18 Page Sociology Paper Topic: Gender Discrimination Against Women In The Workplace

https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764218768863

American Behavioral Scientist 2018, Vol. 62(5) 676 –682

© 2018 SAGE Publications Reprints and permissions:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0002764218768863

journals.sagepub.com/home/abs

Article

Overcoming Persistent Barriers to Broadening Participation in the Federal Workforce

Bill Valdez1

Abstract “Broadening participation” is defined as programs or policies that have the potential to benefit society and contribute to the achievement of specific, desired societal outcomes. This program was created by the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) to address the underrepresentation of women, minorities, the disabled, and other groups in NSF’s programs and workforce. The U.S. Office of Personnel Management has recently taken steps that could lead to a closer examination of the NSF Broadening Participation Program as a way to deliver key insights into ways to overcome three persistent barriers to broadening participation in the overall federal workforce.

Keywords diversity, inclusion, broadening participation, federal government

“Broadening participation” was born out of efforts at the National Science Foundation (NSF) to remedy the underrepresentation of women, minorities, the disabled, and other groups in NSF’s programs and workforce. Although intended for the science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) community, the framework and research from the NSF Broadening Participation Program could provide key insights into ways to overcome per- sistent barriers to broadening participation in the overall federal workforce.

This is an important public policy consideration because the federal government workforce has an enormous, and often poorly understood, impact on virtually every sector of the U.S. economy, workforce, and everyday life of all Americans. The direct

1Senior Executives Association, Washington, DC, USA

Corresponding Author: Bill Valdez, Senior Executives Association, 77 K Street, NE, Suite 2600, Washington, DC 20002, USA. Email: [email protected]

768863ABSXXX10.1177/0002764218768863American Behavioral ScientistValdez research-article2018

Valdez 677

impact is obvious: 2.6 million federal employees and a $4 trillion annual budget. The indirect impact is less obvious, but just as important. Hiring decisions that create a workforce that does not reflect the changing demographics of our nation are likely to have unintended consequences, such as investment decisions that do not address the needs of women and minorities, or the perpetuation of federal policies that have con- tributed to underrepresentation in the federal workforce.

The Broadening Participation Program at NSF is a subset of the federal govern- ment’s larger effort to improve diversity and inclusion (D&I) in the federal govern- ment. The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) coordinates D&I efforts across the government, and every agency in the government has an office dedicated to improving D&I in its workforce. Despite this long-term effort, which began in the 1960s in the wake of the creation of affirmative action programs at federal agencies, federal D&I programs appear to have stalled.

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (2014) tracks federal D&I statistics and their most recent report demonstrates that while there has been some minor progress to increase the diversity of the federal workforce from 2005 to 2014, gains for most groups have been miniscule and some groups (White women, American Indians and Alaskan Natives) have actually regressed (see Table 1). The reasons for this lack of progress have been hotly debated within the D&I community, with some argu- ing that Supreme Court rulings prohibiting the use of hiring quotas is the root cause, while others argue that “unconscious bias” is the primary reason for the stalled effort.

Having served in senior federal government positions at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) from 1994 to 2014, including serving as Chief Diversity Officer, Director of DOE’s Equal Employment Opportunity Office, and working on numerous task forces designed to improve DOE’s recruitment, hiring, and retention of underrepresented groups, a different conclusion emerges. From this vantage point, it was apparent that there are three persistent barriers that prevent increasing the participation of women, minorities, and other underrepresented groups in the federal workforce and could explain why D&I efforts have stalled in the federal government. Those three barriers are

•• Absence of a link between mission accomplishment and D&I programs •• Inability to articulate the return on investment (ROI) for D&I programs •• Lack of a rigorous and analytical basis for D&I programs

Creating the Link Between Mission Accomplishment and D&I Programs

At the heart of the NSF Broadening Participation Program is a link between R&D investments and NSF’s broader mission objectives to support the U.S. scientific enter- prise. Whenever a principal investigator submits a grant proposal, that principal inves- tigator must describe how the research project contributes to two broad criteria: “intellectual merit” and “broader impacts.” Broader impacts is defined as “criterion

678 American Behavioral Scientist 62(5)

[that] encompasses the potential to benefit society and contribute to the achievement of specific, desired societal outcomes” (NSF, 2017b, p. 64).

