diversity Task Force concluded that the Army does not have an effective diversity program in place to facilitate progression toward this vision (US Army Diversity Task Force 2009). Some of the key findings from the Diversity Task Force include:

• The Army has not promoted a univer sal diversity message or an awareness of its efforts in diversity since 2005. • There is a general lack of understanding of the differences between equal EO and diversity principles and practices. • Accomplishment of the diversity mission was hindered by the limited number of assigned personnel, the lack of diversity staff personnel across all commands, and a lack of sufficient resources. • There has been a failure to provide substantial diversity program support to Army Commands. • Most of the recommendations from the Commission on Officer Diversity and Advancement were not being addressed or implemented by the current entities responsible for diversity efforts. • The Army lacks a comprehensive talent management system (e.g., integrating recruiting, coaching, mentoring, professional development, and assignment opportunities) that ensures a diverse pool of soldiers are competitive for positions at all levels. • Regulations and policies are generally inclusive in nature (with the notable exception of the combat exclusion for women and the policy on homosexual behavior in the Army), though these policies might not always translate into practice. • There is currently no comprehensive plan to address diversity training and education for Army personnel at all levels, and EO/EEO training is not an adequate substitute.

In 2010 the Army published a diversity roadmap (US Army 2010), which adopts the implementation plan proposed by the Diversity Task Force. Future action will be guided by the following five strategic goals for diversity: (1) ensuring leader commitment to diversity and inclusion practices at all levels; (2) institutionalizing talent management processes that identify, recruit, develop, and retain a cadre of high-performing personnel from diverse backgrounds; (3) establishing a structure to support the Army diversity roadmap; (4) implement- Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 ing diversity training and education programs that develop sociocultural competencies; and (5) creating and maintaining an inclusive environment where the value of diverse knowledge, experi ences, and backgrounds enhances mission readiness (US Army 2011). In terms of ongoing diversity efforts, the Army has a large number of outreach programs, many of which are equivalent to or go beyond efforts found in the other service components (US Army Diversity Task Force 2009). It has an annual marketing plan, including advert ising in Spanish, and an outreach initiative that focuses on targeting youth through education and intern programs Diversity policies across the DoD 47 (Lim et al. 2008). The March 2 Success program, for example, is a web-based course that helps students prepare for standardized tests. The Army Preparatory School is designed to help otherwise qualified applicants meet the educational requirements for enlisting in the Army by providing classes and training for earning the GED diploma (US Army 2009b). Other outreach efforts include speaking engagements, attendance at conferences, internet correspondence, and the publication of brochures and pamphlets (Lim et al. 2008). Financial incentives are frequently used to recruit new personnel, and programs like Every Soldier a Recruiter (ESAR) provide bonuses to current soldiers who make new referrals (US Army 2009a). A more limited set of initiatives is in place that targets professional development within the Army, including leadership training and a voluntary web-based mentorship program started in 2005 to provide online information, tools, chat forums, and references to assist in creating formal or informal mentoring relationships. A fair amount of cultural awareness training is in place, though this training focuses less on differences existing within the Army and more on the cultural implications of warfare during global engagements (US Army Diversity Task Force 2009). Retention goals tend to be pursued through monetary incentives, such as the critical skills retention bonus available to officers through the Army National Guard. The Army has a pre-commissioning program that allows cadets to select a branch, post, or graduate school in exchange for an additional service obligation of three years, and the Captains Retention Menu of Incentives program also involves a lengthening of the service obligation in exchange for certain opportun ities (US Army 2009c).

Air Force Air Force (AF ) diversity efforts are integrated by the AF Diversity Operations Office, which is responsible for developing cross-functional strategic and communication plans across the department. In 2010 the Secretary of the Air Force issued a Policy Directive that provided an official definition of diversity, directed the development and maintenance of comprehensive diversity initiatives meeting certain policy goals, and tasked specific positions with different roles and responsibilities for implementing the diversity policy (USAF 2010c). This Policy Directive tasked the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force to establish the AF Diversity Committee, whose functions include offering advice on major diver- Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 sity policy issues. The Diversity Committee works in tandem with the AF Per- sonnel Center’s (AFPC) existing Diversity Council, established in 2009 to serve as an advis ory committee to the AFPC commander for diversity issues and to oversee long-term sustainment and accountabil ity (Vaccaro 2009). Actual development of diversity initiatives and proced ures to implement the established policy is the responsibility of the Major Commands, the National Guard Bureau, the Field Operation Agencies, and the Direct Reporting Units. The Policy Direc- tive also provided that periodic updates and an annual report on AF diversity be made available to the top leadership. 48 C. L. Stevens Also in 2010, the AF published its diversity strategic roadmap, a comprehensive goal-oriented action plan to develop, implement, and maintain a total diversity program. In its introduction, the AF describes its vision of diversity in ways similar to the other service components:

Diversity is a military necessity. Air Force decision-making and operational capabilities are enhanced by diversity among its Airmen . . . helping make the Air Force more agile, innovative and effective. It opens the door to creative solutions to complex problems and provides our Air Force a competit ive edge. . . . Diversity includes and involves all of us. (USAF 2010b)

The roadmap describes clear priorities to institutionalize diversity throughout the organization and to attract, recruit, develop, and retain a high-quality, talented force. To institutionalize diversity as a value, the AF is working toward demonstrating leadership commitment, involvement, and accountabil ity regard ing diversity in the workplace and highlighting diversity and inclusion as inherent parts of the AF ’s core values. In this vein, the AF top leadership has issued two letters and a memorandum to the AF ’s airmen regarding the organization’s view of, and commitment to, diversity (SECAF/CSAF 2006). Ongoing dialogue regarding issues of diversity take place in the AF ’s diversity working groups, which bring ideas to the AF Diversity Committee (Lyle 2010). On its website (www.af.mil/diversity.asp) are diversity-related news articles, a diversity events calendar, and a video produced by officials in the AF Equal Opportunity Office and the Strategic Diversity Integration Office to demon strate the commitment of senior leaders to diversity and EO programs. The AF has several strategies in place for attracting and recruiting a diverse pool of individuals who would consider service. These include forming Diver- sity Outreach Teams at installations to plan and conduct outreach to local com munities and identify untapped geographic areas, conducting analysis to determine what prevents influencers from recom mending the AF as a career, and building partner ships with influencers (e.g., civic and social leaders, public and private schools, district and state offices of members of Congress) to provide information about the opportun ities available in the AF. The Gold Bar Recruiter Program, for example, is a recruitment effort that places second lieutenants at select schools with a high percentage of minority students to encourage entry Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 into the Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) program. Within this outreach plan is a strong focus on building certain skill sets that are seen as particu larly important to the AF ’s mission, including language skills and STEM competencies. The AF has plans to conduct a barrier analysis of recruiting processes to reveal any impediments to obtaining a diverse workforce, including any gaps in communications, marketing, advert ising, and initiatives. For its current personnel, the diversity roadmap addresses effective training, education, mentoring, and professional development programs as a means of providing tools for all personnel to navigate career progression. This force Diversity policies across the DoD 49 development plan also includes a focus on fostering foreign language and cultural awareness competencies that are seen as import ant in a global environ ment. Some level of diversity training is currently embedded in established education and orientation programs (e.g., as a sub-competency of “leading people” in the commissioning education curricula or a guided discussion on concepts of “inclusion” and “mutual respect” as part of the First Duty Station and Newcomers’ Orientation) (USAF 2010a). The AF formally established a mentoring program and structure in 2000 to include all officer, enlisted, and civilian personnel, with supervisors and commanders generally responsible for promoting mentoring within their unit (USAF 2000). The AF has plans to assess current mentorship programs, identify gaps where personnel are not receiving meaningful mentorship, and enhance AF members’ awareness of the multiple types of mentoring available. Most of the retention plans outlined in the diversity roadmap involve assessment, both of the organizational climate (through the use of AF Unit Climate Assessments) and the factors and policies influencing individuals’ decisions to stay or leave. Some tools have been identified for getting at this second issue, including analyzing the results of the Career Decision Survey, surveying retirement-eligible individuals to gain insight into their career decisions, assessing exit surveys, and using Transition Assistance Program classes as mini-focus groups to understand individuals’ reasons for leaving the AF. The AF also has plans to evaluate and implement work–life flexib ility programs and address the specific problem of higher rates for female attrition.

Coast Guard The Coast Guard (CG) is the only major service component under the Depart- ment of Homeland Security. In addition to a separate office dedic ated to diversity, a Diversity Advisory Council (DAC) meets on a semi-annual basis to review diversity-related issues and provide recommendations to the Comman- dant. Members serving on the DAC are responsible for “keeping their finger on the pulse of the climate” within the CG and also help convey the Commandant’s feedback to the rest of the field (USCG 2011b). The DAC reviews a wide range of issues that span across the stages of the personnel life cycle. For example, it discussed and recommended some policy changes for the Cape May swim test required for recruits, since it seemed to pose an obstacle to minorities entering Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 the CG (USCG 2009a). The DAC has also addressed several issues specific to women and families, such as the lack of women in non-traditional billets, the availability of childcare and the number of Child Development Centers avail able, perceptions that women’s evaluations are lower than men’s, the assignment and treatment of pregnant personnel, the timing of orders to facilitate enrollment of children in schools, single-parent accessions, and the need to facilitate collo- cation for dual-member famil ies (USCG 2009a). In 2009 the CG hosted its first diversity roundtable that brought together a panel of recognized diversity leaders and chief executives who prioritize 50 C. L. Stevens diversity in their organiza tion to share their perspect ives, best practices, and insights (USCG 2009c). That same year the CG released its Diversity Strategic Plan, which charges the senior leaders and commanding officers with five basic goals: (1) assure a diverse workforce through all-hands commitment with leadership accountability; (2) fully utilize communication and focus groups to improve workforce cultural climate; (3) expand outreach to under-represented popula tions; (4) equitable hiring and career opportunities for all employees; and (5) optimize training and education to emphasize the value of a diverse workforce (USCG 2009b). The Diversity Strategic Plan outlines a set of object ives and performance measures for each of these goals to guide the commanding officers in developing their own diversity action plans. A few examples of concrete object ives include: ensuring diversity initiatives are in all supervisor performance evaluation systems; achieving measureable improvement for under-represented minority representation by 2015; capitalizing on the use of social media to com municate the import ance of diversity and to broadcast outcomes; partnering with affinity groups and other minority-serving institutions; providing timely career counseling, professional development, and mentoring to all members; and implementing a Diversity Strategic Plan Balanced Scorecard Technology System as an integrator tool for performance management. Several other major developments followed on the heels of the release of the Diversity Strategic Plan. In December 2009, the CG launched Operational Tasking (OPTASK) Diversity that requires quarterly progress reports and updates submitted to the Commandant from commanding officers. An OPTASK Diversity Assessment Tool provides a checklist for leaders to ensure that they are taking appropriate steps toward each of the five goals (USCG 2011d). In January 2010, the Commander Atlantic Area, Commander Pacific Area, Deputy for Operations, and CG Chief of Staff drafted Diversity Action Plans. They also released three Situational Reports throughout 2010 outlining ongoing diversity action. Also in 2010, the CG hosted its own Diversity Summit which brought together over 200 CG representatives from across the service to participate in educational and multicultural sessions, receive hands-on diversity training, network with leaders in diversity management, and share best practices (USCG 2011b). In August 2010, a 90-day Diversity Action Plan reported the progress made toward each of the five strategic goals, which unit was responsible for each action, and what still remained to be done (USCG 2010). Examples of some of Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 the action taken to date include a new informal recognition program called Diversity Champion of the Week, the publication of a Diversity Management Handbook to assist leaders, the purchase of survey techno logy for use in future training programs, the development of modular, web-based mentoring training, ongoing updates to all CG personnel regarding the latest initiatives, and the collection of data from individuals leaving the service. Diversity policies across the DoD 51 Conclusion Across the DoD, activity surrounding issues of diversity and diversity management have swelled over the last decade. While different definitions of diversity have been articulated, work still needs to be done to make clear the distinction between diversity goals and existing EEO/EO policies and practices. Much of the action has been in the assessment and analysis phase, with the various ser vice compon ents trying to get a sense of the current state of policy and practice to identify potential areas of improvement. Armed with policy directives/statements and general strategic plans, much of the work left to be done involves translating broad goals and object ives into concrete intiatives. Diversity management is an ongoing process requiring leadership, account ability, and a method for monitoring progress in ways that allows for responsive action. While the importance of leadership has been recognized and emphasized to a fair degree, the need to develop metrics to define success and track progress requires further attention. In particular, there needs to be a tighter connection between the way diversity is typically measured (e.g., demographic data and sometimes climate surveys) and the broader definitions and views of diversity that have been adopted. Accountability, when addressed at all, usually takes the form of periodic reports and updates to the leadership, but more stringent forms of accountability have been suggested and are more likely to ensure actual results. Finally, while much of the focus has been on outreach and recruiting initiatives, diversity efforts would be greatly enhanced by addressing issues arising at all stages in the life cycle of military personnel.

Notes 1 In providing a general overview of military diversity policy, this chapter notably does not include two critical areas that have proven particularly controversial and, therefore, are covered in depth in other chapters in this volume: the military’s policy regard ing homosexual behavior (commonly known as “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell”) and the exclusion of women from combat positions. 2 Two problems in particular arise when trying to find the appropriate benchmark for comparison. First, using general population numbers as a comparison overestimates the degree of discrepancy, since not everyone in the population meets the eligibility requirements to serve in the military. Thus, it might be more appropriate to use the eli gible pool of potential candid ates as the benchmark. However, it could be argued that the military’s eligibility requirements themselves need to be examined as potential bar

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 riers to certain groups and that looking only to the currently eligible pool of candidates unnecessarily limits the scope that diversity initiatives could cover. The second prob lem arises with regard to representa tion among the officer corps. Since it takes 20–30 years to develop personnel into senior positions, it is unclear whether the point of comparison should be current demographics or demographics that reflect the time at which the officer cohort first entered the military. 52 C. L. Stevens References ANSO. (2011) Website available at: www.ansomil.org/node/370 (accessed January 31, 2011). Barrett, K. (2009) Presentation to Military Leadership Diversity Commission, (September 18). Online, available at: http://mldc.whs.mil/download/documents/meetings/200909/ Navy.pdf (accessed February 3, 2011). Becton, J. W. Jr., et al. (2003) Amicus Curiae Brief in Support of Respondent, Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 US 244, and Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 US 306. Booz Allen Hamilton (2008) DoD Diversity Strategic Planning Framework. McLean, VA: Booz Allen Hamilton. DEOMI (2007) Demographic Trend: FY Summary Representa tion of Race/Ethnic Groups and Women in the Active Armed Forces 1997–2007. Online, available at: www.deomi. org/downloadableFiles/DEOMI_1997-2007_Demographic_Trend_Report1.pdf (accessed February 3, 2011). DEOMI (2009) FY 2009 Annual Demographic Profile of Military Members in the Depart- ment of Defense and US Coast Guard. Online, available at: www.deomi.org/download- ableFiles/DeomographicsFY09_DOD_ Military_and_Coast%20Guard.pdf (accessed February 3, 2011). DEOMI (2011) Website available at: www.deomi. org/index.cfm. DoD (2009a) Directive 1020.02. Online, available at: www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/ corres/pdf/102002p.pdf (accessed February 3, 2011). DoD (2009b, February 5) Department of Defense Directive 1020.02. DoN (2008) Annual Report on Diversity. Online, available at: www.bupers.navy.mil/NR/ rdonlyres/106D2AAA-5292-4790-9ABA-62D4629F142E/0/DONReport2008.pdf (accessed February 3, 2011). DoN (2007) Diversity Policy Statement. Online, available at: www.donhcs.com/Link- Click.aspx?fileticket=Fd91vMUaqpI%3D&tabid=119&mid=505. DoN (2009) Annual Report on Diversity. Online, available at: www.deomi.org/ DiversityMgmt/documents/2009_DON_Annual_Report_on_Diversity_000.pdf (accessed February 3, 2011). DoN (2010) Annual Report on Diversity. Online, available at: www.deomi.org/Diversit- yMgmt/documents/2010_Department_of_the_Navy_Annual_Report_on_Diversity.pdf (accessed on February 3, 2011). Lim, N., Cho, M., and Curry, K. (2008) Planning for Diversity: Options and Recommen- dations for DoD Leaders [MG-743-OSD]. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. Love, J. (2009) Summary of Diversity Efforts, Office of Diversity Management and Equal Opportunity. Presenta tion to Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (P&R). Online, available at: http://mldc.whs.mil/download/documents/meetings/200909/OSD. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 pdf (accessed February 3, 2011). Lyle, A. (2010) Air Force Spurs Communication at Diversity Senior Working Group. Online, available at: www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123227451 (accessed February 3, 2011). MLDC (2009) Issue Paper #7: The Defense Diversity Working Group. Online, available at: http://mldc.whs.mil (accessed January 28, 2011). MLDC (2010) Issue paper #9: How did the Military Leadership Diversity Commission Come About?. Online, available at: http://mldc.whs.mil (accessed January 28, 2011). MLDC (2011) Final Report: From Representation to Inclusion – Diversity Leadership for the 21st-Century Military. Online, available at: http://mldc.whs.mil/index.php/draft- final-report (accessed February 3, 2011). Diversity policies across the DoD 53 NNOA (2011) Website available at: http://web.memberclicks.com/mc/page.do?site PageId= 70114&orgId=nnoa (accessed January 31, 2011). ODMEO (2010) Briefing to MLDC. Online, available at: www.ncm-solutions.com/files/ NCMS_DoD_ODMEO.pdf (accessed January 28, 2011). SECAF/CSAF (2006, July 31) Letter to Airmen: Diversity and the United States Air Force. Online, available at: www.deomi.org/DiversityMgmt/documents/SECAF Diver- sity2006.pdf (accessed February 3, 2011). Truman, H. S. (1948) Executive Order 9981 Establishing the President’s Committee on Equality of Treatment and Opportunity in the Armed Services (July 26). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. Tsui, A. S. and Gutek, B. A. (1999) Demographic Differences in Organizations: Current Research and Future Directions, New York: Lexington Books. US Army (2008) Information Papers: Army Workforce Diversity. Posture Statement. Online, available at: www.army.mil/aps/08/informa tion_papers/sustain/Diversity.html (accessed February 2, 2011). US Army (2009a) Army National Guard: Every Soldier a Recruiter (ESAR). Posture Statement. Online, available at: www.army.mil/aps/09/informa tion_papers/arng_every_ soldier_a_recruiter.html (accessed February 3, 2011). US Army (2009b) Army Preparatory School (APS). Posture Statement. Online, available at: www.army.mil/aps/09/informa tion_papers/army_preparatory_school.html (accessed February 3, 2011). US Army (2009c) Officer Retention. Posture Statement. Online, available at: www.army. mil/aps/09/informa tion_papers/officer_reten tion.html (accessed February 3, 2011). US Army (2009d) Army Policy on Diversity. Online, available at: http://usarmy.vo.llnwd. net/e2/-images/2009/04/08/34756/index.html (accessed February 3, 2011). US Army (2010) United States Army Diversity Roadmap. Online, available at: www.armydiversity.army.mil/document/Diversity_Roadmap.pdf (accessed February 3, 2011). US Army (2011) Army Diversity Goals. Online, available at: www.armydiversity.army. mil/adoGoals/index.html (accessed February 2, 2011). US Army Diversity Task Force (2009) Review and Assessment of Army Diversity Pro- grams and Progress. Unpublished paper. US Census Bureau (2009) Total Population: American Community Survey 1-Year Esti- mates. Online, available at: http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/DTTable?_bm=y&-con text=dt&-ds_name=ACS_2009_1YR_G00_&-mt_name=ACS_2009_1YR_ G2000_ B02001&-CONTEXT=dt&-tree_id=306&-redoLog=true&-all_geo_types=N&- currentselections=ACS_2006_EST_G2000_B02001&-geo_id=01000US&-search_ results=01000US&-format=&-_lang=en (accessed October 24, 2010). US Navy (2010) Presentation to MLDC. Online, available at: http://mldc.whs.mil/ download/documents/meetings/201003/MAR_2010_MLDC_Navy_Final.pdf (accessed

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 February 3, 2011). USAF (2000) Air Force Instruction 36-3401. Online, available at: www.af.mil/shared/ media/epubs/AFI36–3401.pdf (accessed February 3, 2011). USAF (2009) “The Air Force in Facts and Figures,” AIR FORCE Magazine (June). Online, available at: www.airforce magazine.com/MagazineArchive/Magazine %20 Documents/2009/May%202009/0509facts_fig.pdf. (accessed January 28, 2011). USAF (2010a) Presentation to the MLDC. Diversity Operations. Online, available at: http://mldc.whs.mil/download/documents/meetings/201003/Air_Force_MLDC_Feb Mar_10_Briefing_FINAL.pdf. (accessed February 3, 2011). USAF (2010b) United States Air Force Diversity Strategic Roadmap: A Journey to 54 C. L. Stevens Excellence. Diversity Operations. Online, available at: www.af.mil/diversity.asp (accessed February 3, 2011). USAF (2010c, October 13) Policy Directive 36-70. Diversity Operations. Online, avail able at: www.af.mil/diversity.asp (accessed February 3, 2011). USAF (2011) Website available at: www.af.mil/diversity.asp. USCG (2009a) Diversity Advisory Council Report. Online, available at: www.uscg. mil/diversity/docs/Dac%20Docs/Signed%20Report%20S09.PDF (accessed February 3, 2011). USCG (2009b) Diversity Strategic Plan: Recognizing Diversity as a Mission Readiness Issue. Online, available at: www.uscg.mil/diversity/docs/Diversity_Plan_ FINAL 090109.pdf. (accessed February 3, 2011). USCG (2009c) “iCommandant, Web Journal of Admiral Thad Allen,” Coast Guard Diversity Roundtable. Online, available at: http://blog.uscg.dhs.gov/2009/06/coast- guard-diversity-roundtable.asp (accessed February 3, 2011). USCG (2010) US Coast Guard 2010 Diversity Action Plan: Recognizing Diversity as a Mission Readiness Issue. Online, available at: www.uscg.mil/diversity/docs/diversity/ Diversity_Action_Plan_2Aug10.pdf (accessed February 3, 2011). USCG (2011a) Diversity Advisory Council. Online, available at: www.uscg.mil/diversity/ dac.asp (accessed February 3, 2011). USCG (2011b) Diversity Leadership: The 2010 Summit Welcome Book. Online, available at: www.uscg.mil/diversity/diversity_summit.asp (accessed February 3, 2011). USCG (2011c) The Commandant of the United States Coast Guard Diversity Policy State- ment. Online, available at: www.uscg.mil/seniorleadership/POLICY/dps.pdf (accessed January 31, 2011). USCG (2011d) OpTask Diversity Workforce Assessment Tool. Online, available at: www. uscg.mil/diversity/docs/DSP/OpTask_Diversity_Assessment.pdf (accessed February 3, 2011). USCG (2011f ) USCG Diversity Staff (CG-12). Online, available at: www.uscg.mil/diversity/Diversity_101.asp USMC (2009, September 18) Equal Opportunity & Diversity Mgt Brief to the Military Leadership Diversity Commission. Online, available at: http://mldc.whs.mil/download/ documents/meetings/200909/MarineCorps.pdf (accessed February 3, 2011). USMC (2010) Implementation and Accountability: Information for MLDC. Presentation to the MLDC. Online, available at: http://mldc.whs.mil/download/documents/meet - ings/201003/USMC_March.pdf (accessed February 3, 2011). Vaccaro, G. M. (2009) AFPC Officials Establish Diversity Council. Online, available at: www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123139901 (accessed February 3, 2011) Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 4 2K10 and beyond Diversity, inclusion, and respect for others in the US culture

William Gary McGuire

What got us here, won’t get us there. . . . The idea that Diversity, Inclusion, Respect for others, and Equal Opportunity are all the same could lead us to another 25 to 50 years of research, studying groups, and waiting for action.

It is my belief that when it comes to awareness and application of any level of diversity, inclusion, and respect, we must know who we are. To know who we are, we must take an internal look at our “mirror self ” as well as our “social self ” to gauge our understanding of our concept of diversity, use of inclusion, or abil ity to show respect for others. In this chapter, I will share my personal experi ences about diversity and how my upbringing gave me a foundation to help better understand the impact diversity can have on the future. The short story I use to help clarify the beginnings of my cultural awareness will help the reader see how inclusion and respect are the cornerstones for a sound application of diversity.1

Building a foundation for diversity acceptance It begins with socialization and must be reinforced throughout our “life process.” There is no perfect model and certainly no perfect social development experi ence that depicts complete acceptance of diversity, inclusion, and respect. The archaic theory that America is a “melting pot” and that we are all the same has long been removed from our educational system. There are still many folks that believe we are indeed a melting pot and continue to pass on commonalities that Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 make us Americans. Yet, when I ask people to describe or define an American, the usual response does not support a clear understanding about diversity, inclu sion, or respect of others so much as it supports ideas about who we are in our enclaves of American society. More appropriate terms to help define us as Amer icans might be “salad bowl” or “mosaic.” Each of us brings different concepts to the forefront of discussions on the topics of diversity, inclusion, and respect, as well as such terms as equal opportunity, equity, and cultural awareness. The use of the term “cultural awareness” is not understood and varies with the individual or organizational use of the term. These differ ences and the way we interact with 56 W. G. McGuire others as a result are the foundations for the application of diversity in our daily lives. Using the “salad bowl” metaphor for diversity, we might all be included as metaphoric parts of a salad. For example, some of us are the lettuce, pasta, or potato forming the base of the salad, while others are the added tastes that each additional component brings to the salad. Each component adds to the flavor without taking over the foundation of the salad. Tomatoes, carrots, onions, broc coli, beans, etc., all bring differences to the taste of the salad while not dimin ishing the foundation. All of this is metaphoric, but the picture remains open for further inter pretation as diversity starts to take on an entirely new meaning. We tend to value the differences in our salad compon ents as we should be valuing the differ ences that people bring to the identity of diversity. The “mosaic” metaphor is similar in that various colors of mosaic tiles are used to design a portrait. There is diversity of color and shape in the tiles and no two tiles are the same, but when placed together on a board by an artist, the tiles take on the vision in the artist’s mind. The color and shape of the tiles blend as the artist moves and cements each piece. Imagine for a moment that each tile is like a square without color and texture. As the artist forms the tile, it is evident that they will all blend to appear as whatever color the tile is; therefore, you will see a large group of small tiles glued together to form an image of blankness. Metaphorically, both methods (as well as others) may appropriately depict diversity, but the real success of diversity is much more than the taste or image defined by salad or mosaic tiles. Diversity must be an indoctrination or socializa tion process over many years of development. It cannot be accomplished through “the stroke of a pen” or through numerous models presented and sold to organ izations. The manager or leader will become no more proficient at applying good diversity strategies in his or her organization using any particular model until they have lived with and through diversity in their life. People must learn early in their life that diversity starts with acceptance of others. There is no “magical wand” to wave to make diversity work. Diversity is about including all facets of people’s being while considering how those facets can best help with the suc cesses and growth of any organization. We know that race, gender, ethnic iden tity, age, religion, sexual orientation, and ability are but a few components of diversity, but those are not the only ones to consider. We must consider experi ences, education, skill sets, values, and many other components that are not so Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 visible to help us form sound diversity strategies. These foundations will help us build successful organiza tions well into the twenty-first century.

Everything has a foundation or baseline One of the major contributions of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (as amended) was the “bringing together of different people to support and implement long-term societal changes in race relations” (Civil Rights Act, 1964, 1991). The diversity of thought, experiences, education, position of responsibility, as well as some of 2K10 and beyond 57 the more common dimensions such as race, ethni city, gender, age, religious beliefs, and abilit ies were part of the natural makeup of the people involved with this historical event. The use of the word “diversity” with respect to equality can be traced back to a young husband-and-wife consulting team, Merlin G. Pope Jr. and Patricia Pope (Pope 2007). They probably never thought about the future growth of diversity or even the use of the word, as diverse social groups and the US military battled over major issues with respect to race relations and equal opportunity while diversity lay somewhat dormant. It is true what people say about how we are socialized. Everything I learned about life started with my family. My father and mother raised nine children in a “project-style” series of rental houses during a time when segregation and exclu sion were the standard of social custom. Respect was a word often used when any adult would remind children to “mind their manners” and always show respect for others, or the result would be a hard tongue-lashing – or even worse, a belt or switch on the rear end. We knew when we did something wrong; but most import antly, we knew how much we could get by with at home and in the neighborhood. We didn’t hear much from mom or dad about diversity, inclusion, or culture, but we knew what respect was and we also knew that we had better not disrespect anyone, especially an adult. My father and mother were third-generation Irish Americans and I believe they had survived multiple forms of disrespect in their lives. They would always remind the family not to be concerned with what happened in their life; as long as we respected others it would be remembered. They were right. Of course, when they were away doing whatever adults did back then, my two older sisters were always in charge of the rest of the family and they were harder on us than our parents were. The rest of the family included seven boys and I was the oldest. My younger brothers would always look up to me and my sisters for advice on how to treat others, and although we are all much older now, we have always prided ourselves on how we learned at an early age to treat others respectfully. The foundation for diversity, respect, and inclusion requires more from us than a one-hour training session. It is indoctrinated into our upbringing and psyche, and warms our hearts while tingling our gut when we know something is being done right or wrong in either or all of the three areas mentioned. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Remembering what I learned from home Values and beliefs have deep-rooted meanings and when they are tapped into they make us react in a way that keeps us connected to what we learned. (Bonvillain and McGuire 2010) 58 W. G. McGuire Knowing where I came from gave me roots for understanding others So, there I was walking down Massachusetts Avenue and Embassy Row in Washington, DC when something sparked my curiosity to take a deeper look at how inclusively ignorant I am when it comes to US culture. I thought I knew quite a bit about culture and was practicing all of the fundamentals of being inclusive, as well as understanding diversity as it is inferred to be defined. My ignorance eluded me as I walked along the road from my hotel to the American University for a conference on international culture and learning methodologies. As I passed the various embassy buildings, I noticed that people employed as security personnel, diplomatic drivers, and even maintenance people tended to be of the same nationality as the country represented; for example, the Egyptian embassy tended to have Egyptian citizens doing all of the odd jobs required of the embassy. The same was true for other embassies such as Haiti, Greece, Brazil, the United Kingdom, South Korea, Japan, and many others I walked past. A situation that amazed me occurred there on the sidewalk. I was raised in the Deep South in the United States, where my parents taught me (as well as all of my siblings) such things as how to talk, eat, walk, show respect, pray (which also defines my religious beliefs), the value of people, and so on. One ofmy mother’s favorite examples was always the greeting to be made when passing on the sidewalk. Mom would tell me to look the person in the eyes, smile, and give the greeting of the day: “Good morning,” “Good day,” “How are you?” “Good evening,” “Goodnight,” or even just “Hello.” I believe I have used all of those greetings in some form or other as I’ve learned that, generationally, I would be classified as a true dinosaur if I didn’t change some of my greetings to include different generations. Today, saying “Hi” (with a smile) versus “Hello” (with a smile) can be interpreted completely differently by different generational groups. Then again, “What’s up?” (also interpreted as “Wassup?”) is the new way to greet people in many American cul tures. I might be taken advant age of by using the more formal greetings with some groups. Therefore, it is important to recognize when and when not to use a particular greeting. I think I am “in tune” with the world around me and have been very good at recognizing how I respond and apply what I have learned. As I passed by the embassy for Haiti, I noticed a man who appeared to be a security guard. He made eye contact with me from almost a block away and kept his gaze on me until I passed the embassy. When I did get to a place that I Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 believed was “within speaking distance” I greeted him with, “Hello, how are you today?” I have to admit that I preceded my greeting with a distinct, non-verbal smile. The gaze from the man was now returned with words and a smile: “Fine, and how are you?” I’m sure this sounds simplistic, but the significant sensitivity that I was taught by my parents helped me to filter and process what could have been a negative experience or an experi ence of caution. I noticed that when I passed an embassy whose occupants used English as their primary language, the greeting tended to be common; but when I passed those whose primary languages were other than English, the greetings were more 2K10 and beyond 59 involved. For example, when I passed the embassies for South Korea and Japan, I noticed right away that the smile and head nod implied different meanings to me and my greeter. The person at the entrance to the South Korean embassy (and the Japan ese embassy) was a male; he made eye contact with me from about 50 feet away. He didn’t stare or gaze at me, but did look away and back to keep me in his peripheral vision. I knew (or at least felt) I was being watched. When I got closer to the embassy, along the front sidewalk, I made my normal greeting that mom had taught me, “Hello, how are you?” and it was at that moment in time that I noticed something I instinctively did that caused me to almost stop in place. While making the verbal greeting and smiling, I dipped my head slightly while placing my hands and arms to my side and bending slightly at the waist. I looked up to see the man making the same gesture. We both smiled and continued with our business. He turned to walk back toward the embassy while I continued along the sidewalk of Massachu setts Avenue. I have never noticed my efforts to treat others with respect while being sensi tive to the differences in diversity and inclusion more so than I did on that par ticular visit to Washington, DC. One could surmise that I was showing levels of “cultural astuteness” or “diversity awareness.” I could think only that my parents taught me well. Was it perhaps the whole experience of being on Embassy Row and recogniz ing so much diversity that naturally fell all around me? Or, was it recalling what my mother and father taught me many years ago about treating people with infi nite dignity and respect? I’m not sure which outweighs the other, or if it’s even worth mentioning, but I do know that I acted differently toward different people, based on events I recalled from deep within my memory. There are too many things about diversity and culture that I have yet to learn that on many occasions I believe I might already know, subconsciously. I am trying my best not to apply the common logic of today when it comes to defining diversity and culture. I am strongly convinced that many folks today see and define diversity as race and ethnicity; they fail to recognize the varied dimen sions of primary and secondary (Loden 1995) bits of our diversity. Another belief is that “diversity is just another affirmative action program” designed to force business and industry managers to place people in the organization based on race, gender, color, or ethnic identity.

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Sharing and understanding others from our own point of view We have to talk about it, but there comes a point in time when we must act or we will be talking forever while diversity moves beyond us. I believe the US military defines diversity by race and ethnic identity. Recently, while attending and speaking at a major conference, I conducted a spur-of-the-moment exercise by asking folks to help me identify their under standing of diversity. First, I asked every individual to think about how they defined diversity and how they described themselves. Then I said, “If you see yourself as white American, please stand.” After the majority of the audience 60 W. G. McGuire stood up, I then said, “If diversity were identified by race or ethnic identity alone, this is how it would look.” Then I asked them to look around the room and “see what you notice.” I did the same thing with other groups that identified themselves as black or African-American, Hispanic or Latino-American, Amer ican Indian, Native American, Alaskan Native, Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, and finally Asian-American. I was astonished that none of the particip ants questioned race and ethnicity as diversity. The majority acted as if this was my push for understanding diversity. When I explained that many people (in businesses as well as social groups) seem to think they can achieve diversity by increasing or decreasing representation in one or more racial or ethnic groups, the audience seemed to “buy in.” What I was trying to get the audience to see was that race and ethnic identity are not the overall pieces of diversity that make an organiza tion effective. For me, diversity goals can be effective when the organiza tion strives to apply as many primary and secondary dimensions (Loden 2000) of diversity to get the best-qualified person into the organization. Now, how do we gauge or measure this perceived “organizational effect iveness” and application of diversity? What are the measurement devices or tools that help us build and maintain diversity in the organization? We might narrow our application of diversity (how it is defined and how it is applied) by taking a closer look at the US military. If you ask any military leader, they will probably tell you that their organization is as diverse as it can be using the principles (as they see them) of diversity. There are no mandatory rules about being a champion of diversity or even applying diversity to military organizations. The point is, everyone is not the same. White people are still the majority of leadership in most organizations, including the US military. That doesn’t mean that the organization will perform better or worse. Also, it should not imply that white people make better managers or leaders. Whites are diverse and bring much diversity to the workforce and military. Leaders must recognize contribu tions of whites or be prepared to face the doom of diversity. There is a change coming with the number of managers and leaders with respect to race and ethnic identity. As demographics in people shift based on racial/ethnic shifts, so shall the demographics of business, industry, and the military. This is a long and arduous process of change. Our nation has long been an image of our history with respect to people. European whites were the builders of the economy, designers of political principles, developers of social standards, and founders of religious schemes that formed the country. They have found themselves to be Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 products of their own ideas of diversity and tend to be struggling with the reality that one day they might be the minority. It seems difficult for whites to accept the principles of diversity where all people are counted for what they can provide to the organization. Thus, we have to talk about diversity or we may never see the results. Every body has a “fix” for diversity, but nobody seems to want to be the first to make it happen. Anybody could be the one to make diversity work, but somebody has to come forward to make it happen or we will be planning and developing this same topic many years into the future. 2K10 and beyond 61 US military diversity champions I briefly mentioned the US military and its view of diversity in the above section. Let’s take a closer look at it. The US military, as referred to in this chapter, is defined as members of the US Air Force, US Army, US Marine Corps, US Navy, and US Coast Guard (though the Coast Guard normally falls under the Depart ment of Homeland Security). The military has invested and continues to invest in diversity teams, depart ments, organizations, and champions. Though they all seem to want the same thing, none of them appear to want to tell the others what they are working on or how their task(s) might work for all of the armed services. I must admit that the work effort has improved since I first started writing this chapter. Each service has its own ideas of diversity: how to define it; how to organize the diversity organization; how many people to employ to make a good diversity division or agency; how to position themselves in the hierarchy; and how to sell diversity as the way ahead. I know this is an opinion, but this opinion counts when I ask, “Are we going to make diversity part of our performance plan as well as a key objective for our military leadership?” If the answer to this question is “Yes,” then we must have a key member of our most senior leadership do something bold and audacious. This leader needs to direct actions that will amplify the importance of good diversity and diversity initiatives across the military forces. As long as diversity is optional for the military, it will remain optional. Yes, some leaders will make it work, but most will declare that diversity is not about combat and it slows the role of combat for “touchy feely issues.” A recent speech by the incoming Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readi ness, Dr. Clifford Stanley (Major General, USMC, Retired) rekindled the use of the phrase, “What have you done for the troops today?” Maybe we can ask the same people, “What have you done to build a diverse military force today?” This could be as difficult as it has been to build an equaltun oppor ity program of acceptance in the military since the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It’s a work in pro gress and has been for 48 years. Another amazing point about this item of inter est is that we have been working, studying, and validating the need for diversity and inclusion for about the same period of time. Diversity is as optional in 2010 as it was in 1971. It is my belief that the US military sees diversity as a means to having the Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 right (or acceptable) mix of people in the organization, primarily based on “racial identity.” Recently (April 2010), while visiting an Army base, I asked a senior male officer how he defined diversity and if he had achieved it (diversity) in his unit. I was not surprised when he responded, “We have a good balance of various races and a few women in the unit and we are about as diverse as we can be.” This would have been a great opportunity to do some teaching, training, and mentoring, but I avoided the next few probing questions that I would have asked, just to allow this leader to continue his positive comments about his unit’s 62 W. G. McGuire performance. He was very proud of the unit and the many accomplishments of its members. Later that same day, I was presenting a model of diversity to the command group and senior leadership when this officer walked in a little late from a field exercise. While quietly taking his seat, he turned his head to make eye contact with me and smiled as if he was non-verbally saying, “I know this diversity stuff because we were talking about it this morning.” When I started showing the primary and secondary dimensions of diversity and started talking about how we can better use our own knowledge of these dimensions to build our diversity program, this guy almost fell out of his chair. I didn’t need to point out our earlier conversation and I certainly was not planning to use him or his organization to boast about an effective diversity team or unit. He saw what he was missing as we talked about the dimensions of diver sity that we can see and the dimensions that are not so visible. This leader was my primary supporter for the rest of the presentation as he asked probing questions about achieving diversity of thought, how to use tech nology skills, and what works best for single parents, how civilians are to be treated when assigned as contractors to a military unit, and a multitude of other questions. I ended my visit with an office call to this senior officer’s department. He thanked me for not putting him on the spot and commented that he was not as astute as he had initially thought, but would start working on how to make diversity work more efficiently in his organization.

The Military Leadership Diversity Commission Congress established the Military Leadership Diversity Commission (MLDC) in 2009 and the commission is reporting informa tion on the use of diversity throughout the armed forces and the Coast Guard. The MLDC is in its infancy, but is progressing to the point of gathering and presenting information to the Congress on diversity achievements. At the time of developing this chapter, the MLDC was not limited in scope as to what they could identify as diversity. There was interest in looking at research and development studies on the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) and “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, Don’t Harass, Don’t Pursue” (also known as the DADT) programs, but shortly after asking questions about the programs, interest seemed to drop off sharply. This could give the perception that the MLDC is interested in presenting information to Congress on topics that are sociologically acceptable only and the debate is Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 still out (at least in the United States) on sexual orientation and the effect on mission readiness in the US military. 2 Another observation about the MLDC is the number of minorities on the commission. I might be the only white guy that even noticed this minor detail, but for me to notice it certainly indicates that others not in the business of diver sity will notice. While the number of researchers on the commission largely appear to be white women, the number of commissioners of color is much greater. I am not saying this to say that there is anything wrong with having a diversity commission that includes more people of color than whites. I am a 2K10 and beyond 63 practitioner in equality and diversity and have been for many years. I work every day on balancing my own understanding of equality, diversity, inclusion, and respect. I haven’t heard any of the commission ask about the numbers of people in an organization that are “other than Black or African.” This makes people believe the commission is operating to justify the need for more minorities in the military and in organizations. The consequences of this perception could be det rimental to the development of diversity programs in the military. The funny thing about this whole issue of the MLDC is that they have not said anything about the makeup of their commission and they don’t seem to notice the number of minorities. If they are truly interested in making changes (societal and military), they would look at themselves first and determine whether they are as diverse as they would expect others to be. I have been included in two meetings with the commission and I have been shocked to see the number of black or African-American people on the commission. I don’t mention the racial makeup (from my observation) to bring race to the forefront of this message. There are several black/African-American members that are leading people in the US commun ity, coming from the senior-most milit ary and civilian positions of responsib ility. They certainly have contributed to many successful programs that have helped people to progress based on each person’s performance. The MLDC has allowed people to “arrive.” The term “arrive” as used here refers to the situation where minorities become part of the hierarchy and tend to forget what got them there and how they could mentor others to follow in the pipeline. They have arrived, but have not helped others come along in leadership. Many minorit ies that find themselves “arriving” have not done much to help others along in business and the military (Thomas 1991). The same can be said about diversity programs and the managers of those programs in the US military. That is, when the program is being developed and operated under the guise that it is developing minorit ies or increasing minority representation in organiza tions, then the program is another equal opportun ity or affirmative action program. In the early stages of the aryUS milit diversity program, there was a push to have minorities chairing the program for their par ticular service. When this is observed, others in senior leadership will always ask if the diversity and inclusion programs are for minorities. The whole idea of the MLDC seems somewhat useless and could be a way to funnel millions if not billions of tax dollars into the development of another equality program that is not directed as part of the military support community. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Unlike the equal opportunity and equal employment opportunity programs, the diversity program is optional. The former two programs are dictated by the law of the land. How much more money do we have to funnel into alternative programs to make the EO and EEO policies work? Should we make diversity a law by telling people what a “good” diversity organization should be? When will the idea of diversity be accepted by leadership and management and then how might it be a natural part of the organizational scheme? These questions and ideas, and many others, might have already been asked, but it is not clear that anyone is practicing the terms of inclusion or openness in the undertaking of this commission. 64 W. G. McGuire Why does it take so long to implement diversity processes? The Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI) has been a champion for diversity awareness education and training since 1970. Headquar tered on Patrick Air Force Base in Cocoa Beach, Florida, DEOMI is the Depart ment of Defense (DoD) schoolhouse for training equal opportunity advisors (EOAs) in the military services. Formerly known as the Defense Race Relations Institute (DRRI), it included some form of diversity training from its beginnings, including individual diversity awareness, diversity management, and diversity and inclusion. Though diversity appears to be the “buzz word” for the last decade, there does not seem to be a consistent move to add diversity into the name of DEOMI, such as when the DRRI converted to DEOMI when the milit ary saw a need to move beyond “race relations” in the late 1970s. In 2011 DEOMI trains equal opportunity advisors in the areas of individual diversity awareness and diversity management. The primary focus of the DEOMI has always been to train the best EOAs for the US military. The EOAs are assigned to the US Air Force as full-time advi sors in the Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) as long as they are in the Air Force. The US Army, Marine Corps, and Navy assign EOAs for as long as two years. In some cases, the EOAs work second jobs while fulfilling their EOA positions. Some EOAs will work in the job as a secondary and not primary position; others will work full-time in the position for no more than the two-year assignment. Once their assignment is completed, they will return to their primary job (milit ary occupation specialty (MOS) or rating). The diversity mission seems to be expanding and might be considered to be “pushed” upon the military. As I mentioned earlier, diversity is still an optional program within the military, and as long as it remains optional many leaders will opt to avoid using diversity in their organizations as they tend to believe it is just another way of providing equal opportunity to the members of a given organization. When diversity becomes a graded part of a person’s performance report it will be import ant to the leadership of any given organiza tion to make it work. Perhaps there should be a statement on the efficiency report thatscribes de an individual as “actively involved in building and sustaining a strong diversity program.” Such a profound action would certainly expedite the support of a strong diversity program and, given sufficient follow-up, would result in a built-

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 in desire to continue making diversity work.

Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans and the January 2010 earthquake in Haiti It takes only one major catastrophe to see how diversity is lacking. Considering that many organizations, including the US military, place racial identification at the top of the list for defining diversity, it could be concluded that larger popu lations such as cities and countries are doing the same thing. The image of 2K10 and beyond 65 diversity with respect to race during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina is etched into the minds of the people as news media depicted blacks as a negative group, shown stealing and looting food from local stores. Whites were depicted by the same media as more positive, since they were shown finding food floating in the water. What does this have to do with diversity? Well, we are what we see. If our lenses are funneled through the eyes of the media, it is easy to see what diversity is not. When such actions as described above are said to be acts of looting for one race and acts of survival for another race, we may never come to understand the need for accepting diversity. The media portrayed “race” as diversity in a negat ive way. One has only to look deep into the diverse history of the people of New Orleans to understand how wrongly the media depicted the two actions men tioned. New Orleans is about as diverse racially and ethnically as any major city might desire to be. The beginnings of the city can be traced back to Spanish and French occupation, as well as a hub for slave trading in the mid-1700s through the US Civil War. The blending of ethnicities such as the Cherokee and Creek Indians with French soldiers and settlers, as well as African slaves, formed the diverse identities of Creole and Cajun members that so strongly influenced the city of New Orleans as well as other major areas in the Deep South. The January 2010 earthquake in Haiti, which had its epicenter in Port au Prince, devastated the city and, as of the writing of this chapter, has taken 200,000 lives. What does this have to do with diversity? Haiti is predominantly a nation of blacks, with most of its history tied to the slave trade between the British and the United States, going back to the late 1600s and early 1700s. The country was somewhat of an “island prison” for slaves awaiting shipment to and sale in the United States and other areas of the world. When slavery finally became illegal, Haiti was left with thousands of slaves having no place to go, so they formed small villages throughout the island. In time, the island developed a major trading port for other goods, and controlled some of the trading routes through the Caribbean. Today, the majority of the country is black, with less than half claiming African descent. The United States has been the major country providing help to the popula tion of Haiti, but if you look through the eyes of the media, it is easy to see that the majority of help comes from whites, and not from a diverse American popu Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 lation. This is not to say that other countries having people of color are not pro viding help to Haiti. The media tends to show, through tainted lenses, only the side it desires to show. Haiti is as diverse as are its people, sharing one island separated by a land border. The influence of the Spanish and French from long ago is rich in the Dominican Republic part of the island, but not so obvious in Haiti. The focus of the US media has been not to show the many dimensions of diversity among the people of Haiti, but to portray Haiti as an underprivileged and lowest-economic-income-in-the-world people. So, given the fact that race and ethnicity are used by the media to depict a poor diversity picture, how does 66 W. G. McGuire Haiti overcome this image to offer its true diversity? Maybe it really doesn’t, or maybe the country of Haiti is as diverse as it can be and the people just don’t see the significant meaning of diversity? The many influences of Haiti’s diversity are much deeper than skin color. For the United States to see those dimensions of diversity, we must practice it in all we do that concerns Haiti. Our best effort might have been the decision to send the US military to Haiti to provide assistance follow ing Hurricane Katrina. When the Haitian people started to talk with our military members and found that many of the service members were from Haiti, they could see how diverse we really were. When they looked at race and ethnicity, they saw diversity, but again, race and ethnicity alone do not make diversity. Someone must look at the other facets to declare diversity.

When will we have a natural process of being inclusive and diverse in the US military without someone thinking that we are using affirmative action or equal opportunity to achieve a diverse organization? The military recruiting and retention process (as well as other data-gathering organizations) should be able to figure out the impacts of not having a diverse force. Imagine a recruiting program that only recruits white males that are six- foot tall. The organization will have all members that look alike and act alike, but do they depict a diverse organiza tion? This one is easy, as it is not diverse. Yes, the all-white group of males could come from diverse backgrounds and the mission could be for like people to be successful, but it is really not “diverse.” Many of the talents and identities of the group chosen to be members of this organization were discounted. Educational background, career choices, language spoken, values, and many other dimensions of diversity were not taken into consideration when this group was chosen. The organization did not fail its mission, but now the standard is set to have only six-foot-tall white males in the organiza tion and it may take years to remove that philosophy from the minds and hearts of the leadership and members that have endured the struggles in the organization.

Diversity and the LGBT community Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 How might the LGBT community be accepted into the US military after Presid ent Obama’s January 2010 State of the Union Address? Will LGBT people be accepted as another dimension of diversity? How is sexual orientation viewed as being diversity in the workforce? (Loden 2000) There is much to learn about the LGBT commun ity and the struggles they con tinue to endure in their quest for equality and fair treatment. Several beliefs influ ence the changes being proposed for the LGBT commun ity and the US military. One belief is that the moment LGBTs are accepted into the military, the quality of mission accomplishment will decline. When we look back in military 2K10 and beyond 67 history, we can see that gays served honorably during the twentieth and twenty- first centuries (Government Accounting Office 2010). Although not openly, gays represented a “silent minority” in uniform. The leadership knew which members were gay, but they were not on a constant vigil to catch gays in acts that violated the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), as this was the only way a person could be punished under the UCMJ. Just admitting homosexuality was not suffi cient for members to be granted separation, and many times the leadership would overlook these admissions as ways for an individual to expedite their discharge from the service, especially during war, police actions, or conflicts. The perform ance of gays in relation to mission success was never a question for leadership. Commanders rarely, if ever, suspected the numbers for gays was signific ant enough to cause any decline in performance of the unit. There is no data to indi cate this idea as most of these thoughts are passed on by stories from leaders across the services. Another belief is that by accepting gays in the military, the heterosexual com munity will suffer some level of responsibility loss while the push for “gay rights” will receive more attention than the majority of heterosexuals in the ser vice. Under the new law, LGBT members will be free to express their sexual orientation identity without fear of retribution or punitive actions (Diversity Uni versity 2011).

Six steps to diversity in an organization today and in the future There are hundreds (if not thousands) of diversity consultants in the United States that profess to be the resolvers of diversity processes for organizations, including the US military. It is my opinion that many of these consultants have great ideas, but they tend to stretch the limits in the way they desire diversity to be implemented. Diversity is not (at this particular time in the United States) policy or directive-driven, and I am not sure that it should or ever will be that extreme. Diversity should be a natural process for making organizations realize the potential of including all facets of humans and technology that sustain the functioning (regardless of what that function might be) of the organization. The process should include, at a minimum, the follow ing steps. 1 Realize that diversity is not race (or ethni city) alone. Defining the diver sity in your organiza tion should not be limited to race and ethni city. There is nothing to say that your definition is not the best for your organization. If you Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 define diversity by race and ethnicity, you must know the percentage of primary dimensions (as defined by Marylyn Loden 1996) of people based on those dimensions in the organization. In other words, you should know what the per centages for the particular racial/ethnic groups are in your organization and cel ebrate all groups. Making a commitment to honor each group throughout the work year is more critical than just celebrat ing the official monthly groups. 2 Recognize the contributions of secondary dimensions (as defined by Loden) of diversity in your organiza tion such as multi-lingual, level of education, specific education (such as engineering), musical talent, artistic abilities, 68 W. G. McGuire physical abilities (all levels to include “wounded warriors”), technology skills, personality preference, various age groups, spirituality, and many others. The fact that you can differentiate between what is secondary and what is primary is sufficient to help members see that you are thinking of diversity as awayto enhance organizational performance. When you can recognize the various talents of members in your organiza tion, you are considering diversity as a benefit rather than just leading because you are the boss. 3 Develop a system of rewards or incentives for those dimensions that will help sustain and enhance the organizational mission (multi-lingualism, as an example, could be rewarded). Letting employees know what rewards or incen tives will come with the particular diversity dimension you bring to the work place will help them to communicate their commit ment early and for many years to follow. This must be done during the initial arrival to the organiza tion by the new member and should be attended by the senior-most members to reinforce their interest in the member. Military leaders can use creative rewards for their members. 4 Hold a monthly “town hall” meeting with all members of the organization to allow for organizational updates, mission changes, mission accomplishments, successes, and failures that will require improvements. Allow time for people to ask questions or for them to offer ideas about how the mission might improve. Use bulletin boards (electronic and physical) to share “things happening” in the organization (children and grandchildren births, graduations, marriages, partner ships, etc.) that help share informa tion about everyone. 5 Share the talents. When the organization is doing well and profits increase, share those profits with all members in the organization. As an example, the way the military profits from an event is not the same as with a commercial business, but there is no reason to not share time-off or use other strategies with the whole organiza tion to make everyone feel part of the success of the team. Performing well at a joint training mission or having team members playing for the base football, basketball, volleyball, or baseball team is a way to recognize talent in the organiza tion that not everyone might be aware of. 6 Recognize individual contributions. Follow up every diversity event that takes place in the organization to maintain its success. There is no single person that should receive all of the accolades for mission success. It is easy to recog nize people when the mission fails. Take time to show mutual respect for all organizational members from entry level to the senior-most team leaders. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016

What will happen in the next two generations with respect to diversity? It is not hard to predict the future with respect to diversity, inclusion, and respect. What history shows will be repeated in the future. The misunder standing and application of diversity is no different. The last ten years of war and the “lessons not learned” are predicting the behaviors and attitudes for the leadership in the current pipeline. 2K10 and beyond 69 The generation fighting the current war is trying to learn languages and culture that are 6,000–8,000 years old by using 2–3 hours of cultural awareness training before deployment. These same members are doing what they can to survive in a war while trying to accommodate the people in the occupied land. The diversity our warriors see is defined by the fact that people in their Area of Responsibility (AOR) are not American and “don’t act like us.” These same members are reluctant to learn much about the people as the members are think ing about surviving and returning home to a far less complicated way of life. This cyclical routine will not change in this or the next generation. By the time many of the current generation depart the military or even if they remain, there will not be a system in place to learn and much less support diversity and inclusion. The youngest generation in the military will tell us that they “accept” others because they have grown up in a society that has learned to respect people for who they are and they will say that they don’t have a problem with race or gender. By the time this cycle of military members rotates from the war theaters, the next generation is being trained in new ways of performing as soldiers on the ground. Some are specifically being trained to deploy to war areas not mentioned by the media and not publicly known, but these new areas will require different dimensions of diversity to help each person cope with understanding diversity. Leaders must be committed to training of their organizations in inclusion and respect or they are doomed in the future. The advancement of technology will be another predictor for the need to understand diversity, inclusion, and respect in the future. Technology must be diverse. Inclusion must be understood and applied. Respect for others must be a natural part of the individual and the organizational way of life. Leaders and managers will need training at new levels to help them understand and apply good practices for their organiza tions. They will be part of the solution for diver sity and will more than likely be the youngest members in the organiza tion. It takes only a moment to see how younger members have become so technolo gically advanced to understand why the next two generations might be the best at naturally accepting and applying diversity.

Conclusion As we have concluded the year 2010, we are no more prepared for diversity inclusion into organizations than we were over 40 years ago. It seems that we Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 could have gone beyond what might be the average length of time to build a diversity plan or even acknowledge that diversity is beneficial to organizations. So what is the next step? There are hundreds, if not thousands, of books and consultants talking about diversity, inclusion, and respect. They all have models of the way diversity should be from their perspect ive, all while they criticize programs from the past. There is not a definite solution to building diversity acceptance. It could be another 20 years before we have the beginnings of acceptance and understanding. As new generations continue to evolve, accept ance and understanding could also be woven into the day-to-day social behavior 70 W. G. McGuire processes, thus reducing or even elimin ating the unawareness of diversity and inclusion. The year 2030 could be a time when diversity is accepted and is working naturally in the United States. Former First Lady of the United States (now the Secretary of State) Hillary Clinton once said that “it takes a village” to get people in the village to under stand what the children need to keep them on track with education. She didn’t specifically mention diversity in her story about the village raising children into the next century. She did make mention of what it takes to make different people in different generations apply different learning experi ences to help children become educated. That is diversity at its best. So what does it take to become a forward thinker when it comes to diversity, inclusion, and respect? The best champion of diversity is the person who wants to “be a champion” as well as the one that doesn’t have to think about it. Doing what is right for everyone will bring rewards that can only make a person feel good that they have practiced it all their life and now they are making it work for others. Yes, diversity is still optional and it would not surprise me if it were still optional in 2025. We (the people) are the only ones who can change this belief. We have been trying to build diversity awareness in organizations and individuals since Dr. Merlin Pope and his wife Patricia coined the phrase back in the early 1970s. I believe they knew what they wanted to accomplish and I also believe they have lived in a more diverse world than they had ever envisioned. Since Merlin’s passing, Pat has kept the fire going as the champion for diversity in business and industry. She has also made signific ant strides while working with the US Army Reserves and their Equal Opportunity Program. She is still fighting the good fight into the twenty-first century. All she needs today is our help in making individuals and organizations havens for diversity in all facets. As Pat might say, “Diversity does not automatically result in inclusion. If we don’t proactively work to include, we unintentionally exclude” (Pope 2007).

Notes 1 Opinions expressed in this chapter are those of the author and should not be construed to represent the official position of the US ary milit services or the Department of Defense. 2 This chapter was developed and completed shortly before the President of the United States (Barak Obama) signed into law the repeal of the 1993 “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law. The service chiefs have been given education and training packets to inform their Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 organizations and individuals from the top-most levels to entry-level service members. The 2011 Implementation Plan has not been acted on by the Secretary of Defense as of this writing.

References Bonvillain, D. and McGuire, W. (2010) American Cultural DNA: A Metaphoric Look at Culture and Diversity. Military Intelligence Professional Bulletin (February), Fort Hua chuca, Arizona. Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 USC 2000. 2K10 and beyond 71 Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 USC 1981 A. Diversity University (2011), Executive Leadership. Online, available at: www.diversityu niversity.com/leadership.php (accessed January 24, 2011). Government Accounting Office (2010), Trends in Management-Level Diversity and Diversity Initiatives, 1993–2008. Report, GAO-10-736T. Loden, M. (1995) Implementing Diversity. Columbus, OH: McGraw-Hill. Loden, M. (1996) Implementing Diversity. New York: McGraw-Hill. Loden, M. (2000) Workforce Diversity. New York: McCormick Publishing. Pope, P. (2007) The Changing Landscape of Diversity. Online, available at: www.diversi tyuniversity.com/uploads/pdf/Changing%20Landscape%20of%20Diversity.pdf. Thomas, R. (1991) Beyond Race and Gender. New York: AMACOM. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 5 Leading across diversity

Renée Yuengling

Introduction This chapter contributes to leadership theory and explores new approaches to leading the diverse workforce. It addresses the current reality of US organiza tions by analyzing the behaviors and leadership skills that enable people to lead “across culture.” The results of an exploratory study into the dynamics of leading in the face of racial, ethnic, gender, and cultural differ ences are summarized. Of primary interest is identifying leadership skills and characteristics present in individuals who have been successful in leading heterogeneous groups and analyzing their behaviors. This study does not intend to represent all leaders, but rather to identify and analyze the relat ively rare skills, character istics, and inter relational patterns of people who lead effectively across diversity. Until very recently, our understanding of leadership has been developed from the specific perspective of white males and with an implicit assumption about followership sharing a cultural norm in terms of leadership behavior. Leadership theory has not included the experi ence of other demographic groups, although some change has occurred recently (Dickens and Dickens 1982; Livers and Caver 2003). The public discussion about leadership has rarely, if ever, addressed the challenges presented by social identity issues, discrimination, pre judice, and different world views about what constitutes good leadership. Yet, leading a diverse followership with differing cultural values is precisely the situ ation in which most leaders and managers find themselves.

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Impact of culture on leadership Although our dominant cultural context is “American,” an explosion has occurred in the number of subordinate cultural groups present in US organiza tions. The increase in the array of cultural norms imposes unprecedented demands on leaders. Traditional leadership theory is unable to provide solutions to the dilemma of leading in such a complex environment. It unfortunately pre sumes a relatively homogenous popula tion with a shared culture and shared values. The neglect of these subordinate cultures in almost all leadership literat ure is profound, yet our cultures radiate meaning throughout every aspect of our Leading across diversity 73 working lives. American workplaces are full of people with different cultural values, norms, and life experiences. This exploratory study seeks to develop new theoretical constructs about leadership of diverse populations – not only the impact of changing demograph ics and differing cultural views on leadership qualities, but also the qualities embodied in a talented leader in a multicultural environment. Certain “bedrock” leadership values may run across cultural norms. If so, the identification of those values and an understanding of how culture may affect their embodiment are of significant value to an understanding of leadership in modern US organiza tions. The outsiders in our culture – women, people of color, immigrants – are not able to thrive in many environments. This study examines leadership qualities present in those environments where the opposite is true, where non-traditional people are able to succeed and advance.

