University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The underrepresentation of African American officers in senior leadership positions in the United States Army

(USC Thesis Other)

The underrepresentation of African American officers in senior leadership positions in the United States Army

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content The Underrepresentation of African American Officers in Senior Leadership Positions in
the United States Army
Andraus Lamar Williams
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education
May 2024

© Copyright by Andraus Lamar Williams 2024
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Andraus Lamar Williams certifies the approval of this Dissertation.
Anthony Maddox
Christopher Riddick
Monique Datta, Committee Chair
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2024

iv
Abstract
The underrepresentation of African American officers in senior leadership positions in the U.S.
Army has long been a concern due to disparities in career progression and limited opportunities
for advancement. This qualitative study sought to understand African American officers’ lived
experiences and perceptions and the factors contributing to their underrepresentation in the U.S.
Army. This research emphasizes the significance of addressing these challenges to foster greater
diversity and inclusivity in senior leadership roles, necessitating cultural and policy changes that
cultivate an environment of equity, inclusion, and opportunity. By leveraging the insights gained,
military leadership, policymakers, and human resource professionals can develop evidence-based
strategies to reduce underrepresentation, leading to improved decision-making, organizational
effectiveness, and overall mission success. Ultimately, this study calls for a concerted effort to
create a more inclusive and equitable environment in the U.S. Army that values all individuals’
talents, experiences, and perspectives. Additionally, the findings may assist others with
addressing the obstacles African American officers face, including disparities in promotion rates
and retention challenges, while sharing their narratives of navigating racial dynamics and their
potential impact on professional trajectories.
Keywords: African American, military, career development, trajectory, barrier, officer,
enlisted

v
Dedication
To my daughters, Andriel and Naihema, you are the lights of my life. Your constant support,
patience, and understanding during the challenging moments of my academic journey have been
invaluable. You have witnessed firsthand the sacrifices and dedication it takes to pursue higher
education, and I dedicate this work to you with the hope that it serves as a reminder to always
pursue your dreams.
To the memory of my beloved mother, Gloria Douglas, and aunt, Carolyn Pope, whose love,
encouragement, and wisdom have profoundly shaped my life. Though they are no longer with us,
their spirits continue to guide me and inspire my pursuit of knowledge.
To my beloved grandmother, Alberta Williams. Your prayers are still at work.
To my precious grandson Isaiah Immanuel Dominguez, you bring boundless joy and laughter to
our family. Your innocent curiosity and thirst for knowledge remind me of the importance of
lifelong learning. May this dedication inspire you to embrace education, explore your passions,
and positively impact the world.

vi
Acknowledgments
First and foremost, I thank God for the strength, boundless knowledge, and profound
wisdom bestowed upon me, leading me down this transformative path of academic growth.
Next, I would like to express my deepest appreciation to my dissertation Committee
Chair, Dr. Monique Datta. Monique, your steadfast guidance has been a beacon of light,
skillfully navigating the intricate academic vortex of research and knowledge. To the
distinguished members of my dissertation committee, Dr. Christopher Riddick and Dr. Anthony
Maddox, the Alpha and the Omega. Your invaluable time, profound expertise, and thoughtful
suggestions have served as pillars of strength, fortifying the outcome of this study.
To my remarkable research study participants, I wish to convey my heartfelt appreciation.
Your commitment, enthusiasm, and dedicated involvement throughout the research have been
truly transformative. Your contributions have left an indelible mark, fostering meaningful
advancements in research and understanding.
Moreover, I extend my sincere gratitude to the esteemed faculty and staff of the
University of Southern California. Their provision of a conducive academic environment and
access to invaluable resources have been paramount in propelling my scholarly pursuits forward.
Finally, to my family and friends, I offer my deepest thanks. Your boundless love and
understanding have been my steadfast pillars of strength throughout this arduous journey. I am
profoundly grateful to all who have played a role in this journey of academic growth and
achievement. Your contributions, whether big or small, have shaped the very essence of this
dissertation, propelling it toward success.

vii
Table of Contents
Abstract.......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication....................................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgments.......................................................................................................................... vi
List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. x
List of Figures................................................................................................................................ xi
List of Abbreviations .................................................................................................................... xii
Chapter One: Introduction to the Study.......................................................................................... 1
Context and Background of the Problem............................................................................ 2
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions.................................................................. 4
Importance of the Study...................................................................................................... 5
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology .................................................... 5
Definition of Terms............................................................................................................. 6
Organization of the Study ................................................................................................... 8
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature .......................................................................................... 9
Historical Overview............................................................................................................ 9
Influencing Factors on U.S. Army Careers....................................................................... 12
Military Culture and Structure .......................................................................................... 17
Factors Affecting African American Officer Promotion .................................................. 24
Conceptual Framework..................................................................................................... 26
Summary........................................................................................................................... 30
Chapter Three: Methodology........................................................................................................ 31
Research Questions........................................................................................................... 31

viii
Overview of Design .......................................................................................................... 31
Research Setting................................................................................................................ 32
The Researcher.................................................................................................................. 33
Data Sources ..................................................................................................................... 33
Participants........................................................................................................................ 34
Instrumentation ................................................................................................................. 34
Data Collection Procedures............................................................................................... 35
Data Analysis.................................................................................................................... 36
Credibility and Trustworthiness........................................................................................ 37
Ethics ............................................................................................................................... 37
Chapter Four: Findings................................................................................................................. 39
Participants........................................................................................................................ 39
Findings Related to Research Question 1 ......................................................................... 41
Findings for Research Question 2..................................................................................... 55
Summary........................................................................................................................... 72
Chapter Five: Recommendations.................................................................................................. 72
Limitations and Delimitations........................................................................................... 76
Recommendations for Future Research ............................................................................ 77
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 78
References..................................................................................................................................... 79
Appendix A: Interview Protocol and Questions........................................................................... 94
Introduction to the Interview ............................................................................................ 94
Conclusion to the Interview.............................................................................................. 97

ix
Appendix B: Recruitment Email................................................................................................... 98
Appendix C: Informed Consent Form .......................................................................................... 99

x
List of Tables
Table 1: Army Officer Ranks…………………………………………………………………….19
Table 2: Time in Grade for Army Officers……………………………………………………….20
Table 3: Active-Duty Officers in Various Pay Grades…………………………………………... 23
Table 4: Study Participant Demographic Data…………………………………………………...40
Table 5: Research Question 1 Themes…………………………………………………………...41
Table 6: Research Question 2 Themes…………………………………………………………...55
Table A1: Interview Protocol…………………………………………………………………….95

xi
List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework……………………………………………………………….. 29

xii
List of Abbreviations
AA Affirmative action
AKO Army Knowledge Online
DOD/U.S. DOD Department of Defense/U.S. Department of Defense
DODODEI Department of Defense Office for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
DOPMA Defense Officer Personnel Management Act
GAO Government Accountability Office
MEO Military equal opportunity
MLDC Military Leadership Diversity Commission
RAND Research and development
ROTC Reserve Officers’ Training Corps

1
Chapter One: Introduction to the Study
Enhancing diversity in the United States is an important goal in multiple areas of society,
including the U.S. Army. Disparities in military career leadership are evident, with fewer racial
and ethnic group representations in all branches of the armed forces (Schulker & Walsh, 2022).
African American officers are underrepresented in senior leadership positions in the U.S. Army
(Chivvis & Lauji, 2022). African Americans have served in military capacities since the Civil
War, fighting alongside their White counterparts to gain equality (Craddock, 2021). Despite this
fact, Craddock (2021) suggested that African American service members and officers continue to
face resistance concerning progressing through the ranks, particularly into positions of senior
leadership. Other researchers contend that career development differences before reaching a
selection board affect advancement and career progression (Schulker & Walsh, 2022).
The selection pathway to leadership positions includes patterns related to service
personnel’s high morale, ethical behavior, and competency (U.S. Army War College, 2020). The
current structure in the U.S. Army has an enlisted category and an officer category, with more
than two-thirds of African American personnel joining the enlisted ranks (U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics, 2023), limiting opportunities for advancement compared to their officer counterparts
(Armor & Gilroy, 2010). Factors that may hinder career trajectory include higher rates of
disciplinary action taken against African American service members compared to their White
counterparts (Kamarck, 2019), social bias (Gamble, 2020), racial stereotypes (Breslin et al.,
2022), limited exposure to career development options, and fewer role models (Chivvis & Lauji,
2022). This study focused on understanding the individual and environmental barriers to the
career trajectories of African Americans seeking senior officer positions in the U.S. Army.

2
Context and Background of the Problem
The U.S. Army’s operational environment is highly structured, particularly in its
command structure. The structure includes the Army headquarters, which oversees three primary
branches: Army commands, Army service component commands, and direct reporting units
(U.S. Army, 2023a). The organizational context meaningful to the study parameters is officers’
advancement and progression through the ranks. The first opportunity as an officer, considered
an entry-level role, is second lieutenant, followed by first lieutenant, captain, and major (U.S.
Army, 2023b). The senior advancement roles from these positions include progression to
lieutenant colonel, colonel, brigadier general, and major general. Roles that exceed these include
lieutenant general, general, and general of the Army. The primary roles for this research are
lieutenant colonels, colonels, brigadier generals, major generals, and generals.
The current Army mission, particularly related to increased diversity, plays a significant
role in this study. This study includes the following renewed mission developed by the
Department of Defense Office for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DODODEI):
We are committed to making the Department of Defense (DOD) a workplace of choice
characterized by diversity, equality, and inclusion. We remain steadfast in our
commitment to promote an environment free from barriers that may prevent personnel
from realizing their potential and rising to the highest levels of responsibility within the
Department. (DODODEI, 2020, p. v)
Considering this mission statement is essential when exploring the experiences of African
American officers seeking career progression in the U.S. Army. Challenges related to the
treatment of, and fairness allotted to, African Americans in the U.S. Army started when Black

3
soldiers were allowed into the armed forces. African Americans have served in the U.S. Army
since the Civil War (U.S. Army Center of Military History, 2022).
As of 2020, over 21 out of every 100 Army soldiers are African American, comprising
102,428 service members (DODODEI, 2020). Nearly 9% of all active-duty officers in the armed
forces comprise 6.5% of the general officer positions (Chivvis & Lauji, 2022). Chivvis and Lauji
(2022) determined that African Americans’ underrepresentation in senior officer positions
increased at the three- and four-star levels. Despite the urgency for recruiting and retaining
African American personnel, the absence of African American senior officers highlights the
problem of lack of inclusivity within the officer ranks.
Discrimination and social biases reinforce the status quo and lead to gaps in senior
leadership opportunities for African Americans. For instance, underrepresented groups
experience social biases in the military setting similar to those in the community setting
(Gamble, 2020). This study included differences in resource distribution, life chances, and lived
experiences. These differences impact patterns in decision-making processes or opportunities
allotted to African American service members and more so with African American women who
expressed challenges related to career progression. African American women in the military
expressed difficulties associated with gaining respect and a lack of encouragement to compete
for senior positions (Sherrer & Hayes-Burrell, 2023).
In recent years, the U.S. DOD has sought to improve racial and ethical diversity in all
sectors of the U.S. military. This approach includes incorporating affirmative action and military
equal opportunity (MEO) policies to help African Americans and other underrepresented officers
rise to the highest positions in the organization (Lytell et al., 2016). The secretary of defense’s
stated goal is to identify ways to “increase racial diversity and ensure equal opportunity across

4
all ranks … ensuring the armed forces look more like the broader society we serve” (Gamble,
2020, p. 57). A qualitative study by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace highlighted
the challenges for African American U.S. Army generals’ path to leadership. The researchers
contended that problems include reduced exposure to career development options and fewer role
models (Chivvis & Lauji, 2022).
One of the challenges the Army faces is that all members must meet specific
requirements, including physical fitness, age, and educational attainment (Kamarck, 2019). The
dilemma, therefore, continues to involve the need for all members to meet these requirements
while increasing diversity among leadership. Furthermore, fewer African Americans in
leadership positions means fewer African American mentors and sponsors for young African
American recruits and has a detrimental effect on path dependency. Path dependency is how
historical precedent influences or determines future behaviors (Hurd et al., 2012). If African
American recruits do not see opportunities for growth and pathways to senior leadership
positions, they become disengaged or leave the military (Ingram, 2020).
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions
This project explored the career trajectories of African American officers and their
perception of environmental influences that impact their career progression. This study identified
factors that may have led to their underrepresentation in senior officer positions. This research
investigated African American officers’ barriers and lived experiences related to career
progression. These officers’ experiences may assist in addressing barriers present for future
African American soldiers and officers seeking higher ranks and higher offices. The dissertation
research addressed two primary questions:

5
1. What are the perceived barriers that affect the career development of African
American officers?
2. What are the lived experiences that affect African American officers’ career
progression in the U.S. Army?
Importance of the Study
This qualitative study explored the factors affecting African American career
development in the U.S. Army. As diversity remains a critical goal for the Army, it is essential to
address recruitment and retention and increase diversity among the senior leadership ranks. The
study provides insight into present barriers, lived experiences, potential patterns, and
environmental factors affecting African American military personnel. Understanding these
factors aids in developing future policies that can assist in alleviating present barriers and
creating conducive environments for future rank advancement among African American officers
and soldiers serving in the U.S. Army (Armor & Gilroy, 2010).
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
The theoretical framework selected for this study is Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) ecological
systems theory, which involves five distinct systems: microsystem, mesosystem, ecosystem,
macrosystem, and chronosystem. It perceives human development through environmental
interconnectedness, directly and indirectly impacting psychological growth (Bronfenbrenner,
1979; Crawford, 2020). According to Bronfenbrenner, individual human behavior is the
exploration of the interaction with interrelated systems in their environment (as cited in
Crawford, 2020). Bronfenbrenner’s theory also shows how various social and environmental
structures interact. The primary focus of this study was African American Army officers; as
such, it explored individual and environmental influences.

6
The methodology used in this study is qualitative, relying on semi-structured interviews.
Qualitative research allows for the exploration of a phenomenon and the subjective interpretation
by individuals (Busetto et al., 2020). The interviews yielded open-ended answers and allowed
participants to dive deep into their experiences throughout their military careers and consider
their family background, upbringing, and other systemic variables. The questions guiding the
interview were semi-structured and informed by the literature review.
Definition of Terms
The definitions provided align with the definitions by the U.S. DOD, the Military
Leadership Diversity Commission (MLDC), and the RAND Corporation.
Affirmative action refers to “processes, activities, and systems designed to prevent,
identify, and eliminate unlawful discriminatory treatment as it affects the recruitment, training,
assignment, utilization, promotion, and retention of military personnel” (Lytell et al., 2016, p. 3).
African American refers to people having origins in any of the Black race groups of
Africa. (McKinnon, 2001, p. 1).
Armed Forces of the United States (military) refers to “collectively all components of the
Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force, and Coast Guard” (U.S. Department of Defense [U.S.
DOD], 2021, p. 18).
Army refers to armed forces coordinating objectives, tactical missions, brigades, and
combat on land (U.S. DOD, 2021).
Colonel refers to an officer who leads a brigade of three or more battalions comprised of
1,500-3,200 soldiers (U.S. Army, 2023b).

7
Diversity refers to “all the different characteristics and attributes of individuals from
varying demographics consistent with the DoD’s core values, integral to overall readiness and
mission accomplishment, and reflective of the nation we serve” (U.S. DOD, 2020, p. 3).
General refers to a senior-level commissioned officer, typically with 30 years of service
and experience in the armed forces (U.S. Army, 2023b).
Inclusion refers to “a set of behaviors (culture) that encourages Service members and
civilian employees to feel valued for unique qualities and to experience a sense of belonging”
(U.S. DOD, 2020, p. 3).
Lieutenant colonel refers to an officer who leads a battalion of 3 to 5 companies
comprising 300-1,000 soldiers (U.S. Army, 2023b).
Military officer refers to an officer in the military with a position of authority in the
armed forces: Field officer (U.S. DOD, 2021).
Major refers to “the primary staff officer for brigade and task force command regarding
personnel, logistical and operational missions” (U.S. Army, 2023b).
Major general refers to the office that “typically commands division-sized units (10,000
to 16,000 soldiers)” (U.S. Army, 2023b).
Military equal opportunity (MEO) refers to “the right of all military personnel to
participate in and benefit from programs and activities for which they are qualified. These
programs and activities shall be free from social, personal, or institutional barriers that prevent
people from rising to the highest level of responsibility possible” (Lytell et al., 2016, p. 3).
Senior officer refers to the middle-ranking or higher military officer above field officer
rank (U.S. DOD, 2021).
Soldier refers to an active member of the armed forces (U.S. DOD, 2021).

8
Organization of the Study
The dissertation study followed the standard five-chapter format. Chapter One states the
study’s purpose and the research background. Chapter Two includes a comprehensive review of
the relevant literature and discusses the conceptual framework in greater detail. Chapter Three
provides a clear description of the research methodology and questions. This chapter provides a
thorough overview of the research methodology, research design, setting, the researcher, data
sources, participants, instrumentation, data production procedures, data analysis, and the
credibility and trustworthiness of the instruments and procedures used. Chapter Three also
describes the ethical components of conducting research with human participants. Chapter Four
discusses the results and findings of the study. This chapter includes findings and a discussion of
the research questions posed. Finally, Chapter Five presents’ recommendations for future
research based on the study findings and concludes the study.