This feature of the NSF grant review processes, when combined with the overall goals of the NSF Broadening Participation Program

While broadening participation is included in the NSF review criteria, some program announcements and solicitations go beyond the standard criteria. They range from encouraging language to specific requirements. Investments range from capacity building, research centers, partnerships, and alliances to the use of co-funding or supplements to existing awards in the core research programs. (NSF, 2017a, Para 1)

constitute a model that other agencies could emulate with their mission activities that would establish a direct link between D&I programs and mission accomplishment.

This is vital because there is increasing scholarly attention to the effects of “mission- extrinsic public values” on the implementation of nonmission requirements at federal agencies. And, more specifically, experience within the federal government indicates

Table 1. Composition of Federal Workforce: 10-Year Trend—Some Progress, Little Overall Change FY 2005 to FY 2014.

Federal workforce Participation rate 2010

Civilian labor force FY 2014 FY 2005 (%) FY 2014 (%)

Men 1,529,840 57.01 56.27 51.84 Women 1,189,114 42.99 43.73 48.16 Hispanic or Latino men 137,600 4.54 5.06 5.17 Hispanic or Latino women 93,552 3.07 3.44 4.79 White men 1,035,919 40.44 38.10 38.33 White women 690,525 26.05 25.40 34.03 Black or African American men 219,917 7.86 8.09 5.49 Black or African American

women 289,799 10.43 10.66 6.53

Asian men 94,669 3.40a 3.48 1.97 Asian women 72,836 2.54a 2.68 1.93 American Indian or Alaska

Native men 17,980 0.77 0.66 0.55

American Indian or Alaska Native women

22,660 0.90 0.83 0.53

Individuals with targeted disabilities

26,042 0.96 0.96 NA

Note. FY, fiscal year; NA, not available. Source. U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (2014). aAsians, Native Hawaiian, and Other Pacific Islander data included in Asian data.

Valdez 679

that diversity and inclusion programs could be the poster child for the unintended (and often negative) consequences of layering on nonmission requirements at agencies.

Mission-extrinsic public values are defined as responsibilities that are not directly related to the core mission of the agency. For example, the Department of Energy (DOE) is primarily a science and technology agency but states in its strategic plan that “diversity” is a core value and that all departmental elements should work toward increasing the diversity of DOE’s workforce. (Valdez, 2016, p. 66)

Rosenbloom (2014) identifies 37 examples of mission-extrinsic public value— ranging from D&I to small business goals to environmental justice—and notes that bureaucracies often view these mission-extrinsic assignments as a distraction from accomplishing their mission. Agencies with limited resources, such as being under- staffed, will forgo mission-extrinsic activities to focus on their core mission responsi- bilities. Even agencies that are sufficiently staffed and resourced will view mission-extrinsic activities with some hesitation because they are seen as diverting critical resources from the core mission.

Unless mission-extrinsic public values are directly linked to the mission of an agency through processes such as including “broader impacts” into evaluation criteria for projects and proposals, the effect within the bureaucracy is to view the public value as another unfunded mandate that can, and often is, ignored. This is why NSF’s Broadening Participation Program could hold the key to linking mission accomplish- ment to what is now perceived as a mission-extrinsic activity.

Inability to Articulate the Return on Investment for D&I Programs

D&I programs are viewed by their supporters as an inherent public good. For example, I was a speaker at a 2010 D&I conference and noted that the Department of Energy was conducting studies to determine the ROI for its D&I programs. This observation was met with outrage from portions of the audience who argued that it was well past the time to study and justify D&I programs and get on with the business of moving aggres- sively to remedy past societal failures to create a federal government that reflects the face and values of a demographically changing America.