Study background The link between effective leadership and full use and engagement of the work force is well documented. Thus, the best place to look for specific leadership skills and characteristics is in organizations where non-traditional people have been highly successful. The US Army represents such an environment in terms of the statistical representation of minorities at all levels and recent findings con cerning the overall environment for opportunity. The Army is arguably one of the nation’s most diverse and highest-performing organizations. US corporations are not unaware of the military’s accomplishments in leadership training. Many executives view the military as having much in common with running large businesses, including the import ance of intelligence, knowing your own strengths and weaknesses as well as those of your opposition, and coping with missions under constant change and changing circumstances. So high is the interest in military leadership that mention of the (now revised) Army Leader- ship Manual FM 22-100 in its Leader to Leader publication flooded the Drucker Foundation (1999) with requests for more information. The foundation has begun to include excerpts on its website. The relevance of Army leadership skills as a model for corporate organizations is further reinforced among corporate leaders by the longstanding popularity of former Chief of Staff of the Army Gordon Sullivan’s 1996 book, Hope is not a Method. This description of Army leadership values, strategy, and tactics to manage change in a transforming Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 organization was a national bestseller. Another recent bestseller on Army leader ship is former Army Joint Chiefs of Staff Eric Shinseki’s Be Know Do (2004), a straightforward discussion of the transferability of Army leadership concepts to civilian organizations. Use of the Army as an example of a successful organization does not suggest the absence of problems with discrimination, bias, and preju dice. The military as a whole and the Army in particular are not perfect in their treatment of women and minorit ies. Although having a long way to go toward creating an inclusive and cohesive environ ment, the Army still outperforms the civilian sector at 74 R. Yuengling moving minorities into positions of leadership and power. This performance in addressing the issues that plague the rest of our society makes the Army an appropriate subject here. Key differences between the Army and the corporate world must be discussed in using the US Army as a model for other organiza tions. These differ ences include the culture and purpose of the volunteer Army; the indoctrination of that culture; the social control over the behavior of soldiers; leadership styles and training; concern for the welfare of members of the organization; contention over the presence of women, lesbians, and gay men; and the ability to leave the institution. While not insignific ant, these differences are a matter of degree rather than substance. The need for effective leadership remains paramount in all organizations. White men are studied here because the history of our nation and our organ izations has dictated that they comprise the bulk of our leaders, although the demographic transition under way is creating a gap in the literature on leading heterogeneous groups from the perspect ive of the dominant traditional group. Studying white men who have only recently been confronted with the need to recognize and cope with the existence of different racial, gender, and ethnic cul tures within our organizations is important in leadership research. Although numerous stories have told the difficulties of women and minorities in succeeding in organizations, many white men also have played significantly positive roles in assisting societal change. Leadership theory can be enhanced through an under standing of how these white men led and how their skills, behavior patterns, and interpersonal relationships differed from other, less constructive behaviors. The leadership competencies articulated here were developed through the first-hand experience of Army leaders. They are based on the thoughtful analysis of the career-long experiences described by high-ranking officers over many hours of conversations. They shared stories about successes and failures and about how they learned the competencies necessary to lead effectively across diversity. They talked about institutional bias, their own challenges around racism and prejudice, and ultimately, how they came to lead all of the people who looked to them for leadership instead of just some of them. When examined through the prism of leadership theory, their stories resonate with a depth and dimension that communicates to all leaders about the unspoken contract with their followers. The Army officers who contributed their stories and leadership philosophies Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 to this book are all 30-year veterans of the military. Their careers span the Vietnam War and the associated racial strife of that time to today’s all-volunteer, highly diverse Army. Their leadership skills successfully guided the Army through difficult demographic changes, and their stories illustrate the challenges and skills required to lead across race and gender. If not managed with sensitiv ity and integrity, these factors can create misunderstanding and lower productiv ity in our organizations. The study’s approach to the subject is from an appreciative analysis of what works and what has been successful in a most diverse and most effective worldwide organization. Leading across diversity 75 Methodology In identifying and analyzing the leadership skills of these culturally competent leaders, the author did not select people who would be a statistically representative sample of what good leaders are doing. The search focused on a specific, statistically rare sample in order to illuminate the skills, characteristics, and interrelational patterns not found in the larger popula tion. This design follows a long tradition of leadership studies that have focused on the characteristic identi fication of successful leaders who:

• are doing something different; • are characterized by behaviors that reflect an understanding of the experi ence and cultural differ ences of others; • act with sensitivity, fairness, and wisdom about those differences; • create environ ments where all can perform to their highest potential.

Finding particip ants for this study (i.e., leaders demonstrating these skills) posed a challenge. The participants had to be identified as culturally competent not by the traditional in-group of white male military leaders, but by the women and minority soldiers they led. These subordinate soldiers were the only people who could identify which leaders created an environment where all could thrive and contribute to their highest level of competence. To address this problem, the Pentagon provided access to 250 soldiers – officers and enlisted – across a broad range of Army occupations and specialties, who were all either female or minorities. All were asked to identify culturally competent white male leaders. The goal was to identify a leader with whom they had worked, who, in their opinion, demon strated cross-cultural compet ency and bias-free leadership. “Culturally competent leaders” had been defined by the researcher for these soldiers as:

Leaders who use an inclusive style of leadership, and who demonstrate respect and understanding for differ ences, and provide an environ ment where all can perform to their highest potential regardless of race, ethnicity or gender. These are leaders that have both an understanding of cultural dif ferences and who have demonstrated a lack of bias, prejudice, or discrimi nation based on race, ethnicity and gender. This is specifically not a leader Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 who functioned as a mentor, but people who were able to effectively lead diverse groups.

In addition to identifying a large pool of culturally compet ent leaders to be inter viewed, the question served to explore the real nature and proportions of the problem. Despite the operations tempo of the Army due to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the response rate was 52 percent. Only 19 percent did not respond at all, and an additional 29 percent of the group selected for study had been deployed to Afghanistan or Iraq and were unable to respond. 76 R. Yuengling Of the remaining 130 individuals queried, only 11 names of culturally com petent white male leaders were offered. Eighty-seven of the identifiers, or 35 percent, said they had never worked for a culturally competent white person. They openly expressed doubt or cynicism about the premise that the Army is an appropriate organization within which to undertake a study of cultural compet ency. An additional 17 respondents stated they were uncomfortable discussing race and gender in any context. Only 11 soldiers, or 4.4 percent of the women and minorities, were able to provide a name of a white male leader whom they believed fit the study’s description: someone who uses an inclusive styleof leadership, demonstrates fairness and respect for differ ences, and provides an environ ment where all can perform to their highest potential regardless of race, ethnicity, or gender. The 11 soldiers who nominated white male leaders comprised four black females, one white female, five black males, and one Hispanic male. They included representatives from Special Forces, Infantry, Logistics, Military Police, Corps of Engineers, Army Materiel Command, and Installation Manage ment. All were very interested in talking about the situation for women and minorities in the Army. Without exception, they indicated that discrimination based on race and gender continues to be a significant barrier to their progression in the Army. They offered many highly personal stories of perceived discrimina tion and showed the psychological fatigue that characterizes individuals working in less-than-welcoming environments. But in each and every case, these indi viduals also acknowledged that they perceived their opportunity for success in the Army to be better than that in the private sector. The 11 soldiers who were able to nominate a leader whom they believed created fair environments almost uniformly described the nominated officer as “fair.” One added, “He lets you be yourself and get the job done without all that crap” (study particip ant). Upon further discussion, “that crap” was defined as uncertainty about unfair treatment due to race. Of the 11 individuals named, nine were general officers who became particip ants in this study.

The interview process Each of the nominated men was sent a letter asking for an interview. To avoid response bias caused by the relationship between the two individuals, the parti cipants were not told in the letter or during the interview who had identified Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 them. All interviews were conducted face-to-face and, with one exception, all were taped. The interviews ranged from two to three hours in length and fol lowed a general format of minimal initial questioning to allow the particip ants to direct the interview to topics on their mind. The interviews supplied the raw data for the development of the theory around culturally competent leadership. The goal was to assess commonalities among interviewees in terms of background, attitudes, beliefs, experiences, outlook, training, and perspectives critical to fostering cross-culturally compet ent leadership. The transcripts revealed certain significant behaviors common to Leading across diversity 77 these leaders, but unusual in the general population of leaders and managers. That certain themes would emerge from the interviews was to be expected. One result, however, was surprising: Despite the officers’ unique experiences, certain behaviors emerged very strongly and very consistently. These behaviors form the basis of the leadership theory and model presented here for leading effect ively across diversity.

Participants The nine participants were all white males in their late fifties to early sixties. Their military careers spanned Infantry, Special Forces, Combat Engineers, Mili tary Police, Field Artillery, Ordnance, Public Affairs, Logistics, and the Medical Corps. The study had a desired distribution across Combat Arms, Combat Support, and Combat Services Support.1 Three were recently retired (within six months of the interview), two were approaching retirement, and four had time left on active duty. All had been in the military for over 30 years; all had been young lieutenants just learning to lead during the racial strife of the 1960s and 1970s. All nine of the particip ants came from working-class or middle-class back grounds: one was the son of a minister; three were from military families; and three had fathers with only a high-school education. The distribution was almost equal among working mothers: five had mothers who worked outside the home, four did not. Only one of the nine had attended West Point; three had attended public universities; three had attended religious colleges; and two had attended Virginia Military Institute. One particip ant was Jewish; seven were Christians of a variety of denominations, including Methodist, Lutheran, and Evangelical; two were Catholic. One had a mixed religious background, raised as a Lutheran, with a Catholic mother. Five received their commissions through Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC); one was drafted and was commissioned through Officer Candidate School (OCS); and two received direct commissions. One received his commis sion upon graduation from West Point. All nine joined the Army between 1968 and 1973 and had their early leadership experi ences during the height and denouement of the Vietnam War. Only two had served in Vietnam, while three had their early leadership experiences in Germany. Four had taken their initial leadership assignments in stateside installations. All nine had long-term first marriages, each lasting over 30 years. Five married their high-school sweet Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 hearts; four married women they met in college or shortly afterward. None of the nine had initially planned a career in the military; all said they went in and “didn’t plan to stay.” One said:

I had no money. Somebody said, “Put on a green suit; they’ll give you 50 bucks.” I went into ROTC for the money. That showed how brain dead I was. [Laughter] 50 bucks a month. I could have done a lot worse for 50 bucks a month. I mean, 50 bucks a month. (Study participant) 78 R. Yuengling Another discussed the draft:

During Vietnam they eliminated fifth-year deferments so I had to sorta scurry to get my four-year degree, and then the selective service folks came calling, took my physical, they said, “You’ll do, and you’ll be hearing from us.” Came right here to Fort Belvoir for six months of pure hell, got com missioned, and have never found my way out of the Army. I’m retiring this fall after 35 years. (Study participant)

Only three of the participants had any significant experience with minorit ies before high-school. Significantly, they had grown up in the Army as part of a military family. For most of the particip ants, their first significantly integrated experience was in the Army. The demographics of the particip ants are startling in their similar ities, yet drawing any conclusions is difficult because the sample size is too small to make any significant claims. Their working- and middle-class backgrounds can be an indicator that individuals from these environments are more socially receptive and egalit arian. Or, this finding may just as equally reflect the absence of the economic elite in the military. Only one had attended a service academy (and then only half- jokingly, claiming it had been under duress); all others had graduated from civilian schools and received their commissions directly through ROTC or OCS. This may suggest that officers coming from these areas are more culturally competent than those graduating from the service academies, or it may merely be an anomaly of the sample. All nine stressed repeatedly that they had not intended to stay in the milit ary, suggesting they were not as hampered by careerism and were more psychologi cally free to take risks in their leadership behavior than their peers. Or, it may simply mean they had intended to remain in the military only as long as they enjoyed what they were doing. That all the participants had lasting first marriages was highly unusual; the divorce rate for the US civilian population is 5 percent annually, while the Army divorce rate is somewhat higher, and rates have increased due to long troop deployments. That 100 percent of the participant sample remained married over the long term could be signific ant (one particip ant humorously sug gested this supports the idea they are extremely good at inter-cultural communica tions). More likely, remaining married to a wife supportive of Army goals is required to arrive at the senior ranks, all of which the particip ants accomplished. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016

Interviews All participants were aware that interest centered on their experience as leaders during the integration of women and minorities in the Army. In each interview, only two formal questions were asked of the participants:

1 How did you come to choose the Army as a career? 2 What is your leadership philosophy? Leading across diversity 79 The first question usually generated a discussion of early childhood, family life, and how they found themselves in the Army. The interviews then progressed into a description of their leadership experi ences. The interviews were both wide-ranging and circular. The men reminisced about how they learned to lead. They spoke candidly about the failures, from which they learned far more than from their successes. They remembered by name the non-commissioned officers who had helped them learn to be good leaders. All the particip ants spoke openly and unabashedly about Army values and the place of principles, morals, integrity, honor, obligation to others, and duty in their lives. These principles were woven smoothly throughout their discussion and thoughts. All participants spoke of a belief in the goodness of people, the desire to treat them fairly, and a sense of responsibility for taking care of the people who looked to them for leadership. Both family upbringing and experi ence with military leaders they admired were credited for their values:

My years as a child, my parents were very open and in my whole time growing up I never heard my parents make an ethnic slur, or a racial joke, or anything that dealt with that. My background was my parents. I don’t think they would permit themselves to be associated with folks who were “exclu sive” folks. Back when my parents were still in the Army, there was a defi nite break between officer and enlisted, a lot more so than there is today, but, having said that, my friends that I hung around with were from all walks . . . from both officer and enlisted families. People are important, they are more important than time. You need to invest time into people. Integrity is non-negotiable. If you have integrity, then people have an inherent trust of you. That’s why I’m in the Army today, because to me it’s about people and the interaction. Most people have great potential to do good, but you gotta get the round peg in the round hole. (Study participant)

One particip ant recalled a young soldier who had helped him in a difficult time of leadership by providing insight about what was happening in his platoon. This soldier served as an informant, a conduit of information about what was happening in the platoon regard ing race relations. He talked about learning the importance of values and the understanding that a leader had to accommodate difficult situations and take care of people in those situations: Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016

It taught me a very important lesson about codes of ethics and a value sys tem. And we always talked about staunch, straight, stalwart. And absolute integrity in all cases, which has certainly been my theme for life. But, what I understood was, he [an enlisted informant] could not do that, he couldn’t survive in the environment he was in and do that. So he was figuring out a way to maybe take some guilt off. So, it taught me that relationships you form as a leader can’t all be hierarchal. (Study participant) 80 R. Yuengling Modeling leadership behavior Another recurring theme articulated in all the interviews was the need to model leadership behavior. These men took very seriously their obliga tion to be leaders, not just talk about leadership. Whether learning about leadership from superiors or demonstrating it for subordinates, without exception the particip ants con sidered leadership a visible act, not just talk.

Ah, you have to employ the Indian Chief style of leadership. You do it and show you’re willin’ to do it, then you can insist on them getting involved. And I learned early there that you had to be genuine. You couldn’t just say the words. I took risks, if it cost me, it cost me. You’re demonstrating to those below you what right looks like. Here’s why I am doing this, it means a lot. You have to demonstrate leadership. Years later, you never know when somebody is going to come up to you and say, “you know, I remember what you did.” I think the service experience for a lot of people changes people’s mind; it causes a change in attitude. What I learned was that in any organization, it is very easy to change the structure of the organiza tion, you can do that with an order. But people have responsibilities, and it takes more effort and time to change processes and procedures, and policy and all that sort of stuff. But by far the longest – it’s tough to change the people, change the culture. But, unless you work at doing it, it’ll never happen. So I started changing around. I learned you had to really set the example. You can’t just write something or say something, you gotta mean it, and you gotta do it. People pick up on that very quickly. A lot of times it’s better not to write or say something, it’s just better to do it. Demonstrate by what you do, what your commit ment is, and what you really feel about it. (Study participant)

Present in these men were two import ant character istics: (1) a real commit ment to values; and (2) a desire to behave like leaders. It was not enough to proclaim they were leaders, they held themselves responsible for behaving like leaders.

Five common themes emerge Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 The importance of a value system and modeling strong leadership behaviors was articulated by all participants and held a significant place in their formal leader ship philosophies. Another quite prominent, but less clearly articulated, set of behaviors emerged from the words of all of the men. In story after story, five common themes stood out and were often interwoven. Something more substan tial than the formal leadership philosophy had guided their behaviors as the Army increasingly worked on the integration of race, gender, and ethnicity. Not defined by the particip ants themselves, but clearly evident upon analysis were these character istics and competencies: Leading across diversity 81 • transformative awareness about the true nature of discrimination • fairness • standards • feedback • task and team focus.

Together, these five characteristics represent the framework for culturally com petent leadership. The behaviors for these character istics are summarized in Table 5.1. Four of these components (fairness, standards, feedback, and task and team focus) can be found in many discussions of leadership and in many leadership theories. They do not conflict with and they certainly support Army values of loyalty, duty, respect, selfless service, honor, integrity, and personal courage. However, the study’s culturally compet ent leaders apply these concepts in a slightly different way. Transformative awareness is a notable and significant addition to the list of character istics. What differentiates these officers from other competent leaders is their acceptance of personal responsibility to examine their own behavior and

Table 5.1 Culturally competent leadership behaviors

Characteristic Behavior

Transformative Having an insight, recognition, or realization that allows the awareness leader to see and understand the implications of bias and discrimination. Recognizing racism and privilege as a system. Fairness Acting with good judgment and with an absence of unreasonable discrimination. Creating process fairness rather than outcome fairness. Treating individuals equitably, not equally. Standards Setting and communicating standards. Holding all individuals (including in-group members) to the same standard regardless of group identity. Supporting individuals to meet the standards, rather than assuming they cannot meet them. Accepting personal responsibility to examine the leader’s own behavior and beliefs and to act in unbiased ways. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Feedback Providing meaningful and constructive performance feedback to women and minorities. Engaging in substantive discussions and learning around race, ethnicity, and gender issues. Challenging in-group racism and code talk. Task and team focus Viewing the team as having a group identity larger than racial, ethnic, and gender identities. Having a commitment to unit cohesion. Focusing on task or mission accomplishment. 82 R. Yuengling beliefs and act in unbiased ways, in addition to treating people as individuals. In the presence of transformational awareness, adherence to the more traditional and well-known tenets of leadership takes on a slightly different aspect and meets with greater success and significance.

Transformative awareness For this study, transformative awareness was defined as the experience, insight, recognition, and realization that allowed participants to see and understand the implications of bias and discrimination. For our particip ants, this “seeing” was profound and revelatory. Although some might challenge the statement, nearly all Americans “see” racism, know that it exists, and can point to its outcomes. The participants experienced a different type of understanding that was profound and personal. Warren Bennis and colleagues speak of “crucible moments” or “defining moment[s] that unleash abilities, forces crucial choices and sharpens focus. It teaches a person who he or she is” (Bennis and Thomas 2002, p. 13). These experiences rise to that level of importance and require particip ants to adapt to new knowledge and understanding of the world. In some cases, the transformative experience reflected the first-hand recogni tion of the existence of racism, both on a personal and an institutional level:

And I really never quite understood institutional racism, until I was giving an Article 15 [a disciplinary action in the Army] to one of my soldiers. It really opened my eyes to how individual preju dices taint things. This prob ably had the biggest impression on me, because I used it over the years to describe how we really have to understand what it is that we’re doing. What happened was, I had a young acting jack, which is an E4, probably year and a half in the Army, wearing NCO ranks. He was a CQ, Charge of Quarters; it’s the middle of the night, and he’s from one of the South Dakota, North Dakota states. White guy – one of the states where he never really had to rub shoulders with anybody of color. About one o’clock in the morning, about six or seven black soldiers are coming back from drinking, they’re having a good time, they’re loud, and the Charge of Quarters, this white kid, you know. There’s some words, back and forth, and the white soldier writes them up, as he probably should have. Because that Charge of Quarters is in fact my representative there. So I’m doing an Article 15 on the [black] Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 guy that he wrote up; there was one particular guy, and, and you know, he said, “Well, yes, sir, we had us an interchange” . . . and I say, do you have anything in mitigation? Because that’s how Article 15 works, and he said, “Well, yes, sir.” Half an hour earlier, PFC Smith, who happens to be white, had an interchange with the Charge of Quarters, and he’d not been punished at all. So I said, “Okay,” so I stopped the Article 15. I call the Charge of Quarters in, the young kid from [North Dakota]; “Did PFC Smith . . .?” “Uh, well, yes, sir, he and Jonesy and, uh, and Smitty and humma, humma, humma.” I said, “Were they loud?” “Well, yes, yes.” And Leading across diversity 83 didn’t Smith call you a bunch of names?” “Well, yes, sir, but that just meant. . . .” I said, “Well, why didn’t he get written up?” He said, “I was scared; there were six of ’em.” And that’s when I realized that I was under writing different treatment, predicated through the eyes of others. And this was not a bad kid; he was just scared at one o’clock in the morning. He wasn’t scared of Smitty! Smitty’s a white guy, but he was dang sure scared of the black guys. (Study participant)

This experience is remarkable not because a young leader suddenly saw that black soldiers were treated differently, but because of the immediate and pro found effect on how he led in the future:

I’ve used that for 25 years as an example of how I almost became party to racism. Now, guess what happened – the black kid, got punished, but so did the white guy. It’s not that we let one or the other get off – both of them, because it’s not a question of “you’ve gotta make sure that those who repre sent you,” it was really a, for me, I don’t want to say defining event because I always knew personally that, I always thought of myself personally as not having those things – those type of prejudicial attitudes – that was totally different. But I learned from it. (Study participant)

Recognition of racism and privilege as a system Talking about privilege in America is talking about social identity, specifically whiteness, and even more specifically, white maleness. Privilege exists when one group has something of value that is denied to others simply because of the groups they belong to, rather than anything they have done or failed to do (Mac intosh 1993). Whites tend to be oblivious to the nature of privilege. They are taught care fully not to notice, while people of color are experts. The agreed-upon invisibil ity of the system allows whites to accept the unearned benefits of being white. More importantly, they can identify the benefits as earned and the failures of the oppressed groups as their own and not the result of lack of privilege or of racism. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 The transformat ive experi ences of the particip ants were moments when they were able to see the system of privilege, and recognize its inherent racism. This experience of transformative awareness incorporates the idea of personal failure, personal responsibility, and in a sense, redemption. In the particip ants, it was manifested positively as acceptance of personal responsibility to examine their own behavior and beliefs and act in unbiased ways. Without exception, the participants’ transformative experi ences were negative and were perceived as personal leadership failures. In his story about an upsetting sexual harassment case, one particip ant said: 84 R. Yuengling My failure was that I didn’t do the right thing. I should have moved one of them on. I didn’t pursue it as aggressively as I should have, and probably, my weakness was that I wanted, I want to believe in mankind. Thinking back, that’s probably the failure I had, I just didn’t do what I should have done the first time. (Study participant)

The idea of personal failure leading to insight is also supported in the story of the black sergeant who had been helpful to one of the particip ants. In so doing, he avoided being reprimanded as early as he should have been for increasingly unsoldierly behavior:

I mean, it was clear cut. So I go to give X an Article 15. X has fallen on bad grace. I probably should have disciplined X earlier in view of the other minor infractions, but my inexperience and the fact he had helped the unit out, and so finally, that was the straw. I think it turned out, I think not dem onstratively, but I think in the back of my mind, it made me, that incident early in my career, much more aware of the race differ ence and the need to be careful and sensitive and help form the fact to just look at the guy as a soldier. (Study participant)

Left unsaid, but implicit in the last sentence is “and hold them to the same stand ards.” The particip ant realized that in not holding the solider to the same stand ards as he would have a white soldier, he had failed the sergeant. Because the sergeant was helping with the race problem in the company, he had not been held to the same standards as others. More importantly, the officer recognized the experience as a personal failing in his responsib ility as a leader. A very moving story was told by a participant who had been chosen as a “thought leader” at Virginia Military Institute (VMI) in the late 1960s to help with the integration of that institution. Early in the interview, he began talking about being chosen along with 15 other students at VMI to make sure the inte gration of blacks went smoothly:

Going to college at VMI, that was at the time all white. I shouldn’t say all white . . . all male. There were Chinese cadets and there were cadets from Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Thailand, other places, but no blacks. Citadel had already integrated, and I knew, to a degree I guess, that the school made the decision to integrate. The Superintendent called 15 of us in, and we tried to figure out why we had been called in, and he, the Superintendent, said, “Well, you guys are, in my mind, the opinion makers of the class. And you all have got to help make this a success. So, we can’t have bad things happen. This is the right thing to do. There will be five cadets coming in that are black.” For some reason, they had been accepting blacks for years, but no one ever showed. But these four or five kids were all Army brats. And so, he said, “Your class is gonna Leading across diversity 85 have [black cadets] and I’m going to talk to them. But I want you to help me make this a success. You’re the leaders of the class; you’re the leaders of the school.” (Study participant)

Visibly saddened in remembering those occasions, the particip ant moved on to discuss other aspects of his Army career. Not until over an hour later, well into the interview, did he return to the story to make this startling revelation about VMI’s integration:

I . . . need to go back to a question you asked me earlier. I gotta say that my first three years at VMI when I was in that environment, I was, I’m not gonna say comfortable, but I got used to hearing black jokes and all this sort of stuff, and probably repeated some myself from during that period of time. [Long silence] and that’s why this meeting with the Superintendent we had in my senior year was a real wakeup call. I highlight that as a signature point in my development, because I well, I don’t think I changed the way I felt about anything, but my behavior was certainly different then than it was later on, and certainly before. I would have never said things like that in high school. When you’re in that environ ment, it is different than what you have experienced at any time in your life before. You’re hearing things that in some cases you might have heard a little of before, but not all the time. You just kind of adapt, this is the environ ment I am in, and you want to be part of it. And you’re part of it as well, but still there’s always something naggin’ at you. Naggin’ at your soul. (Study participant)

“Naggin’ at his soul” was the realization, slowly and carefully articulated, that for the first three years at VMI he was in an all-white, all-male environment for the first time and had reacted favorably at some level. He observed that “you just kind of adapt. This is the environ ment I am in, and you want to be part of it.” That he had been enlisted into racist behavior at the institution was a source of significant distress. The participant viewed this experience as a personal failing, something to be concerned with. He did not shift the culpability to the school, to society, to the nation’s history. He had failed himself, and he held himself accountable. Over the course of his career he made calculated efforts to use his Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 power to create a bias-free Army and to institutionalize inclusive behaviors. Later in the interview he talked about these efforts:

Being a catalyst for institutional change, I think that’s an important part. When you see the negative parts and you make a commitment to change an institution, and you have a focus on making sure EO complaints are taken care of, ensuring CO2 [considera tion of others] training is being done in an organization, holding them accountable if they are not doing those things. (Study participant) 86 R. Yuengling This particip ant explicitly recognized the need to move to the level of conscious organizational change and institutionalize the gains the Army has made. In this sense, he converted his personal experience of “naggin’ at his soul” to concrete and long-lasting, positive change in the Army. A somewhat similar experience of “otherness” is present in the personal his tory of the one participant who did not have an explicit transforming experience. This particip ant related a childhood characterized by poverty and work at a young age. He did not need a transformat ive experience to relate to oppressed people; he had grown up understanding stigma and oppression himself:

You gotta understand, I was working in the fields, alongside black folks pickin’ cotton from the time I was just a little kid. We were from the wrong side of the tracks – we were the same . . . I was white trash. (Study participant)

Religion or faith also played a role in the transformative awareness of the participants, but the part it played was ambiguous, awakening them to the experi ence of discrimination on several levels. When he was a very small child, the Catholic particip ant moved with his family to a small town due to his father’s military service:

And I remember my mother came in one day . . . just, very upset . . . agitated, pulling things out, throwing them in the suitcase, “We’re leaving! We’re getting out of here.” And so she packed everything up . . . into the car, every thing loaded up, just everything hanging out. . . . The reason she left was the lady that owned the farmhouse, was getting on her about our religion and was uncomfortable with the fact that there were people of this religion in this house. [We were] Catholic. And my mother said, “I’m not staying in a place where I’m not wanted; we’re never going back there.” We ulti mately found other places to go . . . but I remember that, that was imprinted on me. (Study participant)

Imprinted was the experi ence of being different, being discriminated against, being considered “less than.” The Jewish officer told a similar story:

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Growing up in the Army I was the guy who, you know, didn’t go to the chapel on Sunday, and didn’t understand some of the other things. So that probably sensitized me early on that people that have different character istics, and I remember [there] being some rather cruel jokes and stuff. (Study participant)

This recognition of discrimination in the name of religion was not restricted to members of non-Protestant religions. The Protestants also saw the discrimina tory capabilities of religion: Leading across diversity 87 And I remember the pastor of the parish, standing up, saying, “I will never accept black kids in this school.” The first time I had been in a segregated environment, you know, seeing people discriminated against, was when I went to this Christian college. There was a lot I didn’t understand. Catholics were bad? But my mother was a Catholic, and I saw Lutherans acting in bad ways. (Study participant)

Although the participants were very circumspect about religious-based dis crimination, it was clear that to some the Army has a growing problem on this issue. More than one mentioned the danger presented to the military by over eager proselytizing or assump tions of religious commonality:

I think that some in the Army have, and the Army leadership, have moved in a direc tion that makes me uncomfortable. And I think it separ ates us. I quite frankly don’t let chaplains [be exclusive with regard to religion] . . . any prayer that a chaplain’s going to give is going to be nondenominational and offend no one. And, I don’t believe chaplains are the center of the universe. And I’ve had some really good chaplains and some really rotten chaplains. (Study participant)

During the course of this study, the Army came into the public spotlight because of religious discrimination and suspicion created by officers. While in uniform at Christian altars, General Boykin proselytized about his God being greater than the God of his presumably Muslim enemies (Leiby 2003). A Baptist Army chaplain refused to provide water to soldiers during the advance on Baghdad unless they would consent to be baptized as Christians (Laughlin 2003). Soldiers were fragged by a Muslim fellow soldier (WorldNetDaily 2003). Captain James Yee, a Muslim chaplain, was charged with treason (the charges were later dropped due to lack of evidence) (Barber 2004). Although this area merits far greater research, it was not the focus of the study. The participants were questioned on what exactly religion taught them about dealing with people. Their responses generally had more to do with a belief in the goodness of people rather than any specific tenets of faith. The impact of religion was somewhat ambiguous. It appeared both as a cause of discrimination and a mitigating factor. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Culturally compet ent leaders demonstrate a formal and outspoken reliance on a very clear set of values and the commit ment to “walk the walk,” to truly dem onstrate leadership behaviors. They move beyond merely treating women and minorities with absence of advantage and toward providing them with the favor able work experiences that lead to success in organiza tions. In this sense, they are transformational leaders. With a true commitment to fairness, standards, feedback, and task and team focus born out of their own transformative experience, these leaders create an environ ment for women and minorit ies where they can: 88 R. Yuengling • commit themselves to excellence; • have the confidence they will receive the feedback they need to meet stand ards of competence; • succeed or fail based on performance rather than other attributes.

Another component was present in these men. As stated previously, trans formative leadership speaks to the ability of the leader to encourage subordinates to transcend self-interest and to commit to excellence. It is primarily concerned with the interaction between leader and follower. These leaders experienced a transforming change in themselves which then enabled them to be transformat ive leaders. In their personal transformation, they changed their view of them selves, of others, and of human equality.

Fairness These culturally compet ent leaders all spoke repeatedly and forcefully about the idea of “fairness.” Fairness was considered a key component in building trust. As a word, fairness has troubling limita tions. It does not seem to accurately capture what the particip ants really meant. They were careful to delineate the concept of fairness, as they used it, from the concept of equality. They were clear in their belief that to treat people fairly is not necessarily to treat them equally; to treat them equally is not necessar ily to treat them fairly. Words like consist ency, judgment, being just, or caring for subordinates may be a better choice for what they meant, but fairness is the word they often used:

I think that this might be . . . it’s that underneath it all, there’s this true belief in equality. That you don’t make excuses for people, you don’t make excep tions for people, you don’t say “Well, because you’re black or female or whatever, and I know things are hard, so I’m not going to. . . .” You just treat people equal . . . fairly. . . . I mean I don’t want to say equally, because to be a good leader you treat people fairly, not equally. But it has to be based in a belief in human equality. Otherwise you might not be seeing everything right. (Study participant)

In all organizations, the relationship between the individual and the manager Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 or leader is based on a psychological contract. The concept of a contract between employee and employer has been around for more than 40 years, introduced in 1960 by Argyis and Schön (1999), and is used to describe perceptions of employer and employee about their mutual obliga tions. This contract is infor mal, imprecise, and generally based on perceptions rather than any explicit agreement. A key component is the employee’s perceptions of the fairness of the manager. The leaders in the present study were concerned to a very high degree that they be perceived as fair and as actually behaving fairly. They did not com promise the contract of the expectations of fairness with their subordinates: Leading across diversity 89 But I thought the one expectation any soldier who’s entering the Army has to have and that is that the leaders are going to be truly equitable in the way they administer things. And I can’t, I’m not here to tell you I never wavered from that, but, I think somehow that the focus for me was, I think, a lot easier than it was for some others. (Study participant)

Acting with good judgment and with an “absence of unreasonable discrimination” In a military environment, the word “fairness” is problematic. The Army Leader- ship Field Manual 22-100 (since updated to FM 6-22) never mentions the word fairness, nor does the Strategic Leadership Primer of the Army War College. In the military, fairness is frequently subordinated to other concepts such as accom plishment of the mission, needs of people, and needs of society. Is it “fair” to ask a platoon of soldiers to give up their lives on a mission? The question may be necessary but hardly seems fair: Why this particular platoon of soldiers? Why this particular mission? The implications of race and gender in this mix make the concept of fairness even more critical. The soldiers must believe that the order is given in good judgment and with an absence of unreasonable discrimination. The risks to employees in our corporate organizations are not as stark as those faced by soldiers; however, acting with good judgment and the absence of unreasonable discrimination is no less a hallmark of culturally compet ent leader ship. In an excellent analysis of inequality in organizations, Nancy Di Tomaso and her research team at Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey investi gated the nature of discrimination (Di Tomaso et al. 2002). Rather than inequal ity being perpetuated by discrimination alone, they identified three different forms: advantage, absence of advantage, and disadvant age. Advantage can be described as having access to favorable work experiences, specifically defined as having control over the work product; having opportunity to serve in leadership capacities; having a mentor; having the confidence of others; and having expo sure to a variety of projects. Disadvantage is having no access to these favorable work experiences. Absence of advantage falls somewhere in-between. Another way of looking at these three categories is to see (1) a favored group, (2) a group that is neither favored nor discriminated against, and (3) a group that is actively discriminated against. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Common among women and minorit ies is the perception of unfair benefits given to the “favored few.” These benefits may include closer, more informal relationships with managers, better work assignments, visibility with senior leaders, and mentoring. There are well-documented ways employees receiving them can improve their performance and get promotions. Although the favored- few group generally, but not always, excludes women and minorities, it also excludes many less-favored white men who fall into the “absence of advant age” category. When the anger about the advant age given to the favored few is articu lated by women and minorities, it often takes the form of angry denunciations of 90 R. Yuengling the favoritism accorded to all white men. In their view, the favored few are only white men. Actually, a large group of people, including many white men, are not receiving any special advantages and are also seeing the favored few advance more rapidly. When white men hear the angry accusation that “all” white men receive the benefits of favoritism and this does not square with their own experi ence, they become angry and frustrated. They may then hold the very damaging perception that women and minorit ies are looking for excuses for their own failure to progress. The call for managers to coach, train, mentor, and develop all employees is not new, but implementation continues to be difficult. The approach of developing all employees and marginalizing none makes good business sense. Failure to do so is at the base of much of the anger, hurt, and frustrations employees experi ence in our organizations.

Creating process fairness, not outcome fairness The concept of process fairness concerns itself with whether employees and managers perceive that they are treating each other fairly. Outcome fairness is about their perceived views of the end results of the process and can be different from their views of process fairness. Process fairness is illustrated by a participant who remembered a talented, young black soldier who had made a significant accomplishment in an assign ment, but was not treated fairly:

So I get this kid, right from the field, can’t spell Pentagon, doesn’t know anything. In walks [this kid]: Sharp looking, black captain, used to be infan try, well decorated, smart, articulate. I didn’t look at this kid as a black MP; I just looked at this kid as a soldier. Could he do the job? Well, come to find out, this kid was a company commander over in Korea. And, he was an MP company commander, and that year his unit won what they call the Jeremiah B. Holland award, which is the number one MP company. They have a little contest, every year. His company won as the best MP company in the Army that year. Very prestigious honor. His white battalion commander gave him a two block on his report card. A two block is average, three blocks is a dis aster but, if you’re the company commander for the full year, no, he didn’t inherit this thing, how can you get a two block? Well, the XC who was a Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 major, who was white, went into the battalion commander three times, and said, “Sir, this isn’t right.” And the guy said, “Look, da dah da dah da duh.” It was really a grievous wrong. But because of that, this kid didn’t make battalion commander the first time, the second time, the third time; finally he got picked up off the alternate list. Now, that really bothered this kid a lot. And I spent a lot of time talking to this kid and saying, “You gotta put it behind ya, there’s not a damn thing you can do about it. All you can do is perform well in all your jobs, and you’ll eventually overcome that.” Well, to this day this kid just finished being a successful battalion commander, got Leading across diversity 91 selected for the War College, and he’s going to command a brigade this summer. Now, it cost him two or three years a little bit later, but he got his wish. Oh, he thought for sure it was discrimination. But he couldn’t prove it, you know. But he said, “How can I be the number one company commander in the whole Army and get a two block?” I think he [the brigade com mander] was an asshole. Excuse my French, I mean, but, I thought the guy was an asshole . . . holy cow, I mean the war stories were coming out, and I see exactly what happened to this kid. I just think the commander was an asshole. . . . You could never prove it was racism. He could have covered his track; it could have been. He could have had covered his track so well, he could have said, “Look. That unit had great lieutenants, great sergeants, they’re the ones that got that award. They’re the ones, and this guy was more of a figurehead and not as capable. That’s why I’m doing that, I’m taking the tough position.” All along, he could be anti-black and nobody’s even gonna know it. (Study participant)

In this example the particip ant was talking about both process unfairness (the failure of the battalion commander to follow a reasonable process in determining the evaluation for the young captain) and outcome unfairness (whether he got a “one block”). The process unfairness is of specific interest here. The lack of transparency in the battalion commander’s decision, his unwillingness to adhere to previously established policies, was the failure of process fairness. In essence, process fairness is about whether the way things are done or decided is perceived to be fair. Process fairness does not ensure that employees will always get what they want, but it does mean they have a chance to be heard. Joel Brockner (2006) describes three drivers of process fairness:

• Employees provide input into decisions; their opinions are requested and heard and are given serious consideration. • Are decisions transparent and consistent? Are personal biases limited? • Do managers explain, listen, and treat each employee with respect and empathy?

One particip ant highlighted the import ance of process fairness for women and minorities, particu larly when they do not get the position they are looking for: Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016

When I was a brigadier general, I was on my, I think third aide. I had a very interesting thing happen with a female when an officer came to interview me to be my aide as a lieutenant when I was a brigadier general. And I didn’t select her. She was very sharp, and I said “Now, you need more time in the field. You need more time in the line. You’ve got a lot of potential but the last thing you need to be is an aide right now.” But I told her, I said, “Cute girls that are soldiers have a disadvantage because they end up being protocol officers; they end up being pulled into the front office, andyou 92 R. Yuengling don’t need that. You need to get out in the field and do your thing, asa leader, a tactical leader, and prove yourself. And that’s why I’m not going to paper you.” She said, “Yes sir. What jobs do you think I should do?” So I told her, I said, “Here’s a list of things I think you need to do. I’ve looked over your officer record brief and you don’t have enough time in the line doing these things so you go do ’em.” (Study participant)

By explaining why the young woman was not getting the position and mentoring her, the particip ant engaged in process fairness. Otherwise, she might have con cluded that her rejection was about race or gender, or both, and not qualifications.

Treating individuals equitably, not equally One of the major issues managers face in the corporate world today is confusing sameness with equality. Many managers, often well meaning, exhibit confusion about sameness with equality. They pursue standardization and uniformity in a workforce that is heterogeneous and complex. Their approach is partly about compliance, partly about being easier, partly about fear of discrimination law suits, and sometimes in the name of “consistency.”

Standards

Setting and communicating standards You gotta measure; you gotta say this is important and then measure it. If you ain’t measurin’ it, it’s bullshit. What you need to do is understand the job, what is it in this job that is really important? How is it measured? What does “good” look like in this job? I always tried to find the band of excel lence and hover somewhere in that band. (Study participant)

Often described as a basic “best practice” of management, setting and adhering to standards becomes a very significant concept for culturally competent leaders. The particip ants understood that the import ance placed on standards is directly related to attitudes about competence, impacting the way all people are per Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 ceived within organiza tions. In a culturally inclusive environ ment, only by adherence to standards can all members work effectively together in an atmo sphere of trust and mutual support. This requirement was articulated by the Special Forces officer when he talked about the “separate and presumably not equal” training of the female soldiers as they attended jump school:

When I was at jump school, women were at jump school for the first time as well, except they were not in my class. They were treated separately. They had their own set of cadre, they never did the same thing . . . never Leading across diversity 93 participated with us, whether it was drills or instruction, it was all separate. The thought was they got special treatment. And if they failed, we’d never know, because they weren’t in our class. As with a male, if you have to jump with them, you might get hurt. So the perception was they were treated differently. And they were. It bothered us. Because we thought the standards were lower. (Study participant)

With or without accurate data, the officer believed that training separately resulted in lower standards. This belief is relev ant in a military context because of the paramount importance of complete trust in the competency of fellow soldiers:

One of the reasons I feel that way is I spent time in Special Operations. We had a different way of thinking about one another, race was unimportant, what was important was can you perform, can I trust you, will you be there when I need you. If you can’t do those things, boy, you didn’t last very long. Your reputation preceded you. If you couldn’t perform, they had no use for you. So I understand what that’s about. (Study participant)

The establishment of multiple or flexible standards is harmful in organiza tions in very signific ant ways. Women and minorit ies face the myth that they are somehow less capable, less competent because they may have benefited from affirmative action programs.

Holding all individuals to the same standard, including in-group members, regardless of group identity Another aspect of standards is the requirement that they be applied equally to all members of the organization. Women and minorities must be held to standards, but the members of the “in-group” must be as well. This realization and the will ingness to hold the in-group members to standards were prevalent among the participants:

So anyway, I get to this organization, and there’s about 400 people in the Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 headquarters, and I’d say, 75% are female. But, most of the directors are male. And I didn’t have a problem with that because I’d come up through the military police ranks and there’s more females in military police and signal and MI units than there are in infantry or artillery which are none; both those boys have some problems. So, anyway, I get in there, and I’m looking at all the directors, and there was one female that ran the HR stuff, the rest were guys that had been there forever. Well, after I got in the organ ization, the most compet ent action officers were females. And, one time one of the directors came to me and said, “You know, I think you favor the 94 R. Yuengling females.” “Well, what do you mean I favor the females?” “Well, they seem to get more face time, they seem to get their actions before ya, they seem to get this and get that.” And I said, “Let me help you out. It’s because they’re four hundred times more capable than half the other people around here.” And I sit there and I said, “Now I’m gonna name you eight females, you tell me which male, that I left out, can hang with these females.” I said, “I’m real sorry, but you bring [name], you bring [another name] in here, they’ve got their stuff together, they breathe it, they believe in it, it’s documented. You bring this guy, he’s forty million pounds overweight, he can’t write good English, and he’s been here for ten years. He’s not hungry. He’d never want to get ahead,” I said. “I don’t give a damn if it’s a male or a female. That person and in this case, females, got their stuff together. It’s con stantly,” I said. “I’m gonna make sure they get promoted; I’m going to make sure they go to school; and if you want your boy promoted, he’s gotta get off his ass, and demon strate the same kind of professionalism and quality of work, and expertise, and I’ll treat him better.”

The connection between standards and competence was also made by an Army officer who spent time in an ROTC unit simultan eously supporting a top- ranked private university and a historically black college (HBCU). A fellow officer, upset by the relat ively poor academic performance of the HBCU cadets, suggested a sliding grading scale in ROTC, implying the HBCU cadets could not meet the same standard as the presumably better prepared white students at the private school. Reflected in the suggestion was the belief that the black cadets were unable to meet the standard. The idea the standard should be lowered for them is a clear example of the soft racism of low expectations. In rebuffing this suggestion, the ROTC officer did not focus on the inherent racism and patronization in the assumption of poor performance on the part of black cadets. He considered the absolute need to prepare all cadets to function equally well in a combat situation. For him, in the face of the first Gulf War, ensuring that all young officers were fully compet ent meant all had to meet the same rigorous standards. He never entertained the notion that they could not meet the standard or the possibility of sending them to war and putting the lives of others in their hands when he had effectively lowered the standard for them based on an assumption they could not meet it. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016

Supporting individuals to meet the standards, rather than assuming they cannot meet them The significance of standards has a subtle element of import ance related to the Army’s approach to equal opportunity. As mentioned earlier, promotion boards are theoretically required to hold all candidates to the same standards. All pro motions must go to qualified people, regardless of whether they are minority, female, or white male. Adherence to standards, both as a mechanism to integrate and a touchstone for fairness, is fundamental: Leading across diversity 95 It’s all about standards, you need to set standards and hold to them. You gotta communicate what the standards are, and tell people what you expect of them – what they will be judged by. Tell them where they stand and what they can do to improve. (Study participant)

The need to maintain high standards has compelled the Army to pour resources into programs to ensure that an adequate number of women and minor ities meet those standards. In an effort to meet affirmative action goals or targets, a civilian organiza tion may promote poorly qualified individuals or perhaps engage in malicious compliance.2 These insidious and destructive practices have devastating organizational effects. They create resentment among those qualified whites who did not receive the promo tion and all others witnessing the situation. They set up the possibility of failure or poor performance on the part of the pro moted individual, confirming stereotypes held about the demographic group of the promoted individual.

Acceptance of personal responsibility to examine their own behavior and beliefs and act in unbiased ways. One particip ant talked about the commit ment to ensuring that individuals who do not meet the standards set are supported in improving their skills as he dis cussed his policy to hold leaders responsible for providing that support:

If they brought me someone they wanted to give an Article 15 to, they damn well better bring me their jacket [personnel file] as well, and it better show me everything they had done to help this person correct their behavior. (Study participant)

Feedback Feedback may seem to be a straightforward concept, but the participants in this study showed additional complexities. They demon strated very robust behaviors associated with feedback, engaging in what might be called “feedback courage” (Duran 2004). Feedback courage takes place on three levels: Engaging in per formance feedback with women and minorit ies in an honest and constructive Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 fashion; having the deeper, more difficult conversations about attitudes and beliefs with women and minorit ies; and challenging white racism and code talk. The feedback given by the participants included the traditional idea of providing and receiving information associated with improvement of technical or profes sional behavior, which includes mentoring. It also showed the willingness to engage in difficult and honest conversations around race and gender. Such con versations continue to be very rare in our society and organizations. 96 R. Yuengling

Providing Meaningful and Constructive Performance Feedback to Women and Minorities. Feedback in the traditional sense is closely associated with standards. Because of the importance of standards and competence to these men, they were not highly skilled in performance feedback. On the surface, the desirability of feedback seemed to be unremarkable. The absence of accur ate and constructive performance feedback is a problem in most corporate organizations. Race and gender compound the problem. Perhaps driven by a fear of being perceived as racist, many managers engage in an unset tling dishonesty in their relations with people of color. Whites are well aware of racial and cultural differ ences, but often believe acknowledging them might be racist. This discomfort often renders white supervisors unable to provide appropri ate, fair, and constructive feedback to minorit ies. An employee’s poor perform ance may not be confronted early on; the white supervisor may fear opening the door to accusations of racism. In some cases, the minority employee may even be told that performance is adequate, or even good, when in reality it is not. The female and minority soldiers who nominated the participants spoke about the fairness and atmosphere that allowed them to improve and grow. The pres ence of performance feedback, to include mentoring, is a large piece of what the identifiers appreciated about their nominees. Without the constructive feedback, women and minorities may not be able to improve. Even more psychologically damaging, they may not be able to recognize when failures may be performance- based rather than gender- or race-related. The participants provided a high level of feedback to their soldiers:

She wanted to be a battalion commander so bad. She was probably the most proficient, tactically proficient officer in my brigade, over all the males.I sent her up for the McArthur Award in Europe. She got one of the McArthur Awards, the only 1 female out of 15 males out there. This woman, she was hard as woodpecker lips. I mean, she was tough. And I said, “You gotta get a little bit of sensitivity and staff work in ya.” So I sent her to West Point as a staff officer. She never forgave me. I mean, she wanted to, but she knows it was the best thing that ever happened to her. (Study participant)

Mentoring is a form of feedback. Individuals who are mentored within organ Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 izations advance more rapidly, have higher salaries, express more favorable atti tudes about the organization, and are less likely to leave the organiza tion (Allen and Eby 2004). Research also supports the finding that racial and gender identi ties have an impact on the mentoring process. The ability to find mentors, as well as the quality of the mentoring relationship, varies for women and people of color (Agars 2004; Bartol et al. 2003; Carli 1999; Foschi 2004; Kanter 1997; Livers and Caver 2003; Parker 2002). One of the closest mentoring relationships in the military is that of a general officer and the young officer functioning as the general’s aide. A highly visible Leading across diversity 97 and important position, being a general’s aide is considered “fast tracking.” Five of the seven general officers interviewed spoke about deliberately selecting females or minorities as aides. One, in particular, showed the benefits of being mentored himself:

I made a conscious decision when I was the commanding general to get a minority aide. Somebody came to me and said, “Every aide you have is air borne, ranger, Fort Bragg, you know, white, been to Bragg,” and I thought, yeah, that’s right, I’m hiring all these guys who look just like me, why not step out a little bit and learn something? So the next aide I had was black, and I learned so much. The feedback I got from him, and his reactions to things . . . it was a whole new leadership laboratory. (Study participant)

All particip ants recognized the import ance of mentors and mentoring in their careers. They spoke about their commitment to mentoring as well. They were the proudest of their mentoring of female and minority soldiers.

Engaging in substantive discussions and learning around race and gender issues, and having the self-awareness to accept feedback regardless of rank Self-awareness was another character istic of the participants’ feedback. In his article discussing strategic leadership competencies, Leonard Wong defined identity as a “meta-competency.” According to Wong, the Army Training and Leader Development (ATLD) panel considers meta-competency in terms of “the ability to gather self-feedback, to form accur ate self-perceptions, and to change one’s self-concept as appropriate” (Wong 2004, p. 2). Part of the process is learning to correct weaknesses. One particip ant described this type of learning from direct relationships with female and minority soldiers:

I had a very good counselor, female, who was a little bit rude, but she helped me a lot because I think I opened the door for her one day, and I outranked her by a number of levels. So when you grow up opening the door for females, you never want to lose your “knight in shining armor” chivalrous position of being one who would want to do that. So, here I am, Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 a brigade commander, and I’m letting my old bringing-up take over, but I was differentiating, because if she was right behind me I would come and open the door and let her through it, and ask her to go ahead of me, where if it was just a bunch of males, I’d walk through first. And so she counseled me. She said, “You know, you think you’re doing me a favor? You think you’re doing me a favor doing that? You’re discriminat ing. Don’t do that.” I said, “Oh, my God, you’ve got to be kidding,” but she was right. (Study participant) 98 R. Yuengling More than once the particip ants recalled situations in which they were caught between old-fashioned ideas of chivalry, social rules learned in childhood, and the need to treat women in the military fairly and hold them to the same stand ards as any other soldier. They received forceful feedback from the women:

So I picked her [to be my aide]. And she was about 5′2″ and very thin, very slight. And we traveled, in Europe, with heavy bags. So, we’re getting off the plane at one of the airports there and we were on a week-long trip, so I have this huge heavy suitcase and this wardrobe bag. And the pilot and crew, and they’re throwing these bags off and she’s handling them, which is the job of an aide but I was, you know, I thought I should help her with these bags. And she looked at me and said, “Get out of here! Please! Leave!” I got this, and then I realized what she was telling me. “I got it, just get out! Get away from here!” And it was. She was being pretty direct with me. A lieutenant talking to a general like that! I’ll never forget it. (Study participant)

An important component of “feedback courage” is the willingness to engage on a substantive level about the usually taboo subjects of race and gender. Feedback courage with these particip ants was striking. They were willing to talk openly about the issues, however controversial, with the people around them. On the sub jects of race and gender, these men approached feedback as an opportunity to learn from experi ence and obtain informa tion to improve their leadership skills:

Boy, when it came to getting it right with females and blacks, we relied on NCOs for advice. I always asked my NCOs their counsel: What’s the right thing to do? What do you think? I was very lucky to have really well- qualified NCOs. I got slammed up one day; I’ll never forget it. I was in a seminar with 15. You know how they get 15 guys and girls and they mix you up, and I was over here at [location in DC] with a woman whom I had known in the Pen tagon. I was giving a presenta tion to the group or something and [the woman] said something, and I said, “Thanks, dear,” or something like that. And, I didn’t mean it wrong, it just sorta came out. Well, she dressed my ass down royally. (Study participant) Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016

This example, using the word “dear” to address a female peer, is patronizing. It also contains a code message guaranteed to be inter preted by both men and women as dismissing the importance of what the woman has said. If he had been a superior instead of a peer, the female officer would have confronted a much more difficult problem. Challenging a senior leader, especially in a public setting, presents a career risk. Through their feedback courage and willingness to engage in a conversation about the impact and importance of race and gender, participants learned Leading across diversity 99 important lessons about leadership and diversity. They did not make the mistake of believing such a conversation would somehow show bias.

Challenging in-group racism and code talk. Participants openly engaged on the issue of discrimination with other whites rather than enlist in racist behavior. One particip ant remembered a heated dis cussion about affirmative action that took place between him and other whites in the presence of black officers:

I got into it a while ago. I gave a [presenta tion] to some senior officers in New York. I was a one-star general. There was a colonel sitting across from me, a reservist, a firefighter. After the [talk], we were standing in small groups having a drink, just talking, and this guy started talking about affirm ative action and how screwed up it was. There were great people who couldn’t be firefighters in New York because they were white andnot minority. He was going on and on about it, and there was a black officer standing there listening to this crap. I was watching their reaction. I said to the guy, “Now wait a minute, if you didn’t have affirmative action, how many blacks would you have in the fire department?” [He said] “Well, I don’t have any trouble with them.” [I said], “That wasn’t the question; how many would you have?” I remember going through the training, the training they do at Patrick Air Force Base. They show you where you start from and where you will end up. You know, if you’re gonna start here [describes a diversity training exercise based on organizations with a low recruitment of minorities] just before you get up there you pull them? So I took this guy on; we went through this, and finally he had no answer. So I took this guy on, you know, he got all flustered, don’t have any answers, and after a while he got to a point, he said, “Well, I guess there are some advantages, but I don’t like the way it’s been implemented.” Started talking procedural things, conversation kind of died away. So after he left, I looked at the black lieu tenant colonel and I said, “Well, now . . . how do you feel?” He said, “Same way you do.” And the other thing, I said, OK, now I am in a position of leadership, obviously out of 33 men ages 17 to 30 you got some who are preju diced, some who are not, and some who could care less about anything. So when Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 ever I heard somebody say anything not complimentary or indicated they had prejudices, I’d stop ’em right away. I let people know right off I did not appreciate that kind of language or whatever. I can’t say I suffered in any way for doing it. (Study participant)

So important was speaking out on the subject of racism and code talk that four participants described regret about not challenging racist talk. In all cases, they identified these times as personal failures: 100 R. Yuengling There were probably times when I heard someone say something that I probably realized I should have told them no. And I didn’t, out of laziness, or I didn’t want to create a scene. . . . I don’t know. (Study participant)

Didn’t say anything, and it always bothered me. When I was in a situation one day and every once in a while you hear a superior officer say something and . . . you know, it would be all you could do to just stop from walking away. Probably should. (Study participant)

The ability of the particip ants to challenge other whites on racist or code talk was enhanced by the Army’s approach to integration. The Army has zero toler ance for racist talk; to engage in or tolerate it is widely understood to be a “career killer.” Unlike corporations with no such policy, the Army position pro vided organizational support for particip ants to avoid enlistment in racism. Failure to confront racist talk is to be complicit in racist behavior and to collude with racism.

Task and team focus I’m not sure how valid this is, but it seemed to be my experience . . . when you’re on a winning team, cultural differences, ethnic difference, and differ ences of color or religion seem not to be as import ant. It’s a phenomenal thing because it’s exactly what you want, unit identity, as the underpinning . . . that’s how you build a cohesive team. So, I don’t think you can be a winning team for sure and have polarized attitudes. You cannot do that because you will for sure sub-optimize the talents that you have. (Study participant)

The term “task and team focus” means the presence and intersection of three critical and recurring compon ents: superordinate identity; unit cohesion; and task focus. These concepts are tightly interwoven in existing research literature and in the experi ence of the participants. They refer to the way a group of people function together and their ability to complete the task they have been assigned. The intersection of task and team is almost a pure definition of high perform Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 ance, or the lack of it, in organizations.

Task focus All particip ants viewed successful completion of the mission as imperative. The “mission” could be large or small, but accomplishment of task was a driving force in all their discussions. The association of task cohesion and performance is entirely consistent with liter ally hundreds of studies in organizational and industrial psychology on the import ance of goal-setting for performance (Lock Leading across diversity 101 and Latham 1990). This interlocking connection between superordinate identity, unit cohesion, and task focus is resounded again and again in the words of the participants:

They’re all equal, especially in the military, we have the mission, we gotta do the mission. . . . I don’t care what race you are, as long as you are doing your share for what we have to accomplish, then it doesn’t matter what color – everybody’s gonna get treated fairly. The ones that take responsibility and complete the mission are gonna be the ones who show the capabilities to be able to do that. It never enters my mind about why I should be thinkin’ about it [race/gender]. To do the mission. And, if you can’t have unity of effort in that, I mean if you can’t “charge the hill.” If you cannot give mission-type orders and depend on your people to carry them out, then the whole concept of training is bankrupt. So there’s great risk if you don’t have that. Everyone in the Army is here for a reason. We all have a mission to do; we all support one another. If there wasn’t a reason for a unit, it wouldn’t be there. You need to do your job for the sake of those who are depending on you. (Study participant)

Seeing the team as having a group identity larger than racial, ethnic and gender identities One thing that I think is such a key fundamental point of basic leadership in this is to understand the fear that is contained in the people who need to be just part of the group. (Study participant)

Strongly present in all interviews was the idea of a group identity greater than the individual. In this sense the particip ants all expressed “superordinate iden tity.” Superordinate identity – known as “Army Green” – means that all soldiers, whether white, black, Hispanic, or Asian share the same group identity, the bigger, more encompassing identity of being a soldier. As members of different groups conceive of themselves more as a single, superordinate group than as two separate groups, they will have more posit ive attitudes toward one another. The concept of individuals being “soldiers” did not negate racial, ethnic, or gender Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 identities. Those identities remained intact and recognized, representing more of a balancing of identities, not a hierarchy. In his seminal 1954 work, The Nature of Prejudice, Gordon Allport developed the “contact hypothesis.” His theory has three components: increased contact or interaction alone is insufficient to reduce preju dice or hostility; such contact can also lead to increased stereotypes and hostility; and interracial relations will improve if the situation is structured to provide equal status for minority and majority group members and is supplemented with strong institutional support for positive social relations such as shared goals. 102 R. Yuengling Many variants of this theory have since been developed. Most involve chang ing people’s categorization of their membership in one group to a larger, more inclusive group (Dovidio et al. 2001).3 Simply put, the concept is seeing the group as a team rather than a collection of diverse people. The military works very effectively to encourage the “recategorization” of individuals into the larger group by diminishing the import ance of the subgroup. This same concept appears in corporations as well – albeit to a lesser extent – as demon strated by the proliferation of golf shirts and baseball caps with company logos. For women and minorit ies, racial and gender identities can never be elimin ated. They can develop a superordinate identity when culturally competent leaders create envir onments where the higher level identity is recognized and racial and gender identity does not hold primary importance.

Commitment to unit cohesion Closely related to group identification and superordinate identity is unit cohe sion, an immensely important aspect of both military and organizational life. The Dictionary of United States Army Terms defines unit cohesion as “the result of controlled interactive forces that lead to solidarity within military units, directing the soldiers toward common goals with the express commitment to one another and to the unit as a whole” (Army Force Management School online). Unit cohe sion cannot be separated from task focus because the point of being cohesive is to accomplish a shared goal or task. Unit cohesion was present as an integral part of all the particip ants’ narratives:

I had women in this company, and they lived in the “WAC shack.” The WACs actually I think in ’74 or ’75 were disbanded and are now integ rated. The WAC shack was a building where all the females lived regardless of unit. So, all the men were in a barracks . . . all the men of the company, working and living together. And the women were not only isolated but didn’t have unit integrity even within the WAC shack. I was the first in the entire area to take my women out of the WAC shack and put them with my men. Because I thought that if you are a unit, you are a unit. (Study participant)

Thus, a critical component to culturally compet ent leadership is the recog nition Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 and development of the team or unit identity, cohesion, and task focus. One fear raised about the integration of blacks in the 1940s was the perceived potential for a negative impact on unit cohesion. That argument continues to be raised today with regard to women and gay people. While the research on the impact of women on unit cohesion is inconclusive, the RAND study, New Opportunities for Military Women (Harrell and Miller 1997), examined the readiness, cohe sion, and morale of selected units. The study found that when compared to other issues such as leadership and operational tempo, gender is not perceived as affecting readiness or morale. When a leader creates a cohesive unit, the possible Leading across diversity 103 conflict due to the presence of other identities is greatly reduced. The leadership skill present in the particip ants and applicable to all organiza tions with diverse workforces was the ability to fuse together the concepts of superordinate iden tity, task focus, and unit cohesion:

My perception was the Army wanted us to be cohesive and be a team and in order to do that you cannot permit that kind of thing [discrimination] to happen in a unit. I think this is a key to why we knew we had to do it, eve rybody needs to be able to stand up there, female, black, Hispanic, white, Asian, doesn’t matter, and do his or her part. (Study participant)

The theory This research began with the objective to identify and analyze the skills, charac teristics, and interrelational patterns of leaders who are able to lead effectively across diversity. In accordance with grounded theory methodology, the design did not incorpor ate testing a hypothesis. Instead, the objective was to formulate a theory based on the data presented. Through interviews with nine officers iden tified as culturally competent leaders, the data have defined a set of behaviors. An emergent theory has been formulated:

To be an effective culturally competent leader, i.e., to lead effectively across race and gender, a leader must have present five character istics or com petencies: fairness, standards, feedback courage, transformative awareness, and task and team focus. All five must be present tansimul eously. If even one is missing, a leader is unlikely to be effective leading across diversity.

