At any other time, it would have been a fairly innocuous picture: The President of the United States posing for a group portrait with the senior Department of Defense (DoD) leaders. The Commander in Chief conducting an occasional public appearance with the flag and general officers representing the U.S. armed forces is more than appropriate. However, the photograph of the President and the Chiefs of Staff of their respective services at the White House in October 2019 unintentionally represents a larger issue in the U.S. military: The photograph depicts an all Caucasian, all male senior leader panel. “It’s America’s military,” reflected retired Major General Dana Pittard, former commanding general of the First Armored Division and an African American. “Why doesn’t this photo look like America?” General Pittard’s observation highlights an apparent deficiency in both the photo and the U.S. military: a lack of diversity in the senior leadership of the military, and by extension, the Navy.
By 2045, most Americans will identify with demographics considered minorities in 2021. Considering the time and experience required to produce a flag officer in the U.S. military (roughly 26 to 30 years from commissioning), the Navy has a limited opportunity to deliberately develop a diverse cadre of senior leaders. While the “Navy’s 2020 Inclusion and Diversity Goals and Objectives” (IDGO) outline a framework for achieving diversity, it also encourages leveraging best practices from institutions outside the Navy.
Professional institutions have struggles with diversity that mirror those of the Navy. For example, building demographic and cognitive diversity in postgraduate institutions is difficult when barriers to entry (standardized entry exams, competitive selection boards, etc.) are high, and the pool of available minority candidates is shallow. Only 17 percent of U.S. post-secondary degree holders identify as either black or Hispanic. Still, if the Navy wants to improve its senior leader diversity over the next two decades, the Navy’s Inclusion and Diversity Council should consider the gains made by professional institutions through focused metrics, targeted engagement, and committed coaching and mentoring. By incorporating these best practices and lessons into its culture of excellence, the Navy has an opportunity to make its future leadership reflect the force it serves.
Senior Leader Demographics
DoD’s Office for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (ODEI) “envisions a DoD that reflects the face of the Nation.” Collectively, the armed forces are moving closer to quantitatively realizing ODEI’s vision. In 2018, nearly one-third of all enlisted service members identified as nonwhite, making minorities overrepresented relative to comparable U.S. demographics. However, minority officers are still significantly underrepresented relative to comparable U.S. demographics. For example, 8.1 percent of officers are black and 7.6 percent are Hispanic, well behind their share of the U.S. population (13.7 percent and 17.9 percent, respectively). These metrics, however, decrease dramatically across the armed forces at the general officer/flag officer level. Nonwhite minorities comprise nearly a quarter of all officers in the U.S. military (22.7 percent), but only 12.5 percent of all general and flag officers. Navy flag officer demographics are even starker: In 2020, of the 219 flag officers in the Navy, only 18 (8.2 percent) are nonwhite, with only one of these officers serving as a vice admiral.
As bleak as these quantitative diversity measures appear, this issue is far from new. In its comprehensive, 162-page report to the President and Congress, the Military Leadership Diversity Commission proposed 20 recommendations targeted to “develop and maintain a qualified and demographically diverse military leadership.” Among these were measures to improve the military's demographic diversity by developing and maintaining strategic metrics, strengthening engagement through improved outreach strategies, and mentoring the next generation of leaders through a leader-led commitment to diversity. Unfortunately, the commission published its report in March 2011, and it would be more than nine years before the Secretary of Defense (SecDef) addressed the issue. That July 2020 memorandum covered immediate actions to address diversity in response to the overwhelming social and political sentiment during that same summer. While the immediate actions outlined in the SecDef’s memo are novel and specific (removing photographs from promotion board files, reviewing hairstyle standards for racial bias), the Secretary acknowledges that “hard work remains and we will continue to learn as we move forward.” If DoD hopes to learn best practices to improve diversity in its senior leader ranks, then the Navy could learn lessons from other institutions that have struggled with and are overcoming diversity challenges.
Focused Metrics
The Navy’s IDGO lists two metric-driven sub-activities in support of its goals and objectives. The first sub-activity, “develop metrics to assess the impact of the Navy-wide I&D efforts,” intends to strengthen the Navy’s goal of institutionalizing inclusion and diversity across the Navy. The conclusions drawn by a five-year study culminating in 2016 on a post-baccalaureate program sponsored by Drexel University's College of Medicine demonstrate the potential effects of this sub-activity. Researchers found benefits in evaluating specific metrics that target academic and standardized test performance of underrepresented minority students participating in the Drexel Pathway to Medical School program. During the study, the program produced nearly 13 times more black and more than 15 times more Hispanic medical school graduates by enrolling its participants in advanced science and intensive Medical College Admissions Test preparation courses. By focusing on metrics that will have the desired impact, Drexel University is achieving its goal of building diversity into the professional healthcare population.