While a noble sentiment, the idea that D&I is an inherent public good runs up against the hard reality that federal program managers must justify their investment decisions to a Congress that is on high alert against the wasteful and inefficient use of taxpayer dollars. The U.S. General Accountability Office (2017) maintains a “high-risk list” of federal agencies, which focuses on the use of public funds and the oversight of federal programs. Not a single agency is on the high-risk list because of a failure to meet their D&I goals.

Collins helps explain this phenomenon when he notes that “great” public sector organizations have a “relentless culture of discipline” that focuses on mission accom- plishment as the primary way to demonstrate ROI, drive employee performance, and ultimately create value for an organization (Collins, 2005). Within the federal context,

680 American Behavioral Scientist 62(5)

it is extremely hard to measure the ROI of programs, for example, demonstrating that investments in science and technology have contributed to increased economic output, but all would agree that anything that increases mission accomplishment is indisput- ably a demonstration of ROI at a federal agency.

The NSF Broadening Participation Program provides a partial solution to this ROI dilemma by directly linking D&I efforts to a broad array of mission accomplishment goals. NSF’s research directorates have commissioned studies that demonstrate how broadening participation has enabled the accomplishment of mission accomplishment goals, and NSF has published a workshop finding that provides a guide to the NSF programs to identify outcome measures that demonstrate ROI (NSF, 2017a).

Lack of a Rigorous and Analytical Basis for D&I Programs

The last barrier is particularly frustrating because it pits anecdotes and belief systems (“Diversity is an unequivocal social good”) against rigorous analysis. This is why the promise of a rigorous and analytic basis for D&I programs is so appealing. Rather than arguing from anecdotes and emotional calls to redress obvious societal failures, the NSF Broadening Participation Program offers the opportunity to develop a rigorous analytical framework federal government-wide that demonstrates the value of diver- sity and inclusion. This was the rationale behind the 2016 NSF Symposium on the Science of Broadening Participation (NSF, 2016).

“The disproportionally low representation and participation of minorities, women, and persons with disabilities in the STEM workforce are the result of complex and systemic institutionalized processes,” the symposium report states. “There remains a critical need for more research on the value and relationship of workforce diversity for obtaining competitive advantages and progress” (NSF, 2016, p. 18).

NSF (2017a) has commissioned a number of workshops and reports that could form the basis for the larger study the 2016 Symposium on the Science of Broadening Participation calls for. It could be argued, however, that understanding the complex and system-level barriers and solutions to broadening participation in the STEM work- force should be expanded to the overall federal workforce.

The federal government’s D&I programs have gone through a significant evolution since the 1960s, moving from affirmative action quota programs to the current behavioral science approaches that look for root causes such as unconscious bias or utilizing work- force analytics to optimize hiring and recruitment practices. Along the way, however, skep- ticism about the value and utility of D&I programs has surfaced in the form of charges of reverse discrimination, resistance to training and education programs that appear to be ineffective, and resentment of the treatment of special classes of individuals.

[R]esearch has shown that many conventional approaches and assumptions do not lead to the encompassing or sustainable changes necessary to effect inclusion and positive transformation. . . . Recognizing that the relevant processes, structures, and relationships are deeply institutionalized and culturally enduring, finding ways to disrupt such patterns remains a critical task. (NSF, 2016, p. 23).

Valdez 681

Moving Forward

Although D&I efforts in the federal government have stalled, OPM is trying different approaches that could be viewed as consistent with the NSF Broadening Participation approach. The Government-wide Inclusive Diversity Plan, issued in 2016, highlights three major components that all federal agencies are asked to address in their D&I strategic plans: (1) engaging leadership; (2) inclusion, collaboration, outreach; and (3) using data to drive efforts (OPM, 2016).