In addition to all being present, the five character istics must work interactively as a participant moves through the process of leading diverse populations. There is no first step. Some examples illustrate the interactive nature of the five components. Transformative awareness allows white males to step out of the invis ible cocoon of privilege and denial, and understand the very real barriers women and minorities confront. They come to recognize as often baseless and false the Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 charges against women and minorit ies as being too sensitive, or not working hard enough, or bringing their problems on themselves. They see the impact of the biased environ ment in which women and minorit ies live their lives.

It really opened my eyes to how individual prejudices taint things. This probably had the biggest impression on me, because I used it over the years to describe . . . uh . . . how we really have to understand what it is that we’re doing. (Study participant) 104 R. Yuengling Transformative awareness allows leaders to see women and minorit ies as people with racial, ethnic, and gender character istics, but not defined by those character istics. Leaders can treat them with fairness, expect them to meet standards, and provide the feedback necessary for them to do so. Barriers to high performance created by bias are removed, and trust in their competence increases, both leading to greater group cohesion. Commitment to standards means having an expected level of competence that all must meet. The standard of performance must be clearly defined and under stood by all.

What you need to do is understand the job . . . what is it in this job that is really import ant? How is it measured? What does “good” look like in this job? (Study participant)

The phrase “the soft racism of lowered expectations” captures in part what is meant here. There is no reason to expect or accept a lower level of performance from women and minorities. Adherence to standards means that the standard is set; those who can meet it, meet it; and those who do not, do not. White men cannot be promoted just because they “fit” the organization better, or because they are someone’s buddy, or because one is more comfortable with them, or because they do things “the way we do around here.” Closely intertwined with standards is the concept of feedback. As stated earl ier, women and minorities frequently do not get the feedback important to improving their performance. They also frequently do not get the mentoring and coaching essential to high performance. They may not recognize that they are not meeting the standards. Another critical aspect of feedback is an absolute zero policy on racial code talk. This policy in the military has teeth and has worked well. In the corporate world, racist commentary is rarely overt. The more preval ent covert form is still widely met with a wink and a nod, or with silence from those who might dis agree. A leader who strongly addresses such code talk sends a potent message about the fairness of the working environment to both the in-group and out- group:

She looked at me and said, “Get out of here! Please! Leave! I got this.” And Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 then I realized what she was telling me: “I got it. Just get out! Get away from here!” And it was . . . she was being pretty direct with me. A lieutenant talking to a general. I’ll never forget it. (Study participant)

Poorly managed, differences of race and gender can create problems in a group that have a deleterious effect on the accomplishment of the task. Task and team focus, awareness and cohesion of group member ship, and attention to task are essential to working together effectively: Leading across diversity 105 And so, one person not pulling their weight, or actually pulling against you, or against the mission can really have a detrimental effect and so I think that I was lucky in that respect. You know, this, needed 29 folks and we got 23, but we got all 23. We need to optimize all 23 of those folks. (Study participant)

Working together toward a common mission with faith in the competence of co- workers links to the concept of fairness:

We have the mission; we gotta do the mission. I don’t care what race you are, as long as you are doing your share for what we have to accomplish, then it doesn’t matter what color, everybody’s gonna get treated fairly. (Study participant)

Fairness is about understanding how to build teams and cohesion and task focus. And fairness is about consistency and taking care of people:

I’ll tell you that, you treat people fairly, and I always find that you’re rewarded in the end. I don’t think you can become a general without build ing teams. And you can’t build teams without treating people right. I think I’ve spent most of my time making sure that my subordinates were taken care of. (Study participant)

These examples serve to illustrate the ways the five concepts interact with one another. They show that the absence of one component will result in a leader who is less culturally competent than one with all five. Without transformative awareness, a leader may miss import ant aspects of reality that prevent real fair ness. Without adherence to standards a leader may let mediocre performance of in-group members pass to the detriment of higher-performing minorit ies, or the leader may feel coerced into promoting unprepared women and minorities to meet imposed goals or quotas. Without the task and team focus and commitment to the mission and unit cohesion, a leader may miss the import ance of adhering to standards in building trust in the competence of team mates. Without feed back, the leader may not ever reach transformat ive awareness. The skills, character istics, and interpersonal behaviors of culturally compet Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 ent leaders vary slightly from leadership character istics and include the notable addition of transformational awareness. Fairness, standards, feedback, and task and team focus can be readily identified in aspects of the Army values of loyalty, duty, respect, selfless service, honor, integrity, and personal courage. The Army’s emphasis on character leads the particip ants to take their commitment to leadership seriously, as well as their commitment to people. The essential component, the quality that makes them different from other competent leaders, is the transformational awareness experience. They come to recognize the existence of bias and discrimination combined with acceptance of personal 106 R. Yuengling responsibility to treat people as individuals. When transformational awareness is present, adherence to the more traditional and well-known aspects of leadership takes on greater significance. Transformational awareness by itself is not suffi cient to be a culturally competent leader. The other four character istics must also be present.

Conclusion This research identifies five character istics present in culturally competent leaders: fairness, standards, feedback, task and team focus, and transformat ive awareness. The emergent theory suggests that all five must be present simultan eously for a leader to effectively lead a diverse followership. If any one of these is missing, the leader will be ineffective leading a diverse followership.

Notes 1 The Army is organized into three services: Combat Arms includes the Infantry, Field Artillery, Aviation, Air Defense Artillery, Special Forces, and the Corps of Engineers. Combat Service Arms includes the Chemical Corps, Military Intelligence, Military Police, and Signal Corps. Combat Services Support includes the Ordnance, Quartermaster, Trans portation, Adjutant General, Finance, Judge Advocate General, and Medical Corps. 2 Malicious compliance is a phrase used to describe the behavior of a person who inten tionally inflicts harm by strictly following orders or regulations. An example might be when a manager faced with an affirmative action plan promotes a woman or minority who has not had the training or experience necessary to succeed in that position with the deliberate intention that the individual fail. The manager can then point to the affirmative action plan as unworkable and women and minorit ies as unqualified. 3 The Common In-Group Identity Model developed by these authors addresses this issue in greater depth. In more than ten years of experimentation, Gaertner and Dovidio (2001) show that activating superordinate identities – whether triggered by contact, cooperation, common fate, or interdependence – reduces intergroup hostility.

References Agars, M. (2004) “Reconsidering the Impact of Gender Stereotypes on the Advancement of Women in Organizations,” Psychology of Women Quarterly 28: 103–111. Argyis, C. and Schön, D. A. (1999) On Organizational Learning, 2nd edn., Reading, MA: Addison Wesley. Allen, T. and Eby, L. (2004) “The Effect of Mentoring Programs in Corporate Settings: A Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Meta-Analytical Review of the Literature,” Journal of Vocational Behavior 72 (2): 159–167. Army Force Management School (1998) The Army Dictionary, AR310-25, Ft. Belvoir. Online, available at: www.afms1.belvoir.army.mil/diction ary/disclaimx.html (accessed September 13, 2005). Barber, M. (2004, April 15) “All Charges Dropped, but Army Gags Yee,” Seattle Post Intelligencer: A-1. Bartol, K., Martin, D. and Kromkowski, J. (2003) “Leadership and the Glass Ceiling: Gender and Ethnic Group Influences on Leader Behaviors at Middle and Executive Levels,” Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies 9 (3): 8–20. Leading across diversity 107 Bennis, W. and Thomas, R. (2002) Geeks and Geezers, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publications. Brockner, J. (2006) “Why It’s so Hard to be Fair,” Harvard Business Review (March): 122–128. Carli, L. (1999) “Gender, Interpersonal Power, and Social Influence: Social Influence and Social Power, Using Theory for Understanding of Social Issues,” Journal of Social Issues (spring). Di Tomaso, N., et al. (2002) “Three Forms of Inequality: Advantage, Lack of Advantage, and Disadvantage,” Meeting report from session on Profiling and Ascription in Employment, American Sociological Association, Chicago, 2002. Dickens, F. and Dickens, J. (1982) The Black Manager: Making it in the Corporate World. New York: AMACOM. Dovidio, G., Niemann, S. and Snider, K. (2001) “Racial, Ethnic, and Cultural Differences in Responding to Differences and Discrimination on Campus: Stigma and Common Group Identity,” Journal of Social Issues 57 (1): 167–185. Duran, A. (2004) Interview by author, December 16, 2004. Foschi, F. (2004) “Double Standards for Competence: Theory and Research,” Annual Review of Sociology 26: 21–41. Gaertner, S. and Dividio, J. (2000) The Common Ingroup Identity Model. Philadel phia: Psychology Press. Harrell, M. and Miller, L. (1997) New Opportunities for Military Women: Effects Upon Readiness, Cohesion and Morale, Santa Monica: RAND. Kanter, E. (1997) Men and Women of the Corporation, New York: Basic Books. Laughlin, M. (2003, April 4) “Baptist Army Chaplain Uses Water to Coerce Soldiers’ Conversions,” Miami Herald, Sec. 1: 1. Leiby, R. (2003, November 6) “Christian Soldier,” Washington Post, Sec. C: 1. Livers, A. and Caver, K. (2003) Leading in Black and White: Working Across the Racial Divide in Corporate America , Greensboro: Center for Creative Leadership. Lock, E. A. and Latham, G. P. (1990) A Theory of Goal Setting and Task Performance, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall. Macintosh, P. (1993) “White Privilege and Male Privilege: A Personal Account of Coming to See Correspondences through Work in Women’s Studies,” in A. Minas (ed.) (2003), Gender Basics: Feminist Perspectives on Women and Men, Belmont: Wadsworth Presses. Parker, P. (2002) “Negotiating Identity in Raced and Gendered Workplace Interactions: The Use of Strategic Communication by African American Women Senior Executives within the Dominant Culture Organizations,” Communication Quarterly (summer– fall): 251–269. Wong, L. (2004) “Developing Adaptive Leaders: The Crucible of Experience of Opera

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 tion Iraqi Freedom,” Monograph for the Strategic Studies Institute, US Army War College, Carlisle Barracks. WorldNetDaily (2003) Patrick Buchanan, a Christian Soldier under Fire. Online, avail able at: http://wnd.com (accessed March 23, 2004). 6 Lessons learned on diversity across military organizations

Grazia Scoppio

Introduction This chapter builds on a previous research project conducted in 2007 that involved benchmarking between military organizations in Canada, Australia, the United Kingdom, the United States, and select police forces. Using a “lessons learned” (LL) approach, this chapter follows up on the previous research study by providing an updated overview of recent diversity strategies carried out across select military organizations in Canada and the United States, shares suc cessful practices, and identifies potential LL. The previous research project resulted in a technical report, Leadership in a Diverse Environment: Diversity Strategies in Military and Police Forces in Canada, Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States (Scoppio 2007). The highlights of the study were also summarized in an article published in the Canadian Military Journal (Scoppio 2009) and presented at national and inter national conferences, including the Inter-University Seminar of the Armed Forces and Society and the International Conference on Diversity. The report included successful practices identified in various organizations, as well as 14 recommendations for the Department of National Defence (DND) and the Canadian Forces (CF ), with a view to transition from a reactive to a proactive approach towards diversity: 1 Develop a unified diversity strategy, which is proactive, inclusive of all of the defense team, and adopts a broad perspective on diversity, beyond legal/ employment equity1 (EE) requirements and the demographic rationale. This integrated approach supports greater civilian–military cooperation, essential Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 in the new security environment. 2 Harmonize the EE cycles of military and civilian personnel to optimize resources and efforts. 3 Amalgamate diversity/EE directorates for CF and DND civilians, to support greater integration, avoid duplication of efforts, optimize resources, and address “common” needs of civilian and military members holistically, while recognizing the “specific” needs of military members. 4 Build capacity within DND/CF for an institute or section responsible for providing direction, coordination, and oversight of diversity research and Lessons learned on diversity 109 professional development (PD), in line with some of the models in other defense departments, such as DEOMI in the United States. 5 Include core Canadian diversity values as a component of CF leadership values. 6 Include diversity competencies within the CF PD framework by incorporat ing them as context-specific competencies, under the element of “social capacities.” 7 Continue to develop and integrate into “all” levels of PD system, specific diversity/EE awareness material, currently included only in basic training for officers and non-commissioned members (NCMs), and in one senior NCM leadership program. 8 Integrate diversity-related topics in different aspects of CF leadership train ing, not just as stand-alone modules. 9 Develop senior officer/executive diversity/EE awareness material for recently appointed general officers, flag officers, executives, and senior chief warrant officers, which could be delivered as a component of the executive leader program. 10 Implement outreach recruiting strategies that include: ethnic community leaders, affinity groups, parents of new recruits, and media. 11 Develop formal mentoring programs focusing on women, ethnic minorit ies, and Aboriginals.2 12 Organize a community forum with leaders from diverse Canadian com munities to identify ways for the CF to become more representative of the multicultural makeup of the Canadian population; 13 Formalize EE/diversity officers as a bona-fide job, requiring specific compe tencies, knowledge, and training. 14 Require all level 1 and level 2 (L1/L2) organiza tions, at a minimum, to have EE/diversity officer positions, responsible for advising, unit training coordination/delivery, EE tasks, and related activities.

Objectives and lessons learned questions As a follow-up to the previous study, the object ives of this chapter are to:

• convey any feedback received on previous 2007 research; • report new information gathered on recent key diversity strategies carried

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 out in the past 4–5 years; • identify challenges encountered, as well as successes; and • share LLs and best practices.

Several organizations concerned with diversity issues were contacted within the Canadian and US Departments of Defense (DoD) and asked to report on key diversity strategies conducted in recent years in order to identify key items:

• What worked well – or didn’t work well – for this strategy? • What needs to be done over or differently? 110 G. Scoppio • What factors were not anticipated? • Were the goals attained? If not, what changes need to be made to meet goals in the future? (See Appendix for survey questions).

Every effort was made to contact as many organizations as possible within the limita tions of time and resources. Many organizations responded positively, some providing specific answers to the LL questions, others providing docu ments, reports, or briefs on their diversity efforts. A few organiza tions did not respond, or had a nil response. The chapter will focus on the organizations that did provide informa tion for the study.

Definitions According to the policy of the Canadian Department of National Defense, LL is defined as: “The adding of value to an existing body of knowledge, or seeking to correct deficiencies in areas of concepts, policy, doctrine, training, equipment or organizations, by providing feedback and follow-on action” (Canadian Depart ment of National Defense 2004, p. 1). Through a systematic LL process, organizations can gather lessons to con tinuously improve their operations. Identifying and analyzing lessons helps organizations to discover deficiencies and problems, determine the root causes, and propose solutions to fix or avoid those problems in the future. At the same time, an LL process can help to identify successes and determine what factors facilitated those successes. By documenting a LL process, organizations can learn from each other’s lessons and share best practices. Diversity has a broad meaning and can include culture, ethnicity, language, religion, ability and disability, education, socioeconomic background, and sexual orientation. Diversity strategies describe any activity, program, process, project, or policy intended to address “organizational diversity,” that is to say within the organiza tion as well as workforce, players, stakeholders, and clients external to the workplace.

Canadian Department of National Defense

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Feedback on previous research report (2007) The Director of Human Rights and Diversity (DHRD) was the sponsor of the project and was overall supportive of many recom mendations in the report pre sented at the Defense Diversity Council in 2008. The point of contact (POC) from DHRD provided comments on the 2007 report with the caveat that some of the recom mendations fall outside of their mandate: recommendations 5–9 fall under the Canadian Defense Academy (CDA) and recommendation 10 under the Canadian Forces Recruiting Group (CFRG). DHRD identified the POCs from CDA and CFRG that would be able Lessons learned on diversity 111 to provide feedback on training, education, and recruiting activities related to diversity. Unfortunately, no response was received from the POC from CFRG and a nil reply was received from the CDA POC provided. In actual fact, the commander of the CDA personally signed the cover letter for the report and supported recommendations 5–9 related to leadership and common education/training falling under his authority and encouraged the chief of military personnel (CMP) to consider the remaining recommendations for implementation within his other organiza tions, which include the DHRD. Subse quently, some of the recommendations have been reflected in some of the activ ities actioned by the CDA and DHRD. The DHRD agrees, for the most part, with the content of the chapter on Canada. Some of the informa tion should be updated in the future. For example, the CF EE plan is a five-year plan versus an annual plan for which the DHRD is the office of primary interest (OPI) (Canadian Department of National Defense 2006); Black Bear is a new recruiting program for Aboriginals (Craig 2009); the demographics tables are out of date. The follow ing are comments provided on some of the recommendations from the 2007 report pertaining to the DHRD. For some of the recommendations, the DHRD had nothing to report (NTR).

• Reference recommendation no. 1: The Defense Diversity Council (DDC) provides the center-piece of the unified CF/DND diversity framework. The CF and DND utilize a common consultative mechan ism, the Defense Advi sory Groups, to hear from and consult with the grassroots of the department on EE issues and to help identify systemic barriers. Joint CF/DND EE work shops are normally held each year. Otherwise, the two organizations operate independently on the EE front, with different regulatory requirements. As an example, the CF EE Working Group was set-up in 2008 and addresses CF EE issues only. • Reference recom mendation no. 2: Requests for military and civilian annual inputs to the EE and multiculturalism reports are now issued simultaneously. The depart ment issues a combined CF/DND multiculturalism report each year and the CF submits its annual EE report in accordance with CF EE regula tions. DND statist ics are “rolled up” in the Federal Public service EE report. • Reference recom mendation no. 3: There has been no effort made to consider amalgamation of the DHRD with the Director of Diversity and Well Being Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 (DDWB).3 Given the EE regulatory differences between the military and civilian organizations, no apparent advantage was seen in going down this road. • Reference recommendation no. 4: There has been no effort made to explore this recommendation, particu larly in view of HR costs. • Reference recommendation no. 12: A visible minorit ies forum was held in May 2009. There was a follow-up by the Navy during the Great Lake deployment in summer 2010, where elders and influencers were met and bridges were built. 112 G. Scoppio Progress made since 2007 In terms of the progress made since 2007 on some of the areas related to the recommendations, the follow ing were reported:

• Reference recommendation no. 1: Military and civilian organizations come together at the DDC. Unfortunately, this forum has lost some momentum over the past few years. A review of the CF/DND EE governance is nearing completion and a new strategic council may replace the DDC. • Reference recommendation no. 2: Greater efficiency for L1s in preparing annual CF and DND EE submissions. • Reference recommendation no. 11: The DND has implemented a mentoring program which is available to all DND employees, including (but not spe cific to) designated group members (DGMs). While this is included as an item in the CF EE plan, thus far it has not been progressed. • Reference recommendation no. 12: The DHRD held the first visible minor ity forum in May 2009. Representa tion included representatives from the six major demographic centers and from the main cultures within those cities. A follow-up took place in summer 2010 during the Navy Great Lake deployment and another visible minority forum is planned for 2011. Abori ginal forums are held 2–3 times per year. • Reference recom mendation no. 14: In accordance with the CF EE plan, L1 and L2 organizations are required to have designated EE officers. This is the case for L1s and for most of the main L2s.

Recent key diversity strategies implemented/in progress (past 4–5 years) The follow ing are the key diversity initiatives recently implemented:

• A 2010 revision of the CF EE plan updated the 2006 EE plan by reviewing progress and updating EE goals and object ives. It is a strategic-level five- year plan which outlines CF activities and performance goals in support of EE and diversity in all environ mental commands and L1 organizations. • Reviews of the CF officer and NCM general specifica tion were conducted in 2009 and 2010, respectively, led by the CDA, which included updating the tasks, skills, knowledge, and attitudes related to EE, human rights, diversity,

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 and ethics. • A review of the Religious and Spiritual Accommodation policy is in pro gress in order to replace the interim Religious Accommodation policy issued in January 1998. Accommodations include the rights of worship observance, dietary practices, dress, appear ance, and medical requirements. • Two new CF Aboriginal programs were created since 2007: • Aboriginal Leadership Opportunity Year (ALOY), 2008 (Royal Mili tary College) • Black Bear, 2009 Lessons learned on diversity 113 The key objectives of CF Aboriginal programs are to recruit, develop, and retain Aboriginal persons in a manner respectful of their cultures.

Strategies highlights (activities, programs, processes, projects, policies)

What worked well? Several CF Aboriginal programs showed some progress as they have matured and are better advertised. The number of students attending and then transferring to CF regular or reserve forces upon graduation has increased over the past three years. Regarding the ALOY program, an LL report was authored by the CDA LL division to identify areas for improvement and make recommendations. Although some changes have been made to the program since its inception, the program is still in its infancy and continues to evolve. The publication Religions in Canada was re-edited in 2009 and was well received by DND/CF organizations and re-ordered by several organizations. Representation of Aboriginal people in the CF increased between 2006 and 2010. Possible contributing factors are: the CF Aboriginal programs, the Aboriginal forum, and the evolving relationship/partner ship with the Aboriginal veterans. Representation of visible minorities also increased, likely due to demo graphics and the economy.

What didn’t work well? Representation of women in the CF has stalled at 15 percent for the past three years. The increase in recruitment in Army-related occupations due to the Afghanistan mission where, historically, less women join contributed to the overall representa tion “plateau.” Members of visible minorities are still under-represented in the CF compared to the rest of the Canadian workforce. Statistic Canada reports that

Only 6% of all CF members (5% of regular forces and 11% of reservists) were visible minorit ies, compared with 17% of the civilian working popula tion. This is much lower than the US military’s rate of 33% . . . Only 3% of Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 officers in the regular forces were members of visible minorit ies. Similarly, a very small portion were immig rants (6% compared with 21%). (Park 2008, p. 21)

As outlined in the 2007 report (Scoppio 2007), the CF do not currently recruit immig rants 4 and this policy impacts on the low rates of visible minority members. The POC indicated a need to re-energize the EE and diversity governance. A review of the CF EE governance framework is currently underway in concert 114 G. Scoppio with DND civilian counterparts to ensure resources are maximized. The new structure should expand the mandate of the DND/CF directorates responsible for employment equity beyond the four EE groups and embrace the larger concept of diversity (e.g., include gay and lesbian groups in working groups, forums, workshop, etc.).

What can we do differently? Involve the voices and contributions of Aboriginal and visible minority women to uncover specific issues related to gender and minority groups.

What factors were not anticipated? Drastic cuts in the operating budget of the DHRD combined with several vacant positions led to less outreach/awareness activ ities (including training and education). The DHRD recommends re-instating an operating budget to permit:

• outreach with communit ies and organization of national events; • an increase in the number of social studies; and • filling the position of Aboriginal desk officer in order to conduct more activ ities, initiatives, and communication with the Aboriginal community.

Were goals achieved? What were the outcomes? Most initiatives (73 percent) in the Action Plan of the CF EE plan are either completed, near completion, or solutions are in place. Twenty-three percent of initiatives have started but are experiencing resources issues, and 4 percent have not started. In 2011–2012 an in-depth employment system review (ESR) will be needed to “take the pulse” of the CF popula tion on diversity, employment equity, multi culturalism, etc. in order to measure success of past programs, evaluate where the CF stands in the diversity paradigm and set new goals.

United States Department of Defense Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Feedback on previous research report (2007) The report was well received in 2007 when it was distributed to the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI). Positive feedback was pro vided by DEOMI staff posting the report on the DEOMI website among the research resources, and forwarded to the DoD in Washington. Lessons learned on diversity 115 Recent key diversity strategies implemented/in progress (past 4–5 years) The input and informa tion provided by the DEOMI POC was not in the LL table format; instead, the POC provided unclassified documents and briefs. Recent DoD initiatives include:

• the Military Leadership Diversity Commission, 2008; • the Diversity Directive, 2009; and • the Office of Diversity Management Equal Opportunity (ODMEO) within the Director of Military Opportunity, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness).

The ODMEO was initially set up in 1994 and named Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Equal Opportunity. Clearly the recent addi tion of the wording “diversity management” acknowledges the broader outlook towards all diversity, beyond the scope of equity legislation. In addition, the transformation of the new office involves:

• forming the Diversity Working Group (US Department of Defense 2009); • establishing diversity offices within various defense components; • updating the advanced draft strategy; and • transforming the DEOMI.

The new vision of the ODMEO is to maintain a diverse, mission-ready force. The mission is to create a twenty-first-century corporate culture that values diversity and inclusion as a readiness imperative and strives for representational diversity at all levels through flag/general officer/senior executives (SEs) to provide a competit ive advantage in the war for talent.

Strategies highlights (activities, programs, processes, projects, policies) The three primary programs that ODMEO is involved with are:

• the Workforce Recruitment Program with the aim of 10 percent annual

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 growth of students with disabilit ies participating in DoD internships; • DoD cultural and diversity research opportunities through DEOMI around competencies to make equal opportun ity advisors more relev ant to future war efforts; and • expanding the “personnel pipeline” with a more diverse eligible pool of applicants interested in DoD employment and careers through internships and mentoring programs. 116 G. Scoppio What worked well? What didn’t work well? The two main challenges for the DoD are to increase the diversity of the force and of defense leadership. Having said that, the statistics provided show some minor increases in the numbers of women and other minority groups in the US forces overall.

What can we do differently? Some of the recommendations in the DoD Diversity Summit Report by RAND identify what could be done differently:

1 Have the Secretary of Defense spearhead the effort to improve diversity among DoD leadership. 2 Create an oversight committee with top leaders from diverse professional backgrounds. 3 Adopt a vision that combines attention to traditionally protected groups with aims for creating an inclusive environment. 4 Expand strategies beyond recruiting by integrating a DoD initiative such as “Diversity Leaders for the Twenty-first Century.” 5 Invest in and develop rigorous metrics on all dimensions that support a stra tegic diversity vision. 6 Design and apply a comprehensive diversity accountabil ity system with real rewards and consequences for individuals and groups.

What factors were not anticipated? Were goals achieved? What were the outcomes? It appears that some of the DoD goals and strategies were achieved with positive outcomes. One can only speculate about the unanticipated factors without receiv ing specific input from the DoD.

US Army

Feedback on previous research report (2007) Based on the feedback received by the Army diversity POC on the previous Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 research, the report was deemed well researched and should be updated in the future by adding recent Army diversity efforts.

Recent key diversity strategies implemented/in progress (past 4–5 years) The key recent strategy identified by the US Army POC is the Army Diversity Task Force established in 2007 to assess diversity across the Army. The result of that assessment was the revitalized Army Diversity Office, currently located Lessons learned on diversity 117 within the office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Manpower and Reserve Affairs (ASA (M&RA)) and created in order to develop diversity strat egy, policy, and oversight. The Army Diversity Office is now also involved with attendance at the senior executive diversity awareness training by DEOMI.

Strategies highlights (activities, programs, processes, projects, policies) At this time the US Army is in the midst of finalizing its diversity strategy. Through a comprehensive strategy and leader commitment that starts at the top, the Army is working to achieve its vision for diversity:

The national leader in embracing the strengths of diverse people in an inclu sive environment . . . investing in and managing talent, valuing individuals, and developing culturally astute Soldiers and Civilians who enhance our communities and are prepared for the human dimension of leadership and global engagements. (US Department of the Army 2010, p. 1)

The Army diversity marketing compet ency development and concept plans are also in the works and moving ahead.

What worked well? What didn’t work well? What can we do differently? According to the Army diversity informa tion paper (2010), its status as an employer of choice provides a competitive advantage in recruiting diverse milit ary and civilian personnel. Nonetheless, it is recognized that further progress is necessary given the predicted demographic shifts and the shrinking pool of avail able talent.

Were goals achieved? What were the outcomes? Based on the recent initiatives it appears that the US Army is progressing aggres sively with its diversity strategy and plans. The POC did not provide specific input regarding goals and outcomes. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016

US Navy

Feedback on previous research report (2007) No specific feedback was received by the US Navy POC regarding the previous research report. 118 G. Scoppio Strategies highlights (activities, programs, processes, projects, policies) The input provided by the Navy POC was not in the LL table format; instead, the POC provided a consolidated document with information on demographics, strategies, and programs. In 2008, Chief of Naval Operations, ADM Gary Roughead, published his Diversity Policy for the Navy. His message continues to resonate today with the US Navy personnel:

We must not be locked in time. As leaders, we must anticipate and embrace the demographic changes of tomorrow, and build a Navy that always reflects our Country’s make up. We must lead in ways that will continue to draw men and women to service to our Country and to our Navy. Diversity of thoughts, ideas, and competencies of our people, keeps our Navy strong, and empowers the protection of the very freedoms and opportunities we enjoy each and every day. (US Department of the Navy 2009, p. 1)

Based on current demographics, the pool of candidates available for military service in the United States is shrinking. Seventy-two percent of all 17–24-year- olds are ineligible for military service: 58 percent due to height/weight issues, moral issues, and or education deficiencies; another 14 percent score too low on the entry-level tests. The issue of a shrinking pool of eligible youth for military service was only mentioned by the Navy POC; however, this challenge is likely common to the other services. A possible solution could be to attract youth by offering incen tives very early in high-school to motivate them to maintain the required educa tional level and physical fitness in order to be eligible to join upon graduation. Consequently, the US Navy recruiting strategies aim at attracting and foster ing eligible individuals with the right capabil ities and talent. Given the complex and constantly changing operational environ ments, and the need to understand morals, customs, ideals, and perspectives of people of diverse cultures, the Navy is looking for the infusion of new ideas and diversity of thoughts. In line with this new approach towards diversity, and to take advantage of the largest possible talent pool in order to increase readiness, the US Navy is lifting

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 previous restrictions and is integrating women into the Submarine Force. In February 2010 the Secretary of Defense signed letters notifying the Congress of the Navy’s intention to change policy regarding the assignment of women to submarines. In April 2010 the Navy announced this policy change. Nineteen women were selected to be the first women to enter the submarine service. Once they have completed the initial training, the Navy is planning for assignment of these women on eight different crews of guided-missile attack and ballistic missile submarines. This initial integration of female officers will inform the way ahead for enlisted female integration. Lessons learned on diversity 119 What worked well? In 2007 Task Force Life/Work (TFLW) was established, with the mission to deliver the policies, programs, and changes aiming to enhance US sailors’ life– work balance. This task force was created to examine initiatives the US Navy could influence through icypol change, identify efforts that require DoD/Con gressional approval for engagement, and solicit feedback from the fleet on desired changes. The US Navy, along with other top-50 employers, has recognized that parent ing is a priority, workplace flexibility is the key, and workers have a demand for balance. The Navy has progressed significantly in this area over the last three years and has implemented several initiatives including:

• operational deferment for new mothers to support breastfeeding, bonding, and infant childcare; • administrative leave for adoptive parents and in-vitro fertilization cost offset; • paternity leave for a married sailor whose wife gives birth to a child; • new childcare center and in-home childcare programs; • a telework program for some personnel utilizing Outlook Web Access, Defense Knowledge Online, and Defense Connect Online to create a virtual workspace; • a results-oriented work environ ment: “outside the box” flexibility based on results regardless of where or when personnel work; and • the Career Intermission Pilot program, which provides an “off ramp” for 20 officers and 20 enlisted each year. Participants exit active duty for upto three years, but maintain all medical, dental, commissary, and Navy Exchange benefits and receive a small stipend.

In terms of US Navy diversity training, there are briefs delivered within various courses at the Command Leadership School, Department Head School, as well as in Senior Enlisted Academy and many enlisted training programs. All flag officers and SEs attend the executive leadership course, which includes a brief on diversity. In addition, a semi-annual Fleet Diversity Council is held each year in two fleet concentration areas that provide training on the topic of diversity by corpor

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 ate and private speakers. Additional general military training has been estab lished for diversity and has been made electronically accessible fleet-wide. Finally, cultural training programs have also been implemented, referred to as Language Regional Expertise and Culture (LREC). The programs have been developed within the Office of the Chief of Naval Personnel in order to provide pre-deployment training, cultural training, and help identify people that speak languages other than English. 120 G. Scoppio Were goals achieved? What were the outcomes? Based on the recent initiatives it seems the US Navy’s diversity strategy and plans are progressing well. In particular, the recent integration of women in the Submarine Force will allow the US Navy to achieve true gender integration. The POC did not provide specific input regard ing goals and outcomes.

United States Marine Corps

Feedback on previous research report (2007) Regarding the previous research report, the POC from the USMC highlighted some key changes occurring since 2007, including an increase in the total number of personnel as well as an increase in the ‘other’ category of officers.

Recent key diversity strategies implemented/in progress (past 4–5 years) The USMC falls under the authority of the Department of the Navy, so some information, particu larly at the strategic level, is similar. In 2008 the USMC published its Diversity Policy (US Marine Corps 2008). As a result of a diversity summit, the Marine Corps also developed a diversity strategy, currently under review by the Diversity Review Board (DRB) and director of manpower. Equal opportunity (EO) guidelines and accountability measures are in place and the USMC reports annually to the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) on harassment complaints and training. The USMC is developing a diversity metrics function within existing man power performance indicators. This new functionality will show gains and losses due to promotions into and out of selected pay grades. The career management life cycle will be evaluated by accession, military occupation specialty selection, assignments, school selection, command selection, retention, and attrition. This enhanced functionality will enable the USMC to gain current, detailed, and actionable informa tion to identify potential trends within the total force. In terms of research, the 2010 Climate Survey was deployed online and included new questions regarding inclusion and engagement to gauge leadership involvement with subordinates. The survey includes 18 specific areas related to command climate, discrimination, and sexual harassment. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016

Strategies highlights (activities, programs, processes, projects, policies) Since 2006 the USMC has increased its strength from 179,000 to 202,000 and achieved this target ahead of schedule. The Marine Corps Recruiting Command (MCRC) attempts to maintain a good balance of diversity, looking at all segments of society. They are currently focusing on the role of African- American and Hispanic influencers, especially the role of parents in prospects’ Lessons learned on diversity 121 decision-making and how their perspectives on the military, enlistment, and related issues affect decisions to join the USMC. The USMC recruits minority enlisted marines and officers in numbers that are close to the representation of minorities in the general US population. Retention is strong in the enlisted ranks across all demographics. Some of the recruiting strategies used by the USMC include:

• outreach through participation in affinity conferences such as the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), the League of United Latin American citizens (LULAC), Historical Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU), and the Central Intercollegiate Athletic Association (CIAA); • the Leadership Workshop, designed to teach college students the USMC leadership traits and how to apply them to their graduation efforts; and • articles and other editorial content showcasing the diverse nature of the USMC.

Mandatory EO annual training is delivered through a one-hour period of instruction. Each command implements this training in different ways, either integrated into a program or as a stand-alone brief. There are different versions and levels of EO training depending on rank. In addition, cultural training is included in pre-deployment training. Newly appointed brigadier generals and SEs attend the Senior Executive EO Seminar (SEEOS), part of the week-long Brigadier General Orientation Course (BGSOC). The SEEOS is a one-day course delivered by DEOMI through contracted trainers and guest speakers. The way ahead will be to infuse all professional military education (PME) with diversity training. To do so, the Manpower Equal Opportunity Branch (MPE) has partnered with Training and Education Command (TECOM) and Le Jeune Leadership Institute (LLI). Another new focus area for the USMC is the implementation of formal men torship programs. The USMC is currently previewing the e-mentoring program for implementation.

What worked well? In 2009 the USMC created a DRB, which involves several organizations Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 responsible for the oversight of all diversity objectives. The DRB is deemed a successful practice, with consistent participa tion to its monthly meetings of all relevant organizations within the USMC.

What didn’t work well? The directed assignments of combat arms Military Occupational Specialties (MOSs) were not deemed a worthwhile approach. Instead, it is being recom mended to leverage mentoring, in order to influence minority preferences. 122 G. Scoppio What can we do differently? Best practices and collaborations should be leveraged more effectively, such as the DoD diversity working group for networking and sharing of successful methods.

What factors were not anticipated? Additional requirements, such as the Military Leadership Diversity Commission (MLDC) and the Government Accountability Office (GAO) requests for briefs or information were not anticipated. The recommended improvement is to route external requirements through the OSD to be collated and edited for the services. The use of the Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) could reduce much redundancy.

Were goals achieved? What were the outcomes? Metric analysis allowed for better understanding of minority representation and it is recommended to institute a more iterative and periodic process. In addition, the new and increased recruiting efforts have allowed the USMC to attract more competitive minority officer prospects. It would be advantageous to analyze results in order to determine the return on investment.

United States Coast Guard

Feedback on previous research report (2007) The USCG is a military organization within the US Department of Homeland Security, and was included in the previous study. No specific feedback on the previous research report was offered by the USCG POC.

Strategies highlights (activities, programs, processes, projects, policies) The USCG POC did not provide input in the LL table format; rather, a consoli dated response was made available on their recent diversity efforts as well as Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 various documents concerning the USCG strategic planning approach to diver sity management. In the view of the USCG total workforce, diversity is a critical mission readi ness issue and they need to recruit and retain the best human capital the nation has to offer. In 2009 the USCG published its Diversity Strategic Plan, which sets the dir ection to better position USCG leaders to make optimal diversity-related business decisions (US Coast Guard 2009). The strategic plan highlights the con text for developing the Coast Guard’s leadership, direction and priorities and Lessons learned on diversity 123 provides a road map for execution within the constraints of a changing environ ment, shifting personnel, and budget prior ities. The USCG’s Diversity Strategic Plan has five main goals:

1 Assure a diverse workforce through all-hands commit ment with leadership accountability. 2 Fully utilize communication and focus groups to improve workforce cultural climate. 3 Expand outreach to under-represented populations. 4 Equitable hiring and career opportun ities for all employees. 5 Optimize training and education to emphasize the value of a diverse workforce.

The implementation strategy covers three specific categor ies of action:

1 Key leadership actions to achieve desired goals. 2 A communication and training strategy to publicize the message and gain involvement, ownership, and skills needed to address diversity training and concerns. 3 Recommendations on modifying the infrastructure to continu ally support necessary reforms to achieve diversity goals.

The plan also outlines the USCG diversity vision:

The Coast Guard will be recognized as the “Service of Choice” in the federal govern ment to Recruit, Retain, and Support a ready, capable, diverse, and highly skilled Total Workforce. (US Coast Guard 2009)

To implement its Diversity Strategic Plan, a focused campaign plan is being implemented, OPTASK DIVERSITY, which provides an operational framework to achieve the USCG diversity vision by aligning the component-level strategic goals with tactical field-level action and related measurable performance objectives.

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 What worked well? The USCG diversity management approach and process has been recognized as “leading-edge” by govern ment and industry leaders, as well as the World Bank, which cited the Coast Guard to be a best-practice model: “The United States Coast Guard (USCG) is enhancing its commitment to building and sustaining an organizational climate in which people of diverse backgrounds, cultures, races, religions, and ethnicities are fully included, valued, and respected” (Stohlman 2010, p. 2). 124 G. Scoppio What didn’t work well? What can we do differently? In terms of barriers and opportunities to improve, the USCG POC shared some results from previous research conducted in 1999, to show the progress made by the USCG in the past years based on research and lessons identified. Previous cultural audits in the USCG have shown areas of strength, opportun ities to improve, and future challenges regarding the potential for individual achievement for all members of the USCG team. Based on surveys conducted, respondents were proud to tell others they were part of the USCG, and were willing to exceed expectations to help achieve the USCG missions. They felt they were part of a socially responsible organization that produces quality work under positive leadership. They displayed confidence and trust in their co-workers. Four specific areas of USCG strength were:

1 Organizational pride and job satisfaction: members are proud to be part of the USCG. 2 Social responsibility: members feel the USCG is socially responsible. 3 Supervisory leadership: most members viewed their supervisors as positive role models. 4 Work group processes: teamwork contrib utes to the USCG’s success.

Based on this research, the USCG identified some challenges, including:

• the perception of career obstacles that prevent personnel from achieving their full potential; and • communication barriers that hinder quality and efficiency.

Opportunities to improve were in areas of personnel involvement, quality pro grams, rewards, recog nition and pay, and adopting a strategic approach to suc cessfully achieve USCG diversity goals.

Were goals achieved? What were the outcomes? The POC stated that since 1999 the USCG has become a model in the Joint Service Community with their Diversity Strategic Plan, which addresses the neces

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 sary reform that will enable the USCG to build an institutional capacity that will improve and capitalize on workforce diversity. As well, the deployment of the executive outreach system allowed the USCG to meet all their market strategies.

Summary and conclusion The previous research conducted received some feedback by a few POCs. All the POCs provided updated information regarding recent key diversity strategies and activities carried out in their respective organizations in the past 4–5 years. This was done either through various documents or using the LL templates pro Lessons learned on diversity 125 vided. Not all of the POCs shared challenges encountered or lessons identified. Perhaps this is due to the fact that diversity organiza tions in general are not accustomed or linked to the LL process, which is normally used in defense by LL organizations within the context of operations. It is noteworthy that no input was provided from either the US or the Cana dian side regarding two controversial policies currently still in place in the respective militaries.5 In the United States, the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy does not allow gay and lesbian members of the US military to openly identify their sexual preference. A US court of appeals ruled that it is the responsibility of the US Congress to repeal this law. Secretary of Defense Gates announced that a report on the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy will be released at the end of November 2010: “All I know is, if this law is going to change, it’s better that it be changed by legislation, rather than have it struck down by the courts with the potential for us having to implement it immediately” (Dougherty 2010). In Canada there is a policy that prevents immigrants from joining the military. This seems to be negatively impacting the numbers of visible minority members joining the CF. Furthermore, this policy is out of sync with the demographics of the Canadian workforce and immigration statistics. Having said that, there are other reasons to explain the under-representation of visible minorities in the CF, such as the fact that some groups of immigrant descent are unlikely to join because they fled countries with military regimes, as well as having security clearance issues. Perhaps it is true that Canadians (and perhaps Americans, also) have a mis conception of how well multiculturalism really works:

Canadians have watched the uproar in Europe – where multiculturalism has been roundly condemned for fostering differ ence and damaging national cohesion – comforted by the thought that their own society seems so much more tolerant. The story we tell ourselves about multiculturalism is a tale of inherent Canadian virtue. The trouble is it’s not true. (Friesen and Martin 2010, p. 1)

Despite talk of changing both of these policies by the respective governments, no real progress has been made in changing them to date. Dealing with changes caused by the ever-increasing diversity of our populations is more difficult in very structured organizations with strong organizational cultures, such as the military. This requires leadership direction and forward vision to support accom Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 modation and inclusion. At the same time, the new recruits in Canadian and American militaries must adapt to and respect the policies and processes of the organizations they are joining when they are based on democratic principles such as gender equality. In conclusion, this overview of key diversity strategies recently carried out by military organizations in Canada and the United States should provide a snapshot of the progress made since 2007, as well as identify some areas that worked well, and what needs to be done differently. Military services and other organizations could benefit greatly from the adoption of the LL process and a common 126 G. Scoppio knowledge management system in the area of diversity. This would allow them to better identify and share lessons, and identify solutions to common issues, in order to help them achieve together what the USCG calls “total workforce diversity.”

Appendix: lessons learned questionnaire Organization Country Organization Location Point of contact (POC) POC coordinates

Feedback on previous research report (2007) General comments Chapter related to your org./country Recommendations Key changes occurred since 2007 Progress made since 2007

Recent Key diversity strategies implemented/in progress (past 4–5 years) Strategies (activities, Date Organization(s) Objectives (goals programs, processes, implemented involved and target groups) projects, policies)

Strategy highlights (activities, programs, processes, projects, policies) What worked well? Things that worked well Factors that enabled success Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016

What didn’t work well? Things that didn’t work well Recommended improvements and/or implemented changes Lessons learned on diversity 127 What can we do differently? Things we can do differently Recommended improvements and/or implemented changes

What factors were not anticipated? Things we didn’t anticipate Recommended improvements and/or implemented changes

Were goals achieved? What were the outcomes? Goals achieved Outcomes Recommended solutions for future and/or implemented changes

Notes 1 The Canadian Employment Equity Act states as its purpose: To achieve equality in the workplace so that no person shall be denied employ ment opportunities or benefits for reasons unrelated to ability and, in the fulfill ment of that goal, to correct the conditions of disadvantage in employment experienced by women, aboriginal peoples, persons with disabilit ies and members of visible minorities by giving effect to the principle that employment equity means more than treating persons in the same way, but also requires special meas ures and the accommodation of differences. (Canadian Department of Justice 1995, p. 1) 2 According to the Canadian EE Act, “Aboriginal peoples” means persons who are Indian, Inuit, or Métis. Ethnic minorities other than Aboriginal peoples are referred to as visible minorit ies – that is to say, persons, other than Aboriginal peoples, who are non-Caucasian in race or non-white in color. 3 There are two separate directorates in the Canadian Department of National Defense dealing with diversity and employment equity. The Directorate of Human Rights and Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Diversity is responsible for the CF, while the responsibility for Department of National Defense civilian personnel falls under the Director of Diversity and Well Being. 4 The term “immig rant” refers to foreign nationals who are permanent residents of Canada or the United States, but are not yet Canadian or American citizens. 5 Although the bill to repeal DADT was supported by a majority vote in the US Senate, the policy was in place when this chapter was forwarded for publication. 128 G. Scoppio References Canadian Department of Justice (1995) Employment Equity Act 1995, Ottawa: Govern ment of Canada. Online, available at: http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/E-5.401/page-1.html (accessed November 23, 2010). Canadian Department of National Defense (2004) Lessons Learned, Ottawa: Government of Canada. Online, available at: www.admfincs-smafinsm.forces.gc.ca/dao-doa/8000/ 8010-0-eng.asp (accessed November 23, 2010). Canadian Department of National Defense (2006) Milperscom (MPC) Employment Equity Plan (EE), Ottawa: Government of Canada. Online, available at: www.cmp-cpm. forces.gc.ca/ps/we-mt/eep-pem/eepl-peel-eng.asp (accessed November 23, 2010). Craig, L. (2009) “Black Bear Reaches Aboriginal Youth,” The Maple Leaf, Ottawa: Depart ment of National Defense, Government of Canada. Online, available at: www.forces.gc. ca/site/commun/ml-fe/article- eng.asp?id=5668 (accessed November 23, 2010). Doughtery, T. (2010, November 23) “Gates Sets Release Date for Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Report,” Newsroom America. Online, available at: www.newsroomamerica.com (accessed November 23, 2010). Friesen, J. and Martin, S. (2010) “Canada’s Changing Faith,” The Globe & Mail, Toronto: Government of Canada. Online, available at: www.theglobeandmail.com/news/ national/time-to-lead/multiculturalism/part-3-canadas-changing-faith/article1741422/ email (accessed November 23, 2010). Park, J. (2008) “A Profile of the Canadian Forces,” Perspectives: Statistics Canada, Ottawa: Government of Canada. Online, available at: www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75- 001-x/2008107/article/10657 -eng.htm (accessed November 23, 2010). Scoppio, G. (2007) Leadership in a Diverse Environment: Diversity Strategies in Military and Police Forces in Canada, Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States, King ston: Government of Canada. Online, available at: www.deomi.org/EOEEOResources/ documents/Research_Report_Leadership_Diversity.pdf (accessed November 23, 2010). Scoppio, G. (2009) “Diversity Best Practices in Military Organizations in Canada, Aus tralia, the United Kingdom and the United States,” Canadian Military Journal, 9 (3): 17–30. Online, available at www.journal.forces.gc.ca (accessed November 23, 2010). Stohlman, R. (2010) “Diversity: A US Maritime Perspective,” The E-Junction . Online, available at: www.uscg.mil/diversity/docs/world_Bank_Article.pdf (accessed Novem ber 23, 2010). US Coast Guard (2009) “Diversity Strategic Plan,” Resources, Washington, DC: United States Department of Homeland Security. Online, available at: www.uscg.mil/diver sity/docs/Diversity_Plan_FINAL090109.pdf (accessed November 23, 2010). US Department of Defense (2009) “The Defense Diversity Working Group,” Issue Paper no. 7: Implementation and Accountability . Military Leadership Diversity Commission, Arling

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 ton, VA: United States Government. Online, available at: http://mldc.whs.mil/download/ documents/Issue%20Papers/DDWG_Issue_Paper_7.pdf (accessed November 23, 2010). US Department of the Army (2010) Information Paper: Army Diversity, Internal docu ment forwarded by Army POC. US Department of the Navy (2009) Annual Report on Diversity, Washington, DC: United States Government. Online, available at: www.history.navy.mil/Diversity/2009%20 DON%20Annual%20Report%20on%20Diversity.pdf (accessed 23 November 2010). US Marine Corps (2008) Commandant of the Marine Corps Diversity Policy. Online, available at: www.deomi.org/DiversityMgmt/.../USMCDiversityPolicy.pdf (accessed November 23, 2010). 7 Getting to “ground truth” in the military Conducting diversity assessments

Brian Alejandro Sandoval and Renée Yuengling

Efforts to create fair, equitable, and inclusive workplaces began with the Civil Rights Act in 1964 and have continued with the development and growth of the diversity industry. Presently, our diverse workforce is benefiting from the great forward strides made by fair employment practices and legisla tion in expanding available opportunities to employees in organizations, especially minority groups. Individuals ranging from the foundational leaders such as Roosevelt Thomas and Elsie Cross, to the newer generation of chief diversity officers and diversity practitioners have explored, learned, and developed effective methods and techniques for diversity initiatives. Notwithstanding the success of early diversity efforts, today’s more complex challenges evidently require more robust strategies. To sustain and advance progress in the domain of diversity management, we must continue with current techniques and develop more rigorous analyt ical organizational interventions. New efforts should include a focus on in-depth stat istical analysis and directed policy reviews. When applied systematically, these methods can deliver results that enable leaders to understand how policies are converted to practice in organizations such as the military, and how practices have disparate impact on groups and individuals. In best practice, a diversity intervention is preceded by a diversity assessment. Being on the leading edge of sustainable diversity efforts requires assessments at a high level of statist ical sophistication. Organizations can use the results to identify potential barriers that prevent individuals from participating equally in the organization’s workforce and various initiatives. A diversity assessment can Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 help an organiza tion examine any underlying causes and challenges, the relat ive impact of policies and practices on diversity issues, and areas of cultural com petency requiring improvement. The results of a robust organizational assessment should be utilized to develop strategies and tactics to create a general culture of inclusion. This approach drives diversity through the full range of organizational processes, and thereby creates sustainable, long-lasting change, which will optimize organiza tional productivity. 130 B. A. Sandoval and R. Yuengling Civil rights continuum As a people, we have struggled through 400 years of slavery, the Civil War, reconstruction, Jim Crow segregation, genocide of indigen ous peoples, oppression of women, and discrimination and violence against immigrants. While we have endeavored to live up to our promise as a nation rooted in the principles of equality, oppression undoubtedly continues. It was only 65 years ago that we began to address pervasive discrimination in a legal form. In June 1941, Presid- ent Franklin D. Roosevelt signed Executive Order 8002, prohibiting govern ment contractors from discriminating on the basis of race, color, or national origin. The order represented the first presid ential action taken to prevent discrimination. Previously, widespread legal discrimination and segregation, enforced by intimidation and violence, had denied women and people of color a place in our educational institutions, or anywhere but on the lowest rungs of the workforce. The US Congress has since passed the Equal Pay Act of 1963, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination Act of 1967, the Equal Employment Oppor- tunity Act of 1972, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978, and the Americans with Disabilities Act in 1990. Thousands of lawsuits, hundreds of thousands of complaints, and millions of dollars in settle- ments have characterized the enforcement of the aforementioned legislation. In the past 15–20 years, organiza tions, primarily in the private sector, have pursued the elimination of discrimination through a business-oriented or diversity approach, augmenting the legislat ive approach: Equal Employment Oppor- tunity (EEO), Equal Opportunity (EO), or Affirmative Action (AA). In the early 1990s, Roosevelt Thomas published “From Affirmative Action to Affirming Diversity” (1990) in the Harvard Business Review, followed by his seminal work, Beyond Race and Gender: Unleashing the Power of Your Total Workforce (1991). Essentially, he breathed life into the fledgling diversity industry, moving organizations from the regulatory EEO focus toward the concept of inclusion and full workforce/employee engagement. According to Thomas, affirming diversity helps organiza tions and the people who constitute the workforce understand the nature of bias and discrimination, and enables organiza tions to work toward the inclusion of all employees. He moves beyond the moral and social arguments for diversity, and instead stresses the business case: “The return on investment in diversity yields more productivity, greater connection to markets, higher morale, lower personnel and litigation costs, and access to a larger talent Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 pool” (Thomas 1991, p. 43). Today, most corporations of any size have some type of diversity program in place. These range from highly developed strategic efforts by Fortune 500 com panies, to more simplistic programs conducted as an extension of company EEO programs. Rarely does an organiza tion in the public or private sector anywhere fail to advertise its appreciation for or celebra tion of diversity. Subsequent to the expenditure of many millions of dollars every year on diversity training and the development of diversity strategies, the focus has turned to sustainability and increased diversification of the workforce. Getting to “ground truth” 131 Although EEO laws and AA programs have opened many doors, some argue that sheer demographic changes might have led to the same result. A similar argument can be made about the development of formal diversity strategies in the 1980s and 1990s to deal with the issues of recruiting and managing diverse workforces. Efforts focused on recruiting and managing diverse workforces have burgeoned, and include diversity interventions, diversity training, diversity coun- cils, minority supplier programs, mentoring programs, employee resource groups, and many other elements designed to create inclusive workplaces. These initiatives have been successful in getting women and minorit ies through the door, but not far up the corporate ladder. Consequently, more effective assessments of the barriers and challenges encountered by women and minority group members are necessary.

Military experience The US armed forces have followed a similar path in their efforts to prevent discrimination and to ensure equality of opportunity. Although most pre-World War II war documents on racial difficulties in the military are still heavily classified, the late 1960s and early 1970s saw racial conflict in all branches of the military. Incidents of violence such as officers and enlisted men being attacked in the barracks were not uncommon; many attacks on military stockades, officers being struck by enlisted soldiers, and numerous night-time assaults were reported. Violence was not restricted to any specific branch of the armed forces. In 1969 a race riot on the marine base at Camp Lejune, NC left one dead and several wounded. Racial “incidents” occurred on board the USS Kitty Hawk and the USS Constellation in 1973, as well as a major riot involving hundreds of ser vicemen at Travis Air Force Base, CA. The Department of Defense (DoD) noted in its four-volume Report of the Task Force on the Administration of Military Justice in the Armed Forces in December 1972: “No command or installation . . . is entirely free from the effects of systemic discrimination against minority ser vicemen” (Vol. 1, p. 112). While the racial problems were grave both stateside and on military bases in Germany, they frequently took a murderous turn in Vietnam. In August 1968 the notorious American military-operated Long Binh Jail had an inmate population of which 90 percent were African-American. Initially fueled by racial discord, a riot soon degenerated into a violent revolt against the military, resulting in one Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 fatality and 63 military police and 52 inmates injured (Kolb 2004). In Vietnam, “fragging” increased signific antly, resulting in the murder of one American soldier by another American soldier. The term “fragging” derives from the weapon of choice, the fragmentation grenade, but has come to mean soldier-on- soldier murder in a combat environ ment. The DoD has estimated there were at least 600 murders and another 1,400 “mysterious” deaths in Vietnam. Whether all of these murders were racially motivated is unknown; however, the potent mix of racial hostility, discrimination, drugs, and open rebellion clearly contrib uted to the violence (Heinl 1971). 132 B. A. Sandoval and R. Yuengling Similar to society as a whole, the military has confronted and incorporated social change, and has done so while meeting the defense needs of the nation. Prior to the end of the draft and the creation of the all-volunteer force (AVF ) in 1973, the military struggled with issues of drugs and alcohol, race relations, the integration of women, and the lack of professionalism. The draft’s end required the military to recruit individuals from all segments of the American population, and find effective ways to motivate all those individuals to high performance. Today’s military has transformed itself into a widely respected and trusted organization. More importantly, it has a highly diverse workforce and is, in many ways, the defining example of a high-performance organization. The milit ary has met, and in many ways answered, the challenges of social change with better results than society as a whole. While public trust in the government was steadily declining during the first part of the millennium, the military enjoyed extraordinarily high levels of public confidence. In a 2002 Harris Poll, 71 percent of the general American population reported a “great deal of confidence in the military” (King and Karabell 2002). In their 2002 monograph, The Generation of Trust, King and Karabell described this change as a histor ical process. These authors maintain that the institution had been pushed to the brink, but had confronted its own failures and engaged in far-reaching reform to heal itself. While many factors contribute to the military’s current success, the story of the integration of women and minorities in the milit ary has a potent message for corporations in the United States. The armed forces’ path is slightly different to that of the private sector. Ini- tially, the military made significant infrastructure and process improvements, and created the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI) to help achieve the integration of women and minorit ies. Originally founded in 1971 as the Defense Race Relations Institute as a result of Defense Directive 1322.11, DEOMI linked readiness and race relations:

Propelled by the civil rights movement of the 1960s and counteracting a national policy of segregation and inequal ity, a virtual Magna Carta for race relations training was issued in 1971. The violent and nonviolent disorders of the late 1960s were the catalysts that convinced military leaders that race relations education must be provided to every member of the Armed Forces. (DEOMI 2010)

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Since its inception, DEOMI has been grounded in race relations and EO. As has happened in the field of diversity, over the years DEOMI has evolved from focusing primarily on race relations to supporting DoD commanders and executives with courses, seminars, research, and consultation to achieve various organ izational goals. Recognizing the need for accurate information to drive organizational change, DEOMI has been the lead provider of organizational assessments. Its original Military Equal Opportunity Climate Survey (MEOCS) has become the DEOMI Organizational Climate Survey (DEOCS) and the Federal Organizational Climate Survey (FEOCS). The DEOCS is viewed as Getting to “ground truth” 133 “a commander’s management tool that allows for proactive assessment of crit ical organizational climate dimensions that can have an impact on effectiveness within the organization” (DEOMI 2004). FEOCS was developed specifically for federal agencies and commissions to meet annual assessments required by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and thus “focuses on equal opportunity and organizational effectiveness” (DEOMI 2004). As these assessments have evolved and increased knowledge regarding the intersection of diversity and performance, they remain valuable but limited tools, because they do not purport to measure anything other than climate, and lack the robust nature of a more comprehensive assessment. Additionally, MEOCS, DEOCS, and FEOCS lack consistency in how the results are used if, in fact, the results are used to drive any measur able change at all. The mention of EEOC Management Directive (MD) 715 in the description of FEOCS is of critical import ance because it reflects a major sea change in the understanding of the federal sector concerning the need for assessments. The EEOC has mandated civilian federal agencies to go beyond the simple rolled-up demographic data, and obtain a deeper understanding of the realities of the workplace. At its foundation and in its very wording, MD 715 reveals EEOC’s understanding that surveys and pie charts cannot get to the “ground truth” of organizational life for women and minorities, and that diversity and EEO are integrally related in terms of their focus, but are not the same:

In order to develop a competit ive, highly qualified workforce, federal agencies must fully utilize all workers’ talents, without regard to race, color, religion, national origin, sex or disability. While the promise of workplace equality is a legal right afforded to all of our nation’s workers, equal oppor tunity is more than a matter of social justice. It is a national economic imperative. Federal agencies must make full use of our nation’s human capital by promoting workplace practices that free up opportun ities for the best and brightest talent available. All workers must compete on a fair and level playing field, and have the opportunity to achieve their fullest potential. (EEOC 2003)

MD 715 is a very powerful tool, requiring agencies to go beyond the statist ics and understand why organizations appear the way they do. However, MD 715 Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 has two significant limita tions: It pertains only to civilians and it is not required on the uniformed side of the services. More importantly, the real power and depth of this type of analysis are only now beginning to be understood. In many cases, the people performing the analyses proscribed in MD 715 lack the requis ite skill sets. While they may be highly competent EEO professionals, they may not have the statist ical, cultural, or assessment skills required by MD 715. The DEOMI-based DEOCS and FEOCS, and the more robust MD 715 have been developed in response to constant demographic changes and organizational struggles to adapt to these challenges by creating fair and inclusive environments. 134 B. A. Sandoval and R. Yuengling These tools are the forerunners of the rigorous assessment methodologies recom mended herein to support organiza tional leaders. Leaders can identify ground truth for their organizations and launch sustainable diversity initiatives through a rigorous methodology, driven by substantive statistical analysis, including a review of all policies, procedures, and practices, and informed by well- constructed surveys, interviews, and focus groups.

The need for rigorous assessments Consider the following three organizational challenges and how they have been explained:

1 In the late 1980s and early 1990s, a signific ant proportion of professional women exited from corporate offices and jobs. In many cases, these women had been working since the mid-1970s, had attained mid- to mid-senior levels in their careers, and were in their late thirties and early forties. 2 A federal agency with a long record of hiring about 35 percent Hispanic applicants had a Senior Executive Service (SES) that was predominantly white male (91 percent) and had only 7 percent of Hispanics at the GS-14 and GS-15 levels, and nearly none in the senior executive ranks. 3 A federal agency with African-American women comprising 87 percent of its workforce at the GS-10 level was served with a “reverse discrimination” lawsuit by white men. African-American women represented 20 percent of the SES positions, while white men represented 44 percent.