9
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
This chapter examined the literature on factors contributing to African Americans’
underrepresentation in senior leadership roles at the rank of lieutenant colonel/O5 and above in
the U.S. Army. Diversity is a critical goal for the U.S. Army (DODODEI, 2020); therefore, it is
essential to address recruitment and retention and increase diversity among senior leadership
ranks (Reyes, 2006). This chapter includes a historical overview, factors influencing U.S. Army
careers, military structure and culture, different realities in the military ranks, career trajectories
of officers and enlisted, and the conceptual framework. In addition, the topics discussed include
African American officers’ barriers and lived experiences and the challenges associated with
career progression.
Historical Overview
A central institution in developing the United States, the U.S. Army was historically
composed solely of White officers. The Army’s formation occurred before independence and
was modeled after British customs and standards (Ganoe, 1924). Military historians refer to the
U.S. Army as “that institution which has been the greatest single factor in the building of our
nation” (Ganoe, 1924, p. vii). It took well over a century for the United States to maintain a fullstanding army, replete with officer training, professional development, and full integration into
American political culture (MacGregor, 2001). Insufficient and inconsistent manpower for a
standing army remained a persistent and pernicious concern, ultimately leading to the admission
of non-Whites (Kreidberg & Henry, 1955).
Slavery and racism in the United States impacted individual and organizational
relationships in general society and the military. During the 1700s, people of color played
integral roles in military campaigns but lacked official integration into the Army (Lutz, 2008).

10
The Army marginalized and discriminated against people of color, an issue that remains
unchanged (Wieffering, 2021). African American soldiers, for instance, were frequently enslaved
and forced to fight for White enslavers (Krauthamer, 2013). Although they were recruited
sporadically and for emergency or auxiliary roles, African Americans and Native Americans
provided the manpower to secure a victory in the Revolutionary War. Compensation such as
citizenship or legal rights was absent for African Americans and Native Americans despite
service to the United States (Nalty, 1986). However, despite adversity and systemic barriers,
African Americans have significantly contributed to the nation’s defense (Glaude, 2016). Their
dedication to duty and country is a testament to their role in shaping the military’s history
(Wright, 2003). Furthermore, exploring the role of African Americans in the military reveals a
dynamic and impactful legacy that spans throughout the nation’s history.
African Americans in the Military
After the military reorganization, the U.S. Army took steps to address the historical
exclusion and racism toward African Americans. The passing of the Army Reorganization Act
(1866) established the Colored Regiments and the Indian Scout program for Native Americans in
the U.S. Army (Krueger, 2020). These regiments were strictly segregated (Krueger, 2020). By
the Civil War, more African Americans enlisted in the military, with 186,000 serving in 16
combat regiments and countless more serving as support staff (MacGregor et al., 2020). The
segregated regiments paved the way for subsequent integration into the armed forces and broader
conversations about racism, political parity, and social justice (MacGregor et al., 2020).
The history of African American officers in the U.S. military has been the subject of
significant academic research. According to Salter (2014), African American officers were first
commissioned during the Civil War but excluded from officer positions in the Army until World

11
War I. During this time, the Army created all African American units, such as the 369th Infantry
Regiment and the 92nd Infantry Division, led by African American officers (Salter, 2014).
However, despite these units’ accomplishments, African American officers continued to face
discrimination and limited career opportunities (MacGregor, (1981).
The inclusion of African Americans into the Army expanded into World War II. During
World War II, the Army expanded opportunities by creating officer candidate schools for
African American soldiers (Lipsitz et al., 1990). One of the most notable officers during this
period was Benjamin O. Davis Jr., who became the first African American General in the U.S.
Air Force (MacGregor et al., 2020). Davis faced significant discrimination and resistance
throughout his career but persevered to become a highly respected military leader (MacGregor et
al., 2020).
Despite progress, discrimination and segregation have persisted in the Army, with
African American officers often serving in separate units and facing limited opportunities for
advancement (Wineman, 2013). It was not until the Civil Rights Movement and the passage of
legislation such as the Civil Rights Act (1964) that the military started to integrate African
American officers fully into all branches of the armed forces (Salter, 2014). The historical
experiences of African Americans in the military highlight their contributions while also
underscoring the enduring challenges of diversity and systemic racism that necessitate ongoing
efforts to cultivate an inclusive and equitable environment.
Diversity and Systemic Racism in the Army
Racism and discrimination in the Army paralleled racism and discrimination throughout
American society. The U.S. Army attempted to foster a diverse organization, yet biased
structures prevented progress for African Americans. Furthermore, the Army has historically

12
employed discriminatory processes to evaluate enlistees while often deeming non-White
applicants unfit for service (Osur, 1977; U.S. Army Center of Military History, (n.d.) Legal
efforts to alter segregated practices improved the ability of African Americans to receive justice
for discriminatory personnel procedures (U.S. Army Center of Military History, n.d).
Furthermore, racism and discrimination remained overt practices, while the more general tacit
approval of a segregated society remained embedded within the development of the U.S. Army
(Bryant-Lees et al., 2021).
The 2019 Government Accountability Office (GAO) data revealed that authorities
disproportionately investigate, issue nonjudicial punishments for, or court-martial African
Americans more frequently than any other group, highlighting an issue with inclusivity and
diversity in the U.S. military structure and culture (Osur, 1977; U.S. Army Center of Military
History, n.d). These findings emphasize the need for persistent endeavors in addressing systemic
inequalities and shed light on the influential factors impacting African American officers’ U.S.
Army careers.
Influencing Factors on U.S. Army Careers
Racial bias, discrimination, and stereotyping influence and hinder African American
personnel’s opportunities and advancement in the U.S. Army. Thus, research on barriers African
American Army personnel face concerning career advancement is essential (Comeaux et al.,
2020). Previous studies documented the persistence of racial bias and discrimination in the U.S.
Army, which can manifest as unequal opportunities for career advancement, negative
evaluations, and restricted access to networking and mentoring opportunities (Amoakoh &
Smith, 2020; Comeaux et al., 2020; Jackson & Bouchard, 2019). African American U.S. Army
personnel may also experience stereotype threat, a phenomenon in which the dread of

13
conforming to negative racial stereotypes hinders performance and motivation (Shepherd et al.,
2021). Stereotyping, discrimination, and racism can impede career advancement by diminishing
self-confidence, job satisfaction, and ambition (Shepherd et al., 2021).
Another factor impacting the career development of African American U.S. Army
personnel is underrepresentation in leadership. The underrepresentation of African Americans in
leadership positions in the U.S. Army requires more role models and mentors, reducing
opportunities for career guidance, sponsorship, and networking (Vaara et al., 2023). These
researchers argued that lack of representation could further decrease confidence and selfefficacy, limiting African American Army personnel’s ability to succeed. Underrepresentation in
leadership adversely affects African Americans’ career development in the U.S. Army (Richard
& Molloy, 2020; Vaara et al., 2023).
Cultural differences and a lack of cultural competence are additional factors that
influence the underrepresentation of African American military personnel. Cultural differences
between African Americans and their White colleagues can lead to misunderstandings, biased
evaluations, and social isolation, which can impede career advancement (Seol et al., 2023). Lack
of cultural competence and increased cultural differences hinder African American Army
personnel’s ability to succeed in the military, their careers, or socially (Breeden et al., 2023; Seol
et al., 2023).
Disparities in educational attainment and access to quality education can also limit U.S.
Army African American personnel’s career opportunities, as many military occupations require
specific academic qualifications. As a result of racial disparities, there are fewer opportunities for
developing social capital through connections and networking, which can impede African
Americans’ career advancement and access to promotions (Hernandez-Gantes & Fletcher Jr.,

14
2022). Systemic barriers, such as disparities in educational attainment and access to quality
education in the U.S. Army, perpetuate disparities in career development and advancement
opportunities for African American personnel (McCluney & Rabelo, 2019). Understanding these
challenges emphasizes the need for the U.S. Army to address recruitment and orientation
processes to foster greater inclusivity and equal opportunities for all its members.
Recruitment and Orientation
The U.S. military’s recruitment and orientation processes influence recruits’ lived
experiences and ability to access equitable resources. In 1970, the draft was dismantled, and the
Army used new recruitment tactics to fulfill the demand for personnel (Lim et al., 2009). As an
all-volunteer force, the Army attracted potential recruits using marketing and public relations
strategies (Ghilani, 2020). For example, in an analysis of the archival records, Ghilani (2020)
presented how the Army positioned itself as a “meritocratic utopia” using “pro-equality
discourses popularized through social movement rhetoric” (p. 16). To a large degree, such proequality discourse persisted in contemporary society as the Army’s official publications tout the
organization’s commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), yet it fails to integrate these
approaches into practice (Proctor, 2020).
After World War II, the Army publicized the importance of diversity and gender
inclusion (Lim et al., 2009). For decades, the Army has attracted diverse enlistees and has been
an emblem of integration and diversity (Lim et al., 2009). The Reserve Officers’ Training Corps
(ROTC) program’s recruitment has also increased diversity (Reyes, 2006), and soliciting
enlistees with diverse occupational interests and academic backgrounds has enhanced the
Army’s recruitment tactics for ensuring diversity (Garamone, 2021). However, Lim et al. (2009)
indicated that African Americans are overrepresented in proportion to their representation in

15
society during the recruitment and enlistment stages and still struggle with discrimination and
racism within the ranks. Thus, despite the Army’s investment in recruitment methods, the lack of
a formal retention strategy and effective measures to combat racism experienced by African
American enlistees persist (Garamone, 2021; Lim et al., 2009; Proctor, 2020; Reyes, 2006). One
viable pathway to tackling challenges involves cultivating leadership that promotes diversity and
addresses barriers to equality in the Army (Lim et al., 2009; Reyes, 2006). African American
Army officers can pursue leadership pathways that foster diversity, address barriers to equality,
and promote inclusive leadership in the military.
Leadership Pathway
Leadership in the Army can be an opportunity to improve representation, address racism,
and remove barriers African American personnel face. Promotion processes determine the
demographic composition of Army officers. The Army has formal diversity goals regarding
promotion strategies (U.S. Army Center of Military History, 2023). However, considering the
significant proportion of African American enlistees, the Army’s underrepresentation of African
Americans in leadership positions reflects deficiencies in its promotion processes and retention
strategies (Garamone, 2021; Lim et al., 2009; Reyes, 2006). Racially biased decisions can occur
in the promotion process, resulting in the passing over of highly qualified African Americans in
favor of less qualified White candidates. This unfairness and frustration can lead to the loss of
highly qualified personnel and contribute to a less robust and diverse leadership corps (Chivvis
& Lauji, 2022).
Multiple pathways exist for African American Army personnel to ascend to leadership
(Lim et al., 2009). Previous combat experience (such as front-line engagement with enemy
forces) and university education approaches allow for leadership promotion (Reyes, 2006). Both

16
combat experience and university degrees are prerequisites for effective Army leadership; when
factors are considered part of the promotion process, African Americans gain opportunities for
advancement. For example, promotion is difficult for African Americans despite serving in
combat roles that would boost their chances of promotion to senior officer ranks (Reyes, 2006).
Furthermore, according to Gamble (2020), due to educational disparities, African Americans are
less likely to graduate college than their White counterparts, which creates a disadvantage for
those seeking promotions to leadership roles. As a result, leadership ascension is complicated for
African Americans because of systematic biases in education, career opportunity disparities, and
promotional biases (Gamble, 2020; Lim et al., 2009; Reyes, 2006).
To further address diversity disparities, mentorship emerges as another valuable
opportunity, involving officers of equal rank or specifically pairing African American personnel
with mentors (Gamble, 2020; Lim et al., 2009). Implementing effective mentorship practices
supports the advancement of individuals toward leadership positions in the military, holding
significant importance for African American Army officers.
Mentorship
Mentorship holds immense importance in the U.S. Army as it catalyzes personal and
professional growth, knowledge transfer, and leadership development. Mentorship improves
morale, aids in career development, and promotes a healthy and sustainable culture in the
military (Reyes, 2006). For example, those with mentors go farther in their careers and are more
likely to achieve senior officer status, while those without mentors have shorter careers (Gamble,
2020). Reyes (2006) highlighted that African Americans encounter numerous barriers to
mentoring, including the scarcity of African American mentors (Lim et al., 2009). Mentorship is
crucial in advancing and supporting African American Army officers, as mentors can provide

17
guidance, opportunities, and a framework to address diversity disparities and promote inclusivity
in the U.S. Army. However, it is important to acknowledge that while mentorship plays a pivotal
role, it may not always be readily accessible for African Americans in the U.S. military (Lim et
al., 2009; Reyes, 2006). This highlights the lack of importance of creating inclusive
environments and support networks to ensure equitable opportunities for career advancement and
success.
The Army attempted to promote mentoring to fulfill human resource management
objectives, but initiatives still needed to meet the desired diversity and inclusivity objectives. For
example, in 2005, the Army introduced the Army Knowledge Online (AKO) Mentorship
Community, but participation in such programs was voluntary (Reyes, 2006). Research on the
efficacy of within-group versus group-irrelevant mentorship remains inconclusive (Reyes, 2006).
Gamble (2020) determined that mentoring was effective regardless of whether the mentor and
mentee shared similar backgrounds. Conversely, Reyes (2006) argued that Whites mentoring
African Americans is often problematic and counterproductive. Ideally, mentorship should
promote visibility and exposure to career-building opportunities. To obtain guidance in the U.S.
Army, African American mentees need more exposure to formal and informal pathways
(Gamble, 2020; Reyes, 2006). While mentorship can contribute to the ascension of African
American Army officers into senior leadership positions, it is essential to recognize that the
military culture and structure also influence this process.
Military Culture and Structure
Analyses of military culture and structure consider the hierarchical nature of the U.S.
Army and other military organizations that exert considerable influence over promotional
practices. In a hierarchical organization, senior leaders exercise command and control over large

18
segments or units, with the individuals in subordinate positions implementing the commands of
superiors (Mattila et al., 2017). Officers in the Army must assimilate the norms, values, and
beliefs of the organization that compose Army culture and act accordingly to receive promotions
(Vangjel, 2020). Regardless of policies and directives intended to promote impartiality, biases
can become implicit in organizational culture, influencing decision-making in essential areas
such as selecting individuals for promotion (McClellan, 2021). African American officers have
historically faced challenges in navigating these structures due to systemic barriers, yet they have
made significant contributions to the armed forces, bringing diverse perspectives and leadership
to their roles (Chivvis & Lauji, 2022).
Organizations reflect the collective identity of the individual members. Evidence from
investigations of U.S. Army culture suggests that the organization reflects the social norms and
values embedded in American institutions, including the residual effects of White supremacy and
racism (Gamble, 2020). The concept of White supremacy in this context refers to systematic
interactions resulting in the oppression of African American officers because of their race
(Banaji et al., 2021). Compared to White officers, the implicit social bias results in a lower rate
of advancement for African American officers. (Ender & Lucal, 2019; Gamble, 2020). The role
of military culture also includes Army ranks that play a role in position and leadership
opportunities, which help shape the experiences and advancement trajectories of African
American officers within the armed forces.
Army Ranks
The U.S. Army utilizes a hierarchical system of various ranks to designate different
levels of authority and responsibility. Each rank carries specific duties, privileges, and
expectations, with promotions typically based on a combination of factors, including time in

19
service, performance evaluations, and completion of required training and education. The ranks
are categorized into three main types: enlisted ranks, warrant officer ranks, and commissioned
officer ranks. According to Mattila et al. (2017), military rank identifies the position of an
individual in the organization. Enlisted ranks constitute the majority of the force and start with
privates and progress to higher ranks such as sergeants, first sergeants, and command sergeant
majors. Warrant officers hold specialized expertise and technical knowledge, with their ranks
ranging from Warrant Officer 1 to Chief Warrant Officer 5. Officers advance in positions
referred to as grades with the size of the unit under the command of the officer related to grade.
Officers are responsible for the planning and motivation of subordinates. Army officers serve in
ranks of 11, ranging from second lieutenant, corresponding to the O1 grade, to General of the
Army, corresponding to the O11 grade (see Table 1). Officers with the rank of O5 lieutenant
colonel, also known as field-grade officers in senior leadership positions, may eventually
advance to colonel or general depending on perceptions of their performance.
Table 1
Army Officer Ranks
Grade Rank
O1 Second lieutenant
O2 First lieutenant
O3 Captain
O4 Major
O5 Lieutenant colonel
O6 Colonel
O7 Brigadier general
O8 Major general
O9 Lieutenant general
O10 General
O11 General of the Army

20
Promotional Requirements and Time in Grade
The Army assigns officers to a promotional cohort based on the year they enter the Army.
Hall and Fu (2015) noted that the Defense Officer Personnel Management Act (DOPMA)
controls the percentage of officers at each rank, with 11% of Army officers permitted to reach
the rank of lieutenant colonel. Less than 1% of officers reach the rank of brigadier general or
higher (Kapp, 2016). Eligibility for promotion depends on sufficient time in grade as determined
by DOPMA. However, time-in-service requirements only apply to officers reaching the rank of
brigadier general or higher.
Time in grade refers to the minimum period an individual must serve in their current rank
before becoming eligible for promotion to the next higher rank. This system ensures that
individuals have gained sufficient experience and honed their skills before taking on more
significant leadership roles. The duration of time in grade varies depending on the rank and can
range from months to several years. The officers pass through promotional zones based on time
in grade, with the possibility of some officers being selected for advancement below the zone
ahead of cohort peers. The Army separates from the service officers who fail to receive
promotion twice after reaching a maximum time in grade (McKenzie, 2011). Table 2 shows the
officers’ time in grade requirements.
Table 2
Time in Grade for Army Officers
Promotion Minimum time Maximum time
O1 to O2 18 months 48 months
O2 to O3 24 months 5 years
O3 to O4 4 years 7 years
O4 to O5 4 years 7 years
O6 to O7 3 years N/A

21
Requirements for Promotion to O5 Grade or Higher
Officers must meet specific requirements and exhibit exceptional qualifications and
performance to attain promotion to the O5 grade or higher in the military. Superior officers,
constituting a selection board, decide to promote officers to these ranks. The selection board
relies on information in officer performance records, which are performance evaluations
compiled by the officer’s past superior officers (Evans, 2018). In addition to positive evaluations,
an officer considered for promotion to field-grade positions of O5 or higher must have had the
appropriate experience in command of units and the professional development history deemed
appropriate by the selection board (Taylor, 2015). Experience can include command of units
related to the officer’s specialty, such as combat commands. Professional development includes
sufficient internal training, such as the Army War College, and external training, such as earning
advanced academic degrees (Kapp, 2016). The promotional process is fundamentally subjective
and depends on the quality of the officer’s relationships with past and present commanding
officers (Taylor, 2015). In addition, the Army limits the number of above-average performance
ratings that a commanding officer can give subordinate officers. Evans (2018) learned that
officers who received two or fewer above-average performance ratings had a promotion
probability of less than 20%.
The slower promotion rate to major has a ripple effect on subsequent promotions to fieldgrade positions. Randolph and Nisbett (2019) indicated that African American officers have
risen from captain to major at a below-average rate for the past 4 decades. In 2020, only one
African American lieutenant colonel was a battalion commander out of 218 combat battalions in
the Army, with the lack of combat unit experience contributing to the slow promotion rate for
African American officers (Brook, 2020). When examining race and ethnicity trends in the U.S.