The second metric-driven sub-activity in the IDGO seeks to “update and refine military recruiting and civilian hiring metrics” to reinforce the Navy’s goal of attracting and recruiting diverse talent. Children's Mercy Kansas City , a hospital, models a comprehensive example of successfully attracting and recruiting minority professionals. In 2014, Children’s Mercy welcomed 72 new residents, none of whom identified as an ethnic minority. Recognizing its diversity shortfall, the hospital implemented three critical changes to its resident evaluation process. The first change added a minority resident faculty member to the selection board. This person assists the program director in prescreening applications for minority applicants. Second, Children’s Mercy offered “coffee chats” as part of candidate applicants’ recruiting visits to the hospital. These voluntary, informal meetings paired applicants with current minority residents to answer questions and provide personal perspectives on training as a minority at the hospital. Third and last, Children’s Mercy sent both residents and staff to represent the hospital at a regional student medical association meeting to recruit midwestern minority students. The results have been encouraging: By applying a multifaceted approach to minority recruiting that is both quantitative (prescreening applications to increase minority considerations) and qualitative (coffee chats and recruiting visits), Children’s Mercy welcomed its most diverse resident class ever in 2019, with minority students comprising a full quarter of the incoming cohort.
Targeted Engagement
The phrase “affinity groups and professional (development) organizations” recurs throughout the engagement sub-activities of the IDGO. This speaks to the Navy’s desire to directly connect with institutions that will help build the diverse leadership the Navy needs in the future. The first engagement sub-activity directs Navy leaders to collaborate with affinity groups and professional organizations to share the IDGO. In this case, academia presents a cautionary tale on how diversity improvement efforts can struggle if there is no deliberate effort to collaborate and share a cohesive diversity message.
A 2020 historical study on Indiana University-Bloomington's (IUB) affirmative action initiatives analyzes two minority recruitment programs. One program, Groups Special Services, targeted disadvantaged minority students. Simultaneously, the Hudson and Holland Scholars Program sought high-achieving minority students to receive a four-year, $8,000 scholarship. Despite their intent, these programs have failed to attract minority students to IUB in large numbers. The study concluded that without a shared understanding of diversity goals and objectives, both within and outside of an organization, realizing desired outcomes will be difficult:
Moreover, all individuals involved in each program’s formation were not motivated by the need to bring more students of color to campus. The individuals who initiated these programs ignored and continue to ignore a population of students of color that are neither disadvantaged nor high achieving.
In contrast, the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine (UMMSM) provides a noteworthy template for successful engagement to build diversity. In "Tips for Building a Pathway to Medicine for Underrepresented Minority Students," the authors highlight nine ways to improve minority representation in medicine the Navy could also use. For example, Tip #7, “Build Partnerships with Local Stakeholders,” is similar to an engagement sub-activity in the IDGO. The Navy seeks to "champion partnerships with internal and external affinity groups, professional organizations and key influencers." UMMSM has partnered with Miami Dade County Public Schools and community organizations to directly facilitate minority student medical school pathways. UMMSM recognized that it is not enough to develop internal diversity initiatives. Institutions must champion advocacy with partners who will invest in improving diversity and inclusion.
Committed Coaching and Mentoring
Coaching and mentoring are critical leadership activities in the Navy. Still, their inclusion as sub-activities within the IDGO provides an opportunity to consider how other institutions approach the task. Specifically, the IDGO calls for the force to "develop and implement strategic coaching and mentoring programs." This sub-activity is similar to an effort by the American Economics Association (AEA) to create programs that target women and minority groups, both of whom are severely underrepresented in the field of economics. The AEA established two committees, one for each group. The Committee on the Status of Women in the Economics Profession (CSWEP) offers a program that matches female economics students with professional female economists. The Committee on the Status of Minority Groups in the Economics Profession (CSMGEP) offers a seven-week summer training program that provides intensive instruction in math and economics disciplines to 25 minority students. A study of the summer program revealed that participants in CSMGEP were more likely to complete an economics doctoral program and work in the field of economics compared with students who did not participate.