In the first case, the cause of this mini-exodus was attributed to women leaving to start families. They had been working for 15–20 years and were racing the biological clock for having children. Many articles described the drain and discussed conflicts between careers and family, and labeled it the “Opt-Out Revolution” (Williams et al. 2006). The drain is now repeating itself in science, technology, engineering, and mechanical (STEM) fields. Folklore continues to present the baby explanation. In 2001 Korn/Ferry International commissioned a study about this drain of mid-level women and found the actual cause: Women were leaving to start or work for small businesses, not to have children as initially postulated. They were seeking greater opportunities than those found in their corporate lives, or they had hit the glass ceiling and decided to create busi- Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 nesses without ceilings, where they could live out their entrepreneurial dreams. In the second example, concerning the lack of Hispanic SES employees, anecdotal explanations abounded, but generally cited the lack of desire to relo- cate when necessary for a career move and to attain senior levels of responsib ility. Lack of US citizenship and education were mentioned as additional motivators for the observed trend. In reality, a hidden requirement existed in the organization: develop mental assignments necessary for leadership positions, but not obvious to those without mentors. A rigorous assessment revealed the agency’s leadership development program as the actual barrier. Very rarely did Getting to “ground truth” 135 anyone achieve a high level without having attended the program. Perhaps His- panics were not aware of the program, were not getting the developmental assignments to get into the program, were not applying to the program, were applying but not accepted to the program, were accepted but did not attend the program, or attended but did not complete the program. Whatever the reason, the barrier was not lack of desire, citizen ship, or language ability. In the third case, a robust assessment showed that the senior leadership team was overwhelmingly white and male; the majority of African-Americans were below the GS-10 level. Job postings, lack of leadership development, or poor performance management may have contributed to the situation, but certainly not reverse discrimination. Further analysis identified a lack of rigorous performance management protocols and poor performance feedback, resulting in the decreased ability of the lower-graded African-American women to improve job performance and progress up the career ladder. The lack of constructive feedback to women and minorit ies is well-documented in research, but poorly understood in organizations. These examples underscore the need for rigorous assessments in organiza tions to correctly identify the problem to be solved. Whether well-meaning, but misguided, or driven by political correctness, or any other reason, folklore about human behavior in organizations has always abounded. It is particularly perni- cious in the field of diversity. Diversity practitioners must begin to work with the rigor and analyt ical depth that will not only provide leaders with accur ate and actionable data, but also move organizations ever closer to true inclusion. The aforementioned examples illustrate how folklore and unconscious stereotypes can lead managers to solutions that only exacer bate the underlying problems. A fourth example highlights the benefits of a correctly performed diversity assessment, and how an assessment is always the first step to the development of effective, strategic diversity plans and metrics. In the late 1990s, a military command had a predominantly STEM workforce, mixed civilian and military, supported by a contingent of civilian administrative staff. The workforce was predominantly older white males, with a few white females. The average age was 65 years, skewed heavily by the white males. Predominantly young, African-American females provided administrative support. For years, in every organizational climate survey, the scient ific workers were very positive about their work environment and simultan eously the administrative staff were extremely negative. When further analysis was recommended to identify the Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 problem, the military commander and the civilian deputy expressed concern. They feared any further examination might stir up racial strife and conflict – not an illogical concern, given the demographics. However, carefully conducted focus groups and interviews revealed that the negative morale among the administrative staff was related to a lack of clear career paths, not a function of race or gender. A GS-9 in an administrative position could not reasonably expect to advance into a higher-graded STEM position. Realizing that the problem was solvable and not connected to race, the command developed a strategy to implement career paths and thereby address the real morale issue. As this example 136 B. A. Sandoval and R. Yuengling illustrates, conducting an assessment before developing a diversity strategy is the key to success and sustainability in organizations. Otherwise, the right solution for the wrong problem can lead to more problems.

Anecdotes, folklore, and pie charts The following discussion provides a rationale for avoiding superficial assessments and folklore-based qualitative reports. An assessment that collects and analyzes only typical demographic data (e.g., gender, race, ethni city, and age) is merely descriptive of the workforce (Figure 7.1). These types of reports may be easy to read and include colorful graphs, but do little to determine the culture of a given organization. Nor do they examine pain points or specific areas within an organization’s policies, procedures, and practices that may have an impact on certain segments of the workforce. For example, Figure 7.1 shows the workforce is composed of 40 percent minorit ies. On the surface, the organization generally seems very diverse, but the image raises more questions than it answers. Does this diversity exist at all levels of the organization? Are employees of different backgrounds progressing through the organizational hierarchy at similar rates? Do applicant data differ from employee data? Do differences in promo tions occur between the groups? Bar graphs, pie charts, and other graphics displaying mere numbers or percentages cannot answer such crucial questions. Reporting descriptive demographic data is not an incorrect practice, but rather, only the beginning of a true statistical analysis, which includes both descriptive and inferential data. Descriptive statistics are used to summarize or describe data. They provide a quantitative snapshot of the state of different groups in an organiza tion. They do not compare groups and determine the stat istical significance of the differences between groups, or answer the question of why the demographics look the way they do. For these and other reasons, we refer to demographic data reports as “superficial” analyses. The reporting of

Other 3% Asian 5%

Hispanic 12% White 60% Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016

Black 20%

Figure 7.1 A “pie chart” description of the workforce. Getting to “ground truth” 137 x percentage of y group does not get to the ground truth of diversity within an organization. An organization measuring the impact of policies and practices on diversity solely using descriptive demographic data is akin to measuring the distance between two atoms with a yardstick. It is the wrong tool for the job. Infer- ential statistics do more than report data; they help answer questions about what and where issues occur within an organiza tion. Analyses using inferential statist ics will be discussed in greater detail in the next section. While a superficial demographic report may not fully assess an organiza tion’s policies, proced ures, and practices, at the very least it attempts to obtain ground truth by examining bona fide data. An assessment based on folklore, on the other hand, is the antithesis of a data-driven approach. It relies on speculation, hearsay, gossip, and anecdotes. A previous example showed how an organiza tion explained away the lack of women managers by relying on “common knowledge” that many women leave the workplace to focus on a family instead of a career. Another example of “common knowledge” is the fear that the number of new hires cannot keep up with the rate of voluntary separations (retirement and leaving for other opportunities). According to data from the Office of Personnel Management’s website, Fed Scope, in FY 2008, DoD new hires outpaced voluntary separations by over 50,000 people. In fact, as seen in Figure 7.2, new hires have consistently outpaced voluntary separations since at least FY 2005. “Common knowledge” is not necessarily factual knowledge and, therefore, not ground truth. Obtaining ground truth requires a rigorous and comprehensive assessment that includes statistical analysis, surveys, policy reviews, and inter views. Assessments must be rigorous, data-driven, and analytical. These assessments should employ multiple methodologies to ascertain the reality of diversity within an organization.

120,000

100,000

80,000

60,000 Number Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 40,000

20,000

0 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 Q1 FY 2009

Voluntary separations New hires

Figure 7.2 DoD new hires have outpaced voluntary separations since 2005. 138 B. A. Sandoval and R. Yuengling Beyond pie charts A rigorous, data-driven assessment consists of three analyses. Their distinct but interconnected approaches provide organizations the ground truth of diversity and inclusion, within their boundaries. A comprehensive assessment comprises of a statistical analysis of the workforce, climate assessments, an extensive policy and documentation review, and interviews of key organizational staff. The analyses should be conducted in the order presented, because each is designed to gather data that is tailored to the focus of the next, ultimately pin- pointing the location and source of organiza tional pain points. The following sections present the recommended methodologies for completing each section of an assessment and examples of data emerging from each analysis.

Statistical analysis As previously mentioned, statistics can be divided into descriptive and inferential forms. Descriptive statistics consolidate and summarize large amounts of data into easier to understand values such as averages, standard deviations, frequencies, and ranges. Inferential statistics are used to draw conclusions and make predictions based on the data. Both types have a place in a statistical analysis. Assessments that only provide demographic summaries, however, fail to present a comprehensive or conclusive picture. Averages, frequencies, and ranges show what the data look like. They cannot answer whether the differ ences between the data are meaningful and significant. Inferential statistics – through the use of t-tests, analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests, correlations, regressions, and other tests – are designed to take chance factors into account in the analysis of differ ences between the data. These analyses allow the end user to draw conclusions, including whether the differences between groups are stat istically significant. For example, descriptive statist ics may show that men within an organiza tion earn an average of $40,000 per year, compared to $35,000 per year for women. Conclusions about the data are not possible without taking into account the size of the organization (i.e., the number of men and women in the organiza tion) and determining if the difference is statistically significant. Inferential statist ics (in this case a t-test) can indicate whether the difference between men and women’s

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 salaries at this company is signific ant. If the difference is signific ant, further ana lysis is necessary. Crime-scene investigators do not stop when they find blood evidence; they recreate the scene to obtain informa tion on the motive – the why. Similarly, statist ics are not the end goal of an assessment, but rather a forensic tool to help a diversity practitioner pinpoint the cause of the significant differ ence. Knowing why evidence is present leads an investigator to figure out how to fix the problem or whether the identified problem truly exists. One specific, statistical method worthy of additional explanation is a regression analysis. Such analyses are helpful in determining the significance of mul Getting to “ground truth” 139 tiple factors – including gender, race, education, and age – on an organiza tional outcome (e.g., organizational rank or participa tion in leadership development). For example, a regression analysis examining the role of race, gender, education, and performance ratings on organizational rank should ideally find that only education and performance ratings positively predicted an employee’s rank in the organizational hierarchy. A recent analysis of a large organization found that leadership training and high performance ratings were predictive of high rank; race and gender generally were predictive of lower rank. This significant finding was a red flag that something was amiss and required additional investigation through climate assessments, policy reviews, and interviews. Given that the ana lysis had shown that leadership training and performance ratings were predictive of higher rank, learning the nature of the problem required an examination of the policies, procedures, and practices involved in these organizational processes. Did women and minorities receive access to the same leadership training as white males? Were performance ratings based on objective metrics, or were they susceptible to bias or other facts due to their subjectivity? The focus on inferential statistics does not suggest that descriptive statistics provide meaningless and useless information. On the contrary, averages and frequencies can portray trends that may otherwise be missed. For example, Figure 7.3 shows the percentages of white and black men and women throughout the ranks of the hypothetical organization mentioned above. Inferential statistics would not necessarily point out the precipitous “waterfall” or decline of black women that occurs in the mid-to-senior levels of the organization, nor the

100

40 ercentage P 30

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 20

�10 GS-4 GS-5 GS-6 GS-7 GS-8 GS-9 GS-10 GS-11 GS-12 GS-13 GS-14 GS-15 SES

White men White women Black men Black women

Figure 7.3 “Waterfall” and “geyser” effects of race and gender across GS ranks. 140 B. A. Sandoval and R. Yuengling “geyser” or surge of white men through the higher ranks. Relying solely on descriptive statist ics (i.e., averages, percentages, bar graphs, and pie charts) does not provide the rigor of inferential statist ics. The data in this graph would ideally prompt a suggestion for a regression analysis to determine which factors are irrelevant to higher ranks. Additionally, Figure 7.3 shows that statistical analysis is only an import ant first step in an assessment. The “waterfall” and “geyser” indicate that something drastic is occurring in the mid-level ranks, but statist ics cannot explain the actual cause. The numerical results should serve to guide deeper analysis of the relev ant policies, procedures, and practices. A precipitous drop occurs in the number of black women in the high ranks, but questions remain: Do they have equal access to leadership training opportun ities? Are they in occupational tracks that provide growth opportunities? What do the performance reviews of these employees look like and, specifically, how do they compare to the reviews of other employees? How do different demographic groups perceive the organiza tion’s policies, procedures, and practices?

Climate assessments The answers may lie in a review of organizational climate and employee satisfac tion. Many organizations conduct annual or biennial employee surveys. For example, US govern ment agencies biennially complete the Employee Viewpoint Survey, formerly known as the Federal Human Capital Survey (FHCS). In the 2008 version of the survey, the Office of Personnel Management asked a litany of questions on talent management, performance culture, leadership and knowledge management, and job satisfaction. The FHCS contained several questions related to diversity climate or contained references to worker diversity, fair policies and practices, and supervisory support of diversity-related issues. These “diversity” questions, however, fail to reveal the true climate of the organization. For example, if 60 percent of the organization is white and 58 percent of respondents say that supervisors support diversity initiatives, some might conclude that the organiza tion has a successful diversity initiative. Yet it is perfectly within the realm of possib il ity that only the white employees agree with the statement. The benefits of climate surveys like the FHCS do not come from five or six diversity-related questions. Instead, two steps are necessary: (1) a review of employee responses to statements related to organizational processes like talent Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 management and performance culture; and (2) a comparison of the results across demographic groups. Comparisons across demographic groups can provide insight into potentially inequitable organizational processes or practices. Demo- graphic groups’ responses to the statements “My training needs are met” or “Promotions in my unit are based on merit” can reveal more insights into the climate of an organization than responses to a general statement such as “Pol- icies and programs promote diversity in the workplace.” Results of statistical analyses and cross-group comparisons help in pinpoint- ing why an organization appears the way it does. In the “geyser” and “waterfall” Getting to “ground truth” 141 example in Figure 7.3, a cross-group comparison of responses to the statement “My training needs are met” might reveal that whites generally agreed and black women disagreed. Something may be awry in the talent management policies, procedures, and practices of the organization. Statistical analyses and climate assessments provide clues to the ground truth of diversity in the organiza tion. The next step of a comprehensive assessment is a review of policies, procedures, and practices.

Policy review The analysis of organization policies centers around two main tasks: (1) determination of whether diversity and EEO policies and components are adequately in place; and (2) analysis of policies for features that may have an adverse impact on employees in terms of discrimination, hostile work environment, harassment, and inequitable treatment. The first task in a policy review requires an organiza tion to examine the effectiveness of its diversity and EEO policies and identify any omissions hindering the implementation of the vision, mission, and object ives of the organization for hiring, retaining, developing, and advancing employees. (These policies are not usually the source of disparate impacts within an organization. and are assumed to be in place for the purposes of this chapter’s discussion.) A policy review for diversity purposes is not limited to diversity and EEO policies. On the contrary, as outlined below, a policy review must examine all policies. The pain points within the organiza tion usually do not arise from the diversity statement, but instead from issues in the human capital policies such as talent or performance management. This task should be performed by a diverse group of individuals with training and background in diversity and inclusion. Reviewers must be able to analyze policies and documents with a “cultural lens” and understand the implications of errors of both omission and commission. The necessity for highly skilled reviewers cannot be over-emphasized. Policies can appear bias-free to individuals without training to look for the primary, as well as secondary and tertiary, effects of policies. A policy on one topic may create a problem in a seemingly completely unrelated area. The policy review should be done systematically, with each reviewed policy being coded for any patterns, themes, or critical factors that may point to core issues within the organization. The individuals carrying out the review should Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 follow a framework of guiding questions based on sound diversity theory and current best practices. An organization must evaluate policies associated with organizational pro cesses including, but not limited to, performance management, recruitment, succession planning, talent management, and workforce planning. The policies should be reviewed in terms of ensuring that diversity and inclusion principles are reflected and integrated throughout all processes in the employee pipeline and other organizational processes. All policies should be viewed through a multicultural lens. 142 B. A. Sandoval and R. Yuengling In Global Competence: 50 Exercises for Succeeding in International Business (Simons et al. 2000) the authors present many ways in which cultural groups differ. Shown below are selections from their list that are particu larly applicable to business settings, and likely to affect the inter pretation and implementation of policies:

• What we call “proper” behavior • How we see and behave toward sickness and health • What we consider “common sense” • Our religious beliefs or faith • When we communic ate directly or indirectly • The import ance of harmony in a group • Hierarchy in business relationships • How we interact with authority • How open we are with information.

These and other cultural differences can influence how employees respond to policies, proced ures, and practices within an organization. For example, an organization had a hiring policy that was very well documented and looked bias- free to someone without cultural experience and training. However, an astute observer noted potential barriers in the assessment exams and the panel inter view. For example, the panel was instructed that maintaining eye contact is a sign of trustworthi ness in a potential employee. Yet, in many Latin American, Asian, and other cultures, making eye contact with an authority figure (e.g., the hiring authorities) is a sign of disrespect. This well-meaning instruction may have been unconsciously affecting the hiring decisions of the panel. Many of the minority applicants might have averted eye contact, not because they were untrustworthy, but due to their cultural background. These barriers would not be obvious to an untrained person, but might result in substantial distortions in the hiring process. Another example of a well-intentioned policy with deleterious consequences for some minorities was a small provision within the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, which included a requirement for recipients to present a birth certificate to obtain Medicaid services. This policy was intended to cut down the instances of fraud; yet, it simultaneously had the impact of denying scores of older African- Americans from the South who, due to segregation in hospitals, had been born at Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 home and may or may not have had access to official public records (Ku and Broaddus 2006). In this case, the policy negatively affected a group which policymakers had no intention of harming, but were inadvertently harmed due to a lack of cultural knowledge on the part of the policymakers. The Army has a clear policy on religious accommodation (AR 600-20, pp. 5–6), which permits all soldiers the right to worship in their own faith, tradition, or not at all. A general policy review indicated a theme of the presumption of Christianity, with all other faiths delegated to a state of being “accommo- dated.” Christianity is a major faith tradition of many Army employees and the Getting to “ground truth” 143 rights of others are protected in policy. Nevertheless, much anecdotal evidence suggests the practice of religious accommodation may not reach the level of inclusion described in the policies. A presumption of Christianity flows through many policies, including AR 600-8-1, the Army Casualty Program. This policy makes no requirement for understanding different faith traditions around death. Without this lens of cultural sensitivity, a casualty assistance officer might dem onstrate cultural incompetence in performing duties on behalf of a deceased ser vice member from a non-Christian family. These examples underline the import ance of a thorough policy scrub that uncovers the direct, secondary, and tertiary effects of policies and procedures on a diverse workforce. A review of the “geyser” and “waterfall” organiza tion’s policies indicated the existence of an employee leadership development program. Having a policy in place does not mean that employees know how to participate in the program. At issue is how policies and procedures are translated into practice.

Interviews and focus groups The next step of a comprehensive assessment moves beyond statistics, surveys, and policies, and delves into the execution and implementation practices of the organization. The content of the interviews should be determined from the stat istical analysis and climate assessment, and refined by the results of the policy and document review. Participants in the interview and focus group process should be selected based on their expertise and experience in the organiza tional areas relev ant to any particu lar analysis. The interviews should be designed to determine if any policy applications or practices are responsible for the patterns visible in the statist ical analysis and climate assessment. A major caveat must be considered in the interview and focus group process: If multiple individuals will be in a room at the same time to answer questions, respondents should be members of the same kinship group. The term “kinship group” refers to groups made up of a specific demographic; for example, white women, Hispanics, or even people in a specific job category. Diversity-related matters, including allegations of bias and discrimination, are taboo topics that can derail an individual’s career if mentioned in the wrong professional circles. Kinship groups do not completely elimin ate the fear of allegations, but do allow individuals to speak more openly about their perceptions of an organization’s Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 practices. The interview and focus group stage of the assessment detailed in Figure 7.3 uncovered a key component of the lack of talent development for many employees: Very few employees were able to become a part of the program, develop the skills, and participate in the rotational assignments necessary to advance to higher levels in the organization. The interview and focus group process is a pivotal portion of the comprehensive assessment. It goes beyond numbers and written policies and asks key personnel their assessment of actual organizational practices. Unlike statistical 144 B. A. Sandoval and R. Yuengling analyses and policy reviews, interviews obtain valuable information from indi viduals within the organization.

Simplicity of diversity metrics Only after an assessment is performed can relevant metrics be developed. These metrics can illuminate with exquisite precision the exact issues in the organiza tion. The discussion around diversity metrics is robust and typically generates more questions than answers. In the federal sector, including the military, there is a heavy reliance on describing the demographic makeup of the workforce as a metric. Colorful pie charts abound in every presentation around “diversity.” Although useful for examining representation, such metrics offer very little in real measurement of diversity in an organization. This mismatch in measurement and metrics with stated desired outcomes for diversity is very apparent in the military. A look at the definitions of diversity in the DoD compared to what is actually measured makes this very clear (Table 7.1). In every case, the definition of diversity focuses on inclusion of diverse popu lations, not just the representa tion of those populations. Pie charts simply do not address the problem of development of appropriate metrics for inclusion, which is how the services have defined diversity. A rigorous assessment enables metrics to be matched up with the objective of an inclusive work environment. Therefore, the charts become forensic tools, rather than inappropriate final conclusions. Whatever challenges or issues the assessment pinpoints represent a starting point for measure ment. Metrics can be developed, for example, for: improvements in positive responses on employee satisfac tion surveys; increased numbers

Table 7.1 DoD definitions of diversity

Organization Diversity statement

DoD The different characteristics and attributes of individuals. US Army The different attributes, experiences, and backgrounds of our soldiers, civilians, and family members that further enhance our global capabilities and contribute to an adaptive, culturally astute Army. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 US Air Force A composite of individual characteristics, experiences, and abilities consistent with the Air Force values and the Air Force mission. US Marine Corps No definition. Marine Corps policy holds that diversity in the background and experience of those who join the Corps is not only a reflection of American society; it is also a key element to maintaining the strength and flexibility required to meet today’s national security challenges. US Coast Guard All the characteristics, experiences, and differences of each individual. Getting to “ground truth” 145 of Hispanic participation in the agency leadership development program; greater retention of women employees through better mentoring; or better performance on personnel reviews. This approach – especially applying the statistical and climate assessment data – allows for the development of baseline metrics and provides an easy way to track progress. These benchmarks and metrics should not be set in generic areas, but they should be tailored to the results of the assessment. For example, if the geyser/waterfall talent development program accepted only five applicants one year, the organization could seek to increase the class to seven next year, and ten the following year. Subsequently, the organization could track progress on increasing employee access, including women and racial and ethnic minorit ies, to upper management tracks. As the example shows, diversity assessments must be tailored to the needs of the organization and enable diversity practitioners to build solutions that are customized to meet those needs. Unlike traditional one-size-fits-all approaches, this solution creates metrics for the specific organization. Furthermore, this process is most useful in iterative form. By analyzing and tracking the results of this ana lysis on a quarterly or yearly basis, an organization can track progress. Hence, an organization can measure the baseline, pinpoint areas for improvement, and demonstrate accountability.

Conclusion A thorough diversity assessment should focus on ensuring that systems are in place for all employees to have access to the advancement pipeline and training opportunities. By reviewing workforce data, climate assessments, policies, and interview results, the assessment uncovers the ground truth of diversity and inclusion within an organization. Only through completing this rigorous approach step by step can an organiza tion get to the ground truth. This approach to diversity assessments brings new rigor to the diversity field by using all available tools to uncover the ground truth. It moves beyond anecdotes, folklore, and pie charts to focus on an organization’s policies, procedures, and practices. In this way, organiza tions can thoroughly assess whether they have created an environ ment where all employees have the opportun ity to thrive, and contribute to optimal mission accomplishment. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 References DEOMI (2004) Mission Statement. Online, available at: www.patrick.af.mil/deomi/ About%20DEOMI/MissionStatement.htm (accessed September 13, 2004). DEOMI (2010) DEOMI History. Online, available at: www.deomi.org/AboutDEOMI/ DEOMIHistory.cfm (accessed July 4, 2011). Department of Defense (1972) Report of the Task Force on the Administration of Military Justice in the Armed Forces, Washington, DC: Department of Defense. EEOC (2003) Management Directive 715. Online, available at: www.eeoc.gov/federal/ directives/md715.cfm (accessed April 24, 2010). 146 B. A. Sandoval and R. Yuengling Heinl, R., Jr. (1971) “The Collapse of the Armed Forces,” Armed Forces Journal 2: 7132–7140. King, D. and Karabell, Z. (2002) The Generation of Trust: Public Confidence in the US Military since Vietnam, Cambridge, MA: John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University. Kolb, J. (2004) “Fighting forces,” Vietnam 10–12: 54–56. Korn/Ferry International (2001) What Women Want in Business: A Survey of Executives and Entrepreneurs. Online, available at: www.kornferry.com/Library/ViewGallery.asp ?CID=301&LanguageID=1&RegionID=23 (accessed April 24, 2010). Ku, L. and Broaddus, M. (2006) New Requirements for Birth Certificates or Passports Could Threaten Medicaid Coverage for Vulnerable Beneficiaries: A State by State Analysis. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Online, available at: www.cbpp.org/ archiveSite/1-5-06health.pdf (accessed April 24, 2010). Simons, G., Myers, S. and Lambert, J. (2000) Global Competence: 50 Exercises for Suc- ceeding in International Business, Amherst: HRD Press. Thomas, R. R. (1990) “From Affirmative Action to Affirming Diversity,” Harvard Busi- ness Review 2: 107–117. Thomas, R. R. (1991) Beyond Race and Gender: Unleashing the Power of Your Total Workforce by Managing Diversity, New York: American Management Association Printing Division (AMACOM). Williams, J. C., Manvell, J. and Bornstein, S. (2006) “Opt Out” Or Pushed Out? How the Press Covers Work/Family Conflict. Online, available at: http://www.psychologytoday. com/files/attachments/47131/optoutorpushedoutreportfinal.pdf (accessed April 24, 2010). Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Part II Special topics in diversity and inclusion Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 8 Status, power, and diversity in the military1

Jeffrey W. Lucas and David R. Segal

Introduction Perhaps the most fundamental organizing feature of humans is that we tend to divide into groups (Tajfel 1982). This tendency to organize into groups of “us” and “them” is one factor that makes military establishments necessary. Within groups, and in societies more generally, the most fundamental dimensions along which persons organize themselves are power and status. This chapter summar izes group processes research on power and status, and it links those concepts to issues of diversity in the military. Power and status, more than any other concepts, have come to dominate what is called the “group processes” perspective in sociology. Power and status are both ways to change what people do, and those in the group processes perspect ive carry out basic, theory-driven research on what gives people the ability to change the behavior of others and the consequences of that behavior change. Those who carry out basic research on groups narrowly and precisely define concepts in order to facilitate research, and then attempt to understand the basic nature of those concepts irrespective of any particular context. The research focuses on only one kind of power, power over others, and only one kind of status, a person’s prestige rank in a group. The goal is to understand how these processes operate at their most basic levels across all types of settings. This is a fundamentally different approach than that taken by researchers who attempt to capture the full complexities of concepts in all of their instantiations. (For treatments of power that follow this approach, see Kelley 1994.) Power, for example, is a concept that spans multiple disciplines and countless treatments. In Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 fact, the philosopher Bertrand Russell called power the fundamental concept of all of the social sciences (Russell 1938). In the case of changing what people do, basic group processes research leads to the conclusion that power and status are both basic ways people organize within groups and basic building blocks of leadership. There are many ways to get people to do things, but power and status are the most fundamental. Group processes researchers define power as the ability to get what one wants even when others resist. A senior military officer has power over a private if she can sanction that private, even if he prefers it not to happen. Status, as group 150 J. W. Lucas and D. R. Segal processes researchers define it, is a position in a group based on esteem or respect. The primary outcome of status is influence, which is a change in the atti tudes or behaviors of others without threat of punishment or promise of reward. That same military officer leads with influence if her subordinates, because they hold her in high regard, carry out actions consistent with her interests without expectation of personal reward or concern about potential punishment. Power, status, and influence are defined in many different ways, and each is the subject of extensive literat ures. We do not suggest that definitions other than the above are wrong. Rather, by defining them narrowly and precisely, group processes researchers are able to carry out research on their basic natures. This strategy, followed by scores of researchers investigating power and status in groups, has produced knowledge growth and insight into how people gain power and status, as well as outcomes of their use. The most consistent research result on power and status is that they both get people to carry out actions they would not otherwise perform. They differ, how ever, in the meanings that people attach to those actions. Power use gains com pliance, but it also leads to resentment. Status induces changed behavior, but without the resistance that power use creates. Diversity in groups, and in soci eties in general, implies differentials in power and status. This diversity may affect who may belong to a group, as well as rankings within the group. Differ entials in power and status, in turn, can affect the ways in which diversity is viewed and managed. In the following, we review theory and research on power and status in groups. We then discuss the concepts in terms of their implications for diversity and leadership in the military.

Power in networks Power, as the ability to get what one wants despite resistance, results primarily from a position in a social structure. Formal rules, for example, give senior milit ary officers power over their junior colleagues. Power exists independently of talent or knowledge on the part of the power holder. Although skill, talent, and charisma usually play a role in attaining power, the power itself, once gained, rests in a structural position. After decades of research on power in networks, social psychologists now identify that power primarily stems from the ability to control resources, particularly the ability to exclude others from resources they Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 desire (Lovaglia 1999). Teachers control grades that matter to students, super visors control pay distributions that matter to subordinates, and judges control decisions that matter to parties in legal cases. Notice that in each of the examples above, the power rests in the position, not the person. If a military officer leaves her position and is replaced by someone new, the replacement will have the same power. This is what we mean when we say that power results from a position in a social structure. People do what those with power want because they fear the consequences or value the rewards available to the power holder. Because power comes with Status, power, and diversity in the military 151 substantial benefits, an important question is how people attain power. Research on power in networks shows how it can be done. Key to holding power is to control resources that others value. Thus, a first step in attaining power is to identify important resources. The next step is to control their distribution. If one can exclude others from resources they desire, that person will have power. Military establishments have clearly specified hierarchies and well-defined positions. In these situations, it is usually not difficult to determine which posi tions in the structure have the most power. Because power comes with many advantages, competi tion for powerful positions is typically intense. Thus, identi fying import ant resources and seeking their control is easier said than done. There are, however, effective approaches to gaining power beyond directly going after positions that control resources. One way to side-step the intense competition for positions already specified as controlling valuable resources is to create a new resource that people don’t yet know they want (Pfeffer 1992). Engineers, for example, can design improve ments in processes, the nuanced workings of which only they understand. The engineers’ knowledge of the improved process represents control of a valuable resource that they can use to gain power. Similarly, in the application of social science knowledge within the military, an understanding of cultural differences has become a valuable asset that in the past was not recognized as such. A particularly advant ageous way to gain power is first to have status.

Status in groups Status is a position in a group based on respect. One of the most consistent findings in research on groups is that people tend to rank themselves and each other into status hierarchies (Berger et al. 1980). The result is that some people (those with high status) talk more in groups, are evaluated more highly, and have more influ ence over decisions. Decades of research on status in groups has demonstrated that status hierarchies emerge out of often unconscious expectations that people develop for the performances of themselves and other members of their groups or organiza tions (for an extensive review, see Berger and Webster 2006). Those expected to perform at higher levels have higher status in the group. Note that expectations of superior performance, rather than performance itself, produce high status. Research on status hierarchies in groups finds that the expectations that produce them emerge largely from character istics of group members. Some Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 character istics act as status markers across a society, with people in one category of a characteristic expected to perform at higher levels than those in another cat egory. Gender, for example, remains a status characteristic in US society. People tend to expect higher performances from men than from women, even on tasks that would appear to be gender-neutral (Lucas 2003). Leadership is one such task. Indeed, some tasks are regarded as gender-specific or inappropriate for one gender group. In most societies and at most times, military service has been regarded as such a gendered occupation. Dealing with traditional definitions of appropriateness is one of the tasks of diversity management. 152 J. W. Lucas and D. R. Segal Other status character istics include education, appearance, race, income, and occupation. Where people stand on these character istics sets in motion expecta tions that produce a status hierarchy in a group. Those expected to perform at a higher level are accorded higher positions in the group’s status order. Status hierarchies in groups of course sometimes defy cultural expectations based on the status character istics of group members. If a white male, for example, consistently performs at a level lower than other members of the group, his status will suffer. However, status hierarchies tend to be resistant to change for two reasons. First, the processes that lead from the status character istics of group members through expectations for performance to a status hierarchy in a group are primarily non-conscious (Webster and Driskell 1978). Second, status hierarchies, once established, tend to be self-reinforcing. High-status group members get higher evaluations for their performances because they are high status. Low-status group members get lower evaluations because they are low status. These forces make status hierarchies stable. Notice that some status characteristics (such as gender and race) are largely or wholly out of our control, while others we can change. One way to gain status is for individuals to change their standings on status character istics within their control. Education brings with it status, and increasing education credentials typ ically leads to influence beyond any directly job-related benefits of the acquired knowledge. For example, the career value of an MBA degree over that of a bach elor’s degree is enormous, relative to the two-year investment required to com plete it. Appearance is another important status character istic. More attractive people are accorded higher status (i.e., are expected to be more competent) than are less attractive people (Umberson and Hughes 1987). The burgeoning cos metic surgery industry likely owes much of its success to the status implications of appearance. In the same way, the common business advice to “dress for the job you want, rather than the job you have” corresponds to the body of research on status in groups. How you dress alters expectations for your performances in groups, ultimately affecting how much influence you have. One method of gaining status, then, is to move to more valued categor ies of status character istics. This would include moving into a more desirable occupa tion. In most modern societies, military service is regarded as a profession: a member of a set of occupations that carry high status (Janowitz 1960). Thus, access to military service is a means of achieving status. Other routes may be accessed through self-presentation. Although status hierarchies tend to be stable, Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 they do change. One way to gain status in groups is to perform competently. Many groups do not interact for long enough periods for group members to get good senses of the relat ive competence levels of members. Moreover, even in organizational groups that meet over long periods, status hierarchies tend to reflect the status character istics of group members (Cohen and Zhou 1991). This is because of the self-fulfilling nature of status orders: The performances of high- status group members are perceived as more competent, helping them maintain their status positions. Nevertheless, competence does matter, and performing more compet ently in groups will enhance status. Status, power, and diversity in the military 153 Research has identified one strategy that is particularly effective for increas ing influence in groups, a strategy especially likely to be useful for women and minority group members (Ridgeway 1982). People in groups typic ally assume that high-status group members are more oriented toward the interests of the group than low-status group members, who people assume are more selfishly motivated. This is one reason why high-status individuals tend to be leaders in groups – we assume that leaders have the interests of the group in mind. Research shows that a self-presentation strategy of group motivation works to increase status (Shackelford et al. 1996). In other words, women and minority group members can increase their status in groups by making clear that their recommendations and performances are carried out with the interests of the group in mind. These behaviors will increase their status and, in turn, their influ ence in the group. Such a strategy should be particularly effective for women and minority group members in military settings because group identities are so salient in the military (Franke 2000; Griffith 2009).

Using power or status to gain the other Power and status usually vary together. Many jobs high in power are also high in status; senior military officers, for example, are high in both power and status. Other jobs, however, are high in one, but not the other. Police officers have more power than status. College professors have more status than power. Military ser vice carries status, particularly for members of groups whose opportunities for service have been restricted. The strategic use of both power or status can be used to gain the other. The use of power has two primary outcomes. One is that those with power tend to accumu late valued resources. The other is that those without power come to resent those who use power (Willer et al. 1997). Because power use creates resentment, and because status is a position based on esteem or respect, it can be difficult to use power to gain status. However, it can be done. There are at least three ways that power can translate to status, and they all result from the fact that those with power accumu late resources. The foundation of status differences is expectations that people have for the competence of themselves and others. The resources that come with power result from a position in a structure rather than personal ability. Nevertheless, if we see one person accumulating many more resources than others do, we tend to Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 assume that the person accumulating the resources is more competent than those others. Another way that power can be used to gain status is to use the resources that come with power, essentially to purchase status. Al Capone became the most powerful person in Chicago, largely through his ruthlessness. Once powerful, however, Capone was generous with the proceeds of his criminal activities, giving to schools and organizing one of Chicago’s first soup kitchens. These activities led to Capone not only being the most feared person in Chicago, but also beloved in many Chicago neighborhoods. In the same way, Pablo Escobar, 154 J. W. Lucas and D. R. Segal the notorious Colombian drug lord, gained status in his community despite being responsible for the deaths of scores of Colombian citizens. He purchased his status by using proceeds from his drug operation to do things such as build com munity soccer stadiums. Members of his commun ity rewarded these actions with respect. A third way that power can translate to status is through strategic image control. Research shows that powerful people are presumed by others to be self- interested and greedy (Lovaglia et al. 2003). When powerful people practice strategic humility and philanthropy, they counter expectations of greed and, in fact, enhance their status with others who admire their perceived restraint and compassion. Bill Gates has enhanced his status by conspicuously applying his vast resources to philanthropic causes. It may not be coincidental that Gates’ philanthropic activities increased dramatically about the time of the European anti-trust legislation against Microsoft. Although power can be used to gain status, it is easier to accumulate power after one has status, rather than the other way around. Power is a natural out growth of status, a fact that can contribute to barriers for people in disadvant aged status groups, such as women and minority group members. The principal antecedent of status is expectations for competence. Status leads to power, in part because selections or elections to powerful positions are typically made based on perceptions of competence. Powerful leadership positions in the milit ary, for example, are filled with persons whom those making promotion or assignment decisions perceive to be the most competent. In other words, those who are highest in status (who may or may not in fact be the most competent) are typically rewarded with powerful positions. Status also leads to power because we value resources held by high-status others (Thye 2000). At the time of this writing, a letter handwritten by Mahatma Gandhi (a person much higher in status than he was in power) was listed on eBay for a price of $64,000. Because those high in status are held in high esteem, people will trade relat ively more of their own resources for fewer of a high- status person’s resources. Time, for example, is a resource we all value, and lower-status people will wait longer (i.e., trade more of their time) for high- status others. In the same way, people will trade money for the autograph of a high-status celebrity, giving a resource they likely value a great deal for a resource relatively insignificant to the high-status celebrity. Power, then, nat urally grows out of status. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016

Leading with power and status The use of power creates resentment. This is true whether or not people are threatened with punishment for undesirable behavior or are promised rewards for desirable behavior. Using both rewards and punishments compels people to do things they would not do if the rewards or punishments were not in place. Using power to lead is also inefficient. It requires a great deal of energy on the part of the leader to have rewards and punishments always in place to compel Status, power, and diversity in the military 155 behavior. If leaders only initiate action through the use of power, then followers will stop carrying out actions that the leader desires as soon as the incentives are removed. Leading with status, in contrast, has significant benefits. People do what a high-status leader wants because they hold her in respect. The influence of high- status leaders makes people want to perform actions they would not otherwise perform. Rewards or punishments are unnecessary. Moreover, influence (the principal outcome of status) can lead followers to carry out positive actions that the leader herself may not have imagined. This is because while power works at changing behavior, influence changes behavior through attitudes. High-status leaders change the attitudes of followers who then, because of these attitudes, carry out behaviors that the leader desires or that followers perceive will benefit the leader. An appealing conclusion that one might draw from this discussion is that effective leaders do not use power. However, leadership positions usually require leaders to use power – teachers grade students and judges decide legal matters. That leaders sometimes must use their power is especially true for military leaders. Research has found that in organiza tions, the most effective leaders use power least (Rodriguez-Bailon et al. 2000). In other words, effective leaders use their power, but only when they must, and at other times manage the resentment pro duced by the use of power. Although leading with power can be easier in the short term, the benefits of leading with status multiply over time. This is because leading with status does not bring with it the resentment produced by the use of power (Willer et al. 1997). While those who use power risk losing it, those who lead with status usually only gain more. An effective approach to leadership, then, is to avoid the use of power when possible and instead lead with status. The result will be that status, and in turn power, grows. When George Washington was the new commander of the Con tinental Army, his troops won an important battle in Boston against the British. As a new leader, Washington might have led the troops into Boston as a signal of his newfound power. Instead, Washington had the generals in charge during the battle lead the troops into the city (McCullough 2005). He quietly arrived in the city the following day. Such an approach required Washington to be confi dent that he would get credit for the accomplishments of the army even if he did not claim them. This confidence certainly grew out of his status. The strategy Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 also required long-range thinking about his status among the troops. The result of his actions in Boston increased his status among the troops, and ultimately his power.

Status, power, and diversity in the military We can conclude from the preceding discussion that status brings with it sub stantial benefits. High-status persons are asked their opinions more, are evalu ated more highly, and have more influence in groups. In addition, leading with 156 J. W. Lucas and D. R. Segal status has the effect of producing changes in behavior without engendering the resentment produced by the use of power. However, some individuals, particu larly women and minority group members, do not have the status on which to draw. For these groups, gaining status through increased military service can be an asset. The US military services have far outpaced private sector organizations in increasing the representations of minority group members in leadership positions (Moskos and Butler 1996). More recently, increasing numbers of women have been moving into senior military leadership positions (Iskra 2008). Such posi tions have given power to members of disadvantaged social groups – a signific ant feat. These advances, however, do less to advance the more insidious issue of status. We continue to live in a culture in which the contri butions of women and minority group members tend to be devalued or ignored. Because women and minority group members are in groups accorded low status in our society, their powerful positions, once attained, tend to be met with resistance. Their positions are not viewed as legitimate. When power is recog nized as legitimate, those with power do not need to carry out any particu lar actions to show that they are powerful (Brass and Burkhardt 1993). When power is illegitimate, however, those with power feel threatened (Rodriguez-Bailon et al. 2000). In organizations, a result has been that women and minority group members are forced to use their power more to show that they have it. Such use, however, creates resentment, lowering their status further (Bruins et al. 1999). Both the need for low-status persons to use power in order to show that they have it and the self-fulfilling nature of status processes create loops in which members of disadvantaged groups will be likely to have difficulty attaining status, even when assigned to powerful positions. An implication for military services is that increasing the representation of members of disadvantaged groups in positions of power is not enough. Even if women and minority group members are proportionally represented in leadership positions, their leadership is especially likely to be met with resistance, potentially requiring them to use their power more and engendering resentment.

Implications and recommendations Social collectives, be they communit ies, organizations, or professions, tend to reproduce themselves mimetically; in other words, they tend to select new Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 members who resemble their current and past members, thus continuing in the future to resemble the way they currently look and the way they looked in the past. They practice exclusion, or closure, whereby group boundaries are drawn, the distinctiveness of the group is affirmed, and the rewards and advantages of group membership are maximized by closing off or limiting opportun ities to members of other groups (Weber 1978, pp. 33–38). This process typically rein forces status and power differentials that have tradition ally advantaged majority group members (e.g., men and European-Americans in US society). Occupa tional exclusion is a special case of this more general process, and in the case of Status, power, and diversity in the military 157 the US military, it has been used historically to minimize the diversity of the force, even as the population and the labor force from which the military is drawn have become more diverse (Segal and Kestnbaum 2002). The US military evolved in a way that advantaged persons in higher status categories in society more broadly – men and European-Americans. The military emerged from a militia background in a relat ively homogeneous population composed primarily of white people of European ancestry. Because military ser vice was regarded as a gendered social role, the militia, and the national army that evolved from it, was seen as the domain of young white men (Kelty and Segal, in press). The military participation of other groups was characterized variously by exclusion, quotas on representa tion, limita tions on the positions they could hold, and segregation in special units, prohibiting promotion to senior ranks. The military reflected the status ordering of society. Thus, the role of African-Americans in the military early in our national his tory was ambivalent and controversial. From the Civil War to the Korean War, they were segregated in black units which limited their numbers, generally com manded by white officers, and commonly restricted to service or support rather than more powerful and higher status combat roles (Lutz, in press; Segal 1989, pp. 103–113). Prior to the twentieth century, women were excluded from the military, except in those instances when they could pass as men. During the World Wars they were admitted to service, first only as nurses and as auxiliaries, and later serving in gender-defined units and branches, with quotas on how much of the force they could comprise, and what ranks they could attain. The auxiliary nature of women’s service was changed after World War II, but other limita tions remained until the advent of the all-volunteer force. The military remains the only employer in America that is legally allowed to bar personnel from certain occupations – those most likely to lead to senior positions of authority and responsibility (Campbell, in press; Segal 1989, pp. 113–124). The US military was racially integ rated to meet the personnel needs of the Korean War, and the pace of gender integration increased in the 1970s to help address recruitment shortfalls in the all-volunteer force. However, the participa tion of the homosexual popula tion is still minimized in the US military, particu larly during peacetime, with discharges for homosexuality decreasing during times of war (Herek et al. 1996). We are currently in a period of transition. With the 1993 policy of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” currently under review, the integra tion of the gay community into the US military is changing, in part influenced by Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 the manning needs of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars2 (Brown, in press). What these cases have in common is the tendency of white male heterosexu als to maintain positions of status and power in the American armed forces. However, as Battistelli (2003) notes, there are processes of ongoing social change that portend increasing diversity in armed forces, as societies collectively become more diverse. The arguments used by those in authority to maintain closure have been similar, regardless of the nature of the source of diversity that has challenged white male hegemony. Thus, the integration of African- Americans, women, and gays was, at various points in history, resisted on the 158 J. W. Lucas and D. R. Segal assertion that these groups would undermine unit cohesion, and that they were carriers of venereal disease (Segal and Kestnbaum 2002). In addition, African- Americans and women were asserted to be ineffective combat soldiers, and indeed, regulations still exclude women from ground combat units that are likely to close with and engage enemy soldiers. However, armed forces increasingly have come to reflect the diversity of their host societies. Segal and her colleagues have specified some of the factors that have contrib uted to gender integration of the military (Segal 1995; Iskra et al. 2002; Sandhoff et al. 2010), and we suggest that these factors have affected racial and gender integration in the US military, have affected sexual orientation integration in other Western militaries, and are likely to affect sexual orientation integration in the United States as well. These factors include elements of social structure, character istics of the armed forces, cultural variables, and political variables. Social structure variables include demographic patterns such as the size of birth cohorts, the degree of minority participation in the civilian labor force, the degree of segregation in the labor force, economic factors, and family structure. Armed forces character istics include the role and missions of the military, the ideology and culture of the military, the demographics of the military, the role of technology in the military, the organization of the military, and military acces sion policies. Culture variables include social constructions of, and values and norms relating to, the military and minorities, norms and values about force, power, and domination, public discourse about minority relations, values regard ing ascription and equity, and the status accorded to people in various social cat egories. Political variables include the national security situation, civil–military relations, political ideology, policies and leadership, sources of social change other than armed conflict, and judicial decisions.

Conclusion The US military services are becoming increasingly diverse and have in the past several decades outpaced the private sector in increasing diverse representa tion. This includes diversity in leadership positions. In 2009, 485 Fortune 500 com panies had men as CEOs. Leadership in the military services is considerably more diverse. At the same time, there is of course more to be done. Women and minority group members are still under-represented in military leadership posi Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 tions relative to their representations in the services at large. This is certainly in part due to status processes that devalue contributions from members of dis advantaged groups, such as women and non-whites in US society. A challenge is that as women and minority group members increasingly take positions of power, they will encounter resistance because their status is low. Two factors will likely work to continue to suppress their status. One is the power they will need to use to counter the resistance to their power, which will engender resentment. The second is the self-reinforcing nature of status orders, whereby performances from low-status persons are evaluated low because they Status, power, and diversity in the military 159 are low status. The basic research literatures on power and status in groups suggest ways movement toward positive change, in which the contributions of all group members are given proper recog nition, can be accelerated. The most basic way for an individual to increase her status is to move to more highly valued categor ies of status characteristics within her control. As we noted, military service acts as one such status characteristic, and those who serve increase their status in society. In addition to being an outcome of status, leader ship leads to status. Persons in leadership positions are accorded higher status than others. Thus, as increasingly diverse groups take more and more leadership positions, the statuses of these groups should increase. There are other structural changes that can counteract status processes that disadvantage women and minority group members. Research by Cohen and col leagues found that racial and ethnic minorities attained status as high as that of majority group members when all group members were trained to recognize the contributions of minority group members (Cohen and Lotan 1995; Cohen and Roper 1972). Research by Lucas (2003) found that when a group structure with women in leadership positions was institutionalized, women as leaders attained as much influence as men as leaders. These studies suggest that strong institu tional support for arrange ments in which women and minority group members hold leadership positions can go a long way toward reducing the resistance they face when in such positions. We have little doubt that the military services and society more generally are moving in the direction of increased diversity in leadership and increased recog nition of the benefits of diversity. As we noted, however, such change happens slowly. The research literatures on power and status in groups suggest how these changes can happen and how they can be accelerated. If these prescriptions are followed, the result should be fully integrated services in which the contributions of all group members receive their proper recognition.

Notes 1 The writing of this article was supported in part by the Army Research Institute under Contract W74V8H-05-K-0007. 2 This chapter was developed and completed shortly before the President of the United States (Barak Obama) signed into law the repeal of the 1993 “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 References Battistelli, F. (2003) “Integration of Ethnic Minorities in the Armed Forces,” in Armed Forces and International Security, Jean Callaghan and Franz Kernic (eds.): 231–240, Munster: LIT Verlag. Berger, J. and Webster, M., Jr. (2006) “Expectations, Status, and Behavior,” in Con- temporary Social Psychological Theories, P. Burke (ed.): 268–300, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Berger, J., Rosenholtz, S. J. and Zelditch, M., Jr. (1980) “Status Organizing Processes,” Annual Review of Sociology 6: 477–508. 160 J. W. Lucas and D. R. Segal Brass, D. J. and Burkhardt, M. E. (1993) “Potential Power and Power Use: An Investiga tion of Structure and Behavior,” Academy of Management Journal 36 (3): 441–470. Brown, M. T. (in press) “LGBT Service in the Military,” in Life Course Perspectives on Military Service, Janet M. Wilmoth and Andrew S. London (eds.), London: Routledge. Bruins, J., Ellemers, N. and De Gilder, D. (1999) “Power Use and Differential Compe tence as Determinants of Subordinates’ Evaluative and Behavioural Responses in Sim ulated Organizations,” European Journal of Social Psychology 29: 843–870. Campbell, D. (in press) “Wars, Women and the American Military,” in Life Course Per- spectives on Military Service, Janet M. Wilmoth and Andrew S. London (eds.), London: Routledge. Cohen, B. and Zhou, Z. (1991) “Status Processes in Enduring Work Groups,” American Sociological Review 56: 179–188. Cohen, E. G. and Lotan, R. A. (1995) “Producing Equal-Status Interaction in the Hetero geneous Classroom,” American Educational Research Journal 32: 99–120. Cohen, E. G. and Roper, S. (1972) “Modifications of Interracial Interaction Disability: An Application of Status Characteristics Theory,” American Sociological Review 37: 643–657. Franke, V. C. (2000) “Duty, Honor, Country: The Social Identity of West Point Cadets,” Armed Forces and Society 26 (2): 175–212. Griffith, J. (2009) “Being a Reserve Soldier: A Matter of Social Identity,” Armed Forces and Society 36 (1): 38–64. Herek, G. M., Jobe, J B. and Carney, R. M. (eds.) (1996) Out in Force: Sexual Orienta- tion and the Military, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Iskra, D. M. (2008) Breaking through the Glass Ceiling, Germany: VDM Verlag. Iskra, D. M., Leithauser, S., Trainor, M. and Segal, M. W. (2002) “Women’s Participa tion in Armed Forces Cross-Nationally: Expanding Segal’s Model,” Current Sociology 50: 771–797. Janowitz, M. (1960) The Professional Soldier, New York: Free Press. Kelley, M. (ed.) (1994) Critique and Power: Recasting the Foucault/Habermas Debate, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Kelty, R. and Segal, D. R. (in press) “The Military as a Transforming Social Agent: Inte gration into or Isolation from Normal Adult Roles,” in Life Course Perspectives on Military Service, Janet M. Wilmoth and Andrew S. London (eds.), London: Routledge. Lovaglia, M. J. (1999) “Understanding Network Exchange Theory,” Advances in Group Processes 16: 31–59. Lovaglia, M. J., Willer, R. and Troyer, L. (2003) “Power, Status, and Collective Action,” Advances in Group Processes 20: 105–131. Lucas, Jeffrey W. (2003) “Status Processes and the Institutionalization of Women as Leaders,” American Sociological Review 68: 464–480.

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Lutz, A. C. (in press) “Integration and the Racial-Ethnic Composition of the Military,” in Life Course Perspectives on Military Service, Janet M. Wilmoth and Andrew S. London (eds.), London: Routledge. McCullough, D. (2005) 1776, New York: Simon & Schuster. Moskos, C. C. and Butler, J. S. (1996) All That We Can Be: Black Leadership and Racial Integration the Army Way, New York: Basic Books. Pfeffer, J. (1992) Managing with Power: Politics and Influence in Organizations, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Ridgeway, C. L. (1982) “Status in Groups: The Importance of Motivation,” American Sociological Review 47: 76–88. Status, power, and diversity in the military 161 Rodriguez-Bailon, R., Moya, M. and Yzerbyt, V. (2000) “Why Do Superiors Attend to Negative Stereotypic Information about their Subordinates? Effects of Power Legiti macy on Social Perception,” European Journal of Social Psychology 30: 651–671. Russell, B. (1938) Power: A New Social Analysis, New York: W. W. Norton. Sandhoff, M., Segal, M. W. and David, R. (2010) “Gender Issues in the Transformation to an All-Volunteer force,” in The Decline Of Citizen Armies in Democratic States, Stuart Cohen (ed.): 110–131, New York: Routledge. Segal, D. R. (1989) Recruiting for Uncle Sam: Citizenship and Military Manpower Policy, Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. Segal, D. R. and Kestnbaum, M. (2002) “Professional Closure in the Military Labor Market,” in The Future of the Army Profession, Don M. Snider and Gayle L. Watkins (eds.): 441–458, Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill Primis. Segal, M. W. (1995) “Women’s Military Roles Cross-Nationally: Past, Present, and Future,” Gender & Society 9: 757–775. Shackelford, S., Wood, W. and Worchel, S. (1996) “Behavioral Styles and the Influences of Women in Mixed-Sex Groups,” Social Psychology Quarterly 59: 284–293. Tajfel, H. (1982) “Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations,” Annual Review of Psy- chology 33: 1–39. Thye, S. R. (2000) “A Status Value Theory of Power in Exchange Relations,” American Sociological Review 65: 407–432. Umberson, D. and Hughes, M. (1987) “The Impact of Physical Attractiveness on Achievement and Psychological Well-Being,” Social Psychology Quarterly 50: 227–236. Weber, Max (1978) “Economy and Society,” in Economy and Society, Guenther Roth and Klaus Wittich (eds.), Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Webster, M., Jr. and Driskell, J. E. (1978) “Status Generalization: A Review and Some New Data,” American Sociological Review 43: 220–236. Willer, D., Lovaglia, M. J. and Markovsky, B. (1997) “Power and Influence,” Social Forces, 76: 571–603. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 9 Diversity and inclusion An equal opportunity practitioner’s perspective

Gregory Jenkins

The concept of embracing diverse people, coupled with the deliberate act of including those different from us, is the key to unlocking the vast array of talents, abilit ies, and potential of the most important resource of any organiza tion – its people. In the following pages I will share with you some of my experi ences as a soldier over the past 28 years, and how those experi ences helped shape me and ultimately led me through my equal opportun ity training experi ence – an event that was life-changing for me. By effectively leading diversity and inclusion, leaders can bring about amazing amounts of synergy, determination, and untapped talent from the people who make up their teams, workgroups, and organizations. In this chapter I present to you a body of work that examines the results of my equal opportun ity education and how that education forced me to look inward and reflect upon my career and life and propose a future of the Army in terms of diversity and inclu sion. This introspection leads to three main topics:

1 A reflection of my experi ence as a soldier in the military culture prior to my equal opportunity education; 2 my experience as a practicing equal opportun ity advisor (EOA); and 3 my hope that the Army fully embraces its own diversity and includes all its members, that is, that the Army is determined to continue its high perform ance as a national defender while remaining reflective of the people it serves.

So, let’s get started as I share with you the first time I was introduced to my new Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 organization and its culture.

Reflections of a soldier “Nice to meet you; glad you shake hands like a white man.” That greeting, and the subsequent negative racist discussion that was apparently in progress as I entered the old blue and dusty Ford Maverick, was the beginning of my initial social contact with a few of the white male members of my first permanent Army unit. I was shocked by the “hand shake” comment and knew immediately Diversity and inclusion 163 to keep my mouth shut. As the four of us continued driving toward a local fast- food restaurant, I just sat and listened. Almost immediately I realized that the inclusive and seemingly fair environment created by my former drill sergeants during basic training was a long way away. That initial encounter during my very first days at Fort Hood, Texas provided a glimpse of what was in store for me as I began to learn how to function in what would turn out to be a very entrenched and dysfunctional organizational climate – an organiza tion that would become my home and job for the next 15 months. My drill sergeants had modeled and provided outstanding leadership for all of us to follow, but it was becoming alarmingly apparent that the majority of my new leaders did not subscribe to such ideals. I wondered if I had made a mistake in joining the Army, but figured that I had to make the best of it and let neither my family nor myself down. Thus began my education of another kind of Army, an Army that did not pay much attention to the higher-ups, an organization that heeded the rules and regu lations just enough to get by, and then sometimes not. I had not started out my Army career as an EOA, but rather as an enlisted bridge crewman. Bridge crewmen were a component of the combat engineers, elements of the Corps of Engineers. I had freely chosen my job at the recruiting station in my hometown and felt confident in my abilities to do the job for which I had been trained in basic and advanced individual training. I was taught to do the right thing at home by my parents, and later by my drill sergeants. What really confused me was the visible disregard of what I thought was reasonable behavior by many of the unit members and leaders toward the other people of differing racial groups within my new unit. I had never been put into an environ ment as caustic as this and wondered what I would have to do to survive and fit into this factionalized team of people indifferent toward each another, all the while trying to accomplish our unit missions. It was a very frus trating and disappointing reality. I felt sick to my stomach, and turned to alcohol much of the time, trying to adjust to this new life to which I was not accustomed. I just couldn’t understand the vulgarities openly expressed about women and minorities in general; nothing was off-limits. Demeaning language and threats were used by many members of the unit, black and white alike. I soon found that my desire to fit into this new culture would be accomplished more easily through bad attitude and large quan Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 tities of alcohol, with a garnish of drugs on the side. And even though I would “hang” with my crew, the white guys, I just found the whole thing repulsive. I can remember we still had some non-commissioned officers, NCOs we called them, who had been drafted in the early 1970s and were still on active duty. I wondered how much of the Vietnam era Army was brought forward by these leaders; how these soldiers viewed race relations, they themselves having grown up in the 1960s. I especially wondered how my organization could function like this! There was even an incident where a friend and I were robbed at gunpoint during my tour of duty at Fort Hood. I think we were set up by members of our 164 G. Jenkins own unit, but we never called the police or reported it to anyone in our chain of command. We didn’t think they’d do anything about it. So, the organization drifted along, doing the things that early 1980s Army units did in peacetime, which was not much. Our days were filled with makeshift tasks and our nights and weekends were spent getting drunk and high and remaining voluntarily segregated. However, I would soon learn about a different kind of Army. I received orders for assignment to an Army unit in West Germany. I really did not want to go, but I knew that I had to finish up my three-year enlistment, so away I went. Being a soldier stationed in West Germany was nothing like I had expected. The unit I was assigned to was so different, and so much better than the Texas-based organization I had come from. The organizational culture was open and receptive and everyone seemed to get along with everyone else. At first I didn’t know what was going on; my previous unit was in a never-ending downward spiral of poor race relations, combined with alcohol and drug abuse. The unit in West Germany, on the other hand, was a God-send. I had finally arrived at a place that I thought could restore my faith in the Army and in those things taught to me by my parents and drill sergeants. Although I was still deter mined to get out of the Army, I felt like I had finally found a good place to serve as a soldier. My new Army engineer unit was a great place to live and work, and I found myself wondering if I should stay in the Army. The soldiers, leaders, and even family members all seemed to get along so well. I wondered how one Army engineer unit climate could be so destructive, while the same kind of Army engi neer unit half-way around the world appeared to be so healthy. I knew then that the Army was not a bad place filled only with poor leaders and racists, but rather composed of different units that had different organiza tional climates. And although I enjoyed my time in this organization, I did elect to leave the Army upon the successful completion of my enlistment contract. But my Army story was far from over. I left the Army, but returned to West Germany and obtained employment with a local German metal fabricating company. Looking back at that job now, I realize it taught me many different things: A new language, new ways to operate in a different culture, and new things about myself. I thoroughly enjoyed my time living as an expatriate, but found myself returning to the service some 19 months later. That break in service provided an insight that would help me learn Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 more about people and different cultures before I returned once again to serve my country. Interestingly enough, I ended up back in the same company I had separated from earlier. The differ ence I experienced this time around, though, was significant. I had developed new skills in my 19 months of being an expatri ate, and found that the ability to speak and read German came in handy. This, of course, helped our unit out during various exercises and projects that had to be carried out with the local German population. I soon found myself translating for a number of leaders, and found myself thinking differently about people in gen eral. For the first time I started to see that by reaching out to a different culture, Diversity and inclusion 165 you can break through and develop relationships that can be benefi cial to both your own organization and the society in which your organization might operate. Yes! Learning how to speak German while learning about another culture was a great step forward in my development toward becoming an EOA, but there were other events that contrib uted to that growth as well, as occurred during my assignment to South Korea. South Korea is a great place, with many fascinating people and interesting places. I enjoyed my tour in South Korea, but unlike my cohesive unit experi ences in West Germany, South Korea was more divided – this time by those who determined the composition of our sub-units. I was a platoon sergeant for one of the engineer bridge platoons, and never thought for a minute about the composi tion of my platoon. I probably never gave it much thought because of work schedules and things that needed to be accomplished. We were busy most of the time and I didn’t notice the differ ences between the two platoons – at least not until it was brought to my attention. One day, an NCO asked me to “look” at the other engineer bridge platoon and tell him if I could see any differences between the two elements. At first I said I saw a platoon of about 55 men and women; what else was I suppose to see? Upon further inspection of the platoon I could see that the other platoon was predominately white and male, and that there were very few people of color or females within that platoon. At first I didn’t see the point of this exercise until this same person asked me to turn around and view my own platoon. Of course, when I turned around what I saw was my platoon. I recognized them as my sol diers; what else should I have seen? Then it was pointed out that my platoon was predominately not white and that the majority of the people in my platoon were people of color. This made me wonder why this had happened. Could this have been just a “luck of the draw” thing? We were a good platoon; I had no com plaints, but why such a distinct color and race differ ence between the platoons? I thought that when new soldiers came to the company, the first sergeant would assign the soldiers based on the needs of the organiza tion and that race, color, and gender had nothing to do with the assignment process. But maybe I was wrong about that. In fact, I was informed that the other platoon sergeant and the first sergeant would sit down with the incoming-gains roster and go over which soldiers the other platoon sergeant did not want and would suggest that the unwanted sol diers go to my platoon. I was flabbergasted! Why in the world would someone Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 do something like that? I guess I didn’t see the differences between the two pla toons because I was working hard to do my job and really didn’t have the time to look up and see if soldier assignments were being manipulated. I couldn’t under stand it. How could anyone select people based solely on race, color, or gender? But again, it was another event that forced me to look at things differently, to look at the ways and means that some leaders take upon themselves to make their organizations appear certain ways. I wondered if that was how the whole Army was being run, but I knew that wasn’t true – I couldn’t believe that! I had been on diverse teams and workgroups; we performed well and we functioned 166 G. Jenkins successfully, despite our differences. In fact, I now think part of our success was attribut able to our differ ences, perceptions, experiences, and similar ities. I believed the Army as a whole didn’t do such things, but I knew there were certain leaders who would discriminate against people of color, gender, national origin, religious preference, and race. I realized this because I was seeing it for the first time. But it wouldn’t be the last. My next big awakening would happen in Iraq. We were on the ground in Iraq by March 2003 and wouldn’t return home until February 2004. It was during this period of time that I was put in charge of the Taji military–industrial complex, Department of Public Works (DPW). This was a job that I did not want to do at first, but quickly learned that I would find out more about people and their interactions and, as it turned out, it would also help me become a better EOA. I was hesitant at first about working side by side with Iraqis. The men who worked for the DPW were carpenters, masons, plumb ers, electricians, and general laborers, and they needed the jobs that the US Army was paying good money for. I seemed to be relearning a lot of the same lessons over again. For example, I learned again that people really like to be respected, and not degraded. It was amazing to me how far a little respect for people from any society and culture would go. As I learned in Germany, you do not need to know a lot of the indigen ous language to communicate. These 40–45 Iraqi men were just trying to find a way to support their families and make life better for them – which was why the Army was in Iraq in the first place. In the early days of my DPW experi ence, I thought I would try an experi ment. I would make it a point to say “Good morning!” every day as the men came to work. At first they were hesitant to respond. They seemed to be some what suspicious of me, but that didn’t stop me from continuing with my very motivated morning greeting. After about a week, I began to notice some of the men responding in kind, some greeting me with an Arabic greeting, but most were using the English words: “Good morning!” As our greetings became second nature and more relaxed, so did the attitudes of both my small group of soldiers and the Iraqi DPW workers. I soon witnessed an increased level of motivation in getting the daily DPW tasks completed. I also began to notice that these men were talking among themselves as if they were preparing to present me with questions or some kind of dialogue. In fact, they wanted to do more than just talk; they wanted to talk about a lot of things. They wanted to bring in lunch for our little group of soldiers, provid Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 ing food that their wives and mothers had prepared, and they wanted to share with us information about some suspicious men who were coming and going to and from their villages. Our “Good mornings!” and curt, stumbling dialogue throughout the day started to develop into conversations about all kinds of situ ations, opinions, and ideas, both work and non-work related. Individual men started volunteering to fix up our dilapidated DPW facilities. One man wanted to start a garden and brought in flowers and other greens to plant and grow. It was an amazing little garden, one that needed daily attention and got it from our self- appointed DPW gardener. But there was much more to what was happening than Diversity and inclusion 167 delicious lunches and flower gardens; we were getting good, solid military intel ligence and information. These men were helping to tell the US Army story to their families and neigh bors. They also began explaining to me and the other soldiers how some of their relatives had gone missing, and how Saddam had controlled the popula tion through the use of electrical power shutdowns and the withholding of informa tion, or the restrictions on TV and radio, just to recall a few of the many accounts I heard. For example, our purchasing agent, Hussein, became very angry during a conversation with me about satellite TV. He was telling me about the prior evening, and how his brother-in-law was finally able to obtain a TV satellite dish, an item that was illegal to own during Saddam’s rule. Following installa tion of the dish, a device that could bring in any number of broadcasts from around the world, Hussein and his brother-in-law sat and watched images from the around the world for the very first time. This angered Hussein, as he learned the effects of the propaganda that had been the strategy of the Saddam govern ment toward its people. Hussein explained to me that the average Iraqi could gain access to only Iraqi government TV programming, and he was appalled and surprised to see how the rest of the world was living while the Ba’ath party was telling the Iraqi people that their way of life was the best and nothing outside of Iraq was worth their while. He was bitterly angered by the lies of his own gov ernment as he watched how parts of the rest of the world actually lived. But those events were only a small part of what was transpiring between our little group of soldiers and these newly liberated Iraqis. More import ant was the connection that we were making with each other. I had the overwhelmingly good feeling that this was what the US Army was supposed to be doing here in this country – liberating it and helping the Iraqi people move forward toward a more open and healthy society and climate. I felt I was doing something good for these people. It also made me feel good that it all started with something as simple as “Good morning!” We were well on our way to developing substantial levels of trust and openness. But with that openness came the uglier side of dealing with human interaction. As we worked alongside our Iraqi counterparts, other soldiers living and working in Taji were not as inclined to extend small amounts of respect and dignity and soon became detractors to our efforts in forming an efficient and effective work group of soldiers and Iraqi workmen. Sometimes our DPW workers were called “mother fuckers,” “assholes,” “bitches” and other deplor Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 able names. I understood that soldiers are directed to execute their missions and perform the jobs that they are trained to do by the Army, but I couldn’t under stand their lack of respect to the very people we were supposed to be liberating and assisting in ways to improve their lives and country. It was a topic that I had to address on more than one occasion with my DPW Iraqi counterparts. They would ask me, “How come some of the American soldiers call us these names?” “I thought the Army was here to help us, not put us down. Please explain this to us.” I would explain as best I could, but the bigger picture that kept going through my mind was the cultural attitudes of some of the very people who 168 G. Jenkins claimed to liberate the Iraqi people. Why would an organization explain to its people (soldiers) that they were helping these people (Iraqis), but oftentimes treat the Iraqi men and women so indifferently? This bothered me and presented me with an observation that an organiza tion such as the Army did not know or at least did not understand the competencies required for the job at hand, and where we were in terms of treating those we claimed to be helping. More importantly, how were we going to develop the kind of organizational culture that could enhance our abilities to connect with our allies? I believed then as I do now that we already have part of that answer in our organization today. I think that in our continually shrinking and complex world, an organization that knows how to lead and maneuver through these intricate group dynamics while communicating across different cultures will be ultimately more effective. In my 28-plus years of active Army service, I have had many high-quality leaders, regardless of their race, color, gender, religious preference, or national origin – leaders who taught me the skills necessary to becoming a better cross- cultural communicator. These leaders were mostly women and ethnic minorit ies who not only led our collective successes of mission accomplishment, but who did so while having to endure differing levels of discrimination and exclusion that I was neither aware of nor had to contend with. These experiences, with different people from different cultures, that I have shared can provide helpful lessons for the Army and our society. Historically, women and ethnic minority leaders have always played large roles in our nation becoming more unified and effective in what we do, and more importantly, who we are as a country. Women and ethnic minorities provide our military and nation with a largely untapped resource of differing perspect ives that many in our soci ety have now begun to fully realize – a perspect ive I believe that can be utilized by the Army today as illustrated by some of the events that I witnessed over the years. In many cases, the women and ethnic minority leaders I had worked harder, longer, and provided better leadership than some other non-minority leaders. I learned more about sacrifice and dedication from these leaders because I had to watch them work even more diligently to gain the same level of acceptance and inclusion that other leaders almost obtained by racial default. Sergeant Reginald White was the best squad leader I ever had. He was an African-American male who taught me how to properly care for my own sol diers and who also taught me perhaps my greatest lesson: The hardest thing in Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 life I will ever have to do will be to forgive others. Then there was Captain Diane Cummins, an African-American female who often put up with insensitive and unsolicited comments about her ability to lead, although she performed better than any other company commander I had. And there was Chief Petty Officer Keith Perkins, an African-American male who explained to me how, when he had to drive across our own country, he did not feel safe unless he had a weapon to protect himself and his family. There was Captain Angela Berg, a white female engineer officer who was referred to as not being a “real” engineer officer by our battalion commander, even though she was successfully running Diversity and inclusion 169 the largest engineer company in the battalion. I include also Major General Randy Castro, a Hispanic male who, among his commanders and staff, was the only leader who voiced concerns about the challenges of off-post housing for all soldiers. Another leader was Command Sergeant Major (retired) Bob Keehu, an Asian male who shared with our class how he would have to explain to complete strangers why he had a little white girl by the hand when he walked through air ports and other establishments, even though the little girl was his own grand daughter. Finally, Command Sergeant Major Maria Martinez, a Hispanic female and American citizen with 30 years of Army service, who, to this day, gets asked to provide proof of her US citizenship. Despite the aforementioned obstacles, I never witnessed these leaders quit, complain, or take revenge. Instead, they simply rose above the demeaning and belittling behavior and led us to successful mission accomplishment. In short, they endured and provided outstanding exam ples of grace and perseverance, exactly the kind of leadership we needed more of in Iraq. In this continually changing and dynamic world we need people who know how to lead and maneuver through intricate group dynamics. These leaders must also have the competencies to communicate across different cultures, providing dignity and respect while accomplishing the mission. Women and ethnic minor ity leaders are some of the best suited for these and other challenges, as they’ve been serving and leading with distinction in challenging environ ments around the world for many years. It is these same leaders from my past that helped me the most in terms of learning about myself and others, which in turn allowed me to become the kind of passionate and dedicated EOA that the Army needs today, and around the world, as our Army finds itself among people in many different regions and nations.