22
Army, it becomes apparent that disparities and inequities exist in terms of representation and
opportunities for advancement among different racial and ethnic groups.
Race and Ethnicity Trends in the U.S. Army
The U.S. Army and other military branches aim to move beyond mere diversity and strive
for inclusivity. This goal involves incorporating individuals from diverse backgrounds into all
military positions, including senior leadership roles (Davis et al., 2018). A trend in the Army
related to inclusivity is to use objective and standardized assessments that include diversity,
equity, and inclusiveness when considering promotional qualifications (Holt & Davis, 2022).
The approach differs from the traditional time in grade, experience criteria, and performance
reports by considering the officer’s knowledge, skills, and behavior to create a more flexible
career path. The new assessment system could indicate that in the future, there will be more
opportunities for African American and minority officers to fill senior leadership positions.
Another general trend in the Army is to decrease the enlisted personnel-to-officer ratio,
with officers now supervising fewer enlisted personnel. The ratio has decreased from 5:1 in 2010
to 4:1 in 2021 (U.S. DOD, 2010, 2021). The trend in the percentage of officers in racial
minorities in the Army is static at approximately 27%. Racial minorities include African
Americans, Hispanics, Asians, and other racial or ethnic minorities (U.S. DOD, 2021).
Individuals identifying as Hispanic are part of the most rapidly growing racial or ethnic group in
the Army, increasing from 10.8% of active-duty soldiers in 2010 to 17.7% in 2021 (U.S. DOD,
2010, 2021). Racial demographics also shed light on the ascension and composition of Army
ranks.

23
Racial Demographics
Racial demographics in the U.S. Army hold significant importance as they reflect the
representation and diversity in the military. It is essential to accurately represent the nation’s
racial demographics in the armed forces to ensure fair and equitable opportunities, promote
inclusivity, and foster a sense of belonging among all service members (U.S. DOD, 2020).
Approximately 12.3% of the officers in the Army identify as Black or African American (U.S.
DOD, 2021). The DOD needs to maintain current information concerning the number of officers
identifying as Hispanic in various pay grades (U.S. DOD, 2021) and found that minority groups
other than African Americans and Hispanics represent a small percentage of officers. Table 3
shows the percentage of active-duty African American and White officers at various grades, with
the representation of African American officers below the percentage of African Americans in
the general population of 12.1%.
Table 3
Active-Duty Officers in Various Pay Grades
Pay grade African American White
O1–O3 8.6% 74.4%
O4–O6 8.1% 80.3%
O7–O10 7.5% 88.8%
Note. Adapted from Department of Defense Board on Diversity and Inclusion report:
Recommendations to improve racial and ethnic diversity and inclusion in the U.S. military by
U.S. Department of Defense, 2020. (https://media.defense.gov/2020/Dec/18/2002554852/-1/-
1/0/dod-diversity-and-inclusion-final-board-report.pdf). In the public domain

24
Factors Affecting African American Officer Promotion
Various factors significantly impact the promotion of African American military officers.
These factors encompass a range of elements, including systemic biases, career progression
opportunities, mentoring and sponsorship, performance evaluations, and the overall
organizational culture and climate (Smith, 2010). A theme in the research investigating the lower
percentages of African Americans in higher officer grades is implicit bias influencing the
selection process (Caldwell, 2019; McClellan, 2020). Implicit bias involves stereotypes
unconsciously affecting the understanding and decisions of individuals who often do not realize
the existence of the bias (McClellan, 2020). According to Tully and Chilton (2020), racial and
other types of bias stem from the social categories developed to classify differences from the
dominant social group carried into the U.S. Army as an extension of general cultural or social
norms. The classifications, such as African American, are based on superficial characteristics
and are irrelevant to the core values and performance abilities important to the Army. Based on
the evidence concerning the percentage of African American officers in various ranks compared
to White officers in similar ranks, Smith (2010) argued that implicit bias slows the progression of
African American officers in lower ranks. Officers may leave the Army due to non-selection of
advancement at lower ranks, leaving fewer qualified candidates for senior-rank positions.
African Americans who challenge the leadership structure risk negative reputations and
unfavorable performance evaluations. Davis (2018) identified the experience of unofficial and
usually clandestine explicit racial discrimination against African American Army officers by
peers or even subordinates as evidence of promotional barriers. Davis also determined that
African American officers challenging the racial insensitivity of peers or leaders developed a
negative reputation among other officers that could undermine future promotion. Evidence from

25
the analysis of interviews with African American officers conducted by Parsons (2023)
demonstrated that positive relationships with peers contributed to improved combat officers’
performance and eventual promotion. Conversely, poor relationships with peers because of
covert discriminatory attitudes can hamper performance and promotion.
Evidence from various studies indicates that insufficient mentoring is a barrier hampering
the promotion of African American Army officers to senior ranks (Davis, 2018; Parsons, 2023;
Randolph & Nisbett, 2019). Using data from interviews, researchers determined that African
American female officers experienced a lack of mentoring opportunities if they did not attend a
military academy (Davis, 2018; Parsons, 2023; Randolph & Nisbett, 2019). While mentoring
programs exist to support retention among junior African American officers, the mentoring does
not prepare the officers for advancement to field grade. Randolph and Nisbett’s (2019) survey
demonstrated that African American officers perceived differences in the availability of
mentoring by senior officers based on race despite Army policies encouraging inclusive
mentoring. In a phenomenological study using interview data, Parsons (2023) also illustrated that
mentoring was influential in promoting African American officers.
African American officers’ command experience affects ascension opportunities. Several
studies indicate that African American officers often do not have the combat command
experience necessary to obtain promotion to more senior positions (Caldwell, 2019; Parsons,
2023; Ralston & Spindel, 2022). Based on interview data, Caldwell (2019) concluded that
African American officers often do not pursue careers in combat arms branches of the Army.
Using data from survey research, Ralston and Spindel (2022) argued that African American
officers who do not serve in combat command positions lack the contacts and reputation
necessary for promotion.

26
Promotion barriers include command experience. Moore (2012) suggested that the early
assignment of African American officers to non-combat military branches is a significant barrier
to promotion to senior ranks. The argument was based on the MLDC observation that the Army
often assigns new African American officers to support branches not directly engaged in combat
operations, such as the quartermaster corps, based on the need during commissioning. The
assignments to branches are determined by the commissioning source, with tactical or combat
positions preferentially assigned to officers from the U.S. Military Academy. The support
branches need more senior leaders, limiting advancement opportunities for African American
officers.
Conceptual Framework
Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) ecological systems theory provides the conceptual framework
for the study, as it provides a valuable framework for understanding the challenges African
American service members face in the Army. This theory emphasizes the complex interplay
between individual factors, such as race and gender, and the larger social and cultural contexts in
which individuals exist (Crawford, 2020). The theory considers the interactions of the individual
with five ecological systems identified as the microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem,
macrosystem, and chronosystem. The interactions are central to the individual’s psychological
development and behavioral adaptations. The interaction element of the theory suggests that
environmental forces choose and shape individual experiences (Bronfenbrenner, 1979).
Microsystem
The microsystem encompasses the closest relationships to an individual, comprising
elements like family, friends, and work colleagues with whom the individual maintains regular
contact (Crawford, 2020). In the case of an African American Army officer, this encompasses

27
the enlisted personnel under the officer’s command, as well as their family and friends who
interact with the officer. However, African American officers may face challenges when it
comes to establishing relationships with both subordinates and superiors, as perceived racial or
cultural differences can hinder rapport building. Furthermore, African American officers may
encounter instances of discrimination or harassment from peers or superiors, leading to a hostile
or unwelcoming environment. These interactions between the individual and the various
elements in the microsystem significantly influence their development and perspectives.
Mesosystem
The mesosystem encompasses interactions within and between various systems affecting
an individual, such as the officer’s family, the duty station, and the relationships among other
officers and enlisted personnel under the officer’s command. It is a system of interconnected
microsystems that influence the individual (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). These linkages can either
work in harmony or conflict with each other, shaping the individual’s experiences. At the
mesosystem level, the interactions between different systems in the Army play a significant role
in shaping African American service members’ experiences.
Research has shown that the military justice system’s policies and practices can
disproportionately impact African American service members, leading to higher rates of
disciplinary action and lower rates of promotion (Christensen, 2017). Moreover, interactions
between the military and civilian communities can also influence African American service
members’ experiences. They may face discrimination or lack of support in their personal lives
outside of the military, which can profoundly impact their overall well-being and sense of
belonging (Merians et al., 2023).

28
Exosystem
The exosystem consists of environments that indirectly influence an individual’s
development, even though they may not have direct contact with them (Eriksson et al., 2018).
Exosystem influences include the workplaces of African American officers, community
resources, and government policies. The exosystem influences the larger social system and
environment. Whereas the micro and mesosystems affect an individual’s behavior, the
exosystem functions within the environmental factors associated with these influential social
structures (Bronfenbrenner, 1977). Moods, stressors, and behaviors influence the exosystem.
Macrosystem
The macrosystem is the broader cultural context in which an individual lives, which
includes societal values, customs, and traditions (de Vos et al., 2019). The macrosystem is the
most distant influence on a person’s development, including the economy, political systems, and
social norms. Also, the macrosystem consists of social or societal norms, such as gender norms,
behavioral norms, and religious community norms, among other norms.
Chronosystem
The chronosystem is a component that Bronfenbrenner (1977) added to his model later.
According to the ecological system theory, the chronosystem involves the changes in social
attitudes toward African Americans over time and the changes due to maturation in the officer,
leading to new behaviors. The chronosystem incorporates the element of time during which
individuals develop and mature. Furthermore, time also includes changes in the other systems,
such as gradually adopting new social norms and values. The chronosystem consists of internal
and external elements that impact an individual based on the other four systems. Figure 1 shows
the relationships of the systems described in the ecological systems theory.

29
Figure 1
Conceptual Framework
Note. The letter “S” at the center stands for “Soldier.” From Ecological systems theory: Using
spheres of influence to support small-unit climate and training by T. Walker, 2016. U.S. Army
Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences. (https://doi.org/10.21236/AD1009046)
In the public domain.

30
Summary
The underrepresentation of African American officers in senior leadership positions in
the U.S. Army has raised significant concerns for the military. Despite attempts to promote
diversity and equal opportunities, African Americans still need to be more represented in higher
ranks. This literature review overviews the current understanding of the experiences and career
paths of African Americans aspiring for senior leadership positions, particularly at the rank of
O5 and above.
The review examined pertinent literature that addressed various critical aspects and
factors. These encompassed an examination of the historical context of racial segregation and
discrimination, shedding light on the influence of such factors in shaping African American
officers’ experiences. Additionally, the literature review delved into the impact of military
structure and culture on career advancement, highlighting potential barriers and opportunities.
Furthermore, the review explored the challenges associated with limited access to education and
opportunities, the intricacies of promotion and selection processes, the significance of
mentorship and networking in fostering career growth, and the retention challenges African
American officers face in senior leadership positions.

31
Chapter Three: Methodology
This project explored the career trajectories of African American officers and their
perception of environmental influences that impact their career progression. This chapter
describes the study’s methodology, focusing on how the research was designed and executed.
The chapter begins by describing the research questions and the research method and design
selected for the study. The chapter also discusses the research setting, the researcher, and the data
sources.
Research Questions
In the context of African American officers’ career development and progression in the
U.S. Army, their perceived barriers and their lived experiences require examination. By
exploring these factors, the study offers insight into African American officers’ challenges and
obstacles in their professional journeys. The following research questions guided the study:
1. What are the perceived barriers that affect the career development of African
American officers?
2. What are the lived experiences that affect African American officers’ career
progression in the U.S. Army?
Overview of Design
The research method employed in this dissertation is qualitative research, which aims to
explore and understand individuals’ subjective experiences, meanings, and perspectives in their
natural settings (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This approach aligns with the research questions, as
this study sought to uncover the perceived barriers that affect career development and the lived
experiences that affect African American officers’ career progression in the U.S. Army. The
research design chosen for this study is phenomenological research. Phenomenology focuses on

32
exploring and understanding the essence of human experiences and the meanings individuals
assign to those experiences (Taylor et al., 2015). Using semi-structured interviews as the primary
data collection method, I gathered rich, in-depth narratives from African American officers,
enabling deep exploration of their career development and progression experiences.
The phenomenological research design is particularly appropriate for this study for
several reasons. Firstly, phenomenology is concerned with uncovering the essence and meaning
of lived experiences (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016), which directly aligns with understanding
African American officers’ perceived barriers and experiences in their career development.
Secondly, phenomenology emphasizes the individual’s subjective perspective and the meanings
they ascribe to their experiences (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016), allowing for a nuanced exploration
of each participant’s experiences and perspectives. Lastly, using semi-structured interviews in
the phenomenological research design provides flexibility for participants to express themselves
and share their stories in a manner that is comfortable and meaningful to them (Taylor et al.,
2015).
Research Setting
The study used video conferencing platforms to interview African American Army
officers who have retired or served at least 15 years in senior leadership positions. The virtual
setting facilitated access to diverse participants from various locations. This format eliminated
geographical barriers and enabled a broader representation of experiences. Furthermore,
participants chose suitable time slots, and the virtual format provides flexibility, accommodating
busy schedules and deployments, leading to higher participation rates. Some participants felt
more comfortable sharing personal experiences and challenges when interviewed from their
environment, potentially leading to more open and candid responses.

33
The Researcher
I am an African American U.S. Army combat veteran with 32 years of military
experience, including tours of duty in Afghanistan and Iraq. I hold the rank of command sergeant
major and senior enlisted leader. My experience and identity as an African American male in the
U.S. Army shaped my perspective and passion for this research topic. I was interested in
exploring African Americans’ underrepresentation in military leadership and contributing to
creating more equitable organizational cultures in the military.
Villaverde (2008) described positionality as “how one is situated through the intersection
of power and the politics of gender, race, class, sexuality, ethnicity, culture, language, and other
social factors” (p. 10). The researchers’ position and experiences may introduce biases and
assumptions into the research. Germain and Caruso Brown (2022) discussed the impact of the
matrix of domination on individuals from marginalized groups, affecting how they are perceived
and treated. To avoid misinterpretation of the participants’ experiences, I used a reflexive
approach throughout the study to mitigate bias.
Data Sources
In-depth interviews with retired African American officers served as the primary data
source. These qualitative methods enabled direct engagement with individuals and gained
insights into their experiences, challenges, and perspectives. In-depth interviews provided a
platform for officers to share their narratives and offer detailed accounts of their career paths,
opportunities for advancement, and barriers they have encountered. These interviews delved into
the nuances of their experiences, shedding light on systemic factors contributing to
underrepresentation. The data allowed for a comprehensive understanding of the factors
contributing to the underrepresentation of African American officers in senior leadership

34
positions. The information obtained will inform policies, initiatives, and strategies to promote
diversity and inclusion within the U.S. Army’s leadership ranks.
Participants
Purposive sampling, or purposeful or selective sampling, is a non-probability sampling
technique commonly employed in qualitative research to purposefully select participants based
on specific criteria that align with the research objectives and the population of interest (Merriam
& Tisdell, 2016). In the context of this dissertation, I utilized purposive sampling to ensure the
inclusion of participants who possess relevant insights and lived experiences related to their
career development and progression. A deliberate and thoughtful approach was adopted in
participant selection to implement purposive sampling.
I interviewed 12 former African American officers who retired or served at least 15 years
in the U.S. Army. Participants range from former mid-level to senior officers (Major/04 and
above). The participants served at least 15 years to ensure they had experienced significant
career progression and faced challenges relevant to the research questions. Including retired
officers, they provided a historical perspective, highlighting challenges faced over the years. By
including officers with various ranks and experiences, the study captured a comprehensive view
of African Americans’ career trajectories and obstacles in the U.S. Army.
Instrumentation
The study’s instrumentation primarily involved semi-structured interviews as the primary
data source, aligned with the qualitative research methodology and phenomenological research
design. Semi-structured interviews provide a flexible framework that allows participants to share
their experiences, perceptions, and insights regarding the perceived barriers affecting their career
development as African American officers and their lived experiences of career progression in

35
the U.S. Army. I carefully designed the interview protocol to address the research questions and
guide the conversation, allowing for open-ended responses and participant-driven narratives
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The interview protocol consisted of 15 questions exploring the
participants’ perspectives, experiences, and perceptions of their career development and
progression (Taylor et al., 2015). I designed the questions to elicit detailed and rich responses,
encouraging participants to reflect on their experiences, identify barriers they perceive, and
describe the nuances of their career progression. The protocol was crafted sensitively to the
research questions and the specific context of African American officers in the U.S. Army.
In addition to the interview protocol, a short demographic survey collected essential
demographic data from the participants. This survey captured age, gender, rank, years of service,
and other relevant demographic variables. The demographic survey provided contextual
background information that contributed to a comprehensive understanding of the participants’
experiences and allowed for potential subgroup analysis and contextual comparisons. The
combined use of the interview protocol and the short demographic survey as instruments in this
study provided a holistic approach to data collection. The interviews enabled an in-depth
exploration of the participant’s perceptions and experiences, while the demographic survey
contributed to relevant demographic information.
Data Collection Procedures
I conducted the interviews via Zoom conference in October and November 2023.
Participants provided consent for both the audio and video recordings of their interview sessions,
and I took notes only after explicitly obtaining consent at the outset of each interview.
Additionally, because specialized military terminology was used, I addressed terminology
requiring clarification during the interviews, ensuring the use of mutually agreed-upon language.