Another example of a deliberate effort to build diversity through coaching and mentorship is in the field of ecology. As in the Navy’s leadership ranks, there is little diversity in ecology: Since 2000, only 7.5 percent of all ecology Ph.D. recipients identify as nonwhite minorities and approximately one percent of all ecologists identifies as either black or African American. Black ecologists' challenge is the lack of representation, which, according to studies, creates feelings of professional isolation that cause minority students to consider abandoning the field. Recognizing this challenge, the Black Ecologists Section (BES) of the Ecological Society of America developed “concrete initiatives that actually foster and develop diversity at every academic stage.” Of the stated “aims” that support the BES mission, two center on the interpersonal relationships familiar to coaching and mentoring: creating and supporting efforts to increase opportunities for minority ecologists and facilitate and encourage collaboration among minority groups through professional events and advisory boards. To the BES, the scientific community can ill afford to lose the few young professionals steered away from ecology because of a tacit lack of mentorship.
Applications to the Fleet
Not every program designed to improve diversity in professional institutions may suit the Navy's needs. The military differs significantly from these institutions in that the term "total organization" describes the former: values, norms, beliefs, and even clothing are, at least, superficially similar. However, regarding diversity, the Navy is "open to diverse perspectives” and will “think differently to find every competitive advantage.” In support of this commitment, the Navy should consider the programs and initiatives of the professional institutions presented in this discussion within the Culture of Excellence (COE) framework, specifically in Command Resilience Team (CRT) and COE Working Group (COE WG) efforts.
- Proposed CRT activities: As the deckplate advocates for diversity in each command, internal and external collaboration must be the guideword for CRTs. No naval vessel or installation has a shortage of engineers, aviators, or physicians. Following the AEA and BES examples, CRTs can identify and develop critical professional competencies that can advance the careers of minority company and junior field grade officers seeking to lead beyond 20 years. Whether through formal professional workshops like AEA and BES, or mentorship through coffee talks like Children’s Mercy, Navy leaders can leverage local professional talent to build future diversity. In most locations, there are large communities that would invite engagement from Navy professionals. Like UMMSM, reaching out to young, diverse populations could help build the Navy's future diverse leadership.
- Recommended COE WG initiatives: As the Navy's forum for "key decision-makers" and "subject matter expertise," the COE WG can adopt two initiatives that could improve the Navy's future senior leadership diversity. First, just as Drexel Pathway to Medical School program identified metrics that predicted success for medical schools, the COE WG should investigate those academic or standardized metrics (beyond the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery) that lend to leaders' success in the Navy. Second, paralleling Children’s Mercy’s processes for choosing its future medical residents, to ensure selection boards consider diversity for desirable billets and command assignments, the COE WG can advocate for minority leaders on selection boards.
There also is an applicable lesson for the Navy in the struggles of IUB. Attempting to build a homogeneous fighting force from a diverse pool of individuals requires an understanding of inclusion that resonates with all races and ethnicities. As noted earlier, IUB did not institutionalize inclusion. An aptly titled article concisely summarizes the consequences of IUB’s mistake: “Diversity Doesn’t Stick Without Inclusion.” The article identifies "levers" that drive inclusion. Two of these levers directly apply to the Navy: inclusive leaders and authenticity. While this discussion focuses on building a diverse force by incorporating minority groups, inclusive leadership seeks to empower, giving a voice to all individuals regardless of race, creed, or gender. Complementing inclusive leadership is authenticity or the quality of an individual being their true self. It is not enough for the Navy's future senior leaders to espouse diversity and inclusion mandates. They must internalize and apply these principles.
The Best the United States Has to Offer
In 2045, the President of the United States will pose for a group portrait with DoD senior leaders for what should be a fairly innocuous picture. What will the American public see? Will the picture reflect the diversity of the American population? The Navy has a unique opportunity to shape its future leaders into a diverse and inclusive cadre. While the Navy's IDGO provides a detailed framework to guide inclusion and diversity efforts in many fields, similar efforts in healthcare, economics, and ecology can offer best practices. The Navy must ensure its future flag officers are inclusive leaders who lead the force with authenticity. With focused metrics, engagement, and coaching and mentoring, the Navy's future could reflect the best the United States has to offer.