The EOA experience It was shortly upon returning from Iraq that I got the news that I was going to attend equal opportunity training at a place referred to as the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI). What happened there was an awakening of monumental proportions, a major milestone in a transformation that I had been going through for much of my military career in terms of diver sity and inclusion. I knew the equality of all people was important, but I couldn’t remember the first time I realized that the Army did, in fact, have an Equal Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Opportunity (EO) program. My journey of transformation, beginning at DEOMI, was something that initially I was not prepared for, but it became something I grew to embrace more and more with each passing day. My perceptions of self were being examined, and I felt uncomfortable and unsure as I began to see things from different perspect ives and from different people. As I reported to my next duty station, as an EOA, I began to wonder how I would be supported by the commander of the installation to which I was being assigned. Our training included, among other things, very helpful tools and insights from experi enced EOAs now serving as DEOMI instructors. My initial 170 G. Jenkins observations of my leaders on the EO program were favorable. I received the resources I requested and I was incredibly fortunate to have a well-trained staff and other organiza tional resources at my disposal. My experiences as an EOA were turning out to be better than expected; however, as I began to develop as an EOA, I noticed that the initial support of the EO program was more like a thin veneer of acceptance as opposed to a deep-rooted commitment. I encountered some resistance along the way from some members of the organization, but nothing that was too difficult to handle. I understood the dif ficulties of introspection and how my own journey of looking inward was at times painful and difficult to accept, even for myself. I could understand some of the push-back, or at least the less-than-enthusiastic support for the EO program, that I got from some of the organization’s members. Having gone through equal opportunity training, and knowing how difficult it was for me and those around me to go through such an experience, I could begin to understand the lack of deep-rooted commitment for a program that almost demands introspection. I would often reflect back on my ierearl career experiences, ones that I have already shared in this chapter, and I began to understand the reasons there was a lack of commitment by some of the organizational members for the EO program. The reason is that introspection is hard! It’s difficult to open up to one’s own stereotypes and biases and admit that there may be some internal ugliness about oneself. That can be tough to handle. My EO program experience dealt with those kinds of challenges and the numerous teaching and educational events that were the core activ ities of the Army’s EO program. We provided ethnic and special observations designed to train and educate others on the significant contributions and sacrifices of all people. We trained and educated soldiers and civilians on the subjects of dis crimination, power and privilege, racism, sexism, the prevention of sexual har assment, and numerous other subjects while including the posit ive aspects that organizations could leverage if they could/would change their leadership/organ izational climate to a more inclusive and receptive environment. I began to wonder if the EO program (Army Regulations 600-20, Ch. 6, pp. 59–72) was designed to get us to the ideal of inclusion. The Army, like many other organizations, has had great levels of diversity for quite some time; how ever, it may not have always exercised the greatest efforts of inclusiveness. This may not be surprising though; the inclusion of diverse people can be challeng ing, especially when an organization does not know how to proceed with such an Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 undertaking. Yes! The Army’s EO program does work, and when it is adequately resourced and supported by the leadership of the organization while coached, mentored, and educated by passionate and dedicated change agents (EOAs), it can change the culture of the organization. The challenge, however, in my opinion, is the design of the EO program. The EO program was developed during the early 1970s at a time when race issues in the military literally had become deadly. The EO program was designed to stop the hemorrhaging of racial issues in the Department of Defense that were directly connected to national racial issues indicat ive of the 1960s. So where do we go from here? Diversity and inclusion 171 Embracing diversity and inclusion I learned that the Army is like any other organiza tion made up of people; the Army, like any other group, has its own culture – a culture developed over time and through experiences and events that have shaped it into what it is today. So, here we are, looking back over the experiences of one soldier. The Army is a fantastic organization whose organizational mission statement is to fight and win the nation’s wars – a mission statement that has been exercised repeatedly since 1775 (US Army 2005). The Army has performed each and every mission it has been asked to perform, and has done its best time and again with the resources provided. The Army is a microcosm of the nation it serves, and thus has sub sequently gone through the same changes that our nation has experienced over its entire history. As such, the Army has had both successes and challenges dealing with people internally and externally both directly and indirectly. Histor ically, as the nation’s culture has been, so has the Army’s. As a segregated nation, we formed a segregated Army, an Army that was not always fair to all the members of its ranks, a condition that the Army in many ways was helpless to change because of the prevailing culture of its national citizenry and elected leaders. However, I think it’s important to understand just how difficult it has been for the Army to move forward in terms of equal opportunity, diversity, and inclusion when faced with a national constituency that may not have always cared about the treatment of certain groups of people the way the Army eventu ally had to. The Army has led our nation in many ways, not just in the protection of our country, but in helping America change its cultural attitudes toward people dif ferent from each another. For example, consider President Roosevelt’s creation of the Women’s Army Corps (WAC) in 1942 to include women in the service of our nation; and President Truman’s signing of Executive Order 9981 in 1948, which elimin ated segregation in the military services; or in the early 1970s when the Department of Defense created the Defense Race Relations Institute (DRRI) to overcome the racial tensions that were adversely affecting unit cohesion and mission effectiveness. These and other undertakings of the Army have been tre mendous successes for the men and women who have served and still serve today, but I submit to you that there is an even greater outcome for our nation because of these Army initiatives. Those outcomes are the equality and inclu siveness that service members have learned by becoming members of the Army Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 and serving alongside people who did not always look and sound like them selves. These same service members learned that those people who were differ ent were also Americans, just like they were, also just trying to serve their nation. I think the Army has not been properly credited with the enormity of this undertaking, nor do I believe the Army itself has yet fully realized the impact it has had upon the nation it serves in terms of cultural change. Do challenges yet remain in terms of how people are treated? Yes, but the vastness of the Army’s impact on American culture is something I believe is yet to be fully comprehended. The Army has learned many lessons along the way, 172 G. Jenkins sometimes taking less-than-desired approaches and sometimes forging along new and uncharted azimuths – discovering upon arrival that the Army had played an integ ral part in changing the course of American history and culture. The Army is an incred ibly important part of our nation, but how can it become even greater? One very important way is in the manner the Army looks at talent. Talent is an important aspect for any organiza tion, and the Army is no different. Today’s Army recruits, trains, and retains some of the best talent in the country, but is the Army doing all it can to attract and retain the best talent? The Army is a diverse organization, and it always has been. But things have changed; demographics are shifting, technological advances continue to shape and bend our ways of doing business. Different generations are serving alongside each another in daily interactions. These changes do impact the way the Army does its job, and it is yet again another example of how the Army is a subset of the overarching changes that are occurring within our society today. And like every organization, it will have to change and adapt to remain effective and successful as a fighting force. The Army has another opportunity to make a substantial contribution to the nation by leading in a cultural change that could mean the beginning of complete inclusion of our national diversity, a diversity we have always had, but have not always chosen to embrace. As a nation changes, so must its military, and if our military takes this culture-changing opportun ity, it will once again present to the nation that not only does our Army protect us, but it also helps our country adapt and change as it has done so in the past. In short, the Army can change the way it recognizes talent by the way it recognizes people. The Army has an opportunity to recognize its own diversity and manage that diversity and talent to make it an even better fighting force. The Army today works hard to protect America and those nations aligned with the interests of a free, democratic, and developing world. Harnessing the Army’s diversity and including those who can and want to enter into the profession of arms to serve their country and belong to something greater than themselves can be accom plished by and for the Army. As an EOA I have had quite a journey. I never asked to become an EOA, but the results of my experi ences have been far beyond my initial comprehension and expectation for me as a soldier. The Army is facing a great opportunity to fully develop and commit itself to the ideals of inclusion while improving itself as the premier fighting force in the world. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 The concept of embracing diverse people, coupled with the deliberate act of including those same diverse people, is a key to unlocking the vast array of talents, abilit ies, and potential of the most important resource of our organiza tion, our soldiers, civilians, and family members. By effectively leading diversity and inclusion, Army leaders can bring about amazing changes while improving the lives of Army personnel and the effectiveness of Army organizations. Diversity and inclusion 173 References Executive Order 9981 Establishing the President’s Committee on Equality of Treatment and Opportunity in the Armed Forces (1948), Washington, DC: US government. US Army (2005) Field Manual 1-0 The Army, para. 1–2. US Army, Regulations 600-20 Army Command Policy, Ch. 6: 59–72. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 10 Generational diversity Removing barriers to building bridges

Patrice Reid

In today’s world of accelerated change, the need for skilled employees has become one of the most pressing concerns for organizations. The demand for cutting-edge ideas and employee thought leadership has compelled organizations to seek individuals with diverse skill sets. Such diversity stems from differences in ethnicity, race, age, and sexual orientation, to name a few. Likewise, particu lar interest in the popular press and diversity-related issues has been centered on generational differ ences. Given the increase in trends toward generational mixing, as well as the immin ent departure of older, skilled generation, understanding the impact of intergenerational dynamics on organizational outcomes is of utmost concern. This chapter therefore focuses on generational diversity, which arguably stems from experi ences shared by different cohorts. A generation is a group of individuals who share birth years, age locality, and significant life events at critical developmental stages (Kupperschmidt 2000). Despite the vast amount of research and attention that generations have received in the press, critics have argued that generational differences may be nothing more than maturational changes. However, proponents contend that generational diversity in fact differs from age differences in that a generation is a social phe- nomenon rather than a biological creation (Sessa et al. 2007). Generational dif ferences go much deeper than a birth date, as these individuals share a common history defined by dramatic demographic changes. Notwithstanding, generational differences also go far beyond racial, ethnic, and economic boundaries. The defining events and trends of their time shape the attitudes, values, thought pro cesses, and work styles that demarcate a generation. Such life experi ences pre- dispose them to manifest a distinctive mode of thought which they carry to work Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 each day. On the contrary, age diversity implies that individuals develop their attitudes, behaviors, and thought processes based on a maturational effect of one’s age, and will therefore transition out of certain tendencies with the passage of time (Sessa et al. 2007). Despite this traditional belief, a generationally diverse workforce has distinct, more stable, and predictable effects on organiza tional outcomes as compared to a workforce driven primarily by age and maturational changes. Today’s generations – Traditionalists, Baby Boomers, Gen Xers, Millenni- als – are defined by common attitudes and experiences. The passions a group Generational diversity 175 of individuals agree or disagree about, the music they listened to, the heroes they shared, their demographics and early life experiences, the headlines that defined their times, their early days in the workplace, and their common his tory shape and define their generation (Zemke et al. 2000). Notably, adverse societal events also have significant influence in their formative years. Genera- tional differences are a product of their varied attitudes, beliefs, values, and backgrounds. A generational identity is a state of mind shaped by seminal events and social influences (Lancaster and Stillman 2002). These notable events profoundly affect the wealth and health of people and permanently shape the way people look at the world. Generations are also likely to entrench themselves even more deeply into the attitudes and behaviors that have been ingrained in them when faced with challenging situations. Furthermore, members of a generation are deeply affected by the personal ity of their cohort group. It is therefore imperative that organizations understand the generational identities, as such awareness can provide insight into the values and expectations of each generation.

Understanding generational identities This chapter does not serve to stereotype individuals, as it is expected that behaviors will vary between people. Nonetheless, members of a generation are deeply affected by the personality of their cohort group. A generational identity is a state of mind shaped by the above-stated events and influences (Lancaster and Stillman 2002). The experiences a generation endures forms a generational identity which transcends an individual’s state and further infil- trates and influences the way individuals respond to changes in their environ ment. These differences are frequently overlooked due to the assumption that we all experience the same life stages and are therefore expected to respond in similar ways (Lancaster and Stillman 2002). However, these formative experiences, sudden changes in demography, mentors and heroes of their time, as well as other life influences, help to shape the way these groups of individuals respond to life circumstances. Being able to understand the generational identities can help managers recognize and appreciate the different values and work attitudes associated with each cohort. This understanding can also serve as a foundation for managing and leveraging generational diversity. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016

The Traditionalists Traditionalists are the oldest generation in the US workforce, most of which have already left behind their working days. They are also referred to as the Veterans, Silent Generation, WWII Generation, GI Matures, or Seniors, and they account for approximately 56 million individuals who share birth years roughly between 1922 and 1943. Presently, many of the nation’s government and business leaders hail from this generation. Traditionalists come from a 176 P. Reid generation where the workplace believed in rank and status; it was a work environment where seniority and age were highly interrelated. The workplace in the 1900s was highly structured, with a well-defined hierarchy. Relation- ships in the workplace were exceedingly formal, almost military-like (Zemke et al. 2000). In fact, the management style of Traditionalists was modeled after the military chain of command. Their work ethic was influenced a great deal by the manufacturing economy. It was quite common to spend one’s entire career at a single organization. On the job, Traditionalists are characterized as patient, detail-oriented, thorough, loyal, hardworking, rule-followers (Zemke et al. 2000). They are reluctant to challenge the system, uncomfortable with conflict, and have a reticent disposi- tion. They have the tendency to wait passively for their bosses to dictate the best paths (Lancaster and Stillman 2002). These characteristics differ notably from those of their younger counterparts. However, it is expected that cohorts who come of age in lean times or war years, such as Traditionalists, would think and act differently from those who were born and raised in a peaceful and abundant climate (Zemke et al. 2000). These individuals’ attitudes and values were shaped by defining events and trends such as the Great Depression, World War II, the Korean War, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and the rise of labor unions. As a result, Traditionalists learned to put aside the needs and wants of the individual and instead work together to achieve common goals. Their core values are centered on dedication, sacrifice, conformity, respect for authority, and striving for duty before pleasure.

The Baby Boomers Baby Boomers grew up in a relatively affluent, opportunity-rich world. As their name suggests, the Boomers accounted for a large surge in the number of babies born around the period of 1943–1960; roughly 80 million people. As a result of their upbringing, Baby Boomers tend to have a very optim istic outlook on life. Their primary goal was to fix what was wrong with America (Lancaster and Stillman 2002). They questioned the ideals of society, protested the status quo, pushed for change in the areas of civil rights, women’s rights, etc. These were the individuals responsible for redefining roles in the workplace and promoting equality (Zemke et al. 2000). They fought for much of what they have achieved in corporate America and against a large number of peers competing for the Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 same jobs. Baby Boomers have been characterized as being very driven, optim istic, service- and relationship-oriented, team players. The vast majority of Boomers tend to be in touch with their feelings and in love with communication. As a result, they adopted the annual performance appraisal. They display the need to readily inquire about their performance as they highly value a work environ ment that fosters communication. The Boomers also value personal growth and are committed to lifelong learning and self-improvement. They find much of their identity in their work. After seeing their parents make a career out of one institution, Boomers developed the Generational diversity 177 belief in job security where the goal was to find a company where they could stay for a long time, invest time, get promoted and/or ultimately get tenured. Boomers are often described as politically correct hard workers who desire recognition for their accomplishments. Their notable core values are optimism and team orientation, with an emphasis on personal growth, health and wellness, work involvement, and personal gratification.

The Gen Xers Then along came the Generation Xers, who account for 38 million people, and display a strong need for independence, autonomy, and flexibility in the workplace (Yrle et al. 2005). The Gen Xers are adaptable, technologically adept, independent, and creative in the workplace (Zemke et al. 2000). They are extremely resourceful and independent individuals who rely on their peers and themselves to get things done. Accordingly, they do not like to be microman- aged. Unlike their older cohorts, Gen Xers place more value on career security as they have seen many institutions crumble in their lifetime, where their parents may have been victims of downsizing and lay-offs. They do not believe that organizations will reward loyalty with lifetime careers (Lancaster and Stillman 2002). Gen Xers lack faith that job security exists anymore. They are also dis- pleased by the high prices their parents had to pay to be successful (Zemke et al. 2000). Gen Xers do not believe that the companies their parents worked for cared about them. As a result, their approach to authority is often described as casual and distrustful of, as well as not intimidated by, authority figures (Zemke et al. 2000). Gen Xers are a generation characterized by dimin ished expectations about their economic prospects (Yrle et al. 2005). The belief that good work habits and a positive mental attitude are not always rewarded by organizations is highly prevalent among Gen Xers (Zemke et al. 2000). They tend to distrust the permanence of institutional and personal relationships, the latter of which is evident with the skyrocketing divorce rates at the time of the Gen Xers (Zemke et al. 2000). Gen Xers are marked by skepticism: They grew up seeing every Amer ican institution called into question. Their format ive years were marred by milit ary, political, diplomatic, and economic failures (Zemke et al. 2000). Many businesses terminated workers by downsizing or merging and this resulted in a diminished sense of trust in the permanence of the workplace. Gen Xers saw Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 their parents work hard, yet they still got laid-off or fired from their jobs because the economy went sour. As a result, Gen Xers’ sense of distrust and skepticism in organizations has grown, and these traits have become characteristic of the generation. Furthermore, Zemke et al. (2000) assert that Xers’ greatest fear is to become stagnant in their career. Unlike the older cohorts, they do not believe in the idea of staying committed to one organization for a lifetime. This is a generation that needs to move around; freedom is their ultimate reward and everything plays into their distrust of career permanence. Their core value is centered on achieving work–life balance. 178 P. Reid The Millennials The Millennials are today’s newest generation in the workforce; a cohort with completely different attitudes and mindsets than the previous generations. The Millennials account for roughly 78 million individuals, and are also known as the Nexters, Gen Y, Generation Net, and Nintendo Generation, among other things. The older Millennials, who have already entered the workforce, are typ ically described as being smart, practical, techno-savvy, confident, and of a prag- matic nature (Lancaster and Stillman 2002). Their defining traits include diversity, optimism, confidence, achievement, sociability, and morality, to name a few (Zemke et al. 2000). This is a generation that desires to make an impact on its customers or clients above and beyond the actual job. They take pleasure in knowing that their work affects the lives of others in a significant way. Millenni- als are often perceived as hardworking, dedicated, and ready to sacrifice personal pleasure for the collective good (Zemke et al. 2000). They are very focused on keeping up-to-date with the latest innovations and often employ creative ways to get work done efficiently. Millennials demonstrate a strong desire for performance feedback and have high expectations of their employers. They require and often solicit direction and guidance, but their preferred learning style is to have a say in how and when they will perform assigned tasks (Espinoza et al. 2010). They want to be directly involved in their professional development; however, they do not want to be defined solely by their job. This is a generation that is viewed by other generations as having high perceptions of themselves; a never-before seen sense of entitlement. Millennials grew up in an era where their parents’ constant focus was on nurturing them; where praise-based families (i.e., constantly being told how special they were) was the norm (Espinoza et al. 2010). Also, Millennials grew up working on teams, in and outside of school, which served to frame their ideals and expectation for teamwork and diversity. Furthermore, they came of age in a culture where parents would personally get involved in all aspects of their child’s life, even at work. With this generation it was, and still is, not uncommon for parents to get directly involved in resolving work-related issues at their child’s job. In general, Millennials have been shaped by seminal events such as September 11 and terrorism, the Columbine shooting, cell phones, text messages, social networking, and a strong emphasis on social responsibility (Espinoza et al. 2010). Their inner core values are centered on achievement, civic duty, sociability,

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 work–life balance, reward, self-expression, informality, and diversity.

Generations at work It is expected that generations will carry these discernible tendencies throughout their lives and display them in their day-to-day functions at work. Demographic and social trends impact individuals in a manner that defines the workforce quality (Lockwood 2009). Furthermore, these varied aspects all contribute to the character istics embedded in generational diversity at work. The personalities Generational diversity 179 formed as a result of such tendencies will ultimately infiltrate and affect the way individuals go about their work. Thus, it is imperative that organizations capitalize on the generational assets and cohort values in order to leverage their skills as a means of creating competitive advantage needed to succeed in the global economy (Lockwood 2009). Despite the perceived differences, organizations can capitalize on generational diversity as a means of developing universal strengths by tapping into the positive potential of each generation. According to Zemke et al. (2010, p. 154), “generationally-savvy organizations value the differences between people and look at differences as strengths.” Organizations that have acknowledged such benefits are best positioned for success as they are able to harness the power in the convergence of diverse viewpoints, passions, and inspirations (Zemke et al. 2000). Furthermore, being able to strategically manage generational assets can serve to create properly developed talent pipelines. Also, being mindful of the value differences between generations will make managers more cognizant of the need for different means of communication and management styles in order to leverage generational assets.

Current demographic changes Given the economic downturn that began in late 2007, the projected exodus of Baby Boomers into retirement has been postponed as a result of diminished port folios and unstable investments. A few years ago, analysts feared that there would have been a mass Boomer departure that would have left organizations with a scarcity of talent due to incoming younger generations lacking the experience and “know-how” that organizations valued in the older Boomer generation. However, the current financial quandary has slowed the expected migration of the older, experienced employee who would have ordinarily begun to seek retirement from the workforce by this time. Nonetheless, despite the slowed departure of Boomers, there continues to be a gradual shift in demographic makeup which comes as a result of an aging population; a populace where Millennials are now beginning to enter and satur ate the workforce. Furthermore, the impending retirement of a large section of the workforce continues to perpetu ate generational concerns, and a shift toward increased interest in work–life balance (Lockwood 2009). The loss of talent that will eventually come as a result of the Baby Boomer retirement has placed an increased emphasis on the need for skills and retention strategies for the current and future workforce. On the contrary, Boomers who Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 failed to save for retirement have now chosen to remain employed into their older years. This has resulted in a dire need for talent management strategies that seek to address the integration and reten tion of incoming and current generations while simultan eously leveraging the contri bu tions of each generation. Additionally, high-performing organizations are now faced with addressing the current roles of Baby Boomers, now that Gen Xers have begun to assume key leadership roles in management and executive positions. These demographic changes therefore require that leaders acknow ledge the potential value of each generation, mean- while strategically capitalizing on their human capital. 180 P. Reid Managing generational diversity Managing generational diversity is integral to employee productivity and organ izational effectiveness. Cultivating a cross-generational environment demands that leaders engage and manage generations in terms of their differing values and expectations at work. As well, organizations should employ strategies that promote generational diversity through the development of succession management initiatives that heed the concerns of the older generations while making preparations for incoming younger generations. In order to meet such varied needs, organizations should keep in mind the different attributes – based on different life stages – of the generations when designing work strategies. Managers can therefore use generational qualities to influence engagement, recruitment, retention, and organiza tional culture, as well as other relev ant performance outcomes (Lockwood 2009). Furthermore, employers can hone in on fundamental talent management principles which serve to enhance generational adaptability (Xavier and Doyle 2010). The four generations bring varied talents, viewpoints, backgrounds, experi ences, and skills that can be harnessed to strengthen teams and units, thereby creating competitive advantage for any organiza tion. Organizations that fail to employ cross-generational initiatives which serve to strategically manage and monitor generational diversity may fall short in meeting their strategic goals as they consequently become stagnant in their way of thinking, are less creative, and are void of diverse opinions. Such pasteurized organiza tions inhibit innovat ive ideas that are needed to succeed in today’s rapidly changing and contempor ary world. Thus, leaders must manage generations using strategies that serve to harness generationally diverse inspirations and viewpoints in order to motivate and inspire individuals to meet strategic goals.

Communication strategies Organizational communication is important to retaining talent and avoiding conflict among the generations. One of the key strategies to managing generational diversity is to expand the capacity to manage diverse communication styles across the generations, as well as to implement initiatives that serve to bridge communication gaps. This task involves the acknowledgment of differ ences in communication styles in addition to focusing on generational strengths to maxi- Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 mize learning, productivity, and innova tion of thought. All generations want frequent, accurate, specific, and timely feedback. Feed- back provides individuals with vital information about their performance. This information increases individuals’ awareness of their level of job performance. Thus, being aware of generational differ ences may provide a better understanding as to why employees behave in the manner they do. Additionally, this awareness may help to reduce intergenerational conflict. When individuals are equipped with the knowledge and understanding of generational character istics and are aware of generational differences, they, in turn, may be likely to Generational diversity 181 encourage feedback processes and informa tion sharing. However, when generations fail to communicate it reduces the benefits that may result from a positive feedback environment. The scarcity of feedback seeking thereby signifies a lack of performance information being disseminated. In so doing, it can ultimately affect the bottom-line, leading to a reduction in profits, low staff retention, and an increase in recruitment costs, hiring, and training. In terms of intergenerational communication tendencies, Millennials display an insatiable demand for feedback and validation. Millennials appreciate being told that their contribution will make a positive difference on the job. They also welcome opportunities where they can provide ideas and input using techno- literate avenues. On the other hand, Gen Xers adore being told that they have free reign to do business their own way. Furthermore, the Gen Xer’s preferred communication style is one that is direct, immediate, and instantaneous (Lancas- ter and Stillman 2002). On the contrary, Baby Boomers are individuals who want to hear that they are important to the organization’s success. Boomers like to be recognized for their unique and important contribution to the team. They favor a more personable style of communication that centers on building rapport. Managers should therefore solicit their opinion and ask for their input in order to relay their value. Likewise, Traditionalists have been on the job for a while and are expected to know what roles to perform and how well they are executing assigned tasks. Despite their strong sense of loyalty and dedication, they may be less likely to seek feedback for fear that their colleagues may see them as lacking confidence and in need of self-assurance (Ashford and Tsui 1991). However, as individuals become more acclimatized to a work environment, the extent of their feedback seeking declines (Ashford and Cummings 1983). Hence, older generations such as Traditionalists will inquire less when they think colleagues expect them to be competent and confident (Ashford et al. 2003). Furthermore, Tradi- tionalists appreciate being told that their experience and perseverance is respected and will be rewarded. They value a formal communication style channeled through the top-down chain of command.

Recruitment and retention initiatives Organizations have to adapt their culture for the younger generations, such as the Millennials and Gen Xers, in order to recruit and engage these cohorts. To engage Millennials, managers need to customize work assignment and sched- Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 ules, provide constructive feedback and recognition, and offer rewards, in addition to providing individualized career paths (Xavier and Doyle, 2010). Managers should provide Millennials with clear direc tion and managerial sup port without micromanaging them, as Millennials value the freedom and flexibil ity to work at their own pace. Managers therefore need to be flexible to the needs of this generation in order to attract and engage the Millennial generation (Xavier and Doyle 2010). In order to recruit Gen Xers, organizations have to espouse and display values that mirror that of work–life balance. Gen Xers are attracted to organiza tions that 182 P. Reid shun corporate politics, but instead champion ideas that are evaluated based on merit as opposed to tenure. Thus, it is imperative that managers highlight oppor tunities to broaden the Gen Xer’s skill set. Organizations that stress that they are seeking multi-tasking technolo gical innovators would appeal to the Gen Xers’ work style and therefore attract them. Talent retention can be achieved through different means of communicating and rewarding individuals. Organizations can seek to retain Gen Xers and Mil- lennials by showing appreciation, aligning compensation with performance, making top management accessible, as well as providing work–life programs (Sladek 2010). The different generations all value work–life balance, so key decision-makers should consider generational issues in the design of such programs. Also, organizations should provide social opportunities in which these cohorts can develop friendships among themselves. Gen Xers are known to be self-sufficient, whereas Millennials are touted as high achievers. Hence, managers should provide opportunities that give these cohorts some autonomy and authority, thereby increasing their sense of empowerment. Increasing such decision-making opportunities in turn engages these individuals. Up-to-date technology, training opportunities, meaningful work, and community-focused service projects are all aspects that are valued by Gen Xers and Millennials (Sladek 2010). Organizational factors such as autonomy, upward mobility, career growth, job challenge, and decision-making ability also play an integral role in retaining these younger generations (Xavier and Doyle 2010). Like the Gen Xers, Millennials also want to be recognized and rewarded for making a difference. Gen Xers and Millennials have a stronger learning orientation and lower organiza tional commitment. Hence, it is imperative that organizations emphasize key retention factors such as leadership development programs, with an emphasis on learning. Managers should provide mentoring opportun ities to help ensure the transfer of knowledge and skills from older to younger generations. The younger generations, especially the Millennials, would value the opportunity to learn from seasoned veterans on best practices, which they themselves can utilize in order to successfully navigate the organiza tion. Furthermore, mentoring opportunities can also serve to teach Gen Xers about maneuvering organizational politics, which they are known to despise, thereby making it easier for them to assimilate (Zemke et al. 2000). Another key strategy that addresses this issue of retention of the younger gen- Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 erations is the establishment of affinity groups. These affinity groups can provide the formal and informal mentoring opportun ities that are crucial to employee development (Xavier and Doyle 2010). Affinity groups serve to promote professional and personal development of their members, and are an incredible resource for identifying potential candid ates for mentoring and development programs. Despite the fact that a great deal of attention is focused on retaining the younger generations, organizations should be cautious so as to not ignore their more senior generations. Effort should be made to keep the older generation Generational diversity 183 involved and connected. It is critical that these individuals remain engaged and satisfied in order for them to continue to provide value to the organization. Man- agers should therefore reinforce their value through employee recognition, rewards, job enrichment, valuing employee contribution, and providing increased and meaningful responsibility.

Leader values and leadership styles Organizations need to be cognizant of the differ ences in leadership qualit ies among the generations (Lockwood 2009). Each generation holds different views of leadership and considers different leader attributes to be import ant. Likewise, managers and leaders from different cohorts vary in their perception of successful leadership attributes (Sessa et al. 2007). In regard to leadership roles, Traditional- ists prefer a structured authoritat ive leadership style, where delegation is custom- ary. They are used to a command-and-control directive style which was the standard operating procedure when they first entered the workforce (Zemke et al. 2000). Traditionalists therefore admire leaders who are able to provide clear, specific, and simple directions that allow them to effectively perform their tasks. Boomers prefer a more collegial and consensual work environ ment with a less defined hierarchy. They advocate for a leadership style that promotes parti cipation and involvement; however, critics argue that very rarely do Boomers’ leadership behaviors espouse such values (Zemke et al. 2000). Moreover, many argue that Boomers have a rather hard time practicing participative management skills – understanding, listening, communicating, motivating, delegating – and are often unaware that they are lacking in these areas (Zemke et al. 2000). Gen Xers, on the other hand, have been known to distrust authority and display a casual approach to it. Nonetheless, this sense of distrust does not trump their desire for leadership roles. Gen Xers tend to value fair, competent, and straightforward leadership style (Zemke et al. 2000). Alternatively, Millennials have a polite relationship with authority and value optim ism and dedication from their leaders. Millennials look to their leaders for direction and guidance and are inspired by transformational leaders who actually bring about change. The aforementioned differences in attitudes, values, and beliefs influence how the generations perceive leadership. However, despite their differing leadership styles, they all value balance, responsibility, credib ility, honesty, trustworthiness, and good listening skills in their leaders. Managers should therefore take note of Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 these leadership values and attributes and be keen on modeling such behaviors based on their demographic at hand. Being able to appeal to such leadership attributes serves to better facilitate interaction between leaders and subordinates, as well as improve the intergenerational dynamic in an organization.

Succession management It is imperative that organizations discern the training needs of Millennials, as well as the requisite leadership competencies of Gen Xers. According to the 184 P. Reid 2000 US Census Bureau, approximately 75 million employees are currently eli gible to retire. Furthermore, the Bureau of Labor Statistics predicts that many organizations are prone to losing a significant portion of their top talent and senior management during this period of retirement. Hence, in a time where Gen Xers are poised to assume leadership positions for impending vacancies as a result of the immin ent departure of Traditionalists and Boomers, organiza tions must identify a steady, reliable pipeline of talent that will meet its future needs in leadership and other critical roles. Succession management provides high- performing, high-potential employees with opportunities for development to enhance their knowledge and skills (HJAIA 2008). This, in turn, results in a pool of qualified successors who can preserve the intellectual capital and are readily prepared to accept new leadership roles, as well as overcome the challenges of future workforce shortages (HJAIA 2008). Organizations will therefore have to adjust their routines in order to accommodate Gen Xers (and their generational characteristics) in such critical roles. Managers should be cognizant of contrasting differences between the older and younger generations in areas that affect succession planning. For instance, the interpretation of work ethic differs between the two older generations (i.e., Tra- ditionalists and Baby Boomers) and the younger generations (Gen Xers and Mil- lennials). The older generations define a strong work ethic by an individual’s physical presence in the office. Specifically, Baby Boomers consider teamwork and collaboration as evidence of a strong work ethic. Conversely, younger generations measure their worth by focusing their energy on making an impact in the company, as well as outside the company (Lockwood 2009). Another example is the belief that Baby Boomers gain satisfac tion from simply getting their jobs done, whereas Gen Xers derive satisfaction from tan gible material rewards. Also, it is of utmost concern that Boomers get commit ment and loyalty from their organization. However, Gen Xers will remain with an organiza tion as long as it meets their needs. It must be noted with caution that despite popular stereotypes about Gen Xers, they are not disloyal employees. These individuals are actually eager to contrib ute to organizations that truly value their input. Furthermore, they possess the unique ability to adapt to change as a result of the short-lived institutional relationships they observed with their parents’ employers (Tulgan 2000). Alternatively, Millennials are motivated individuals who, when groomed properly, can become well-suited for the leadership pipeline. Millennials value a Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 supportive environment that provides structure and personalized work, and they ultimately want to feel as if they are making a differ ence. They excel at multi- tasking, which is an invaluable trait in organiza tions, given the current need for individuals who can manage multiple priorities in this rapidly changing environ ment (Xavier and Doyle 2010). These varied generational characteristics require that organizations find and utilize innovat ive methods that take into consideration the nuances of each generation. In order to groom key talent for critical positions, managers have to be mindful not to inter pret their generational tendencies as shortcomings or lack of Generational diversity 185 preparedness. Hence, the fact that Gen Xers and Millennials display less rigidity and conformity does not mean that these cohorts detest structure and compliance. In fact, organizations can leverage generational diversity as a means to accelerat- ing the growth of key talent. This can be done by facilitating knowledge transfer through key succession planning initiatives such as programs for professional development. Organizations should therefore provide mentoring opportunities, job shadowing, leadership coaching, and enhanced manager-in-training development programs tailored to the generational values of the cohort of inter est (i.e., younger generations). This strategy will ensure that the needs of the younger generations are being met through the accommodation of generational character istics while identifying, acquiring, and developing key talent. Hence, an organization’s future vitality is dependent on the above-mentioned areas – effective communication strategies, recruitment and retention of key talent, successful leader values, and succession planning initiatives. Managers should be cognizant of the generational values while being cautious so as not to reinforce stereotypes, whether posit ive or negative. Using effective communication strat egies can help individuals explore assump tions that underlie such stereotypes, thereby helping individuals avoid them. Also, such communication strategies can serve to mitigate conflict and keep individuals connected and engaged.

Generational challenges in the military Despite the focus of this chapter on generational diversity from a civilian standpoint, the information provided herein is applicable to all agencies and work environ ments, including the military. Generations carry these distinct tendencies to work with them every day and thereby face similar issues while interacting with members of different cohorts. Nonetheless, additional consideration has to be given within the military, as such an environ ment inculcates a singular culture that requires individuals to “fit in.” This particular culture pasteurizes and pla- cates individual behavior, thereby subduing the varied expression of generational identities. Pasteurized environments such as that found in the military may view themselves as harmoniously diverse; however, this can be detrimental in that it limits creativity and diversity of thought (Zemke et al. 2000). Furthermore, the military’s fraternization policy serves to deter the socialization of individuals across different ranks, and in so doing dissuades the integration and mentorship of different cohorts. Younger recruits are more likely to Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 enter the military as enlisted members. However, given the fraternization policy, opportunities for informal mentorship between older, experienced officers and younger, enlisted recruits are evidently rare. Nonetheless, despite such a rigid organizational structure where hierarchy primarily dictates interpersonal relations between service personnel, initiatives can be employed, within reason (discussed below), and as a means to preserving the chain-of-command as well as promoting inclusive, generationally balanced units. Another challenge within this realm that also presents concern in the military has to do with the fact that each generation has different motivators, and thus 186 P. Reid may require a multi-faceted approach when dealing with issues such as recruitment and retention. Younger generations are enlisting with certain expectations that differ from that of previous generations. These young recruits enter the military expecting that certain desires will be met. Hence, military recruiters will have to tailor their approach in a manner that is conducive to attracting and engaging this new cohort.

Practical considerations for the military In order to foster and promote generational diversity, the military can employ a strategy known as difference deployment which, according to Zemke et al. (2000, p. 154), is the “tactical use of employees with different backgrounds, experiences, skills, and viewpoints to strengthen project teams, customer contact functions, and, at times, whole departments and units.” This strategy serves to leverage generational assets, as varied ideas, experiences, and value systems are embraced to produce innovative outcomes. It may therefore appear to be difficult at first, but definitely not impossible, for generational accommodations to be made in the military. It is also imperative that the military leverage generational diversity as a means of enhancing leadership. Gen Xers are looking for opportunities for growth; however, managers should anticipate dissension from these middle-aged subordinates who are eager for promotions but have limited opportunities for advancement due to the presence of older employees who continue to occupy top-level positions (Lockwood 2009). As mentioned earlier, supervisors can provide a talent pipeline that identifies critical positions and key talent to fill those positions. Thus, when vacancies appear, such individuals can transition into designated leadership roles after being groomed appropriately. Most note worthy is the notion that these younger cohorts will bring creative and techno- savvy styles of leadership that can serve to address contemporary issues being faced when engaged in wars abroad. Additionally, these younger generations need the support and guidance from their supervisors in learning to cultivate and practice the basics of management (Tulgan 2009). This leadership grooming can be done using formal training or informal mentorship opportunities. Finally, the military can foster intergenerational dynamics by providing opportunities for different generations to work together on projects, as well as to mentor each other. Providing team-building activities that are staffed with Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 members of the different generations can serve to foster communication as well as bridge communication gaps. Also, the use of a variety of media and learning methods can serve to facilitate this process. Focusing on the strengths that each generation possesses can therefore encourage diversity of thought as well as provide competit ive advantage, thereby improving readiness and adaptability. Generational diversity 187 References Ashford, S. J. and Cummings, L. L. (1983) “Feedback as an Individual Resource: Per- sonal Strategies of Creating Information,” Organizational Behavior and Human Per- formance, 32: 370–398. Ashford, S. J. and Tsui, A. S. (1991) “Self-Regulation for Managerial Effectiveness: The Role of Active Feedback Seeking,” Academy of Management Journal, 34: 251–280. Ashford, S. J., Blatt, R., and VandeWalle, D. (2003) “Reflections on the Looking Glass: A Review of Research on Feedback-Seeking Behavior in Organizations,” Journal of Management, 29 (6): 773–799. Espinoza, C., Ukleja, M., and Rusch, C. (2010) Managing Millennials: Discover the Competencies for Managing Today’s Workforce, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons, Inc. HJAIA (Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport) (2008) Department of Aviation: Integrated Talent Management System (ITMS). Online, available at: www.aci-na.org/ static/entransit/HartsfieldJackson-IntegratedTalentManagementSystem.pdf (accessed June 18, 2010). Kupperschmidt, B. R. (2000) “Multigeneration Employees: Strategies for Effective Man- agement,” The Healthcare Manager, 19 (1): 65–77. Lancaster, L. C. and Stillman, D. (2002) When Generations Collide: Who They Are. Why They Clash. How to Solve the Generational Puzzle at Work, New York: HarperCollins. Lockwood, N. R. (2009) “Research Quarterly: The Multigenerational Workforce; Oppor- tunity for Competitive Success,” Society for Human Resource Management. Online, available at: www.shrm.org/Research/Articles/Articles/Pages/0309rq.aspx (accessed June 18, 2010). Sessa, V. I., Kabacoff, R. I., Deal, J., and Brown, H. (2007) “Generational Differences in Leader Values and Leadership Behaviours,” Psychologist-Manager Journal, 10 (1): 47–74. Sladek, S. L. (2010) “How to Retain Generations X and Y,” Talent Management (Janu ary): 30 Tulgan, B. (2000) Managing Generation X: How to Bring Out the Best in Young Talent, New York: W. W. Norton & Company. Tulgan, B. (2009) Not Everyone Gets a Trophy: How to manage Generation Y, San Fran- cisco: Josey-Bass. Xavier, S. and Doyle, S. (2010) “Succession across the generations,” Talent Management (July): 40–42. Yrle, A. C., Hartman, S. J., and Payne, D. M. (2005) “Generation X: Acceptance of Others and Teamwork Implications,” Team Performance Management, 11 (5/6): 188–200.

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Zemke, R., Raines, C., and Filipczak, B. (2000) Generations at Work: Managing the Clash of Veterans, Boomers, Xers and Nexters in Your Workplace, New York: Amer ican Management Association. 11 Exploring the management of religious diversity within the US military

Charlotte E. Hunter and Lyman M. Smith

Introduction In 1997 First Lieutenant Ryan Berry, US Air Force, an honors graduate from the US Military Academy (cross-commissioned to the US Air Force), was assigned to the 740th Missile Squadron at Minot Air Force Base, North Dakota. His duties included standing watch in isolated bunkers buried 90 feet underground, each one 12 × 20 feet in size and containing a bunk, a toilet, and a curtain separating these simple living facilities from the instruments and launch systems necessary to operate a Minuteman III missile. During missile alerts, two officers could expect to spend 24 to 48 hours together in these tiny missile control sites. Lieu- tenant Berry learned that, in this assignment, the possibility existed that he might be required to stand missile alert duty with a female missile crew member. A devout Roman Catholic and married man, Lieutenant Berry believed his faith required him to avoid situations in which he might develop inappropriate inti- macy, even if platonic, with a woman who was not his wife. In addition, Berry was concerned that spending several days in the bunker with a female officer might give the appearance of impropriety, potentially damaging his marriage, which his faith demanded he seek always to preserve and protect. To set aside or ignore these convictions, he believed, would require that he ignore his obliga tions to practice not only physical fidelity within marriage, but also emotional and spiritual fidelity; thus, he felt obligated by his faith to request an accommodation of his religious beliefs and practice. With these faith issues in mind, Lieutenant Berry approached the Minot base Roman Catholic chaplain and “expressed his religious objections to being Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 assigned to that particu lar type of gender-integrated crew based on his understanding of Catholic religious doctrine”1 (Berry 2003). With the assistance of the chaplain, Lieutenant Berry applied for and received from his squadron commander a religious accommodation that exempted him from any requirement to stand duty with female crew members when responding to missile alerts in the squadron. He received stellar officer performance evaluation reports throughout his time with the squadron (Berry 2003). In April 1998 Berry was selected for instructor duty and transferred to the 91st Operational Support Squadron, also located on Minot Air Force Base. Upon Management of religious diversity 189 reporting for duty, he immediately requested a similar religious accommodation from his new commanding officer. His request was approved, although this approval stated that military necessity could override the accommodation, a stip- ulation that was acceptable to Lieutenant Berry. A few months later, after command in the unit changed, the new commanding officer also agreed to a con tinuation of Berry’s religious accommodation, preserving the military necessity exception. Throughout this time, and up through December 1998, Berry performed all his duties, including those that involved working with women. There exists no record that any other Roman Catholic – or officer of any religious faith or Humanist belief – requested a similar religious accommodation. In December 1998, the 91st Operations Groups Commander (senior to Berry’s commanding officer) informed Berry, in writing, that the religious accommodation would be discontinued, stating:

Previous accommodation of your religious practice, of not serving with a female missile crew member, has had an adverse impact on good order, dis cipline and morale of the group. I have determined that there will not be any future accommodation of this religious practice. As such, you need to understand that failure to deploy to the missile field with a member of the oppos ite sex may result in disciplinary action being taken against you. (Berry 2002, p. 8)

Why did the commanding officer of the 91st Operations Group revoke Berry’s religious accommodation? Were the reasons for the revocation based on the commander’s hypothetical reasoning that a complaint from a male or female officer might arise? There exists no record that any person, male or female, com- plained about Berry’s religious accommodation, nor was any complaint cited in the revocation of the accommodation that would support the commander’s assertion that good order, discipline, and morale within the unit had been adversely affected. At no point during the period in which his religious accommodation was in force did Berry refuse an order to stand duty or work with a female officer, nor was the “military necessity” exception ever invoked by his commanding officer. In the absence of actual complaints filed, was the revocation based on the commander’s conviction that, in a gender-integrated unit, such a gender-focused religious accommodation might be considered by others as gender preju dice, rather than a bona fide exemption based on religious convic- Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 tion, especially if other Roman Catholic officers, male and female, were standing missile alert duty together in the bunkers?2 After seeking and failing to have his accommodation restored through the chain of command, Lieutenant Berry eventually pursued legal relief through a lawsuit against the Air Force. In 2003 the lawsuit was decided in favor of Berry, and all of his requests for relief were granted. He continues to serve today as a member of the Air Force Reserve. Would the Air Force, and the armed forces as a whole, have been better served by senior leaders who were better educated regard ing religious diversity, 190 C. E. Hunter and L. M. Smith its dynamics and implica tions, and strategies for managing this diversity equitably and effectively? Lieutenant Berry’s story is but one of many that highlights the complexity of leading and managing religious diversity in the military. Although the age-old convention discouraging discussion of religion may retain some element of truth, in today’s military religion cannot be ignored, and attempts to do so inevitably end up compromising readiness and squandering valuable resources. In this chapter we explore the place of religion in the modern military and provide both specifics about its impact and guidelines and suggestions on how it fits within sound leadership practice despite the fact that, because faith precepts are so close to human hearts and souls, religion may well be considered the most difficult area in which any leader practices diversity management. Religious rhetoric has been employed by military leaders since our military was formed, in part to comfort military men and women as they faced both the fearful probability of combat and the subsequent struggle with combat’s emotional aftermath, such as post-traumatic stress syndrome, suicidal ideations, sui cide attempts, abuse of self, abuse of family members, and other grim possibilities. Religious language is also used to cultivate desirable public opinion in support of government policy and initiatives and was deployed heavily to “shape American responses toward both the issues of Iraqi disarmament and an invasion of Iraq” (Smidt 2005). Religion continues to act as a public force to engage and secure a civilian and military public whose members were profoundly shaken in the shocked aftermath of the September 11 bombings, in which the Bush administration announced a global crusade against terrorism in all its forms (Smidt 2005, p. 260; Bush 2003; Eberle 2007; Bess 2006; Fahey 2005; Benimoff 2009; Lawrence 2007; Drescher et al. 2007; Shay 2002; Verkamp 1988; Marin 1981). Although probably not a desired result, religion also serves to challenge assumptions regarding the internal functioning of military units and appropriate leadership roles. It reveals patterns of discrimination in military schools; it heightens tensions among service members whose religious faith – or lack thereof – does not align with the religious assumptions and language of the majority society as reflected in Department of Defense (DoD) policies and traditions. On the domestic DoD front during the past decade, numerous controversies came to the public’s attention, painting a picture of an organization whose Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 leaders – and, in several cases, more junior members – seemed insensitive to the place of religious difference within a diverse population. The majority of cases involved accusations of bias and proselytizing, casting the leaders of military venues as dispar ate as the US Air Force Academy, the Pentagon, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune as predisposed to slight religious minorit ies, particularly non-Christians, or those with no religious affiliation. Other incidents have centered around the accommodation of religious practices, both those requested by service members and those traditionally accepted, as well as a seemingly deliberate ignorance about or ignoring of Management of religious diversity 191 religious practices on the part of leaders. In addition, throughout the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the military has been plagued with outbursts of embarrassing proselytizing on the part of service members, behavior that threatened the milit ary mission as some defied regulations by passing out Christian bibles to Muslim nationals, distrib uting Christian-inscribed coins, and displaying provocative Christian triumphalist messages on military vehicles. Even military contractors have fed the fires of religious contro versy; for example, early in 2010 one com pany was found to have placed biblical references on all rifle sights used in low- light conditions. All these, and myriad other smaller, unpublicized tangles between religion and policy have challenged the ability of military leaders and created media controversies and legal quagmires that have distracted and detracted from the military’s primary goal: winning the nation’s wars (Cook 2007; DoD IG Report 2007; Rittgers 2007; Hanna 2008; Shane 2008; Banarjee 2006; Associated Press 2008; Jonsson 2010; Allen 2009; Leopold 2009; Mount 2009; Paley 2008; Sharlet 2009). What do these controversies say about religion within the military? Do they reflect evidence of singular or widespread religious discrimination within milit ary units? Do they reflect growing demand on the part of members of minority religious groups for attention, respect, and accommodation? Do they represent resistance to accommodation of members of minority religions, or Humanists, on the part of the slowly receding and ever more fragmented Christian majority? Do military leaders and policymakers have access to informa tion that permits them to deal with these and other questions effectively? Such religiously suffused controversies reinforce religion’s capacity to act, simultan eously and ironically, as a source of comfort, power, strength, confusion, and discord within the US armed forces, as in the civilian world. One ser vice member’s cherished faith may be shared by many or few, it may offend or embarrass those who believe differently, particularly those who believe themselves forced to participate in its celebra tion. Our hypothetical service member’s faith may be reduced by colleagues and superiors as a thing purely private, that ought never to impinge upon military issues big or small, or it may be a matter of indifference to those for whom religion no longer offers a source of identity or motivation. In addition, how religious and Humanist beliefs are perceived by leaders and subordinates may depend upon the context and the manner in which religion is used or abused, or is perceived as working for or against the unit or military mission. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016

Accommodating religious diversity in the armed forces

Religion, identity, and service The armed forces play an obvious and critical role in US international and domestic issues. Military men and women may often be the only Americans whom citizens of foreign societies meet. These service members are not ident ical; they do not all look or act the same as they interact with popula tions around 192 C. E. Hunter and L. M. Smith the world, but rather carry within themselves their own sets of values, beliefs, and assump tions about the world and the people who live in it. America’s success in prosecuting the conflicts of this century depend more than ever on the individual strengths of our service members and the ways in which they themselves perceive their roles and the missions they must accomplish. Operating as an all-volunteer force since 1973, the US military’s continued strength depends upon recruitment from all segments of the civilian population and, consequently, retention of trained personnel to maintain its professionalism and leadership capabilities. In light of demographic and social changes in the United States during the past three decades, military leaders have had to focus on effective means of recruiting men and women from a variety of socio economic, racial, and ethnic backgrounds. Retaining these military members beyond the initial enlistment or contract has likewise captured the attention of DoD and civilian leaders; basic training, skills training, and leadership training all cost the nation enormous sums, and the loss of too many educated and skilled warriors threatens the health of the military institution and, thus, the mission. Consequently, the voluntary nature of today’s military force and the perceived need to achieve healthy recruitment and retention figures has stimulated the pursuit of increased demographic diversity at all leadership levels throughout the armed forces (Elder et al. 2010; Armor 2010; Lim et al. 2008). Hand in hand with increased understanding of cultural diversity goes increased awareness of the diversity of religion present in the ranks of the armed forces. This compon ent of diversity has become a key factor in issues of leadership, morale, cohesion, equity, and cultural acuity; religious diversity affects all aspects of military life and operations. 3 The services pride themselves on creating a cohesive force that can carry out whatever mission is set before them by the president or Congress. They are likened to a band of brothers, in which all wear the same uniform, adhere to the same core values, and focus on the same goals. This is a force that declares that not one of its own will be left behind on the battlefield to die alone or be captured, that all bleed the same color blood. Sameness, often referred to as uniformity, in key principles of conduct and belief are central to a functioning military unit that can win wars and bring its people home. Uniformity is not, in itself, a core value, but it constitutes a powerful controlling force, unseen but always felt, conveyed by regulations, words of guidance or discip line, and centuries of tradition. It is cherished, protected, and carefully cultivated because, as Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 all military leaders are aware, the men and women who serve in the armed forces are individuals who hail from widely varying backgrounds and who are pos- sessed of diverse skills, abilities, outlooks, political beliefs, and, sometimes differing if not contradictory or oppositional, religious beliefs. The emphasis on discipline, uniformity, and cohesion seeks to minimize these differ ences, estab lishing a set of values to which all service members adhere and that are elevated above potentially divisive personal differ ences, or, at least, those personal values that conflict with those the military organiza tion has adopted. To an admirable degree, the organiza tion’s socialization efforts are successful. However, some Management of religious diversity 193 personal values are tougher to control and transform than others, and among these are values that go to the heart of the individual, personal core values formed by and supported through religious faith and spiritual understandings. Diversity management related to religion boils down to preserving individual faith perspectives while creating unit cohesion based on shared understandings of community commitments. In addressing the role of diversity in a meaningful and coherent way within the military, knowledge of religious diversity – to include religious beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors of US military personnel – is a critical component in moving forward intelligently in diverse domestic and global environments. Both studies and experience have demon strated that religious identity affects one’s motiva tion to perform a task. It is essential to know how this is manifested in the unit setting. Common sense also reveals that those who believe in dissim ilar ways may feel uncomfortable working with one another. Is this a fact that should be consciously addressed or does a false assump tion of religious homo geneity lend itself to optimal mission accomplishment? And regardless of the value a service member might place upon religion, in terms of his or her performance, what difference would knowledge of individual faith perspectives make to military and civilian leaders in the DoD?4 In the sections that follow we address particulars of how and why leadership can positively interact with the religious diversity of today’s force.