36
Subsequently, I saved each recording to a password-protected server, and I reviewed and verified
the transcript for accuracy with each participant. I scheduled follow-up interviews as needed for
clarification or expanded questioning. This approach enabled participants to review their
transcripts and ensured credible study results. I will destroy the transcripts 3 years after the
study’s conclusion.
Data Analysis
The analysis involved a systematic approach to interpreting the data provided by
participants. The process included developing a coding scheme based on emergent data,
categorizing the data, and organizing the codes into themes to comprehensively understand the
participants’ perspectives and meanings (Creswell & Poth, 2018). I conducted the interviews
through Zoom, and I recorded and transcribed them verbatim, which was essential to accurately
capturing the participants’ narratives (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Data analysis required manual coding to capture inferences and nuances in the
participants’ discourse that automated software might overlook (Elliott, 2018). The interview
transcripts required careful reviews to identify significant statements or quotes that encapsulate
critical aspects of the participants’ experiences and responses (Morrow & Rodriguez, 2015).
These statements were analyzed to extract underlying meanings and implications, which
subsequently were aggregated into theme clusters to reveal patterns and common threads in the
data (Esim et al., 2014; Morrow & Rodriguez, 2015n).
Throughout the data analysis, I took a reflexive stance to critically examine any biases
and assumptions that may influence the interpretation of the data (Morrow & Rodriguez, 2015).
Additionally, the process should align with the research questions, allowing the emerging themes
and findings to provide insights into the research objectives (Hickson, 2016; Merriam & Tisdell,

37
2016). By adhering to these rigorous data analysis practices during Zoom interviews, I obtained
rich and meaningful qualitative data, contributing to the robustness of the study’s findings.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
This study utilized interview transfer review (ITR), an essential tool for interviewing
African American Army officers, as it helps ensure fairness, impartiality, and inclusivity in the
assessment process. According to Rowlands (2021), ITR refers to the process of providing
revised transcripts to the participants for their review, and it is recognized as one of the most
effective methods for assessing the quality of qualitative research. Implementing ITR facilitates a
more comprehensive understanding of their skills, experiences, and potential contributions to the
Army. It also provides a level playing field for all candidates, regardless of their racial or ethnic
background. This approach demonstrates a commitment to creating an equitable and inclusive
environment, fostering trust among African American officers interviewed.
Furthermore, ITR requests that participants review initial findings following their
interview to confirm the accuracy and documentation of their experiences and stories (Rowlands,
2021). The use of ITR, along with my understanding and addressing of positionality and
potential biases, contributes to the credibility and trustworthiness of the data and study.
Confirmability, which addresses objectivity and neutrality, is pivotal in guarding against the
undue influence of researcher biases, values, or preconceptions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Reflexivity was an integral part of the research, ensuring critical self-reflection regarding
personal assumptions and subjectivity.
Ethics
The ethical treatment of research participants was guided by the three fundamental ethical
principles outlined in the Belmont Report (2003). The principles include respect for persons,

38
beneficence, and justice (U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 1979). This study
fully informed participants about the research’s purpose, procedures, potential risks, and
benefits. Participants can ask questions, seek clarification, and freely decide whether to
participate. I used pseudonyms for all identifying information to ensure anonymity and protect
participants’ identities. Additionally, I recorded the interviews using my personal computer, as
opposed to a government-issued computer, to ensure the participants’ anonymity.
Beneficence emphasizes the obligation to maximize potential benefits and minimize
potential harm to research participants (U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
1979). Ethical considerations aided in formulating the interview questions to ensure respectful
and sensitive treatment of participants. Additionally, I disseminated the research findings in a
manner that respects the participants’s dignity and promotes understanding and positive change
within the military organization.
Justice underscores the importance of the equitable distribution of the burdens and
benefits of research (U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 1979). I made every
effort to avoid overburdening any subgroup and provide equal participation opportunities
through purposive sampling. Additionally, to contribute to justice, I shared the findings with
relevant stakeholders, such as military leaders, policymakers, and diversity and inclusion
advocates, to foster awareness and address African American officers’ systemic barriers to career
development.

39
Chapter Four: Findings
This phenomenological study explored African Americans’ underrepresentation in senior
leadership positions in the U.S. Army. The conceptual framework, Bronfenbrenner’s (1979)
ecological systems theory, guided the identification of direct and indirect influences on African
American officers’ career development and progression. This chapter synthesizes participants’
responses to open-ended, semi-structured interview questions and supporting quotes. These
findings may help African American soldiers and officers in pursuit of upper ranks and offices
and foster critical improvements in leadership and organizational culture.
This chapter focuses on findings related to two research questions:
1. What perceived barriers affect the career development of African American officers?
2. What lived experiences affect African American officers’ career progression in the
U.S. Army?
The chapter begins with a description of the research participants. Then, it presents the findings
for both research questions and discusses them. The chapter concludes with a synthesis and
summary of findings in preparation for the final chapter.
Participants
This study focused on the experiences of senior-ranking African American U.S. Army
officers with a minimum of 15 years of service. Prior to the semi-structured interviews,
participants completed a demographic data survey with questions about age, gender, rank, and
years of service. Participants also indicated whether they were recruited via ROTC, attended a
historically Black college or university (HBCU), and had combat arms experience. To ensure
transparency and honesty without facing ridicule, only retired officers who met the study’s
criteria participated. In total, 12 retired officers met participation criteria, returned their

40
demographic surveys, and completed the interviews via Zoom. The 12 participants who
completed the interviews were two females and 10 males. Seven reached the rank of major O-4,
three reached the rank of lieutenant colonel O-5, one reached the rank of colonel O-6, and one
reached the rank of brigadier general O-7. Table 4 presents the results of the demographic
survey. This table and the remainder of the dissertation use pseudonyms to ensure participants’
anonymity.
Table 4
Study Participant Demographic Data
Name Gender Years in
service
Rank ROTC HBCU Combat Education
attainment
Amber Female 15 O-4 Yes Yes No MA
Karlton Male 15 O-4 No Yes Yes MBA
Rodney Male 16 O-4 Yes No Yes MA
Treymane Male 16 O-4 Yes No No MA
Joel Male 17 O-4 Yes No Yes MA
Bobby Male 19 O-4 No No Yes PhD
Edward Male 20 O-4 Yes Yes Yes MA
June Female 20 O-5 No No Yes PhD
Andrew Male 21 O-5 Yes No Yes MA
Kenneth Male 22 O-5 Yes Yes Yes MA
Eric Male 23 O-6 No Yes Yes MA
Robert Male 25 O-7 No No Yes MS

41
Findings Related to Research Question 1
The first research question and related interview questions focused on barriers to career
development among the participants. The three themes from the data are the need for positive
reinforcement, uninformed recruitment and enlisting practices, and organizational bureaucracy.
The first barrier, lack of positive reinforcement, aligns with Bronfenbrenner’s (1977)
microsystem, which represents the relationships between the individual and the immediate
setting. Regarding this barrier, the primary setting includes the physical, social, and work
environments in which the officer exists (Bajjani-Gebara et al., 2021; Crawford, 2020). The
remaining two barriers align with the mesosystem, which consists of the relationships among
multiple settings in which the individual exists (Bronfenbrenner, 1977). Table 5 presents the
findings associated with Research Question 1, including the three themes serving as barriers to
career development and their alignment with Bronfenbrenner’s framework.
Table 5
Research Question 1 Themes
Theme Codes Framework alignment
Lack of positive reinforcement Lack of military support
Isolation
Lack of mentorship
Microsystem,
mesosystem
Uninformed recruitment and
enlisting practices
Lack of community support
Recruitment initiative
The ROTC contract
Chronosystem
Organizational bureaucracy Institutional racism
Politics
Chronosystem,
Exosystem

42
Lack of Positive Reinforcement
Participants identified a lack of positive reinforcement from family, peers, and mentors as
one barrier to career development. Consistent with Bronfenbrenner’s (1977) microsystem,
participants described problems with interpersonal relationships that hindered a desire or
opportunity for advancement. Several participants, including Rodney and Treymane, reported
feeling torn about some of their career choices because they received “conflicting messages”
from family and peers. Treymane explained that family and peers opposed the option of a
military career, urging him to find work outside the military. He said, “My brother has always
been opposed to the military and gave me a hard time about joining.” In addition, Treymane
commented, “My father has much respect for the military, but to this day wishes I had chosen a
career in law or business.”
Rodney said that a military career strained his marriage, resulting in inconsistent support
from his wife. He commented, “I was a military officer first and a husband and father second.
Although my wife supported my career choice, we often argued about the priority I placed on
that career.” Concerning the latter, strained marriages in military families arise partly from a lack
of social support for the military spouse (Pflieger et al., 2018; Ross et al., 2020). The absence of
support for military spouses can lead to a lack of support for enlisted officers by their spouses.
This lack of family support highlights the impact of the mesosystem on the participants’ career
development. Therefore, the interactions between the spouse and their support microsystem play
a vital role in determining the relationship between the two spouses. As such, factors within the
microsystem and mesosystem can negatively impact officer advancement due to the lack of peer
and family support. Similarly, lack of support in the military itself can be a factor.

43
Lack of Military Support
In addition to family and peer support, a lack of support from commanding officers
hindered career development. Within the first 10 years of their career, four participants requested
a transfer due to conflicts with their commanding officers. These conflicts were related to
perceived discrimination, overt racism, or microaggressions. For example, June filed a sexual
harassment complaint against a fellow soldier. Then, she requested a transfer from her unit
because her commanding officer “offered no support and thwarted me.” Some of the
microaggressions the participants cited were “being ignored,” “rude or racist comments,” and
“not being taken seriously.” Eric mentioned “overt hostility,” which led to some of his
colleagues’ deciding to leave the Army entirely. Microaggressions in the military can negatively
impact individual members’ effectiveness, confidence, and mission readiness (Brown & Brown,
2020), thus potentially impacting career advancement.
The lack of support from family, peers, and mentors represents a barrier to career
development for African American Army officers at the microsystem level. This level involves
the immediate environment and associated interpersonal relationships (Crawford, 2020). Friends,
family, and lack of spousal support may discourage officers from remaining in the military. In
addition, mentors from different racial backgrounds may lack the experience common to
minorities in the military and unable to provide empathetic wisdom and support. The lack of
support may lead to feelings of isolation and segregation from non-minority military members.
Isolation
Military officers who sense a lack of support from their families, peers, and mentors,
compounded by experiences of racism, may develop a sense of isolation. Underrepresented
minorities in formal groups are at increased risk for informal isolation (Perez & Strizhko, 2018).

44
Three participants addressed this issue in their interviews. For example, Andrew said, “There
was sometimes this barrier between myself and others, which I began to recognize. It was like
we were speaking a different language sometimes.” Two additional participants related feelings
of isolation to overt racism. Both participants relayed stories of African American colleagues in
the military who left their posts because of racism. Joel said, “We’ve all experienced it, felt it.
It’s impossible not to. But for some people, it was worse than for others. Some units seemed to
self-segregate, which bothered many people.” Kenneth shared that as he was coming up in the
ranks, he would often have to prove his qualifications, certifications, or knowledge, more so than
his White peers, which became very frustrating for him.
Ethnic military personnel often face race-based discrimination and are treated differently
than Whites, making it difficult for them to fully integrate into the larger group (Salem et al.,
2023). When underrepresented officers feel socially excluded or face microaggressions, they
may find it challenging to establish meaningful connections with peers and superiors, limiting
their access to valuable mentorship networks.
Lack of Mentorship
Like commanding officers, mentors may fail to provide the support that African
American officers perceive as essential for career development. Several participants reported
being dismissed or brushed off by mentors when they tried to address diversity, equity, and
inclusion topics. For instance, Eric said, “I asked my mentor, who was White, why there were so
few African American leaders, and he said it was because there were more Whites in the
military.” In addition, mentors did not always provide the emotional support required to bolster
their chances of success. Rather than imparting empathy and wisdom based on personal
encounters with racism and discrimination, some mentors provided generic responses. Army

45
resources such as training manuals offer nonspecific advice. Kenneth said, “After I witnessed
another officer use racial slurs against a Black female subordinate, my mentor cited regulations
against this kind of behavior, but he offered no suggestions on how to handle the issue
realistically.” The lack of effective mentoring for African American officers is problematic,
given the significant and positive relationship between mentoring for military personnel and
career development (Aman, 2018).
Although racial concordance between the mentor and mentee is unnecessary for a
successful mentorship (Bonifacino et al., 2021), participants reported a desire for African
American mentors. General Raymond T. Odierno stated, “It doesn’t matter what race you are
because an officer is an officer is an officer” (as cited in Randolph & Nisbett, 2019, p. 16). “If
that was the case,” Bobby said, “then there would be many more majors who look like me.” Of
the 12 interviewees, only three had African American mentors. “I had some great mentors, don’t
get me wrong,” said Robert, “but there’s always going to be a lack of real understanding about
what it’s like to be Black, our perspective, and why that perspective matters.” Thus, while
African American officers have positive experiences with mentors, the lack of racial
concordance may lead to feelings of being misunderstood.
To summarize, the participants faced pushback from family and peers regarding their
choice of a military career. They also encountered strained marriages as they progressed up the
ranks. Lastly, they experienced mentorship relationships that did not meet their needs or address
the issues they saw in their surroundings. However, some of these challenges manifested very
early in their careers, as seen in the various avenues for their recruitment and their communities’
reactions to it. The following section discusses how they came to enlist.

46
Uniformed Recruitment and Enlisting Practices
Uniformed recruitment and enlisting practices can undermine the military’s ability to
attract qualified and diverse candidates, potentially compromising the overall strength and
capabilities of the force. Unlike the first theme, lack of positive reinforcement, which addressed
the microsystem, the second theme relates to Bronfenbrenner’s mesosystem, a network of
interactions among the various microsystems that impact the individual (Bronfenbrenner, 1977).
The second theme from the interview data involves ineffective recruitment and enlisting
practices. This theme encompassed the interactions among the individual’s recruitment,
community, school, and the ROTC. The ROTC program offers college students the opportunity
to receive military training while pursuing a degree. The primary goal of the ROTC program is
to produce officers for the United States armed forces, including the Army, Navy, Air Force, and
Marine Corps. Once the individual graduates from college, they may have a military obligation
for various years, which could limit the support they receive from outside sources, like their
communities.
Lack of Community Support
Individuals interested in joining the armed forces who do not participate in the ROTC
program may be recruited through community efforts. Participants commented that a lack of
community support for recruitment could prevent enlistment and, thus, career advancement in
the military. Not all communities emphasize the value of being a part of the military. A lack of
targeted community engagement and outreach efforts may result in a disconnect between the
military and African American communities. Insufficient efforts to build relationships, provide
information, and address diversity, equity, inclusivity, and belonging can limit interest in military
service.

47
Bobby said that he grew up in a small town where people “didn’t dream big,” and little
information was available about enlisting. Conversely, Eric grew up in Los Angeles with
numerous options and opportunities. He noted, “After my initial tour of duty, I was tempted just
to come home because there are so many career options in L.A. No one back home ever talks
about the benefits of a long-term career in the military.” Communities that do not adequately
support military enlistment may hinder individuals from enlisting and thus pursuing a career in
the military.
Historical disparities and systemic factors, including instances of racial bias and
discrimination, can create a sense of mistrust or skepticism among African American
communities. Black communities have long carried a deep-seated mistrust of government
agencies. For 4 decades, the government ran what is known as the Tuskegee syphilis study in the
deep South exclusively on Black men in the 20th century. Researchers never received informed
consent from the participants nor offered them treatment for the disease, even after penicillin
became the main form of treatment for syphilis (M. Johnson, 2020). Rodney recounted his
excitement, informing his grandmother of his desire to attend college and the military utilizing
the ROTC program. Rodney discussed that, to his dismay, his grandmother expressed her
apprehension about him joining the military based on her knowledge of the Tuskegee
experiment. Subsequently, Rodney discovered she had dissuaded two of his cousins from joining
the military as well.
Implicit cases of prejudice and discrimination, whether perceived or actual, can deter
African American individuals from considering a career as an Army officer. Addressing these
historical factors, such as through recruitment initiatives or the ROTC program, is essential for

48
building trust and confidence in military recruitment efforts. Recruitment incentives are often
used to encourage those who many not otherwise consider becoming an officer.
Recruitment Initiatives
African American individuals may need more access to information about the benefits
and opportunities of the pathway to becoming an officer. The lack of targeted officer recruiting
incentives in majority African American communities can contribute to this lack of awareness.
Bobby shared his disappointment that his two African American soldiers, with college degrees,
were not informed about the process of becoming officers. They had the misconception that
joining the Army as enlisted men would automatically result in the management of their student
debt. Limited information about the benefits, opportunities, and requirements for officer
positions can contribute to a lack of interest and participation in the officer program.
Treymane said he was a high school graduate with stellar grades but faced a financial
barrier that made pursuing a college education seem like an impossible dream. Compounding the
issue was a notable absence of military presence in his community, and information about the
benefits and pathways to becoming an officer was scarce. The community needed more outreach
programs or initiatives to bridge the gap between Army officers and aspiring African Americans
like himself. However, many of his friends were encouraged to enlist in the Army as an enlisted
member, which does not require a college degree.
Treymane said he used the ROTC program to support his education goals and become an
Army officer. Once in the Army, he rarely saw individuals who looked like him in leadership
positions. The officer’s doubts about achieving his goal of becoming a colonel were fueled by
the lack of minority officers in higher-ranking roles. Without visible role models, he questioned
whether the Army was a place where he could advance and succeed.