The OPM D&I plan defines diversity and inclusion broadly and includes both inherent diversity characteristics (race, national origin, etc.) and acquired diversity characteristics, such as education status, positions within an organization, and senior- ity. This aligns with the “broadening participation” concept at NSF and leaves no group, including the underrepresented group, out of the definition. This definition is inclusive of all federal employees and includes the White male, who may be in the overrepresented group, and not necessarily feel a part of D&I initiatives.

The OPM D&I Plan, as does the NSF Broadening Participation Program, puts an emphasis on ensuring that performance plans include D&I components, such as creat- ing inclusive cultures and leading cultural transformation efforts, in the plans of super- visors, managers, and Senior Executive Service, and that strategic plans include D&I components when addressing organizational performance goals and objectives. Agency leadership is encouraged to take deeper dives into applicant flow data, training and development demographic data, Federal Employee View Point Survey data, among others.

Conclusion

The three barriers identified in this article are interrelated. Without a rigorous and analytical framework, determining the ROI of diversity and inclusion programs cannot be accomplished and, as a result, federal agencies will continue to view D&I as “mission-extrinsic.”

What is required is for agencies to adopt the approach that NSF has successfully piloted and to learn from the recent OPM experience that broadens the definition of inclusion. Without that approach, the persistent barriers identified in this article will become permanent barriers.

The OPM D&I plan offers a path forward for agencies in this regard because it includes a much broader definition of D&I than has traditionally been used and also explicitly links D&I progress to agency performance. This is consistent with the proven NSF Broadening Participation approach and is worth further study.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

682 American Behavioral Scientist 62(5)

Funding

The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

Collins, J. (2005). Good to great and the social sectors: A monograph to accompany Good to Great. Boulder, CO: HarperCollins.

National Science Foundation. (2016). Report on the symposium on the science of broadening participation. Retrieved from https://www.nsf.gov/sbe/scisip/SoBP_Symposium_report_ final.pdf

National Science Foundation. (2017a). Broadening participation portfolio. Retrieved from https://www.nsf.gov/od/broadeningparticipation/bp_portfolio_dynamic.jsp

National Science Foundation. (2017b). Proposal and award policies and procedures guide- line (OMB Control No. 3145-0058). Retrieved from https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/ pappg17_1/nsf17_1.pdf

Rosenbloom, D. H. (2014). Attending to mission-extrinsic public values in performance oriented administrative management: A view from the United States. In J. P. Lehrke, E. Bohne, J. D. Graham, & J. C. Raadschelders (Eds.), Public administration and the modern state: Assessing trends and impact (pp. 17-30). Hampshire, England: Palgrave Macmillan.

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (2014). Table 2: Composition of Federal Workforce. In Annual report on the federal work force (Part 2) fiscal year 2014. Retrieved from https://www.eeoc.gov/federal/reports/index.cfm

U.S. General Accountability Office. (2017). High risk list. Retrieved from http://www.gao.gov/ highrisk/overview

U.S. Office of Personnel Management. (2016). Governmentwide inclusive diver- sity strategic plan (DI-02598-7/2016). Retrieved from https://www.opm.gov/ policy-data-oversight/diversity-and-inclusion/reports/governmentwide-inclusive-diver- sity-strategic-plan-2016.pdf

Valdez, B. (2016). Theory and practice in federal government executive branch leadership and administration. In D. H. Rosenbloom, P. S. Malone, & B. Valdez (Eds.), The handbook of federal government leadership and administration (pp. 55-77). New York, NY: Routledge.

Author Biography

Bill Valdez was appointed as the president of the Senior Executives Association in 2016 and is focused on strengthening the Senior Executive Service (SES) and building a leadership pipeline in the federal government. Bill retired from federal service as a career senior executive in July 2014. His career with the Department of Energy spanned over 20 years and he held the posi- tions of acting director, DOE Office of Economic Impact and Diversity; director of Business Services, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy; and director of Planning and Analysis, and director for Workforce Development within DOE’s Office of Science.