Religious makeup of the armed forces What does today’s military look like religiously? How diverse are the expressions of faith, whether these comprise a religious faith in a deity (or deities), a non-deistic religious faith, or a Humanist faith in one’s capacity? How closely does our military reflect the nation’s popula tion at large? During the past two decades, civilian researchers have reported significant changes within the American religious landscape. New religious movements – or, at least, movements new to many Americans – seem to bubble to the nation’s religious surface on an almost daily basis, espousing a vast and varied array of beliefs that sometimes defy ready categor ization and some that seem to stake out faith claims that embrace elements of science fiction, or that exist as articulations of purely personal construction. Even among the venerable denominations with whose names, if not theology, Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 the public is familiar, significant changes have occurred during the past four or five decades of the twentieth century. The Roman Catholic Church in America, for example, which has been and often still is touted as representing a more lib eral theology than its European, Asian, or Southern Hemisphere contingents, increasingly reflects the faces and concerns of the growing Latino presence and culture. At the same time the local church leadership, particu larly among ordained priests, suffers a significant shortage of Anglos, as well as Hispanics, with many congregations now led either by deacons or, if sufficiently fortunate to have access to a priest, by clerics of African, Asian, or Eastern European birth 194 C. E. Hunter and L. M. Smith and training. Denominational adherence among other Christian churches appears to be declining, along with attendance at formal worship services, with home churches and mega-churches – whose members meet in small groups – reported to be in the ascendant. Scholars everywhere strain to divine the cultural, sociological, political, and economic implications for a nation in which many now declare themselves religious, but who profess no religious preference, and still others wrestle with the dynamics surrounding religious discrimination. Previ- ously almost undetectable within the civilian population, new religious movements, pagan and neo-pagan groups, and adherents of faiths outside the so-called norm of Judeo-Christian heritage, increasingly demand time, attention, worship space, worship supplies, and – above all – respect from fellow citizens. Membership in the US armed forces does not reflect the demographics of the civilian population in several categories with exactitude, including religion. Rather, the military consists of a self-selecting portion of the population and consequently possesses social character istics that differ signific antly from the nation’s overall diversity in terms of age, gender, education, ethni city, race, geographic origin, and, of course, religion (Segal and Segal 2004). Because of the importance of knowing the demographic constitution of the force, the DoD created and charged the Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) with collecting and maintaining personnel data on all service members. To this end, religious data are maintained on individual service members through a voluntary request for identification at the time of entry into the service. This information may be updated at the request of the service member, but no official inquiry as to the ongoing accuracy of the reported identification at the time of entry is made during a service member’s career. The DMDC aggreg ates informa tion on the force with respect to religious identity based on the voluntary identification made at the time of entry. This aggregate data acknowledges a near 9 percent data error rate and categorizes another 20 percent of the force as Other Christian. Rather than use the official force composition figures provided by DMDC, this chapter refers instead to statistics gained from a survey of military personnel entitled The Religious Identification and Practices Survey (RIPS) conducted in July 2009 in conjunction with the Defense Equal Opportunity Climate Survey (DEOCS) adminis tered by the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI). These statist ics provide greater fidelity than DMDC figures due to the nature of their acquisition, and are representative of the force composition based Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 on the similarity of RIPS demographics to DMDC figures. The RIPS was admin istered as a voluntary part of the DEOCS. All individuals who took the DEOCS during the period July 1–16, 2009 were offered the opportunity to complete the RIPS questionnaire, which consisted of 28 questions related to religious practice and salience, as well as two questions related to religious preference. In total, 6,384 of 14,769 DEOCS participants voluntarily elected to take the RIPS survey (38 percent). Of these, 133 came from the Air Force, 2,115 from the Army, 220 from the Coast Guard, 1,783 from the Marine Corps, and 2,132 from the Navy. Eventually, the number used in the data analysis was reduced to 5,952 due to Management of religious diversity 195 data processing errors. Members of the Air Force and Navy completed the RIPS at a slightly lower rate (30 percent and 31 percent) compared to the Army, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard (41 percent, 49 percent, and 46 percent, respectively). The demographic information for those who completed the RIPS was virtually identical to those who did not and to DMDC service demographics overall. The majority of active-duty military personnel across all service lines identify themselves as religious, and those who claim some form of Christian identity constitute by far the largest category (66 percent). Looking at separately identified groups within Christianity, the two largest comprise those service members who identify as some form of Catholic (20 percent) or some form of Baptist (18 percent). Here, however, the similarities between the military and civilian religious worlds begin yielding to differences. The single largest group of military members (outside of the broad category of some form of Christian) queried about their beliefs are those who claim no religious preference (also known as Nones), at 25 percent constituting a considerably larger group than Roman Cath olics and greatly outstripping the Baptists. In addition, the military boasts nearly as many Humanists as Methodists, and more Pagans than Episcopalians (Hunter and Smith 2010).5 At the very least, with just over 70 percent of active-duty personnel indicating that they follow some form of religion, it is certain that the majority of people in the military are affected by religion in some way, and this makes religion of interest to military leaders and policymakers (Table 11.1). Any myopic tendency to focus solely on the numbers – how many of a par ticular faith or group exist in the military and whose percentages are higher – will reveal little of the meanings that underlie this diversity. As indicated above, and in line with principles of military leadership, every soul has meaning and each is critical to unit success. The presence of but one member of a particular faith group means that faith perspective is import ant and worthy of a leader’s respectful attention and care. In the sections that follow, the discussion is intended to elucidate leadership and policy implications inherent in dealing with a religiously varied military force.

Religion’s importance in the armed forces Religion resists attempts to control, submerge, or minimize it largely because, Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 for many believers, faith constitutes the core of their identity. Religion offers structures of meaning that allow one to inter pret the world and other people; its values often form, even constitute, the values of the individual; its rituals, sounds, theology, hierarchy, and traditions may constitute an existential filtration system, through which all outside influences are sifted, sorted, categorized, organized, and given meaning. Consequently, men and women may categorize themselves and others on the basis of religious beliefs and religiously derived values, creating in-groups and out-groups. Those who on a daily basis hear language or see imagery consonant with their religious beliefs will feel themselves 196 C. E. Hunter and L. M. Smith Table 11.1 Religious identification by denomination or belief category

Faith group or other identification Percent

No religious preference 25.50 Catholic 20.11 Baptist 17.56 Other Protestant* 6.54 Methodist 3.70 Humanist 3.61 Other Christian** 3.28 Charismatic 2.89 Adventist 2.77 Lutheran 2.57 Congregational 2.23 Presbyterian 1.68 Less common*** 1.19 Pagan 1.18 Jewish 1.09 Evangelical 0.99 Eastern 0.87 Episcopal 0.86 Muslim 0.45 Orthodox 0.40 Brethren 0.27 Data error 0.25

Notes * Apostolic Christian Church, Churches of Christ, Church of Christ (Holiness), USA, Churches of God General Conference (Winebrenner), Independent Christian, Church/Churches of Christ, Independent Fundamental Churches of American (IFCA), Iglesia Ni Cristo, Moravian Church, New Apostolic Church. ** Advent Christian Church, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints/Mormon, Community of Christ (formerly the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints), Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, First Church of Christ, Scientist, Jehovah’s Wit- nesses, Native American Church. *** Unitarian/Universalist, Church of Scientology, Bahai, New Age, Eckankar, Rastafarian, Voudoun/Voodoo, Santeria/Lukumi, other less common.

part of the in-group, while those whose beliefs and practices differentiate them from the majority of others in their units may consider themselves members of an out-group – and they may be viewed as such by the majority. Even those who do not possess a strong religious faith may find, in encountering those whose Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 faiths differ significantly from their own, that the differences trigger seldom- used filters, born of family and societal training, causing them to see faith differ ences in terms of personal values, and perhaps making them inclined to prefer certain expressions of faith over others (Weeks and Vincent 2007; Cunningham 2010). When, for example, a member of the Native American Church – a soldier – approaches her first sergeant with a leave request and informs the first sergeant, as required by regulations, that she is returning to her home town to take part in a religious ceremony that involves ingesting peyote, the first sergeant’s filters Management of religious diversity 197 immediately come into play. He may first feel surprise at receiving such an unusual request – the numbers of Native Americans in the military are not large – and hard upon this surprise may think, first, that peyote is an illegal drug in all 50 states and US territories and, second, that the use of hallucinogenic drugs in a religious ceremony is bizarre, something outside his religious experience. Here, a soldier whose minority faith places her in the out-group – forms of Christianity comprising the majority of faiths represented in the military and those that suffuse American culture – has brought her religion out into the open, and a member of the in-group (who also represents a dominant position based on rank), however tenuous and infrequent his religious observ ance may be, must lead in the face of widely varying cultural, specifically religious, values.6 Other minority religious groups may request accommodation for practices that strike members of the majority group as equally, if not more, bizarre, outra- geous, or ridiculous. Members of one faith group request permis sion to conduct a ritual animal sacrifice on a military base; a Mormon requests permission to wear his sacred undergarments during physical training despite the fact that these show under his regulation shorts and T-shirt; a group of Muslims requests per mission to be excused from work several times each day to fulfill their sacred prayer obligation; a Seventh-Day Adventist requests a change in the duty roster, allowing him to refrain from work on his Sabbath; a Christian Scientist submits a request for a waiver of all immunizations required of military personnel; a group of Wiccans request permission for use of space within the chapel for their religious services; a religiously observant Jew wears a yarmulke in the workplace while in uniform; a Buddhist member of a unit embarking on a training evolution requests that vegetarian meals-ready-to-eat be obtained by the supply company; an atheist requests permission to be excused from standing in ranks during a change of command ceremony so she is not required to passively parti cipate in the chaplain’s prayer. All these, and many more, occur every day in individual units of the armed forces, and every day leaders must grapple with the tension between their own values and those of their out-group subordinates. As challenging as it may seem at times to handle this tension, it may be – or at least seem to be – relat ively easy for leaders to deal with the out-group requests, given the distinct difference that may exist between the beliefs of these service members from the beliefs, values, and practices of the leader. The other and the other’s beliefs can be objectified; they pose little or no threat to one’s own beliefs and values. It is also easy to minimize their importance by subordi- Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 nating their needs to the overall good of the unit, based on rationalizations of conformity and uniformity. Herein the majority rules. Sometimes just as difficult are requests for accommodation that do not arise from members of religious minorities. No two Christians, for example, believe and practice their faith in the same manner. Diversity abounds even where one might expect a large degree of uniformity, yet expression of this diversity is either so seldom expressed or, perhaps, acknowledged, that when in-group members request an accommodation that reveals these differences, the clash of values – values that leaders assumed were in lock-step – may seem all the 198 C. E. Hunter and L. M. Smith greater. Thus, a conservative Evangelical Christian marine asks permission to wear modest physical training apparel – a long-sleeved shirt and long sweat pants – during unit physical training (PT) despite the fact that other conser vative Evangelical Christian marines are lined up in normal PT gear; a Roman Catholic Coast Guard officer requests a waiver from the hepatitis A vaccine, a vaccine required of all Coast Guard personnel and to which hundreds, if not thousands, of other Roman Catholics have submitted, on the basis that the serum contains within it minute particles of material obtained from aborted human fetuses. Herein lie signific ant leadership challenges.

Religious diversity and age, ethnicity, and race

Faith and age Catholics outnumber all other religious denominations and groupings in the military (see Table 11.1). Yet, when compared with the civilian population, fewer numbers of active-duty personnel claimed adherence to the Catholic faith. Do these numbers indicate that fewer Roman Catholics seek to join the all- volunteer force? Unlikely. In fact, given the dominance of their numbers among active-duty military, it seems obvious that Catholics of all kinds volunteer to serve in the armed forces in substantial numbers. Explanation for the disparity, therefore, must be sought elsewhere. Another group whose adherent numbers differ greatly from those of the civilian population, “no religious prefer ence,” outstrips all others, and accounting for this requires that one reflect upon the youthfulness of the military population (Kosmin and Keysar 2008; Kosmin and Mayer 2001). Age appears to play an important role in the strength and manifestation of religious belief, or lack thereof, for young men and women in the civilian world, particularly with regard to overt practice, such as attendance at worship services, or desire to ally with any sort of traditional organ ized faith. That those young adults who join the military would be substantially different seems doubtful, and, consequently, the lower percentage of Catholics found on active duty, compared with percentages found in civilian surveys, may reflect a national tendency that is manifested by young military members. This belief is bolstered by other survey results indicating that, as with Catholics, the percentages of active-duty military members who identify with traditional religious faith groups (such as Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Methodists, Episcopalians, Jews, Muslims, and several other groups) tend to be lower than the percentages claimed for the civilian population (Wilson and Sherkat 1994; Hunter and Smith 2010). Civilian social scientists have long been fascinated by the rise in those who are often called Nones, and during the past three decades numerous surveys have indicated that Nones comprise an increasing and significant proportion of the civilian population. As high as the civilian numbers may be, however, these are overwhelmed by those in the military who claim no religious preference. Of military members aged 18–30, for example, 28 percent identified as having no Management of religious diversity 199 religious preference. As the age of respondents increased, the percentage of those claiming to be Nones declined steadily, to 24 percent for those aged 31–40, 16 percent for those aged 41–50, and 10 percent for those aged 51 and older (Glenn 1987; Hout and Fischer 2002; Dougherty et al. 2007; Kosmin and Keysar 2008; Cheyne 2010; Hunter and Smith 2010). The US military is young. At any given time, according to government figures, approximately 30 percent of the military service is under the age of 25, and 69 percent are under the age of 35; in the civilian US popula tion these ages comprise only 21 percent of the whole. Young men and women, most of them in their late teens, enlist or enter through an officer program; regardless of the route by which they enter, once sworn in they become immersed in a world of strict discipline, enforced uniformity, and mission orientation, all of it conducted in a milieu grounded in practicality and rationality, and one that occasionally raises service traditions above those of any faith group even as, paradoxically, religious language and symbols find place and purpose in maintaining the military ethos. Once past the intimidating initial stages of training, during which attendance at on-base military chapels is high, recruits become increasingly involved in developing relationships, studying, and looking ahead toward their new careers, and involvement in religious activities and expressions of religious faith begins to drop off. It is not that military service causes religiosity to decrease; rather, high operational tempos, the intens ity of military routines, the ease with which one may disengage from the religion and religious practices of one’s former civilian life, the absence of peer criticism for doing so, desire to engage fully with the military’s religion-like traditions, and skepticism about established religious institutions all lend themselves to a lessening of traditional religious adherence, a willingness to accept altern ative religious views, laxity in religious practice, or a simple lack of interest in religious matters, if not spiritual ones.7 This is not to say religion is not still an extremely import ant concept in the minds of many, if not most; it is simply not at the level of salience as in the general population. For some, religion continues to be of prime importance as they seek to cope with life in a new and challenging environment.

Faith, ethnicity, and gender As with age, ethnicity and gender diversity are both inextricably linked with religion. Table 11.2 was developed from the RIPS data as a means to examine the Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 intersection of these three categor ies. Women of all ethnic and racial groups indicate that religion holds a higher degree of import ance in their lives than is true of males within the same groups. Non-Hispanic blacks of both sexes express a higher level of import ance of religion in their lives than do all other ethnic or racial groupings. Although these statist ics must be understood as character istics of the popula tion as a whole and not predictive of any one individual, they must nevertheless be considered when examining aspects of diversity management. As has been demonstrated in many venues, members with a minority status often do not cope 200 C. E. Hunter and L. M. Smith Table 11.2 Race, ethnicity, and gender and the importance of religion among service members (%)

Race and ethnic origin Very Important Moderately Of little Unimportant important important importance

White non-Hispanic Male 23.88 18.25 26.47 13.17 18.22 Female 27.69 21.98 25.71 12.09 12.53 Black non-Hispanic Male 49.02 21.94 18.76 3.93 6.35 Female 61.36 21.36 10.45 4.55 2.27 Asian non-Hispanic Male 32.57 21.71 21.71 11.43 12.57 Female 32.26 32.26 22.58 6.45 6.45 Other non-Hispanic Male 25.71 24.57 24.57 14.29 10.86 Female 40.54 18.92 27.03 8.11 5.41 Hispanic Male 29.73 22.6 25.34 9.45 12.88 Female 35.22 23.27 27.67 6.29 7.55

Source: Adapted from DEOMI 2009.

as well under stress as do those in the majority culture. If, in the majority culture (in this case white), religion is of a much more proportional import ance distributed from very important to unimportant as evidenced in Table 11.2 for white males, non-Hispanic black males will differ from the majority not only with respect to their skin color but also with respect to the importance of religion in their overall population. This is but one more area in which they differ. Aside from good diversity management, it will be one more area in which they might be expected to compromise to be like the majority as well, and thus, one more area in which they will sense a need to be other than themselves to fit in. In considering issues of diversity from a policy or human environment perspect ive, religion must be considered to gain a full picture of the issues facing the force.

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Accommodating accommodation However challenging these circumstances may seem, military leaders are expected to adapt and, if not overcome, at least cope effectively with each and every one. Leaders are faced with responding to the expressed individual and group needs regarding religious expression every day. When faced with the requirement of making a decision regarding religious expression or accommodation, leaders are provided posit ive, if occasionally broad or even vague, guidance upon which they are required to rely, eschewing personal preju dice, common sense (which frequently is simply a reflection of the status quo), or scuttlebutt. Management of religious diversity 201 DoD regulations and policies neither require nor suggest any attempt be made to determine the validity of a religious belief. DoD leaders are charged, however, with the responsibility for gauging the sincerity with which an individual believes in a given theology, tenet, or philosophy when making decisions about requests for religious accommodation. Religious believers and Humanists must demonstrate sincerity in their beliefs (religious or ethical), and determination of their sincerity demands impartial evaluation of these beliefs on the part of leaders as they are evidenced in the totality of an individual’s life (DODI 1300.06).8 How is sincerity to be gauged? Certainly it can be said that some individuals are more articulate in stating their beliefs; their words convey passion and ardor, while others may find such articulation difficult, or are less adept verbally. How, then, does a military leader know who is sincere and who is, perhaps, attempting to play the system? The DoD instruction regard ing conscientious objectors attempts to provide leaders with helpful informa tion by which the sincerity of religious belief may be weighed and judged, advice that may also be useful when considering requests for accommodation. The instruction begins by probing the term “belief ”:

Belief in an external power or “being” or deeply held moral or ethical belief, to which all else is subordinate or upon which all else is ultimately depend ent, and which has the power or force to affect moral well-being. The external power or “being” need not be one that has found expression in either religious or societal traditions. (DODI 1300.06, 3.2)

A service member’s stated belief in a deity or higher power fits the definitional bill, and moral or ethical beliefs held by a Humanist service member are afforded the same legitimacy. This definition, however, raises the stakes in so far as it requires such beliefs to occupy within an individual an ultimacy against which all other beliefs are judged and “to which all else is subordinate.” While inclusive, DoD directives nonetheless set a high standard regarding the intensity and import ance of non-deistic or secularist beliefs in the lives of men and women claiming them. While such beliefs need not mirror the deistic convictions of the majority of faith groups (thus including new religious movements Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 as well as singular and personal faiths), such beliefs must be characterized by a demonstrable strength: “[they] should sincerely occupy a place of equal or greater value in the life of its possessor. Deeply held moral or ethical beliefs should be valued with the strength and devotion of traditional religious conviction” (DODI 1300.06, 3.2). While secularists and adherents of non-traditional or unfamiliar religious faiths are expected to demonstrate strong commitment to their belief(s), they are not required to mimic the devotional practices or standards of such well- established and familiar faith groups as Roman Catholicism, Baptists, Judaism 202 C. E. Hunter and L. M. Smith (to name but a few traditional faith groups). Rather, in seeking to make a determination of the sincerity of an individual’s belief, in light of a request for religious accommodation or application for conscientious objection, the phrase “strength of traditional religions” gives leaders a means of judging sincerity on a logical, factual scale, measuring the passion – the strength – by which a philosophical religious belief is held with that of those beliefs and practices espoused by long-established and generally familiar faith groups. Does an individual, for example, adhere to the dictates of his or her belief system with the same depth of conviction with which a Roman Catholic believes that, during the Eucharist, a sliver of bread and a cup of wine are transformed into the body and blood of Christ Jesus? The same reverence with which a Baptist regards his personal relationship with the risen Christ Jesus? The same deep conviction as a Muslim who believes she must, if possible, participate in the hajj (the pilgrimage to Mecca) at some point in her life? Even here, the wise leader treads warily. Certainly, the conduct of persons, in particular their outward manifestation of belief, may be scrutinized for evidence of sincerity. When gauging sincerity of a religious belief with which one is unfamiliar or suspicious, however, one may be tempted to adopt measures of dubious value and validity. For example, a leader may elect to judge a believer’s sincerity using the yardsticks of faith group membership or worship attendance; does the individual, for example, belong to an interna tional or national, established faith group, or a local manifestation of it? And, if so, does the individual attend faith group services at every possible opportunity and without fail? If tempted to use these standards, a leader must confront two realities. First is dominance of the Nones within the military, constituting the largest self-identified faith grouping within the ranks of the US armed forces. Social science research indicates that these men and women may possess ortho dox, if hazy and seldom-voiced religious beliefs (in fact, the majority tend to hold Christian beliefs), may occasionally attend a church or other place of worship, and may pray in times of danger and difficulty, such as combat, without feeling any need to declare a specific religious adherence or become a member of any religious group. Second, a leader must ponder whether such membership and attendance standards are applied in an egalitarian manner, or if an adherent of an unfamiliar or unpopular faith group is being asked to meet a higher standard than are adherents of other, more familiar, faith groups. For example, do all Christians attend church ser vices without fail, or might some be found in Walmart or on the golf course Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 come Sunday morning? If the sincerity of an adherent of an unfamiliar faith group is cast into doubt because he or she does not regularly attend worship ser vices, will the same be said of a Christian who misses a church service? In any case, a service member may constitute a religion of one, or belong to a faith group comprised of a mere handful of individuals, and merit the same regard, in terms of requests for accommodation, as those who belong to vast and ancient religions (DODI 1300.06, 5.2.2.1).9 No weight can be given to the sophistication of a sailor’s belief, the length of time a marine has believed, or the ability of a soldier to articulate his or her Management of religious diversity 203 belief with fluency. A believer, religious or secular, is not required “to be a St. Augustine or a St. Thomas Aquinas” when attempting to explain his or her beliefs; the believer need only express a sincere belief. In addition, the Supreme Court has stated: “Religious beliefs need not be acceptable, logical, consistent, or comprehens ible to others in order to merit First Amendment protection (Thomas v. Review Board of Indiana Employment Sec. 1981).” Thus, a religious belief unfamiliar, or even incomprehensible, to a military leader should not be summarily dismissed as illegitimate or unworthy of thoughtful consideration with regard to a request for religious accommodation. Some faith groups, as mentioned earlier, practice sacramental animal sacrifice, a practice long aban doned by the majority of Christianity, the dominant faith within the armed forces. The sacrifice of animals may be anathema to leaders, or unacceptable; it is, nonetheless, a legitimate practice for many, as is the eschewing of medical treatment in favor of spiritual or faith healing, belief(s) in multiple deities, or the sacramental use of hallucinogenic drugs (Army Regulation 600-43 2006).10 Nor are unortho dox beliefs within more well-known and familiar faith groups, such as Christianity or Judaism, to be dismissed as illegitimate or unworthy of thoughtful consideration. Theologies within faith groups can and do vary widely, proclaimed by religious leaders and scholars, but inter preted internally by indi viduals. The majority of Christians, for example, consider Trinitarian views of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost as orthodox belief, but other Christian groups, such as Unitarians and Christian Scientists, reject Trinitarian theology and espouse unique views regarding Jesus; each group considers the theology of the other unacceptable, while each proclaims itself as properly Christian. The deter- minant of what amounts to a comprehensible or acceptable belief should not be made by a DoD leader. Sincerity of belief is what counts, not conformity or uniformity.11 Commanding officers – assisted by chaplains, equal opportunity (EO) advisors, and others within the unit – are charged with the responsibility of making decisions about the sincerity with which beliefs are held when weighing requests for religious accommodation. Leaders wade into ethical, legal, and moral quick- sand if tempted to act upon their personal values, religious or secular, and move beyond determination of sincerity and enter the arena of the legitimacy of belief, symbols, and practices. Even when a belief, symbol, or practice is familiar to the leader, wisdom, prudence, and care must be exercised in all deliberations regard ing another’s beliefs, religious or secular. Ultimately, a leader’s personal disbe- Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 lief in or gut feeling regarding an individual’s sincerity does not constitute a sufficiently logical or reasonable basis for rendering a decision regarding a request for religious accommodation or making a judgment about religious speech or religious practice. When faced with an accommodation request from a soldier whose beliefs seem dubious, or perhaps all too conveniently and recently adopted, or with which a leader simply is in disagreement, cold, hard facts must be sought before making a decision, and some time spent in ensuring that filters of socialized personal prejudice are not overriding the spirit and letter of regu latory purpose. Doing so enables leaders to avoid the very real pitfall that awaits 204 C. E. Hunter and L. M. Smith if, for example, they inadvertently or purposefully favor religious or ethical viewpoints that agree with their own, that of the military services, or those of the US government. Favoring a particular religious viewpoint is, sad to say, neither a new nor unusual trap into which leaders, high and low, may fall. In 1996, for example, during a campaign sponsored by the Roman Catholic Church, priests were encouraged by their ecclesiastical superiors to preach sermons urging congregants to write their Congressional representatives advocating an override of President Clinton’s veto of the Partial Birth Abortion Ban. In anticipation of this campaign and its sermons, the Air Force Judge Advocate General and the Navy and Army Chiefs of Chaplains issued memoranda to all military chaplains, for- bidding the discussion of legisla tion during sermons or counseling. This marked the first time in modern history that military chaplains were told, under threat of prosecution, what they could preach. The order was instantly challenged in a lawsuit filed by a civilian legal group that agreed to represent a coalition of Cath olic, Jewish, and Muslim chaplains (Jolkovsky 1996).12 Shortly thereafter, a Roman Catholic Air Force chaplain, a Reservist assigned to Andrews Air Force Base, MD, filed a legal complaint, stating that the milit ary’s memoranda “created a conflict of conscience between the demands of [his] faith and [his] desire to conform to military directives,” causing him to be “wary of addressing moral issues that intersect with legislation in homilies or counseling for fear of disciplinary action” against him and thus constraining his religious activ ities, specifically the content of his sermons. In other words, although he wished to preach from a military pulpit on this subject, and in favor of the postcard campaign, he did not do so for fear of punishment by the military. An active-duty Air Force chaplain and co-plaintiff, Rabbi Kaye, similarly com- plained that the military’s prohibitions about preaching and counseling consti- tuted an attempt “to separate moral teachings from Judaism.” As a rabbi he believed himself morally obligated “to speak out against or in favor of legisla tion concerning what he considers to be immoral practices,” including “partial birth” abortion, euthanasia, and “various forms of sexual immorality,” yet he feared the threat of punishment that, he believed, was contained in the orders issued by the Air Force Judge Advocate General (Rigdon v. Perry). At trial, the court rebuked the military’s stance as viewpoint discrimination. The concerns of the military leaders, it said, were “hollow” and, in fact, violated the Establishment Clause. Why? Because another Roman Catholic Navy chap- Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 lain, who chose to preach on this topic at the US Naval Academy chapel, and who had specifically urged his congregants to refrain from writing letters to the Congress on the subject of partial birth abortion, was not admonished by his superiors for expressing political views in his sermon, presumably because his views were in agreement with those of the military leaders present. Thus, the court declared, the military had sanctioned one viewpoint of Roman Catholic theology over another, placing chaplains in an untenable position by “muzzling . . . religious guidance” (Rigdon v. Perry). Management of religious diversity 205 Beyond accommodation

Personnel policy How might military and federal leaders benefit from information about the religious identification and practices of DoD personnel? In view of the power religion wields within the human cultural terrain, and despite the limitations of current social science research in the area of religious identification within the DoD, arymilit leaders need accur ate and descriptive information about the religious identification and practices of its arymilit members. Such information plays a critical role in the execution of federal mandates that require commanders and federal supervisors to avoid religious discrimination and, at the same time, requires them to make every effort possible (within broadly outlined limits) to accommodate the religious beliefs and practices of members. To do so, leaders must have pertinent knowledge of these beliefs and needs, and their potential impact on the unit/organiza tional mission. Creating a supportive workplace and environment is a proven contributor to a mission-ready workforce and is intimately tied to other aspects of environ mental concerns within a diversity-oriented establishment. Religious factors may heighten or lessen the likelihood that men and women choose to enter the DoD or remain, and certainly DoD leaders have been given reason to acknow ledge this potential. While, to date, little scholarly attention has been given to this subject, it is worthwhile to speculate what may be the reaction of family members, relat ives, and friends of those who, as members of minority faith groups, receive positive or negative reinforcement of their faith and practices during their DoD tenure. Respectful and informed attention given to the religious beliefs and practices of DoD personnel, reinforced by knowledge gained through sound sampling results, cannot help but add to the ability of commanders and civilian supervisors to address two leading indicators: recruitment of new personnel and reten tion of active-duty members, Reservists, and DoD civilians. Service members and federal employees whose religious practices require funding and the provi sion of various items (for example, host used in the celebra tion of the Roman Catholic and Orthodox mass, kosher and hallal meals- ready-to-eat, candles for worship services of all kinds, time off for religious observances) demand the attention of commanders and supervisors. Those whose religious practices require time, space, or permissions beyond what currently Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 exists likewise command attention. Military leaders bear a responsibility to negotiate what is, without doubt, a complex Constitutional right, while at the same time preparing for and executing the military mission. These various streams of responsibility can be facilitated only by accurate and up-to-date information that allows this to occur with minimal error and with adequate attention given to ensuring the availability of necessary resources (Laplante 2009; Eisman 2008; Jordan 2009; Lancaster et al. 2004). Finally, accur ate measures and analysis of religious diversity are needed to allow DoD policymakers to examine current and planned policies, regulations, 206 C. E. Hunter and L. M. Smith and military law to determine what, if any, religious biases are reflected in these documents and how such biases affect effective leadership and service. If one accepts that religion exists as an important factor in understanding the needs of military members, treatment of religion at the hands of leaders may inform an individual service member’s decision about pursuing a career in the military or seeking a change in employment at a potentially great cost to the military organization. In the midst of all the shifts and changes that have occurred and that continue, Americans still generally regard themselves as a highly religious people and, for the most part, Christian. It may be, however, that this religiosity, often touted by those with a stake in perpetuating religious influence in American culture, is in reality superficial, even if sincere. Much of the US population appears to possess, at best, little more than a vague understanding of the country’s religious herit age, and recent research has revealed high levels of illiteracy among Americans regarding their own religious beliefs and even less knowledge about the beliefs of those whose religious beliefs lie outside the boundaries of the major Judeo- Christian traditions. This information abyss has particular pertinence with regard to acknowledging and understanding the growth and influence of minority religious groups in the United States – and, consequently, within the US military and DoD workforces – and is of special concern when considering religious sampling procedures within the DoD setting. Because the number of individuals who adhere to minority faiths is small relat ive to the total US population, social scientists using survey methodologies rarely achieve sufficient numbers in large- scale national polls to permit comparisons with more common faith groups, complicating the exploration of faith. Inability to study minority groups contrib utes to the lack of available information about some of the fastest-growing faith groups in the United States, information that might well assist military leaders in policy and command deliberations, particu larly if such information included reli able data concerning those faith groups whose inclusion and accommodation within the military prompt review and even revision of policy and doctrinal standards.13 Few practical or accurate means exist to identify the diversity of religious belief in the DoD, or to comprehend how diversity of belief interacts with personnel, training, and policy factors critical to the military mission. Consequently, policies and doctrine that address and affect religion and religious practice are often developed without informed input from religious experts, particularly those Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 familiar with the US military institution, or they are insufficiently examined for inherent cultural biases, to include religious prejudices and assumptions that may unwittingly be formalized in these policies and doctrine. And, all too often, those recruited and commissioned to act as experts on religious issues within the DoD context, such as military chaplains, are uneducated in the sociology or his tory of religion in the United States, may at best possess a shallow understanding of comparative religions, and are unequipped with sufficient personal and social analytical skills to enable them either to recognize or address these deficiencies. Management of religious diversity 207 The regulations and policies regarding religious attire and grooming stand ards, for example, work well for Christians, few of whom are mandated by their faith to adopt specific hair styles, facial hair, or head coverings. Fornon- Christians, however, these standards act as reductionist pressures upon their religious identities that seek to make them fit, however uncomfortably or incongruously, into a model incompat ible – in part or in toto – with the requirements of their faith and to do so within a military culture that does not easily comprehend or accommodate difference. Because of this, non-Christian service members automatically face the probabil ity that they will be forced to either submerge a vital element of their identity, their religion and its practices, or face the necessity of requesting accommodations time after time, with each new assignment or new commanding officer. Native American service members who, as part of the Native American Church, commonly ingest peyote as a sacramental act in a worship service; Christian Scientists who, in accordance with their desire to heal using spiritual means and who request exemptions from immunizations; Mormons who wear sacred undergarments; Seventh-Day Adventists and Seventh-Day Baptists who celeb rate the Sabbath on Saturday and seek to exchange Saturday duty for any other day; Muslims desirous of honoring the daytime fast of Ramadan, even as they carry out their duties, or to wear the hijab or khufi; Sikh men who wish to wear their hair unshorn and tucked neatly in a turban, wear a beard, and carry the kirpan to demonstrate their piety; Wiccans who seek opportunities to worship in a military chapel; Jewish marines who wish to wear the yarmulke when in uniform (allowed in all the services except the Marine Corps); Humanists who seek to be excused from listening to prayers at mandatory formations; all these men and women – and too many more to include in this short chapter – continually face the need to justify themselves, their faith, and their faith practices. These justifications most often must be made when reporting to a new command, since religious accommodations do not necessarily follow a service member from one unit to another. These requests to preserve an essential part of identity immediately mark these service members as different, highlighting their arrival to the unit, creating paperwork for other unit members, necessitating in-depth interviews with senior unit leaders, subjecting the requestors to attention that, while necessary, is not always welcome. A key aspect of the effective management and leadership of religious diversity – indeed, of all forms of diversity – lies in ensuring that leaders shun the temptation to succumb to tolerance, a reductionist, even arrogant, attitude that Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 service members encounter all too often when requesting religious accommodations. Leaders might benefit from asking themselves the same questions their religious subordinates must continually face: “What does it mean that I am the exception to the rule, that I must daily struggle against a cultural bias about who I am and what I believe? Why is it, in a nation that celeb rates religious freedom, must I work so hard to maintain my identity? And why must I always put myself on display as an outsider, an exception, in a military service that, at the same time, tells me I am equal to everyone else in all essential ways?” 208 C. E. Hunter and L. M. Smith Education, training, and deployment Because beliefs – religious and Humanist – vary widely, leadership awareness of the potential advantages and impediments inherent in belief structures and sub sequent behaviors may result in greater situational awareness within the unit or organization, and the promotion of education and training that take these factors into account. Although no attempt may be made legally by a military leader to change or undermine a service member’s religious belief or unbelief, training curriculums can and should be geared to known facts that may have an impact on performance. Frank, well informed, and accur ate discussions about religious realities, rather than strategies of assumption or avoidance, will better serve units preparing for operations in areas of responsibility in which prevailing religious sentiment(s) differs markedly from that of the United States. If military actions involve popula tions whose religious beliefs, shrines, and customs are unfamiliar to military personnel, approaches to cultural training for these men and women could be enhanced by an understanding of the religious beliefs and prejudices existent among DoD members. If, for example, the assigned mission of a military unit is geared toward enhancing the political strength and integrity of an Islamic regime, US military leadership might choose to present troops with a sympathetic and in-depth educational presentation about Islam. Such education could address strong religious positions held by service members that might contain inherent prejudices against Islam. Such a presenta tion might directly address the tactical and strategic consequences upon the mission of proselytizing efforts, as well as historical views of Muslims with regard to Christian missionary efforts. In other words, knowledge about religious identification and practices of DoD personnel would beinvaluable from the standpoint of providing reliable foundations for informed and effective education and training, which in turn would posit ively affect policy decisions. Such educational efforts might also be of benefit to military leaders whose personal levels of religious salience are low, particularly if these are designed to impart a measure of understanding of the powerful role religion plays in the lives of service members. Conversely, those whose personal religious salience levels are high might benefit from education that illustrates the fact that men and women can and do lead committed, meaningful, moral lives with little or no reli ance on religious beliefs or behaviors. Might such religion-focused training, no matter how well intentioned, be used Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 to instill in military members beliefs more acceptable to leaders than others, or persuade military members to adopt beliefs that reflect those of their leaders? In fact, religious evangelizing and proselytizing have triggered public turmoil in at least one major training command in recent years, calling into question the religious impartiality of command leadership and highlighting the potential for abuse that exists within the total institutional training setting. Certainly, vigil ance in this arena, backed by clear policy guidelines, must be exercised by leaders of the respective service training commands to ensure that education or training curricula are not used to influence the religious beliefs (or unbelief ) of Management of religious diversity 209 military members, particularly those in basic training units, whose stressful environ ments are geared toward assimilation (Cook 2007). At the same time, while by no means downplaying the importance of ensuring this policy-driven alertness, several studies indicate entry-level military education and training is largely unsuccessful in achieving more than superficial compliance and buy-in with regard to military values and rules. The attitudes, values, and beliefs – presumably, as noted earlier, including the religious beliefs – of incoming members remain entrenched against the concerted efforts of DoD leaders, which, while perhaps not pleasing to service leaders, educators, and drill instructors, may provide a degree of assurance to those who fear DoD leaders might successfully influence the religious beliefs of ary milit members (Cook 2007; Mouzelis 1971; Lovell and Stiehm 1989; Sigel 1989; Pershing 2003). Acknowledging, perhaps even understanding, the variety of religious sentiments and Humanist beliefs, on the part of senior officers and enlisted leaders may ameliorate resentments or lessen suspi cions of exclusion. At the very least, it seems incumbent upon all leaders to be aware of any tendency – their own, that of the unit chaplain, or any other unit personnel – to indulge in religious clichés, include religious elements in non-religious military proceedings, or use non-inclusive religious language and references. Men and women in uniform want to feel valued. They expect to receive respect from their subordinates, their peers, and their superiors. They want to be part of the in-group. The extent to which leaders understand the worth of religious diversity – providing substantive training that lends itself to intelligent reflection on theological differences; actively supporting religious expressions that fall within regulations; articulating a clear and equitable policy regarding religious accommodation requests; ensuring unit members have access to regular and special worship ceremonies – acts as a measure of how ready and willing they are to meet the expectations of their people. Leaders within the US military should not make decisions about whether a particular religion or Humanist belief makes a better soldier, sailor, marine, or airman. They must, however, consider underlying presuppositions concerning the attitude of soldiers toward those unlike themselves and ensure that such attitudes, if they exist, do not obstruct or frustrate the assigned mission. When the military mission aims to both secure an area from partisan violence and to win the hearts and minds of the popula tion, a well-informed approach to religious views and beliefs becomes vitally important. If a popula tion senses it is being Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 treated with respect, being valued for who they are, rather than for whom they might become, they may be more willing to accept the presence of the military forces, and may even view these forces as valued friends and trusted agents to help secure a better way of life. If, however, a foreign population senses that US military forces regard them in an arrogant light, as a people in need of transforming traditional ways of life, perhaps even to include their identity at its most basic religious roots, they are likely to feel and express resentment, seeing US forces as occupiers. Those US military members who help create the likelihood of acceptance or rejection are the men and women who are on the front line. 210 C. E. Hunter and L. M. Smith Service members’ personal religious views and identities have an impact on how they view others, the legitimacy of other religions, and whether others who believe differently from themselves can be treated as equals. These religious views thus have an impact on mission accomplishment. Consequently, training and policy considerations would be wise to give concerted attention to issues of human rights, human dignity, and human equality, with deliberate focus on the implications of religious exclusivity attitudes on the military unit environment and the military mission. Self-identification in terms of religion or ethical perspective has an impact on how a military member perceives the command EO climate. Too often, however, EO climate studies fail to consider religious identity in the leadership equation, even among those commands whose unit climates have been found hostile, unless religion comprised the primary and gross focus of EO complaints, such as occurred at the US Air Force Academy in 2004 and 2005 (Cook 2007). In the few cases in which religious identity has been a principal issue in negative climate situations, investigation results often have indicated that actions and words on the part of overly zealous, conservative Christian military members have comprised the nexus of disharmony. The RIPS analysis reveals that even commands that have not faced allegations of religious discrimination neverthe less are perceived in a more negative light by members of religious minorities. President George W. Bush, a self-described devout Christian, closed his famous “Mission Accomplished” speech on the Lincoln with religious and deistic language, with a specific reference to the book of Isaiah, in the Hebrew Scriptures, that assumed a connection with other Christians and, perhaps, with Jews and Muslims. On May 2, 2003 the president stood on the deck of the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln and addressed thousands of assembled members of the ship’s crew, as well as millions of US citizens via media coverage. Dressed in a military flight suit and standing above the flight deck, he spoke at length about military sorties recently carried out in Iraq, applauded his senior military leaders, thanked foreign allies, and laid out in general terms his ambitious plan to defeat the forces of terrorism around the world. Nearing the end of his speech, he moved from words of liberty and defiance to religious rhetoric, proclaiming to the ship’s sailors and marines and, by means of media, to military personnel around the world:

Wherever you go, you carry a message of hope, a message that is ancient and ever new. In the words of the prophet Isaiah, “To the captives, come Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 out; and to those in darkness, be free.” Thank you for serving our country and our cause. May God bless you all. And may God continue to bless America. (Bush 2003)

To whom was the President speaking? Of those several thousand men and women who thronged the flight deck of the Abraham Lincoln, how many embraced the president’s invocation of God? How many understood his refer ence to the biblical prophet Isaiah? How many were Christians? Jews? Muslims? Management of religious diversity 211 Pagans? Humanists? Did they all welcome his religious language, or were there some among them who grimaced and wished he had left out the God-talk? How many considered it mere rhetorical flourishing, the sort of thing commonly done by other presidents and senior military leaders, words possessing little significance? Did the president know to whom he was speaking, in terms of religious identification, or did he simply assume that his use of religious words must necessarily be understood and would motivate all who heard him? He called upon religion to act as an ethical compass for military men and women who prepare for battle. He summoned religion’s power to provide clarity for those who would soon find themselves amidst morally equivocal situations in which they were called upon to inflict harm upon, perhaps even kill, both known enemy warriors and unknown, including women, children, and the elderly. He did as he had done in other speeches, and as other senior govern ment and military leaders had done, and continue to do; he invoked religion in the expectation that the words he chose would convey sentiments understood by all and be embraced by most.14 President Bush was and is not alone in his utilitarian use of religion. Often conveyed within military motivational communications and speeches are overt reminders that military members are fighting for a greater and holy good, that God has blessed this nation with gifts and responsibilities, and that military ser vants of this nation are part of a divinely blessed mission, one intended to bring righteousness into dark (foreign) places where evil (falsehood and ignorance) resides. Chaplains authenticate these messages with official prayers, often choos- ing to couch these in sectarian and deistic language. Commanding officers may reinforce these sentiments by invoking God’s blessings upon the unit and upon the United States. While such religion-laden messages may appeal to a signific ant number of troops, given the numbers who lay claim to a religious identity, over 30 percent of active-duty military members find in these words little or no appeal. In fact, for these men and women, religious language and the unspoken assumption of its acceptability may actually prove counterproductive, arousing or reinforcing feelings of aliena tion, exclusion, and resentment, particularly in those situations, such as mandatory formations, in which they may feel coerced into giving at least tacit consent to something that, for them, holds little value personally or with regard to the military mission (Hajjar 2010; Hunter and Smith, forthcoming). The challenge of leading and managing religious diversity lies in not only Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 determining individual faith perspectives, but also arriving at shared understandings of community commit ments. Underlying assumptions about leadership and values in military organizations tend to reflect a hegemonic Christianity with regard to organizational behavior by default. The growing consciousness of religious (and primarily Protestant Christian) presuppositions in organiza tional structure and publications has potent implications for military leadership and developers of policy, who by law must seek to ensure religious neutrality. These same policy implications reach into the areas of retention and recruitment, for just as military leaders seek to be mindful of those individuals with specific 212 C. E. Hunter and L. M. Smith racial and ethnic character istics, who regis ter negatively in this model (e.g., His- panics and blacks), so also should they be mindful of those possessing a minor ity religious identity when seeking to ensure a favorable EO climate within individual units and the armed forces as a whole.

Conclusion The US military has garnered considerable unflattering attention in the media and courts as a result of words used and actions taken by a few handfuls of milit ary leaders that were either religiously insensitive or in violation of well estab lished religious accommodation principles and practices. While some military and civilian leaders may laud the promotion and display of a particular faith in given military settings, believing these efforts to be conducive to making better war fighters, others – leaders, subordinates, and civilians – lament and resent such actions and see them as offenses against a national principle of church– state separation and potential obstacles to accomplishing the military mission. Recent military missions have promoted concern and respect for all humanity, regardless of religious belief and the promotion of fairness and justice based on the rule of law. Some of these missions have sought to undo damage done to societies where the people of one particular faith with a very specific inter pretation of its public face seek to impose it on all. In view of such mission imperatives, soldiers who do not naturally accept the equality of those whose religions differ from their own may be aided through training and doctrine, which realistically addresses the larger strategic concerns.15 Today’s DoD leaders work within an environment in which demographic diversity is obvious, equality within that diversity is both mandated and pro claimed (with a few exceptions), and in which mission success has been tied to respect for diversity of all kinds, cultural and demographic. At the same time, DoD leaders work within a culture that values uniformity and conformity, often equating these with unity of purpose and a culture that seeks always to promote unit cohesion and esprit de corps. These are truths, seemingly distinct and different, held by some to be paradoxical, but nevertheless in search of a unifying principle. The leadership task involved in promoting reliance on and the desirability of diversity, and acceptance of a certain measure of non-conformity, rather than rote uniformity, sameness, and exclusion of difference, is neither simple nor easy. Understanding the critical role of religion as potentially provid- Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 ing a means by which individuals can bridge these seemingly divergent truths and be inclusive of all engaged in the effort, while valuing their individual distinctions and inherent worth, is appropriately and necessarily included in mission accomplishment and official recog nition and cognizance (Lim et al. 2008). Our nation’s success is inextric ably tied to its diversity as long as all citizens are potentially welcome into the armed forces. Dealing as forthrightly with religious diversity and its complex challenges as leaders do with issues of race, eth nicity, and gender can only enhance unity of effort within an increasingly diverse workforce, and understanding the dynamics of religious diversity and formulating Management of religious diversity 213 effective means of responding to it are key to allowing military leaders to chart a proper course, not only in caring for their own, but in ensuring the force stands ready to respond whenever the nation calls in an ever-changing national and global environment.16 Leaders who possess an understanding of the role of religion, in all the ways it becomes manifest within military units, or who take the time and trouble to find and listen to those with this knowledge, position themselves to succeed in diversity leadership and management.

Notes 1 Lieutenant Berry’s religious objections were based upon the Roman Catholic doctrine of avoidance of approximate occasion of sin. Briefly stated, this doctrine requires Roman Catholics to avoid placing themselves in situations that might incite or invite a person to sin. 2 Berry continued to request the religious accommodation. According to a lawsuit filed on Berry’s behalf by the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, this persistence resulted in Berry being subjected to unlawful retribution. The validity of his religious beliefs was questioned as the Air Force consulted two other chaplains. He was removed from instructor duty, permanently decertified under the Personnel Readiness Program, and received a disadvantageous Officer Performance Report that, according to the complaint, contained false statements to the effect that Berry had refused to perform duties with other qualified crew members and that, despite an outstanding record, he did not meet performance standards. He was transferred and subsequently applied to the Air Force Funded Legal Education Program; his application was rejected because “he held a moral position contrary to Air Force policy.” Eventually, in 2003, a settlement of the lawsuit was negotiated; the Air Force conceded to all of Berry’s requests, including removal of negative comments placed in Berry’s OPRs and restitution for legal expenses. 3 Regarding the value of cultural education and competence among military leaders, see Hajjar (2010); Stringer (2009); McFarland (2005); regard ing the controversial nature of such training, see Connable (2009); Reger et al. (2008); Lucas (2008); Brown (2008). 4 While numerous studies have been conducted that examine the correlation between religious values and career development or work satisfaction, few have focused on the workplace, and even fewer on specific task performance and work values. For those that examine religiosity, diversity, and the workplace, see Cunningham (2010) and Strauss and Sawyerr (2009); for an examination of religion and work values among college students, see Duffy (2010). 5 The survey was designed to demonstrate how religious identification and religious practices (or lack thereof ) are intertwined with leadership imperatives regard ing milit ary education and training, personnel policy, and operational planning. Copies of the Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Religious Identification and Practices Survey (RIPS) are available at www.deomi.org. 6 For the DoD regulations on the sacramental use of peyote, see www.deomi.org/Diver- sityMgmt/Peyote.cfm. The authors have, in their careers as Navy chaplains, frequently grappled with these situations, helping both requestors and leaders work their ways through the hurdles of cultural dissonance. 7 Regarding the median age of military personnel, see Pollack et al. (2009), Office of the Under Secretary of Defense, Personnel & Readiness (2008), US Government Accounting Office (2005), Segal and Segal (2004); regard ing age-relevant changes in religiosity, see Arnett and Jensen (2002); regard ing the use of religious language and symbols, see Parabo (2010) and Hunter and Smith (forthcoming). 8 “Great care must be exercised in seeking to determine whether asserted beliefs are 214 C. E. Hunter and L. M. Smith honestly and genuinely held. Sincerity is determined by an impartial evaluation of the applicant’s thinking and living in its totality, past and present. Care must be exercised in determining the integrity of belief and the consistency of application.” 9 “The conduct of applicants [for conscientious objector status], in particu lar their outward manifestation of the beliefs asserted, will be carefully examined and given substantial weight.” Regarding group membership as a standard of sincerity, see Zabala v. Hagee (2007): “It is undisputed that an individual may have a belief system which is held with the strength of traditional religious convictions without being a formal member of a particular church, synagogue, or temple.” Regarding the religious beliefs of Nones, see Hout and Fischer (2002). Regarding attendance at worship ser vices as a marker of religious sincerity, see Barnes v. Green (2008): “Much is made of the fact that Barnes did not attend church services in Iraq.” 10 Glossary, Section II (Religious Training and Belief ): “Beliefs can be deeply held, even though they lack sophistication. Care must be taken to avoid the inference that an applicant who lacks sufficient insight or knowledge to express his or her beliefs clearly does not hold the beliefs, or that they are not ‘religious’ in origin or held with the strength of traditional religious convictions.” For more on this, see Barnes v. Green (2008). 11 “The guarantee of free exercise is not limited to beliefs which are shared by all of the members of a religious sect. Particularly in this sensitive area, it is not within the judicial function and judicial competence to inquire whether the petitioner or his fellow worker more correctly perceived the commands of their common faith. Courts are not arbiters of scriptural interpretation.” 12 The Army, Navy, and Air Force memoranda all inter preted limitations on political activities by service men and women as barring chaplains from speaking about the veto override in sermons or counseling. Generally, military members are prohibited from participating in political activities when in uniform or identified as a member of the military (DODI 1344.10 2008). 13 For an overview of those who claim Christian affiliation of some kind, see ARIS 2008 (Kosmin and Keysar 2008) and Pew (2008); comparisons of ARIS 2001 (Kosmin and Mayer 2001) and ARIS 1990 with those conducted in 2008 illustrates the dramatic drop in Christian numbers. The most popular writing on religious illiteracy among Americans comes from Prothero (2007). As used in this chapter, the term “minority” refers to numbers of faith group adherents in comparison to the adherent/member ship numbers of large groups such as the Roman Catholic Church, the Southern Baptist Convention, and Methodist groups. 14 Regarding President Bush’s use of religious rhetoric, see Schroepfer (2008). 15 For a sampling of these incidents, see Sharlet (2009); Mount (2009); Leopold (2009); Allen (2009); Hanna (2008); Shane (2008); Jordan (2008); Eisman (2008); Cook (2007); DoD IG Report (2007). 16 For surveys of US religious representation in general, see Kosmin and Keysar (2008); Pew (2008); Wuthnow and Hackett (2003); Smith (2002); Kosmin and Mayer (2001). Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016

References Allen, B. (2009, April 6) “Top Army Chaplain Raises Jewish Ire with Call for Fasting during Passover,” Associated Baptist Press. Online, available at: www.abpnews.com (accessed June 5, 2010). Armor, D. J. and Gilroy, C. L. (2010) “Changing Minority Representation in the US Mili- tary,” Armed Forces & Society, 36: 223–246. Army Regulation 600-43 (2006) Conscientious Objectors. Online, available at: www.fas. org/irp/doddir/dod/i1300_06.pdf (accessed June 5, 2010). Management of religious diversity 215 Army Regulation 670-1 (2005) Wear and Appearance of Army Uniforms and Insignia. Online, available at: www.armyg1.army.mil/hr/uniform/docs/r670_1.pdf (accessed June 10, 2010). Arnett, J. J. and Jensen, L. A. (2002) “A Congregation of One: Individualized Religious Beliefs among Emerging Adults,” Journal of Adolescent Research, 17: 451–467. Associated Press (2008, 15 November) Veteran: Marines’ Policy Barring Certain Bumper Stickers is Off-Base. Online, available at: www.firstamendmentcenter.org/ news/aspx?id=20890. Banerjee, Neela (2006, September 19) “Proposal on Military Chaplains and Prayer Hold Up Bill,” New York Times. Online, available at: www.nytimes.com/2006/09/19/ washington/19chaplains.html. Barnes v. Green (D. AK, May 13, 2008). Benimoff, R. (2009) Faith under Fire: An Army Chaplain’s Memoir, New York: Crown. Berry v. US Air Force (2002) Complaint, U.S. District Court, District of Columbia. Berry v. US Air Force (2003), Civil No. 02-1725 (ESH), US District Court of the District of Columbia. Bess, M. (2006) Choices Under Fire: Moral Dimensions of World War I, New York: Knopf. Brown, K. (2008) “ ‘All They Understand is Force’: Debating Culture in Operation Iraqi Freedom,” American Anthropologist, 110: 443–553. Bush, G. W. (2003) “Address to the Nation of Iraq from the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln May 1, 2003,” Weekly Compilation of Presid ential Documents (May 5) 39: 516–518. Cheyne, J. A. (2010) “The Rise of the Nones and the Growth of Religious Indifference,” Skeptic, 15: 56–60. Cook, H. (2007) “Service Before Self? Evangelicals Flying High at the U.S. Air Force Academy,” Journal of Law and Education, 36: 1–33. Connable, B. (2009) “All Our Eggs in a Broken Basket: How the Human Terrain System Is Undermining Sustainable Military Cultural Competence,” Military Review, 89: 57–64. Cunningham, G. B. (2010) “The Influence of Religious Personal Identity on the Relation- ships among Religious Dissimilarity, Value Dissimilarity, and Job Satisfaction,” Social Justice Research, 23: 60–76. Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI) (2009) Religious Identifica tion and Practices Survey (RIPS) (July). Online, available at: www.deomi.org (accessed May 30, 2010). Department of Defense Inspector General Report No. H06L102270308 (2007, July 20) Alleged Misconduct by DoD Officials Concerning Christian Embassy. Online, avail able at: www.DoDig.osd.mil/fo/Foia/ERR/Xtian_Embassy_072707.pdf (accessed June 20, 2010). Department of Defense Directive 1344.10 (2008) Political Activities by Members of the

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Armed Forces. Online, available at: www.fvap.gov/resources/media/doddirective 134410.pdf (accessed June 10, 2010). Department of Defense Instruction 1300.06 (2007) Conscientious Objectors. Online, available at: www.fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/i1300_06.pdf (accessed June 10, 2010). Department of Defense Instruction 1300.17 (2009) Accommodation of Religious Prac tices within the Military Services. Online, available at: www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/ corres/pdf/130017p.pdf (accessed June 10, 2010). Dougherty, K. D., Johnson, B. R., and Polson, E. C. (2007) “Recovering the Lost: Remeasuring U.S. Religious Affiliation,” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 46: 483–499. 216 C. E. Hunter and L. M. Smith Drescher, K. C., Smith, M. W., and Foy, D. W (2007) “Spirituality and Readjustment Following War-Zone Experiences,” in C. R. Figley and W. P. Nash (eds.), Combat Stress Injury: Theory, Research, and Management, New York: Routledge. Duffy, R. D. (2010) “Spirituality, Religion, and Work Values,” Journal of Psychology and Theology, 38: 52–61. Eberle, C. (2007) “God, War, and Conscience,” Journal of Religious Ethics, 35, 479–507. Eisman, D. (2008) Military Aims to Muzzle Evangelizing at Recruiting Sites. Online, available at: http://hamptonroads.com/2008/12/military-aims-muzzle- evangelizing- recruiting-sites (accessed June 5, 2010). Elder, G. H., Jr., Wang, L., Spence, N. J., Adkins, D. E., and Brown, T. H. (2010) “Path- ways to the All-Volunteer Military,” Social Science Quarterly, 91: 455–475. Fahey, J. J. (2005) War and the Christian Conscience: Where Do You Stand? Maryknoll, NY: Orbis. Glenn, N. D. (1987) “The Trend in ‘No Religion’ Respondents in U.S. National Surveys, Late 1950s to Early 1980s,” The Public Opinion Quarterly, 51: 293–314. Hajjar, R. M. (2010) “A New Angle on the U.S. Military’s Emphasis on Developing Cross-Cultural Competence: Connecting In-Ranks’ Cultural Diversity to Cross- Cultural Competency,” Armed Forces & Society, 36: 247–263. Hanna, J. (2008, 25 September) “Second Soldier Sues Over Religious Freedom Issues,” Associated Press. Hout, M. and Fischer, C. S. (2002) “Why More Americans Have No Religious Prefer ence: Politics and Generations,” American Sociological Review, 67: 165–190. Hunter, C. E. and Smith, L. M. (2010) “Religious Diversity in the U.S. Military: Human Potential in Support of Policy Formation, Cultural Acuity Initiatives and Mission Accomplishment,” Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute Research Publi- cation (March 5). Hunter, C. E. and Smith, L. M. (forthcoming) “Strategies of Power and Patriotism: Public Prayer in the Military Setting,” Political Theology. Jolkovsky, B. L. (1996, October 16) “Military Bans Pulpit Politicking,” Christian Science Monitor. Jonsson, P. (2010, January 22) “Trijicon Sights: How the ‘Jesus Gun’ Misfired,” Chris tian Science Monitor. Online, available at: www.csmonitor.com/USA/Military/ 2010/0122/Trijicon-sights-How-the-Jesus-gun-misfired. Jordan, B. (2008, February 26) “Flag Ritual Returns to Annapolis Chapel,” Military.com. Online, available at: www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319.162582,00.html (accessed June 5, 2010). Jordan, B. (2009, April 15) “Sikhs Want DoD Turban, Hair Bans Lifted,” Military.com. Online, available at: www.military.com/news/article/sikhs- want-DoD- turban-hair- basn-lifted.html?ESRC=eb.nl (accessed June 10, 2010).

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Kosmin, B. A. and Keysar, A. (2008) American Religious Identification Survey. Online, available at: www.americanreligionsurvey-aris.org/reports/ARIS_Report_2008.pdf accessed (June 5, 2010). Kosmin, B. A. and Mayer, E. (2001) American Religious Identification Survey, New York: The Graduate Center of the City University of New York. Lancaster, A. R., Klein, R. M., and Wetzel, E. S. (2004) U.S. Department of Defense Retention Trends, Arlington, VA: Defense Manpower and Data Center. Online, avail able at: www.internationalmta.org/Documents/2004/2004036P.pdf (accessed June 10, 2010). LaPlante, M. D. (2009, January 22) “Religion, Economy Cut into Number of Utah’s Management of religious diversity 217 Army Recruits,” The Salt Lake Tribune. Online, available at: www.sltrib.com/ci_ 11529454. Leopold, J. (2009) “Army Faces Backlash for Scheduling ‘Day of Fast’ on Feast of Pass- over,” The Public Record. Online, available at: http://pubrecord.org/religion/845/army- faces-backlash-for-scheduling- day-of-fast-on-feast-of-passover. Lim, N., Cho, M., and Curry, K. (2008) Planning for Diversity: Options and Recommen dations for DoD Leaders, Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. Lovell, J. P. and Stiehm, J. H. (1989) “Military Service and Political Socialization,” in Political Learning in Adulthood: A Sourcebook of Theory and Research, R. S. Sigel (ed.), Chicago: University of Chicago Press: 172–202. Lucas, G. R. (2008) “The Morality of ‘Military Anthropology,’ ” Journal of Military Ethics, 3: 165–185. McFarland, M. (2005) “Military Cultural Education,” Military Review, 85: 62–69. Marin, P. (1981) “Living in Moral Pain,” Psychology Today (November): 71–80. Mount, M. (2009, May 20) Military Burns Unsolicited Bibles Sent to Afghanistan. Online, available at: www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/05/20/us. military.bibles.burned/ index.html (accessed June 7, 2010). Mouzelis, N. (1971) “On Total Institutions,” Sociology, 5: 113–120. Office of the Under Secretary of Defense, Personnel & Readiness (2010). Population Representation in the Military Services 2008. Online, available at: http://prhome. defense.gov/MPP/ACCESSION%20POLICY/PopRep2008/summary/summary.html (accessed June 12, 2010). Paley, A. R. (2008, 30 May) “Marine in Iraq Suspended Over Coins Quoting Gospel,” Washington Post. Online, available at: www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/art icle/2008/05/29/AR2008052903683.html. Parabo, B. (2010) “How Soldiers, Too, Can Be Saved: Allegiance and Idolatry in the U.S. Military,” Political Theology, 11: 247–270. Pershing, J. L. (2003) “To Snitch or Not to Snitch? Applying the Concept of Neutraliza- tion Techniques to the Enforcement of Occupational Misconduct,” Sociological Per spectives, 46: 149–178. Pew Forum on Religion in Public Life (2008) U.S. Religious Landscape Survey, Wash- ington, DC: Pew Research Center. Online, available at: www.religions.pewforum.org (accessed June 5, 2010). Pollack, L. M., Boyer, C. B., Betsinger, K., and Shafer, M. (2009) “Predictors of One-Year Attrition in Female Marine Corps Recruits,” Military Medicine, 174: 382–391. Prothero, S. (2007) Religious Literacy (What Every American Needs to Know – and Doesn’t), New York: HarperOne. Reger, M. A., Etherage, J. R., Reger, G. M., and Gahm, G. A. (2008) “Civilian Psycholo-

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 gists in an Army Culture: The Ethical Challenges of Cultural Competence,” Military Psychology, 20: 21–35. Rigdon v. Perry, 962 F. Supp. 150, 165 (D.D.C. 1997). Rittgers, D. (2007) “These Dishonored Dead: Veteran Memorials and Religious Prefer ences,” First Amendment Law Review, 5: 400–433. Schroepfer, H. D. (2008) “Pursuing the Enemies of Freedom: Religion in the Persuasive Rhetoric of the Bush Administration,” Political Theology, 9: 27–45. Segal, D. R. and Segal, M. W. (2004) “America’s Military Population,” Population Bul letin 59, Washington, DC: Population Reference Bureau. Online, available at: www. prb.org/Source/ACF1396.pdf (accessed June 10, 2010). 218 C. E. Hunter and L. M. Smith Shane, L. III (2008, November 12) “Military Atheists Want New Rules on Prayer,” Stars and Stripes. Online, available at: www.stripes.com (accessed June 15, 2010). Sharlet, J. (2009, May) “Jesus Killed Mohammed: The Crusade for a Christian Military,” Harper’s Magazine. Online, available at: www.harpers.org/archive/2009/05/0082488 (accessed June 5, 2010). Shay, J. (2002) Odysseus in America, New York: Scribner. Sigel, R. (1989) “Introduction: Persistence and Change,” in Political Learning in Adult hood: A Sourcebook of Theory and Research (vii–xvi), R. S. Sigel (ed.), Chicago: Uni- versity of Chicago Press. Smidt, C. (2005) “Religion and American Attitudes Toward Islam and an Invasion of Iraq,” Sociology of Religion, 66: 243–261. Smith, Tom W. (2002) “Religious Diversity in America: The Emergence of Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, and Others,” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 41: 577–585. Strauss, J. P. and Sawyerr, O. O. (2009) “Religiosity and Attitudes Toward Diversity: A Potential Workplace Conflict?”Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 39: 2626–2650. Stringer, K. (2009) “Educating the Strategic Corporal: A Paradigm Shift,” Military Review, 89: 87–95. Thomas v. Review Board of Indiana Employment Sec., 450 U.S. 707 (1981). US Government Accounting Office (2005) Military Personnel: Reporting Additional Servicemember Demographics Could Enhance Congressional Oversight, GAO-05- 952, Washington, DC. Online, available at: www.gao.gov/new.items/d05952.pdf (accessed June 10, 2010). Verkamp, B. J. (1988) “The Moral Treatment of Warriors in the Early Middle Ages,” Journal of Religious Ethics, 16: 223–249. Weeks, M. and Vincent, M. A. (2007) “Using Religious Affiliation to Spontaneously Cat- egorize Others,” International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 17: 317–331. Wilson, J. and Sherkat, D. E. (1994) “Returning to the Fold,” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 33: 148–161. Wuthnow, R. and Hackett, C. (2003) “The Social Integration of Practitioners of Non- Western Religions in the United States,” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 42: 651–667. Zabala v. Hagee, F. Supp. 2d. (2007), WL 963234 (N.D. Cal. 2007). Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 12 Wounded warriors An inclusive culture for all in the workplace1

Lyndsay S. Baines, Eric A. Elster, Edward M. Falta, and Rahul M. Jindal

An inclusive work culture for wounded warriors ensures that veterans are treated with dignity and respect while recognizing their individual differences. An inclu sive work culture also moves beyond the built environ ment to ensure that wounded warriors have equal opportunities to develop their full potential in the workplace. However, such an environ ment has to be cultivated and shaped, start ing with attitudes of the wider community in which both wounded warriors and potential employers are embedded. A positive attitude that focuses on the valu able contri bution wounded warriors can make facilitates an inclusive culture much more than a focus on their limitations. The development of an inclusive work culture that embraces a diverse gender, ethnic, and skill set workforce has been equated with a company’s enhanced per formance and ability to compete and produce innovative products. For their part, wounded warriors often enter the workforce with a good skill base that can con tribute greatly to a company’s performance and enhance its competit iveness. Furthermore, ongoing employment for wounded warriors facilitates wider com munity engagement, helps expand their social networks, and prevents the social disconnection that has been equated with compromised psychosocial function ing, poor social integration, incarceration, and homelessness. However, traditionally, wounded warriors from previous wars have often been socially and economically excluded from our society generally and from the workplace specifically (Carruthers and Harnett 2008). Wounded warriors from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are no exception. Many have endured multiple surgical and medical interventions, prolonged periods of rehab ilitation, a predisposition to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or traumatic brain Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 injury (TBI) and debilitating psychosocial issues (isolation from family and neighborhood). Psychosocial issues, if left untreated, can present significant obs tacles to an integ rated, quality civilian working life.