49
Financial constraints may limit African Americans from pursuing higher education, a
prerequisite for becoming an officer. The absence of targeted financial incentives, such as
scholarships or tuition assistance programs, can act as a deterrent. The ROTC program is a
pathway to becoming an Army officer, although many African American individuals may need
more awareness of the ROTC program.
The ROTC Program
Study participants mentioned that entry into the ROTC program was a significant
influencing variable. Seven participants joined ROTC programs at their universities or colleges.
The contract signed by ROTC participants specifies that they must serve a specific number of
years to pay off student loans. Participants who did not enlist via the ROTC program had
different contractual obligations. The ROTC contract specifies that individuals who receive a
scholarship through the program must commit to 4 years of full-time service as an officer upon
graduation and then an additional 4 years either full-time as an officer or part-time as a member
of the Individual Ready Reserve (U.S. Army, n.d.).
The lack of involvement in ROTC programs may hinder career advancement, given that
non-ROTC enlistees are not required to remain in the military for an extended time. According to
Eric, who did not participate in ROTC, “Although I chose to make the military my career and
climb the leadership ladder, I saw others who did not participate in the ROTC program end their
military careers after meeting their 4-year commitments.” Treymane said, “If I hadn’t joined
ROTC, I probably would have never considered a long-term career in the military.” Six
participants mentioned the positive impact of ROTC on their military careers due in part to the
extended service requirements. The lack of ROTC involvement may hinder career advancement

50
as enlistees are not required to serve beyond an initial 4-year commitment and may be less likely
to advance in rank.
A general perception among study participants was that ROTC instructors assigned to
HBCUs were less experienced than those employed by non-HBCUs. Four of the participants
attended HBCUs, and three of these individuals also participated in the ROTC program. Four
additional participants participated in ROTC programs but in non-HBCUs. Edward, who
participated in the ROTC program at an HBCU, stated, “We knew that ROTC programs in
mostly White schools had higher-ranking instructors than our school.” Amber also addressed this
issue, noting, “You were sometimes looked down on for going to a Black college because their
ROTC programs didn’t have the same level of instructors as other schools.” Three participants,
two who attended HBCUs and one who did not, mentioned that at least one instructor in their
ROTC program was a lieutenant colonel. However, Amber stated that most instructors at her
school held ranks lower than captain. Poor performance by graduates who attended HBCUs was
often blamed on the quality of the ROTC program or college. Joel, who participated in ROTC at
a non-HBCU, said there was an overall perception in the Army that HBCUs had “lower-quality
ROTC programs” than other universities. While these findings support a perception of lowerquality ROTC programs in HBCUs, they do not provide objective information regarding the
quality of such programs. However, a superior’s perception of program quality could hinder
career advancement by HBCU graduates.
Overall, the lack of community support and minimal information on the military were
hindrances, while the ROTC program was beneficial. Nonetheless, the interviewees noted that
even that program was considered lower quality if it involved an HBCU. Once enlisted, the

51
participants’ narratives turned to difficulties in the military organization itself, as the following
section presents.
Organizational Bureaucracy
Organizational bureaucracy includes the characteristics and politics that influence
corporate and individual outcomes. A third theme associated with barriers to career advancement
was related to Army bureaucracy and its connection with institutional racism, discrimination, and
politics. Harassment through bureaucratic channels is often overlooked and can negatively
impact military officers’ professional careers (Bonnes, 2017). Despite efforts to promote equal
opportunity and inclusion, challenges still exist in the bureaucratic structures of the military that
disproportionately impact African American officers, based on information received during the
interviews.
Institutional Racism and Discrimination
A barrier related to organizational characteristics is racial and gender discrimination.
Discrimination often results in differential treatment for underrepresented groups. Seven
participants said they experienced or witnessed someone being disciplined unfairly due to race.
Four said that they believed non-White soldiers were punished more harshly than White soldiers
or that White soldiers were more likely to be “given the benefit of the doubt,” as Rodney noted.
He continued, “Of course, you can never prove these things, but I’m certain that some COs were
just looking for reasons to punish people he didn’t care for.” Edward said that a White colleague
was once “let off the hook” for something that one of his African American colleagues was
punished more severely for, which bothered him. Regarding this incident, Edward continued, “I
requested a transfer after that.” According to a recent report by Samee Ali (2017), African

52
American military personnel are more prone to experience harsher disciplinary actions in the
military compared to their White counterparts.
African American women may face discrimination due to their race and gender. Jane
said, “People like me who rise through the ranks have to develop a thick skin. … You’re
working twice as hard to prove yourself while the man beside you takes credit for stuff he didn’t
even do.” Black women in the military are also at increased risk for sexual harassment due to the
intersectionality between race and gender (Breslin et al., 2022). Amber recounted taking a leave
of absence for mental health issues after being sexually harassed: “My mentor supported me
during this challenging time. My CO did not handle the situation well.” If she had not requested
a transfer, Amber said, “I might never have become an Army Major in the first place.” African
American women in the military face barriers beyond those African American men face, as they
must contend with racism, misogyny, and sexual harassment.
In addition to discipline disparities, several participants described blatant racism, most of
which carried discriminatory overtones. Regarding the frequency and intensity of institutional
racism during her Army tenure, Jane said, “You learn to live with it and ignore it and develop a
thick skin.” Robert relayed a story he had suggested to his commanding officer, who dismissed
the idea. The following day, the CO implemented Robert’s suggestion but credited a White
officer with the idea. Robert said, “It’s hard to advance in your career when others continually
get credit for things you do.” Institutional racism and discrimination such as these may prevent
senior leaders from recognizing the actual value of officers and promoting them.
Interviewees handled the stress of a hostile work environment due to racism and
discrimination in ways that may hinder their job performance. Several said that it was especially
tricky to straddle the line between “sucking it up” and “ratting” or “being that person,” meaning

53
someone who reports incidents to superiors regularly. Seven interviewees said they eventually
reported incidents involving them or others in their units. Andrew noted, “These things hurt our
cohesion. They hurt our performance.” Impaired performance may hinder opportunities for
advancement, particularly in an environment dominated by office politics.
Politics
Organizational politics may play a significant role in African Americans leaving the
Army before having the opportunity to be promoted. Four participants reported knowing soldiers
who left the military simply because, as Edward noted, “they did not like being in the Army
anymore.” One underlying reason for this dislike may be the politics involved in succeeding in
the organization. When asked how they overcame barriers to advancement, several participants
said politics was paramount. “You learn early on that if you want to be a leader, you have to do
what the other leaders do. They know when to keep their mouths shut. If you know what I
mean,” said Bobby. Karlton also stated that he had to master the art of communication to get
promoted. “I had to learn how to be confident and compassionate on the one hand. You need to
have the respect of fellow soldiers if you intend to lead.” Andrew frankly stated, “I had to charm
their socks off. I’m only half joking. You must read the room well, know what you want, and be
persistent.” Individuals who fail to fit into the organization are less likely to advance in their
careers.
Other politics related to the Army extend beyond the organization and into global society,
strongly influencing those who serve. According to Bartee and Dooley (2019), Afghanistan and
Iraq War veterans are more likely to leave the military, particularly those who are African
American. Several study participants’ perspectives were consistent with Bartee and Dooley’s
findings and emphasized the urgent need for improved accessibility to mental health services for

54
African Americans in the Army, particularly those with combat experience. For example, June
said, “If we want to see more minorities and women in upper ranks, we will have to provide
young minorities with the resources they need to thrive in the Army.” Without adequate mental
health resources, African Americans with combat experience may exit the military before
realizing promotional opportunities.
In short, the Army’s bureaucracy, institutional racism, discrimination, and politics proved
to be hindrances to the interviewees’ careers. As they noted, the politics were significant. One
went so far as to master the art of communication to try to ensure success. Coupled with
disparate recruitment and enlisting practices and a lack of positive reinforcement, the
participants’ narratives describe various challenges African Americans must overcome to reach
the higher officer ranks.
Discussion of Research Question 1
The barriers African American Army officers face in advancing to senior leadership
positions are deeply rooted in various aspects of their military experience. The lack of positive
reinforcement is evident in conflicting messages from family and peers, strains in marital
relationships, and social support, which acts as a microsystem-level impediment. This lack of
encouragement can affect African American officer’s self-efficacy and sense of belonging.
Furthermore, recruitment and enlistment practices contribute to the challenge, with
limited community support, limited awareness, and historical disparities creating challenges for
African American individuals considering military careers. This mesosystem-level barrier
intersects with institutional racism, exemplified by differential discipline practices and perceived
biases in the Army’s organizational politics. The broader impact of institutional racism and
politics on career advancement becomes apparent, as these systemic issues disproportionately

55
affect African American officers, hindering their progression to senior leadership positions in the
U.S. Army.
Findings for Research Question 2
The second research and interview questions focused on the lived experiences that may
affect African American U.S. Army officers’ career progression. The three emerging themes
from the data are systemic racism, ingrained misconceptions about environmental structures, and
limited access to influential networks. Ingrained misconceptions from environmental structures
and limited access to influential networks are inextricably linked to systemic racism, as the
former are undergirded by factors that impact institutional, political, economic, educational, and
societal infrastructures. Accordingly, these themes align with the ecological system model
(Crawford, 2020). Table 6 presents the findings associated with Research Question 2, including
the three themes serving as barriers to career development and their alignment with
Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) framework.
Table 6
Research Question 2 Themes
Theme Codes Framework alignment
Systemic racism Unconscious bias
Implicit bias
Microaggressions
Microsystem, mesosystem
Ingrained misconceptions
from environmental
structures
Education affiliation
Short-term orientation
Mesosystem
Limited access to
influential networks
Outsider-insider dynamics
Limited visibility
Imposter syndrome
Mesosystem

56
Systemic Racism
Systemic racism shapes African American Army officers’ lived experiences, influencing
various aspects of their military careers. According to Banaji et al. (2021), systemic racism
encompasses the mechanisms and results of racial disparities and unfairness in access to life
opportunities and treatment. This overarching issue is further characterized by unconscious bias,
implicit bias, and microaggressions, creating challenges that impede the overall career
progression of African American officers. During the early stages of his career, Eric experienced
setbacks because he lacked a mentor and had limited exposure to high-profile assignments.
Despite having a master’s degree, he felt excluded from exclusive networks and opportunities.
He noticed that his White colleagues, with similar or even less education and experience, had a
more direct path to success. The complexity of the hurdles African American Army officers face
underscores the intersection of systemic racism and unconscious or implicit bias, making it
necessary to adopt a comprehensive approach to promoting equity and inclusivity in the military.
Unconscious and Implicit Bias
Unconscious biases are biases of which an individual may not be explicitly aware;
however, they can persist even if the individual overtly rejects discriminatory attitudes (Banaji et
al., 2021). Seven participants believe that unconscious bias was present in performance
evaluations and promotions. Although the participants could not provide evidence to support
their belief, their views suggested a prevalence of unconscious bias in their units, which
prevented fair assessments and hindered the progress of qualified officers. Moreover, they
believe the bias also affected the distribution of opportunities, making it difficult for many
African American officers to demonstrate their leadership skills. Researchers argue that biases
can affect various aspects of a person’s professional growth and development, including training

57
and opportunities for skill-building and leadership (Coffman & Gino, 2021). For instance, Robert
believes he was denied a promotion due to being considered “too busy.” In this context, “too
busy” implied that he was involved in activities his superior perceived as unimportant. Robert
shared that his superiors advised him to concentrate more on his goal of becoming a lieutenant
colonel and reduce the time he spent mentoring officers before granting him the promotion.
Robert’s mentoring focused on the career development of other African American officers.
Unconscious bias, also referred to as implicit bias, affects the lived experiences of
African American Army officers in senior leadership positions. Although the U.S. Army has
pledged to promote diversity and equal opportunity, African American Army officers still
encounter biases and stereotypes that influence their career trajectories. Edward recalled one
instance during which a commanding officer became dismissive of his aspirations for a
promotion, saying that he might “consider other options.” Two weeks later, one of Edward’s
White colleagues was promoted to the position he sought. When striving for senior leadership
positions, African American Army officers may face challenges associated with preconceived
notions based on their race.
These biases can manifest in various ways, affecting how their decision-making is
perceived, their leadership style is evaluated, and their suitability for higher-ranking roles is
judged. Stereotypes can have a significant impact on African American Army officers’
experiences, leading to increased scrutiny and expectations due to such stereotypes. Andrew said
that sometimes he found himself overcompensating for stereotypes about African American
culture, such as altering the way he spoke when he was around White versus Black commanding
officers. Karlton said that throughout his Army career, White people often expressed surprise
that he had grown up in a fairly well-off family and seemed “a little too impressed by the fact

58
that I dabbled in day trading.” These types of biases add complexity to African American
professional journeys.
Joel, who was a dedicated officer, shared his experience of facing the impact of
unconscious bias as he progressed in his military career. He noticed a pattern of being passed
over for promotions that would elevate him to higher ranks. Joel attended leadership meetings
and briefed his soldiers regarding upcoming missions. However, as he shared information, his
subordinates would question his decision-making and credibility. Joel gave an example of how
his White counterpart was given his notes to brief the soldiers, and not a single question came
up. Joel’s peer gave several excuses for the soldiers, dismissing what Joel dealt with regularly
and downplaying his feelings. Unconscious biases frequently reflect intersectionality. For
example, Amber mentioned that she had to navigate biases related to both race and gender. She
emphasized the importance of addressing multiple dimensions of identity in discussions about
unconscious bias.
African American officers who aspire to hold senior leadership positions often encounter
biases that are implicit or unconscious. Addressing these biases requires resilience, advocacy,
and a commitment to dismantling systemic prejudices. In addition to implicit bias, the
participants in the study reported facing experiences that could be described as microaggressions.
African American officers in leadership roles may encounter microaggressions that undermine
their authority or question their qualifications.
Microaggressions
Microaggressions are unintentional behaviors, both verbal and nonverbal, that convey
derogatory or demeaning messages (Sue et al., 2020) and can harm African American Army
officers throughout their military careers. These microaggressions have had a pervasive influence

59
on the participants’ personal and professional experiences. Participants commonly experienced
heightened stress, anxiety, and feelings of isolation due to the psychological impact of
consistently encountering these microaggressions. These effects were manifested in reduced job
satisfaction, morale, and overall well-being, thereby impeding their ability to perform at their
best.
Karlton shared how microaggressions affected him. He faced skepticism about his
accomplishments as he reached milestones in his Army career. Despite earning the
"distinguished honor graduate" title in his advanced officer class, Karlton overheard non-African
American peers attributing his success to affirmative action instead of recognizing his skills and
achievements. This experience made him question his sense of belonging within the military
community. Robert also pointed out that sometimes, being ignored or having people avoid
making eye contact can be perceived as a microaggression. He often found himself socially
isolated until he rose in the ranks when official titles lent the credibility and esteem that would
have been automatically given if he were not Black. “Creating a sense of camaraderie and
building trust is crucial to unit cohesion. For the most part, people are kind and respectful. But
there’s always one or two people who make things a little more challenging,” said Robert.
Edward stated he believed well-meaning people were simply “afraid of saying the wrong thing or
appearing racist,” but their avoidant behavior ended up creating anxiety for him. “It was
frustrating at times, but by the time you’re in college, you’re used to that sort of thing. You
somehow expect things to get better as you mature, but that’s not necessarily the case.” Edward
stated.
The question of affirmative action arose for many of the participants. During June’s
interview, she mentioned hearing some of her peers state she was only promoted because she is a

60
"Black female." These and other similar comments had become overwhelming, prompting her to
take action. June decided that it was time to address the issue and approached her commanding
officer to express her concerns about the blatant racism within the organization. Initially, the
commanding officer reacted with surprise, indicating a lack of full awareness of the extent of
microaggressions within the unit. In response, the commander initiated an open discussion,
emphasizing that in the Army, there is only one color, "green." However, unbeknownst to the
commander, his statement unintentionally conveyed another microaggression, further
contributing to June's challenges. June stated that if her color was not acknowledged, then she, as
an individual, was not truly seen. Her response highlights the complexity of addressing
microaggressions within military units, where racism can persist despite well-intentioned efforts
to foster an inclusive environment. Incidents like these serve as a reminder of the daily
microaggressions African American service members face. The cumulative effects of these
actions cast shadows on the achievements of African American officers and lowered their
confidence.
In sum, the interviewees noted unconscious bias preventing their accomplishments from
being gauged fairly or assumptions about affirmative action being behind their success. They
also believed that bias affected the distribution of opportunities. Moreover, their merit was met
with skepticism or ignored outright. Their descriptions call attention to systemic racism, which
may stem from societal misconceptions, addressed in the following section.
Ingrained Misconceptions From Environmental Structures
To improve access to social capital for African Americans, one needs to address and
dismantle the long-standing misconceptions ingrained within societal structures. Challenging and

61
correcting these norms can create opportunities for better social connectivity and networking,
ultimately improving prospects for individuals within the African American community.
Educational Affiliation
African Americans with strong educational affiliations, such as advanced degrees or
specialized training, may have enhanced opportunities for career advancement. Without
sufficient educational and other academic affiliations, they may face barriers to promotions or
assignments, which can impede their career growth and opportunities for advancement. Joel, for
example, discussed that he was passed up on an opportunity for a key role in Iraq because he did
not have the “West Point” education legacy like his White female peer. Joel said that this might
not be intentional, but his peers reminded him that prestigious institutions and influential
networks, such as Westpoint, provide a strong foundation for a successful Army career.
Edward proudly recounted his experience attending a highly respected HBCU in
Washington, DC. After graduating college and receiving his commission as a second lieutenant,
he was stationed in Colorado. While assigned as a platoon leader, Edward faced exclusion in
assignments and found that his opinions were consistently overlooked. Notably, three out of four
platoon leaders shared an alma mater, leading Edward to feel his input was consistently
dismissed, while the suggestions of the other three were always accepted. Edward stated, “It was
only obvious they were all boys from college.” Edward said that his peer lieutenants were
selected for advancement schools over him, which automatically put him at a disadvantage for
promotions.
In contrast to Joel and Edward’s stories, Robert’s Army journey was shaped by his
educational affiliation. He attended a prestigious military institute renowned for its rigorous
training and academic excellence. Robert’s alma mater boasted a robust military network that

