![]()
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 cyberspace. To combat this threat, the federal government has appointed a senior general to oversee cyber warfare, and has devoted resources to support multinational military operations and humanitarian efforts in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Djibouti (Beaumont 2010). Most recently, the congressional Military Leadership Diversity 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the rescinding of the “combat exclusion policy” for women (Jelinek 2010), the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” policy has been repealed, and the US Navy now allows women to serve on submarines.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 continuous focus on the topic.
Subsequently, the current combat situation in the Middle East and policy modifications are indicative of the importance of military leaders excelling in operational adaptability or “the ability to link policy goals and strategic objectives” (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 simultaneously identifying and rectifying any weaknesses that diminish their contribution to the mission. This volume, Diversity Management in the Military: 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 opportunities 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 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 measurable outcomes that are linked to the organization’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, different. 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 commercial 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 profound change in the role of women in the military. Their leadership skills successfully guided the Army through these difficult demographic changes, and 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 leadership competencies necessary to lead in the face of racial, ethnic, and gender differences. 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 business 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 benchmarking between military organizations 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 diversity 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 statistical analysis, policy reviews, climate assessments, interviews, and focus groups. These methods, when applied systematically, provide thorough and focused results that enable leaders to understand the reality on the ground. In best practice, any diversity intervention 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 organization examine any underlying causes and challenges 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 processes literature, 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 resistance, 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 representation of women and minority group members in powerful positions, status processes represent a more insidious challenge. They propose that in an increasingly diverse society, a military leadership calling for increased diversity, and a recognition that operational needs benefit from increased diversity, will all contribute 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 opportunity practitioner’s perspective” (Jenkins), illustrates the results of the author’s equal opportunity 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 inclusion. His introspection leads to three main topics: A reflection of his experience as a soldier in military culture prior to his equal opportunity education; his experience as a practicing equal opportunities 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 characteristics that each cohort brings to the workforce. The chapter explores intergenerational dynamics by examining similarities 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 manifestation 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 historical changes in religious diversity in the US military (to the extent that statistically reliable data are available), and subsequently focus on the dynamics of this diversity in today’s military. Additionally, 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 practices 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 preferences? 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 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 importance 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 workplace; promoting positive community-based attitudes toward wounded warriors 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 contemporary 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 ability to work effectively in foreign cultures. Cross-cultural competence means 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 (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 resistance 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 competence 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).
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, available 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
![]()
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 organization. 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 characteristics (Loden and Rosner 1991). These dimensions represent the multiple personal identiti...