The law Conducting employment workshops, training programs, enforcement of federal laws, and visible proactive liaison and supportive services contributes to the engagement of potential employers and maximization of employment 220 L. S. Baines et al. opportunities. The main two laws that protect both wounded warriors and dis abled persons are the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Uniformed Services Employment and Re-employment Rights Act (USERRA).

Americans with Disabilities Act The ADA, a law introduced in 1990 by the American Congress, is a wide- sweeping civil rights law prohibiting discrimination against disabled persons as relates to access to employment, transportation, public accommodation, commu nications, and governmental activities. The ADA has commonality with the Civil Rights Act (1964), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, gender, and religion. A disabled person, as defined by the ADA, must meet the follow ing criteria:

1 Has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities. 2 Has a history of such impairment. 3 Is perceived as, or is regarded as, having such an impairment, even when the impairment does not exist.

To clarify, “major life activ ities” include functions such as daily personal care, performing manual tasks, walking, hearing, seeing, speaking, breathing, learn ing, and walking. A disability, while “substantially limiting” an individual in performing such tasks, is determined on a case-by-case basis. The determination is not made based just on the existence of a specific condition (physical or mental impairment), but the effect of that impairment on the individual. The ADA has gone a long way to ensure the physical accessibility and adap tion of the work environment for both civilian and military disabled personnel. Introduced 20 years ago, it sent a very powerful message to employers that isola tion and exclusion will not be tolerated. The ADA opened up accessibility of transport systems and public areas to people with disabilities, removing previ ously significant obstacles to reaching employment. Wounded warriors have benefited signific antly from this legisla tion. It has helped both warriors and their civilian counterparts get reasonable accommodations in the workplace, such as flexible schedules, accessibility, adaptive environments, and assisted technolo gies. The visibility that the ADA has given the disabled has also helped the Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 public comprehend the difficulties faced in their daily lives. During a routine bus ride, for instance, watching a disabled person in a wheelchair using the door lift helps develop public empathy.

The Uniformed Services Employment and Re-employment Rights Act The USERRA (1994) is a federal law pertaining to individuals who have served or are serving in the armed forces, reserves, National Guard or other uniformed services. The legislation is designed to ensure that military personnel are not Wounded warriors 221 disadvantaged in their civilian careers once they return from duty, and are not discriminated against based on their past, present, or future military service. It was designed to make the federal govern ment a “model” employer.

The wounded warrior The concept of the wounded warrior really came into focus during the Iraq war, when Lieutenant Colonel Tim Maxwell was wounded by shrapnel. Following a period of hospitalization he was sent back to his unit’s barracks at Camp Lejeune for rehabilitation. Left unsupervised to move around empty buildings, he gath ered up other wounded marines and formed a wounded warrior unit (Pashman 2007). The Army and Air Force now have similar units.

Legislation and community involvement The successful implementation of legislation is depend ent upon the individual’s access to commun ity involvement and the cooperation of all of its parts. The better connected (social capital accumulation) a wounded warrior is in the com munity, the greater the potential for both securing employment and becoming integrated into the workplace. Social integration is strongly associated with engagement in community activities. Psychosocial support emulating from family, friends, and organ ized social networks has consistently been shown to be a key determining factor in access to and sustaining inclusion in the workplace (Grieco 1987; Mortensen and Vishwanath 1994). The armed services are themselves communities defined by persistency and dependability . It can be a challenge for military personnel to balance the demands of the military, family life, and wider social structures. The military is an import ant locus of social solidarity, mutual support, and shared expertise. For wounded warriors this sense of belonging is the starting point for new, civilian social networks. These networks will generate a pathway to employment and ultimately an inclusive work culture, through their generation of good will, com panionship, sympathy, social interaction, and communication among family and friendship units (Carruthers and Harnett 2008). When the demands of the military impact upon family life (e.g., deployment, severe injury) the impact upon the latter is often brutal. The family is forced out into the mainstream social structure, the lay community. The frequent reloca Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 tions that are part of military life often cause disruption to engagement in com munity living. This is especially true among wounded warriors who have been injured after some considerable time spent in Iraq and Afghanistan, and it can take some time to put down roots in the new community. An individual as an isolated entity is deprived of the inclusive state that is generated as one neighbor meets another neighbor and the ensuing social capital that may well lead to employment and a better quality of life. Indeed, social iso lation has been equated with unemployment, homelessness, substance abuse, and generally unsatisfact ory living conditions. 222 L. S. Baines et al. An inclusive work environment In these challenging economic times and with increasing domestic and interna tional competi tion, more work organizations are striving to create an inclusive work environment. Inclusivity has been equated with dramatic improvements in productivity, quality, creativity, customer service, job satisfaction, and skill retention. An inclusive work environment is a continuous process which evolves and changes in response to the environ ment and its policies. To be effective it requires quantitative monitoring and measure ment at a senior management level. The achievement of an inclusive work culture requires a sustained effort that must be backed up and reinforced by leaders of the organiza tion (Hammer 2000). Visibility of the disabled among senior executives is important and rein forces a company’s commitment to an inclusive culture. In the first instance, obstacles and barriers to creating such an environment need to be identified and a strategy developed to address them. In order for people from diverse back grounds to feel included as a vital component of the work environ ment, they may require some level of retraining and acquisition of new skills and adjust ments in interpersonal behavior. A clear and sustained connection must be made between a change in skill base and improved business outcomes. Autocratic hierarchies with only top-down communication prevent the culti vation of a broader pool of skills, talents, and perspectives that are necessary prerequis ites for problem solving and organizational success. The Army has formed partnerships of cooperation and coordination with a view to embedding its wounded warriors in the commun ity by engaging employers with their unique skills and qualit ies (Wounded Warriors Project). However, for wounded warri ors, the community outside the Army is often fraught with obstacles and barriers sustained through fear or ignorance. The Army has addressed public perception of wounded warriors by re-framing the environment through training, technical assistance, collaboration, and the development of inclusive practices, team work, and mutual respect. An inclusive work environment may include ensuring that a place of work is accessible to wheelchairs, the provi sion of a sign-language expert, or large-print documents.

Creating a pathway to an inclusive work culture Equal expectations are synonymous with equal and inclusive results. The milit Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 ary, like most work-related organizations, is a good starting point for creating a pathway to employment. Disabilities suffered by wounded warriors have tradi tionally served to isolate them from mainstream society, whether the disabilit ies are defined in terms of physical or psychological limita tions. We have seen earl ier in the chapter how federal and state laws use different definitions to classify disabilities and how the same disability can affect individuals in different ways, so it can be difficult to generalize. The following organizations have done much to assist disabled warriors in re- acclimatizing to civilian life. Wounded warriors 223 1 Pathway to an inclusive work culture at Walter Reed Army Medical Center Social networks and subsequent social support are cultivated early in the rehabil itation process at Walter Reed Army Medical Center (WRAMC) – in many ways a commun ity in itself. “Physical and occupational therapy” is a place of rehab il itation and restoration of physical functioning designed for the wounded warrior to acquire vocational skills necessary for employment and social networking, with an emphasis on maximizing social capital. The built environ ment of the department is conducive to this, as it is designed in an “open-plan” fashion where every patient has their own work space but is accessible to staff, patient instruction, and peer-to-peer support as patients move along the recovery path. The dividing wall adjacent to the passageway is made of glass, opening up patients quite liter ally to the wider WRAMC community. The WRAMC community is in some way a protected community comprised of people sensitive to patients’ unique experiences, difficulties, and needs, thereby maximizing potential for early accumulation of social capital. The rehab ilitation staff invests a consider able amount of time and energy in cultivating opportunities for companionship, understanding, sympathy, and competition through their organization of social and sporting events. Each extra-curricular encounter, although organ ized and purposeful, helps engage warriors in friend ship, sociability, and social support, which will serve them well in the wider community. Family support and presence in the rehabilitation area is encour aged, giving patients an opportun ity to spend meaningful time during the recov ery process with their families. Well bonded and motivated family members can assist with the formation of social connections across wider sections of the popu lation in civilian life. Generally, warriors will fare better in highly structured communities which mirror the military.

2 Pathway to an inclusive work culture in community and business connection forums Organizations such as Enable America (www.enableamerica.org) bring local leaders, lawmakers, employers, and service providers together to share their experiences and help reintegrate wounded warriors into the mainstream com munity. These meetings are important in building a bridge between wounded Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 warriors and the lay community. VetsConnect (www.vetsconnect.org) is dedic ated to assisting wounded warriors to better re-acclimatize to civilian life or active duty by providing rehabilitation programs and engaging local community and civic leaders and legislators into the reintegration of wounded warriors into their commun ity. This helps improve the recovery of wounded warriors by pairing them with similarly disabled peer mentors who have been through the rehabilitation program. Similarly, Team Enable (www.enableamerica.org/ programs-team-enable.html) takes a more indirect approach to team and skill building by organizing training groups and sports activities. Team Enable 224 L. S. Baines et al. provided a team at the St Anthony’s Triathlon. The team included two particip ants who were blind and who ran with the assistance of running partners.

3 Pathway to an inclusive work culture by virtual communities The military has been quick to make use of virtual communities as a means to connect warriors, who are often widely dispersed geographically. Online com munities such as America’s Heroes at Work (www.americasheroesatwork.gov), Wounded Warrior Project (www.woundedwarriorproject.org), and Operation Second Chance (www.operationsecondchance.org) have helped provide a bridge between the military and the lay community. Virtual communities are increas ingly replacing the traditional physical commun ity as a means of promoting social connectedness. The ensuing exchange of experi ences help warriors cope with their challenges and connect with other warriors dispersed around the world. Virtual communities are quite simply a gather ing of people in an online space. The space facilitates communication and connection for business, com munity, and social contacts. In short, virtual communit ies provide an opportun ity to become acquainted with others and build social networks.

Wounded warriors’ potentials in the workplace Military personnel are taught to lead by example and direc tion, delegation, motivation, and inspiration, and are well-schooled in the theory of leadership. They are also experi enced in skills to manage individual behaviors for results. Military training teaches them to work as a team by instilling a sense of respons ibility to one’s colleagues. The sheer size of the military necessitates an under standing of how groups and organizations relate to one another and support the long-term object ives of the government. While military duties stress team work and the productivity of the group, they also produce high-performing individuals. The military is also characterized by its racial, gender, religious, and ethnic diversity. Many military personnel have been stationed and have operated in foreign countries and therefore have good views of the global economy. The military helps its warriors heal from combat wounds, both physical and psychological, in a number of ways. Therapy, medications, and physical massage are all part of the healing process within the Warrior Transition Brigade (WTB). However, the WTB at Fort Hood has cultivated a particularly innovative series Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 of internships for warriors with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). While the IRS is usually equated with being stress inducing, for wounded warriors com pleting internships at the IRS it has been utilized as a means to reduce stress by finding an avenue to learn new skills, find a purpose, and secure employment. The WTB has come to view the IRS as a confidence booster and stress reliever. IRS internships are part of the Vocational Reintegration Program, which matches wounded warriors with federal jobs to help them acquire skills and employment. Wounded warriors 225 Promoting positive community-based attitudes toward wounded warriors through specific outreach activities Societal attitudes toward wounded warriors have varied through the generations. The Vietnam War was politically controversial and morally questionable, and this was reflected in society’s attitude toward the wounded warriors. The pub lic’s attitude toward the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan has changed dramatically since the beginning of these conflicts. While the public was initially supportive, this support has dropped dramatically as the conflicts have dragged on. The United States and its allies may have been able to occupy Iraq and Afghanistan and curtail the activities of the insurgents and anti-US forces, but the inabil ity to establish a system of values, win hearts and minds, and maintain a functioning economy have been largely responsible for the dwindling support. The lack of support for both wars has had an impact on the returning wounded warriors as they transition to the community. The attitude of the community toward wounded warriors has been shaped by notions of femininity, victory or defeat, and whether or not they are perceived as an inconvenience and embar rassment; warriors with physical and mental disability are seen by some as a threat to a stable society (Bradlet et al. 2005; McFall et al. 1991).

Cultivating inclusive opportunities between wounded warriors and their civilian counterparts As we observed earlier in the chapter, assistance to wounded warriors is differ ent from that offered to civilians and is determined by a variety of regulations. This is in no small part because veterans’ groups have been successful in lobby ing for government support. But foremost, such assistance has been seen as a reward for service and personal sacrifice. This is in contrast to their civilian counterparts for whom assistance can be perceived as charity or welfare. These actual and perceived differences can create intra-disabled prejudice, not only in terms of access to affordable housing, health care, and transport, but also access to decent employment. Support for assistance to wounded warriors has also been successful in shaping public policy for non-veterans. Many of the devices and prostheses developed for wounded warriors have historically been made available for civil ian populations. In this way, the evolution of public policy toward the disabled Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 veteran has served as a model for social policy and practice for all disabled men and women. This sharing of medical techno logy creates a good environment to begin the inclusion of wounded warriors into the commun ity and the workplace. Pressure from veterans’ groups has resulted in publications such as Work- place Warrior: The Corporate Response to Deployment and Reintegration in the Workplace (Carruthers and Harnett 2008). The study reinforces best practices and disability management among employers regard ing leave and benefits and, more import antly, promotes the establishment of workplace warrior mentoring programs to link returning warriors with veterans in the workforce. It helps 226 L. S. Baines et al. identify co-workers who exhibit hostility and wounded warriors who show increased irritability and poor time-keeping, all of which might prevent reinte gration into the workplace. The delayed effects of the war experi ence will be evident in the workplace for years to come. To both help and retain disabled warriors in the workplace and to enable employers to benefit from their unique knowledge, skills, and experience will require a long-term response. Employers will need to address work, health, and other long-term effects on the family unit from prolonged deployments in war zones. Mandatory compliance with USERRA necessitates the protection of jobs for employees returning to work after deployment. However, job security is only a component of the overall picture, which also includes the continuation of com pensatory supplements, leave, and access to health care as prerequisites. Employers often underestimate the psychological impact of war upon return ing warriors. The most effective support managers can promote warriors’ reinte gration by assigning meaningful work that can be performed in the context of a team effort, thereby bringing the warriors in contact with other colleagues, and by supervising their work in a facilitating, can-do manner. Regular professional development meetings are vital, as is access to counseling. Employer assistance should ideally involve collaboration across a number of different departments. The Workplace Warrior (Carruthers and Harnett 2008) recommends an effective employee assistance program (EAP) to address health issues such as PTSD, depression, and other personal challenges that can result from lengthy assignments in dangerous war zones and disabling injuries. Inter estingly, the guide also refers to the manner in which lessons learned from returning wounded warriors can be applied to civilian employees returning to work after lengthy illnesses or life-altering events. There are fundamental benefits to the business community in both retaining and employing wounded warriors in the workforce. Wounded warriors bring back to the workplace enhanced skills in leadership developed during difficult war situations. They can also contribute an intelligence perspective and finely tuned social networking skills. Mentoring and group forum programs can be implemented at very little cost by employers, and the rewards in terms of staff retention and their subsequent skills are high. In particular, wounded warriors who have already made the transition can be called on to serve as valuable mentors. Acknowledging the skills and attributes of returning warriors helps Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 non-veteran employees understand the needs of future warriors and how to manage them. A diverse staff enriches a work environment in terms of know ledge, skills, and life experiences. Studies have shown that diverse teams respond to work-based problems with solutions that are more durable and have a greater scope of perspectives and understanding, which better serve clients’ short- and long-term needs. Wounded warriors 227 Sustaining an inclusive working environment experience Wounded warriors are no different from other potential employees in that they need to be able to compete and appeal on an ongoing basis. Achieving this requires a process of education and training. Organizations such as the Wounded Warrior Project and Wounded Warrior Care and Transition Policy (http:// prhome.defense.gov/WWCTP) are two of a number of initiatives designed to help wounded warriors compete for positions in the workplace. The TRACK initiative that comes under the umbrella of the Wounded Warrior Project is a college program that adapts/teaches vocational skills compatible with civilian employment for able-bodied and wounded warriors. Other organiza tions such as Segway (www.segway.com) provide mobility equipment that enables wounded warriors to be more physically mobile in their daily lives, such as being able to move around a college campus. These groups provide laptop computers and fin ancial assistance, coaching in resume and interview skills to ensure post-military success in the workplace, and a career service matching skills to civilian employ ment. Operation Franchise (http://operationfranchise.com), with an emphasis on education, provides internships and matches skills with training positions.

Traumatic brain injury and post-traumatic stress in the work environment Estimates are that 30 percent of all wounded warriors will suffer from either PTSD or TBI, but only half of these individuals will seek help and treatment. The main barriers to treatment for PTSD are related to the stigma attached to such disorders – that they may not be able to deal with the daily stresses of working life, and the fear of being perceived as weak or as a malingerer. An inclusive work environment for patients with PTSD and TBI includes job coach ing, workplace mentoring, training, supervision, workplace supports, and cus tomizing the work environment. Employers need to be educated that such disorders are a complex interaction of psychological, historical, social, and biological factors. More than half of all civilian Americans will experi ence some level of PTSD at some time in their lives and it should not be considered as a character flaw. While all jobs can be stressful from time to time, it is import ant to find a good match between the needs of the employer and the needs of the employee in an environment condu Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 cive to the individual, regardless of whether or not the employee has a mental health issue. Workplace support that assists the employee to balance internal and external stresses and that also monitors the employee’s workload is conducive to improved self-esteem and recovery. America’s Heroes at Work conducts an anti-stigma public education initiative aimed at educating the community about the effects of PTSD and TBI. Warriors with these conditions returning to the workplace can be a challenge, but the rewards for both the employer and employee far outweigh the problems. However, sustaining such individuals in the workplace requires resources and 228 L. S. Baines et al. training tools to ensure that both parties understand the nature of the injuries. Contrary to popular opinion, persons with PTSD and/or TBI do get better, and some recover completely. The key to their success is a recovery process that involves returning to and following a daily routine, and includes the opportun ity to live, learn, work, and particip ate in community living. Such a lifestyle inspires hope, which is integral to the recovery process.

The role of employers is to create an inclusive work environment Employers can play a powerful role in dispelling myths and stigma surrounding PTSD, TBI, and disabled warriors, as well as assist in recovery and rehab ilita tion as follows:

1 Inclusion of an on-the-job supportive infrastructure: Alarm clocks, cogni tive aids, adaptive technology, regular scheduled rest breaks, and adjust ments to the heat and lighting of their work environ ment can help facilitate an accepting, productive, and inclusive work environment. 2 People-first language: This moves beyond labeling the individual as a dia gnosis. The military has become adept at hosting workshops and training sessions to educate employers and co-workers on the facts about PTSD and TBI. 3 Physical environment: Built environment entrances, passageways, doors, rooms, bathrooms, and kitchens – indeed, all aspects of the built environ ment – should meet current accessibility standards. Accessibility needs to be a primary factor when deciding the location of meeting spaces and place ment sites. 4 Accommodation requests: Requests for specific accommodations in an inclusive work environ ment will include ensuring access and physical and cognitive independ ence in an opportunistic and dignified fashion. 5 Recruitment: This involves refraining from illegal interview questions or the breaching of confidentiality. An inclusive work environment embraces all people regardless of their disability and recognizes their skills, strengths, and abilit ies. It is respectful, supportive, and – most of all –equalizing.

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Moving beyond an inclusive working environment The skills of wounded warriors are an underutilized pool of talent in the current skills-short market. Wounded warriors are characterized by their people skills, reliability, and good work ethic. As a minority they are willing to go the extra mile. Research supports this position and more, suggesting that 85 percent of employers who have hired disabled people are predisposed to hiring disabled people again. Despite positive work records, they remain under-represented in the workforce. Records also show that disabled employees are absent from work 85 percent less than their able-bodied counterparts, that they are cheaper to Wounded warriors 229 maintain in employment (recruitment, insurance, and safety costs), and that adaptations for them in the work environment are cost neutral and generally enrich the work environment. Employing wounded warriors also makes good business sense as it has been shown to strengthen workplace morale and produc tivity, is demonstrative of being a good citizen, and shows the company to be complying with legislation. To be competit ive and effective, the work environment needs to be an inclu sive cultural entity. Employers need to ensure that they recruit the best persons for the job and then retain and develop them. If wounded warriors are excluded from the job market for reasons that do not relate to their ability to do the job, the workplace is being deprived of a resource of skills, talent, and energy. Learn ing to respond creatively to life’s challenges means that these warriors develop good problem-solving skills and are open to flexible and innovative ways of approaching issues, in addition to maintaining determination and focus. Wounded warriors and disabled people as a group represent a market share in the community. To attract wounded warriors and disabled customers/clients, businesses would do well to have a visible presence of this group. Home Depot and Walmart stores have actively recruited disabled and more mature staff to their stores and have successfully attracted this market, enhanced their brand, and improved their image as a company. Good customer service requires busi nesses to think creatively about the needs of their customers. Those with a direct experience of living with a disability or deployment to hostile environments provide an invaluable perspect ive. This concept has worked most effectively by employing these individuals as frontline service staff, signaling to clients that disabled people are welcome and that their needs will be met. Both Walmart and Home Depot have incorpor ated disability issues into their induction programs. The successful creation of an inclusive workplace culture can be difficult to evaluate as it is not easily quantified. Moreover, just because an establishment has reached a certain percentage of wounded warrior employees, it may not necessarily be inclusive within the context of issues discussed herein.

Conclusion A country’s domestic and global economic competit iveness depends on the inclusion of diverse perspectives, life experiences, and skills of its workers. Ini tiatives that have been successful in integrating returned wounded warriors into Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 the workplace include mentoring, counseling, monitoring the recruitment and retention of employees, the need for a work–life balance, and formal social net working. Formal social networking that focuses on career development, mentor ing, webcasts, network meetings, community involvement, and the development of leadership skills increases opportunities for all employees, not just wounded warriors. Other options for creating an empowering workplace for wounded war riors include person-centered planning, support such as assistive techno logy, instructional strategies and personal assistants. Exploring alternative work arrangements such as telecommuting has also been useful. An inclusive work 230 L. S. Baines et al. environment is reflected in the retention of employees and requires both employ ers and employees to be organized, thoughtful and flexible, and provide/perform purposeful work. The military has been creative in terms of generating both physical and virtual communities to assist with placement and reten tion of jobs. Both employers and employees benefit from diversity in the workplace and the stimulation and inter ests that a range of approaches brings to a company. This, in addition to the sense of fairness and justice that comes from seeing good employment practices in action, improves workplace morale and productivity. Good employment practice concerning disabled persons is both ethical and good business. It serves to signal the company is fair, just, and committed to inclusion. In addition, addressing disability issues gives organizations an oppor tunity to brand themselves as good corporate citizens.

Note 1 The opinions expressed in this chapter are solely those of the authors and do not repre sent an endorsement by the Department of Defense.

References Bradley, Wain H., Nam, T., Waldrep, D., and Cozza, S. (2005) “Psychiatric Interventions with Returning Soldiers at Walter Reed,” Psychiatric Quarterly, 76 (4): 351. Carruthers, M., and Harnett, C. A. (2008) The Workplace Warrior: The Corporate Response to Deployment and Reintegration. Disability Management Employers Coali tion. Online, available at: www.dmec.org (accessed September 9, 2010). Grieco, M. (1987) Keeping it in the Family: Social Networks and Employee Chance, London: Tavistock Publications. Hammer, K. (2000) Workplace Warrior: Insights and Advice for Winning on the Corpor- ate Battlefield, New York: AMACOM. McFall, M. E., Mackay, P. W., and Donovan, D. M. (1991) “Combat Related PTSD and Psychosocial Adjustment Problems among Substance Abusing Veterans,” Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 179 (1): 33. Mortensen, D. T. and Vishwanath, T. (1994) “Personal Contacts and Earnings: It Is Who You Know,” Labor Economics, 1 (2): 187. Pashman, D. (2007, November 26) “Wounded Warrior Barracks Founder Lt. Col. Tim Maxwell on the BPP.” Online, available at: www.npr.org/blogs/bryantpark/2007/11/

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 wounded_warrior_barracks_found_1.html (accessed September 9, 2010). Wounded Warriors Project. Online, available at: www.woundedwarriorsproject.org (accessed September 9, 2010). 13 LGB and possible challenges that will happen now that “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” has been repealed

J. Goosby Smith, Katherine A. Miller, and Mandy McBain

Other world military forces lifted their bans on openly gay service members in the early 1990s, around the time that then-US President William J. Clinton signed a policy named “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, Don’t Pursue.” The policy was a “satisficing” effort to alleviate conflict between two constituencies – those who wanted to retain the “gay ban” and those who wanted to remove it. The law later came to be known simply as “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell,” or DADT. However well- intentioned the policy’s genesis may have been, DADT suffered the fate of many resolutions reached through “satisficing” – holding in the short-term but suc- cumbing when the original (unresolved) conflict inevit ably re-erupts. Not only was neither constituency satisfied, DADT did not protect effectively lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) service members. Since 1994 at least 10,000 LGB service members have been discharged as a result of the policy (Palm Center 2006, p. 4). As a point of reference, approximately 66,000 homosexuals are estimated to be currently serving in the military today (Gates 2010). Between 1998 and 1999, five years after theicy pol took effect, the volume of incidents of harassment increased 142 percent (Culley 2000). In 1994 there were 617 DADT-related discharges, steadily increasing to a high of 1,273 discharges in 2001 (American Progress 2009). However, as US military engagement abroad increased (specifically, “post-9/11”), the rate of homosexuality- based discharges decreased by roughly 50 percent, a trend which some find problematic:

“It is hypocritical that the Pentagon seems to retain gay and lesbian service members when they need them most, and fires them when it believes they Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 are expendable,” said Steve E. Ralls, a spokesman for the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, a nonprofit that opposes the policy. (Tyson 2007)

Also, there are noteworthy gender-related patterns among those discharged. According to a recent report by the Palm Center for public policy research, based out of the University of California Santa Barbara, there are some disturbing trends indicating that women fare worse than men with respect to DADT discharges: 232 J. G. Smith et al. Although women comprise only 14% of the Army, lesbians received 48% of the Army’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” discharges in FY 2009. In the Marines, women comprise just 6% of the force, but received 23% of discharges under the policy. The numbers represent a dramatic shift from last year, when women received 36% of Army discharges and 18% of Marine Corps discharges. In the Air Force, women comprise 20% of the service but received 51% of “don’t ask, don’t tell” discharges in FY 2009. Women comprise 14% of the Navy but received 27% of the discharges last year (Palm Center 2010)

DADT has also been costly. Research from the US Government Accountabil ity Office (GAO) estimates that it cost over $190 million to discharge and replace service members fired for homosexuality during the first ten years of the DADT policy’s existence (Palm Center 2006). A subsequent Blue Ribbon Com- mission found errors in the GAO methodology, corrected those errors, and estimated that in its first ten years, the DADTicy pol cost $363.8 million to implement (Palm Center 2010, p. 2). Consider the accounts below of two service members from different coun tries’ military forces. Each independ ently articulates her ideas about being directly affected by the DADT policy.

I have lied to my classmates and compromised my integrity and my identity by adhering to existing military policy. . . . West Point’s [honor code says] . . . “a cadet will not lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do . . .” – Cadet Katherine Miller, US Military Academy at West Point. (Oatman 2010)

I had to wrestle with my own conscience, knowing that I had lied to close friends; bosses I respected and worrying just how my deceit would be accepted. It sometimes felt like a risk that I was not willing to take. – Lieu- tenant Commander Mandy McBain, Royal Navy. (McBain 2009)

The above service members’ excerpts elucidate the moral dilemma that many LGB service members face as a result of the DADT policy. Many, like their heterosexual counterparts, volunteered for military service because they wanted to serve Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 their countries by protecting the freedom, safety, and rights of their countrymen.

The perils of passing It should come as no surprise that any policy that requires one to lie (either overtly or by omission) about one’s identity would cause a high level of intrapersonal conflict. The research on “passing” in the social-psychological literat ure bears this out. In her recollection of often being mistaken as “white,” mixed-race black scholar Adrian Piper poignantly remarks that LGB and possible challenges after DADT repeal 233 There was the groundless shame of the inadvertent imposter, exposed to public ridicule or accusation. For this kind of shame, you don’t actually need to have done anything wrong. All you need to do is care about others’ image of you, and fail in your actions to reinforce their positive image of themselves. Their ridicule and accusations then function to both disown and degrade you from their status, to mark you as having not done wrong but being wrong. This turns you into something bogus relat ive to their criterion of worth, and false relat ive to their criterion of authenticity. (Piper 1992, p. 6)

“Passing” is defined as “a deception that enables a person to adopt certain roles or identities from which he would be barred by prevailing social standards in the absence of his misleading conduct” (Kennedy 2001, p. 1145) All of the excerpts above make it clear that passing presents a dilemma for individuals – regard less of which aspect of one’s identity is the issue. One psychological consequence of passing is feeling like an imposter, as if one truly doesn’t belong – and living in fear of being found out or “outed.” Nonetheless, people choose to pass, often because they simply want to be treated like everyone else – like those in the dominant group. As McBain stated above, “outing” herself sounded like a risk she was not willing to take – and this was after the ban on gays in the military was repealed in the UK’s Royal Navy. Individuals are often scared to let others know of their true identities because they fear retribution or isolation. Piper chose not to pass for white, but let others know her black ances try and identity. Of this decision, she recalled that her “choice not to pass for white in order to gain entry to the academy originally made out of naïveté, had resulted in more punishment than [she] would have imagined possible” (Piper 1992, p. 10). While we often assume that the punishment comes only from dominant group members, in reality the punishment comes from both sides: dominant group members and the passing individual’s fellow minority group members. Dominant group members often are resentful of the individual who is passing when they discover the person’s true identity. They often feel deceived, that the passer has been “underhanded or manipulative, trying to hide something, pretending to be something that [she’s] not by not telling them” (Piper 1992, p. 23). It must be emphasized that the above speaker did not lie about being white; Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 she simply implemented a “DADT” behavioral stance. If her white colleagues didn’t ask her about her race, she didn’t tell. From this incident, we can see that members of the dominant group do not always appreciate one’s efforts to pass and fit in. They do not take well to the deception. Neither do many members of the passer’s own minority group. Many blacks require fair-skinned blacks to “prove their blackness by passing the suffering test. They recount at length their recent experiences of racism and then wait expectantly, skeptically, for [the passer to match theirs with hers.]” (Piper 1992, p. 14). And the treatment by blacks of others who pass is often full of disdain, 234 J. G. Smith et al. though “in the African American commun ity we do not ‘out’ people who are passing as white” (Piper 1992, p. 14). The first author (a black heterosexual female) naïvely assumed that the code of protection described by Piper above (i.e., blacks not outing other blacks who are “passing”) was also honored by members of the LGB community. However, she was surprised when, after cursory conversation, a white gay male colleague of hers (whose name she didn’t know) said that he saw a student of hers and that the student had “outed” the author. Caught off guard, the author said, “Outed me? . . . Hmmm . . . I’ve never had that experience [of being a lesbian].” As he turned to head to his office on the other side of campus, he said, “Oh. I thought you were gay.” This incident disturbed the author. Her discomfort wasn’t because the colleague thought she was a lesbian. She was disturbed because if she had been a lesbian – and he, an out member of the LGB campus community didn’t know that already – he should have surmised that the author was “closeted,” at least on campus. So, the author pondered her colleague’s motives. Was he trying to out her? Was he trying to be supportive? Was he making idle conversation? While the author will never know, she did glimpse an inkling of the level of intrapersonal angst and interpersonal strategy that must be managed by LGB individuals in a DADT environment. In sum, this incident reminded the first author that, as humans, we are simply not wired to work amidst perceived deception, inauthenticity, or ambiguity – even if laws and policies dictate us to do so. Our natural human response is to ask questions to gain clarity about identity group memberships.

Criticisms of DADT repeal Critics of repealing DADT cite operational effectiveness and unit cohesion as the bases for their opinions (Goldich and Webb 2010; Brown and Ayers 2004). Many fear that “openly gay and lesbian people . . . will make other soldiers uncomfortable [and that] . . . this discomfort will cause a breakdown in morale and discipline, destroying the ‘unit cohesion’ that is essential for effective sol- diering” (Brown and Ayers 2004, p. 151). However, research and personal accounts show that the fallout of serving in a DADT environ ment includes: forced imposter status, fearing punishment from one’s peers for being the wrong thing (versus doing the wrong thing), exclusion from one’s straight (and even Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 LGB) colleagues, and feelings of having to remain ever-vigilant from internal enemies. Clearly, being forced to spend so much time, energy, and resources on one’s psychic, emotional, and sometimes physical survival can only detract from the capacity of operational effectiveness of the team. How is team cohesion even possible in an environment which condones and induces such intrapersonal, interpersonal, intragroup, and intergroup deception and angst? We do not find the DADT policy to be in the best interest of the military because it clearly detracts from the operational effectiveness and mission readiness that it, ironically, sought to protect. We believe that all service members, LGB and possible challenges after DADT repeal 235 assuming proper conduct and competence, should be allowed to serve their respective countries regardless of gender, race, religion, or sexual orientation. Next, this chapter summarizes issues that arose when other countries repealed their respective “gay bans.” The chapter concludes after presenting 11 recom mendations for maximizing chances of a smooth transition to a post-DADT military world.

Other countries’ experiences in lifting “gay bans” North Korea, Iran, Pakistan, Syria, and the United States1 are among the world military powers that still enforce a ban on gays in the military (World/Global News Blog 2010). However, according to a 2010 research report by the Palm Center, our strongest allies – Canada, the United Kingdom, and Israel – and 22 other nations lifted their previous bans on allowing homosexuals to openly serve (Frank et al. 2010). In fact, we have served effectively in theater with our allied nations who allow open service and no documented problems emerged during these joint efforts. Other nations who effectively lifted the ban include Germany, France, South Africa, and Australia. Although these countries lifted the bans in different con texts, each nation experienced a smoother than expected transition. In fact, in Britain and Canada, roughly two-thirds of military respondents in polls said they would refuse to serve with open gays, but when inclusive policies were implemented, no more than three people in each country actually resigned (Frank et al. 2010, p. 2). So, fears of mass-resignations of heterosexual service members in the United States after DADT is repealed are greatly exaggerated. However, before discussing the lessons learned from these military transitions, we will address criticisms of using other nations’ experi ences and decisions as lessons.

Criticisms of learning from other nations’ experiences Some influential military personnel and scholars discourage the study of foreign military forces as grounds for US military policy or behavior. Charles Moskos, widely cited as the author of the DADT policy, warned that “no neat and tidy lessons can be drawn from one country to another” (Frank et al. 2010, p. 105). Critics such as Moskos often argue that the world’s other military forces are smaller and less powerful than that of the United States, and thus not worthy of Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 emulation. As an example, in 1993 while testifying before the Senate, Lieutenant General Calvin Waller of the US Army and a high-ranking military official in the Persian Gulf War said that

when we allow comparisons of smaller countries to this great nation of ours, the comparison between these countries with their policies regarding known homosexuals serving in their country, it is my belief that we do a grave disservice to our fellow American citizens (Frank et al. 2010, p. 105; US Senate 1994) 236 J. G. Smith et al. While it is unclear how American citizens are harmed by gay service members, one thing is clear; Waller believes we cannot learn from smaller countries. Another argument is that the United States has a special and unique context that is simply not shared by other nations’ military forces. A third argument is that the United States leads policy changes; it doesn’t set or change its policies simply because other nations do. According to the Palm Center report,

John Allen Williams, President of the Inter-University Seminar, commented during a 2005 discussion of [DADT] that the “American military tends not to want to learn from other militaries on any subject. It’s just a fact. We see ourselves as sui generis.” (Frank et al. 2010, p. 106; Callaway 2005).

In other words, no smaller nations could possibly share our unique requirements and demands. But, in a post “9/11” world, the United States cannot afford to rely solely on the status quo with respect to policies or practices. Some oppose the repeal of DADT because we are in the midst of two wars. On February 2, 2010 Repub lican John McCain (AZ) is on record as saying that:

This would be a substantial and controversial change to a policy that has been successful for two decades. It would also present yet another challenge to our military at a time of already tremend ous stress and strain. Our men and women in uniform are fighting two wars, guarding the frontlines against a global terrorist enemy, serving and sacrificing on battlefields far from home, and working to rebuild and reform the force after more than eight years of conflict. At this moment of immense hardship for our armed ser vices, we should not be seeking to overturn the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. (MSNBC 2010)

Interestingly, McCain’s argument hails from the unsubstantiated assumption that the repeal of DADT will cause “tremendous stress and strain” – which we have shown in this chapter to be the opposite case. The existence of DADT causes undue stress to troops. He also cites the fact that the United States is working to “rebuild and reform the force” at this time. Aren’t times of hardship and man- Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 power shortage the very times when we need to ensure that we are recruiting and retaining the best military service members possible – regardless of sexual orientation?

The US military must learn from other countries We argue that it is because the United States is waging two wars that it must utilize all learning opportunities – even those from other nations, especially if the knowledge gained will help it to recruit, retain, train, and deploy exceptionally LGB and possible challenges after DADT repeal 237 competent military personnel. Because bureaucracies are designed to promote stability and not change, “military organizations must be goaded into innovating” (Grissom 2006). In fact, Barry Posen says that even the most high-performing armed forces sometimes need a “ ‘kick in the pants’ from external authority if they are to innovate” (Posen 1984). At a time when the United States is engaged in two wars, key specialized personnel like Arabic and Farsi linguists are being involuntarily separated from the military as a direct result of DADT (MSNBC 2005). It is time to innovate so the US military can maintain key personnel whose contributions are vital to preserving and further improving the mission readiness and operational effectiveness that are so import ant to US military success. We argue that it is because the United States is waging two wars that it cannot afford to lose competent personnel in elite specialist jobs simply because of their sexual orientation. Defeating terrorist forces demands the best talents and skills of everyone. We believe that certain lessons learned from foreign militaries’ experience 17 years after they dropped their bans on gays in the military are quite valuable as the United States contemplates the post-DADT military envir onment. The 11 recommendations offered below emerge from the experiences of these nations and from the collective bodies of knowledge in the well-established fields of leadership and organiza tional change agency.

Recommendations The repeal of DADT in the United States will occur once the presid ent, the sec retary of defense, and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff certify that the repeal of DADT will not influence readiness. Subsequently, we respectfully offer the following 11 recommendations for consideration by military and govern mental policymakers, once DADT is repealed.

Recommendation 1: replace all homophobic UCMJ codes with ones that do not disparately impact LGB service members Though public opinion has weighed heavily into the DADT debate, military ser vice members are not governed by civilian EEO laws, but rather, by military equal opportunity (EO) and Universal Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) laws ( UMCJ 2010). For example, as of the writing of this chapter, UCMJ sub-chapter X, Chapter 925, Article 125 defines “sodomy” as: “Any person subject to this Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy. Penetration, how ever slight, is sufficient to complete the offense” (UCMJ 2010) In their “point-counterpoint” article entitled “Taking Sides” (Goldich and Webb 2010) Webb, in his section, suggests that the law unfairly discriminates against gay men because “The Manual for Courts-Martial defines sodomy as anything other than penile vaginal sex . . . [which means that] virtually all heterosexuals are guilty of some form of sodomy at one time or another [yet they go unpunished under this law].” 238 J. G. Smith et al. Goldich and Webb allege that a discrepancy exists enforcing this law. If these authors are correct, such alleged discrepancies will have grave consequences for LGB military personnel. This is because sodomy is equated to murder based upon Chapter 918, Article 118 of the UCMJ, which states:

918. ART. 118. MURDER Any person subject to this chapter whom without justification or excuse, unlawfully kills a human being, when he: 1 has a premeditated design to kill; 2 intends to kill or inflict great bodily harm; 3 is engaged in an act which is inherently dangerous to others and evinces a wanton disregard of human life; or 4 is engaged in the perpetration or attempted perpetration of burglary, sodomy, rape, robbery, or aggravated arson. (DoD UCMJ 2010)

Therefore, we recommend that the UCMJ elimin ate sodomy laws, which would require the removal of clauses including, but not limited to, Chapter 925, Article 125 and the sodomy clause in Chapter 918, Article 118, Part IV.

Recommendation 2: in all relevant policies, explicitly prohibit discrimination and harassment based upon sexual orientation All formal communication and formal statements of EO policy given to pro spective, current, and recently discharged service members should explicitly pro hibit discrimination against others based upon sexual orientation. Such changes in documentation should be made immediately follow ing repeal to send a unilat- eral and clear message that LGB individuals are to be treated with the respect deserved by all soldiers in good standing. While informal communication is, of course, a valuable leadership communication tool, it is the formal statements that carry the most weight in large bureaucracies such as military organizations. Once all DoD organizations have changed their formal statements and policies to reflect this new behavi oral standard, a review should be done to integrate this new policy into all training and development exercises: From Army Basic Train- ing to command officers’ training, such as the US Army’s Intermediate-Level Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Education (ILE) program.

Recommendation 3: firm and explicit leadership support The success of organizational change initiatives hinges on clear support from the most senior leaders in the organization. John de Chastelain, former Chief of the Canadian Defense Staff, said that “It does take a commitment from the top” (Frank et al. 2010, p. 32). Not only is this true in military contexts, but organiza tional contexts in general. Without top leadership support, employees often lack LGB and possible challenges after DADT repeal 239 motivation to work through the tough initial parts of large or radical organiza tional change efforts. The support that a leader gives an initiative is often as subtle as what questions the leader asks: Whether the question anticipates prob lems or whether it is more focused on what’s working (Sekerka et al. 2009).

Recommendation 4: de-normalize discriminatory behavior In an exploration of attitudes of West Point cadets, Miller (2010) found that freshmen cadets were less likely to find homosexuality immoral and more likely to express personal comfort with homosexuals. In contrast, Miller found that senior cadets were far more likely to believe that homosexuality is immoral and less than one-third of them still expressed personal comfort with homosexuals. If this is the case, we recom mend further improving existing leadership education and development programs by adding a module that specifically addresses the behaviors needed to create an “inclusive command” (Brown and Ayers 2004). Such a module would prepare leaders to explicitly eliminate homophobic behavior and hold them accountable for enforcing a non-discriminatory command climate that disallows discriminatory action toward anyone.

Recommendation 5: articulate and implement the policy change immediately Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said that the Pentagon would require “at least a year” to implement repeal once the decision was made to lift the ban, and that the military would spend months studying repeal and consulting the troops (Frank et al. 2010, p. 30; Gearan 2010; Miles 2010). However, “research concludes unequivocally that such policy changes are most successful when implemented quickly” (Frank et al. 2010, pp. 30–31). Along these lines, in most of the 25 countries that allow openly gay and lesbian individuals to serve, the law change was immediately implemented. “Fast and pervasive change will signal commitment to the [new] policy” while incremental change can send the message that the repeal of the ban is “experimental” (RAND Corporation 1993), which will weaken chances of a successful organizational change effort. Swift and decisive action by military leaders, demonstrating their support of the repeal and their confidence in the success of the repeal, will send a clear affirming message to service members that the ban is over – and that everyone will be Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 okay in a post-DADT world.

Recommendation 6: focus on military readiness . . . not morality Many approach the issue of allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military through the same lens they use to establish their opinions on the exist ence of homosexuality itself: the lens of moral judgment. In fact, some cannot critically analyze these topics enough to realize that they are two distinct issues. In a study of West Point cadets, Miller found that “cadet dissent is rooted in 240 J. G. Smith et al. moral objections, not the belief that homosexuals have detrimental effects on unit cohesion or military readiness” (Miller 2010, p. 29). However, experienced organiza tional change agents know that attitudes cannot be legislated – only workplace-relevant behaviors. Civilian Equal Employment Opportunity laws bear this out in that prejudicial attitudes are not illegal; however, acting upon them and engaging in discrimination against protected classes is illegal. Therefore, we recommend keeping the focus on organ izational effectiveness and mission-readiness in the military context. Many of the sexually explicit and unprofessional conduct that proponents of the DADT policy cite are already governed by the military’s existing laws banning sexual harassment. As such, we recommend that all branches of the armed services make one behavi oral “gold standard” for all service members and enforce it equally and aggressively, regardless of the direc tion harassment takes (i.e., male → female, male → male, female → male, or female → female).

Recommendation 7: bolster existing EO education to address the homosexual experience Leaders and others who support openly gay and lesbian service members must be careful not to implement a “must ask, must tell” norm. Well-meaning heterosexual (and even homosexual) service members may “out” another service member – intentionally or unintentionally – with the best of intent. Supplement- ing existing EO training programs to educate all service members about the homosexual experience and about proper behavioral standards can increase the empathy and cognitive understanding necessary in such an environment. This is a similar approach to that used in EO training with respect to promoting cross- racial, cross-cultural, and cross-gender communication in service of operational excellence.

Recommendation 8: do personal training on what is acceptable behavior Telling a person not to focus upon an object effectively centralizes the object in the individual’s thoughts (Meyer 1996). Try it: do not think about Washington, DC. If you’re like most of us, you conjured up images of the beltway, the White House, the Lincoln Memorial, etc. Positive psychology advises that the most Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 effective change initiatives focus on what the organization needs to do in order to thrive (University of Pennsylvania Positive Psychology Center 2007) – not what it’s trying to avoid. Similarly, we recommend that post-DADT educational efforts which prepare military personnel focus upon the desired outcome: A superior military force that values all of its service members and allows each one to bring his or her best to theater in service of protecting their country. Furthermore, we recommend that the acceptable behavi oral standards be operationalized and clearly stated, easily grasped, and easily implemented. For example, we recommend that customized, factually based case studies and LGB and possible challenges after DADT repeal 241 first-hand accounts be used as pedagogical tools to identify what to do – rather than what not to do.

Recommendation 9: utilize affinity groups as a management tool An affinity group refers to a group of people having a common interest or goal (Merriam Webster 2010). Organizations often use them to better understand the concerns and views of different groups of employees. We recommend utilizing affinity groups to gain insight into LGB issues. Such a group can serve as a tool for military leaders and those charged with creating a more inclusive culture for all service members, regard less of sexual orientation or other identity group differences. The following case study details an LGB forum, which emerged from a confidential database initiated by one of the authors of this chapter. Below, Lieuten- ant Commander Mandy McBain of the United Kingdom relays her first-hand experience with setting up both the database and the Royal Navy’s LGB Forum, of which she is presently chair:

With such a dispersed workforce and no real knowledge of the number of gay personnel in the Navy, I decided that there would be benefit from starting a confidential database or network of some description. But with such a scattered workforce, I understood it would have to be a “virtual” network as the numbers might eventually be high and with operational constraints the likelihood of people meeting up was slim. The form of communication needed to be easily accessible, such as by email as a starting point. The rules had changed and although there were numerous avenues of support and advice offered in many welfare areas, there was not one from which people, especially those in the LGB commun ity, could be confident to approach and receive confidential and impartial advice on matters unique to homosexuals serving in the Royal Navy. In setting up a confidential database and in order to make it a success, I knew it needed to be sold as a management tool, especially if it was to be endorsed by the organization. The missing link was not only in support to the LGB commun ity, but also to line managers, most of whom had been in the Royal Navy prior to the law changing. In August 2008, the first Royal Naval Service Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 and Transgender (LGB) confidential community database was created. This would ensure those in the commun ity, could feel included, informed, and if they wanted to, become more involved as mentors, role models and representatives. The confidential database was immediately keeping the small, but growing community informed about policy, legislation changes and conferences in an inclusive but more informal way. The support and contact offered needed to be ongoing as Royal Naval personnel change jobs approximately every 2 to 3 years. This often means moving on from friends, a ship or a shore establishment, a comfort zone and 242 J. G. Smith et al. in many cases starting the whole coming out process all over again in a new unit. By allowing people on the network to know they were not alone, even if they did not need the immediate support of others, being part of a group would hopefully allow them to feel more confident and supported. I understood from my own experiences that the removal of any type of isolation, whether self imposed or otherwise, brings benefits. By being open and accepted, individuals do not waste time and energy not being themselves, they develop into stronger, more confident and productive members of their ship, shore establishment or unit and the Royal Navy. Following the success of the confidential database, in October 2008, the Naval Service LGB Forum was launched. This comprises 10 people who are a cross section of Royal Navy and Royal Marine personnel. It is an executive forum that meets approximately four times a year and aspires to represent the Naval Service LGB Community. It also acts as an avenue through which Divisional Officers, Line Managers and Equality and Diversity Advisers can seek advice. The Forum has also been a vital channel for the Royal Navy Command Equality & Diversity Policy team to use when seeking views and representation. As a result of the Forum being active and visible to management, Forum Members were asked to meet with the Equal- ity and Human Right Commission (EHRC)2 to offer input for their research. The Forum has also given advice to Senior Officers in prepara tion for pre sentations and briefings at both Service and civilian seminars and meetings in the UK and abroad. Other associates on the wider database have carried out interviews and articles in the press, which shows the Royal Navy as an inclusive employer that now accepts homosexuals, something which a lot of people still do not realize [is possible]. Since the change in the rules, the Royal Navy has become a member of Stonewall3 and a member of the Stonewall Diversity Champions programme4 that benchmarks an organization’s good LGB practice in the workplace. With some of the more Junior Ranks taking on the responsibility of being a Forum member, they find themselves elevated to a position of responsibility that they may not have otherwise reached. Some are mentors and are used when it is more appropriate that they engage with a similar rank, specialization or simply because they are in the same geo- graphical region. However, the work undertaken by the Forum members is voluntary and Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 additional to their primary roles; therefore the level of support offered cannot always be guaranteed. In the creation of a confidential database and the Forum there was a fine balance to be made between emancipation and integration of the LGB community and the possibility of alienating them from the rest of the military as they could be seen to be getting preferential treatment. (McBain 2009)

Lieutenant Commander McBain’s account offers several learning points. First, because members on the forum are voluntary, in addition to their primary LGB and possible challenges after DADT repeal 243 combat-related or combat-supporting roles, the level of support varies. We therefore recom mend institutionalizing a similar (but assigned) diverse forum whose charge it is to centralize the successful implementation of DADT repeal and to support and assess the strategic and tactical efforts of the military branches in their efforts to create more inclusive support and combat environ ments. We also recommend that the military support an anonymous support network, a virtual affinity group of sorts, for lesbian and gay military men and women. This will enable them to provide much-needed support for each other in service of opera tional excellence. Such a network can also be used as an organizational research tool for getting the opinions of a diverse group of LGB service members on key issues. It is worth noting that as the ban was lifted in the United Kingdom and as the LGB Forum gained traction, the Royal Navy received endorsements touting it as an inclusive place to work. Such endorsements not only send positive messages to prospective LGB recruits, they send positive messages to all prospective recruits who value fairness, integrity, and equality. After all, an inclusive workplace is inclusive for everyone.

Recommendation 10: create fully integrated “inclusive commands,” not segregated ones Surprisingly, some think it’s okay to consider segregating troops by sexual orientation. A July 12, 2010 article on CBS News Online, quotes Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell as saying that

We think it would be irresponsible to conduct a survey that didn’t try to address these types of things. Because when DADT is repealed, we will have to determine if there are any challenges in those particular areas, any adjustments that need to be made in terms of how we educate the force to handle those situations, or perhaps even facility adjustments that need to be made to deal with those scenarios. (Condon 2010)

We cannot overstate our disagreement with any attempts at segregation, beyond those which already exist by gender. This would be merely a regression to how American blacks were introduced into the military – a throwback to the Jim Crow era. We now, however, have the benefit of hindsight. History shows that Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 while many units performed admirably under segregated conditions (e.g., Tuske- gee Airmen, Buffalo Soldiers, etc.), integration, not segregation, is the best route to operational excellence and unit cohesion. An interesting idea, pre-DADT repeal, is to create “inclusive commands” in the US military, which consist of gay and non-gay soldiers who volunteer for such commands (Brown and Ayers 2004, p. 151). While we don’t recommend creating segregated commands (even voluntarily segregated ones), some of Gates’ and Ayres’ ideas of a more tentat ive and voluntary “inclusive command” may prove useful for all commands. 244 J. G. Smith et al. Our recommendation is to not inquire about the attitudes or sexual orientations of troops, but rather, using some of Gates’ and Ayres’ ideas, to normalize inclusion in fully integrated commands. We take this stance, because gay and lesbian troops are already integrated into commands: sharing the same barracks, shower facilities, and living in close quarters. Estimates of the number of LGB service members range from 13,000 active duty and 58,000 in the various reserve and guard forces (Gates 2010) to 66,000 total LGB personnel (Williams Institute Report 2010) already serving and integ rated into commands. Therefore, we already have an environment capable of functioning effectively and inclusively – as well as policies banning inappropriate behaviors.

Recommendation 11: focus sexual orientation and gender research on the combat arms Miller’s exploratory study of West Point cadets showed that those in combat military occupation specialties (MOS) reported “higher levels of discomfort than the cadets not intending to branch into the combat arms” (Miller 2010, p. 29). This difference in acceptance of gays serving openly may be due to several factors, including gender-related attitude differ ences on this issue. Specifically, Miller’s and others’ studies find that women areerally gen more accepting of gays serving in the military; whereas combat arms, from which women are pro hibited, are all male and thus less positive about open service. While a different issue than having openly LGB individuals serve in the military, the fact is that (at the time of this chapter’s writing) women are not allowed to have combat rates or MOSs. Another issue that has been on the table for some time is whether or not the military should allow women to serve in combat branches. For these parallel issues, we recom mend continuing to evaluate the combat arms in order to prepare for possible social and organizational role changes in the future (Miller 2010, p. 29).

Conclusion The repeal of DADT has occurred because of its blatant inequity for service members of military organiza tions. Unfortunately, the law itself degraded the unit morale and cohesion which it sought to protect. As a result, the number of service members who were dismissed from the military branches due to sexual Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 orientation increased rather than decreased, costing the DoD millions of dollars. A major reason for the policy’s failure is that forced inauthenticity – in the forms of “passing” and lying by omission or commission – rarely, if ever, increases group cohesion. For these reasons, we believe the policy should be repealed. It is our hope that as military leaders and service men and women are educated and supported to create and sustain commands that exemplify one standard of inclusive and fair behavior, mission readiness and operational excellence of the US military will continue to be among the strongest in the modern world. LGB and possible challenges after DADT repeal 245 Notes 1 Although the bill to repeal DADT was supported by a majority vote in the US Senate, the policy was in place when this chapter was forwarded for publication. 2 The EHRC is a statutory body in the United Kingdom that has the responsib ility to protect, enforce, and promote equality across the seven “protected” grounds: age, disability, gender, race, religion and belief, sexual orientation, and gender reassign- ment. It is classed as a non-departmental public body, meaning that it is separate and independent from the govern ment, but still accountable for its public funds. The EHRC is not an integral part of a government depart ment and carries out its work at arm’s length from minis ters, although ministers are ultimately responsible to Parliament for the activ ities of bodies. 3 Stonewall was founded in 1989 with the aim to create a professional lobbying group. Stonewall has subsequently put the case for equality on the mainstream UK political agenda by winning support within all the main UK political parties. Renowned for campaigning and lobbying, one of Stonewall’s many successes includes helping achieve the lifting of the ban on lesbians and gay men serving in the military. 4 Stonewall’s Diversity Champions programme is Britain’s good practice forum in which employers work with Stonewall to promote LGB equality in the workplace. Stone- wall’s good practice forum presents a unique opportun ity for employers to engage with one another on sexual orientation issues.

References American Progress (2009) DADT Numbers. Online, available at: www.americanprogress. org/issues/2009/06/pdf/dadt_numbers.pdf (accessed November 3, 2010). Brown, J. G. and Ayres, I. (2004) “Voluntary Integration of Sexual Minorities into the U.S. Military,” Michigan Law Review, 103 (1): 150–188. Callaway, John (2005, June 30) Front and Center with John Callaway: Gays in the Mili- tary – A Policy Review. Online, available at: www.pritzkermilitarylibrary.org/ events/2005/06-30-front-and-center.jsp (accessed October 21, 2010). Condon, S. (2010) Pentagon: Gay Soldier Survey Won’t Lead to Segregation. Online, available at: www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20010332-503544.html (accessed November 4, 2010). Culley, D. (2000, March 10) Conduct Unbecoming: A New Report Details the Sharp Increase in Harassment of Gays in the Military. Online, available at: www.salon.com/ news/feature/2000/03/10/gays (accessed November 3, 2010). Frank, N., Basham, V., Bateman, G., Belkin, A., Canady, M., Okros, A., and Scott, D. (2010) Gays in Foreign Militaries 2010: A Global Primer, Palm Center: University of California Santa Barbara. Gates, G. J. (2010) “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual Men and Women in the US Military: Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Updated Estimates,” eScholarship. Online, available at: http://escholarship.org/uc/ item/0gn4t6t3?query=gary%20gates (accessed November 3, 2010). Gearan, A. (2010, February 4) Gates: Don’t Rush to Lift Ban on Gays in Military, Asso- ciated Press. Goldich, D. and Webb, A. (2010) “Taking sides: Repealing ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ ” United States Naval Institute Proceedings, 136 (7): 66–67. Grissom, A. (2006, October) “The Future of Military Innovation Studies,” The Journal of Strategic Studies, 29 (5): 905–934. Kennedy, R. (2001) “Racial Passing,” Ohio State Law Journal, 62: 1145. McBain, M. (2009) Author’s personal account of life in the Royal Navy before the change 246 J. G. Smith et al. in regulations to allow homosexuals to legally serve in the UK military, working paper, Orlando, FL: Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI). Merriam-Webster (2010). Online, available at: www.merriam-webster.com/diction ary/ affinity+group (accessed November 2, 2010). Meyer, Jan (1996) “Don’t Think about Pink Elephants,” Sport Parachutist’s Safety Journal (January/Febru ary). Online, available at: www.makeithappen.com/spsj/ele- phant.htm (accessed November 4, 2010). Miles, D. (2010, February 10) “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” Repeal Demands Study, Gates Says, American Forces Press Service. Miller, K. A. (2010) “A Network Evaluation of Attitudes toward Gays in the Military: A Preparation for the Repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ ” working paper. MSNBC (2005, January 13) Report: More Gay Linguists Discharged than Originally Thought. Online, available at: www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6824206 (accessed October 7, 2010). MSNBC (2010, February 2) John McCain on DADT, ’10 vs. ’06. Online, available at: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/02/02/4429314-john-mccain-on- dadt-10- vs-06 (accessed October 21, 2010). Oatman, M. (2010, August 10) “A Gay Cadet Resigns,” MotherJones. Online, available at: http://motherjones.com/mojo/2010/08/gay-cadet-resigns- military-west- point-dadt- honor-code (accessed September 21, 2010). Palm Center (2006) “Financial Analysis of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’: How Much Does the Gay Ban Cost?” Blue Ribbon Commission Report. Online, available at: www.palmcenter.org/node/462:2-4 (accessed November 3, 2010). Palm Center (2010, May 29) Military Fired Gay Mission-Critical Troops: Specialists Continue to Hemorrhage Under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Online, available at: www. palmcenter.org/press/dadt/releases/military_fired_gay_missioncritical_troops_2009_ new_data_show.html (accessed October 21, 2010). Piper, A. (1992) “Passing for White, Passing for Black,” Transition, 58: 4–32. Posen, Barry R. (1984) The Sources of Military Doctrine: France, Britain, and Germany Between the World Wars, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. RAND Corporation (1993) Sexual Orientation and U.S. Military Personnel Policy, Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. Sekerka, L. E., Zolin, R., and Smith, J. G. (2009) “Careful What You Ask For: How Inquiry Strategy Influences Readiness Mode,” Organization Management Journal, 6: 106–122. Tyson, A. S. (2007, March 14) “Sharp Drop in Gays Discharged from Military Tied to War Need,” Washington Post. Online available at: www.washingtonpost.com/ wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/13/AR2007031301174.html (accessed November 3, 2010).