62
played an influential role in propelling him to the rank of brigadier general. Although Robert did
discuss some challenges in his career, he still felt that the connections established through his
alma mater facilitated access to key assignments and deployments, contributing significantly to a
successful and rewarding military career.
Two of the participants received a Ph.D. Robert stated that the value of his degree made
him stand out among his peers, enabling him to strive for advanced positions that might have
been otherwise out of reach. Likewise, June said her Ph.D. “opened a lot of doors” and “put me
into rooms I might not have otherwise been invited into.” Interestingly, neither Robert nor June
went to an HBCU or entered college via the ROTC program. Educational and other academic
affiliations serve as protective factors for African American officers through access to
opportunities and experiences often not afforded to them. Such achievements enhanced the
ability of some officers to seize opportunities toward establishing a long-term military career.
Overall, the interviewees discussed the role of education and the perceived prestige of
educational institutions in career advancement. They also lacked the asset of sharing an alma
mater with superiors. The misconceptions about prior preparation hindered the participants’
advancement. To counter them, some discussed the value of planning for the long term and
delaying gratification, as the following paragraphs discuss.
Short-Term Orientation
Short-term orientation is often associated with a preference for instant gratification, while
long-term orientation emphasizes patience, persistence, and a willingness to invest in the future.
Individuals with a short-term orientation tend to prioritize immediate rewards and quick results
over long-term planning or delayed gratification. June recalled her roommate at her first duty
station always volunteered for the “cake” jobs. Her previous roommate always said, “Why work

63
hard when you can work smart?” June explained that “cake” was a military slang term meaning
something is easily done. This mindset can have a negative influence on the African American
Army officers’ career progression. It can also affect decision-making, goal-setting, and time
management by focusing solely on achieving quick and tangible outcomes. While pursuing her
PhD, June had already been planning her career trajectory. She said that it is important to plan
and have goals but also remain flexible and willing to change. “Especially given changes to the
political climate, and also how new technology changes our job descriptions, it is important to
remain true to the core of your goals but not fixated on every little step along the way,” June
stated.
Entering the ROTC program seemed to have had a positive impact on preparing African
Americans for long-range orientation with regard to their careers. Andrew, Rodney, and Joel
shared that the initial excitement of ROTC precipitated their interest in looking 5, 10 years down
the road, or even more. “We were actively encouraged to consider our social contract, our duty
of service, and to figure out where we fit into the system,” said Rodney. Andrew had a mentor
early in the ROTC program, and that mentor pressed the young cadets to stay connected and
“keyed in” to Army news so that they could use creative thinking for career planning. According
to Joel, the ROTC contract served as a “strong motivation” to push through short-term
challenges to achieve long-range goals.
Robert, a brigadier general with a one-star ranking, shared a story about one of his
African American colleagues who prioritized immediate gratification over long-term goals.
Robert was a college friend of “Major Rodriguez” and was impressed by his exceptional talent
and self-drive. However, Major Rodriguez always chose to opt out of “non-hazardous” jobs.
Although he received accolades and short-term glory in the early part of his career, Robert

64
believed that those jobs did not align with the long-term strategic needs of the Army. The Army
required leaders with a comprehensive understanding of diverse operations. Robert emphasized
that he was fortunate to have mentors who prioritized gaining diverse experiences and
understanding the broader context of military operations. Robert advises young African
American officers to think beyond the immediate benefits of their career choices. He emphasizes
that they should not compromise the development of their leadership skills for short-term
recognition. Robert encourages the upcoming generation of officers to prioritize a well-rounded,
strategic approach to their careers. He aims to create a culture that values long-term success over
quick gains.
Part of the well-roundedness for which Robert advocates might come in the form of
advanced degrees or specialized training. As seen, a long-range orientation and delaying
gratification are also beneficial. Nonetheless, these factors rely on the individual’s forethought,
absolving the organization from taking helpful actions, such as widening access to networking,
as presented below. Exposure to and knowledge of military career pathways through programs
such as ROTC allows African American officers to build a vision beyond their immediate
circumstances. This awareness can foster the resilience and adaptability necessary to meet the
challenges they endure.
Limited Access to Influential Networks
One recurring issue African Americans face is their limited access to influential
networks. This problem is also prevalent among African American Army officers and is due to
various systemic factors rooted in historical and institutional biases. Racial biases and
stereotypes can unconsciously affect access to key networking circles, making it difficult for
African American officers to feel included. Historical disparities in opportunities, promotions,

65
and leadership roles have resulted in a lack of representation in senior leadership positions,
further excluding African American officers from influential networks.
Amber mentioned that there were very few female and minority mentors in her military
unit. This lack of role models who shared her background made it difficult for her to navigate the
complexities of Army life. She felt that if she had access to role models with similar
backgrounds, she could have received valuable guidance that could have significantly advanced
her career.
Informal networking opportunities are often created through shared experiences and
relationships, which may be difficult for African American officers to access due to their
historical underrepresentation and isolation. Creating an inclusive environment for all officers in
the U.S. Army requires addressing the outsider-insider dynamics of influential networking
groups, limited visibility of African American officers in influential positions, and imposter
syndrome.
Outsider-Insider Dynamics
The term “outsider-insider dynamics” refers to the social categorization and identitybased distinctions within the African American Army officer community. While these officers
belong to the military community, they may feel like outsiders due to factors such as racial
disparities, cultural differences, and challenges. Insider group dynamics play a central role in
career advancement and are often formed during casual interactions, off-duty gatherings, or
exclusive events. However, this poses a challenge for the few African American officers in the
unit who are not part of the predominant social circles where information circulates, and they
struggle to access it.

66
Rodney revealed that outsider-insider group dynamics can have an impact beyond casual
interactions. Despite his good performance and leadership capabilities, Rodney was excluded
from influential circles in his unit. He noticed that certain mentorship opportunities and career
insights were informally shared only within these insider groups. This outside-insider dynamic
was particularly evident to Rodney during informal gatherings and networking events, where he
sometimes felt disconnected from the more established circles in the military community.
June shared her observation of a group of officers who were having an impromptu
strategy discussion after a training session. This situation made her realize the inherent challenge
that she faced. These informal settings were where crucial relationships were forged, and
information about upcoming opportunities and promotions was often shared. However, June felt
excluded from such discussions due to the limited diversity in these influential circles. African
Americans congregated together, forming their own insider dynamics group, which made them
outsiders. It can be challenging for African American Army officers to find influential advocates
who can support their career advancement. Informal networks sometimes convey opportunities
for high-profile roles, leadership positions, and progress, leaving some at a disadvantage. African
American officers require mentors who can provide valuable advice, guidance, and opportunities
to close the gap created by the lack of access to influential networks and increase their visibility
to influential networks.
Informal social venues represent another way in which African American officers are
disadvantaged in getting essential support for their career journey. The awareness of the
exclusion makes it difficult to gather the internal resources necessary to persist toward the goals
of advancing and pursing leadership positions. Visibility and representation can be powerful
means to challenge beliefs about African American officers’ career limitations.

67
Limited Visibility
The underrepresentation of African American officers in the U.S. Army has significant
consequences for their career progression. All 12 participants highlighted the importance of
being recognized by senior leaders at their organization as a key factor in facilitating their career
advancement. Edward pointed out that accessing influential networks is a challenge due to
systemic barriers, unconscious biases, and a lack of diverse representation within the military
hierarchy.
Treymane expressed that when African American officers do not have visible role models
and mentors, it unconsciously hampers their ability to navigate the complexities of their military
career progression. According to Treymane, “As I moved up the ranks, I consistently
demonstrated exceptional skills and dedication to my duties. However, the lack of visibility had
unconscious powerful effects on my career progression.” Treymane often missed out on highprofile assignments and special projects, and his name was not always at the forefront during
discussions of promotions. Treymane questioned whether his efforts were truly being recognized
and appreciated.
Kenneth, Treymane, and Edward faced obstacles in their careers that their equally
qualified White peers did not. These challenges hindered their advancement and caused
frustration as they watched their peers progress more quickly. The lack of mentors who had
experienced similar situations made it difficult for them to understand the unwritten rules and
nuances of climbing the military ladder. These individuals’ stories demonstrate how the absence
of visibility can adversely affect the career progression of talented officers striving to break
down barriers for a more diverse and inclusive military leadership.

68
Imposter Syndrome
In addition to external challenges, individuals like Edward, Treymane, and Kenneth also
dealt with imposter syndrome, highlighting the need to recognize and overcome self-doubt
during their journeys. Imposter syndrome can have a significant impact on the professional
journey of African American Army officers by casting an overwhelming shadow on their lived
experiences. It is a persistent feeling of not belonging that can undermine confidence and pose a
challenge to career progression. In the U.S. Army, where leadership is paramount, imposter
syndrome can lead to heightened stress and self-doubt. The weight of representation for oneself
and for an underrepresented community can intensify these feelings.
Furthermore, the fear of being perceived as less competent can influence decision-making
and contribute to reluctance to take advantage of leadership opportunities. As Treymane put it, “I
had an aura of self-confidence that could charm a lot of people. But deep down, I’d be thinking,
‘I don’t belong here. Who am I trying to fool?’ It was like a constant battle within myself.”
Imposter syndrome can also cause an individual to feel isolated, hindering the development of a
strong professional network. This isolation can prevent the exchange of experiences and
strategies for overcoming challenges, which can have a negative impact on an individual’s
career. Edward and Kenneth both admitted to having opted out of some opportunities they
believed were out of reach, fearing the social and psychological consequences of rejection.
Ultimately, imposter syndrome can result in missed opportunities and continued self-doubt.
Karlton shared his experience as one of the few African American Army officers in a
senior leadership position in the Pentagon. Despite his accomplishments, he often doubted if he
truly belonged among the esteemed ranks of senior officers, especially during the late hours of
the night. He would think of the struggles of those who came before him, and this would make

69
him question himself. However, Karlton connected with other seasoned African American Army
leaders who had similar feelings of imposter syndrome. Knowing that he was not alone in his
feelings became a source of strength, fostering resilience in the face of self-doubt. His journey
became a testament to breaking barriers, not just for himself but for future generations of African
American officers ascending the ranks. Although he did not know the reason, Karlton noticed
that it was rare for African American officers to seek him out for guidance or mentorship.
Amber experienced imposter syndrome during her time as a company commander of a
majority White male Army unit. Amber recalled, “When we would go out to the field for
training, I would always face skepticism from some of my subordinates.” Amber said her
“lieutenants” would question her ability to read a map. Amber stated she had to deal with
skepticism, racism, and gender biases. The negative responses to which she was subjected made
her think about resigning her commission several times due to professional burnout. Eventually,
through open communication, she earned her subordinate’s respect.
Various factors, including historical obstacles and stereotypes, can cause imposter
syndrome. If you belong to a minority group in a leadership position, this feeling can be
amplified. Negative racial stereotypes and the worry of confirming them can also contribute to
imposter syndrome. However, overcoming this feeling involves acknowledging your
accomplishments, seeking support, and accepting your abilities.
In short, the findings for the second research question highlight that racial biases and
stereotypes can become a barrier to key networking circles. Also, the lack of female and minority
mentors leads to African American officers being less than fully visible to or recognized by
senior leaders. Lastly, self-doubt is an internal challenge that impedes progression.

70
Discussion Research Question 2
Research Question 2 examined the challenges African American U.S. Army officers face
during their career progression and lived experiences. The study identified three main themes
that emerged: systemic racism, ingrained misconceptions from environmental structures, and
limited access to influential networks. The theme of systemic racism was explored through the
lenses of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory, including the important role implicit bias
and unconscious bias can play in shaping the military journeys of African American officers.
The findings here show that implicit bias played a significant role in evaluations, promotions,
and leadership opportunities. The behavioral externalization of such biases and microaggressions
has notable implications for military career trajectories.
Acquiring advanced degrees and specialized training is highly valued in the field of
education, while the inclination toward immediate gratification that may undermine long-term
career objectives is highlighted in short-term orientation. The challenges of accessing influential
networks, building relationships, and overcoming self-doubt are encapsulated in the dynamics of
being an outsider or insider, limited visibility, and imposter syndrome. Outsider-insider
dynamics reflect social categorization and identity-based distinctions, while limited visibility
stresses the importance of being recognized by senior leaders. Finally, imposter syndrome
addresses the psychological burden of feeling like a fraud.
These three themes are intricately connected, contributing to a complex array of
challenges African American Army officers face. Systemic racism intersects with both ingrained
misconceptions and limited access to influential networks, and the ecological system model is
referenced to align these themes with Bronfenbrenner’s framework, emphasizing their
multifaceted impact across various systems.

71
Summary
Several themes emerged from the data analysis. The study explored African American
Army officers’ lived experiences and the challenges and personal experiences they faced while
progressing to senior leadership roles. Their stories and experiences have shaped this study,
providing valuable insight into the lack of diversity and equity in the officer ranks in the Army
specific to African American personnel.
Each participant shared the obstacles they faced while advancing to senior leadership
roles. They highlighted various challenges of their military experience, such as the lack of
positive reinforcement, uninformed recruitment and enlisted practices, and organizational
bureaucracy. The participants also mentioned three main impediments that consistently came up:
systemic racism, ingrained misconceptions from environmental structures, and limited access to
influential networks. Despite these significant challenges, these officers navigated their careers
and advanced in a military environment that was not geared toward their success.

72
Chapter Five: Recommendations
This study aimed to explore the lived experiences and barriers of U.S. Army African
American officers’ career paths. This research is significant because African American officers
are underrepresented in senior leadership positions at the field grade level (U.S. DOD, 2020).
The study provided insight into the environmental factors impacting the career progression of
African American Army Officers, identifying the challenges and experiences of these men and
women leading to the following recommendations: targeted mentoring programs, talent
development, robust social networks, and DEI training. While not exhaustive, the
recommendations could remove potential barriers to advancing future African American soldiers
and officers aspiring for senior leadership positions. The findings of this research can also inform
institutional processes and procedures.
Recommendation 1: Targeted Mentoring Programs
Seven participants said their mentors did not provide them with opportunities to advance
in the ranks, such as exposure to social networks or coaching on communications and
organizational politics. Previous research and the current study have found shortcomings in the
Army’s formal mentorship program (Stork, 2023). Participants in the study shared that although
having a mentor of the same race or gender is not mandatory, it can positively impact the
mentorship relationship. When a mentee has a mentor who shares comparable racial or gender
experiences, it can provide a more relatable and effective role model. Several other participants
said their mentors did not provide them with exposure to social networks or coaching on
communications and organizational politics. Participants who had mentors’ support understood
the importance of mentorship in career planning.

73
The first recommendation is a targeted mentoring program for early-career African
American officers. An abundance of research shows unequivocally that mentorship programs
improve minority representation, improve talent retention, and promote leadership development
(Crapanzano & Cook, 2017). The Army currently has several formal mentorship programs,
including an online network through the AKO. However, such programs are not used to their full
potential and have even been deemed “totally ineffective” (Nieberding & Leitzel, 2007, p. 10).
Furthermore, existing mentorship programs in the Army take place firmly in the chain of
command, which seems reasonable except for the fact that mentorship outside of the chain of
command proves more valuable for expanding one’s social networking skills and broadening
one’s career path potential (Crapanzano & Cook, 2017; Lund, 2023).
Combining formal mentorship programs with informal mentoring may offer support
systems to those seeking promotions (Lund, 2023). Some studies show that informal mentoring
is often superior to, or more effective than, formal mentoring programs such as the ones that
currently exist in the U.S. Army (W. B. Johnson & Anderson, 2010). Furthermore, it is
recommended that senior African American officers actively participate in both formal and
informal mentorship programs. Lastly, African American officers should reach out to recruits
outside their chain of command to demonstrate the various possibilities available for career
development.
Recommendation 2: Talent Development
The study highlights that African Americans with advanced degrees or specialized
training generally experience greater opportunities for career advancement. Conversely, those
lacking strong academic affiliations may encounter obstacles in securing promotions or desirable
assignments, hindering their career progression and limiting avenues for growth. Notably, a

74
substantial disparity exists between the number of African American enlistees and senior officers
in the Army. To address this gap effectively, there is a pressing need for culturally affirming
talent development programs. Establishing talent development initiatives explicitly tailored for
African American officers is crucial.
Cultivating a conscious awareness of race within talent development is paramount, as it
enables individuals to navigate career-related identity effectively. Meyer and Rinn (2022)
suggested that such exploration positively impacts African American JROTC enlistees,
mitigating stereotypes and tackling underrepresentation in certain professions. Moving forward,
integrating racial awareness into talent development processes is essential for fostering future
success. This approach not only enhances individual career trajectories but also combats
stereotypes and psychological barriers. Encouraging young African Americans to take proactive
steps in their personal career development can empower them to overcome obstacles and
contribute to achieving racial equality within Army leadership.
Recommendation 3: Robust Social Networks
The third finding underscores a common challenge among the participants: limited access
to influential networks. This issue may be entrenched in systemic factors stemming from
historical and institutional biases. Racial prejudices and stereotypes subtly impede access to
influential networking circles and promotional avenues.
The third recommendation stresses integrating social networks and signals a need for
leaders to cultivate influential networks that benefit all officers. Building robust social networks
entails forging informal mentoring connections beyond the chain of command. Engaging with
influential figures facilitates the expansion of social circles, broadening opportunities, and
reinforcing psychological and social support systems (Crapanzano & Cook, 2017). For the

75
Army’s overall efficacy, organizational dynamics and relational analytics demonstrate how
social networks bolster task completion and readiness (Holt & Davis, 2022).
Military leaders adeptly foster and sustain social networks, recognizing the potency of
developmental networks, or “mentoring constellations,” which surpass the effectiveness of oneon-one mentoring (W. B. Johnson & Anderson, 2010, p. 120). The recommendation is that
African American soldiers in the Army leverage the power of social networks for their
advancement. Social networks in the Army can be formal or informal, with the success of formal
networks contingent upon strong leadership that fosters trust, upholds behavioral standards, and
celebrates diversity (Garrett, 2021).
Informal networks organically evolve, with junior African American soldiers relying on
mentors and leaders to facilitate connections and propel their careers forward. W. B. Johnson and
Anderson (2010) posited that exposure to leaders beyond the chain of command fosters informal
networks, alleviating psychological stress and fostering advancement opportunities for African
Americans. Casual relationships often prove instrumental in securing promotions, sometimes
surpassing the impact of formal DEI initiatives (Crapanzano & Cook, 2017). Integrating social
networks, both formal and informal, with leadership development and mentorship programs can
maximize their effectiveness.
Recommendation 4: DEI Training
The study discovered that participants commonly experienced microaggressions, negative
stereotypes, and biases. These experiences undermined their authority, questioned their
qualifications, and hindered their chances of career advancement. As a resolution, the study
recommends that all Army personnel, particularly officers, undergo comprehensive DEI training.
Although the Army and other military branches already have DEI training programs, their

76
effectiveness has been a matter of controversy. Gooding (2023) proposed that changing how
these programs are perceived may enable them to achieve their goals.
To address race-related disparities in senior leadership, targeted DEI training is crucial to
raise awareness about the challenges African Americans face. According to a report by the
RAND Corporation (2022), holding leaders accountable for meeting DEI goals and ensuring all
unit leaders receive training in DEI are initial steps, followed by consistently implementing
evidence-based practices to foster diversity in senior leadership ranks. Accountability entails
encouraging all personnel to recognize and address microaggressions and toxic work
environments, as well as validating complaints that undermine trust and contribute to feelings of
isolation among African American service members.
Integrating DEI training into all organizational procedures, rather than offering sporadic
education, is essential. DEI should not remain a standalone program but become intrinsic to how
military leaders interact with their colleagues. By doing so, DEI training provides opportunities
for all military leaders to acknowledge the strategic value of diversity in the Army (Garrett,
2021). Implementing best practices for DEI training in the military enables non-African
American officers to understand the significance of race and identity in shaping career choices.
Limitations and Delimitations
Future researchers should consider the phenomenological research reported in this study
in light of its limitations and delimitations. The participants were retired African American Army
officers who held the rank of major (O4) to major general (O8) and had retired within the last 5
years. However, their insights provided valuable information about the challenges people of
color face in terms of career progression in the Army. The study only included participants who
identified as African American and did not include individuals from other ethnic backgrounds.

77
Conversely, I interviewed both men and women, so the study presented perspectives from both
genders in this heavily male-dominated organization.
The study had a significantly small sample compared to the Army’s overall population.
The research focused solely on field-grade ranks, which could result in bias due to the declining
number of African American field-grade officers as they advance in rank. A larger sample could
produce different results and/or perspectives. I had prior experience with the Army’s officer
system, which provided me with access to up-to-date empirical data on career advancement and
information on diversity policies and practices in the Army.
Recommendations for Future Research
This study focused on a significant issue within the U.S. Army and African Americans’
underrepresentation in high-level leadership positions. However, the study’s small sample
prevented the full exploration of the complexities of personal experiences. While
Bronfenbrenner’s (1977) ecological systems theory provided a framework for understanding the
various factors influencing the participants’ career choices, it is not the only one. Thus, similar
studies using other frameworks could provide different information to inform best practices.
Future research could focus on one of the social systems to gain a more detailed understanding of
significant influences. Similarly, narrowing down the population sample could help uncover the
intersections between race and gender better.
To build on this study’s findings, a recommendation is to implement experimental
initiatives within specific Army divisions or units. Information gained from these initiatives can
aid in addressing African Americans’ underrepresentation in high-level leadership roles. The
focus of these initiatives should be on improving the quality of leadership and mentorship in the
Army and identifying effective practices for reducing institutional racism and unconscious bias.

78
Such initiatives could transform Army culture and socialization, leading to a future where more
African Americans hold senior leadership positions. Additionally, future research should
concentrate on key themes identified in this study. Specifically, researchers should investigate
how a lack of support from peers and family can hinder African Americans’ military career
progress.
Conclusion
This study shed light on the lived experiences of African American officers in senior
leadership positions within the Army. The perspectives and stories shared by these officers
necessitate a demand for systemic changes within the Army to address a seemingly intractable
problem. Only by confronting entrenched ideological constructs the Army maintains can one
address the impassioned cries of African American soldiers calling for meaningful change within
the military hierarchy. Through the transformative potential of intentional mentoring and
culturally relevant talent development initiatives, one can effectively address the persistent
underrepresentation of African Americans in senior leadership roles. The Army must ensure that
every officer is empowered, regardless of race, to thrive.
Embracing diversity is not a charity initiative; it is an organizational imperative. With
diversity as a strategic asset, the Army can chart a course toward greater equity, representation,
and effectiveness in its leadership ranks. Rather than implementing ad hoc initiatives, actionable
solutions lie in comprehensive initiatives across all Army personnel. Meaningful change will
embed DEI principles into organizational practices and foster a culture of respect and inclusivity.
Good intentions do not interrogate ineffective systems and challenge the status quo. Rather, it is
intentional efforts to combat microaggressions and biases and eliminate systemic barriers that
can have lasting benefits for African American officers’ advancement.

79
References
Aman, S. (2018). Effect of mentoring on military personnel retention. Edelweiss Applied Science
and Technology, 2(1), 156–168. https://doi.org/10.33805/2576-8484.132
Amoakoh, J., & Smith, W. (2020). Diamonds on the sole of their boots: The experiences of
African immigrant men in STEM careers in the USA. Spectrum A Journal on Black Men,
8(1), 29–53. https://doi.org/10.2979/spectrum.8.1.03
Armor, D. J., & Gilroy, C. L. (2010). Changing minority representation in the US military.
Armed Forces and Society, 36(2), 223–246. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095327X09339900
Bajjani-Gebara, J., Wilcox, S. L., Williams, J. W., Jr., Kosinski, A. S., Allard, R. J., Wilson, C.,
& Landoll, R. (2021). Adjustment disorders in US active-duty military women: A
scoping review for the years 2000 to 2018. Women’s Health Issues, 31, S33–S42.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.whi.2020.12.003
Banaji, M. R., Fiske, S. T., & Massey, D. S. (2021). Systemic racism: Individuals and
interactions, institutions and society. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications,
6(1), 82. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-021-00349-3
Bartee, R.L. & Dooley, L. (2019). African American veterans career transition using the
transition goals, plans, success (GPS) program as a model for success. Journal of
Veterans Studies 5(1): 1–13. https://doi.org/10.21061/jvs.v5i1.122
The Belmont Report: Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of
research. (2003). In S. Eckstein (Ed.), Manual for Research Ethics Committees (pp. 126–
132). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511550089.028
Bonifacino, E., Ufomata, E. O., Farkas, A. H., Turner, R., & Corbelli, J. A. (2021). Mentorship
of underrepresented physicians and trainees in academic medicine: A systematic review.

80
Journal of General Internal Medicine, 36, 1023–1034. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-
020-06478-7
Bonnes, S. (2017). The bureaucratic harassment of US servicewomen. Gender & Society, 31(6),
804–829. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243217736006
Breeden, R. L., Means, D. R., Beckham, M. A., Rose, H. S., Walls, C. M., Idehen, O., Marshall,
B., & Stanton, J. D. (2023). Black women, white coats: Black women undergraduate
students use community cultural wealth to persist in healthcare careers. Journal of
Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 29(4), 55–78.
https://doi.org/10.1615/JWomenMinorScienEng.2022040103
Breslin, R. A., Daniel, S., & Hylton, K. (2022). Black women in the military: Prevalence,
characteristics, and correlates of sexual harassment. Public Administration Review, 82(3),
410–419. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13464
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of human development. The
American Psychologist, 32(7), 513–531. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.32.7.513
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and
design. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674028845
Brown, U. J., III, & Brown, C. S. (2020). Hispanic Americans and the military: Measuring
microaggression and its mediating effects on organizational climate factors. International
Journal of Business Research, 20(1), 71–88. https://doi.org/10.18374/IJBR-20-1.7
Bryant-Lees, K. B., Prince, L., Goodman, T., Chappelle, W., & Thompson, B. (2021). Sources of
stress and psychological health outcomes for remotely piloted aircraft operators: A
comparison across career fields and major commands. Military Medicine, 186(7–8),
e784–e795. https://doi.org/10.1093/milmed/usaa257

81
Busetto, L., Wick, W., & Gumbinger, C. (2020). How to use and assess qualitative research
methods. Neurological Research and Practice, 2(1), Article 14.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s42466-020-00059-z
Chivvis, C. S., & Lauji, S. (2022, September 6). Diversity in the high brass[Blog post]. Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace.
https://carnegieendowment.org/2022/09/06/diversity-in-high-brass-pub-87694
Christensen, D. (2017). Racial disparities in military justice: Findings of substantial and
persistent racial disparities within the United States military justice system. Protect Our
Defenders. https://www.protectourdefenders.com/wpcontent/uploads/2017/05/Report_20.pdf
Coffman, K., & Gino, F. (2021, August 30). Unconscious bias training that works. Harvard
Business Review. https://hbr.org/2021/09/unconscious-bias-training-that-works
Comeaux, E., Chapman, T. K., & Contreras, F. (2020). The college access and choice processes
of high-achieving African-American students: A critical race theory analysis. American
Educational Research Journal, 57(1), 411–439.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831219853223
Craddock, T. B. (2021). Patriotism: The price paid by the African-American soldier. Journal of
Veterans Studies, 7(3), 23–37. https://doi.org/10.21061/jvs.v7i3.260
Crapanzano, R. A., & Cook, C. L. (2017). A call for an effective mentorship program. U.S.
Army Maneuver Center of Excellence.
https://www.moore.army.mil/infantry/Magazine/issues/2017/APR-JUN/pdf/5)CookMentorship_txt.pdf

82
Crawford, M. (2020). Ecological systems theory: Exploring the development of the theoretical
framework as conceived by Bronfenbrenner. Journal of Public Health Issues and
Practices, 4(2), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.33790/jphip110017
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C.N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among
five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Davis, B. H., Mitchell, P., Gmelch, W. H., & III, J. R. (2018). Perceptions of barriers to
leadership appointment and promotion of African American female commissioned
officers in the United States military (Publication No. 10846309) [Doctoral dissertation,
University of San Francisco]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
Department of Defense Office for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. (2020). Portrait of
Black/African-American DoD government active duty service members. Defense
Manpower Data Center.
https://diversity.defense.gov/Portals/51/Images/AA%202020_ACC.pdf?ver=2020-02-18-
072209-043
de Vos, A., Biggs, R., & Preiser, R. (2019). Methods for understanding social-ecological
systems: A review of place-based studies. Ecology and Society, 24(4), Article 16.
https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-11236-240416
Elliott, V. (2018). Thinking about the coding process in qualitative data analysis. The Qualitative
Report, 23(11). https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2018.3560
Ender, M. G., & Lucal, B. (2019). Social inequality and the United States Army: The (un)lucky
seven. In R. E. Tully & B. Chilton (Eds.), Equality: More or less, (pp. 61–82) Hamilton
Books.

83
Eriksson, M., Ghazinour, M., & Hammarström, A. (2018). Different uses of Bronfenbrenner’s
ecological theory in public mental health research: What is their value for guiding public
mental health policy and practice? Social Theory & Health, 16(4), 414–433.
https://doi.org/10.1057/s41285-018-0065-6
Evans, L. A. (2018). Simulation-based analysis and optimization of the United States Army
performance appraisal system [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of
Louisville. https://doi.org/10.18297/etd/2906
Gamble, D. R. (2020). Toward a racially inclusive military. Parameters, 50(3), 57–69.
https://doi.org/10.55540/0031-1723.2674
Ganoe, W. A. (1924). The history of the United States Army. D. Appleton & Co.
Garamone, J. (2021, August 30). Military phase of evacuation ends, as does America's longest
war. DOD News. https://www.defense.gov/news/newsstories/article/article/2759031/military-phase-of-evacuation-ends-as-does-americaslongest-war/
Garrett, M. X. (2021). Military diversity: A key American strategic asset. English Military
Review, May-June, 14–21. https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Portals/7/militaryreview/Archives/English/MJ-21/Garrett-Military-Diversity-1.pdf
Germain, L. J., & Caruso Brown, A. E. (2022). Theoretical foundations to consider. In D.
Laraque-Arena, L. Germain, V. Young, & R. Laraque-Ho (Eds.), Leadership at the
intersection of gender and race in healthcare and science: Case studies and tools (pp.
14–21). Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003092551-3
Ghilani, J. L. (2020). ‘The Army just sees green’: Utopian meritocracy, diversity, and United
States Army recruitment in the 1970s. In B. Maartens & T. Bivins (Eds.), Propaganda

84
and public relations in military recruitment (pp. 145–160). Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429319624-13
Glasrud, B. A. (2010). Black Officer in a Buffalo Soldier Regiment: The Military Career of
Charles Young. By Brian G. Shellum. (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2010.
xxiv, 360 pp. Paper, $19.95, ISBN 978-0-8032-1385-2.). The Journal of American
History, 97(3), 817–818. https://doi.org/10.1093/jahist/97.3.817
Glaude, E. (2016). Democracy in black: How race still enslaves the American soul. Broadway
Books.
Gooding, M. (2023, April 4). Critics claim DoD efforts on diversity, equity and inclusion create
divisions, harm recruitment. 13 News Now.
https://www.13newsnow.com/article/news/national/military-news/critics-dod-effortsdiversity-equity-inclusion-create-divisions/291-47057b78-78a7-4246-9c50-
af567be28269
Hall, A.O., & Fu, M.C. (2015). Optimal Army officer force profiles. Optimization Letters, 9,
1769 - 1785.
Hernandez-Gantes, V., & Fletcher, E. C., Jr. (2022). A case study of a low-income AfricanAmerican career academy’s approach to student services. Journal of Research in
Technical Careers, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.9741/2578-2118.1116
Holt, D., & Davis, S. (2022). Interrupting bias in Army talent management. The U.S. Army War
College Quarterly. Parameters, 52(1), 21–40. https://doi.org/10.55540/0031-1723.3127
Hurd, N. M., Sánchez, B., Zimmerman, M. A., & Caldwell, C. H. (2012). Natural mentors, racial
identity, and educational attainment among African-American adolescents: Exploring

85
Pathways to Success. Child Development, 83(4), 1196–1212.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01769.x
Ingram, P. (2020, December 15). The forgotten dimension of diversity. Harvard Business
Review. https://hbr.org/2021/01/the-forgotten-dimension-of-diversity
Jackson, L. C., & Bouchard, M. M. (2019). Mentoring: A key success factor for AfricanAmerican women in the US Federal Senior Executive Service. S.A.M. Advanced
Management Journal, 84(4), 35–56.
Johnson, M. (2020, December 23). Mistrust of government is significant roadblock to Black
American vaccination efforts. The Hill. https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/530947-
mistrust-of-government-is-significant-roadblock-to-black-american/
Johnson, W. B., & Anderson, G. R. (2010). Formal mentoring in the U.S. military. Naval War
College Review, 63(2), Article 9. https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/nwcreview/vol63/iss2/9
Kamarck, K. N. (2019). Diversity, inclusion, and equal opportunity in the armed services:
Background and issues for Congress (R44321). Congressional Research Service.
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R44321
Kapp, L. (2016). Military officer personnel management: Key concepts and statutory provisions.
Congressional Research Service.
Krauthamer, B. (2013). Black slaves, Indian masters: Slavery, emancipation, and citizenship in
the Native American South. UNC Press Books.
Kreidberg, M. A., & Henry, M. G. (1955). History of military mobilization in the United States
Army, 1775–1945 (No. 20). Department of the Army.