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice). Online, available at: www.army.mil/refer ences/UCMJ/ucmj2.html. University of Pennsyl vania Positive Psychology Center (2007) Positive Psychology. Online, available at: www.positivepsychology.org/index.html (accessed November 4, 2010). US Senate (1994) Policy Concerning Homosexuality in the Armed Forces: Hearings before the Committee on Armed Services, 103rd Congress, 2nd sess., March 29, 31; April 29; May 7, 10, 11; July 20, 21, 22, 1993, Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office: 400. Williams Institute Report (2010) “UCLA Says Gay Military Ban Costs Millions.” Online, LGB and possible challenges after DADT repeal 247 available at: www.upi.com/Business_News/Security-Industry/2010/01/27/UCLA- says- gay-military-ban-costs-millions/UPI- 16331264625908/.html (accessed November 3, 2010). World/Global News Blog (2010) “ ‘Don’t Ask Don’t Tell’: How Do Other Countries Treat Gay Soldiers?” Christian Science Monitor. Online, available at: www.csmonitor. com/World/Global-News/2010/0526/Don-t-ask- don-t- tell-How- do-other-countries- treat-gay-soldiers.html (accessed November 3, 2010). Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 14 A new angle on the US military’s emphasis on developing cross-cultural competence Connecting in-ranks’ cultural diversity to cross-cultural competence1

Remi M. Hajjar

Part of the US military’s contempor ary transformation focuses on enhancing cross-cultural competence (Selmeski 2007; Abbe et al. 2007). An emphasis on increasing the understanding of, and ability to interact effectively with, people from different regions (e.g., Middle-East, Africa, Asia, etc.) helps explain the litany of emerging cultural programs and initiatives in the military. One example of this ongoing transformation is the Culture Center located at Fort Huachuca, Arizona, which provides culture education and training for the Army and other military services.2 Several other programs, such as the culture centers rising in each of the US military services, as well as myriad other Army programs and initiatives (e.g., Human Terrain Teams, Red Teams, a growing Interpreter Program, etc.), illustrate other examples. Despite these absolutely necessary initiatives directed toward heightening the military’s understanding of foreign people, issues stemming from the very diversity of the members of the armed forces present another seemingly untapped opportunity to bolster cross-cultural competence. This chapter’s main argument is that the US military can improve its cross-cultural competence by focusing on and addressing diversity concerns in its own ranks, and that this heightened cross-cultural competence will help the military in all of its missions. This chapter discusses the import ance of cross-cultural competence in contemporary military operations, explains the concept of cross-cultural competence, discusses the salience of the civil–military gap debate, analyzes three internal diversity problems in the military, shares some preliminary ideas on how to address these issues through a bolstered educational program, and concludes with a reflection Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 on the import ance of cross-cultural competence for the military.

The importance of cross-cultural competence in contemporary military operations Cross-cultural competence plays a critical role in myriad contemporary military charters. First, the military’s ability to build a cohesive and effective force from a diverse constituency hinges on cultural understanding, appropriate attitudes, relevant skills, appropriate policy, and organizational commit ment. Second, The US military and cross-cultural competence 249 cross-cultural competence provides strategists with necessary insights to develop sound military policy and operational plans. At this point in time, many senior military and government officials cite the problematic and flawed culturally based assumptions used to plan the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Third, comprehend- ing and effectively working with different Department of Defense (DoD) and governmental agencies – including joint and interagency operations – requires adequate cross-cultural competence. Fourth, ongoing campaigns continue to illuminate the need for enhanced cross-cultural competence to better predict, comprehend, and influence the behavior of diverse people in foreign lands (including populations, adversaries, and non-governmental organizations). Regarding this particular point of improving the military’s ability to influence foreign com munities, ameliorating internal diversity issues will enable the US military to serve as a more effective role model for foreign people (e.g., new governments, budding security forces, etc.) to emulate regarding professionally benefi cial tolerance and respect for others in a multicultural context. Fifth, contemporary operations illustrate the import ance of multinational and coalition operations, and heightened cross-cultural competence will enhance cohesion and effect iveness in these partner ships with diverse allies and peers. These areas provide some illustrative examples that underscore the significance of cross-cultural competence in contempor ary military operations.

What is cross-cultural competence?3 This chapter defines cross-cultural competence as the knowledge, attitudes, and behavioral repertoire and skill sets that military members require in order to accomplish all given tasks and missions involving cultural diversity (Selmeski 2007; Abbe et al. 2007). Cross-cultural competence consists of two major sub- parts: culture-general factors and culture-specific factors. The culture-general factors form the foundation of cross-cultural competence for the military, con- sisting of the core attitudes, skill sets, and knowledge bases that facilitate adapta- tion to multiple culturally diverse contexts over time. The culture-specific factors of cross-cultural competence consist of the necessary attitudes, skills, and know ledge sets that enable effective mission performance in a given task or operation characterized by signific ant cultural diversity. The military must develop both components of cross-cultural competence in order to succeed in contempor ary and future operations. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 The culture-general knowledge, attitudes, and skill sets that all soldiers require constitute the enduring essence of cross-cultural competence. Acquiring cross-cultural competence begins with the culture-general factors. First, military members require a sufficient understanding of the complex and complicated concept of culture. Second, military members need a clear understanding of “self ” in a cultural context, which sets the stage to develop a sufficiently open- mind and positive attitude about issues, situations, and missions that involve diverse people and places. This second point of establishing adequate cultural self-awareness includes understanding cultural identities, associated biases and 250 R. M. Hajjar world views, and broadening perspect ives and openness towards multicultural contexts. The third culture-general factor includes the ability to analyze the culture of any given region or group in order to accomplish a mission (e.g., effectively applying regional analytical models to prepare for a mission). Some important variables 4 that pertain to this factor include relevant social structural and organizational constructs (e.g., governance/political body, social classes, castes, and tribes, economic systems, families, etc.), as well as other interconnected and salient cultural factors (e.g., major languages, religions, sex and gender practices and norms, races and ethnicities, the various cultural factors associated with the aforementioned structural factors, etc.). Fourth, many skill sets pertain to the culture-general aspect of cross-cultural competence, which comprise a continuously developing repertoire of behaviors (e.g., persuasion, negotiation, conflict resolution, leadership, influence, etc.), cognitive capabilit ies, and other abilities that contribute to positive performance outcomes in missions involving culturally diverse people and places. The culture-general aspect of cross-cultural competence endures – it constitutes the requisite foundation of knowledge, attitudes, and repertoire of skills that help military members to adapt, develop, and perform effectively amid cultural diversity throughout a military career. The second major part of cross-cultural competence entails the culture- specific compon ent. The culture-specific component of cross-cultural competence refers to the knowledge, attitudes, and skill sets (e.g., relevant language abilities) that pertain to a given country, region, or group. Military members acquire culture-specific competence through direct work experi ence in a target culture or through in-depth study and analysis of a culture. Military members with advanced levels of culture-specific competence include Special Forces, civil affairs, psychological operations, intelligence operators, foreign area officers, military attachés, human terrain teams, and other military specialists who devote a large portion of their careers to studying a specific area or group. Due to the inevitable, ongoing structural and cultural changes in any region or group, as well as other factors, military members’ culture-specific competence tends to fade without the application of significant time, attention, and focus (e.g., practicing a foreign language). In sum, the US military aims to build cross-cultural competence in order to better accomplish numerous contemporary missions. The culture-general factors make the foundation of cross-cultural competence; building culture-general com- Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 petence helps to prepare the military for all present and potential future opera tions that require effective performance when interacting with or developing plans involving diverse people and places. This chapter asserts that the US milit ary should focus on building cross-cultural competence, which consists of a foundational culture-general aspect and a culture-specific compon ent of a more perishable essence. By building greater cross-cultural competence, the armed forces will more effectively accomplish challenging missions characterized by cultural diversity in the twenty-first century. The US military and cross-cultural competence 251 Cross-cultural competence: contemporary illustrative examples This section illustrates specific examples of both positive and negative military outcomes linked to cross-cultural competence (or the lack thereof ). Beginning with some recent mistakes, contemporary operations illustrate how cultural ignorance, closed-mindedness, and associated improper behaviors degraded mission performance. For example, military members must beware of (inadvertently or purposefully) using disrespectful labels to refer to foreign people, especially important populations that the military must effectively influence to accomplish the mission. An American soldier deployed to Iraq recently lamented the prob lematic, negative use of the term “Haji” by peer Army soldiers to refer to Iraqi people and culture. He asserts that, “at best, calling local nationals ‘hajis’ is an uneducated use of Islamic terminology . . . at worst, it is a racial slur that could marginalize the very people we’re trying to win over” (Case 2006, p. 525). The US Marine Corps’ Center for Advanced Operational Culture Learning (CAOCL) cited the following examples as problems and patterns that emerged in their ana lysis of hundreds of recent interviews and surveys with Marine veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan.6 First, the CAOCL found a pattern of comments that illus trated a problematic over-reliance on traditional combat solutions; this became troublesome and counterproductive in situations where culturally appropriate, non-traditional plans and actions would have yielded better operational results. Second, analysis of the surveys pointed to a mismatch between military policy and strategy and the cultural reality that characterized certain situations. For example, trying to teach Iraqi sergeants and junior officers a relatively decentralized military system (such as the one employed by the US armed forces) yielded frustration and poor outcomes because senior Iraqi officers and sergeants (many of whom served under Saddam Hussein) spent their careers immersed in a highly centralized military and acted upon those experiences and beliefs (e.g., these senior Iraqi officers in command provided extremely limited flexibility, autonomy, and empowerment to their subordinate officers and sergeants) (Markiewicz 2006, p. 19). A third trend that emerged in these studies entails the lesson that the Amer ican military’s individual-focused approaches (e.g., sending individual sergeants to schools to learn special skills or leadership) for building Iraqi or Afghani armed forces did not work well. Rather, an emphasis on implementing collective training strategies where entire units experienced and learned new skills together Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 better matched the emphasis on collective activ ities (and not on individualized approaches) in these diverse cultures (Salmoni 2006, p. 18). In another study focusing on the US Air Force in Iraq, one emergent pattern included the need for Air Force members’ improved social etiquette when interacting with influential Iraqi elders (Ali 2006, p. 7). A British flag officer with significant experience in counterinsurgency operations recently provided another relevant account of the US Army’s mixed effectiveness in interacting with the Iraqi population. He noted that in some cases, US Army soldiers’ “cultural insensitivity, almost certainly inadvertent, arguably amounted to institutional 252 R. M. Hajjar racism” (Aylwin-Foster 2005, p. 3). All of these recent illustrative examples (among many others) show the US military’s need to build greater cross-cultural competence to enhance mission performance. Despite some of the contemporary lessons learned linked to cases where the military showed a lack of cross-cultural competence, recent reports also demon strate some examples of how cross-cultural competence produced positive mission outcomes for the armed forces. For example, when coalition forces assign women military members to interact with indigen ous Muslim women in Iraq and Afghanistan, this policy shows cross-cultural competence regarding proper interactions between the different sexes as practiced by many indigen ous Muslims (Bearor 2006, p. 18). In a report from Iraq, American military advisors to the budding Iraqi Army noted Iraqi “morale and motivational benefits when adjusting the training schedule around the prayer periods [and also making realistic training adjustments during the Muslim Ramadan fasting period]” (Salmoni 2006, p. 17).

The salient civil–military gap debate The ongoing debate over the potential danger of an excessively large gap between the US military and American society sets the stage for discussion of cultural diversity issues in the armed forces. Commentators on one side of the debate argue that an excessive fissure between the military and the greater US society threatens the national fabric, with some critics citing civilian authorities’ supposedly waning control over the armed forces (Hooker 2003; Schiff 2009). Scholars on the other side of the debate state that today a sufficient, healthy, necessary civil–military gap exists in the United States, and that it supports democratic, American ideals (Hooker 2003; Schiff 2009). This scholarly argument – which focuses on the differences between the military’s unique culture and the greater national culture – presents an important contextual point for this chapter: A solid majority of the officer corps possesses primarily Christian-based spirituality and conservative, partisan orientations (Hooker 2003, p. 8; Dempsey and Shapiro n.d.7). Furthermore, despite increases in the diversity of the officer ranks over the past several decades, a clear majority of US military officers continues to be male, Caucasian, middle-class, and heterosexual. This cultural homogeneity among the majority of the officer corps presents a few import ant, timely ques- Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 tions for the profession to ponder.

Cultural diversity challenges in the US military provide an opportunity Although the US military has a reputation for cultural diversity success stories, the armed forces face some contempor ary problems. Before proceeding with a discussion of some of the more challenging issues confronting the US armed forces today, this piece will reinforce the thought that the military has The US military and cross-cultural competence 253 accomplished some noteworthy achievements in increasing diversity and cross- cultural competence within its ranks over the past several decades. For example, the profound achievement of effective racial integration – including African- Americans and Hispanic Americans – stands as an illustrative example, though race relations continue to present some culturally based tensions in the force (Moskos and Butler 1996). This chapter explores three current internal challenges that provide a golden opportun ity for the US military to build greater cross-cultural competence. These three areas include: signs of religious intolerance; continued resistance towards women service members; and anti- homosexual attitudes and conduct.

A Christian force and cross-cultural competence The US military profession, like the society it serves but generally to a greater extent, possesses a dominant Christian spiritual emphasis. This presents certain benefits and costs to the armed forces. On the one hand, having aChristian umbrella as the dominant faith of choice in the military facilitates cohesion among military members and military famil ies of similar spirituality, particularly when Christian-based activ ities and services bring these families together. This spiritually generated camaraderie promotes strong group bonding, which certainly fosters a degree of healthy, functional cohesion in the US military. On the other hand, this prominent spiritual emphasis in members of the US Military carries certain costs. One downside includes the potential exclusion and aliena tion of people with diverse spiritual beliefs or a general intolerance of spiritual diversity in the US military. At times, unprofessionalism, harassment, and even abuse of spiritually diverse members of the force occur. A leader and chaplain that supports the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI) provided a relev ant opinion and a series of reports that highlight some of the internal problems of the US military in the vein of religious intolerance (DEOMI 20078). The chaplain offered this illumin ating statement: “The big story regarding religious discrimination is comprised of hundreds, even thousands, of little stories, most of which are not reported . . . nor broadcast by the media, but which affect the spiritual lives and the morale [of US Military members].” As one example, the US milit ary (including some of its chaplains) has shown unprofessional cultural insensitivity and outright ignorance regarding the application of the official DoD policy Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 about Native American military members’ rights regard ing religious rituals and practices. Another problem includes Wicca military members who have con tinued to endure discrimination, unprofessionalism, and both structural and cultural obstacles to their right to practice their religion (Cooperman 2006, p. 2). Additionally, instances of mistreatment of Christian Scientists in the US military have occurred, whereby their requests for waivers from immunizations have been denied despite policies that allow such waivers. As a more widely known example, Army Lieutenant General William Boykin made controversial remarks in the public forum in military uniform that described the Global War on 254 R. M. Hajjar Terrorism as a war between Christianity and Islam, which sparked enormous debate and calls for rebuke (Eisman 20039). These recent examples and incidents illustrate the need for greater cross-cultural competence (as well as policy clarification and application adjustments) regarding religious diversity in the US military. The US Air Force Academy (USAFA) has also seen contempor ary examples of ethnocentricity and religious intolerance. One part of the problem included some senior adult leaders (both military and civilian) at USAFA who exhibited narrow-minded conduct with regards to spiritual diversity, which may have influenced an academy culture that set the conditions for unprofessional, abusive behavior by cadets. For example, Coach DeBerry, the head USAFA football coach, after consulting with cadet team captains, once posted a prominent Fel- lowship of Christian Athletes’ Competitors Creed banner in the team locker room, which included a line that stated, “I am a member of Team Jesus Christ” (Jenkins 2005, D01). Another part of the USAFA problem involved several cases in which non-Christian cadets were harassed and abused. For example, Jewish cadets were called “Christ-killer” and were told that the Holocaust occurred as some form of revenge for the slaying of Christ (Jenkins 2001, D01). Additionally, USAFA experienced numerous cases of overly exuberant, aggres- sive campaigns to proselytize non-Christian cadets to Christianity (Fagin 2005; Garamone 2005). These recent problematic developments at the USAFA provide an example of ethnocentrism, closed-mindedness, and a lack of cross-cultural competence. As a result of these problems, the USAFA established new programs and initiatives directed toward rectifying these issues and promoting increased tolerance and cross-cultural competence regarding spiritual diversity at the USAFA (and this case sparked similar directives for the US Air Force as a whole). Sufficient cross-cultural competence will create the conditions for greater inclusiveness, cohesion, and professionalism at the USAFA and in the US military generally. Although the recent events at the USAFA illustrate an overt example of a problem, more subtle spiritually based concerns sometimes compromise professionalism in the military today. For example, any military members, particularly those in leadership positions, who make frequent public statements about their particular faiths, run the risk of creating feelings of alienation, exclusion, and discomfort, and even perceptions of coercion among members of the force. This practice becomes especially problematic in official capacities or venues, includ- Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 ing e-mail. As a specific example, a senior leader at the US Military Academy (USMA), who advises both USMA and the US Army at large on issues of diversity, identified the inappropriate use of religion-based e-mail signature lines (e.g., biblical quotes) and advised the academy to disallow (all) personal quotes on official e-mails.10 This example might seem trivial, but to the extent that US military members are made to feel uncomfortable or alienated when reading official e-mails with faith-based messages from their chain-of-command, this illus trates a relevant, subtle, contemporary problem of closed-minded, unprofessional conduct in the vein of spiritual diversity. The US military and cross-cultural competence 255 Not only will in-ranks cohesion increase through leader-driven, respectful, congenial, sufficiently open-minded behavior toward people of differing spiritual convictions, but also the military’s ability to work with religiously diverse people outside of its ranks will improve. Additionally, the need for heightened cross- cultural competence in the domain of religious diversity in the US military inter- relates with other internal cultural diversity concerns that this chapter discusses.

Continuing problems with women membership in the US military A second area of concern involves the continuing mixed acceptance of women military members. On the whole, the military’s level of structural and cultural acceptance of women in its ranks falls behind most areas of mainstream US soci ety (Segal and Bourg 2005, pp. 710–712).11 Contemporary evidence shows that significant resistance towards women members continues to surface in the armed forces. In one study, 48 percent of Army women reported crude and offensive behavior directed towards women members, and 64 percent of women reported gender harassment (Segal and Bourg 2005, p. 711). Gender harassment – defined as harassment based on resistance toward the changing roles of men and women in society – is a problem that is often overlooked but neverthe less persists in the US military today (Miller 1997, p. 711). Some relatively recent incidents illus trate how serious problems can ensue in a military culture that continues to have sizable pockets of resistance toward women member ship. Scandals at Tailhook, Aberdeen Proving Grounds, and most recently the USAFA, which involved large-scale instances of sexual assault and, in the latter two cases, multiple rapes, provide evidence for the military’s continuing problems with regard to women service members. Additionally, recent reports show the continuing problem of sexual assault and rape of US military women in current times (Baldor 2007; Corbett 2007; Smith 2004, p. 1).12 Resistance toward and abuse of women milit ary members in a mixed-sex force hinders team building, decreases overall cohesion, and constitutes a current, ongoing problem for the military that illustrates insufficient cross-cultural competence. Part of the closed-mindedness and resistance towards women military members might stem from traditional views on the proper place for women in society, generated in part by some members’ religious beliefs. The armed forces must build greater cross-cultural competence that includes more complete incul- cation of values that embrace women as equals with regard to military member Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 ship. A potential starting point is an improved educational initiative that included regular, professional conversations (instead of standardized policy lectures) in the ranks of the military on sex and gender differ ences and tension points; the role of women in the military; how to build a more cohesive, mixed-sex force; and also how to more effectively leverage the cultural differences among men and women to accomplish the military’s myriad missions. The US military needs a rejuvenated self-examination of its collective level of open-mindedness towards women member ship, which is a fundamental requisite to bettering cross- cultural competence and ameliorating problems along sex and gender lines. 256 R. M. Hajjar Problems in the realm of sexual orientation The third contempor ary cultural diversity issue that faces the US military is its generally intolerant attitude and conduct with regards to sexual minorit ies; a sizable portion of the armed forces possess and act on anti-homosexual mindsets. This chapter does not aim to address the controversial law associated with the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, Don’t Harass” policy, but it does intend to discuss how greater cross-cultural competence in the realm of sexual orientation presents another import ant task for the military. A major contempor ary study captured significant numbers of military members’ first-hand experiences of anti-homosexual behavior among professional peers. In a 2000 study conducted by the Inspector General, which col- lected data from 71,570 service members across all branches of the US military, 80 percent of military members reported hearing anti-gay remarks and 39 percent reported witnessing or experiencing targeted incidents of anti-gay harassment (Bowling et al. 2005, p. 416). Some of the actions that fell into the category of anti-gay harassment in this study included offensive speech and gestures, threats or intimidation, graffiti, vandalism, physical assault, denial of opportunities, and biased punishments (Bowling et al. 2005, p. 417). Across the military, each branch had a different percentage of members that reported witnessing or experiencing anti-homosexual harassment: Army 46.1 percent; Marines 44.2 percent; Navy 39 percent; and Air Force 27.1 percent (Bowling et al. 2005, pp. 432–433). One theory offered to explain this variation by branch suggests that the more traditional, institutional ground forces in the Army and Marines create unit cultures that possess signific ant intolerance of sexual minorit ies (Bowling et al. 2005, p. 434). On the whole, this particu lar study highlights the fact that anti- homosexual behaviors occur pervasively throughout the US military, which suggests that at least parts of the culture of the armed forces condone or tolerate this conduct (Bowling et al. 2005, p. 433). A military culture that transmits or overlooks anti-homosexual values and behaviors can degrade mission performance. First, the tragic murder that occurred at Fort Campbell in 1999 illustrates an extreme example of an anti-homosexual incident. In that incident, Private Barry Winchell was bludgeoned to death with a baseball bat due to the perception that he was a sexual minority (Segal and Bourg 2005, p. 713). Second, a recent study of Iraq and Afghanistan veteran homosexual soldiers provided a view of an officer corps (from across the US military) with Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 some members that either failed to enforce the “Don’t Harass” element of the military’s policy by ignoring anti-homosexual language and harassment, or who personally took part in such conduct (Frank n.d.13).v A rele ant question is whether this harassment caused any soldiers (regardless of sexual orientation) to feel a lower level of trust and confidence in their chain-of-command and units during these combat deployments, and whether this anti-homosexual behavior negatively impacted unit performance in any way. It seems reasonable to expect that tainted trust and confidence among members of a unit operating in a combat theater is not conducive to optimizing cohesion or mission performance. The US military and cross-cultural competence 257 The seemingly wide-scale anti-homosexual aspect to US military culture, which to a certain extent may stem from some members’ spiritual beliefs that question or denounce homosexuality, as well as from specific unit cultures that transmit hyper-masculine values, potentially damages the force’s readiness. Anti-homosexual harassment – as stated by former Secretary of Defense William Cohen – can decrease overall unit cohesion and jeopardize mission performance (Myers 2000, p. 114). Additionally, to the extent that the US military increasingly works with foreign soldiers, interagency members, non-governmental organiza tions, Army civilians, and other civilians (e.g., foreign or US popula tions) not bound by the dictates of the military’s policy, its members (especially the officer corps) must become more open-minded and gain more cross-cultural competence as it applies to the realm of sexual orientation (Belkin 200315). Anti- homosexual conduct can degrade mission performance insofar as it can hinder the establishment of mutual trust, teamwork, and cohesion to accomplish the mission. Anti-homosexual beliefs and behaviors comprise an important area where the profession needs to influence change and educate the force as a whole – beginning with its officer and non-commissioned officer corps and especially in ground combat units – to build greater cross-cultural competence in order to better accomplish the mission.

Preliminary ideas on heightening the US military’s cross-cultural competence All three aforementioned problem areas regarding cultural diversity (e.g., indica tions of religious intolerance, continuing resistance towards women service members, and anti-homosexual attitudes and conduct) require attention as part of the military’s mandate to build more cross-cultural competence. The idea that America’s all-volunteer force continues to recruit new service members (many from lower-income rural and urban communit ies) who have cultural identities that reinforce some of these internal diversity problems merits mentioning. Addi- tionally, trying to change the longstanding cultural values of any organiza tion or institution requires significant time, emphasis from leadership, and a social tipping point where old traditions and values become genuinely deviant to the group, and new values and beliefs achieve a collective consensus. So this chapter does not suggest any quick remed ies to these problems. Despite the fact that this chapter’s thesis entailed identifying some internal Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 diversity concerns and linking them to the need to build greater cross-cultural competence in the US military (and not detailing a strategy to ameliorate the problems), this section will make some modest suggestions intended as a starting point for further thought. The US military establishment requires enhanced educational programs focusing on heightening cross-cultural competence. As this chapter has argued, a prerequisite for building cross-cultural competence entails education on the meaning of culture and cultural identities, including how identities deeply impact value systems, thought-processes, and behavior. A discussion of these issues in 258 R. M. Hajjar the armed forces would set the stage for candid, thorough reflection in the milit ary to help members develop greater self-awareness and ability to identify and manage mental roadblocks and biases linked to diverse cultures and people. This educational strategy should also be implemented in basic training, professional military education, and other military schools (i.e., socialization programs in all of these schools, especially in the combat arms, should seek to ameliorate, rather than create or reinforce, the concerns cited in this chapter). After educating the military on the fundamental aspects of cross-cultural competence, then specific topical discussions should ensue. These discussions would include the three topics explored in this chapter, as well as a variety of other rel evant subjects. Building cross-cultural competence will require sufficient time on units’ training schedules where service members can learn more about how these problems damage the unit and the military at large, talk about their thoughts and exchange ideas, and receive subject-matter experts’, leaders’, commanders’, and the military’s contempor ary ideas and guidance on these topics. Beyond mandated lectures that dictate military policies to service members, the profession must establish an effective educational program and dialogue among its members on a variety of salient topics that contrib ute to developing the military’s cross- cultural competence. This revitalized educational campaign would provide the force with the fundamental ingredients for cross-cultural competence, which in turn would enhance its internal cohesion and also build vital skills necessary to accomplish missions worldwide alongside and among diverse people. Furthermore, the US military should consider the following additional recom mendations regarding building cross-cultural competence. First, the armed forces need to conduct research and experimentation to determine the best possible measurement instrument for cross-cultural competence. Ideas include already established measures for emotional intelligence and cultural intelligence, which may coincide with some of the personality inventories used by parts of the US military. 16 Second, the US military would benefit from a more systematic method of gaining and employing cultural lessons learned from combat theaters,17 including relevant thoughts from interna tional military peers. For example, the America, Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand (ABCA) Program and military alliance provides a potentially valuable resource for the US military regarding gaining insights and policy recommendations for building cross- cultural competence. These suggestions provide a starting point regarding a strategy for the US military to build sufficient cross-cultural competence to Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 accomplish its twenty-first century missions.

Final thoughts: internal diversity concerns connect to the military’s campaign to build enhanced cross-cultural competence and successfully influence people outside its ranks One of this chapter’s core arguments is that a connection exists between internal cultural diversity problems in the US military and building cross-cultural The US military and cross-cultural competence 259 competence, and that increased cross-cultural competence would help the milit ary in all of its missions, including operations in foreign lands. Should a military that possesses pockets of members who exhibit inadequate cross-cultural competence toward diverse military peers expect optimal organizational performance when planning for and operating in cross-cultural contexts? The fundamentals of cross-cultural competence apply similarly, regardless of the context of their application. By building more cross-cultural competence in the force, including an understanding of the complexity of culture, heightened self-awareness, sufficient open-mindedness, and a robust set of skills, the military will better accomplish its multiple charters. By answering the contemporary call to build cross-cultural competence, the armed forces can bolster in-ranks’ cohesion as well as its ability to forge solid working relationships with diverse people outside of the military. As world events from the onset of this new millennium underscore, the military profession must transform and build a sufficient level of cross-cultural competence in order to successfully accomplish all of its missions, including irregular, post-modern warfare.

Notes 1 The final definitive version of this paper has been published in Armed Forces & Society 36 (2), January/2010 by SAGE Publications Ltd/SAGE Publications, Inc. All rights reserved. ©. 2 The Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) Culture Center (TCC) located at the US Army Intelligence Center, at Fort Huachuca, Arizona, officially opened in February 2006. The TCC’s main purpose is to provide the US Army, military, and DoD with mission-focused culture education and training for global requirements. The TCC has also provided insights and information to international military peers regarding culture education and training. 3 The author has received feedback on this project’s core cross-cultural competence concept from Allison Abbe, Brian Selmeski, and Kerry Fosher. Dr. Fosher worked on the cross-cultural competence project for the Center for Language and Culture at the Air University at Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama, in 2007. 4 Myriad regional and cultural analytical models exist in the US military today, and some of these models influenced the variables applied in this chapter: the Culture Profile used by the TCC; the developing system and model (called the “MAP Human Terrain” model) in use by the experimental Human Terrain Teams in the US Army in Afghanistan and Iraq; the Command and General Staff College Culture Worksheet (from the Culture and Military Operations manual, 2005) at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas; the Center for the Advanced Operational Culture Learning (CAOCL is Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 the US Marine Corps’ culture and language center) concept of operational culture; the “DoD Regional and Cultural Capabilities: The Way Ahead” (October 2007) concept paper that summarizes findings from the DoD Regional and Cultural Exper- tise Summit sponsored by the Defense Language Office, June 2007; and Selmeski 2007. Similarities in these analyt ical models – as well as concepts from cultural anthropology and sociology – influenced the regional variable examples used in this chapter. 5 Case voices his concerns of his first-hand experi ences of hearing and witnessing US Army soldiers (officers and enlisted) deployed to Iraq using the term “Haji” as a negative label for all Iraqi people. He heard soldiers use “Haji” (a signific ant word in Islam associated with the pilgrimage to Mecca) as a synonym for insurgents, 260 R. M. Hajjar terrorists, or “the enemy,” among other derogatory meanings linked to Iraqi people and culture. The author has also discussed this issue with US Army veterans who served in Iraq – including several officers – who confirmed that a tension exists in the US military’s deployed ranks regard ing the use of “Haji” by soldiers. 6 The CAOCL of the US Marine Corps and the TCC of the US Army analyze military cultural lessons learned from active theaters worldwide to enhance cultural instruction and curriculum development. In a working group between these organizations held at the TCC on August 6–10, 2007, the topic of cultural lessons from theater received explicit discussion. Reports from the CAOCL and insights shared in this working group provided some of the data cited in this chapter. 7 This is a presently unpublished manuscript that draws on and updates the findings from the 1998–1999 Triangle Institute for Security Studies (TISS) study. TISS found that 67.4 percent of Army majors and above identified with the Republican Party, and Dempsey and Shapiro’s study found that 69.5 percent of Army majors through colonels self-identified as conservatives (p. 11). Dempsey and Shapiro further found that the ratio of Republican to Democrat self-identifiers in the Army officer corps asa whole is five to one, and among lieutenant colonels and colonels, it is six toone (p. 19). Dempsey and Shapiro expressed concerns with the finding of a generally polarized partisanship in the officer corps, including the potential for group think, biased appraisals of world events that can create faulty military policy, out-grouping of non-conservatives, and the potential for the Army to gain an even greater reputation as a conservative body, which would impact those who self-select into the commissioned ranks (thereby exacerbating the problem). 8 Members of DEOMI, particularly a lead chaplain in that organization, provided signi ficant insights and articles that contributed substantially to this section of the chapter. Most of the communications between DEOMI and the author about these topics took place in March 2007. 9 The article discusses how the US president and other high-ranking government officials apologized to prominent Muslim allies and heads of state due to Lieutenant General Boykins’ controversial remarks. 10 The head of the US Military Academy’s Working Group on Diversity sent out a letter to USMA faculty and staff delineating concerns over personalized quotes and signature lines on official e-mails, particularly quotes of a spiritual nature (May 2005). He explained that biblical quotes did not belong on official e-mails as they had the potential to alienate or frustrate members of the West Point community and corps of cadets. He thought these biblical quotes were unprofessional and inappropriate. 11 Despite the increase of women in the US armed forces over the past several decades, their overarching representation in the military (about 15 percent) still significantly lags behind their representa tion in the civilian sector. The military has resisted gender integration and is one of the last organizations to adapt to its society’s changing values regarding the role of women in the workplace. 12 It merits mentioning that increased reports of sexual assault and rape of military women does not necessarily mean that the number of occurrences of these crimes has Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 increased in the military. Insofar as reporting of these incidents by military women is low (e.g., many military women, not unlike civilian women, but perhaps in greater proportions, do not report these problems), the increased reporting of these crimes might not indicate an actual rise in cases (in fact, this development might indicate that more military women have selected to report these crimes). Corbett’s article, in par ticular, discusses the problems that contempor ary military women deployed to combat theaters face. Dr. Laura Miller, a military sociologist who has served on numerous committees charged with studying the problem of sexual assault in the US Military, corroborated the point that sexual assault and rape occurring in combat theaters in the ranks of the armed forces constitutes an ongoing, current challenge. The author spoke with Dr. Miller on November 26, 2007. The US military and cross-cultural competence 261 13 Presently unpublished manuscript presents the results from a study performed with the support of the Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military, Univer- sity of California, Santa Barbara, September 15, 2005. 14 The article cites the secretary of defense’s assertion that anti-homosexual harassment “seriously undermines the good order and discip line that is critical to an effective fighting force.” 15 Belkin discusses how 24 nations allow homosexuals to serve openly in the military, and only a small handful of NATO members continue policies that ban gay and lesbian soldiers. 16 Of the numerous measure ment instruments for cultural intelligence, emotional intelligence, and other relevant personality assessments, the US military needs to identify the models most likely to address its unique needs and experiment to find the most useful, salient models. 17 Future studies of US military units that showed insufficient cross-cultural competence in combat theaters should seek to determine whether those units have in-ranks cultural diversity problems, or if those units had such problems prior to the deployment.

References Abbe, A., Gulick L. M. V., and Herman, J. L. (2007) “Cross-Cultural Competence in Army Leaders: A Conceptual and Empirical Foundation,” United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences Study Report, 1. Ali, F. (2006) “Developing a Framework for Foreign Language and Foreign Competen- cies,” Project Air Force, (October): 7. Aylwin-Foster, N. (2005) “Changing the Army for Counterinsurgency Operations,” Mili- tary Review, (November–December): 3. Baldor, L. C. (2007, March 21) “Sex Assault Reports in US Military Increase by 24 Percent in 2006,” Associated Press. Bearor, J. (2006, April) “First lieutenant M and First Lieutenant G,” CAOCL Report: 18. Belkin, A. (2003) “ ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’: Is the Gay Ban Based on Military Neces- sity?” Parameters, 40: 173–183 Bowling, K. L., Firestone, J., and Harris, R. (2005) “Analyzing Questions that Cannot be Asked of Respondents Who Cannot Respond,” Armed Forces & Society, 31: 411–437. Case, S. (2006, February 20) “ ‘Haji’ Disrespects Iraqis,” Army Times, 66 (31): 52. Cooperman, A. (2006, July 4) “Fallen Soldier Gets a Bronze Star but No Pagan Star,” Washington Post: 2. Corbett, S. (2007, March 18) “The Women’s War,” New York Times Magazine. Dempsey, J. K and Shapiro, R. Y (n.d.) “A Divided Team: Understanding the Underlying Ideology and Content of the Partisan Affiliations of Members of the US Army,” unpublished manuscript. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Eisman, D. (2003, October 25) “Army Officer’s Remarks Providing a Lesson in Military Law,” Norfolk Virginia Pilot. Fagin, B. S. (2005, July 29) “Faith and Tolerance at the Air Force Academy,” Air Force Print News. Frank, N. (n.d.) “Gays and Lesbians at War: Military Service in Iraq and Afghanistan under ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ ” unpublished manuscript. Garamone, J. (2005, June 22) “Air Force Addressing Problems of Religious Intolerance,” American Forces Information Service News Articles. Hooker, R. D (2003) “Soldiers of the State: Reconsidering American Civil–Military Rela- tions,” Parameters (winter): 8. 262 R. M. Hajjar Jenkins, S. (2005, May 21) “Football’s Religious Kick,” Washington Post: D01. Markiewicz, R. (2006, September 14) “Mitt Team Leader: 7th Division Iraqi Army,” CAOCL Report: 19. Miller, L. L. (1997) “Not Just Weapons of the Weak: Gender Harassment as a Form of Protest for Army Men,” Social Psychology Quarterly, 60: 32. Moskos, C. C and Butler, J. S. (1996) All That We Can Be: Black Leadership and Racial Integration the Army Way, New York: Basic Books. Myers, S. L. (2000, March 25) “Survey of Troops Finds Antigay Bias Common in Service,” New York Times: A1. Salmoni, B. (2006, July 24) “1st Battalion, 6th Marines,” CAOCL Report: 18. Schiff, R. L. (2009) The Military and Domestic Politics: A Concordance Theory of Civil– Military Relations, New York: Routledge. Segal, M. W. and Bourg, C. (2005) “Professional Leadership and Diversity in the Army,” in D. M. Snider and L. J. Matthews, The Future of the Army Profession, New York: McGraw Custom Publishing: 710–712. Selmeski, B. (2007, April 19) “Military Cross-Cultural Competence: Core Concepts and Individual Development,” Royal Military College of Canada, Centre for Security, Armed Forces and Society Occasional Papers, Series 1: 38. Smith, R. J. (2004, June 3) “Sexual Assault in Army on Rise,” Washington Post: A1. Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Index

Abbe, A. 5, 248, 249 research report 116; leadership across Aboriginal programs, Canada 111, 112–13, diversity 72–106; recent diversity 114 strategies 116–17; strategic highlights accountability reviews: Army 45; Navy/ 117 Marine Corps 44 Ashford, S.J. 181 advantage 89–90 Asian military employees 136 affirmative action (AA) programs 14–15, assignment process 165–6 16–17, 18, 27, 92–3, 95, 99, 130–1 Association of Naval Services Officers Afghanistan War 190–1, 225 (ANSO) 44 Afghanistan, cross-cultural issues 251–2 Aylwin-Foster, N. 252 African Americans: historical experience 21, 23, 33–4, 157–8; as military Baby Boomers 176–7, 179, 180–5 employees 134–6, 139, 142; on MLDC Baldor, L.C. 255 63 Banerjee, N. 191 Agars, M. 96 Baptists 195 age and faith 198–9 Barber, M. 87 Air Force Academy (USAFA) 254, 255 Barrett, K. 43 Air Force Speciality Code (AFSC) 64 Bartol, K. 96 Air Force: definition of diversity 38, 144; Battistelli, F. 157 diversity policy 47–9 Bearor, J. 252 Ali, F. 251 Beaumont, P. 1 Allen, B. 191 Becton, J.W. Jr. 33–4, 35 Allen, T. 96 beliefs, need to demonstrate sincerity of Allport, G. 101 200–4 America’s Heroes at Work 224, 227–8 Belkin, A. 257 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Benimoff, R. 190 220 Bennis, W. 82 anecdotal evidence 136–7 Berger, J. 151

Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 appearance, as status characteristic 152 Berry, Ryan 188–90 Argyris, C. 20, 88 Bess, M. 190 Armor, D.J. 192 Beyer, J.M. 17 Army Casualty Program (AR 600–8–1) Bonvillain, D. 57 143 book chapters 1–5 Army Leadership Manual FM 22–100 73, Bourg, C. 255, 256 89 Bowling, K.L. 256 Army Training and Leader Development Bradley, W.H. 225 (ATLD), panel 97 Brass, D.J. 156 Army: definition of diversity 37, 38, 144; Broaddus, M. 142 diversity policy 45–7; feedback on 2007 Brockner, J. 91 264 Index Brown, M.T. 157 community connection forums 223–4 Bruins, J. 156 competence: and standards 93–4; and Burkhardt, M.E. 156 status 153–4 Bush, G.W. 190, 210–11 competitive opportunity, diversity as 28 business connection forums 223–4 conscientious objectors 201 Butler, J.S.156, 253 “contact hypothesis” 101–2 Cook, H. 191, 209, 210 Campbell, D. 157 Cooperman, A. 253 Canada, immigrant recruitment policy 125 Corbett, S. 255 Canadian Defense Academy (CDA) corporate diversity programs 130–1 110–11 corporate leadership, army as model for Canadian Department of National Defense 73–4 108–10; feedback on 2007 research Cox, T. Jr. 11, 15 report 110–11; progress since 2007 112; Craig, L. 111 recent diversity strategies 112–13; cross-cultural communications 162–9 recommendations for 108–9; strategy cross-cultural competence: and acceptance highlights 113–14 of women 255; and acceptance of sexual Canadian Forces Recruiting Group minorities 256–7; civil–military gap (CFRG) 110–11 debate 252; costs and benefits of Capone, Al 153 Christianity 253–5; definition of Captains Retention Menu of Incentives 249–50; effects of internal diversity Program, Army 47 concerns 258–9; illustrative examples career decision-making 78–9 251–2; preliminary ideas on heightening career progression: discrimination as barrier 257–8 to 76; strategies to encourage 135–6 cross-generational environments, Carli, L. 96 cultivation of 180–3 Carruthers, M. 219, 221, 225, 226 cultural astuteness 58–9 Case, S. 251 cultural challenges 185, 252–7 Catholicism 193–4, 198, 204 cultural changes, challenges of 171–2 Catholics, numbers of 195 cultural differences 142–3 Caver, K. 72, 96 cultural generalization strategy 20, 23 Cheyne, J.A. 199 culture-general/culture-specific Christian Scientists 253 competence 249–50 Christianity: and cross-cultural Cummings, L.L. 181 competency 253–5; presumption of Cunningham, G.B. 196 142–3 Christians, numbers of 195 data-driven assessment 138–44 Civil Rights Act (1964) 56–7, 61, 220 Defense Directive 1322.11 132 civil rights continuum 130–1 Defense Diversity Working Group civil–military gap debate 252 (DDWG) 40 civilian disabled population 225–6 Defense Equal Opportunity Management civilian life, acclimatizing to 222–4 Institute (DEOMI) 41, 64, 114–15, 132, climate assessments 132–4, 140–1 169–70, 194, 253; Military Equal Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Clinton, Hillary 70 Opportunity Climate Survey (NEOCS) Coast Guard: definition of diversity 37, 38, 132–4; Organizational Climate Survey 144; diversity policy 49–50; strategic (DEOCS) 41, 132–4, 194–5 highlights 122–4 Defense Human Resources Board (DHRB) Cohen, B. 152 40 Cohen, E.G. 159 Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) cohesion 192–3 194–5 communication strategies, across Defense Race Relations Institute (DRRI) generations 180–1 41, 64, 171 communication style, generational defensive reasoning strategy 20, 24 differences 175–8 Deficit Reduction Act (2005) 142 Index 265 definitions 13–17 14–17; Marine Corps 120–2; Navy demographic challenges 35, 60, 118 117–20; as optional 63, 64, 70 demographic changes 175, 179 diversity: benefits of 10; DoD demographic characteristics, leaders 77–8 understandings of 37–9; embracing demographic motivators 27 171–2; foundations for 56–9; identifying demographic representation, military 36–7 understandings of 59–60; natural Dempsey, J.K. 252 process of 66; secondary dimensions of Department of Defense: components of 65–6, 67–8; six steps to 67–8 diversity policy 41–50; Directive Dobbs, M.F. 10 1020.02 39; diversity metrics 144; “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADS) policy Diversity Summits 40; drivers of 62, 125, 157, 256 diversity policy 35–7; feedback on 2007 Dornbusch, R. 20 research report 114–15; policy Dougherty, K.D. 199 coordination 39–41; strategic highlights Dougherty, T. 125 115–16; understanding diversity within Dovidio, G. 102 37–9, 144 Doyle, S. 180, 181, 182, 184 Department of Public Works (DPW), Iraq Drescher, K.C. 190 166–8 Driskell, J.E. 152 deployment: impacts on effectiveness 35, Duran, A. 95 66–7, 256–7; importance of cross- cultural competence 1248–52; need for Eberle, C. 190 religion-focussed training 208–12 Eby, L. 96 descriptive statistics 136–7, 138, 139–40 economic-centered strategy 20, 24 Di Tomaso, N. 89 education: and cross-cultural competence Dickens, F. & J. 72 208–12, 257–8; as status characteristic difference deployment strategy 186 152 difference, internalization of 19–22 Eisman, D. 205, 254 Dipboye, R.L. 10 Elder, G.H. Jr. 192 Director of Human Rights and Diversity Ely, R.J. 10 (DHRD), Canada 110–14 employee perceptions of workplace 17 disabilities legislation 219–21 employee surveys 140–1 disability management, role of employers Enable America 223 225–6 Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) disadvantage 89–90 policy 130; federal agencies 11, 14–15, diversity acceptance, foundation for 55–60 16–17, 18; reviews of 141–2 diversity assessments: anecdotes, folklore Equal Employment Opportunity and pie charts 136–7; civil rights Commission (EEOC) 26; Management continuum 130–1; climate assessments Directive (MD) 715 133–4 140–1; interviews and focus groups equal opportunities advisors (EOAs): 143–4; military experience 131–4; need embracing diversity and inclusion for 134–6; policy review 141–3; 171–2; experiences of 169–70; simplicity of diversity metrics 144–5; reflections as a soldier 162–9; training statistical analysis 138–40 and deployment 64 Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 diversity discussion, reframing 17–30 equal opportunity (EO) programs 121, diversity lenses 11, 25–30 130–1; lack of commitment to 169–70 diversity metrics, simplicity of 144–5 equal rights legislation 37, 130 diversity policies: components of 41–50; equality and fairness 88–9 coordination of 39–41; drivers of 35–7; equitable/equal treatment 92 reviews of 141–3 Escobar, Pablo 153–4 diversity process 13–17; delay in Espinoza, C. 178 implementing 64 ethnicity and religion 199–200 diversity programs: Army 116–17; European-Americans: advantaging 156–7; Canadian forces 110–14; Coast Guard contributions of 60; see also white 122–4; DoD 114–16; characteristics of males 266 Index Executive Order 8002 (1941) 130 group identity, overriding importance of Executive Order 9981 (1948) 33, 171 101–2 group status 151–3 Fagin, B.S. 254 Grutter v. Bollinger (2003) 33 Fahey, J.J. 190 Gutek, B.A. 39 fairness 81, 88–92, 105 faith group services, attendance at 202 habitual ways of thinking 22–5 family life, military impact on 221 Haiti, diversity 64–6 Federal Organizational Organizational Hajjar, R.M. 211 Climate Survey (FEOCS) 132–4 Hammer, K. 222 Fernandez, J.P. 18 Hanna, J. 191 Fine, M. 20 Harnett, C.A. 219, 221, 225, 226 Fischer, C.S. 199 Harrell, M. 102–3 Fischer, S. 20 Heinl, R. Jr. 131 focus groups, diversity assessments 143–4 Herek, G.M. 157 folklore-based qualitative reports 136–7 Hispanic military employees 134–6 Fort Hood, experiences at 163–4 Home Depot 229 Foschi , F.96 Hooker, R.D. 252 Frank, N. 256 Hout, M. 199 Franke, V.C. 153 Hudson Institute Report 27 fraternization policy 185 Hughes, M. 152 Friesen, J. 125 Humanists 195 Hunter, C.E. 195, 198, 199, 211 Garamone, J. 254 Hurricane Katrina 64–6 Gates, Bill 154 gender integration 157–8 identity: choice of 21–2; and service 191–3 gender issues, engagement with learning image control strategy 154 and discussion on 97–9 in-group members and standard setting gender policies: Coast Guard 49; Marine 93–4 Corps 45; Navy 43 in-group racism, challenging 99–100 gender: and religion 199–200; and inclusion: benefits of 166–7; embracing religious accommodation 188–90; 171–2; experiences of 169–70; representation in military 36–7; as status foundations for 56–9; legislation characteristic 151 219–21; natural process of 66; general’s aide role 96, 98 reflections as a soldier 162–9; role of Generation Xers 177, 179, 180–5, 186 employers 228; and workplace potential generational challenges 185–6 224–9; wounded warriors 221–4 generational diversity: current individual contributions, recognition of 68 demographic changes 179; leader values inferential statistics 136–7, 138–9 and leadership styles 183–5; managing influence 150, 155 180–3; understanding generational inspirational leaders 168–9 identities 175–8; at work 178–9 integration, factors affecting 158 generational progress on diversity 68–9 internal discourse 19–22 Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Gentile, M.C. 12, 13, 14, 18, 19, 20, 21, Internal Revenue Service (IRS) 224 22, 24–5, 30 interviews, diversity assessments 76–7, Gesell Committee 34 78–9, 143–4 “geyser effects” 139–41 intra-disabled prejudice 225 Gilovich, T. 20, 24 Iraq War 190–1, 225 Gilroy, C.L. 192 Iraq: cross-cultural issues 249, 251–2; Glendon, M.A. 20, 22 experiences in 166–9 Glenn, N.D. 199 Iskra, D.M. 156, 158 Gold Bar Recruiter Program, Air Force 48 Islam 208, 252 Grieco, M. 221 Griffith, J. 153 Janowitz, M. 152 Index 267 Jayne, M.E. 10 Leopold, J. 191 Jelinek, P. 1 lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Jenkins, S. 254 (LGBT) see sexual minorities Johnston, W.B. 27 lessons learned (LL) approach: Army Jolkovsky, B.L. 204 116–17; Canadian Department of Jonsson, P. 191 National Defense 110–14; Coast Guard Jordan, B. 205 122–4; definitions 110; Marine Corps 120–2; Navy 117–20; objectives and Kanter, E. 96 lessons learned questions 109–10; Karabell, Z. 132 questionnaire 126–7; US Department of Kelley, M. 149 Defense 114–16 Kellough, J.E. 15, 16–17, 18 life cycle, military personnel 42 Kelty, R. 157 Lim, N. 35, 39, 40, 44, 45, 47, 192, 212 Kennedy, John F. 34 Livers, A. 72, 96 Kestnbaum 157, 158 Lock. E.A. 100–1 key diversity strategies: Army 116–17; Lockwood, N.R. 178–9, 180, 183, 184, Canadian forces 112–13; Marine Corps 186 120 Loden, M. 9, 14, 59, 60, 66, 67 Keysar, A. 198, 199 Lotan, R.A. 159 King, D. 132 Lovaglia, M.J. 150, 154 Kolb, J. 131 Love, J. 35, 39, 40 Kosmin, B.A. 198, 199 Lovell, J.P. 209 Ku, L. 142 Lucas, J.W. 151, 159 Kupperschmidt, B.R. 174 Lutz, A.C. 157 Lyle, A. 48 Lancaster, A.R. 205 Lancaster, L.C. 175, 176, 177, 178, 181 McCullough, D. 155 LaPlante, M.D. 205 McFall, M.E. 225 Latham, G.P. 101 McGuire, W. 57 Laughlin, M. 87 Mackintosh, P. 83 Lawrence 190 majorities, advantaging 156–7 Leach, J.B. 14 Marin, P. 190 leader values 183–5 Marine Corps Climate Assessment Survey leadership behavior, modelling 80 (MCCAS) 45 leadership development programs 134–5 Marine Corps Recruiting Command leadership failures 83–5, 99–100 (MCRC) 44–5, 120–1 Leadership in a diverse environment report Marine Corps’ Center for Advanced 108–9 Operational Culture Learning (CAOCL) leadership philosophies 78–9 251 leadership styles, generational differences Marine Corps: definition of diversity 38, 175–8, 183–5 144; diversity policy 44–5; feedback on leadership: dealing with religious 2007 research report 120; recent accommodation requests 200–4; diversity strategies 120; strategy Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 emergence of common themes 80–103; highlights 120–2 enhancing 186; inspirational examples Markiewicz, R. 251 of 168–9; interview process 76–7; Martin, S. 125 interviews 78–9; methodology 75–6; Mathews, A. 11, 15 participants 77–8; study background Maxwell, Tim 221 73–4; theory 103–6; use of power and Mayer, E. 198 status 154–5 measures lens 11, 29–30 legal pressures 27 media depictions of diversity 64–6 legislation: equal rights 37, 130; disability Meek, Kendrick 36–7 219–21 “melting pot” metaphor 55 Leiby, R. 87 men, advantaging 156–7 268 Index mentoring 96–7, 182, 185, 186, 226 occupational exclusion 156–7 Merit Systems Protection Board 15 Office of Diversity Management and Equal methods lens 11, 28–9 Opportunity (ODMEO) 39–40, 115; Military Academy (USMA) 254 Diversity Strategic Planning Framework military chaplains 87, 204, 206, 253–4 40 military diversity champions 61–9 Officer Candidate School (OCS) 77, 78 military experience 131–4 Operation Franchise 227 military identity 191–3 Operation Second Chance 224 Military Leadership Diversity Commission Operational Tasking (OPTASK) Diversity, (MLDC) 34, 41, 42, 62–3, 122 Coast Guard 50 military views of diversity 60–9 organizational challenges 134–6 Millennials 178, 179, 181–2, 183–5 organizations: methods to evaluate Miller, L.L. 102–3, 255 diversity 29–30, methods of responding mindset lens 11, 27–8 to diversity; reasons for diversity 26–7; minorities: identification of culturally views of diversity 27–8 competent leaders 75–6; impact on unit outcome fairness 90–2 cohesion 102–3; as leaders 155–6; on outreach programs: Air Force 48; Army MLDC 62–3; military representation 46–7; Coast Guard 50; Marine Corps 36–7; performance feedback 96–7 44–5; Navy 43–4 minority religious groups 195–7, 201–2, 206–7 Paley, A.R. 191 Mortensen, D.T. 221 Park, J. 113 “mosaic” metaphor 55–6 Parker, A.H. 27 Moskos, C.C. 156, 253 Parker, P. 96 motivation lens 11, 27 Pashman, D. 221 Mount, M. 191 performance and status 151–3 Mouzelis, N. 209 performance feedback 81, 104; acceptance multiple identities 19–21 of 97–9; across generations 180–1; Myers, S.L. 257 challenging in-group racism and code talk 99–100; women and minorities Naff, K.C. 15, 16–17, 18 96–7, 135 National Defense Authorization Act Pershing, J.L. 209 (2009) 41 personal responsibility, acceptance of National Naval Officers Association 11–12, 79, 83–5, 95, 105–6 (NNOA) 44 personnel policy and religion 205–7 National Partnership for Reinventing Pfeffer, J. 151 Government (NPR), Diversity Task physical accessibility 220 Force 14–15 pie charts 136–7 Native American Church 196–7, 207, 253 Pope, P. 70 Navy Women eMentor Leadership post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) 226, program 43 227–8 Navy: diversity policy 42–4; strategic power: implications and recommendations highlights 118–20; understanding of 156–8; in networks 150–1; in the Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 diversity 37–8 military 155–6; leading with 154–5; use networks, power in 150–1 of status to gain 153–4 New Opportunities for Military Women preaching, military prohibitions on 204 study 102–3 President’s Committee on Equality of New Orleans, diversity 64–6 Treatment and Opportunity (Fahy new religious movements 194, 201–2 Committee) 34 no religious preference (Nones) 194, 195, privilege, recognition as system 83–8 198–9, 202 process fairness 90–2 non-visible difference 21–2 professional development policies: Air Force 48–9; Army 47; Coast Guard 50; Obama, B. 33 Marine Corps 44–5; Navy 43–4 Index 269 Public Law 110–417 41 Force 49; Army 47; challenges 172, public opinion on military 132, 225 192; Coast Guard 49–50; impact of diversity deficit 66; Navy 43–4 race issues, engagement with learning and Ridgeway , C.L.153 discussion on 97–9 Rigdon v. Perry 204 race, as status characteristic 152 rights talk strategy 20, 22–3 racial abuse 163–4, 167–8 Rittgers, D. 191 racial code talk, challenging 99–100, 104 Rodriguez-Bailon, R. 155, 156 racial reasoning strategy 20, 23–4 Roper, S. 159 racial violence 131 Rosener, J. 9, 14 racism, recognition as system 83–8 Roughead, Gary 118 reasoning errors 20, 24 Rumsfeld, Donald 40 recruitment: across generations 181–3; Air Russell, B. 149 Force 48; Army 46–7; challenges 35, 172, 192; Coast Guard 49–50; impact of “salad bowl” metaphor 55–6 diversity deficit 66; Marine Corps 44–5, Salmoni, B. 251, 252 121; Navy 43–4, 118; wounded warriors Sandhoff, M. 158 228–9 Schiff, R.L. 252 regression analysis 138–9, 140 Schön, D.A. 88 regulatory pressures 27 science, technology, engineering and religion-focused training 208–12 mechanical (STEM) fields 37–8, 134, religion: importance in armed forces 135–6 195–8; as non-visible difference 21–2; Scoppio, G. 108, 113 role in transformative awareness 86–7 secular beliefs 201–2 religious accommodation 142–3, 188–98, “seeing for innocence strategy” 20, 23 207; dealing with requests for 200–4 Segal, D.R. 157, 158, 194 religious adherence, changes in 193–4 Segal, M.W. 158, 194, 255, 256 religious attire, regulations on 207 self-awareness 58–9, 97–9 religious diversity: accommodating self-presentation strategy 152–3 accommodation 200–4; and age 198–9; Selmeski, B. 248, 249 education, training and deployment Senior Executive Service (SES) employees 208–12; and ethnicity/gender 199–200; 134–6 and identity/service 191–3; measures Sessa, V. 174, 183 and analysis of 205–6; overview sexual harassment 83–4, 255 188–91; personnel policy 205–7 sexual minorities 62; acceptance of 66–7; Religious Identification and Practices integration of 157–8; intolerant attitudes Survey (RIPS) 194–5, 199, 210 towards 256–7; as non-visible difference religious intolerance 253–5 21–2; see also “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” religious makeup, armed forces 193–5 policy religious proselytizing 87, 190–1, 204, Shackelford, S. 153 208–9, 210–11, 253–4 Shane, L. III 191 Report of the Task Force on the Shapiro, R.Y. 252 Administration of Military Justice in the Sharlet, J. 191 Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Armed Forces (1972) 131 Shay, J. 190 research report feedback: Army 116; Sherkat, D.E. 198 Canadian forces 110–11; Coast Guard Shinseki, E. 73 122; Department of Defense 114–15; Sigel, R. 209 Marine Corps 120–2 Simons, G. 142 resentment and power/status 154–5, 156 skill requirements 37–8 Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) skill-sets, ex-servicemen 224–9 77, 78, 94 Sladek, S.L. 182 resources and power/status 150–1, 153–4 Smidt, C. 190 respect, foundations for 56–9 Smith, L.M. 195, 198, 199, 211 retention: across generations 181–3; Air Smith, R.J. 255 270 Index social change, challenges of 132 trust: building 166–7; importance of 93 social policy, disabled persons 225–6 Tulgan, B. 184, 186 social support networks 221, 223–4, 226 Tsui, A.S. 39, 181 socialization 55–60 Soeter, J. 1 Umberson, D. 152 soldiers, reflections of 162–9 Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Soni, V. 14 67 South Korea, experiences in 165–6 Uniformed Services Employment and standards 81; acceptance of personal Re–employment Rights Act (USERRA) responsibility 95; commitment to 104, 220–1, 226 105–6; holding all individuals to 93–4; uniformity 192–3 setting and communicating 92–3; unit cohesion, commitment to 102–3, supporting individuals to meet 94–5 105–6 Starbase Atlantis 43 unit performance, effects of anti- statistical analysis 138–41 homosexual behavior 35, 66–7, 256–7 status: implications and recommendations unorthodox beliefs 203 156–8; in groups 151–3; in the military unreasonable discrimination 89–90 155–6; leading with 154–5; use of power to gain 153–4 Vaccaro, G.M. 47 Steel, S. 20, 23 values, generational differences 175–8, Stiehm, J.H. 209 181–5 Stillman, D. 175, 176, 177, 178, 181 Verkamp, B.J. 190 Stohlman, R. 123 veterans’ groups 225–6 strategy highlights: Army 117; Canadian VetsConnect 223 forces 113–14; Coast Guard 122–4; Vietnam War: public opinion 225; racial Department of Defense 115–16; Marine violence 131 Corps 120–2; Navy 118–20 viewpoint discrimination 204 succession management 180, 183–5 Vincent, M.A. 196 Sullivan, G. 73 Virginia Military Institute (VMI) 84–5 superordinate identity 100–2 virtual communities 224 Vishwanath, T. 221 Tajfel, H. 149 Vocational Reintegration Program 224 Taji military–industrial complex, Iraq 166–8 Walmart 229 talent, recognition of 68 Walter Reed Army Medical Center Tannen, D. 20 (WRAMC) 223 task focus 81, 100–1, 105–6 war on terror, use of religious rhetoric Taylor, C. 13 190–1, 253–4 Team Enable 223–4 Warrior Transition Brigade (WTB) 224 team focus 81, 101–2, 105–6 Washington, George 155 technology 69 “waterfall effects” 139–41 Thomas, D.A. 10, 11, 14, 15, 18 Weber, M. 156 Thomas, R. 63, 82 Webster, M. Jr. 151, 152 Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Thomas, R.R. Jr. 9, 130 Weeks, M. 196 Thye, S.R. 154 West Germany, experiences in 164–5 TRACK initiative 227 West, C. 20, 23–4 traditional faith groups 197–8 white males, in leadership roles 74–106 Traditionalists 175–6, 180–5 Wicca 195, 253 transformative awareness 81–8, 103–4, Willer, D. 153, 155 105–6 Williams, J.C. 134 traumatic brain injury (TBI) 227–8 Wilson, J. 198 Trice, H.M. 17 Women’s Army Corps (WAC) 171 Trinitarian theology 203 women: exodus from employment 134; Truman, H.S. 33, 34 identification of culturally competent Index 271 leaders 75–6; impact on unit cohesion World Wars 157 102–3; integration into Submarine Force Wounded Warrior Project 222, 224, 227 118, 120; as leaders 155–6; as military wounded warriors: concept of 221–4; employees 139; mixed acceptance of legislation 219–21; role of employers 255; occupational exclusion 157; 228; work environment 228–9; performance feedback 96–7 workplace potential 224–8 Wong, L. 97 workforce changes, federal agency Xavier, S. 180, 181, 182, 184 responses to 14–17 working environment, wounded warriors Yanow, D. 12 222–4, 227; role of employers 228 Yrle, A.C. 177 working style, generational differences 175–8, 181–3 Zemke, R. 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 182, workplace adaptations 220 183, 185, 186 workplace potential, wounded warriors Zhou, Z. 152 224–8 Workplace Warrior (Carruthers/Harnett) 225–6 Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016 Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 20:24 09 May 2016