86
Krueger, D. (2020). “To hold what the U.S. Has Taken in Conquest:” The United States Army
and Colonial Ethnic Forces, 1866-1914. Doctoral dissertation, Harvard University,
Graduate School of Arts & Sciences.
Lim, N., Marquis, J. P., Hall, K. C., Schulker, D., & Zhuo, X. (2009). Officer classification and
the future of diversity among senior military leaders: A case study of the Army ROTC.
RAND National Defense Research Institution.
Lipsitz, G., Fletcher, M. E., & Davis, B. O. (1990). Review: [Untitled]. Reviewed work:
America's First Black General: Benjamin O. Davis, Sr., 1880-1970. by Marvin E.
Fletcher, Benjamin O. Davis, Jr. The Journal of Southern History, 56(3), 557–558.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2210324
Lund, N. (2023). Mentoring on a division. Association of the United States Army.
https://www.ausa.org/articles/mentoring-division
Lutz, A. (2008). Who joins the military? A look at race, class, and immigration status. Journal of
Political and Military Sociology, 36(2), 167–188.
Lytell, M. C., Keller, K. M., Katz, B., Marquis, J. P., & Sollinger, J. M. (2016). Diversity
leadership in the U.S. Department of Defense: Analysis of the key roles, responsibilities,
and attributes of diversity leaders. RAND Corporation.
https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/AD1014144.pdf
MacGregor, A. J., Zouris, J. M., Watrous, J. R., McCabe, C. T., Dougherty, A. L., Galarneau, M.
R., & Fraser, J. J. (2020). Multimorbidity and quality of life after blast-related injury
among US military personnel: A cluster analysis of retrospective data. BMC Public
Health, 20(1), Article 578. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-08696-4

87
MacGregor, M. J. (2001). Chapter 5: The formative years, 1783–1812.
https://history.army.mil/books/amh/amh-05.htm
MacGregor, M. J. (1981). Integration of the Armed Forces, 1940-1965. Center of Military
History, U.S. Army.
Mattila, J., Tukiainen, S., & Kajalo, S. (2017). Meanings of military ranks. Defence Studies,
17(4), 359–378. https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2017.1364967
McClellan, B. (2020). Disparity in Black Officer promotions: A survey of implicit racial attitudes
among U.S. Army Officers [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Northwestern University.
https://web.archive.org/web/20201212020854id_/https://repository.library.northeastern.e
du/files/neu:m046pd543/fulltext.pdf
McClellan, B. (2021, January 5). Address implicit racial bias found in officers [Blog post].
AUSA. https://www.ausa.org/articles/address-implicit-racial-bias-found-officer
McCluney, C. L., & Rabelo, V. C. (2019). Conditions of visibility: An intersectional
examination of Black women’s belongingness and distinctiveness at work. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 113, 143–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2018.09.008
McKenzie, T. (2011). The Defense officer personnel management act: The Army’s challenge to
contemporary officer management. United States Army Command and General Staff
College Monograph. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA545125.pdf
McKinnon, J. (2001). The black population: 2000. U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 Brief,
C2KBR/01-5, 8(2), 1-11.
https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/decennial/2000/briefs/c2kbr01-05.pdf
Merians, A. N., Gross, G., Spoont, M. R., Bellamy, C. D., Harpaz-Rotem, I., & Pietrzak, R. H.
(2023). Racial and ethnic mental health disparities in U.S. military veterans: Results from

88
the National Health and Resilience in veterans’ study. Journal of Psychiatric Research,
161, 71–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2023.03.005
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Meyer, M. S., & Rinn, A. N. (2022). School-based leadership talent development. Journal for
the Education of the Gifted, 45(1), 4–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/01623532211063937
Moore, L. (2012). Black general officers: Why we lack them. U.S. Army War College Strategic
Research Report. https://doi.org/10.21236/ADA561383
Nalty, B. C. (1986). Strength for the fight: A history of black Americans in the military. Simon
and Schuster.
Nieberding, R. J., & Leitzel, B. (2007). Effectiveness of the Army mentorship program.
https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA469007.pdf
Osur, A. M. (1977). Black people in the Army air forces during World War II. The University of
Michigan Press.
Parsons, E. (2023). A phenomenological study: Exploring the lived experiences of how male
Black combat specialty officers achieve personal and organizational career success in
the U.S. military [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Creighton University.
Perez, A. L., & Strizhko, T. V. (2018). Minority representation, tokenism, and well-being in
army units. Military Psychology, 30(5), 449–463.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08995605.2018.1482184
Pflieger, J. C., LeardMann, C. A., McMaster, H. S., Donoho, C. J., & Riviere, L. A. (2018). The
impact of military and nonmilitary experiences on marriage: Examining the military

89
spouse’s perspective. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 31(5), 719–729.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jts.22321
Proctor, J. D. (2020). The relevance of the commander’s estimate to the Army people strategy.
Army Command and General Staff College Fort Leavenworth KS.
Ralston, R., & Spindel, J. (2022). Public attitudes towards diversity, promotion, and leadership in
the U.S. military. Armed Forces & Society, published online in advance of print.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0095327X221117609
RAND Corporation. (2022). Improving workplace diversity and inclusion.
https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/AD1168539.pdf
Randolph, B., Jr., & Nisbett, K. (2019). Mentoring leaders across race and gender lines: Insight
from U.S. Army officers. Global Business and Organizational Excellence, 38(4), 16–25.
https://doi.org/10.1002/joe.21931
Reyes, A. D. (2006). Strategic options for managing diversity in the US Army. Joint Center for
Political and Economic Studies Inc.
Richard, K., & Molloy, S. (2020). An examination of emerging adult military men: Masculinity
and U.S. military climate. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 21(4), 686–698.
https://doi.org/10.1037/men0000303
Ross, A. M., Steketee, G., Emmert-Aronson, B. O., Brown, T. A., Muroff, J., & DeVoe, E. R.
(2020). Stress-buffering versus support erosion: Comparison of causal models of the
relationship between social support and psychological distress in military spouses. The
American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 90(3), 361–373.
https://doi.org/10.1037/ort0000438

90
Rowlands, J. (2021). Interviewee transcript review as a tool to improve data quality and
participant confidence in sensitive research. International Journal of Qualitative
Methods, 20. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069211066170
Salem, K., Randles, R., Sapre, B., & Finnegan, A. (2023). Experiences of ethnic minority
personnel in the armed forces: A systematic review. Journal of Military, Veteran and
Family Health, 9(1), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.3138/jmvfh-2022-0019
Salter, K. A. (2014). The story of Black military officers, 1861–1948. Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315879963
Samee Ali, S. (2017, June 8). Black troops more likely to face military punishment than whites,
new report says. NBCNews.com. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/black-troopsmore-likely-face-military-punishment-whites-new-report-n769411
Schulker, D., & Walsh, M. (2022). The military demographic equity machine: A tool for helping
decision-makers address disparities in career success. RAND Corporation.
https://doi.org/10.7249/TLA1905-1
Seol, J. H., Sohn, Y. W., Yoo, M., & Park, Y. (2023). Decent work, posttraumatic stress
disorder, and posttraumatic growth from the psychology of working perspective: A threewave study of military personnel. Journal of Career Assessment, 32(1), 26–47.
https://doi.org/10.1177/10690727231163321
Shepherd, S., Sherman, D. K., MacLean, A., & Kay, A. C. (2021). The challenges of military
veterans in their transition to the workplace: A call for integrating basic and applied
psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(3), 590–613.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620953096

91
Sherrer, J., & Hayes-Burrell, I. (2023). Leadership opportunity experiences among AfricanAmerican female veteran officers in the U.S. Army: A qualitative case study. Open
Journal of Business and Management, 11(1), 174–183.
https://doi.org/10.4236/ojbm.2023.111010
Smith, I., III. (2010). Why Black officers still fail. Parameters, 40(3), 1–16.
https://doi.org/10.55540/0031-1723.2540
Stork, B. F. (2023). Mentorship is a mess. Army University Press.
https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Journals/Military-Review/English-EditionArchives/November-December-2023/Mentorship/
Sue, D. W., Spanierman, L., & Sue, D. W. (2020). Microaggressions in everyday life. John
Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Taylor, C. (2015). Breaking the Bathsheba syndrome: Building a performance evaluation system
that promotes mission command. U.S. Army War College Press.
https://doi.org/10.21236/ADA625353
Tully, R. E., & Chilton, B. (2020). Equality: More or less. Hamilton Books.
U.S. Army. (n.d.). Get a world-class education in leadership. https://www.goarmy.com/careersand-jobs/find-your-path/army-officers/rotc.html
U.S. Army. (2023a). Organization. https://www.army.mil/organization/
U.S. Army. (2023b). U.S. Army ranks. https://www.army.mil/ranks/
U.S. Army Center of Military History. (n.d.). The Army and diversity.
https://history.army.mil/faq/diversity.html#african
U.S. Army War College. (2020). How the Army runs: A senior leader reference handbook.
https://ssl.armywarcollege.edu/DCLM/pubs/HTAR.pdf

92
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2023). Military careers: Occupational outlook handbook.
https://www.bls.gov/ooh/military/military-careers.htm?view_full
U.S. Department of Defense. (2020). Department of Defense Board on Diversity and Inclusion
report: Recommendations to improve racial and ethnic diversity and inclusion in the U.S.
military. https://media.defense.gov/2020/Dec/18/2002554852/-1/-1/0/dod-diversity-andinclusion-final-board-report.pdf
U.S. Department of Defense. (2021). DoD dictionary of military and associated terms: 2021.
https://irp.fas.org/doddir/dod/dictionary.pdf
U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welface (1979). Health United States, 1979.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/hus79acc.pdf
Vaara, J. P., Pihlainen, K., Rusila, J., Ojanen, T., & Kyröläinen, H. (2023). Physical fitness and
anthropometrics in Finnish soldiers during their early career: Prospective changes during
a 3-year follow-up. BMJ Military Health, 169(2), 116–121.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjmilitary-2020-001571
Vangjel, P. (2020). Strategic drift and U.S. Army operational logic. U.S. Army Command and
Staff College. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/AD1159929.pdf
Villaverde, L. E. (2008). Feminist theories and education: Primer. Peter Lang.
Walker, T. (2016). Ecological systems theory: Using spheres of influence to support small-unit
climate and training. U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social
Sciences. https://doi.org/10.21236/AD1009046
Wieffering, H., Morrison, A., Stafford, K., & Laporta, J. (2021, May 28). Deep-rooted racism,
discrimination permeate US military. AP News. https://apnews.com/article/us-militaryracism-discrimination-4e840e0acc7ef07fd635a312d9375413

93
Wineman, B. A. (2013). The African-American officer corps: A history of African-American
military advancement from integration through Vietnam. Choice, 51(1), 147–148.
Wright, K. (2003). Soldiers of Freedom: An illustrated history of African-Americans in the
armed forces. Black Dog & Leventhal.

94
Appendix A: Interview Protocol and Questions
The following sections present the interview protocol used in this study.
Introduction to the Interview
Hello, my name is Andraus Williams. I am a doctoral candidate at the University of
Southern California. Before we get started, I want to provide you with an overview of my study
and answer any questions you might have about participating in this interview. I am conducting a
study on the underrepresentation of African American officers in senior leadership positions in
the U.S. Army. I am talking with multiple African American U.S. Army officers, both men and
women, who served a minimum of 15 years of service or retired and held the rank of Major/04
above to learn about their lived experiences in the U.S. Army. This interview is confidential, and
I will not be sharing the documents with any other person. Before we go any further, I want to
thank you for agreeing to participate in my study. I appreciate the time you have set aside to
answer my questions. The interview should take 60 to 90 minutes. Does that still work for you?
I am happy to provide you with a copy of my final manuscript if you are interested. I will
keep the data on a password-protected computer, and all data will be erased after 3 years. Do you
have any questions about the study before we get started? I will record our Zoom interview today
so that I can accurately capture what you share with me. The recording is solely for my purposes
to best capture your perspectives and will not be shared with anyone else. May I have your
permission to record our conversation?

95
Table A1
Interview Protocol
Interview questions Potential probes
RQ
addressed
Key concept
addressed
Tell me about yourself and
your background.
Where did you grow up?
Family? Military
influences? Education?
RQ2 Environment/
background
Please share with me how
long you have served in
the U.S. Army.
What are some factors that
have influenced you to
stay/leave the military?
RQ1, RQ2 Military
culture
What is your title and /or
position?
How was the process to
achieve said
title/position?
RQ1 Recruitment/
retention
What led you to join the U.S.
Army? Preparation?
Was it preplanned to join the
military? Family
members served?
RQ1 Environment/
upbringing
What is your educational
background/University?
Did the school have ROTC
programs? Attended
HBCU? Did you join
ROTC?
RQ1 Recruitment
In your experience or
observations, what are
some of the most
common perceived
barriers that African
American officers face in
their career development
within their respective
fields?
Any specific challenges you
recall?
RQ2 Cultural/
military
structure
What have your mentorship
experiences been to
prepare you for the rank
of lieutenant colonel and
higher?
Do you feel you benefited
from mentoring? Any
specific mentorship
programs for African
American officers?
RQ2 Mentorship
In your opinion, how
significant is the impact
of historical racial
discrimination and
institutional biases on the
lack of African American
representation in senior
leadership positions?
Have you encountered any
specific challenges or
obstacles related to
diversity and
representation during
your time in the U.S.
Army?
RQ1 Diversity

96
Interview questions Potential probes
RQ
addressed
Key concept
addressed
How would you describe the
current representation of
African American
officers in senior
leadership positions in
the U.S. Army compared
to other racial or ethnic
groups?
Can you share your personal
experiences or
observations?
RQ1; RQ2 Military
structure
What biases have you
experienced with
discipline practices
among service members?
Underrepresented groups/
African American service
members? Etc.?
RQ1; RQ2; Military
culture/
environment
How do African American
female officers
experience opportunities
to obtain senior
command/leadership
positions?
What challenges have
they/you faced, if any?
RQ; 1RQ2 Racism/gender
bias
What advice would you give
to aspiring African
American officers who
aspire to attain senior
leadership positions in
the U.S. Army?
What would you tell your
younger self?
RQ2 Racism/bias
What role models influenced
you in your U.S. Army
career?
What stood out the most
about these influential
role models?
RQ2 Leadership
What efforts do you feel can
be made to increase the
representation among
African American
officers in senior
leadership positions?
How feasible are these
efforts?
RQ1, RQ2 Culture
Is there anything that you
thought of during the
interview from your
experiences that may add
to my understanding of
this issue?
Any questions that I did not
ask or anything that you
want to add?
RQ1, RQ2 Follow-up

97
Conclusion to the Interview
Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts and time with me today! I appreciate your
time and willingness to share. Everything that you have shared is really helpful for my study. If I
find myself with a follow-up question, I am wondering if I might be able to contact you, and if
so, is email okay? Again, thank you for participating in my study.

98
Appendix B: Recruitment Email
Date:
Dear retired Army officer,
First and foremost, I would like to thank you for your service. I am a graduate candidate
at the University of Southern California. I am conducting research as part of my doctoral degree.
The purpose of this study is to explore perceived barriers and lived experiences of African
American officers, both men and women, in senior leadership positions.
To be eligible to participate in the study, you must identify as a former African American
Army officer who has retired or had at least 15 years of service. You must have held the rank of
Major/04 promotable at the time of retiring or ending your term of service (ETS). I will conduct
an interview lasting 60 to 90 minutes with participants virtually via Zoom. I will make an audio
and video recording of the interview for transcription purposes. You will be asked to review your
transcripts for accuracy. The review should take approximately 30 minutes to complete. The
transcripts of the interviews will be sent to you by email approximately 1 week after the
interview. I will keep all information you discuss in the interviews confidential, and you will be
identified only by a pseudonym in all transcripts and records of the interview.
If you agree to be interviewed, I will forward an informed consent document for you to
complete prior to the interview.
If you have any questions, please contact me at andrausw@usc.edu.
Sincerely,
Andraus L. Williams

99
Appendix C: Informed Consent Form
You have been invited to participate in a research study to explore perceived barriers and
lived experiences of African American officers, both men and women, in senior leadership
positions. You were selected for participation because you identify as African American, you
reached the rank of Major (promotable), and you served at least 15 years in the military. Please
read this form and ask any questions before agreeing to participate in this study.
Andraus L. Williams, a doctoral candidate at the University of Southern California, is
conducting this study.
Background: The purpose of this qualitative study is to explore the career trajectories of
African American officers and their perceptions related to environmental influences that impact
their career progression. This study includes the identification of factors that may have led to
their underrepresentation in senior officer positions. The goal of this research is to learn about
the barriers and lived experiences of African American officers related to career progression,
which may assist in addressing barriers present for future African American soldiers and officers
seeking higher ranks and higher offices.
Procedures: If you agree to participate in this qualitative study, you will be interviewed
virtually via Zoom for 60 to 90 minutes. I will be the interviewer and will record the Zoom
session. You will also be asked to review the preliminary analysis of the content of the transcript
of the interview emailed to you 1 week after the interview, with the review expected to take 30
minutes.
Risks: The risks of this study are minimal and are similar to the risks you would
encounter in everyday life.

100
Benefits: Participants should not expect to receive a direct benefit from taking part in this
study.
The findings of the study may benefit the U.S. Army in addressing barriers present for
future African American soldiers and officers seeking higher ranks and higher offices.
Compensation: There is no compensation for participants in this study.
Confidentiality: I will keep all records related to the study confidential. In any sort of
report, I might publish, I will not include any information that will make it possible to identify a
participant. I will store the research records securely, and I will be the only person with access to
the records. All participants will be assigned a pseudonym with no records linking the name to
their identity.
Voluntary Nature of the Study: Participation in this study is voluntary. Your
involvement is a personal choice, and there will be no consequences or repercussions for
deciding not to participate. Your willingness to contribute your insights and experiences is highly
valued, and we respect your right to choose whether to take part. Rest assured that your decision
will in no way impact your military service, standing, or future opportunities.
Withdrawing from the study: If you choose to withdraw from the study, please contact
me at the email address included in the next paragraph. If you withdraw, data collected from you
will be destroyed immediately and will not be included in this study.
If you have any questions, please contact me by email at andrausw@usc.edu
_____________________
Participant
_____________________
Andraus L. Williams

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The underrepresentation of African Americans in information technology: an examination of social capital and its impact on African Americans’ career success

PDF

Where are they? The underrepresentation of African or Black American senior executives in the Department of Defense

PDF

African American officer's experiences as leaders navigating the United States Armed Service

PDF

Equitable schooling for African American students: an evaluation study

PDF

Breaking barriers to leadership: what's the best solution?

PDF

Identifying the environmental and systemic factors contributing to the underrepresentation of women leaders in the male-dominated information technology sector in the United States

PDF

Underrepresentation of African Americans in master’s engineering programs

PDF

The challenges women face becoming peace officers

PDF

Equitable learning opportunities for English Language Learners

PDF

Black brilliance in leadership: increasing the number of Black women in the senior executive service

PDF

Marginalization of African Americans in Managerial Leadership: The Barriers to Success

PDF

Missed opportunities: lack of advancement of African American females  into senior executive healthcare leadership

PDF

Sustainable fashion leadership: The female phenomenon

PDF

School district leadership and the motherhood penalty

PDF

Leadership in turbulent times: a social cognitive study of responsible leaders

PDF

Examining the underrepresentation of African Americans in the Senior Executive Service within the United States federal government’s civilian workforce

PDF

Human resources and equity: the influence of HR on addressing the underrepresentation of women in higher education leadership

PDF

No officer left behind? The promotion experiences of retired and separated Black commissioned officers in the United States Army

PDF

Workplace bullying of women leaders in the United States

PDF

Belonging in America: Black Muslim refugee women’s’ trials and triumphs in the workplace

Asset Metadata

Creator Williams, Andraus Lamar (author)

Core Title The underrepresentation of African American officers in senior leadership positions in the United States Army

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2024-05

Publication Date 04/10/2024

Defense Date 03/20/2024

Publisher Los Angeles, California (original), University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag barrier,career development,enlisted.,Keywords: African American,Military,OAI-PMH Harvest,officer,trajectory

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Datta, Monique (committee chair), Maddox, Anthony (committee member), Riddick, Christopher (committee member)

Creator Email andrausw@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC113871309

Unique identifier UC113871309

Identifier etd-WilliamsAn-12789.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-WilliamsAn-12789

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Williams, Andraus Lamar

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20240409-usctheses-batch-1138 (batch), University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu