University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Cultivating workplace belonging through managerial impact

(USC Thesis Other)

Cultivating workplace belonging through managerial impact

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Cultivating Workplace Belonging Through Managerial Impact
Jennifer Lyn Potter
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 Jennifer Lyn Potter 2024
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Jennifer Lyn Potter certifies the approval of this Dissertation
Eric Canny
Marcus Pritchard
Esther Kim, Committee Chair
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2024

iv
Abstract
Large, legacy aerospace defense organizations are heavily influenced by White supremacy
culture, resulting in an environment where employees from historically marginalized
demographics may find it difficult to feel a sense of belonging. Workplace culture, including a
sense of belonging and feeling valued for one’s unique contributions and perspectives, has
become an important element for employee engagement and retention since the COVID-19
pandemic. First line managers hold significant influence in creating a culture of inclusion and
cultivating a sense of belonging for their employees. This study explores the knowledge,
motivation and organizational influences that help or hinder first line managers in cultivating a
sense of belonging for their employees using the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework.
In this qualitative study, 16 first line managers in large, legacy aerospace defense organizations
were interviewed to understand their perspectives and experiences. The findings show that first
line managers in large, legacy aerospace defense organizations understand the conceptual and
procedural knowledge to cultivate belonging, but are unable to articulate their organization’s
DEI goals beyond increasing representation for women and employees of color. Without
organization-wide value on a culture of inclusion, benefits of a diverse workforce are unlikely to
emerge and employees from marginalized demographics are unlikely to find a sense of
belonging. Four recommendations for practice are discussed that will help large, legacy
aerospace defense organizations cultivate a sense of belonging and inclusion for their employees
and increase employee engagement and talent retention.
Keywords: aerospace defense, White supremacy culture, belonging, diversity, equity, inclusion,
gap analysis

v
Dedication
To my dad, who would have been the most proud.

vi
Acknowledgments
Thank you to Dr. Kim, my unexpected chair. Your kindness, compassion, and direction
perfectly matched what I needed to complete this journey. Thank you to Dr. Eric Canny for your
guidance and inspiration throughout the program, and thank you to Dr. Marc Pritchard for being
so willing, supportive, and helpful as a last minute addition to my committee. And many thanks
to Dr. Jennifer Phillips for your early support in this program and for your military service.
My heartfelt gratitude goes out to the 16 managers who were willing to talk about their
experiences and answer all my questions with honesty, candor, and humor. An additional thank
you to the women–and Jeff–who helped me refine my interview questions.
A special thank you to my “EdD besties”–Saida, Lauren, Mayu, and Connie–without our
weekly meetings and extensive reading note matrices, finishing this program would have been
immensely more difficult. More importantly, I am forever grateful for your friendship, love, and
general support in life.
Thank you to Dana Perkins, writing coach extraordinaire, whose feedback undoubtedly
made my work richer, clearer and more concise.
Finally, thank you to my partner Bill for all the dinners, housework, and dog walks that
gave me the time and space to complete this work.

vii
Table of Contents
Abstract.......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ....................................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgments.......................................................................................................................... vi
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. ix
List of Figures................................................................................................................................. x
List of Abbreviations (Optional).................................................................................................... xi
Chapter One: Overview of the Study.............................................................................................. 1
Context and Background of the Problem............................................................................ 1
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions.................................................................. 3
Importance of the Study...................................................................................................... 4
A Brief Overview of the Theoretical Framework and Methodology ................................. 7
Definition of Terms............................................................................................................. 9
Organization of the Study ................................................................................................. 10
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ........................................................................................ 11
The Aerospace Defense Industry ...................................................................................... 11
Workplace Culture ............................................................................................................ 19
Belonging.......................................................................................................................... 26
Conceptual Framework..................................................................................................... 35
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 38
Chapter Three: Methodology........................................................................................................ 39
Research Questions........................................................................................................... 39
Overview of Design .......................................................................................................... 40
Research Setting................................................................................................................ 40
The Researcher.................................................................................................................. 41

viii
Data Sources ..................................................................................................................... 42
Credibility and Trustworthiness........................................................................................ 49
Ethics................................................................................................................................. 50
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 51
Chapter Four: Results or Findings................................................................................................ 52
Findings............................................................................................................................. 53
Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences.................................................. 63
Summary ......................................................................................................................... 111
Chapter Five: Recommendations and Discussion....................................................................... 112
Discussion of Findings.................................................................................................... 112
Recommendations for Practice ....................................................................................... 120
Limitations and Delimitations......................................................................................... 128
Recommendations for Future Research .......................................................................... 129
Conclusions..................................................................................................................... 130
References................................................................................................................................... 133
Appendix A: Interview Protocol................................................................................................. 155

ix
List of Tables
Table 1: Summary of Participant Manager Demographics 49

x
List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework 41

xi
List of Abbreviations
CEO Chief Executive Officer
DEI Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
DoD Department of Defense
ERG Employee Resource Group
HBCU Historically Black Colleges and Universities
LGBTBQ+ This phrase is meant to include those who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersexual, asexual, non-binary, as well as
other identities that have yet to be named.
RAA Roles, Responsibilities, and Authorities
STEM Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math
TMCF Thurgood Marshall College Fund

1
Chapter One: Introduction to the Study
The Aerospace defense industry is dominated by large, legacy corporations that are
predominantly staffed by White males (Ram & Fuller, 2022). Given these demographics and the
influence of the military culture on the industry, White supremacy values are pervasive within
corporate culture (Herspring, 2011; Valasik & Reid, 2021). Typically, these legacy organizations
are slow to enact cultural changes, which impacts their ability to attract and retain employees
who are seeking a fully inclusive culture. Workplace culture has become an essential element of
both employee retention and attraction since the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted traditional
office environments in early 2020 (DeSmet et al., 2021). Diversity has emerged as an important
facet of workplace culture, not just for the younger generations joining the workforce, but for
current employees as well (Deloitte, 2022; Ram & Fuller, 2022), and organizations that
demonstrate a commitment to diversity are rewarded with increased innovation (Hofstra et al.,
2020). Companies are responding by adding C-suite positions to increase representation of
minority employees (Goldstein et al., 2022). Effective diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI)
efforts result in a feeling of belongingness within the workplace, and employees who feel a sense
of belonging are more likely to stay with their organization, as well as recommend employment
there to others (Kennedy & Jain-Link, 2020). Cultivating a sense of belonging amongst
employees can help organizations attract and retain talent, and the opposite is true as well; not
feeling this sense of belonging is one of the top reasons employees left their jobs in 2021
(DeSmet et al., 2022).
Context and Background of the Problem
The U.S. government spends billions of dollars annually to meet a myriad of hardware,
software, and personnel needs (United States Department of Defense, 2021). In the aerospace

2
defense industry, nearly 30% of U.S. government spending goes to just five companies (Forecast
International, 2023). These five companies–Lockheed Martin, Raytheon Technologies, General
Dynamics, Boeing, and Northrop Grumman–are considered legacy organizations in the industry,
with histories dating back to pre-World War II, a time before women were welcomed into the
workforce. In the 2020s, leadership positions in these legacy organizations are still mostly made
up of White men, and representation in the technical workforce is also lacking in both gender
and racial diversity (Ram & Fuller, 2022). The prevalence of White men in these organizations
results in workplace cultures that enable this population to feel a sense of belonging without
much, if any, effort, but the same cannot be said for their diverse counterparts.
The aerospace defense industry was not immune to the workplace disruptions of the
COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent shift in priorities of its workforce. Remote and hybrid
working environments have become non-negotiable benefits for some employees (Ram & Fuller,
2022), and workplace culture is ten times more likely to predict employee turnover in the last 2
years than compensation (Sull et al., 2022). Employees are less tolerant of toxic workplace
cultures and are willing to change jobs to improve their working conditions or work life balance.
For Black, Indigenous, and Brown employees, microaggressions in the workplace stemming
from White supremacy culture have serious implications for retention and job satisfaction
(McCallaghan, 2022); the same is true for gendered microaggressions against women in male
dominated fields (Rubin et al., 2019). Creating psychological safety in the workplace–defined by
trust, honest, and open communication–has become a focused approach to cultivating a positive
workplace culture (McCausland, 2023). When considering which organizations to stay with,
leave, or join, employees make individual calculations on whether or not they will “fit in”–that
is, whether or not they will feel a sense of belonging (Ching et al., 2022; Zimmerman, 2022).

3
First-line manager influence over workplace culture is significant (Anderson, 2021;
Davis et al., 2020; Krivkovich et al., 2022; Manley et al., 2011). Managers who reward high
performing employees and hold lower performing employees accountable can increase retention
in their organizations (Sull et al., 2022). Similarly, managers with the ability to inspire rather
than pressure or control employees have higher retention rates (Reina et al., 2018), as do
managers who demonstrate a genuine concern for their employees’ well-being (Steiner et al.,
2020). Ensuring individual employees feel valued and respected in the workplace is the crux of
effective managerial leadership, and organizations must evaluate their management ranks to
ensure individuals in these roles are well qualified to do so (Anderson, 2021).
Current research has indicated that employees feel a sense of belonging in the workplace
when they are comfortable being their authentic selves and are subsequently seen for the unique
contribution they bring to the workplace (Kennedy & Jain-Link, 2020; Zimmerman, 2022).
Furthermore, feeling connected to one’s colleagues has been shown to increase a sense of
belonging, as has managerial support in both daily work tasks and career development. This
study aims to explore some of these options as a way for first-line managers to cultivate
belonging.
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions
The purpose of this study is to examine first-line managers’ perceived effectiveness in
cultivating a sense of belonging amongst their direct reports. If, how, and why first-line
managers are (or are not) effective will be explored. Gap analysis (Clark & Estes, 2008)
pertaining to knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences will be conducted based on
the experiences and perceptions of these first-line managers. The research questions that guide
this study are as follows:

4
1. What strategies and tactics do first-line managers use to cultivate a sense of belonging
for marginalized employees?
2. What knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences are affecting first-line
managers’ ability to impact the industry’s diversity, equity, and inclusion goals?
3. What are the recommended process changes and implementation methods to provide
sufficient knowledge, motivation, and organizational support for first-line managers
to aid in cultural transformation?
Importance of the Study
To maintain an innovative culture and meet the needs of its government customers,
aerospace defense should embrace DEI efforts. However, military culture has a considerable
influence on legacy aerospace defense organizations, in part due to a strong desire within the
industry to understand its customer base, and also due to the number of veterans that transition
from military careers to civilian jobs at their suppliers. The history of military culture is
intertwined with White supremacy values, which are then translated to legacy aerospace defense
organizations (Valasik & Reid, 2021). Characteristics of these values include: objectivity, the
belief that emotion has no place in the decision process; paternalism, the belief that those in
power need not understand the viewpoint of those they are making decisions for; perfectionism,
the belief that making a mistake indicates a lack of any potential valuable contribution from the
individual; and a right to comfort, the belief that those in positions of power are entitled to
psychological comfort at the expense of others’ comfort (Callwood et al., 2022). When these
characteristics are present in an organization, it can be difficult for employees who do not
identify as cisgender, straight, White, and male to feel a sense of belonging.

5
Representation of women and of Black, Indigenous, and Brown employees in the
aerospace defense industry is not reflective of the overall population of the United States, and
this lack of representation is exacerbated by the hierarchy of management levels (Ram & Fuller,
2022). The largest gap between the general population and aerospace defense employment
remains gendered: while the United States is 50% women (Census Bureau, 2020), nearly 70% of
the industry’s executives and over 80% of their engineering force are male (Ram & Fuller,
2022). The Latinx population in the United States is more than double that of aerospace defense
engineering and nearly four times the executive representation of the industry (Jones et al., 2021;
Ram & Fuller, 2022). Intersections of race and gender have an even higher impact on
representation: across multiple industries, White men make up 68% of C-suite positions, whereas
women of color hold only 4% (Krivkovich, 2022). This widening gap in the hierarchy
demonstrates a federally funded reinforcement of opportunities and wealth disparities between
White men and women, and employees of color.
Further, employees in the LGBTQ+ community, those with disabilities, and employees
who are viewed as overweight will have difficulty in identifying a senior leader who mirrors
their personal characteristics and values (Hodson et al., 2018; Kulkarni & Lengnick-Hall, 2014;
Roehling et al., 2009). For women in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) fields,
having access to successful and relatable female role models has been found to increase a sense
of belonging within the field (Pietri et al., 2017). Similar results have been found for Black
students in STEM regarding access to a Black professor (Johnson et al., 2019). It is then
reasonable to assume that the same could be true for other underrepresented characteristics in
individual employees. The extrapolation of these findings summarizes the adage that
“representation matters” in cultivating belongingness in the workplace.

6
The COVID-19 pandemic coincided with the Summer of Racial Reckoning that was set
off by the murders of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and Ahmaud Arbery (Chang et al., 2020).
In the aftermath, the hiring of C-suite positions to address DEI in the workplace increased
dramatically; however, these roles were often not given sufficient resources to carry out
ambiguous charters and have subsequently seen high turnover rates (Goldstein et al., 2022).
Recognizing value in creating a heterogeneous workforce is either tied to the idea that diverse
companies are more profitable, or that equity should indeed be a core value of the organization
(Georgeac & Rattan, 2023). What many companies fail to realize is cultural changes are
necessary to fully operationalize the DEI directives (Byrd & Sparkman, 2022); organizations that
are still steeped in White supremacy values will find this task difficult.
Every employee deserves an equitable opportunity to feel respected and valued in the
workplace and the freedom to bring their whole, authentic selves to their professional roles.
When individuals are unable to do so, the message from the organization is that they are less
important because they have not assimilated to the current workplace norms–and this message
has real consequences for an individual’s lifetime earnings (Aragão, 2023; Bayer & Charles,
2018; Denier & Waite, 2019; Henly & Brucker, 2020; Li et al., 2021). Cultivating a sense of
belonging for all employees, specifically for those who identify as female, Black, Indigenous,
Latinx, Hispanic, Asian American, Pacific Islander, Indian, part of the LGBTQ+ community, are
living with a disability, or are seen as overweight, is a necessary step to achieving equity in the
workplace.
This study uses the term “marginalized employees” to describe the identities named
above. Marginalized is defined to be “relegated to an unimportant or powerless position”
(Merriam-Webster, n.d.), which is how these underrepresented demographics can feel in the

7
context of White supremacy culture (Callwood et al., 2022). Ways this marginalization manifests
can be through targeted microaggressions, unintentional exclusionary practices, and the misuse
of pronouns. DEI is often strongly associated with reducing race and gender disparities;
however, myriad identities make up the minority demographics of the aerospace defense
industry. This list is not all-inclusive of the marginalized identities but was intentionally chosen
to highlight the additional populations beyond race and gender that will benefit from an
organization’s efforts to operationalize their DEI charters.
A Brief Overview of the Theoretical Framework and Methodology
Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis is used as the theoretical framework for this study.
Through this lens, knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences are examined to
determine the gap between current and desired performance. This systematic, analytical
approach enables the identification of actionable steps to be taken to close the gaps in these three
categories. For this study, it is assumed that there is indeed room for improvement between
managers’ actual performance and the desired performance levels, and that changes to
knowledge, motivation, and/or organizational influences will help realize the enhanced
performance. Based on the literature review, it is presumed that this level of gap analysis has yet
to be conducted in this particular industry for this particular issue.
Knowledge can be categorized in four ways: factual, conceptual, procedural, and
metacognitive (Krathwohl, 2002). Factual knowledge includes basic facts and terminology on a
particular topic, such as managers believing they have cultural influence in their work groups.
Conceptual knowledge refers to the underlying principles and theories of the topic, for example
transformational leadership theory. Procedural knowledge involves the skills, techniques, and
methods to perform the task, including the use of emotional intelligence to build relationships.

8
Metacognition is the process of reflecting on one’s own abilities and making changes as
necessary, for instance, self-assessment of progress on a chosen approach to problem solving.
Motivation can be both intrinsic and extrinsic, based on either the individual’s interest in
the task or the usefulness of the task (Clark & Estes, 2008). The value of the task is also
evaluated based on perceived importance and resulting benefit. Expectancy outcome, or the
belief that one’s own actions or behavior could lead to a certain outcome, can also be a driving
motivational factor (Pintrich, 2003). Similarly, yet distinct, is an individual’s sense of selfefficacy, or the belief that the outcome is attainable, regardless of external influences (Pintrich,
2003). Finally, goal content, where an individual has a clear and relevant goal to achieve, is an
effective motivational strategy (Clark & Estes, 2008).
For this study, organizational influences are categorized into cultural settings and cultural
models. Cultural models are the underlying values, traits, and beliefs of the organization that are
ingrained and not easily observed (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). Cultural settings are the
concrete, observable events and actions in the organization resulting from the underlying models.
These organizational influences are often out of the individual’s control yet have a direct and
considerable impact on their ability to achieve the desired performance goal.
Managers will be interviewed on the topics of their current knowledge, motivation, and
their perception of organizational influence; qualitative analysis will be performed on the
resulting data. A qualitative approach is preferred to quantitative in this study to understand the
managers’ lived experiences and to obtain details on the complexities and nuances of their
insights. This approach will also enable rich discussion regarding managers’ suggestions and
recommendations for how to increase knowledge and motivation and remove organizational
barriers that would better enable them to cultivate a sense of belonging.

9
Definition of Terms
The following definitions are meant to provide clarity and awareness for terms used in
this study, as many may not be used in daily conversation:
Aerospace defense: The aerospace defense industry, including organizations that contract
with the United States government to produce products, services, and personnel to support
missions within the air and space domains, including airplanes, missiles, satellites, and
associated sub-components (Wang et al., 2018).
Disability: While recognizing that the use of the term “disability” centers an ableist
viewpoint, in this study, the Center for Disease Control’s definition will be used: “A disability is
any condition of the body or mind (impairment) that makes it more difficult for the person with
the condition to do certain activities (activity limitation) and interact with the world around them
(participation restrictions)” for clarity (CDC, 2020 p. 1).
LGBTQ+ community: This phrase is meant to include those who identify as lesbian, gay,
bi-sexual, transgender, queer, intersexual, asexual, non-binary, as well as other identities that
have yet to be named (Hodson et al., 2018).
Marginalized employees: This descriptor was purposely chosen over the phrase “Black,
Indigenous, and people of color” to more intentionally include the non-racial identities that are
often left out of the diversity conversation. However, the racial gaps in the aerospace defense
industry are significant (Ram & Fuller, 2022) and should be noted. From a racial and ethnic
standpoint, “underrepresented” is also inclusive of those who identify as Black, Indigenous,
African American, Latinx, Hispanic, Asian American, Pacific Islander, and/or Indian.
Overweight: This qualifier of an individual’s body size is rooted in the Body Mass Index
(BMI) construct, which was created using the bodies of White men of European descent as the

10
definition of healthy and normal (Gordon, 2023). Wellness culture within the United States
inappropriately and unfairly associates people in the category of “overweight” as lacking work
ethic and intrinsic motivation.
White supremacy culture: The concept of White supremacy culture describes the culture
that systemically and systematically privileges Whiteness above all other races and includes the
norms, behaviors, structures, and practices that are generally accepted in the United States
(Callwood et al., 2022).
Women: The term “women” is used to describe those who identify as female, including
but not limited to cisgender and transgender women (Gordon, 2023).
Workplace culture: This term describes the microclimates found at the working, or nonmanagement, level; these cultures vary geographically and by function, individual manager,
common interests, and local interactions (Manley et al., 2011).
Organization of the Study
This dissertation will follow a traditional five-chapter model. Chapter One has provided
an overview of the study to include context of the industry setting and the importance of the
research. It has also introduced the theoretical framework and definitions of terms used in the
following chapters. Chapter Two is a summary of relevant literature for the study, as well as the
conceptual framework model that will serve as the lens through which the interview data is
analyzed. Chapter Three will outline the methodology of the research approach including
discussion of participants, data collection, and analysis. Chapter Four will provide the findings of
the analyses. Finally, Chapter Five incorporates the findings with proposed solutions,
recommendations, and suggestions for future research.

11
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
Interpersonal connections are key to cultivating a positive workplace environment;
however, explicit training for managers in this area is inconsistent (Yeardley, 2017). Positive
workplace culture is a major consideration for employee retention in the post-pandemic labor
market (Kyzer, 2023; Ram & Fuller, 2022; Sull et al., 2022); it also has a direct impact on a
company’s bottom line, as replacing an employee can cost up to 200% of their salary (Davis et
al., 2020). Feeling a sense of belonging is one necessary aspect of a positive workplace culture
(Zimmerman, 2022). In legacy aerospace defense companies, White male norms still dominate
corporate culture, and for those employees who do not identify as straight, White, and male,
feeling a sense of belonging in this environment may not come easily. To ensure that
marginalized populations feel that they can bring their whole and authentic selves to the
workplace, managers need to become effective leaders in the cultivation of belongingness on
their teams.
This chapter will discuss the related literature, context, and conceptual framework for this
study. First it explores the current demographics and cultural influences of the aerospace defense
industry, including the workplace environment since the COVID-19 pandemic, and talent
recruitment efforts. Second, it describes the definition and complexities of workplace culture,
including the impact of first-line managers as well as DEI considerations. Third, this chapter
discusses workplace belonging; how it is intertwined with DEI; and the concept of transactional
belonging. Finally, the conceptual framework is presented.
The Aerospace Defense Industry
The top five largest aerospace defense contractors–Lockheed Martin, Raytheon
Technologies, General Dynamics, Boeing, and Northrop Grumman–have roots dating back to the

12
1930s, a time when White men predominantly held positions in scientific professions. Through
the years, this trend has persisted. Since the 1970s, women have increased their STEM presence
by 19%, and Black representation has increased by only 4.5% (Landivar, 2013; Martinez &
Christnacht, 2021; Okrent & Burke, 2021). White men continue to be the majority demographic
in aerospace defense organizations, especially in leadership positions: 81% of executives are
White, and 70% are male (Ram & Fuller, 2022). Most of these senior and executive management
roles are promoted in-house, which perpetuates legacy cultures. The impact of these cultural
traits on people who identify as anything other than straight, White, and male is rarely
questioned by those in positions of power (Proudman, 2011). Traits include an either/or
mentality that solutions are binary, there is a winner and a loser, the individual is valued over the
collective, and that monetary gain is more important than cultivating relationships with other
humans. Speaking to be heard instead of speaking as part of a constructive dialog is another
White male norm. Interrupting is a common attribute of this norm, as is putting the burden of
understanding on the person doing the talking, especially if that person is not White and male or
part of the majoritized demographic (Callwood et al., 2022).
Defense contractors' workplace culture has been influenced by the military. Because the
Department of Defense (DoD) is its primary customer, aerospace defense organizations are apt to
ensure communication styles and traditional norms are compatible with it. Military branches
such as the Air Force, Navy, and Army make up a significant portion of the DoD’s spending
profile (Garamone, 2022), and understanding these customers’ needs involves an appreciable
amount of time understanding their culture. The United States military has roots in White
supremacy and a history of sexism and heteronormativity (Valasik & Reid, 2021); while many
policies have been established in the name of equality, the remnants of these roots can still be

13
seen in the demographics of the military’s highest officials. For example, as of 2021, 90% of the
highest-ranking officers in the military were White, and 92% were male (Demographics Report,
2021).
Aerospace defense contractors naturally recruit veterans, especially those with ties to
active customer branches and organizations (Guillory, 2001). For veterans, this makes for an
easier transition into the corporate world while maintaining their culture, military contacts, and,
often, their security clearance. For defense contractors, veterans provide valuable insights to the
customer base and a network of professional contacts. According to the websites of the top five
defense contractors, between 15% and 20% of their workforce is made up of military veterans. It
can be valuable for aerospace defense contractors to hire veterans into sales and government
operations roles where inter-organization influence is high. These roles are often filled by retired
high-ranking officials, inevitably leaving out women, Black, Indigenous, and Brown veterans,
given the prevalence of White males in those senior officer positions.
Another way the hiring process favors White males is through the use of current
employees’ networks to fill open positions; upwards of 50% of employers reported using this
method for open job requisitions (Galenianos, 2014). In many white-collar, high-paying jobs–
including aerospace defense–White men are still the dominant decision-makers in the hiring
process (King et al., 2006) and are likely to have deep networks of other White males
(McPherson et al., 2001). Although racially minoritized individuals are more likely to use social
networks to find jobs, the jobs they do find are lower-paying ones, a circumstance referred to as
being a part of the “wrong network” (Fernandez & Fernandez-Mateo, 2006). Indeed, McDonald
(2011) has shown that White male networks consist of significantly higher status connections
than female, Black, or Hispanic networks, giving credibility to the term “old boys’ club” (p.

14
319). Because of the current demographics in aerospace defense, a predominantly White male
network has created a limited and narrow pathway of interpersonal connections for those
searching for jobs.
Through these promotion and hiring practices, the industry, especially the large, legacy
organizations that dominate the U.S. government’s aerospace defense spending, continues to
create homogenous leadership. These leadership networks, in turn, create an environment in
which mainly, and sometimes only, White men feel a natural sense of belonging. Due to their
long-time majority status, White men may not even see or understand the need to upend this
status quo (Proudman, 2011).
Significant STEM Presence
The DoD employs over one hundred thousand engineers, making it the largest
engineering organization in the world (DOD Civilian Careers, n.d.). The DoD even has its own
pipeline initiative, DoD STEM, aimed at cultivating and developing future technical talent and
maintaining sufficient employment levels to maintain infrastructure and national security efforts
into the future (DoDSTEM, 2023). Similarly, aerospace defense contracting is driven by a
significant STEM presence, and the underrepresentation of women is stark: the industry as a
whole employs 25% women, but only 17% of all technology and engineering roles within the
industry are occupied by women (Ram & Fuller, 2022). In terms of racial representation, nearly
70% of engineers in the aerospace defense industry are White (Ram & Fuller, 2022).
Much has been written about the lack of diversity in STEM, and the realities of that
literature are applicable to the aerospace defense industry. In 2019, 47% of women in aerospace
defense experienced discrimination at some point in their careers, compared to only 38% in other
industries (Ketzner et al., 2019). Even subtle discrimination negatively impacts an employee’s

15
sense of belonging and self-efficacy, especially among those who do not fit the majority
demographic (Jones et al., 2017). Women, specifically those who experience this kind of
threatening environment, are much more likely to leave the field (Casad et al., 2018).
Current Environment
From the perspective of the current senior and executive leadership levels in aerospace
defense, there may be little incentive to change the system that has enabled their success. These
corporate leaders have been promoted in their careers through a certain set of behaviors–often
those that align with White supremacy culture–and are, therefore, comfortable promoting
subsequent generations of leaders who mimic these behaviors (Callwood et al., 2022). Four of
the five biggest aerospace defense companies are led by White men over the age of 60,
representing both significant knowledge base and cultural experience leading to their CEO
appointment. However, the industry is changing, and the assumptions and mechanisms of how
and why employees stay with their organizations have evolved.
Financial Compensation
One example lies in the elimination of pension plans: employees born before 1980 are
likely to have entered the workforce when organizations offered a comprehensive pension plan,
incentivizing long-term careers with the same company (Davis et al., 2020; Hudson, 2021). This
practice has fallen out of favor as corporations look to shift the financial planning burden to the
individual employees. Both pensions and profit-sharing plans encourage employees to consider
the long-term financial implications of changing jobs, with the goal of keeping them with the
organization, though neither are widespread practices within the aerospace defense industry
currently (Hudson, 2021).

16
A gap in consistent hiring in the industry during the late 1990s has left aerospace defense
companies dealing with a pipeline issue today. Over half of the aerospace defense employees are
over the age of 50, and there is a notable lack of 40 to 50-year-old employees in leadership
positions (Ketzner et al., 2019). The United States government is poised to increase spending for
its aerospace defense contractors by 35% over the next 10 years (Congressional Budget Office,
2023), which will further exacerbate the talent shortage. Legacy companies face competition
from both new startups in the industry, as well as tech giants like Amazon and Meta, who are
pulling from the same pool of engineers (Ketzner et al., 2019). Technical employees are finding
that it is easier to get a promotion or pay increase at a competing business than it is to be
promoted within their own organization (Davis et al., 2020). Not only will a higher paycheck
lure employees to competitors, but the less bureaucratic cultures of startups can be equally
appealing (Hudson, 2021).
Remote and Hybrid Work
The COVID-19 pandemic proved that high levels of productivity could be maintained
when many aerospace defense employees were forced to work from home. Boeing CEO Dave
Calhoun stated at an all-employee meeting that the pandemic “taught us all, especially us oldtimers, that people can work virtually, they can be remarkably productive…in some ways more
productive than coming to the office” (Blum, 2022). For some, the flexibility that working from
home provides has become a non-negotiable aspect of workplace culture. According to Ernst and
Young’s 2022 Aerospace and Defense Workforce Study, more than 30% of respondents said a
lack of flexibility in work location or remote work was a primary driver of attrition, and 84% of
organizations said that to address this, they were enabling remote work options; only 3% of
respondents said their organization did not offer any alternative or flexible work arrangements

17
(Ram & Fuller, 2022). However, following the lead of Apple, Starbucks, and Disney (Peters,
2023), aerospace defense companies have begun to call their white-collar employees back to the
office, anywhere from 3 days a week to full-time hours; the implications of this on employee
retention are yet to be seen. Employee pushback from Amazon’s call for a return to office
indicates that the flexibility of remote work is still highly valued by employees across the board.
Remote work is not without its issues; a loss of comradery and feelings of isolation increase
when employees do not see each other face to face. However, hybrid options mitigate these
downsides while maintaining the flexibility and work-life balance that remote employees have
become accustomed to (Babapour Chafi et al., 2022).
The disruption of traditional work environments during the pandemic provided a gold
mine of research on effective employee retention strategies as companies were forced to rethink
their typical approaches, and employees reevaluated their priorities and values. The phrase “the
new normal” was utilized to describe the pandemic policies and practices that would be here to
stay (Vyas, 2022). The “Great Resignation” was also a term coined to describe the increased
attrition levels that started in March 2021 (Serenko, 2022), a phenomenon that continued in 2023
even as potential recession loomed. Toxic culture, defined by unethical behavior, disrespect, and
a failure to promote DEI, is the highest driver of employer turnover in this era (Sull et al., 2022).
Other significant factors resulting in job changes since early 2021 included job insecurity driven
by constant reorganization, high levels of innovation, insufficient or inconsistent employee
recognition, and a poor response to the pandemic (Sull et al., 2022). Sustained levels of high
innovation are associated with long hours, higher stress levels, and a faster pace, which lead to
low levels of work-life balance. Companies looking to retain their workforce in this environment

18
need to ensure awareness of how their cultures are perceived by current and candidate employees
(Sull et al., 2022).
Branding and Marketing Efforts
Given the current competitive environment for talent, legacy aerospace defense
companies must have a “compelling employee value proposition” (Ram & Fuller, 2022; p. 1) to
differentiate themselves from competitors. Tangible benefits such as overtime pay, retirement
contributions, and higher education benefits are so ubiquitous across organizations that they are
practically negligible in an individual’s calculation between companies (Boeing, n.d.; General
Dynamics, 2024; Lockheed Martin, 2024; Northrop Grumman, 2024; RTX, 2024). Legacy
organizations have a strong presence at college and job fairs, industry-centric events, and
growing attendance at annual minority-specific conferences such as the Society for Women
Engineers and the National Society of Black Engineers (NBSE, 2023; SWE 2023). Often these
events include large, interactive displays and high-spirited current employees who promote
positive, fun work environments and an opportunity to solve challenging problems in an effort to
entice candidates to apply for open positions.
Indeed, company brand names, culture, and compensation are ranked high in potential
candidates’ priorities for future employers (Leekha Chhabra & Sharma, 2014). Corporations
need to understand the expectations of incoming employees to tailor their messages to these
candidates’ values and priorities. How a company approaches work-life balance, performance
management, training and professional development opportunities, and succession planning are
all important factors that candidates will consider (Goswami, 2015). In addition, flexible work
arrangements have become non-negotiable for some employees (Özçelik, 2015). Organizations

19
must be able to communicate these concepts genuinely and authentically in their branding efforts
to secure coveted top talent.
Across the board, aerospace defense organizations are looking to fill highly technical
positions with an underpopulated skill set, necessitating intentional and targeted recruiting efforts
to reach the desired demographic (Gould & Losey, 2022). Passive approaches of expecting
potential candidates to seek out open job opportunities on a company’s website are no longer
effective (Kyzer, 2023). The use of industry specific websites to advertise job postings and
attract candidates is one way to focus recruiting efforts, as is an increase in social media use,
such as LinkedIn posts by the hiring manager, and the use of recruiting specialists to bring in
specialty talent through an additional fee for a full-time position (Kyzer, 2023). Successful
efforts to appeal to diverse candidates can be as simple as adjusting the language an organization
uses to indicate its value and commitment to diversity (Flory et al., 2021).
Workplace Culture
Workplace culture is one of the top reasons employees stay or leave a job (Kyzer, 2023;
Ram & Fuller, 2022; Sull et al., 2022). Culture represents the shared beliefs and behaviors
amongst employees and the social influences that define accepted norms (Holmes & Marra,
2002; Manley et al., 2011). Workplace culture should be differentiated from corporate and
organizational cultures: the latter is the summation of individual group cultures shared across the
larger organization, insomuch as senior levels of management share its values and beliefs
(Manley et al., 2011). Corporate culture represents the espoused values or how a corporation
would like to be perceived by external stakeholders. Workplace culture reflects the
microclimates of smaller groups and sub-organizations that are experienced at the working, or
non-management, level; these cultures vary geographically and by function, based on managerial

20
influence, common interests, and interactions with nearby group. Positive culture has been
shown to be a precursor for effective employee engagement (Anderson, 2021).
Facets of Culture
As employees evaluate potential employers, one aspect of the job they are trying to
determine is whether they are going to fit in (Kyzer, 2023); in doing so, what they are attempting
to address is whether or not the workplace culture is compatible with their values, assumptions,
and authentic behaviors. This evaluation takes many forms depending on the individual, and can
look very different based on ethnic, gender or ability. Candidates may be interested in diversity
and inclusion efforts, business ethics, work-life balance, and company philosophy. They may
also assess their direct manager’s leadership style, learning and development opportunities, and
the corporation’s overarching philosophy (Deloitte, 2022; Kyzer, 2023). Unanticipated external
shifts in the environment, such as the recent COVID-19 disruption, can also cause employees to
reevaluate their current working situations. Employee evaluation of their workplace is an
ongoing process that can be initiated by an extreme circumstance such as the pandemic, but it is
also the result of changes that occur in an employee's lifetime, such as family commitment and
personal priorities (Nelson, 2023). What is important to the Millennial and Gen Z generations
today is unlikely to remain static throughout their working careers.
For current employees of any organization, a feeling of psychological safety is critical to
a positive working environment (McCausland, 2023). Psychological safety involves respect,
trust, and open, honest communication that enables disclosure and discussion of mistakes so that
not only the individual, but the group can collectively learn (Grant, 2021). It includes being
vulnerable with coworkers without fear of reprisal or judgment (McCausland, 2023). Grant
(2021) further explains that focusing on the process, not solely on the outcome, is key to

21
cultivating psychological safety; when employees are only accountable for the outcome, the final
deliverable, they can develop a fear of failure, take shortcuts in the process, and lose important
learning opportunities. When psychological safety is present, group performance, knowledge
sharing, and retention all improve (Liu & Keller, 2021), and individual performance for
minoritized populations also improves (Singh et al., 2013).
Espousing organizational values is not necessarily indicative of embodying them, and
employees can tell the difference when this gap is present (Manley et al., 2011). Living the
organization's published or accepted values is the basis for ethical behavior and another way to
build a positive culture and avoid toxicity in the workplace. Employees rely on leadership to
demonstrate ethical behavior, and when leadership actions do not align with the organization’s
values or an individual employee's morals, attrition increases (Cialdini et al., 2021). While many
organizations have an avenue for their employees to contact their ethics department, the
associated accountability systems are not always clear; without feedback that the complaint has
been heard and addressed, policies alone are insufficient (Meidav, 2021). Globally, more than
20% of employees are under pressure to compromise laws, company policies, or their own
ethical standards, and these employees are more likely to witness and report other unethical
behaviors (Meidav, 2021). This statistic demonstrates the need for both open lines of
communication as well as an accountability mechanism for the disposition of complaints.
Work-life balance has become an increasingly important aspect of workplace culture
(Nelson, 2023). The subject can be distilled to the idea that work and nonwork pursuits are not
mutually exclusive endeavors but together foster holistic growth within an individual (Gragnano
et al., 2020). Employees who report having a positive work-life balance have lower levels of
stress, as well as higher job satisfaction and performance (Gragnano et al., 2020; Nelson, 2023).

22
Organizations can enable and promote work-life balance by respecting individuals’ workday
boundaries, such as not expecting employees to answer emails after hours, or providing childcare
and flexible work arrangements for working parents (Ketzner et al., 2019). Not all employees
improved their work-life balance during the pandemic, but those who did reported that time
usually spent commuting was now spent on more enjoyable activities like spending time with
family and exercise (De Vincenzi et al., 2022).
Another way employers can cultivate a positive culture is creating pathways for not only
promotions, but for lateral moves as well. Opportunities for lateral moves are a better predictor
for employee retention than promotions alone, as not all employees are interested or willing to
take on increasing responsibility associated with climbing the corporate ladder (Sull et al., 2022).
Recognizing the value of employees who are content with their current level of commitment and
providing growth and development opportunities is one way organizations can demonstrate
respect and inclusion (Sull et al., 2022). Organizations should ensure differentiation in employee
recognition for top performers and address underperformers; rewarding all employees with
nearly identical levels of appreciation increases attrition (Sull et al., 2022), as is the case when
employees who do not contribute are not held accountable for their share of the work. From a
relational standpoint, humor has been found to be indicative of workplace culture in both its
frequency and type (Holmes & Marra, 2002). Humor can support and develop comradery, or
express cynicism and aggressive feelings, adding or detracting from positive workplace cultures.
Likewise, managers can have both a positive and negative impact on employee well-being,
depending on their leadership style.

23
Managerial Impact
The Theory X management style was prevalent in many legacy aerospace defense
companies from the late 1960s until the 1980s where micromanagement and public reprimanding
of employees by management were not only commonplace, but accepted behaviors (Graham,
1980). Today’s effective leadership styles take on a more positive tone: transformational, ethical,
and servant leadership have been found to be beneficial for employee engagement and workforce
productivity through their person-centered attributes (Appelbaum et al., 2005; Caniëls et al.,
2018; Irving, 2005). First, transformational leaders treat their followers as full human beings;
they create emotional connections that inspire motivation and morale and enable teams to
overcome challenges standing in the way of success (Manley et al., 2011; Northouse, 2022).
Second, ethical leadership involves becoming a role model and demonstrating the honest, just,
and respectful behaviors expected of the followers (Elci et al., 2012; Northouse, 2022). And
finally, servant leaders are driven by a desire to serve others, put the needs of their followers
above their own (Russell & Stone, 2002), and work to nurture their followers into future servant
leaders (Northouse, 2022).
As leadership is a primary driver of employee engagement, it is crucial to employ
managers who can have a positive impact (Anderson, 2021). Managers who use inspirational
tactics that appeal to employees’ values and aspirations have far higher retention rates than those
who use pressure tactics meant to control or threaten employees (Reina et al., 2018). Managers
with high levels of emotional intelligence–those who can connect with employees on a
psychologically emotional level–are better equipped to build positive workplace cultures and
increase employee retention (Keller et al., 2020). When employees believe that their manager is
genuinely concerned about them as a person, they are more engaged; this engagement increases

24
when employees also believe their manager values what they bring to the organization (Steiner et
al., 2020). Women reported being nearly 40% happier with their jobs and twice as likely to stay
with their current employer when their manager demonstrated people-centric behaviors such as
providing feedback, showing an interest in their career, checking on their well-being, and
encouraging inclusivity and respect (Krivkovich et al., 2022).
When managerial education is inconsistent across organizations, it is difficult for
managers to demonstrate the traits described above. Less than half of organizations train
managers on how to facilitate discussions regarding DEI, how to ensure promotions are fair and
equitable, and how to minimize burnout for their employees (Krivkovich et al., 2022).
Historically, many aerospace defense companies have promoted talented senior engineers into
management using the rationale that their subject matter expertise will enable them to effectively
run a team. Over half of aerospace defense companies are now working to improve the soft skills
of their management teams (Ram & Fuller, 2022), recognizing that technical expertise is no
substitute for people-centric behaviors that promote positive team dynamics. Desirable
leadership traits, like emotional intelligence, can be learned, just like any other skill (Keller et al.,
2020).
Targeted Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Efforts
Recent efforts to promote DEI in the workplace have resulted in new roles, programs, and
initiatives across the board. Chief diversity officer positions now exist in over half of Fortune
500 companies (Goldstein et al., 2022). These roles are more effective when the incumbent is
from a minority demographic, resulting in an increase in minority representation and improved
implementation of diversity practices in the organization (Ng et al., 2021). Aerospace defense
companies recognize that diversity means more than race and gender and have started including

25
statistics and target goals in their annual reports for persons with disabilities. That being said,
only 65% of aerospace defense companies include diversity statements in their company’s
mission or vision, and less than 30% have leadership ranks representative of the entire company
(Ram & Fuller, 2022).
Diversifying the pipeline of candidate employees is one way aerospace defense
companies can improve their overall demographics. Recruiting at Historically Black Colleges
and Universities (HBCUs) is up slightly between 2021 and 2022 from 64% to 69% (Feeko &
Fuller, 2021; Ram & Fuller, 2022). Black, Hispanic, and Asian students collectively earned 36%
of science and engineering bachelor’s degrees in 2019 (National Science Board, 2023), but only
make up 27% of the aerospace defense workforce (Ram & Fuller, 2022), indicating that the
pipeline is not the biggest barrier to creating a racially diverse workforce. Once Black,
Indigenous, or Brown engineers are hired into the company, the efforts to retain them must be
ongoing. A significant portion of women leaders–26% for white and 38% for Black–reported
that in 2022 they were mistaken for someone at a lower level, compared to only 13% of male
leaders (Krivkovich et al., 2022). Black employees experience higher levels of racially motivated
microaggressions and are subsequently more likely to leave an organization that does not feel
inclusive (McCallaghan, 2022).
To promote DEI for current employees, company-wide education on microaggression
and bias training are popular ways to improve the culture (Ram & Fuller, 2022; Zimmerman,
2022). Employee resource groups (ERGs), those that connect individuals based on similar traits
such as race or gender, have been found to be effective ways to help employees feel valued and
respected through access to mentors and development opportunities (Cenkci et al., 2019). Nearly

26
70% of aerospace defense companies hold some level of recognition and celebration of cultural
months, such as Black History Month and Pride Month (Ram & Fuller, 2022).
As representation of minorities increases in the aerospace defense workforce, it is
important to remember that the reasons behind this are complex. It is unclear at this point in time
if DEI initiatives have begun to reap their benefits, or if the increased numbers are borne out of
necessity due to the staffing shortages in the industry, the impacts of the Great Resignation, and
the high demand for talent–that is, are hiring managers doing less unintentional filtering of
candidates as they struggle to fill open roles? Once an employee from a marginalized population
is hired, additional efforts are necessary to ensure a welcoming and positive workplace culture;
to retain their best employees, organizations will need to think beyond their traditional practices
and strategies.
Belonging
On the motivational hierarchy, Maslow (1943) placed belonging as less important than
basic survival and safety needs but as an antecedent to esteem and self-actualization. In other
words, once physiological and safety needs are more or less satisfied, the need for love and
belonging in the form of friendship, intimacy, and being part of a group will materialize. A sense
of belonging is, therefore, necessary to feel accomplished and achieve one’s full potential. Other
scholars have agreed that belonging is a human necessity, is tied to identity, and drives the need
to form notable, ongoing, positive relationships (Baumeister & Leary, 1995; Chin, 2019).
Belonging can manifest within an individual in a myriad of ways. Brown (2017) defines
it as “the innate human desire to be a part of something larger” (p. 31). The feeling often
involves a sense of external recognition, the notion that the group must approve or validate one’s
status before the individual can believe it to be true (Chin, 2019). Feeling respected and valued

27
are core attributes of establishing a sense of belonging (Cenkci et al., 2019). To cultivate a sense
of belonging requires constant evaluation of external cues, experiences, and relationships to
assess the fit between the individual and the group or setting (Belanger et al., 2020). Through
this evaluation of contextual cues, the individual will determine if their identity is compatible
with the environment (Slepian & Jacoby-Senghor, 2021).
Shared beliefs, shared values, and even shared suffering can create a sense of belonging
(Okun & Raffo, n.d.) that can be applied across a spectrum of activities and settings. With racial
and ethnic identity, shared language is a key tenant of belonging (Neville et al., 2014). For youth,
participation in sports has been found to create belonging, with the added benefit of adult
recognition of youth contribution to the group (Hall, 2011). Even professional sports game
attendance can create a sense of belonging through shared experiences with other fans (Inoue et
al., 2020).
Workplace Belonging
Zimmerman (2022) summarized belongingness in the workplace with three basic facets:
feeling as though one can be themselves at work, an ability to create connections with others at
work while being one’s authentic self and feeling recognized for one’s unique contributions at
work. Ultimately the question of “Can I be me?” while in the workplace setting is how
employees determine if they belong (Zimmerman, 2022). In a study of the public sector, Sharp
(2022) determined that participants felt belonging when they were valued and comfortable
expressing their authentic selves. Additionally, individuals with strong workplace friendships
have reported higher feelings of belonging (Badri et al., 2021).
In the workplace, there is a positive correlation between employee engagement and
belonging (Vujko et al., 2022); similarly, employees who feel a strong sense of belonging

28
generally have a higher commitment to the organization (Cenkci et al., 2019). Belongingness, as
well as other intrinsic motivational factors such as training and development, challenging work,
and the promotion of innovative thinking, have been shown to influence employee retention in
both public and private sector organizations (Samuel & Chipunza, 2009). These elements of the
workplace, along with recognition programs, create a psychologically healthy workplace
(Kelloway & Day, 2005) that is associated with a positive culture.
Various recent studies have explored the reasons why employees are leaving their current
jobs and what attracts them to new opportunities. Nearly a quarter of Millennial and Gen Z
employees indicated positive workplace culture was a major factor in choosing an employer, on
par with financial benefits and career advancement (Deloitte, 2022). As the Millennial and Gen Z
generations have already become the majority demographic in the workforce (Bureau of Labor
Statistics, 2023), it would behoove organizational leaders to take note of these desired workplace
traits. Post-pandemic data indicate that organizations have not yet made this connection: while
employers believe inadequate compensation or a “better” job are the main reasons for departure,
employees cite feeling valued and belongingness as important reasons to depart an organization
(DeSmet et al., 2021).
It is worth noting the impact of workplace belonging for women in male-dominated
fields, specifically in STEM as it is a significant portion of the Aerospace Defense industry’s
statement of work. At the onset of their college careers, women entered engineering with
significantly lower belongingness than their male counterparts (Pearson et al., 2018). Throughout
academia and corporate STEM fields, women continue to experience gendered microaggressions
that threaten their sense of identity (Kim & Meister, 2022; Yang & Carroll, 2018). Workplace
sexism, manifested as microaggressions, can reduce women’s sense of belonging in male

29
dominated fields, ultimately leading to both reduced job satisfaction and commitment to the field
(Rubin et al., 2019; Slepian & Jacoby-Senghor, 2021). Collaboration, belonging, and feeling
valued as a member of a team is positively correlated to employee retention in STEM (Ayala et
al., 2021).
Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Belonging
Three recent studies by McKinsey & Company have established a correlation between
diversity and profits, creating what is now known as the business case for diversity (Dixon-Fyle
et al., 2021; Hunt et al., 2015; Hunt et al., 2018). While this may appeal to executives and
shareholders alike, it frames diversity efforts as a means to financial gain, not as a complex issue
rooted in social justice (Byrd & Sparkman, 2022). The downsides to this approach are myriad.
First and foremost, this correlation may not even be true. Green and Hand (2021) used
McKinsey’s approach to evaluate Fortune 500 companies and found no statistically significant
correlation between profit and diverse executive teams. Other analyses have shown that gender
diversity on executive boards yields little to no increase in company performance (Post & Byron,
2015). Yet corporations still use this argument to justify their diversity efforts, though many do
not feel the need to justify other values such as innovation or integrity (Georgeac & Rattan,
2023).
Second, this sentiment can cause women, members of the LGBTQ+ community, and
underrepresented minorities to feel othered, tokenized, and only included for their physical
attributes rather than their intellectual contributions to the organization (Kaiser et al., 2013).
Hiring diverse populations for the purpose of increasing an organization’s bottom line
encourages employers to consider race, gender, and other identities over skills and experience,
the latter being the mechanism through which innovation is realized (Georgeac & Rattan, 2023).

30
This approach seeks to use diverse populations for financial gain, rather than seeking to
understand what the individual and the teams need to thrive (Byrd & Sparkman, 2022). During a
study in which underrepresented populations read a business case or a fairness case justifying
diversity as an organizational value, the business case left participants feeling 10% more
concerned that the organization would view them as interchangeable with others in the same
identity group, 16% more concerned that they would be stereotyped, and 11% less likely to feel a
sense of belonging within the organization (Georgeac & Rattan, 2023). These data indicate that
using a business case in this context is exacerbating the feeling of “othering” for diverse
populations.
Finally, the argument to “increase diversity, gain profit” neglects the transformational
work required to achieve any financial results. Organizations may abandon or weaken their
diversity efforts if economic benefits do not materialize in a timeframe deemed soon enough.
Budget cuts often hit diversity initiatives early in the process of companies tightening their
wallets (Meidav, 2022). However, the efforts required to build a true culture of inclusion and
respect are not insignificant (Phillips et al., 2014). The foundation for these cultures requires
effective management skills, supportive and aligned HR policies, fair employment practices such
as equal pay, deliberate and consistent attention on diversity from the C-suite, and open and
honest communication between management levels (Kochan et al., 2003; Lorenzo et al., 2018).
These positive culture attributes not only set up successful diversity initiatives, but also create a
better reputation for the organization and increase sustainability and longevity through a solid
foundation of inclusivity and equity (Byrd & Sparkman, 2022), and in the process, cultivate
belongingness.

31
Belongingness is at the center of successfully operationalized DEI efforts. Cultivating
belonging amongst diverse populations requires consideration and integration of all three
dimensions of DEI initiatives. Utilizing the analogy of a party, diversity is being invited without
needing to seek out an invitation, equity is being able to attend the party without undue barriers
to access, and inclusion is being able to choose or dance to the music without being judged for
your moves (Waters, 2021). Belonging is leaving the party filled with satisfaction and being a
part of something bigger.
Diversity not only refers to race and gender attributes, but is inclusive of education,
political beliefs, sexual orientation, disability, and socioeconomic backgrounds (Konrad et al.,
2006). True diversity cannot only be achieved through demographics but must include
“informational heterogeneity” or diversity of thought (Kearney & Gebert, 2009; p. 86). The
concept of diversity is based on both individual identity and the perception of others, which
includes elements of acceptance and respect, thereby influencing interactions and
communication (Patrick & Kumar, 2012). Diverse groups are not inherently inclusive, and
effective team leadership styles are pertinent to fully realize the benefits of bringing together
each individual’s unique contribution (Ashikali et al., 2021). Successfully embracing diversity
entails accepting, honoring, and welcoming differing viewpoints and perspectives (Patrick &
Kumar, 2012), as well as reflecting on the similarities and differences to one’s own. The first
step to feeling a sense of belonging is to not feel othered or singled out.
Affirmative action created progress toward establishing equity in the workplace, but the
work is still ongoing. Equity is centered around removing barriers to participation, including
both access and what having equal voice and equal participation feels like to individuals (Sturm,
2006). Efforts to effectively enable full participation from underrepresented populations should

32
consider the power dynamics in group settings and how voices of the minority demographics can
be uplifted and amplified, rather than silenced or repeated by and credited to someone from the
majority demographic (Farr, 2018). Equity is an important facet of belongingness as it ensures
each individual has the opportunity for an equal say, regardless of their starting point compared
to others (Randel et al., 2018).
Workplace inclusion is the pinnacle of belongingness and the culmination of
organizational diversity, equity, and leadership efforts. Much of the literature refers to an
inclusive workplace relating directly to a sense of belonging to the organization or vice versa
(Ashikali, 2021; Cenkci et al., 2018; Randel et al., 2018; Zimmerman, 2022). An inclusive
workplace culture can be described as one in which an individual, regardless of identity, style, or
background, can fully and authentically contribute to the group while feeling like a valued
member of the team (Ferdman, 2017). Recognizing and embracing individuals’ unique attributes
are important aspects of cultivating belonging and inclusivity (Randel et al., 2018; Shore et al.,
2018). Shared decision making, fostering mutual respect for group members, and creating
development opportunities are all avenues to build inclusivity in the workplace (Cenkci et al.,
2019; Randel et al., 2018).
Transactional Belonging
It is human nature to try to fit in, to try to find a sense of belongingness both at work and
in one’s personal life. To be seen and heard innately requires external validation, an undeniable
component of belonging (Chin, 2019). Sometimes individuals sacrifice aspects of their authentic
selves in this endeavor. For example, one method that new nurses were found to employ to
secure belonging was “adjusting oneself to blend in” (Ching et al., 2022, p. 1). Embellishing the
truth or downplaying one’s abilities are both examples of this in practice. Employees may feel an

33
obligation to attend work-related social events such as happy hours or lunchtime celebrations
that are at odds with the authentic presentation of themselves (Haldorai et al., 2020). This
obligation stems from the desire to be seen as an integral part of the organization but asks
employees to sacrifice their comfort for the ease of the majority demographic (Slepian & JacobySenghor, 2021). Happy hours, in particular, are often seen as fun ways to bond with others in the
workgroup; however, those who do not drink, either by choice or necessity, are put in a position
in which they must choose between being left out of the social activity and risk missing
networking opportunities or put themselves in a situation that does not reflect their core values
(Haldorai et al., 2020). Feeling valued and respected for one’s whole self is integral to feel a
sense of belonging; the concept of transactional belonging is insufficient to satisfy the primal
need (Okon & Raffo, n.d.).
White male norms continue to be the standard by which all others are evaluated
(Callwood et al., 2022). Status and rank in the corporate hierarchy are associated with the
definition of career success and are often tied to an individual’s worth within the company. How
individuals dress, how they communicate, and the type of education they receive are all used to
ascertain if someone is “management material” (Proudman, 2011, p. 5). Seeking a sense of
belonging within this hierarchy can mean assimilating to these norms. For example, Black
women’s natural hair can be described as unpolished or distracting, and straightening it indicates
compliance with White beauty norms, which is not an uncommon practice in the job interview
phase (Donahoo, 2023). The additional emotional and intellectual workload for these employees
is significant and impacts their ability to fully engage in their work tasks (Krivkovich et al.,
2023).

34
One final example of transactional belonging in the workplace is a paycheck. This work
for pay contract does not consider the emotional labor associated with a lack of belongingness,
nor of the intangible benefits of positive workplace culture. Pay is often cited as a major driver
for professional movement (Deloitte, 2022; Ram & Fuller, 2022), and employers often try to
counteroffer with higher financial incentives to retain top talent. However, two of the top three
factors behind employees leaving a job in 2021 were not feeling valued by their organization and
not feeling a sense of belonging in the workplace, the latter being a bigger factor for non-White
employees (DeSmet et al., 2022). By assuming that employees are only looking for a bigger
paycheck, employers are unintentionally communicating that their relationship is purely
transactional and that the workplace is not where employees can bring their whole, authentic, and
true selves (DeSmet et al., 2022). Addressing the complex factors of workplace culture,
including a sense of belonging can have a bigger impact on employee retention than financial
benefits alone.
Cultivating Workplace Belonging
How do managers and organizational leaders enable individuals to feel safe and confident
bringing their most authentic presentation to the workplace? Zimmerman (2022) suggests the
practice of small acts, small freedoms, and small talk can have a big impact on belonging. Small
acts are personalized gestures like giving an employee a handwritten note or favorite candy;
small freedoms mean enabling freedom of expression through clothing and appearance as well as
autonomy in their work tasks; small talk is used for developing relationships through getting to
know the individual (Zimmerman, 2022). When onboarding new employees, forming quality
relationships with both coworkers and managers is key to developing belongingness (Korte &
Lin, 2013). Promoting and supporting friendships amongst employees are also ways managers

35
can increase a sense of belonging (Badri et al., 2021). Ensuring employees feel seen as unique
individuals, connected to their fellow employees, supported in both daily activities and career
growth, and proud of the organization’s mission are four ways managers can foster
belongingness (Kennedy & Jain-Link, 2020). Cultivating this feeling is not a one-time event for
new employees, but an ongoing effort that involves both the individual, the manager, and the
group (Marra, 2022).
Organizations can jumpstart their inclusion and belonging efforts by developing a diverse
pipeline of potential employees, providing training for managers and employees on bias and
microaggressions, and instituting avenues for accountability to meet DEI targets (Shore et al.,
2018). Managers must navigate conversations and relationships with empathy and compassion,
as employees are intensely aware of what is genuine and what is staged for the sake of show
(Zimmerman, 2022). Beyond feeling valued for unique contributions and a bona fide connection
with coworkers, employees also find belongingness through support in their daily work tasks and
a sense of pride for the organization’s values and purpose (Kennedy & Jain-Link, 2020). Because
first-line managers are key players in daily support, they should set clear expectations with their
leadership and individual employees regarding what positive support looks like in their unique
workplace culture (Zimmerman, 2022). Clear communication of an organization’s mission,
values, and purpose along with dialog in a psychologically safe environment can aid in
developing a sense of pride for employees (Kennedy & Jain-Link, 2020).
Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework is created based on the research’s concepts, assumptions, and
expectations, as well as on the chosen theoretical framework (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). It creates the underlying structure of the research design, including the questions,

36
methodology, and analysis approach and provides a lens through which to interpret the data and
draw conclusions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The conceptual framework for this study is based
on the Clark & Estes (2008) gap analysis theoretical framework, as discussed in Chapter One,
and takes into account the organizational, knowledge and motivational factors that influence
managers’ ability to cultivate a sense of belonging.
The organization in this study is the aerospace defense industry, which is influenced by
certain traits of White Supremacy Culture: objectivity, or the belief that emotions are irrational;
paternalism, where those in power do not see a need to understand the experience of those over
whom they hold power; power hoarding, where power is a zero sum game; and valuing product
over process, or productivity over engagement (Callwood et al., 2022). These White supremacy
culture traits make up the cultural model of the industry, which inform the cultural setting.
Cultural settings are how the models manifest within the organization or industry. Examples of
the cultural settings in this study are incentivizing managers to meet cost and schedule rather
than develop meaningful relationships with their employees, as well as promoting through the
hierarchy ranks of managers who embody these traits.
Knowledge and motivation factors are unique to the individual and are shown as
overlapping in the conceptual framework. Together, knowledge and motivation represent the
managers’ individual contribution to the cultivation of belonging within the bigger
organizational context. Knowledge can be factual, conceptual, or procedural (Krathwohl, 2002);
in this study, factual knowledge is an understanding of the theory of belonging, conceptual
knowledge is an understanding of leadership principles that fall under soft skills, and procedural
knowledge is a manager’s understanding of how to cultivate belonging amongst their employees.
Motivation in this context will address task value, expectancy outcomes, and self-efficacy. Task

37
value is the belief that cultivating a sense of belonging is a worthwhile effort for the manager,
expectancy value is the belief that belonging can be cultivated, and self-efficacy is the belief the
manager themselves can cultivate belonging.
By examining the knowledge, motivational and organizational influences described in
this conceptual framework, the study intends to draw out root causes of the presumed gap
between current managerial performance and the desired goal of cultivating a sense of belonging
for employees who identify as women, Black, Indigenous, or Brown, those in the LGBTQ+
community, those with disabilities, those perceived to be overweight, those under the age of 40,
or any other myriad identities that are underrepresented in the aerospace defense industry. Figure
1 depicts an illustration of the conceptual framework.
Figure 1
Conceptual Framework

38
Summary
This chapter provided context for the current workplace environment in the aerospace
defense industry. While the literature specific to manager training in this industry is lacking, the
fact that not feeling a sense of belonging is one of the top three reasons employees leave their
organization (DeSmet et al., 2022) is indicative of a gap in current and desired effectiveness in
cultivating it. Recent research describes a common definition of what workplace belonging is,
how to foster it, and the benefits of doing so. This study seeks to understand the knowledge,
motivation and organizational influences that prevent managers from effectively cultivating a
sense of belonging.

39
Chapter Three: Methodology
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences that help or hinder first-line managers in cultivating a sense of belonging for their
employees–specifically those from historically marginalized populations. The study sought to
understand managers’ experience in the realms of knowledge, motivation, and organizational
factors and the personalized impact they have on first-line managers’ capabilities to foster
belonging. This chapter outlines the design of this research study and explores my positionality.
Additionally, this chapter details the study setting, participant attributes, and interview protocol.
It describes the data collection and analysis methods and examines the credibility and
trustworthiness of the study. Finally, this chapter addresses the ethical considerations of the
study and limitations of the research.
Research Questions
To understand the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that affect firstline managers’ ability to cultivate a sense of belonging, the following research questions are used
to guide the study:
1. What strategies and tactics do first-line managers use to cultivate a sense of belonging
for marginalized employees?
2. What knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences are affecting first-line
managers’ ability to impact the industry’s diversity, equity, and inclusion goals?
3. What are the recommended process changes and implementation methods to provide
sufficient knowledge, motivation, and organizational support for first-line managers
to aid in cultural transformation?

40
Overview of Design
This qualitative study was aimed at understanding the experiences of first-line managers
in their ability to effectively cultivate a sense of belonging amongst their direct reports. The
study was phenomenological in nature with the intent to describe managers’ collective
experience in their own words (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Managers participated in qualitative
interviews, providing first-hand insights into their personal knowledge, motivation, and
perceptions of organizational influences. These interviews were conducted with 16 first-line
managers employed at the large, legacy aerospace defense organizations.
Qualitative interviews were the appropriate research method to understand how first-line
managers understand the importance of a sense of belonging, what motivates them to cultivate it,
and the organizational aspects that help or hinder their efforts (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Through the interview process, the nuances and complexities of these managers’ workplace
experiences were explored. Interviews enabled an understanding of how first-line managers
comprehend their workplace environments. These interviews were intended to result in
recommendations for legacy aerospace defense companies for improved awareness of manager
effectiveness, as well as education and policy changes that will foster a greater sense of
belonging for their employees and ultimately reduce turnover.
Research Setting
This field study utilized participant data from legacy aerospace defense companies. Firstline managers in STEM related organizations were interviewed to explore their understanding
and approaches to cultivating a sense of belonging amongst their employees. White men are the
majority demographic in STEM positions within aerospace defense; executive ranks are also
dominated by White men (Ram & Fuller, 2022). This results in an environment where this

41
majority population can experience a sense of belonging without much effort (Kennedy & JainLink, 2020). For the minority populations in aerospace defense, this study sought to understand
what additional methods and strategies managers use to ensure a sense of belonging for
marginalized employees. As first-line managers have significant influence over workplace
culture, interviewing this set of stakeholders enabled the identification of the gaps between how
belonging is currently cultivated and what is necessary to produce a welcoming, inclusive work
environment for more than just the majority demographic.
Interviews were conducted over the online platform, Zoom. As the legacy aerospace
companies have offices all over the world, this enabled participation from a variety of locations.
This cross-section of managerial experiences provided insights from numerous individual
workplace cultures.
The Researcher
I have been in leadership positions in the aerospace defense industry and in coaching
athletics for nearly 20 years. As a technical engineering manager, I have worked with employees
in every stage of their career from internships to retirement; as a competitive rowing coach, I
have worked with teams spanning from high school girls to septuagenarian men. In these roles, I
have observed consistency in people’s need to belong. Across the board, people have a desire to
feel as if they are a part of something bigger, to contribute and master a skill or task, to grow and
develop, and to be accepted by their peers and those who guide them. I have also observed that
not all leaders have an innate ability to cultivate an environment in which this belonging can be
felt by all participants–and sometimes not even an awareness that they could or should. This
first-hand observation is directly tied to my positionality in this study.

42
While I am motivated to understand the phenomenon of cultivating belonging, the
intention of this study is not to center my own experience but on the voices of current first-line
managers to understand their challenges and share their successes. Acknowledging that my own
positionality reflects and aligns with that of the interviewee will strengthen my comprehension of
their responses and enable me to have a deeper understanding of the gathered data (Creswell &
Creswell, 2018). It is my hope that through this study, I am able to identify gaps in knowledge
and motivation that both aid in and prevent first-line managers from cultivating belonging, as
well as the organizational policies and practices that could be altered to improve a sense of
belonging for all employees, specifically for marginalized populations. My journey through
USC’s Organizational Change and Leadership doctorate program has instilled a greater sense of
social responsibility than I previously felt and has armed me with the tools to take action;
through this study, I hope to have a positive impact on the industry.
Interviewers are human and are apt to filter respondents’ answers through our own
experiences (Burkholder et al., 2019). Because of my previous role as a first-line manager in a
legacy aerospace defense organization, I had opinions and biases on what I would expect to hear
in each of the answers. Recognizing that my bias exists enabled me to separate myself from it
and hear participants’ answers through their own experiences. I needed to be aware that how I
phrased questions may have influenced how they are answered, and that I may have been
tempted to lead the interviewee to an expected answer.
Data Sources
This study used qualitative methods to gather the desired information. The following
sections describe the layout of the study starting with the approach to participant sampling, the

43
participant descriptions, and detailing the instrumentation used. It then explains the data
collection methods and data analysis procedures followed.
Sample
This study gathered its data from interviews with 16 first-line managers actively working
in one of the five largest legacy aerospace defense companies: Boeing, Raytheon Technologies,
General Dynamics, Northrop Grumman, and Lockheed Martin. These managers were
specifically working in the defense-focused division of their companies, rather than a
commercial-focused division. Purposeful sampling was used to identify the initial set of
managers who met the organizational criteria above, as well as criteria regarding time as a
manager and number of direct reports (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Snowball sampling was then
used to identify other managers for interviews. The total number of interviews was considered
sufficient once data saturation was achieved (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
Initial interviewees were a mix of professional contacts, contacts gained through my
professional and educational networks, and contacts identified using social media (i.e.,
LinkedIn). These first-round participants were asked to recommend others at their organization
who met the criteria and would be willing to participate. Each of these managers has been in
their role for at least 2 years, ensuring that they had an opportunity to establish themselves in
their positions and were not still in the initial learning phase. Additionally, manager interviewees
all worked within a STEM field in their organization, overseeing a technical area of expertise,
and had at least five direct reports. Participants were from multiple sites within each organization
and fell into a wide range of age, gender, social, and ethnic identities.
Based on these criteria, this set of participants were uniquely qualified to share their
relevant experiences in how they cultivate a sense of belonging for their employees within the

44
aerospace defense industry. Participants willingly participated in the interviews and were given
pseudonyms to protect their personal identity and the identity of the organization they work for;
this level of anonymity allows for more honest and open answers during the interviews. Email
and LinkedIn messaging were used for interview coordination and follow-up questions. Informed
consent was obtained from each participant prior to beginning their interview.
Participants
Sixteen managers participated in the semi-structured interviews, representing three of the
five legacy aerospace defense organizations. At the start of each interview, relevant demographic
information was collected. The military experience was not initially part of the demographic data
collection, but through the interviews, it became clear that this background influenced
participants’ views on the questions and was verified during member checks for all participants.
Managers in this study identified as 31% female and 69% male. From an ethnicity standpoint,
managers identified as 75% White, 19% Asian, and 6% Black. Experience as a people manager
ranged from 2 years to 20 years, and all managers were relatively new to their current role,
averaging less than 3 years, with a minimum of 2 years and a maximum of 8 years. Four
managers, or 25% of the total, had prior military experience. Table 1 is a summary of participant
demographics.

45
Table 1
Summary of Participant Manager Demographics
Manager Gender Ethnicity
Years in
Management
Years in
Role
Military
Experience
Laurie Female Asian 6 2 No
Emily Female Asian 20 3 Yes
Olivia Female White 5 2 No
Julianne Female White 7 1 No
Louise Female White 10 1 No
Jerry Male Black 13 1 No
Carl Male Asian 8 1 No
Richard Male White 25 8 Yes
Frank Male White 4 1 No
Dave Male White 4 4 No
Brian Male White 16 3 Yes
Benjamin Male White 15 3 No
Jim Male White 6 6 No
John Male White 2 2 No
Kevin Male White 15 4 Yes
Bill Male White 12 3 No
Instrumentation
Semi-structured interviews were the data collection method used for this study, as they
enabled the researcher to examine the lived experiences of the managers and capture responses in
their own words. This approach provided the necessary context and perspectives for a successful
phenomenological study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Managers were asked questions regarding
their current practices, perceived organizational expectations, and base knowledge in an effort to
reveal insights on their effectiveness in cultivating a sense of belonging. Interviews were

46
conducted using the Zoom platform and recorded for reference with participants’ explicit
permission. These interviews took place between the beginning of September and the end of
October 2023.
Merriam and Tisdell’s (2016) semi-structured interview approach is similar to what
Patton (1987) called a general interview guide. In both of these approaches, the interviewer uses
the research questions as a guide, but does not follow a specific set of questions in a specific
order. This allows for flexibility to explore topics as they arise and skip topics that may not be
relevant to the individual interviewee. For example, the initial questions were asked in order, but
the follow-on questions asked only if they applied based on the answer to the initial question and
in an order that enabled normal flow of the conversation. The interview protocol for this study is
included in Appendix A.
The framework used for this study is Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis. The
conceptual framework is based on Clark and Estes’ facets of knowledge, motivation and
organizational influence, and the following underlying assumptions about the study:
1. There are knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that impact first-line
managers’ ability to cultivate a sense of belonging for marginalized employees.
2. Managers can be more effective than they currently are in cultivating a sense of
belonging.
3. Organizations have a responsibility to provide an inclusive workplace environment
for all employees.
There were 11 initial questions with additional, optional follow-up questions based on
answers to the initial. Each of the three conceptual framework facets was addressed by at least
four of the initial questions; most of the questions addressed more than one research question or

47
conceptual framework dimension. The questions sought to explore multiple types of information
as recommended by Merriam and Tisdell (2016). Questions regarding knowledge were subcategorized into factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge questions.
Questions regarding motivation addressed task value, expectancy outcome, self-efficacy, and
goal content. Questions regarding organizational influences focused on the organization’s
priorities, policies, and incentive structures. The questions were worded as to avoid single word
responses, to avoid leading the participant to respond a certain way, and to ensure only one topic
was addressed in each question.
Data Collection Procedures
Interviews began in September 2023 and completed by the end of October 2023, with
each interview scheduled for 60 minutes. The interviews were synchronous and online,
conducted over Zoom, enabling audio and visual communication independent of location. These
Zoom sessions were recorded, with explicit participant permission, so that the transcript could be
downloaded for future reference. Zoom recordings and transcripts were saved to a passwordprotected server. Transcripts were reviewed after the interview session, and follow up
discussions were coordinated, via Zoom or telephone, when clarification was required.
Individual quotes used in Chapter Four, with context, were shared with participants for an
opportunity to verify accuracy, provide feedback, and increase study credibility. Transcripts and
Zoom recordings will be destroyed 3 years after the study concluded.
Participants were assigned a pseudonym for themselves and for their organization to
ensure anonymity in the data analysis. Any identifying information participants shared during the
interview process was redacted in the transcript generated from the interview. Participant
information with their corresponding pseudonym was logged in a text file on a password-

48
protected server, separate from the transcript storage. Information regarding date, time, and
interviewee pseudonym were noted in the transcript files to aid organization of interview data.
Interviewees were provided with a synopsis of the purpose of the study and the type of
information sought during the interview and were given a chance to ask clarifying questions
prior to the start of the interview. Common terminology was established at the beginning of each
interview. Field notes were taken during the interview, which helped highlight what I found
important during the conversation as well and helped trigger my memory during the analysis.
Reflective journaling was also part of the post interview process, and any immediate
observations from the interview documented for future reference and inclusion in the final
analysis. Complete analysis of all interview data was conducted upon conclusion of all
interviews starting November 2023.
Data Analysis
Data analysis is a necessary step to understanding and applying the collected data
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Analysis for this study was conducted using the eight-step process
outlined by Creswell and Creswell (2018). After all interviews were completed, the transcripts
were organized with the interviewer’s related field notes and post-interview notes. Each of the
transcripts were read thoroughly and compared to the field notes, and further reflective
journaling was conducted to identify significant content. As concepts emerged, they were
categorized and organized depending on the main topic and importance or prominence within the
topic. These categories were used to reevaluate the transcripts and identify any missed or newly
emergent themes. Specific quotes, with context, were shared with participants for their review
and validation of their intended insights.

49
As the interview questions were asked in sections corresponding to knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences, the data analysis was conducted with an expectation
that themes would emulate these blocks. The coding analysis produced not only these expected
themes, but also surprising or unusual themes (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The main themes
were further analyzed into sub-themes that are related to the research questions, conceptual
framework, or underlying assumptions of the study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This approach to
analyzing the data revealed that the individual manager experiences were similar across
interviewees.
Coding and sub-coding the data produced descriptions and themes of the settings and
findings, respectively, drawing out key aspects of the participants’ experiences, ideas, and
challenges that generated future recommendations (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). A narrative was
produced from the descriptions and themes to convey the findings in the next chapter. Overlap of
themes between the research questions, conceptual framework, and assumptions led to a complex
and rich understanding of the managers’ perspectives and experiences.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
Strategies used to ensure credibility and trustworthiness within the interview process
were respondent validation and establishing a rapport with the interviewee. Respondent
validation is when the interviewer validates with the interviewee that the former properly
understood and captured what the latter said and intended to say (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Establishing a rapport starts with small talk and continues with non-judgmental responses to the
interviewee’s answers in an effort to have them feel comfortable sharing their experiences
(Bogdan & Bilden, 2007). I further established trustworthiness by explaining the purpose of the

50
project, committing to interviewee anonymity, and explicitly asking permission to record the
session.
Strategies used outside the interview process for credibility and trustworthiness were
researcher reflexivity, developing a rich description of participants’ experiences for the findings,
and member checks (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Researcher reflexivity is the process of selfreflection on the researcher’s part to understand and acknowledge the biases she brings to the
study. Developing a rich description of the participants’ experiences enabled outsiders and
consumers of the findings to share in the reality of the interviewee’s personal experiences and
perspectives. Member checks, like respondent validation, were used for accuracy of quotations
used after the narrative was completed; participants verified content and answered questions
regarding clarity of statements to ensure the quotations reflected their intended thoughts.
Ethics
The credibility and trustworthiness of any study are inextricably intertwined with the
ethics of the researcher (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In conducting research with human subjects,
care must be taken to ensure no harm is done to the participants. Considerations in this regard
include the right to privacy, informed consent, any potential issues of deception, and the
researcher’s own sensitivity and values. Furthermore, researcher-participant relationships and the
dissemination of findings need to be evaluated to ensure protection of the subjects. Interviewing
poses inherent risks to the subject in the form of privacy concerns and the potential for triggering
unwanted emotions or memories. However, long term benefits are also possible through the
interviewing process, with the potential for participants to gain knowledge or have a therapeutic
experience.

51
To mitigate any negative effects of conducting the study, participants were informed of
the intent of the study, the use of data collected, procedures to ensure confidentiality and
anonymity, Zoom and transcript recording process, and the data storage approach. Each
participant both verbally consented to the recording of the interview and storage of their data, as
well as filled out a pre-interview questionnaire indicating their voluntary willingness to
participate. During the interview, the initial conversation allowed participants to clarify any
outstanding concerns and become comfortable with the process. At the beginning of each
interview, the interviewer communicated to participants that they could stop the interview at any
time should they choose to or refuse to answer any questions they were not comfortable with.
Conversation within the interviews was limited to the initial 11 questions and appropriately
related follow-up questions.
Data is stored on a password-protected server and will be destroyed 3 years after the
conclusion of the study, including Zoom recordings, transcripts, reflective journaling, and field
notes. Information tying pseudonyms to interviewees’ actual identities is stored separately from
the transcripts on the server. These processes were approved by the university’s institutional
review board and diligently followed per the board’s ethics approval.
Summary
This chapter provided a detailed description of the methodology used to collect and analyze the
data for this phenomenological field study. The researcher’s positionality as well as
considerations for trustworthiness, credibility and ethics were discussed. Limitations of the study
were addressed.

52
Chapter Four: Findings
This chapter explores the detailed findings from the qualitative interviews. The
interviews sought to determine how managers cultivate a sense of belonging, if the industry’s
DEI goals were aligned with these efforts, and what changes would be recommended to bridge
the gap between the current state and one that enables cultural transformation. Chapter Four
begins by describing the interview participants’ understanding of belonging, both intellectually
and experientially, to depict their lived experiences and set a foundation for the remainder of the
chapter.
The individual findings regarding the specific knowledge, motivation, and organizational
factors from the conceptual framework are then discussed in detail. The knowledge findings are
broken down in to four elements:
1. Conceptual: how participants understand belonging to relate to DEI or employee
engagement.
2. Procedural: how participants cultivate belonging for their employees.
3. Factual: what participants knew about their company’s DEI goals.
4. Metacognition: how DEI training changed how they think about DEI.
It is worth noting that findings that have been identified as knowledge gaps often have
elements of organizational influence, as organizations are apt to communicate and prioritize what
they value. Lacking this demonstrated value or priority, managers may not necessarily be aware
of specific goals or initiatives. Motivation findings were also broken down into four elements:
1. Expectancy outcome: how participants see themselves contributing to their
company’s DEI goals.
2. Self-efficacy: participants’ confidence in their ability to cultivate belonging.

53
3. Goal content: whether managers understood what was expected of them with regards
to DEI.
4. Task value: what motivates participants to stay in their managerial roles.
Organizational influences were divided into cultural settings and cultural models. The
former explored what resources and incentives were in place that may influence managers’
behavior. The latter sought to understand what the organization as a whole believed to be
valuable and how managers were impacted by these values.
Findings
Participants were asked to both define belonging in the workplace and later to describe
why or why not they personally felt a sense of belonging in their current role. Definitions and
descriptions followed the research described by Zimmerman (2021) and Kennedy and Jain-Link
(2020); no information regarding this research was provided ahead of time, and the unprompted
responses confirm the work of previous authors. Common themes in responses included the
importance of relationships, including trust and respect; feeling like a part of a team, including
feeling heard or listened to and valued; an ability to bring one’s authentic self to the workplace;
feeling supported; and having their efforts matter.
Managers’ Definition of Belonging
Brian, a White male with 16 years of managerial experience, cited positive relationships
as the basis of belonging in the workplace, saying, “Relationships make all the difference for
me.” Louise, a White female who is at a newly established work location for her company, called
“friendship” the core to a sense of belonging, and Dave, a White male with 4 years in his role,
responded that belonging meant “really having a bond with someone who shares your interests,
shares your focus, and especially when it comes to work, has a love of some of the same things.”

54
A White female with 7 years in management, Julianne’s definition of belonging included a
“connection to the people” working on the product, and Bill, a White male in his second
managerial role, agreed that belonging means “being able to connect with people on a personal
level.” While Benjamin initially defined belonging as a sense of trust, he expanded his answer as
he reflected on the question:
I just feel like if you don’t feel like other people trust you or you don’t trust the people
you’re working with, then you know… why bother? Why engage? Why put yourself out
there if you don’t think that someone is going to trust what you say. I know you asked for
a feeling, but I’m going to put respect in there too. You know, I think in a team
environment with a diverse group of people, you’ve got to have some respect in there too.
Here, Benjamin, who has been in the same organization his whole career, describes trust and
respect as separate feelings, but in this case, they are intricately related; it is difficult for one to
exist without the other. Jim, a White male with 6 years as a manager, agreed with the concepts of
relationships and respect and further expanded these concepts to feeling like a valued member of
the team:
I would describe that as being a team member that is valued in their role, that’s respected
and listened to, that collaborates with other team members on a regular basis and has a
relationship–a positive relationship with other team members.
Similar to Jim, Jerry, and Bill also cited listening and feeling heard as key components of a sense
of belonging. Jerry, a Black male, said that belonging to him meant that others “listen when you
speak,” and Bill described belonging as “people listening to my ideas.” Participants signaled that
listening is a core component of ensuring that others feel valued.

55
Feeling valued is one aspect of feeling like a part of a team, which was another theme
from the participants’ responses. Richard, a White male with prior military experience, explicitly
tied the two together, saying belonging meant “you feel like you’re part of the team–that you’re
valued.” Richard was intentional in stating that feeling like one is part of a team creates a feeling
of value. Laurie, an Asian female with 6 years in management, also described belonging as being
“part of a team,” and for her as a manager, being the “central person that people can depend on”
was how she felt valued within the team setting. Like Richard, Carl’s interpretation of belonging
tied multiple concepts together, saying belonging was “like being part of a team; you’re feeling
valued by others. People listen and are respectful of your opinions.”
Much of what these participants described can be summarized by the concept of
psychological safety, which includes the existence of trust, respect, and honest and open
communication (McCausland, 2023). Frank, a White male born and raised in the Middle East,
expanded on the concept, describing a sense of belonging as “being surrounded by supportive
people, people who’ve always been listening and helping me even when I’m wrong.” When
commenting on psychological safety, Olivia, a White female with 5 years of experience as a
manager, pointed out that “sometimes it’s easier to see when you don’t have it, than when you
do.”
Psychological safety is an antecedent for many people to be able to bring their full and
authentic selves into the work environment. Jerry said belonging included “feeling like you can
be yourself,” and Olivia said it meant she could “bring my full self to work and feel comfortable
with my employees and company leaders,” both of which are fostered by a culture that includes
psychological safety. Emily, an Asian female with over 20 years of management experience,
described establishing a sense of belonging as going through the exercise of “This is who I am;

56
tell me who you are” which resulted in the feeling that “We are a team.” Managers used the term
“team” to describe the relationship of their direct reports, often including themselves in the
group.
Finally, the importance of the work or whether the work mattered was a theme of
participants’ definition of belonging. Julianne described belonging as not only being connected
to the people doing the work but also to the “warfighter,” which is the industry’s end user.
Richard found the concept of mattering especially important, describing a sense of belonging as
I think it’s working on something that people care about. And I’m not just talking about
me [as their manager] caring about it, but people that may be decision-makers or leaders
caring and saying, hey, that’s important work.
Brian agreed that work mattering was an important aspect of belonging but tied it to a sense of
intrinsic satisfaction and interpersonal connection rather than extrinsic validation. He said
belonging feels like:
I want to show up today. Not just because this is how I pay my bills, but it also feels like–
yeah, it’s five o’clock in the morning, but there’s all my brothers and sisters right there
also walking in from the parking lot in the dark because we belong here together. I’m
happy coming here because it’s fun; it’s rewarding. And when I go home, I feel a sense
of accomplishment.
Brian is inspired by the work he does and sees the early morning arrival as a badge of honor. He
believes the work that he and his coworkers are doing is so powerful that he is motivated to start
the day early. Brian’s role connects him to the warfighter and instills meaning and purpose in his
day. Many defense contractors encourage their employees to work long or early hours in the
name of national security, and for Brian especially, this tactic is effective.

57
Kevin, a White male who has 4 years of industry management and another 11 in the
military, also said that a sense of belonging meant he was “able to contribute in some meaningful
way.” His description starts to go beyond the definition of belonging and approaches that of
mattering: being someone who is depended on, someone whom others are interested in, and
someone whose fate others are concerned about (Rosenberg & McCullough, 1981). While
belonging is closely related to inclusion and feeling a part of something bigger, mattering is more
aligned with individual contributions and being acknowledged for them.
Managers’ Personal Experiences
When participants were asked if they currently felt a sense of belonging in their
workplace, the responses were mixed, but each fit into the framework the individual had
provided for their definition of a sense of belonging. For example, Laurie noted that she felt
belonging as the central person that her team turned to, but her sense of belonging was limited
when she did not have the technical knowledge that her team sought from a leader. Dave, who is
in his first managerial role, had a similar experience managing a group he did not share a
technical background with: “There were some moments where I didn’t feel like I would quite
belong with the people who were doing the engineering work because I had not done that work
myself.”
Shared past experiences were strong indicators of a sense of belonging. In the workplace,
relationships are built through successes as well as hardships, forming bonds throughout the
process. As Laurie and Dave noted, outsiders who have not experienced this can find it difficult
to feel like part of the group. Experiences like Laurie’s and Dave’s led some managers to feel a
sense of belonging with their peers, rather than their direct reports, based on their current roles.

58
This echoed the theme of shared goals and experiences. Dave continued in describing his
experience:
I feel a stronger sense of belonging with my fellow managers because we had all come
from very different backgrounds. Some had been engineers in the group, and some had
not, but still, we are dealing with the same thing and driving towards the same goals, and
generally trying to learn from each other.
Above, Dave describes an inclusive environment amongst his peers. Dave’s peer group has
embraced the diversity of thought that comes with the varied backgrounds and is leveraging it to
both improve themselves individually as well as ensure they are collectively making the best
decisions for the organization.
At the same time, sharing current experiences also helped foster a sense of belonging
between managers and their direct reports. Many managers described feeling a sense of
belonging with their employees, similar to being on a team or part of a family. Brian explained:
I feel it more with my team than my peers. And I say that because I can relate; I interact
more with my team on a daily basis. … But my peers, there’s about 12 of us, and we all
run different businesses. It’s almost like the manager of a grocery store being a peer with
the manager of an auto shop. And the grocery store manager can relate a whole lot better
to all the grocery store employees, but he and the auto shop guy report to the same
person. So, with my peers, the belonging just is not as strong.
Emily also felt more connected to her direct reports, saying, “I feel like we are absolutely a team,
and I think the team looks to me to be a part of them.” John, in his first management role, said, “I
identify as belonging to the team, based on my motivation, investment in the product, and the
quality of work I provide in the end product.” Managers experiencing a stronger sense of

59
belonging with their direct reports can be beneficial in building the trust and communication
between supervisor and employees, as well as increase effectiveness in manager contribution to
the group. Both Benjamin and Richard talked about aspects of the environment that they
intentionally cultivate to foster belonging, and how they needed to demonstrate these aspects
rather than just talk about them. Benjamin said, “I work hard to create an environment of trust…
and really walk the walk and set the example.” Richard described a similar approach in which he
tries “to create an environment” to reach his vision where “I want people to feel comfortable, I
want them to enjoy, but I also want them to be open.” Richard made an important distinction
here that the environment does not create itself but requires deliberate actions and ongoing care
to shape it into the desired form.
A challenge that managers who felt this stronger bond with their employees face is
establishing professional boundaries that still allowed them to be effective leaders. Louise, a
manager with 10 years of experience, succinctly summarized this feeling by saying, “The people
I feel closest to are my direct reports, which is awkward, right? You don’t want to be too
friendly.” Jerry, who has a similar 13 years of experience as a manager, described his approach
to boundary setting:
I feel like there’s a little bit of a boundary that I create between myself and my team. And
maybe it doesn’t need to be there; maybe it does. It’s kind of a management philosophy,
but in general, I don’t sit with my team at lunch. All my team sits together, and I won’t sit
with them. They’ve invited me, and I say, well, you know I think I’ll decline. And I’ve
thought about that, like, should I just [sit with them and] make that part of my regular
routine? I haven’t been comfortable with that because we have to evaluate people so how
close do you get to your employees?

60
Here, Jerry provides a good example of effective boundary setting. He enables, and possibly
even encourages, his team to connect with each other over a meal, but removes himself from the
situation based on his own comfort level. He has recognized the importance of team cohesion
and acknowledges that it can be cultivated without him needing to actively drive every
conversation. In doing so, Jerry is still able reap the benefits of his team bonding with each other
while protecting his own boundaries–keeping emotional distance between him and his team
members whose performance he will need to subjectively evaluate at the end of the year.
Bill, another experienced manager of 12 years, described his style of boundary setting
and tied it directly to the level of engagement he feels in the workplace. He indicated that the
more engaged you are in the workplace, the easier it is to find that sense of belonging. However,
Bill was also careful of how he set his boundary for workplace engagement as to protect his
home life rather than the emotional ties with his employees. When describing his sense of
belonging, he commented:
I think it has to do with how much you let yourself engage from a psychological
standpoint. The problems at a big company like this are very complex. I’ve always
engaged as much as I can when I’m in the office, and then I disengage with I leave the
office. To me the best engagement is work-life integration, where you can be engaged all
the time and not be stressed about that… the idea of being able to think about work
outside of work and not get stressed about it would be ideal. So, I feel belonging when
I’m here, to the extent that I bring myself to work. I don’t feel like I bring 100% of
myself to work because I leave a little bit out of the office because I don’t want to leave
everything here–I want something when I go home.

61
Bill recognizes that full engagement when he is in the office will impact his home life,
accelerating any path to burnout that he may be on. Finding the balance for him means
completely separating his work and home lives, which allows him to be present in both spaces
without letting one encroach on the other.
Similarly, Louise explained that she did not bring her full self to the office given to a lack
of consistent psychological safety and the need to be emotionally resilient: “I don’t get to bring
my authentic self because I just don’t know how it’s going to be. Like some days you feel very
supported and other days you’re shocked because it’s not even close.” She also indicated that in
her current role, her lack of belonging in her current role stemmed from “not very many women”
being present in her workplace. It is often easier to bond with those who have similar shared
experiences; women in engineering certainly fall into this category, especially if, at any point in
their education or career, they did not feel welcomed by their male counterparts.
When previously shared experiences are strong, a sense of belonging may be felt quickly
or even instantaneously, but belonging is also built through establishing relationships and
creating new shared experiences together. Julianne, new to her current management role,
described her experience: “My peers are a new team, and I did not necessarily feel a sense of
belonging when I joined the team because I was new to the role and a lot of my peers had had the
role in the past. But I think over time, it’s been very easy to feel like part of the team.” Jim felt
similarly about his path through his organization, saying:
I’ve been a part of this organization for a long time. I started out in a technical role, then
moved into a lead role and into a management role. So, I’ve developed relationships with
individuals across the various teams over that amount of time, and I feel like I have good
strong relationships with a lot of the members of the team. So, I feel like I belong.

62
Jerry described his experience as being new to different management roles as feeling like he
needed to prove his abilities and counter any negative biases people may have had about him. He
explained that establishing a reputation and a track record with his new workgroup took time, but
eventually, it led to positive relationships and a sense of belonging.
Finally, while managers described feeling a sense of belonging with either their peers or
their direct reports, some did not feel a sense of belonging when they thought about the people in
their leadership chain. Kevin had specific reasons for not feeling a sense of belonging from
managers in his leadership chain:
I think sometimes there’s a lack of understanding by the leadership that they have
someone like me on their team with the kind of background and experience I have
because they haven’t taken the time to get to know me. And I’m not talking about my
immediate supervisor. But if you go two or three levels above me, if they don’t
understand their team, and the expertise that resides on the team, even at a cursory level,
then you don’t necessarily know how to tap it, and decisions and strategies may be
developed and positions maybe taken [that are not in line with the customer’s needs] that
I may not have known about.
Kevin’s position as a retired military contributor is likely one of the reasons his company sought
him out for his current role; however, he does not feel fully recognized or appreciated for the
expertise that he brings to the organization and how he can help inform decision-makers or
influence strategy. He reiterates that his senior managers are not aware of “the diversity of
experiences on your team that they could potentially tap.” Kevin’s lack of belonging is related to
the disconnect between what he believes he can bring to the conversation and subsequently not
feeling valued for it. He is looking to leverage the contribution of his expertise and background

63
to feel like a contributing member of the bigger organization; recognition from his superiors
would certainly help him find that.
Olivia and Richard echo Kevin’s feelings to a lesser degree, indicating that being
appreciated by their higher-level managers would improve or strengthen their sense of
belonging. Olivia was explicit when sharing her feelings regarding the hierarchy, explaining that
she feels well supported by her direct reports and her peers, but less so from those above her:
“As a manager, from the individual level up, 100% I feel supported, I feel appreciated, I feel
recognized… from above, it’s maybe fifty-fifty.” Richard was more speculative regarding how
his manager cultivated belonging:
Now looking up… does my manager create that? I mean, to some level I think he allows
it to happen. He lets us run the team and create the environment. Do I feel like I’m part of
a bigger organization and engaged? Maybe. Maybe, probably not.
For participants to feel a sense of belonging in their workplace, support from their direct reports,
peers, and from managers above them was very important. All manager participants understood
this through their experience and actively worked to cultivate belonging for their direct reports,
even if they did not feel a full sense of belonging for themselves.
Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences
Interview questions were designed to explore the three conceptual framework factors:
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influence. Managers were asked questions about
procedural, conceptual, and factual knowledge as well as metacognition. Motivation questions
focused on self-efficacy, goal content, expectancy outcome, and task value. Cultural models and
settings were examined regarding resources, incentives, and the underlying beliefs of senior
leaders to determine the organizational influences. While participants’ responses were often

64
intertwined and overlapped across these categories, results were collected into a primary
category for discussion below.
Knowledge
Managers were asked questions about their knowledge, or what they believed to be true.
The intent of these questions was to identify behaviors that were working well in cultivating
belonging and explore participants’ understanding of how belonging is related to employee
engagement and DEI. Further, questions sought to identify any knowledge gaps between the
industry’s DEI goals and how that has been communicated to managers as well as effectiveness
of DEI training.
Conceptual Knowledge
To test managers’ conceptual understanding, questions were asked regarding how
belonging relates to employee engagement and how it relates to DEI. Overall, managers agreed,
some emphatically, that belonging was directly related to employee engagement and to DEI.
Richard, a White male, said it simply: “I think engaged employees certainly feel a sense of
belonging.” Laurie agreed, using the corollary: “I think if there’s a low sense of belonging,
there’s a low level of engagement.” Bill was more elaborate, saying,
If you feel you belong, you’re going to feel like you can engage at a deeper level, and not
just sit back or do your work by yourself. The idea of collaboration is going to be much
higher if you feel like you belong, and you’re engaged.
These responses echo the research of Vujko et al. (2022), Anderson (2021), and Cenkci et al.
(2019), which all support the idea that an increase in employee engagement will result in an
increase in belonging.

65
Frank’s conceptual knowledge of belonging and engagement recognized that employees
are looking for more than just a paycheck in the workplace, saying, “People can get paid very
high, but don’t feel like they belong. They don’t feel included, they don’t feel supported. That
will affect productivity for sure.” Jerry had a similar belief, saying he thought belonging was
“key to high performing teams. If someone doesn’t belong, they’re probably not going to give
you the extra effort or may not even want to be there.” John, 2 years into his first management
role, recognized the importance of belonging in building his team:
If I have someone who comes in who doesn’t feel like they belong here or like they’re
welcomed here, they’re just going to key in the nine to five. They’re not really invested in
the products we’re producing or the mission we’re fulfilling. They don’t feel supported
and they don’t care to support others.
John, Jerry, and Frank all talked about the importance of belonging as it relates to employee
engagement but went a step further to relate it to presenteeism and productivity. In corporate
America today, organizations must have high levels of engagement and collaboration to meet the
demands of their customers.
Louise, a White female, thought employee engagement and belonging were tied together
by the ability to bring one’s authentic self to the workplace and the need to feel a sense of
psychological safety in doing so. She said, “if you don’t really feel like you belong… then you
can’t ever bring your full authentic self to work. You’re very guarded, and it’s very exhausting.”
Louise’s comments echoed Olivia’s definition of belonging in the workplace, as well as how she
connected belonging and employee engagement: “If you’re not feeling safe or that you belong,
you’re going to constantly worry about your performance; you’re going to be in fear.” Both

66
women noted the emotional toll that the lack of belonging can take, and how it can negatively
impact performance.
As discussed in Chapter Two, emotional labor is higher for women and employees of
color as they battle interrupting or vocally dominating male coworkers, experiencing
discriminatory acts in the workplace, or feeling a need to assimilate or change their appearance
to meet spoken or unspoken dress codes. Bill, a White male, summarized how this can impact
belonging for underrepresented employees:
I think the idea of being able to bring your whole self to work every day, and that means
everything about your life, if you’re able to do that, then the sense of belonging goes up
exponentially. So, when it comes to diversity and inclusion, being able to be yourself in
the workplace and not feeling judged.
When asked how belonging related to DEI, some managers did address the gender and ethnicity
aspect of diversity, but many were more focused on general diversity of thought and how
different backgrounds provide different perspectives regardless of gender, ethnicity, or other
protected class status. Olivia, in her first managerial role, summarized the general diversity of
backgrounds well, saying, “There’s going to be different aspects of belonging and psychological
safety for each person. Each individual is going to show up differently; they have different lived
experiences.” Managers are well aware that these differences in backgrounds are beneficial to the
performance of their teams but were not aligned on what diverse backgrounds should entail.
When asked about the connection between diversity and belonging, John took the
thinking a step further by indicating that experience was the key factor to diversity: “I personally
try to seek diversity through engineering experience. So not just the classic because of race and
gender.” While John, a White male manager, takes a valid and intentional approach to finding

67
diversity of thought on his team, he implies that he is able to attain this diversity without
necessarily addressing race and gender gaps on his still mainly male and White team. Emily, an
Asian female with a military background, had a similar view on diversity, saying, “I think we
often think like race, sex, things like that. But I think even culturally, in terms of myself being
from a military background, we are still a team.” Kevin–White, male, and a military veteran–
shared the sentiment, saying, “I don’t think it’s fair to talk about belonging just in terms of
ethnicities, which I think people stereotypically tie to diversity, equity, and inclusion. I think it
has to be much broader than that.”
Jerry and Dave both noted that being sought out and accepted for one’s unique qualities
and experiences were only part of the equation. Jerry, a Black male, said that “Belonging goes
hand in hand with inclusion,” and to ensure new group members felt that inclusion, current
members needed to make the extra effort to make them feel welcomed. Dave, a White male in
his first managerial role, expanded on this, saying, “You can’t have that sense of belonging if
you feel like you’re not welcomed, if you feel like an outsider in any way, or you feel like you’re
left out of the opportunities at work.” These responses related feeling welcomed and included
directly to finding the sense of belonging, and indicating that to create the latter, there must be
intentional action between current group members and those coming into the group. To be
inclusive and welcoming is an active choice that takes intentional effort, especially if those being
welcomed come from diverse backgrounds.
Jerry also noted the importance of networks and how they relate to belonging. He
indicated that without the support and connection of the network, it can be more difficult to find
a sense of belonging, especially in a new group. He also connected it to DEI:

68
I think the other thing with diversity is that we have our formal process and you see
names and that can be one of the cues of gender or race… you don’t have a background
[with the person] and I see that as a component of diversity or a block in some cases: if
you’re not part of the network you can have a hard time.
Jerry’s observation is tied to the phenomenon of networking as described in previous
research by Fernandez and Fernandez-Mateo (2006), McDonald (2011), and McPherson et al.
(2001). Homogenous White male networks dominate the aerospace defense industry, and it is
difficult for women and employees of color to penetrate and leverage them.
Although unprompted in the interview questions, Richard and John both recognized the
impact of their White male backgrounds and how it may limit their ability to cultivate a sense of
belonging for underrepresented employees in their organizations. Richard said, “Because of my
background, which is pretty limited being a White male, I don’t think I appreciate sometimes
what others might have to go through to feel like they belong in a group.” John reflected,
I can never probably appreciate appropriately what the barriers are for folks that are
coming into this all-White male organization. But I absolutely want people to feel like
they’re accepted and belong here as they’ve been chosen to help us succeed in whatever
it is we’re doing.
Both men acknowledged that their positionality impacted their ability to fully connect with the
experiences of employees with different backgrounds. Awareness is an important step in the
intellectual and emotional journey toward a racially equitable workforce.
Procedural Knowledge
Managers were asked a series of questions regarding how they cultivated belonging for
their employees. This line of questioning was heavily based on the work of Kennedy and Jain-

69
Link (2020), but included questions rooted in the work of Zimmerman (2021). The former
research focused on how employees felt seen, connected, supported, and proud of the work and
the organization, and managers were probed directly for ways they cultivated these feelings.
Direct questions targeting the latter were focused on how managers encourage employees to be
their authentic selves. No direct questions were asked about Zimmerman’s concepts of small
acts, small freedoms, and small talk, but through the responses to the procedural knowledge
questions, themes emerged that supported these concepts.
Small Acts, Small Freedoms, and Small Talk. Small acts or personalized gestures were
mentioned by managers as ways that they make their employees feel a sense of belonging. Olivia
contributes coffee to the local coffee club, run by one of her employees. Louise described a
1980s origami fortune teller that she gave to an employee:
When we were younger, we had these little finger puppet things that were decision
makers and you’d move your fingers in four directions… and [my employee] said, I think
I need a decision maker because I never know what to do. And so, I made one to respond
back to a question he had asked me and left it on his desk.
This small gesture not only addressed the question Louise’s employee had asked but recognized
a shared childhood experience and created a connection between the two people. Louise went out
of her way to create something meaningful for her employee, and the result was an increased
interpersonal connection.
Small freedoms were demonstrated through empowerment, trust, autonomy, and support
from the manager to their employees, mostly with regard to their job duties. Some described an
outcome-based philosophy and how it related to flexibility during the workday. Jim, who is in
his first managerial role, said, “Full time 5 days a week is not a good fit for everybody. So

70
having a little bit of flexibility as a leader to allow deviations” was helpful for retention. Olivia
agreed, noting that she required flexibility in her work-life balance, and therefore promoted it
with her employees. Emily indicated that she did not want to micromanage her employees but
rather trust that they will complete their required tasks on time with the flexibility to balance
work and personal activities.
Brian and Julianne both talked about empowering their employees to make decisions and
execute the business as they saw best. Brian, with his 16 years of managerial experience,
described his role as one of support rather than authority, and conveyed his expectation that his
employees would make the necessary decisions to move their projects forward, but that they
would also call for support when necessary. He said,
I’m here to support them. They need top cover, they need a bigger decision made, they
need guidance on the bigger picture, they need a sounding board. That’s what I’m here
for, not how to tell them to do their jobs.
Julianne shared a similar sentiment, commenting that her employees “know that if they make an
educated decision with a reason that I will back them up.” She continued, “I need them to feel
that I trust them, and I do. Part of that empowerment helps them do their jobs every day.”
Feeling empowered and feeling trusted to do the job as they see fit is a recognition of the
employees’ expertise and an appreciation of the education and experience they bring to their
roles.
Finally, Zimmerman (2021) explains that small talk is a way to create and maintain
interpersonal relationships, and in doing so, creates a sense of loyalty among employees. During
interviews, managers described small talk with their employees as an intentional act, one that
was intended to do as Zimmerman proposed. Managers described small talk as showing

71
investment in their employees’ personal interests. Jim said small talk was “having impromptu
conversations with folks and getting to know them a little bit.” Emily and Richard incorporated
small talk into their staff meetings, by asking people to share good news about their personal
lives, or to share a book or movie they had recently read or watched. Many managers sought out
opportunities for small talk in an individual setting and asked their employees about things not
related to work, such as weekend plans, or updates on higher education and family activities.
Brian intentionally created space during the workday to check in with his employees at other
sites, scheduling what he calls “balance checks” to disconnect from the work at hand and to have
a lighthearted chat about things like funny online videos they had recently seen.
Encouraging Employees’ Authentic Selves. Both Kennedy and Jain-Link (2020) and
Zimmerman (2021) found that in order to feel a sense of belonging, employees needed to feel
safe bringing their full and authentic selves to the workplace. Many managers said that they
encouraged this in their employees by demonstrating it themselves. Julianne, a White female
manager, said, “I bring my whole self to work, unapologetically.” John claimed to be “pretty
unguarded” in his own way, and Louise said she “tried to model it” herself. Olivia elaborated,
“I’m very vulnerable and transparent upfront… I feel like letting them know I’m not perfect”
helps to create an environment where employees can feel a sense of psychological safety.
Benjamin, a White male with 3 years in his current role, said “I’m my authentic self; I’m not
trying to be someone I’m not.” In bringing their whole, authentic selves to work, managers not
only show their employees that it’s acceptable to do so, but also create opportunities to connect
at a more personal level, which is another key component to belonging.
Managers intentionally create this safe environment by establishing trust, being
respectful, and ensuring that employees do not feel any sense of judgment. Richard said by

72
cultivating this environment, he hoped his employees may “start to let down their guards a little
bit… and become more of themselves.” Benjamin continued in his response,
I think showing interest when [employees] come in and talk about whatever they want to
talk about, and actually showing interest. Don’t just blow it off. I think that would
encourage them to be themselves because they’re comfortable and they feel safe that they
can talk about them being them.
Jim said an essential piece for him was to “build trust” and then “people are more apt to not be
reserved and be more of themselves.” He concluded: “It starts with just building a foundation of
trust through your day-to-day experiences,” noting that consistency is important. Jim’s comment
echoes Louise’s experience as an employee in which she held back from being her full self at
work due to inconsistent support and changing judgment from her direct manager.
Another way managers cultivate a psychologically safe environment for employees to be
themselves is through the practice of listening. Often this is done in a one-on-one setting, away
from other employees. When working with employees who may be having a hard time, Bill said,
“I think having these one-on-ones and hearing, really hearing their struggles and trying to help in
any way I can” is an effective way of building trust between himself and his employees. Jerry
said, “I try to show an interest in everybody and what they want to talk about, so kind of going
back to listening and maybe asking follow-up questions if I see something that sparks
somebody’s interest.” Recognizing an individual’s struggles or passions shows that managers
believe their employees matter. When managers demonstrate good listening skills, they also
show respect and support and build trust between themselves and their employees. By doing so,
managers further establish a psychologically safe environment for employees to bring their

73
whole selves to the workplace. Carl, an Asian male with 8 years of managerial experience,
explained how he encouraged his employees to feel comfortable being themselves:
It goes back to just listening to people and not having any preconceived notions or
judgments. I think just having empathy for people. So, you may not agree with
something that someone does, but acknowledging that that’s how they feel, or that’s the
experience that they have.
Along with a lack of judgment, Carl ties together listening, empathy and acknowledgment of
others’ differing experiences and perspectives, which are all important aspects in cultivating a
positive working environment. Encouraging employees to bring their authentic selves to the
workplace ties closely to how managers help their employees feel seen and appreciated.
Feeling Seen and Appreciated. Kennedy and Jain-Link (2020) describe four main
elements to belonging in the workplace. The first, feeling seen, is described by being recognized,
rewarded, and respected by one’s colleagues. The ways managers fulfilled this task was
consistent across all participants. Recognizing employees’ efforts or accomplishments both
amongst their peers and in front of higher-level managers, listening and providing feedback, and
creating dedicated one-on-one time were all methods managers used to accomplish these
feelings. Appreciation was focused on ways to recognize and reward employees while ensuring
employees felt seen by listening and providing individual attention.
Olivia intentionally created regularly scheduled one-on-one sessions with employees
because she wanted “to have space and time dedicated specifically to [each of] them.” Bill
encouraged an “open cubicle” policy to honor the fact that different employees wanted to interact
with him at different intervals, rather than on a regular basis. Benjamin tied this dedicated time
together with explicit appreciation, making a point to thank employees for coming to his office to

74
see him rather than him needing to meet them at their various locations. Often these one-on-ones
were used to provide feedback to employees. For example, Frank, who has been in management
for 4 years, noted that this was an opportunity to both recognize good work and show employees
that he was attuned to how they might improve, saying, “It’s always about providing dynamic
feedback, whether people are doing a great job, or they need help or attention. That’s how you
make them feel appreciated, even when you deliver constructive feedback.” Receiving
constructive feedback indicates that managers are paying attention to their employees’
performance to be able to provide meaningful and specific ways they can improve.
Laurie, an Asian female with 2 years in her current role, noted that during one-on-one
sessions, she is able to adjust her demeanor and be both more direct and more friendly with her
employees, saying, “I’m not so much your manager; I’m a person to encourage you in the way
you are and the way you can be in other forums outside our one on ones.” She creates a
confidential and private environment for her employees to discuss their performance and their
growth with her, so that they can take the feedback and apply it in a larger group setting. Brian
explained how he did the same, describing how he would call an employee after a meeting in
which he did not think the employee was fully expressing themselves, asking them, “What’s
going on? What are your thoughts? What did you want to say that you didn’t?” He would then
provide guidance on how his employee could feel more comfortable expressing their thoughts
and opinions in the future. Direct attention and care from managers can make employees feel
seen and that their opinions matter, increasing their sense of belonging.
Managers sought to demonstrate appreciation through recognition. Recognition was
rarely mentioned in monetary terms, but rather focused on ensuring that efforts and
accomplishments were shared with others. Organizing group meetings in which employees could

75
be validated by their peers was a common theme amongst managers. Jerry described why he
thought this was important, saying, “A lot of times it’s your peers that you really want to have
feedback or acknowledgement from.” Laurie said she tried to “actively highlight people’s
contributions in team meetings,” and Dave said he made sure he “routinely lifted [his employees]
up in meetings with the rest of the group.” Julianne noted the need for peer-to-peer recognition
and created time in her staff meetings for “shoutouts” where her employees recognized each
other in a public forum. Peer appreciation was a way to develop respect and connection between
their employees and intended to increase camaraderie and relationships within the team.
Ensuring employees were recognized in the managerial hierarchy and by outside entities
was essential for appreciation as well. Benjamin said he felt it was “important to share up the
chain of command” because “it’s hard to understand what everybody’s doing down in the
trenches.” Richard said that he ensured his employees were “getting recognized above me to
whatever level is appropriate” so that when more senior managers visited the team, they had the
context and the background to meaningfully recognize and thank people for their contributions.
Jim found that “When a team gets recognized, whether it’s a customer or a business partner,” it
was beneficial to pass that on to his management chain because it provided “satisfaction and a
feeling like they’ve accomplished something” amongst his direct reports when they were
recognized by organizations outside their own.
Recognizing and acknowledging personal successes and milestones unrelated to the work
were also ways that managers tried to make their employees feel seen and appreciated. Frank
made a point to celebrate “personal occasions like birthdays, graduation, big family events”
which helped create a sense of belonging with his team. Similarly, Brian’s philosophy was that

76
his employees’ home lives were just as important, if not more important, than their work lives,
saying:
I do whatever I can to make sure the team knows that I care about them first and
foremost. And their families matter as much to me as the work because if they aren’t
happy and their families are happy, they won’t perform, and we don’t succeed together.
And if one fails, we all fail.
When a manager in their chain recognizes that their employees have outside interests, employees
feel valued as full humans and accepted for who they are. Acknowledging that employees have
external commitments that impact their ability to be fully present in the workplace allows for
meaningful and honest conversations regarding their mental health and recognizes a balance is
necessary between work and home life.
Feeling Connected. The second element in Kennedy and Jain-Link’s (2020) research
centered on feeling connected or having positive and authentic social interactions with one’s
colleagues and managers. Participants were not prompted with this definition and interpreted the
question of connection both in a work effectiveness and social construct. They created
mechanisms for employees to connect with one another in the workplace for opportunities to
learn and complete daily tasks. They also created mechanisms for employees to know one
another on a personal level either through social activities outside the workday or social
opportunities within the workplace context.
Work-related connections were intended to aid in the execution of assigned tasks and to
further employees’ careers through mentoring or development opportunities. Jim talked about
how he accomplished this, saying “We have an informal mentorship program where we pair
earlier career folks up with later career folks and have them partner on things.” From his

77
perspective, this not only enabled collaboration and learning, but also gave earlier career
employees opportunities for visibility through the networks of the more experienced employees.
Olivia, who previously worked for the DoD, made her own network accessible for her employees
to connect with others in the company. Louise, who has 10 years’ experience as a manager,
created space in group meetings for her employees to connect on work issues and talk through
potential solutions together. Carl described a similar approach, saying, “I encourage the team to
leverage their network, especially with the junior engineers, telling them that the problems
they’re seeing, it’s very likely someone has seen them before… so, don’t be afraid to ask
questions.” John and Jerry intentionally co-located employees in working groups or desk seating
to encourage them to talk more often. John explained, “I do try to sit people next to each other
that are effective, that are either going to get along with each other for that intrigue each other.”
Brian took a virtual approach, sending group text messages to “stir the pot” between employees
and create a playful bantering that eventually led to work-related problem solving. Benjamin
takes a collaborative approach to defining his team’s roles, responsibilities, and authorities
(RAAs), using discussion to connect employees with each other. He says to his team, “let’s all sit
down and talk about what we like to do, what our strengths are.” Describing what followed that
prompt, he said:
And then actually get the employees to talk and interact and sketch up what they think the
RAA should look like, which would force them to interact and talk about what they want
to do and also what is best for the team.
This approach also promotes ownership of the outcome and a shared commitment to the
agreement. It also encourages employees to recognize their strengths, vocalize what they enjoy
about their jobs, and provides a forum to create opportunities for growth as a team. Julianne has

78
a team that is distributed across the country and found that the requests for help were often
related to connecting her direct reports with each other. She said it was important to follow
through on these requests not only so her team could complete their tasks through connection
and collaboration, but also to build trust with her direct reports so they know that her offer to
help was genuine.
Jim goes back to his core philosophy of building relationships to cultivate belonging. He
said his “ultimate goal is to build high performing work teams” and in order to do so he needed
to establish “strong relationships, not just with each other but with our business partners.” He
noted that “the building block of these relationships is trust.” Tying it all together, he said, “The
methods I encourage team members to use is a lot of the day-to-day communication.” Jim also
noted that communication methods were important, recommending face to face interactions as
much as possible before phone calls, instant messaging, or email usage. Kevin and Brian also
noted the benefits of in person interactions; both lamented the lack of travel budget as their
companies tried to cut costs and indicated that the ability to interact face to face was paramount
to building relationships and learning from each other.
Appreciating the benefits of face-to-face interactions, managers aimed to create space for
social interaction outside the work context; often this involved food and drink. Laurie and
Richard both hosted summer barbeques at their homes, welcoming their employees and their
families on a weekend afternoon. Many managers described after work happy hours as positive
social events that encouraged interpersonal connection, though none mentioned potential feelings
of exclusion that such events may elicit in introverts or those who do not consume alcohol.
Organizing meals celebrating birthdays and anniversaries that were held outside of the office that
allowed employees to disconnect from their work were common across manager responses. Even

79
meals that did not involve a trip out of the office were believed to be effective in promoting
connections between employees as it brought them together in the same space for a shared
purpose beyond their assigned work tasks.
Managers also intentionally cultivated other opportunities for employees to connect
during the workday, either by simply creating the space and time for people to talk or by raising
a topic for discussion. Olivia said this informal chatter offered her employees the opportunity to
find similarities between them that they might not have otherwise known about, which helped to
cultivate relationships. Louise created physical space and time after hosting meetings, saying
“It’s kind of neat that they linger in my office and hang out” after she would leave for her next
meeting. Dave, with 4 years in management, encouraged dialogue by “just asking questions
about things not related to work,” saying that he would share things about himself that were
external to his role as a manager, and then the conversation would “snowball.” All these actions
are parallel to Zimmerman’s (2021) small talk approach, intended to cultivate belonging through
interpersonal connection.
Feeling Proud. Kennedy and Jain-Link (2020) described feeling proud as being aligned
with the purpose, vision, and values of one’s work and organization. Of all the research-based
ways to cultivate belonging, managers struggled the most in articulating how they instilled a
sense of pride in their employees. Brian, Julianne, and John all labeled pride as an intrinsic
attribute that their direct reports showed without prompting. Brian noted “99% of my workforce
is veterans, so pride, I think, is one of those things that comes relatively naturally to my
workforce.” He connected the military and combat experience of his employees to their feeling a
sense of pride in supporting the products that the military uses. John felt similarly about his
employees and their connection to the product, saying “There’s an extra sense of pride because

80
of the customers that we have and the missions that we have; they instill a sense of pride on their
own.” Julianne said her employees “came with it” and that she did not feel like she needed to
actively do anything to instill it further.
Other managers fostered a sense of pride by promoting ownership of specific tasks or the
work in general. Kevin, with his 15 years of managerial experience, encouraged his employees to
consider their work as “your name, your brand, your reputation” and gave them “opportunity to
develop a product, put their name on it, and push that to our customer.” Emily, an Asian female 3
years into her current role, used a humorous analogy, saying, “I do sometimes think it’s silly,
titles that make no sense. But I think sometimes, when you do have a younger team, it’s okay to
have a chief of gummy bears because it kind of allows them to be like, hey, I own something.”
Jim married ownership with visibility, saying, “You give folks an opportunity to present their
designs and their status. Give folks the opportunity whenever possible to present in front of
leadership rather than me do the presentation.” When employees take ownership, they also take
responsibility for the result, as Kevin suggested. Ownership can also cultivate a sense of agency
and control over the end product, inspiring greater investment and of effort and resources.
Richard, who has a military background, summarized this when saying, “I think there’s pride in
doing something really well.”
Feeling Supported. The final component to Kennedy & Jain-Link’s (2020) research was
feeling supported, or having what one needs to thrive both in and out of the workplace. Managers
were asked about how they support their employees in both their day-to-day work and in their
career growth. Many responses aligned with servant leadership practices in which the manager
was looking to support rather than direct their employees. Managers regularly mentioned an
“open door policy” in their responses as a way to communicate that they are always willing to

81
make time to talk with their employees. For career growth, managers thought it was part of their
jobs to understand employees’ career goals and to create or find opportunities for employees to
grow and develop.
Support in Daily Work. “How can I help?” Managers ask this question of their
employees in their efforts to support them. Julianne noted that at first, her direct reports were not
sure that she was genuine in her offer to help, but after consistently following through on
requests, they began to trust that she was. Louise makes time in her weekly staff meetings to ask,
“What do you need from me or from your peers?” to drive dialogue and sometimes solve
problems in the moment. Benjamin explained that “Always being responsive is a very key
thing,” and while “there’s definitely times when I’m super swamped, but acknowledgement of
receipt of messages” was something he made a point to do. Kevin established a turnaround time
expectation for himself, saying, “I am very responsive to my employees. No email or phone call
goes more than a day without being addressed.” Offering support and following through in a
timely manner helps employees feel heard and supported and builds trust and relationships.
Managers also made themselves available both for scheduled and impromptu meeting
times. The “open-door policy” was used to indicate that managers were available outside of
planned sessions, and scheduled individual sessions ranged from weekly to quarterly, depending
on the employee’s needs and desires. Richard used the open-door policy to acknowledge his own
limits, saying, “If I don’t know about something, you need to come tell me and let me know what
I need to do to support you.” Carl, with 8 years’ experience in management, used individual
sessions with his direct reports “just to check in on them, and see if there’s anything I can do for
them,” and Jerry, an experienced manager of 13 years, said that the individual sessions were
“sacred,” indicating that he prioritized this time with his direct reports over other tasks,

82
specifically emergent ones. Olivia used the individual time to be a sounding board for employees
who were overwhelmed and to craft a plan to rebalance their workload. She said, “I talk about
other areas where we can shift their work statement for now to give them some space and grace,
or I helped to really clarify the expectation so that they can filter out some of the noise that
they’re feeling and I will… let them know that I’m here.”
Recognizing that scheduled individual sessions may not be the only effective way to
connect with employees, many managers described other ways they reached out to ensure
employees were supported in their daily work. Bill, a soft-spoken White male, reflected on the
varying needs of his direct reports:
Everyone’s a little bit different in how much they want to see their manager. Some people
love to see the manager all the time and talk to him and tell him what they’re up to.
Others don’t want to see me at all. So, I have to kind of, you know, make it make a point
of seeing those people and making sure their voices are heard too.
Jim, a manager of 6 years, took a similar approach, saying, “I try to walk around and check in on
folks to see how they’re doing, if they need any help.” Emily did too, explaining, “I kind of make
various visits to them, stroll around a bit.” Louise is part of a new location in her company, and
new to her role there. She used the walk around time to make sure her employees had what they
needed in their new offices:
I try to go see everyone in their office at least once a week. I don’t schedule it or
anything, but I’ll notice that I haven’t gone and put eyes on them, and see what they’re
doing, and see, what does their space look like? How are they doing? Are they settled?
Do they feel comfortable?

83
Proactively seeking out employees rather than passively waiting for them is another way
that managers can demonstrate care and respect. Laurie thought it was important to be present
when her direct reports were onsite, saying she tries “to make sure that if they’re there working,
I’m with them as well.” Onsite support from managers, especially during long or odd hours,
shows that the manager is committed to their group’s outcome and is dedicated to helping
achieve that outcome by sacrificing some part of their own work life balance. John, a White male
manager, used a common World War I analogy, saying a vital function of his role as a manager
“is making sure folks don’t feel like they’re in the trenches alone.” While white-collar STEM
workers are far from the horrors that WWI soldiers endured in the trenches, the sentiment of
“We’re in this together” builds camaraderie, offers a chance to bond, and cultivates a sense of
belonging (Okun & Raffo, n.d.).
Support for Career Growth. Overwhelmingly, managers believed it was part of their job
duties to understand their employees’ career goals and to help them get to the next step. Olivia
keeps a detailed Excel spreadsheet of all her employees, their current skill set, and what their
next career move could look like. Richard said of his direct reports, “You gotta talk to each one
of them and figure out what they want to do.” Jim described the approach he uses for
conversations with his employees: “Are you all right? Are you happy? What’s your stress level?
And then, what are your goals? If an individual has certain aspirations or goals, we work toward
that and build a plan.” In these conversations, Jim is not only addressing the day-to-day
wellbeing of his direct reports, but he is also ensuring he is aware of their goals and demonstrates
that he can help them achieve them. Frank schedules one on one sessions to discuss career
development specifically, rather than trying to tie it in with a conversation about daily support.
He uses these monthly sessions to identify short- and long-term career paths, leaving them with

84
an assignment to think about how their current work is supporting those goals and what might
need to change to get there. Bill tries to create an environment in which his employees “will
come to me with ideas for where they want to go with their career” and when they do, he says, “I
feel like they’re trusting me” to help them. Brian, with 3 years in his current role, was hopeful he
was conveying the same:
I would never see their leaving for a better opportunity as something against me or their
happiness, because I would never want somebody to leave because they’re unhappy, I
would want somebody to leave because there’s an opportunity. So I want them to know
that I support you no matter what, I don’t care if you’ve been in this role for 3 months, if
there’s an opportunity, and you see that as growth, you have my support. I got your back.
At times, employees can feel that they are only valued in a large organization because of
the daily work tasks they accomplish and how they contribute to the near-term projects and
deliverable goals. Tracking quarterly financial results, as publicly traded companies are wont to
do, puts a heavy focus on the immediate profit generating opportunities, which can result in an
environment where managers are only focused on near term task execution. John noticed how
this was exhibited in his organization, saying, “without fail, everyone is still surprised that I’m
asking them what they want to be when they grow up.” He jokingly suggests that his direct
reports are still learning about themselves and exploring the path they might want their careers to
take in the future in the future. Interview data indicates that first-line managers find value in
helping employees in their career growth and incorporate this support into their routines.
Once managers understand their employees’ career goals, they create or find
opportunities for employees to continue their development. Richard disagreed with the idea that
employees are fully in charge of their own careers, saying, “They have to perform, but we have

85
to give them the opportunity” noting that he takes responsibility for finding work scope to
expand his employees’ experience base. Jim makes a point to “pass along opportunities that
come up throughout or outside the organization.” One such opportunity in his organization is
cross training between his group and his peers’ groups that do similar but different enough work
to help his employees develop new skills. Olivia said she helped connect her direct reports with
outside individuals to do “informational interviews” to explore what options are available. If a
direct report were interested in the outside group after that step, Olivia would take the time to
discuss the possibility of job openings with the manager there.
Like Olivia, managers routinely offered up their own networks to help employees reach
beyond their current sphere of knowledge. Richard tells his employees, “I can get you plugged
into other areas, or maybe I know people who know people.” Brian intentionally sets up his
direct reports with mentors that he sees as a good fit for the individual. Carl said of his direct
reports that he tries to “expand their network, give them different opportunities and find
opportunities, connect them with different mentors or mentees” depending on where they are in
their career. Kevin makes a point to assign his direct reports tasks outside their comfort zones,
but then follows up with support; he asks what kinds of challenges they are facing and then
connects them with someone who has experience in that area. By doing this, Kevin is creating a
learning opportunity that is intended to stretch his employees and further their career
development. Kevin is aiding his employees in developing additional skills that make them feel
valued by more people in the organization.
Laurie, an Asian female with 6 years management experience, also looked for
professional development opportunities, but also supported her employees in external education
ventures. She said she would “definitely look for assignments that are able to fill gaps” and

86
“absolutely support people who pursue education, whether a master’s or some other degree, or
some skill or certification.” She enables flexibility in working hours so that employees can
pursue outside education, and doing so shows that she values her employees’ outside interests
and believes they have potential to grow outside of their assigned tasks. Richard and Louise also
spoke about the value they put on outside education. Louise offered time at staff meetings for her
employees to talk about what they are learning, demonstrating that she is not only interested in
what her direct reports are doing outside of work, but values their efforts to take time out of her
and their group’s day to discuss it. Richard recommends his employees take advantage of the
financial graduate school support his company offers, especially to his early career employees
who generally have fewer at-home commitments. Richard ensures his employees are fully aware
of the professional development opportunities and the benefits that are part of their employment,
again demonstrating that he supports them beyond how well they complete their assigned tasks.
Factual Knowledge
Managers unanimously agreed that belonging was related to DEI. However, when asked
to articulate their company’s DEI goals, none of them tactically linked equity, inclusion, or
belonging to the goals. Across the spectrum of answers, if managers could identify industry goals
at all, they were only in conjunction with increasing representation, specifically at the higher
executive levels, and specific to women and employees of color. While better representation is a
worthy goal, it neglects the transformational cultural work to increase inclusion and belonging
and thereby reap any benefits of a more diverse workforce.
When asked about their company’s DEI goals, variations of Louise’s comment, “I really
don’t know if we have measurable goals” dominated managers’ responses. Richard said, “I do
not know what our goals are. Yikes. I don’t even know if we have goals,” and Dave said, “I’m

87
just not sure I know how to articulate what those goals are.” Jim trailed off in his response, “I
should know this but…” before settling on a description of male and female percentages of the
engineering workforce. Emily’s answer was blunt–“Yeah, I don’t know;” Kevin said he
“certainly couldn’t articulate them;” and Carl said, “I’ve looked at them before, but I couldn’t
tell you what they are.” Without an understanding of the end state, it is difficult to develop a plan
for execution.
It is worth noting that Carl also commented, “It seems like one of our goals is to be an
inclusive employer, because they often advertise or market that” but “I don’t think you’re gonna
see that on our corporate website like it’s an objective.” He described his company’s efforts as
targeted towards recruitment for new employees. Many other managers also described a focus
that included increasing representation of women and/or employees of color. Julianne, a manager
with 7 years of experience, explained that her company’s goals were reviewed on a quarterly
basis and were “specifically focused on women and people of color.” She continued, “There’s
not a lot of discussion about actions or plans to increase… I rarely see a goal with respect to
disability; it’s really only women and people of color.” Jerry noted the history of the focus,
saying, “Going back a couple of years, there was a push to increase Black representation some
percentage, and I know they’re still giving updates on that. I know there was a little bit of a focus
on Asian underrepresentation in management; I’ve seen that shared a few times.” He also noticed
“percentages of different backgrounds in executive management” was something his company
was tracking. Similarly, Kevin thought his company’s goals were centered on “core company
composition” of gender and racially diverse employees. These observations indicate only a
surface-level attempt to diversify the workforce across the industry.

88
Olivia and Louise, both women leaders with more than 15 years working in the industry,
expressed frustration in how this newfound focus came to light. After years of being the only
female in their respective work group and feeling as though company leadership did not
recognize that there was an issue, Olivia said her organization had finally taken action after
releasing metrics, not through listening to their employees. She said, “It wasn’t like the years of
[women] saying we’re the only ones in the room. It was the fact that the company finally started
releasing metrics. And now they say our metrics are lower than average.” Louise had a similar
experience, saying her White male colleagues were oblivious to the concept that there was a
diversity issue: “I said, well, look around the room, and I’m the only female manager of people.
Other than the secretary and HR, I’m the only woman! I think maybe we should really think
about what we’re doing… I’m the only woman here, guys.” These stories are not uncommon
among women in the industry, and the frustration of feeling not heard reduces a sense of
belonging; further, not feeling as though your experience is valued or that your colleagues even
believe your experience is true or noteworthy can alienate an entire demographic.
Bill, who works in the same organization as Olivia, described their site’s efforts to
acknowledge and remedy the lack of women in their workforce. He said, “This year my
organization has tried to make a difference with women in engineering. They’ve noticed the
retention of women hasn’t been great over the years.” As a White male, Bill does not share the
lived experience of Olivia, and glossed over how and why the organization came to notice dismal
female participation in their workforce. He continued that his leadership has asked, “What’s the
main reason we can’t retain women?” and went on to describe efforts to answer the question,
saying “We’ve had some roundtable discussions with whoever wants to attend, and then some
smaller roundtable discussions of women who have had really strong careers and growth in the

89
organization.” The latter was focused on connecting experienced female engineers with earlier
career female engineers to promote the positivity that exists and convey recommendations to the
next generation. While Bill and Olivia’s organization was right to attempt to understand their
failure to retain women, they are toeing the line of asking the remaining women to provide a
solution to a systemic issue.
Factual knowledge regarding how to increase representation revolved around hiring
practices. Managers generally agreed that there were guidelines around having both a diverse
hiring panel and a diverse candidate pool. Jerry has been in management long enough to consider
this a trend that comes and goes, saying his company “reintroduced the concept of a diverse
interview panel. I remember that going back to like 2012, and then it kind of faded and now it
seems like it’s back as an encouragement or a requirement.” John also indicated that hiring
diverse candidates may not be an actual requirement, saying, “To me, targeted hiring actions are
a little shaky because I get these DEI initiatives, but they’re kind of strong advisements at my
level; nothing’s super hard and fast.” John also said, “I think at the higher levels there’s more
rigor” meaning that at the senior manager and executive levels, diversity is more heavily
weighted in the hiring process. Without a full pipeline of diverse candidates at the individual
contributor and first-line manager levels, hiring qualified candidates at the more senior levels
will be a difficult task for the industry as a whole.
Metacognition
The final knowledge topic addressed in the conceptual framework is metacognition, or
the practice of thinking about thinking. Managers were asked about formal training they had
participated in, and how it might have changed the way they think about how they contribute to
the organization’s DEI goals. The formal training will be described in detail in the organizational

90
influence section; the following is a synopsis of managers’ metacognition regarding the impact
any formal training has had on how they think about diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging
in their workplace.
Managers who identified as female, Asian, or Black generally did not find the formal
training useful in promoting deeper thinking. Julianne simply said, “No,” the training did not
change how she thought about her contributions. Laurie said, “not necessarily; being female and
Asian, I already have open knowledge about what it means to be inclusive.” Emily, also an Asian
female manager, said, “No, no, honestly” and Carl, an Asian male manager, said, “It wasn’t
really anything new to me.” Jerry was more thoughtful, albeit general, in his response, saying, “I
know a lot, but then you learn more… I think every little piece of knowledge equips you better, I
think it does change the way you think.” Olivia also generalized how it was helping her and her
colleagues, saying she felt like “it helped give vocabulary to more people around the issue.” She
describes the SNOW model as “see, name, own, work–you can’t work on what you don’t own,
you can’t own what you can’t name, and you can’t name what you don’t see” and said the
training has enabled her organization to see and name aspects of diversity and be able to own and
work on them. Emily and Carl also indicated that while the training was not personally
impactful, it did help their coworkers. Emily said it “forced some good discussions and that’s
valuable,” while Carl said “adding awareness” was helpful for his workgroup.
Many managers who identified as White men found the training to be useful in
identifying biases or giving language to things they otherwise were unable to describe. Richard
recounted a memorable experience from an executive led discussion, saying “Before I don’t
think [DEI] was something I even really thought about too much” and then shared a quote from
the executive that had stuck with him years after the training session:

91
Here's my view on things. If you have two candidates that you’re hiring for a job, and one
is a diverse candidate and the other is not, and they’re basically equal, chances are the
one who is diverse, it was probably a lot harder for them to get to where they are than the
other.
The impact of this discussion on Richard is clear. Prior, he did not consider a candidate’s
background or lived experiences in his decision-making process. Yet after learning that some
candidates must work harder and overcome more obstacles to be seen as equally qualified, he
understands that candidates bring more to the table than what is on their resume or conveyed in
their interview. Bill, also a White male, agreed that the training educated him on the existence of
biases, saying he tries “to think about those on a day-to-day basis; do I have any blind spots?”
Brian said the training “has given me and my peers some good education and eye-opening things
that we’re able to use as tools to educate, but also foster our own perspectives.” He continued,
“It’s not changing the way I think, but it’s enabling bigger thinking.” Benjamin, a manager of 15
years, said of his training experience, “I think it really helps in terms of understanding how we
are doing.” Frank, who is new to his current role, said training has “helped a lot to learn from
different resources.” Training has raised awareness in the realm of DEI and enabled a change in
these managers’ thought processes.
Other managers talked about how the training revealed the need to be intentional about
DEI and belonging efforts. John, a White male manager, said, “Going through those training
made me realize that I have to be more deliberate about things. I can’t kind of sit back and just
let initiatives do their magic over whatever period of time.” Kevin, another White male, used the
same terminology in his reflection, saying, “It’s something you have to deliberately work
towards. I think it’s something you have to believe in.” Jim, a third White male, described how

92
he was putting the intention into practice, saying the outcome of the DEI training has “made me
look at our teams. How are we helping or hindering the process? And what can we do to correct
it?” He continued with an example: “We’ve got a gap; we don’t have a single woman on the
team.” He and his technical leadership team then took the time to evaluate their hiring processes,
including how they source candidates, and what they might do to influence the pipeline of
women in engineering to address a systemic issue across the industry.
Motivation
The conceptual framework explored motivational factors including expectancy outcome,
self-efficacy, goal content, and task value. The first three topics were in reference to how
managers saw themselves contributing to and supporting the DEI goals they had described in
their organization. Task value was centered on why they choose to stay in a managerial role.
Overall, managers detailed how they aided in the hiring process to diversify the workforce from
a race and gender perspective, and explained how helping people kept them on their managerial
career paths.
Expectancy Outcome
Being cognizant of a diverse candidate pool and ensuring a diverse interview panel was
utilized were the main ways managers saw themselves contributing to the DEI goals of their
company. A subset of managers talked about their personal efforts to make their colleagues and
subordinates feel included. An even smaller subset mentioned diversity councils and information
sharing intended to educate and increase awareness.
Jim said he supports his company’s goals by “being intentional about future hiring,” and
Olivia said she thinks “being really specific and intentional about hiring” is a way to make
progress. Brian said, “I look for diversity in experience. I think the hiring I’ve done is a good

93
example because I try to surround myself with people that are smarter than me and have a
different perspective than me.” Bill said, “We’re making sure we choose a pool that’s diverse, as
much as possible, and then making sure we give everyone in the pool an equal opportunity.”
Managers recognize the intentionality that is necessary for effective change and have committed
their efforts to do so.
Benjamin explained how he approaches hiring, asking himself “Are we really looking at
a diverse candidate slate here?” Louise, who has been with her same company and in a people
managerial role for the past 10 years, works with her HR and talent acquisition representative
when evaluating her candidate pool as well, asking “Are there any other candidates? These all
seem to be of the same demographic and background. Are there any others we could pull from to
make sure we’ve got a diverse pool?” Often companies will advertise job postings with the
national affinity groups like Society of Women Engineers or National Society of Black
Engineers to intentionally reach candidates who may not have otherwise seen the job posting.
Richard thought about what information he had available on the resume alone, saying, “It’s
really hard with the candidate pool to try to be diverse because many times you base it on a
name; we don’t have a picture, we don’t know who they are.” These managers are aware of the
potential homogenous candidate pool, using the resources they know of to try to expand it.
John described his attempts to diversify his team, recognizing that he can ask his
employees to help him. He said, “So with the folks that come in, I have very deliberate
conversations with them about whether they’re interested in supporting and being catalysts for
the DEI initiatives.” John acknowledged his positionality and how it might prevent him from
being fully effective in doing the work himself, as well as the challenges of shifting the
demographic as a whole, saying, “So as we pull people in to deviate from our old, White

94
maleness, I have these conversations… and without question everyone who’s come in says yes, I
want to help interview people; I want to go to conferences.” John is not only leveraging his
workgroup to aid in the efforts, but is also giving them a voice and ownership in the process
which helps cultivate a sense of pride, inclusion, and belonging.
John provides a good example of how he continues the inclusion work once employees
are on staff. Olivia recognized the importance of this as well, saying, “I try to bring a friend if
I’m ever invited to a speaking engagement, try to bring someone who might not be as
represented as me.” Laurie said she felt a sense of responsibility as an Asian woman to “be an
example in the room” representing a different voice. Jim explained his self-reflection process,
asking himself, “Are we supporting diversity and inclusion in our teams?” He held conversations
with his leadership team to identify gaps and create a plan to fill them, which led him to
intentional hiring practices.
Gathering and sharing information on other cultures were ways a few managers thought
they could contribute to a culture of inclusion. Louise noted that at her site, they held small
monthly celebrations for nationally recognized diversity awareness events, such as Hispanic
Heritage Month, Black History Month, and Veterans Day. Jerry, whose father served in the
military, said he made a point to bring diversity material into his staff meetings; as an active
member of multiple diversity councils and ERGs at his company, he was able to easily find
resources to share. Carl had been nominated for a two-day affinity group conference, with an
opportunity to share experiences with people who shared his ethnic background. Employee
resource and affinity groups are numerous at legacy aerospace defense organizations, but very
few managers talked about how they were connecting to them for support.

95
Self-efficacy
Whether managers had confidence in their ability to foster belonging in the workplace
was highly dependent on the individual. Some were emphatic about their abilities, while others
shared low levels of confidence in not just cultivating belonging, but in most things they did in
life. Kevin said, “I’m extremely confident” and wished he could reach more people than his
current sphere of influence. Jim said, “I have good confidence that I can build a good community
or a strong community.” Dave, a White male in his first management role, tied it back to
relationships, saying, “I feel it’s pretty high because I feel like I have good relationships with the
vast majority of people on the team.” Louise attributed her high level of confidence to how she
showed up at the workplace, saying, “I feel like if I’m my authentic self… I can create a space
where they feel comfortable, where I’m open to learning and open to learning about them.”
Laurie said, “I’m fairly highly confident in building that sense of belonging,” but she recognized
she felt less confident when the conversations turned technical, as she did not share the same
background as her direct reports.
Other managers either struggled with their confidence or could not tie their actions to
how they were cultivating belonging. Bill said, “I feel like it just happens with me. I mean,
maybe it’s how I operate things, how I communicate. I don’t know.” He described that in his
previous job, where he knew the employees as peers prior to becoming their manager, it was
easy to foster a sense of belonging based on his long-time relationships. Yet when he
intentionally moved to a new group where he did not know anyone, he said, “I had to ask myself,
did I change much about how I manage when I did that? And the answer is really no; I get to
know people pretty quick, and it’s kind of like family here too.” John said, “I think whatever I’ve
done over the last 2 years seems to be quite effective, at least for this group of people and this

96
environment.” He recognized the impact of both his individual employees and the bigger system
they operate in, and, unlike Bill, he may need to adjust how he cultivates belonging with a new
team in a different organization. Julianne shared something similar, saying, “My confidence is
high, but I think a lot of that is based on having a more senior, engaged team.”
Benjamin did not know how to evaluate if his efforts were effective. He said, “I know I
try hard, and it’s important to me, but I don’t know that I have a great metric to understand how
successful I am.” Richard thought his confidence hovered around “medium-high.” Brian, who
has been in management for 16 years, thought he might be getting in his own way of his selfefficacy, saying, “I think my personality can put a speed bump in me feeling super confident that
I’m instilling a sense of belonging.” Jerry worried about not doing enough, saying, “I could
probably, definitely be better in terms of recognizing people and probably do more.” Throughout
their interviews, these managers described efforts in line with the research indicating they were
quite good at cultivating a sense of belonging, but for some intrinsic reason, could not fully let
themselves believe it.
Goal Content
When asked if managers understood what was expected of them in supporting the DEI
goals of their company, they again talked about the hiring process and diversifying their
workforce. Additionally, many described the expectation of DEI as part of their day-to-day
performance. While the DEI goals of their companies may have been nebulous overall, managers
certainly understood that there was an expectation to treat everyone with respect and fairness and
to cultivate a positive working environment.
Louise said her organization “needed to get more female supervisors.” She also said she
is “encouraged to make sure we have a diverse hiring panel” made up of people of various stages

97
in their careers, different ethnicities, and backgrounds. She said her organization was “pretty
good” with the diverse interview panel, but “that’s kind of where it stops.” Laurie and Julianne
both described efforts for diverse interview panels and diverse candidate pools. Laurie said,
“There’s an emphasis that candidates are reviewed without prejudice or predisposed biases” and
that efforts to ensure “that interview panels have a diverse set of folks so they can bring different
perspectives and opinions.” Julianne’s expectations were focused on the candidate pool. She
explained that there was a requirement to have a diverse slate of candidates, and that after
reviewing resumes, she could either ask for a waiver if the candidate pool was too homogenous
or she could request additional candidates from HR. Since the waiver came with a three-month
waiting period, the easy choice was to continue to look for qualified candidates. This waiver and
waiting process is an effective way to incentivize managers to look for all possible candidates
rather than proceed with interviewing a subset that all have similar experiences. Jerry noted that
there were not only targeted efforts to increase representation in specific skill sets but there was
also an expectation that he retains these people once hired. He said, “making people feel
welcomed” was part of how he went about doing so. In this statement, Jerry acknowledges that
inclusion is a vital aspect of employee retention.
John described both overarching expectations in detail. He said of the daily DEI
expectation, “I can effectively have a team with a diverse populace and not have complete chaos,
not have people feel like they are ostracized or don’t belong or don’t get along with people.” He
continued that “that feels like a base requirement.” He then described the hiring efforts as an
“expectation that I at least make an attempt to diversify my candidate pool.” John explained that
the candidate pool expectation does not always align with other initiatives his organization is
promoting and that “it’s up to the first-line leaders to try to piece that puzzle together.” He

98
indicated that some managers may be successful in meeting all initiatives while others may
struggle with one or more. John concluded, “There’s all those expectations… but there’s not a
hard and fast point where they’re like, you’re not allowed to move forward.” Jim indicated that
the expectations on him were “to do the right thing” but that he wasn’t “being measured on it,
formally.” Emily linked her similar experience to a lack of training as a relatively new manager,
saying her organization “kind of doesn’t allow time to learn how to be a manager. To learn, what
does diversity mean? What does quality mean? What does inclusion mean? I don’t know that we
really do that.”
These experiences represent common, high-level expectations on managers to follow a
moral compass that is aligned with the company’s stated values and to use their judgment in
building their workplace culture. Bill, who has been in his current role for 3 years, summarized
this expectation, saying:
The expectations aren’t explicit, they’re more implicit in that you’re expected to have
diversity and inclusion in everything you do every day. And the way it would become a
problem is if it’s obvious you weren’t doing that. And then you’d get talked to about it.
Other managers described similar situations. Kevin said the expectation was “not being not
compliant,” but he continued with an example that focused on inclusion:
If you’re running a meeting [the expectation is] that everybody has the opportunity to
contribute and if you notice that I’ve got two people who tend to contribute everything,
but I’ve got some quiet people in the background, you try to find a tactful way to not
embarrass them, not call them out but how do you pull them into the discussion?
Dave had a similar perspective, saying, “I do think the expectation is that no one feels left out,
and that we’re watching out for those who may be quieter and making sure they feel encouraged

99
to speak up.” Brian said, “The expectation is that the same people are not getting the same
opportunities and we are inclusive of everybody.” These examples show how managers can
support employees once they are on payroll and cultivate an inclusive environment that will aid
in a sense of belonging. Ensuring all employees can have their voices heard or have equal
opportunity for assignments or promotions is a good first step in cultivating belonging. It is
unclear from the interview responses if managers felt comfortable in taking these actions or if
they would prioritize it over schedule or budget pressures.
Task Value
The final motivational factor that managers were queried about was what kept them in
their roles. For first-line managers, balancing the needs of their employees with the demands of
their superiors can be a never-ending challenge. Almost all managers said what satisfied them
most in their jobs was their ability to help and support their employees.
Olivia, a female manager with small children, was one participant who shared a personal
story that led her to her current career path. Ultimately, she did not feel valued by her
organization until a manager intentionally reached out to ensure she had what she needed to
succeed in her home life. She said, “We need more people who see the value of a person” and “I
stay because I want to do that for others. I want to be able to give back what I’ve learned and
been given.” Richard, who has been in the same role since he joined his company 8 years ago,
said, “I’ve got some really good employees and I feel like I owe it to them to take care of them.”
Emily said she believes in “giving back” through mentoring and helping others grow. Julianne,
who is new to her role, described why she loved her job, saying “A lot of that love is from being
able to help people.” Kevin said simply about developing people, “That’s my passion.”

100
Managers are getting satisfaction from supporting others, which is aligned with the theory and
practice of servant leadership.
Brian explained why people leadership was his chosen field, saying, “People are the
biggest challenge. I never get bored; they’re not straightforward no matter how much you want
them to be.” Brian said he would be happy managing people in any discipline because “you’re
always learning, you’re always figuring out new wins and new ways to connect.” Kevin
described his passion for developing people wherever he could, saying, “I’ve done it in the
government for a long time. I’m doing it here at this company. I do it on a soccer field.” These
examples demonstrate how some managers feel called to lead and develop others and why they
seek out similar opportunities outside of their work contexts.
Managers also talked about enjoying their roles because they were good at the job. John
said, “I feel like I’m more beneficial to my group as a leader than an engineer.” Jerry said, “I
think it’s something I’m good at… it’s a match for my skill set.” Carl said he “liked working
with people” and that the “people management aspect is not difficult, and I enjoy doing it.”
Management is a skill that can be developed just like any other, and establishing competence and
mastery of these skills is satisfying. Additionally, doing work one enjoys builds a sense of
confidence and self-efficacy, and for these managers, it gives them purpose within their
workgroups that they may not have found as an individual contributor.
Organizational Influences
The conceptual framework explored the cultural models and settings that would influence
managers’ ability to cultivate a sense of belonging. Models were interrogated from a core belief
standpoint, or how the organization demonstrates that it values something. Settings were

101
evaluated by reviewing what managers were incentivized to do and what resources were
available to them to succeed.
Cultural Setting: Incentives
When asked what attributes would get managers promoted to the next level, most either
laughed or let out a deep sigh, with the consensus being that there was no clear answer. Laurie, a
manager with 6 years of experience, exclaimed, “I have no idea!” While all participants
demonstrated a good understanding of the importance of cultivating a positive work
environment, very few mentioned it or strong people leadership as a part of the requirement or
desired qualities for the next level.
Olivia and Emily both said, “Yes Men,” those who tell the boss what they want to hear.
Olivia continued in her response, saying, “individuals who communicate they’re good at
execution” indicating that actual execution was less important than the perception of
performance. Richard disagreed, saying “high performers” got promoted, and noted that being
good at “engaging with people” was part of high performance. Jim thought success in the current
role would get noticed by senior leaders; Benjamin added “a good set of rigor” or an ability to do
it all. Laurie thought “ambition,” regardless of qualifications, would garner a promotion in her
organization. This vast range of responses may be representative of the range of organizations
represented by the managers interviewed, or it may be a reflection of overall unclear paths to
promotion across the industry.
One common response was the need to have a strong network and connections to aid in
promotions. Jerry said having “a background in working with that person” would help get to the
next level, and Louise, a White female, said, “It’s really who you know and who you impress,”
noting that “first impressions matter.” Good business sense and an ability to positively impact

102
the bottom line was another common response. Julianne thought “well roundedness, business
acumen and flexibility” were keys to managerial career growth in her company. Kevin, who has
been in his current role for 4 years, thought promotions all came down to whether someone could
“help increase our revenue stream” and that “everything else is an afterthought.” In their
responses, managers sometimes shared that they did not think any of the attributes above were
possible without putting their people first and ensuring the success of their direct reports. Emily,
with over 20 years of experience, summarized this sentiment, saying that “taking care of your
people” was the only way to succeed.
Some managers did explicitly note the need to utilize diversity and strong people
leadership skills on their path to promotion. They thought diversity of experience and diversity
of thought were both considerations of senior leaders as they identified talent to fill their teams.
Dave, a White male, said “They’re looking for the right cultural add to the team,” indicating that
it was unlikely he’d be chosen for a promotion if his new peer set all had the same opinions as he
did. Brian and Bill both said “diversity of thought” was important, coming to the same
conclusion that Dave did. Carl, who is new to his managerial role, was more specific, saying “a
diverse background” was needed, meaning experience in both people management and program
management. Brian said, “People leadership is huge!” while Frank described “servant
leadership” as the main attribute his management chain looked for. Benjamin tied it all together,
saying, “Understanding why diversity, equity, and inclusion is important and then making sure
your team is benefiting from a diverse team.” Benjamin makes an important distinction from all
the other responses, recognizing that it is not just having diversity on the team, but taking the
additional steps necessary to ensure that the culture is inclusive so that the workgroup can thrive.

103
Cultural Models
Two questions addressed the cultural models of the industry. The first asked managers if
they thought their leadership chain valued the work they did in cultivating a sense of belonging.
The second asked them to describe why or why not they thought their company valued DEI. Like
the incentives for promotion, managers’ responses varied across the spectrum.
Valuing Managers’ Efforts. Managers who believed their work to cultivate a sense of
belonging was valued thought as much because their supervisors had seen first-hand the benefits
of their labor. Brian recently had a new senior manager join his hierarchy, and after her first visit
to his site, he said, “I think that was her first opportunity to see it and realize why I’m in this
position or why her predecessor valued my contributions and leadership.” John, in his first
management role, has also received direct feedback that the culture he has created is appreciated.
He said, “When they visit, they’re very encouraged by the team cohesion, everyone working
together. I’ve heard it mentioned multiple times about the way the team works up here. So yeah,
I feel that is something I’m valued for.” Jim, who has been in his managerial role for 6 years, felt
his management chain recognized his ability to be an effective leader because of his efforts to
build relationships with his direct reports. He said, “I can get people on board” in challenging
situations, and that his focus on “open and honest feedback” is the key to why this works for
him. “I feel like my leadership chain values that aspect about me,” he said. Demonstrating the
value of their soft skills allowed managers to feel a sense of appreciation for more than executing
their daily work tasks.
Managers whose chain of command did not see first-hand the benefits of their efforts still
thought a sense of belonging was valued, but they also believed that their leadership did not
understand just how much work went into cultivating it. Benjamin, a White male, said, “I think

104
they value it; I don’t think they prioritize it.” He went on to say that if he were listing his top 10
accomplishments for the year, belonging wouldn’t be one of them. Along the same lines, Olivia
said, “I think a lot of people don’t realize that about 80% of what we do is personal, so I think
there’s a misalignment of the value of people and relationships.” Olivia continued, explaining
that the reason she is able to successfully execute her statement of work is because of the culture
she has created for her people. Jerry and Kevin both thought their managers did not appreciate
how much effort they put into their people and the culture. Jerry commented, “It takes time, and I
don’t know that that is always appreciated, the time it takes.” Kevin provided more detail,
saying, “I don’t think anybody appreciates the time, effort, and energy I put into these things or
the value proposition or the reach and the benefit that comes from it. It takes time. Not
everybody’s willing to give that time.” He described the kind of manager that was highlighted in
his organization’s newsletter, one that had a direct impact on new business or successful contract
execution, lamenting, “Not often do you see them calling out somebody who is a true leader in
the company developing people, promoting diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging.” All
these managers believe their own efforts to create a culture of inclusion is vital to their ability to
conduct their business, but they do not believe their leadership chain appreciates how much work
they are putting in. This mismatch in values can result in low morale for first-line managers, and
a missing sense of belonging within their organization, company or even the industry.
Valuing DEI. Participants were split on whether they believed their company valued DEI
overall. Some thought there was clear evidence that their company did while others did not at all.
Many thought their company did not value it for genuine or honorable reasons, but rather to say
that they did for the purpose of public relations.

105
Richard, Dave, and Jerry all noted that their companies had put significant resources
toward DEI efforts, and according to Jerry, “Your priorities often go hand in hand with what you
fund.” Dave said, “We see it in the mandatory training that’s being pushed through,” and Richard
added, “You talk about 125,000 people taking 10 hours of training and someone’s gotta pay for
that.” These managers all thought that because their company was putting in the time and money
to develop a training program and to have every employee complete it, that demonstrated their
commitment to the cause. Carl noticed a similar effort by his company saying he believed DEI
was valued because “I constantly hear about it.” He explained that the email communication and
the active website advertisement as an inclusive company meant that the company was putting
resources behind their beliefs. Jim agreed, saying, “It’s incorporated into our operating rhythm to
where we have regular discussions on diversity and inclusion” indicating his belief was based on
a demonstrated recurring display of commitment in taking time out of the workday for
discussion. John reflected on how past DEI efforts were coming to fruition, saying:
The five direct line leaders above me are all female, and I don’t think that would have
happened had [my company] not leaned into gender diversity some years ago. So,
whether they believe it or not, the policies they put in place have been effective.
However long it took for John’s organization to go from male dominated in the senior
management ranks to the situation he finds himself in now is irrelevant to him. For John, and
more importantly for John’s female employees, it is a time to celebrate representation and the
possibility of further diversification in the future.
Other managers, mostly women whose lived experience as the minority differs greatly,
were less enthused with their company’s DEI efforts. For example, Louise, Julianne, and Olivia
all thought the efforts were for optics and not for the benefit of underrepresented employees.

106
Louise said, “I can’t tell how much they value it because they truly see how it improves the
company or if they value it because it gives them a competitive edge” indicating that the appeal
of being a diverse and inclusive company can be marketed to lure both potential employees as
well as customers, regardless of any cultural transformation. Julianne did not question the intent,
but the comprehension of what the efforts entailed. She said, “I truly believe they want to be a
diverse company. The real question is what diversity means. The only metric we see on a regular
basis are people of color and women.” She recognizes that merely increasing representation of a
few demographics does not provide a complete solution. She continued, “I will say, I truly
believe they care about increasing the population of people of color and women. But I’m not
convinced of anything else.” Like Jerry noted his company funds what it values, Julianne
believed that the effort to track metrics indicates that the company values the outcome in that
realm. In comparison, not tracking any metrics regarding demographics beyond women and
marginalized employees indicates that the company is not interested in representation in those
categories. Olivia articulated her frustration with representation in the C-suite, saying, “I have
seen a few women in the C-suite. It would be nice to have more representation, not just in human
resources.” As the human resources field has historically been a field dominated by women
(Stych, 2019), Olivia’s observation is that elevating a woman to the highest level of a female
dominated field is not meaningful compared to a female leading a STEM centric part of the
organization. She does not believe her company should get credit for diversifying the C-suite
when they are still hiring the majority demographic of a given discipline.
Finally, a couple of managers expressed dismay in the overall value placed on DEI in
their company or even across the industry, and those who felt that way were passionate about it.
When asked if his company valued DEI, Brian, a White male, said, “I don’t; God’s honest truth,

107
I don’t.” He continued, “I don’t know that I completely buy into the conviction and the belief in
DEI that I’m looking for, that I’m hoping for.” Brian wanted to feel that his company valued
cultural transformation, rather than just see and hear the messaging. Given that he did not see it
demonstrated at all levels, he was not convinced. Louise’s personal experience is what drove her
skepticism. She said:
I thought it would get better as I got older, like all these older people who didn’t value
women or didn’t value a diverse background or education… they would start to retire,
and then new people would be all better than me in valuing diversity. So that was my
blind post. I was being ageist and just assumed it was because that’s how they were
raised and that was an older society and that this was a new concept, and all new people
would be on board.
Louise’s observation reflects the deep-seated cultural models of White supremacy culture. She
continued, “It’s not because of how people were raised or because they don’t know better. They
just don’t [value diversity].” Her experience as a female in an industry mired in beliefs of
paternalism, objectivity and productivity has resulted in not feeling valued or believing that her
organization respects or appreciates the emotional aspects that she brings to her role. Louise has
identified a generational issue within the industry, how beliefs can be perpetuated over time, and
how difficult it will be for effective cultural transformation.
Cultural Setting: Resources
Managers were asked two questions regarding their company’s resources for DEI. The
first was with regards to what training they had been to, and the second inquired about resources
available to support their company’s DEI goals. Overall, managers struggled to identify or
describe the training they had taken, though all were sure they had been through something.

108
From a resource standpoint, many described company websites, councils, ERGs and specific
people within their organization they could reach out to for support.
Training. Nearly two-thirds of managers could not initially identify formal DEI training
they had completed through their company, though after further reflection, some were able to
articulate something specific. Richard said, “I could not name any courses;” Brian said, “I don’t
remember, I would have to go look it up;” and Louise said, “I’m sure I have,” although she could
not remember if the training she took was through her company or through external professional
affiliations. Benjamin said, “I don’t recall formal DEI training,” and Bill said, “There are classes
that my company gives every year” but that he did not consider those “formal training.” Carl
said, “If I have [had training], I don’t remember what it was,” continuing that he did not believe
any DEI training was mandatory at his company. Kevin expected formal DEI training at his
company to be part of a leadership development curriculum which he did not participate in and
instead described the DEI training that he had been exposed to as “low level.” It is possible that
all these managers were confused by the wording of the interview question, and had “formal” not
been specified, they could have more easily identified classes their companies had offered.
However, the fact that nine out of sixteen managers initially could not describe any specific DEI
training they had taken as a manager is indicative of course material that is lackluster at best.
Those who could recall or articulate DEI training described online classes, either for the
individual or in a group setting. Olivia and Emily both recalled monthly videos their company
distributed. Olivia said they were “awesome” and that they “helped showcase some of the issues
you might see.” Emily was less animated, saying, “I think the company has made an attempt to
ensure DEI is enforced by having these group discussions with a video that the team will watch
and discuss” but she did not elaborate further on her memories of the discussions. Dave also

109
remembered video-centric DEI training in a group session, and specifically that, as a manager, he
had been put in a facilitator position without feeling qualified to be there. He said:
After George Floyd… we started having a number of those [videos] related to race where
we had questions, and it was one of those things where I was the facilitator. I wasn’t ever
supposed to be the one there with all the answers and made it really clear up front that I
wasn’t someone who had all the answers.
Managers are often asked to conduct group discussions from their position of leadership,
but do not also receive facilitator training to effectively do so. Dave’s approach to his situation
was to establish that, while he was leading the discussion, he was a peer when it came to
answering any questions. Richard recalled being on the receiving end of this facilitation, where
his manager needed to lead the DEI discussion, saying “Even before my current manager was
here, my last manager led multiple trainings that were required.” He was then expected to lead
the same course with his direct reports, providing him with only slightly more preparation than
Dave had received.
Resources to Support DEI. Finally, managers were asked about the resources available
to them to support their company’s DEI goals. The most common response was in reference to
the company website; some even opened it up during the interview to validate what they knew.
Olivia said she found monthly references on the website to bring to her staff meetings. Jerry,
Benjamin, Richard, Emily, Julianne, Brian, and Bill all pointed to the website without expanding
further on what they might look for once they got to it. Carl said, “we have an entire DEI website
with a number of different resources there that I haven’t looked at in a long time.”
Managers cited specific people they would reach out to for DEI support. Louise said her
company has an “ombudsman, so if you feel you’re being discriminated against,” there was an

110
avenue for accountability. However, she continued, “Most of us are just like, you know what I’m
just gonna vote with my feet and go someplace else” noting that people are more likely to leave a
discriminatory organization than “pitch a fit.” Laurie said she could reach out to her HR
counterparts but would not do so “unless there was a problem,” indicating that HR was there to
help solve issues once they arose but not help prevent them. Jim talked about his fellow
managers who were passionate about DEI that were willing to discuss the topic; he and John also
cited their recruiters that helped them in the hiring process as a resource.
ERGs, DEI or management councils, and employee engagement teams were all named as
resources managers could use. Laurie said, “we have an amazing engagement team” at her site;
John, who works in the same organization as Laurie, noted the engagement team as one of his
resources as well. Brian, explaining that he would rather talk to a human than go to a website,
said, “Our HR partners are amazing… and they host the people council and the DEI council.”
Julianne talked about the disabled employees ERG that she became a part of during COVID-19,
saying, “I did three of their book clubs… they had a lot more. I was encouraged to join from an
employee I had that was disabled.” She went on to describe that while she was not as active a
participant as she would have liked to be, she was pleased to see how active the group was and
how many resources they were able to provide for their members. As a manager, she periodically
reached out to the leaders of that ERG to ensure they have the resources they need to continue to
do their work, establishing a symbiotic relationship.
One theme that emerged from the resource discussion was that to maximize effectiveness
of all the materials available, managers must be deliberate in their actions. John said of his
company’s DEI efforts, “It’s not something I can sit back and watch happen. It requires me to
take very specific action.” He said his company had quite a lot of resources, but it was his

111
responsibility to “be knowledgeable to know when to pull on something to help.” Kevin said he
knew “exactly where to go” to get the material he needed for DEI support, but that he “couldn’t
spell them out” at the time of the interview. Julianne said of her company’s website, “I don’t
always consider it a major reference unless somebody else has kind of mentioned, ‘Oh, you
should go check this out.’” Richard’s response was similar; he said, “There’s a whole website
that we can go research,” indicating that while the materials were available, he needed to take the
initiative to seek them out. Frank, a White male who was born in the Middle East, took this
intentionality in his approach to ensuring DEI events were available to his workgroup. He said,
“We don’t like waiting for things to get funded, so for example we do potlucks where we bring
different foods and people share about the food, like where it came from.” He continued, “We
work with available resources to make sure we deliver the diversity and support diversity and
inclusion.”
Summary
This chapter reviewed the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences
that impact managers’ ability to cultivate a sense of belonging for their direct reports. Overall,
manager procedural knowledge aligns with previous research, specifically that of Zimmerman
(2021) and Kennedy and Jain-Link (2020). Goal content and expectancy outcomes were highly
focused on hiring women and people of color. Cultural models are still rooted in White
supremacy culture values, and the resources available to address them require deliberate
engagement. Chapter Five will address how each of these factors relates to the research questions
and provide both discussion and recommendations to support cultural transformation that will
enable large aerospace defense organizations to reap the benefits of a diverse workforce.

112
Chapter Five: Recommendations and Discussion
The final chapter of this dissertation contains a discussion of the findings based on the
interview data, as well as recommendations for practice and for future research. This study
collected qualitative data on 16 managers and their experiences in cultivating belonging in
legacy aerospace defense organizations. Furthermore, these managers provided their
understanding of their company’s DEI goals and how they felt empowered and supported, or not,
to achieve them.
The findings discussed in this chapter are grounded in the first two research questions,
first exploring strategies managers use to cultivate belonging for historically marginalized
employees. Then the knowledge, motivation and organizational influences that are affecting
managers’ ability to impact the industry’s DEI goals are examined, focusing on how managers
present their authentic selves in the workplace, as well as their perceptions and understanding of
the overall DEI goals of the industry. Recommendations for practice address the final research
question, with four tactical proposed solutions targeting mainly knowledge and organizational
influences. Knowledge gaps include a lack of understanding of the industry’s goals and a lack of
awareness of how inclusion and equity can be leveraged to amplify the effects of a diverse
workforce. Organization influences are centered around investments in ERGs, and dedicating
time and resources to enable cultural transformation from the first three recommendations.
Limitations and delimitations of this study are also addressed in this chapter, as are the
recommendations for future research.
Discussion of Findings
All the managers interviewed were able to clearly articulate the ways in which they
cultivate belonging for their employees. Many spoke of research-based approaches they used in

113
their daily interactions, often without realizing that what they were doing had been previously
validated as effective methods. However, very few managers discussed ways they altered their
approaches when working with employees from historically marginalized demographics. As this
topic was not explicitly prompted, managers who addressed it demonstrated an increased
awareness of systemic inequities and how those apply to DEI in their workplaces. That the
majority of managers did not talk about intentional efforts to ensure underrepresented employees
felt a sense of belonging indicates a knowledge gap in the industry.
Belonging for Underrepresented Employees
Managers who talked about different or additional tactics they used to cultivate belonging
for their underrepresented employees did so across three categories: making an effort to
empathize and understand the position of their minority employees, seeking out information on
how to better support them, and intentionally taking action to demonstrate an equitable
environment. Olivia noted the importance of using her position as a White woman to say when
something made her uncomfortable rather than putting the onus on her underrepresented
employees to speak up when they felt as much. Similarly, Julianne told a story of a Hasidic
Jewish man on her team who privately told her that popular culture references the rest of the
team understood made him feel left out; Julianne took actions to steer large group conversations
away from these references rather than announcing to the team that their colleague was
uncomfortable. These two examples demonstrate an understanding that further public
acknowledgment of differences can be isolating for employees who already have additional
barriers to finding belonging in a White and male-dominated industry. In this case, by taking
responsibility to speak on behalf of their employees, these two managers have recognized that

114
part of their leadership duties include ensuring everyone feels welcomed and included, not
singled out for their differences that do not fall within dominant cultural norms.
Another way managers cultivated belonging for underrepresented employees was to
understand how to effectively advocate for them. Olivia, Bill, and Richard all said that they
explicitly asked their employees how they could best advocate on their behalf. Taking the time to
understand each employee’s position demonstrates an ability to listen, empathize, and appreciate
the individual’s needs and desires. Some employees may prefer to advocate for themselves,
while others may not feel comfortable speaking up in a group where they are the only minority
demographic. The best way to determine this information is to simply ask. Managers are more
likely to get an honest answer from their employees after establishing a psychologically safe
environment where employees do not fear judgment or reprisal for being vulnerable and honest
in their responses. Furthermore, in asking employees how managers can support them, managers
have indicated that it is both accepted and encouraged to ask for what they need. White
supremacy culture has historically dismissed, belittled, or ignored the voices of those who
identify as women, Black, Indigenous, or Brown, those in the LGBTQ+ community, those with
disabilities, and those perceived to be overweight (Proudman, 2011). When managers challenge
these norms by encouraging employees to speak up and further demonstrate that employees’
voices are valued, managers aid in necessary cultural transformation.
Olivia described a gender-based situation in which she sought to establish an equitable
and inclusive environment. A parent herself, she worked with a male employee to plan out how
he would take the entirety of the parental leave included in his employment benefits. By doing
so, Olivia sought to disrupt the gender norms that surround parental expectations. Women still
bear the brunt of childcare duties, even when both parents are employed (Maume, 2008). By

115
ensuring that her male employee had the opportunity to take paid time off for childcare, Olivia
demonstrated her belief that a father should be equally involved and responsible for childcare
and that his wife was entitled to spend time focusing on her career after childbirth. By
advocating for her male employee in a situation where he may be expected to advocate for
himself–or to not utilize an employment benefit due to social norms–Olivia demonstrated her
belief in equity in a way that she hoped indicated to her employees that she would take actions in
other equity and inclusion beliefs.
Managers’ Authentic Selves
Managers were explicitly asked how they encouraged employees to be their authentic
selves. For most participants, showing up as their own authentic selves was one way they
encouraged this behavior in their direct reports. However, many interviewees discussed the
boundaries they set regarding how much authenticity and energy they brought to the workplace
and why they felt they needed to hold back. Some described the need for boundaries regarding
employee evaluations and avoiding favoritism, while others described an expectation from their
more senior management chain regarding how they present themselves to be taken seriously in
their roles. For example, Julianne described a training she had taken in which she was given
opportunities to reflect on how she wanted to present herself to different audiences within the
company. Based on this training, she adjusted which authentic parts of herself she shared with
her direct reports compared to those she shared with her peers and managers above her.
Julianne’s example raises the question of what true authenticity looks like for managers.
Many participants described a type of code switching they do throughout the day where they
present themselves differently depending on who they are interacting with and on the context.
Laurie described having her guard up when talking to individuals with whom she did not share a

116
sense of belonging. Managers who found a greater sense of belonging with their direct reports
than with their peers were also mindful of building relationships that would impact or influence
their biases during performance evaluations. Some participants explicitly recognized that their
own sense of belonging would increase if they were to bring more of their authentic selves to the
workplace. However, they still held back in doing so to create boundaries in their professional
relationships or to reduce the emotional toll their role took on their overall well-being. Managers
are often overloaded with both people and program responsibilities, and in fast-paced work
environments, they also deal with emergent issues every day. To fully give oneself to each of
these tasks creates an emotional strain that is unsustainable; managers must choose which
activities to fully invest in, a process that ebbs and flows with the workload throughout the year.
The final piece related to managerial authenticity is the idea of a workgroup operating as
a team or a family. Effective managers work to ensure cohesiveness and collaboration among
their employees and to create a culture where their direct reports feel welcomed, included, and
valued. Investing in the individual is an effective way to increase employee engagement, and
developing tight-knit workgroups with close personal bonds can improve productivity. However,
large, legacy organizations that are focused on generating profits and shareholder value do not
consider individual employees as teammates or family members when financial times get tough
and layoffs are used to balance the books. First generation employees may be more shocked than
others when their seemingly caring manager delivers the news that their position within the
company has been cut and that their tenure at the company has ended. While managers want
their employees to feel like they are part of the team or family, they recognize their role as an
agent of the company and the associated financial responsibility to support the needs of
shareholders.

117
Industry DEI Goals
When asked to articulate their company’s DEI goals, many managers were initially at a
loss for words. Without clearly communicated goals, employees cannot be expected to achieve
them. Further, without an end state, organizational resources cannot be efficiently or effectively
allocated to support these goals. As they considered their organizations, managers generally
identified their company’s goals to include increasing the representation of women and people of
color. Representation for employees with disabilities, those in the LGBTQ+ community, or
neurodiverse employees were not mentioned as part of the industry’s goals, leaving out a huge
population of potential candidates. Participants described increasing representation at the
executive levels to be a bigger focus for their organization than to increasing it within individual
contributors; there was no hard requirement to ensure a diverse candidate was considered at the
working level. Legacy aerospace defense companies have historically hired first-line managers
from their engineering ranks, thereby creating their own future pipeline issue by focusing on top
management ranks without giving the same attention to their STEM workforce.
Managers were also focused on increasing diversity of thought in their workgroups, with
more than one indicating that military experience or a different engineering skill would provide
it. Yet since these two demographics are predominantly White and male, this approach to
diversification misses the opportunity to add employees to the team who have a truly different
lived experience; it also continues to center the White male employee. Using military or alternate
engineering experiences as diversity of thought does not encourage hiring managers to fully
consider or reflect on their position of power and how they could use it to promote cultural
transformation in their organizations. For effective change, the industry must stop pretending that

118
a diverse pipeline can be magically identified and leveraged using the current networking and
recruiting tactics.
Addressing the pipeline for both STEM employees and industry leadership requires a
cultural shift in how employees are recruited and retained. The current STEM education pipeline
as well as the military pipeline, especially the senior military officials who retire and are then
hired by the general industry, is still homogenous from a race and gender perspective and
continues to leave out the voices of employees of color and women. While seeking out diverse
professional experiences will increase the diversity of thought to some extent, the tactic of
pulling from homogenous pools of candidates continues to center and promote the views of
White male employees. Solutions to the STEM education pipeline will not be found by focusing
on colleges and universities, or even in high schools; data show that as early as elementary
school, girls lose interest in math and science due to western cultural influences (Cohen et al.,
2021). Similarly, pulling from military backgrounds will not address diversity of thought, even if
candidates are racially or socioeconomically diverse; the military intentionally trains its ranks to
assimilate to a single, able-bodied, White male norm (Gamble, 2020; Pawelczyk, 2021).
As discussed in Chapter Four, Olivia and Bill’s organization acted on metrics that
showed their retention of women engineers was below the company’s average. The actions they
took involved asking women–many who had been highlighting this problem for years to no
avail–to participate in workshops and roundtables to identify solutions. While women like Olivia
may be thrilled that their opinions are finally being sought out and their stories valued, others
may feel that the emotional labor has been unfairly thrust upon them to fix a problem that they
did not create. Asking women or marginalized employees to explain how and why they have
been oppressed levies undue burden and additional unpaid work on these demographics. There is

119
a fine line between giving someone a voice and asking them to solve a problem that is beyond
their sphere of influence or their statement of work, and to properly respect the voices of
minority populations, organizations must ensure they are not on the oppressive side of this line.
Resources to support the industry’s nebulous goals were identified to be human resource
and talent acquisition organizations, those centered on hiring practices. Little to no responses
from interviewees discussed resources to increase equity or inclusion within the workplace,
which are both pertinent facets to retaining these marginalized employees that the hiring
practices attempt to target. For managers wanting to educate themselves, ERGs and colleagues
who valued diversity were the most sought-after resource; neither of these resources are formal
or company funded.
When people of varied backgrounds are collected in one place, cultural transformation
does not happen on its own, and often institutionalized resistance occurs in organizations where
the roots of White supremacy culture run deep (Agocs, 1997). Bill described the expectations
with regards to DEI levied upon him to be implicit and that only an egregious misstep would be
noticed. What is interesting about the paradigm that Bill describes is that the people who are
monitoring his diversity and inclusion performance are most likely other White men in
managerial positions of power (Ram & Fuller, 2022). As the majority demographic, White men
are much less likely to notice a lack of diversity or inclusion, especially in other teams mainly
made up of White males. Further, White men have the most to lose if DEI efforts are truly
effective, since they are the ones generally in positions of power; the purpose of DEI is to upend
these long-standing power structures and give those in the minority demographics a voice and a
seat at the table (Agocs, 1997). Thus, it is in the best interest of White men to not notice when
and where DEI is lacking.

120
Particularly in legacy aerospace defense organizations, employees from historically
marginalized populations may find themselves feeling like a fish out of water, which is quite the
opposite of a sense of belonging. Intentional and systematic approaches to increasing an
inclusive culture are necessary to shift the overall thinking of the organization. These approaches
must address both individuals in the industry as well as the institutions.
Recommendations for Practice
The aerospace defense industry supports a customer base that is often on the cutting edge
of technology, developing products so unique that they must be protected by government
security classification. Government contracts are generally on aggressive schedules and tight
budgets, creating more need for industry partners to find creative solutions that meet both time
and money constraints. If employees are not engaged, they are less likely to personally succeed
and are more likely to negatively impact the success of the entire project or group. Managers as a
whole agreed that belonging was strongly tied to employee engagement; a culture of inclusivity
is the basis for a sense of belonging.
Creating a sense of belonging for underrepresented employees requires the industry’s
DEI goals to align with this task. Goals must then be tied to behavioral drivers (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016). One way to accomplish this is through policy. For example, if the industry
has a goal to increase the representation of women in the management ranks, policy must align
with this goal. However, as of late 2023, return to office decrees were increasing across many
major companies, including those in the aerospace defense industry (Gates, 2023). For example,
Emily noted that her organization recently called all managers back into the office full time. As
previously noted, women are still responsible for the majority of childcare and housework,
regardless of their employment status (Del Boca et al., 2020). Barring drastic social change,

121
corporate policy that reduces flexibility for women is also apt to reduce their presence in the
office as they opt for jobs that enable them to be both employees and mothers. Dictating that
managers be in the office full time but allowing engineers and other individual contributors to
continue pandemic-era hybrid work, will exacerbate the gender gap in higher-level leadership
positions or drive ambitious women to leave the industry for more flexible options.
Participants spoke of how they needed to be intentional in their DEI efforts, and this must
be reflected in recommendations for the industry. A passive approach to any one facet of DEI
will not result in an end state of increased belonging. Not only do managers need to be
intentional in their actions, but they must also be incentivized to choose this purpose-driven path
and provided with sufficient education to understand appropriate actions. By connecting the
industry goals with behavioral drivers and training opportunities, large aerospace defense
companies can reap the benefits of proven learning and development strategies (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016).
The recommendations are aligned with Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis and the
conceptual framework. The key stakeholder for these recommendations is the senior leadership
in legacy aerospace defense organizations who have sufficient authority to implement change.
The recommendations align with knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences.
Together, the recommendations describe tactical steps the industry can take to work towards
cultural transformation and a sustainable change that not only center the voices and experiences
of historically marginalized employees but enable true diversity of thought that leads to
increased innovation.

122
1. Knowledge & organizational influence (cultural models): Managers cannot articulate the
end state or vision of the industry as with regards to DEI; this represents a knowledge gap
for managers as well as the lack of value the industry places on DEI goals.
2. Knowledge: DEI training is myopically focused on hiring practices, but does not include
education on equity, inclusion, or belonging; the benefits of a diverse workforce will not
be realized without taking additional steps.
3. Organizational influence (cultural resources): Informal communication, employee-led
resource groups, and personal education were all cited as the main sources of DEI-related
material; investing in and leveraging these informal networks will have a positive impact.
4. Organizational influence (cultural models): Transformation requires time and energy; the
industry must commit to the long-term goals and provide sufficient resources to succeed.
Recommendation 1: Clearly Define and Communicate Goals
The first step towards increasing belonging in the workplace is for companies to clearly
define and communicate what the desired end state will look like. Currently, managers
understand the DEI-related goals of their organizations to be an increase in representation for
women and people of color. However, this does not reflect an end state in which the benefits of
increased representation will be realized, nor is it fully inclusive of many marginalized
demographics such as those with disabilities or neurodivergent employees. Most importantly, it
does not acknowledge the potential harm that marginalized employees may experience by
entering a workplace that is not fully inclusive (Russen & Dawson, 2023). Aerospace defense
organizations should aim for cultural transformation in which voices of historically marginalized
populations feel a sense of equity and inclusion in the workplace and are comfortable sharing
their opinions. Achieving these goals will require complex and resource-intensive efforts, as

123
most meaningful cultural changes do. However, without clearly defined goals, it will be
impossible to allocate resources effectively or efficiently. Defining an end state that supports an
increase in diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging is the first step in reaching those goals.
Clearly defined goals enable the development of a roadmap to the end state, providing
direction and focus for the stakeholders. Using the roadmap, progress can be tracked, and
resources allocated; celebrating milestones along the way can increase motivation. Without
clearly defined goals, managers are more likely to engage in activities, intentional or not, that do
not align with the desired outcomes (Clark & Estes, 2008). In the current understanding of goals,
managers are only aiming to achieve a representation milestone, not the end state that will result
in equitable practices or increased performance (Byrd & Sparkman, 2022). Increasing
representation of marginalized employees is a worthy and attainable goal, but limiting DEI
efforts to this as an end state does not necessarily provide an equitable or inclusive environment
for these employees, nor does it enable the organization to reap any benefits of increased
diversity (Russen & Dawson, 2023).
Recommendation 2: Provide Training on Equity and Inclusion
Diversity training for managers was generally unmemorable. The majority of managers
were sure they had been through some kind of training with their company but could not
articulate or describe it. A small subset of participants described videos or senior manager-led
discussions that enabled them to put language to the concepts in DEI. Some pointed to hiringrelated DEI training, such as recognizing biases, and many described additional company
resources that helped them in the hiring process to increase the diversity of the candidate pool.
Managers did generally agree that the training they did receive, however enigmatic it was,
increased awareness of the topic and provided an opportunity to reflect on their part in it.

124
The benefit of this DEI training seems to be more effective for White men in the industry,
as it conveys information that marginalized employees already understand through their lived
experiences, a phenomenon described by female and managers of color. The training not only
promotes deeper awareness regarding biases and language, but it also brings the voices of
marginalized employees to the center of the conversation and enables their experiences to be
heard by more people (Shore et al., 2018). While the conversation is still very focused on
increasing representation rather than on cultural transformation, White male managers like
Richard, John and Frank found the delivery methods useful in furthering the dialogue. Training
sessions need to be considered for the equity and inclusion aspects of cultural transformation
(Russen & Dawson, 2023).
Effective training modules need to align with the desired behavioral drivers and,
ultimately, the desired outcomes (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Training sessions should
provide not only knowledge and skills, but also attitudes, confidence, and commitment to the
training outcomes. Knowledge is the participants’ intellectual understanding of the material; skill
is the ability to apply that knowledge to a task. Attitude is the belief that the acquired knowledge
and skills will be useful when participants return to their work environment. Confidence
measures whether participants believe they will be capable of applying the knowledge or skill,
and commitment is the participants’ willingness and intent to apply it in their daily work.
Course evaluations should also measure participants’ reactions. As current training
sessions are mostly unmemorable, it is unlikely that participants have learned much. While an
ineffective measure of outcomes, the reaction measure still holds value: enjoyment, engagement
and relevance have all been positively correlated to learning outcomes (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016).

125
Training focused on all three elements of DEI should be spread throughout the year and
should be based in the creation of spaces in which employees can make mistakes, have
meaningful dialogue, and share their experiences (Gill et al., 2018). Diversity content that
continues to focus on the importance of increasing representation should not be abandoned but
augmented with information regarding the importance of representation and the energy required
for cultural transformation (Byrd & Sparkman, 2022; Johnson et al., 2019; Pietri et al., 2017).
Equity training should highlight the systemic inequities marginalized employees face in
obtaining access to higher education and reaching the interview stage of the hiring process
(Velasco & Sansone, 2019). Inclusion training can incorporate both the microaggressions that
marginalized employees face as well as address head on how White male dominated
organizations center the experiences of their majority demographic (Shore et al., 2018).
Recommendation 3: Network Differently
ERGs, optional DEI committees, and personal connections were all listed as resources
that managers used to increase their knowledge base. Managers needed to be intentional about
finding these assets within the company as many were not formally advertised or necessarily
endorsed. For example, managers listed their colleagues who were passionate about DEI topics
as reliable sources they would seek out for information rather than investigating official
company channels.
ERGs are often employee-led, with little financial support from the organization. Benefits
of ERGs include increased engagement through a sense of belonging and increased access to
mentors due to networking opportunities (Cenkci et al., 2019). No current data for participation
rates in ERGs are available; the last viable rate was 8.5% in 2011 (Hastings, 2011); assuming
that the participation rate rose at the same rate that representation of women and racial minorities

126
has increased in STEM since 2011 (NSF, 2022), the current participation rate is likely close to
17%. Organizations that provide nominal resources to these groups are likely to see increased
benefits through participation.
Networking must be intentional, or it is liable to continue to be segregated and
homogenous (McDonald 2011; McPherson, 2011). Encouraging and incentivizing White men to
engage with ERGs and professional societies that represent marginalized employees can be
impactful if White people actively leverage their own networks in support of their marginalized
colleagues. Of course, the same can be said for White women engaging with societies that
represent people of color. When engaging, White people must also be aware of their
positionality, be open to listening and learning, and be prepared to not be the central voice in the
conversation.
To continue bringing the topics of diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging into the
forefront of managers’ minds, resources must be easily accessible and readily available.
Leveraging passionate employees to help create content to share enables both the previous goal
as well as encourages and validates these employees’ contributions to the workplace. Sharing
content, making DEI a part of daily conversation, and encouraging others to take an active role in
cultivating a sense of inclusion and belonging keep the momentum going beyond just increasing
representation.
Recommendation 4: Stay Committed to Change
Cultural transformation takes significant time, energy, and financial resources to realize.
While implementing the first three change recommendations, significant transformation will not
instantly follow. Following the 2020 Summer of Racial Reckoning, C-suite positions focused on
DEI were created across a multitude of industries, including aerospace defense. The demise in

127
popularity of these positions was almost as swift as their rise (Chen & Weber, 2023). As
discussed in Chapter Two, these positions were often given ambiguous charters, little resources,
and an unrealistic expectation for large change in short timeframes–assuming companies knew
what change they were targeting. Organizations must stick to their commitments and the purpose
of these positions, providing support to the chief diversity officer role through monetary
resources and embracing the long-term dedication required to enact change (Goldstein et al.,
2022). Further, aligning the goals of other C-suite charters to include DEI will create a level of
accountability across the organization. As previously mentioned, ensuring company policies
support the desired end state is paramount.
Addressing the pipeline of marginalized employees is another lengthy but worthwhile
process. As discussed in Chapter Two, recruitment at HBCUs is on the rise. Of the legacy
aerospace defense organizations, Boeing appears to be leading the industry with a $6 million
investment in 2018 and an $8 million investment in 2023 to the Thurgood Marshall College
Fund (TMCF) to intentionally develop the talent pipeline from a set of preferred HBCUs
(Boeing, 2022; TMCF, 2022). The reinvestment in 2023 indicates a strong return from the 2018
investment. The partnership between Boeing and TMCF provides access to internships with
monetary bonuses for completion, participation in an immersive experience at Boeing, access to
mentorship and coaching from leaders within the company, and an entry level position upon
graduation (TMCF, 2022). In return, students are expected to be ambassadors on their campuses
for the partnership.
Implementing changes like those above is a step towards greater transformational change,
but it is only one of many steps. Transformation requires a fundamental shift in how an
organization operates, and its impact is widespread (Ashkenas, 2015). Change is an external

128
trigger to an organization that will initiate a response to address a specific issue (Bridges &
Mitchell, 2000). To transition through changes and reach a transformative state, individuals
within the organization must process their intellectual and emotional responses to the change and
shift their mindset to align with the new direction and focus. Recognition of current power
structures must be addressed, and resistance is likely from those who are in a position to lose
power in the transformation. In legacy aerospace defense organizations, this will mean
addressing the aspects of White supremacy culture that centers and values the White male
experience over all others.
Limitations and Delimitations
The underlying delimitation of this study was the purposeful and snowball sampling of
managers in a people leadership role, with at least five direct reports overseeing a STEM-based
statement of work. The data from this study are bound by the experiences of people managers in
the aerospace defense industry within five large, legacy organizations. These results may be
transferable to other large corporations but are not intended to be universal. Time constraints
limited the number of total interviews; other relevant aspects of these large organizations, either
based on geography or specific departments, may have been revealed through further
investigation.
Participant interactions led to limitations of the study. Conducting interviews virtually
made picking up on nuances a challenge, especially since many interviewees were not in a
position to use their cameras and their interviews were audio only. Both the interviewer and
interviewee brought some level of bias, either acknowledged or not, to the conversation that may
impact the data collected. While efforts were made to establish rapport and increase
trustworthiness, participant responses could not be controlled for truthfulness or accuracy, nor

129
could any underlying biases that may have impacted their responses. For example, it is possible
that my positionality as a White woman asking questions about DEI influenced participants’
answers, especially those who identified as White. Interview questions were chosen for their
targeted investigation of the knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors that influence
managers’ ability to cultivate belonging, based on the conceptual framework.
Recommendations for Future Research
This study centered the voices of managers in the aerospace defense industry, and only
those in large, legacy organizations. Many of those managers identified as White and male,
representative of the industry demographics. Three areas of future research emerged based on the
literature review and the evaluation of participant interview data.
First, future research that centers the voices of marginalized employees in large, legacy
corporations should investigate what these employees need to feel a sense of belonging in the
workplace. Employees who identify as women, Black, Indigenous, or Brown, those in the
LGBTQ+ community, those with disabilities, those who are neurodivergent, and those perceived
to be overweight are the experts on their own lived experiences and are, therefore, uniquely
qualified to describe the barriers they’ve faced to a fully inclusive culture in the workplace. Gap
analysis in manager knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences can only be truly
meaningful when input to the end state is gathered from all stakeholders specifically those who
are most affected.
Second, comparative studies in other industries are a topic for future research. The
aerospace defense industry is distinct due to its close ties with military customers and the
influence of military culture. Large, legacy organizations exist in other sectors as well; many
companies are also dominated by the White, male demographic. For example, the automotive

130
industry in the United States is mainly comprised of three of these companies; similarly, the
banking industry has just four large corporations. It is plausible that these other industries are as
resistant to change and slow to enact cultural transformation as this current study determined,
leaving myriad employees from feeling a sense of belonging in their workplace.
Finally, future research should investigate the impact of manager assimilation in large,
legacy organizations and its implications for managers’ ability to encourage their employees to
be fully authentic. This study found that managers held back from being their whole, authentic
selves in the workplace either to maintain emotional distance from employees whose
performance they needed to evaluate, or to present a more professional, promotable appearance
to their superiors. If managers are not truly themselves, is it possible for them to be fully
accepting of their colleagues? More importantly, as employees pick up on managers’ reticence,
will they be willing to be vulnerable and fully authentic?
Conclusions
The purpose of this study was to investigate managers’ ability to cultivate a sense of
belonging for their employees, especially those from marginalized demographics, with the goal
of educating large, legacy aerospace defense organizations on ways to improve this ability. This
study was important because marginalized employees in these organizations continue to be
valuable contributors to the products and services of the industry, despite waning interest in DEI
among the greater public. More importantly, these employees have just as much to a right to a
sense of belonging as their White, male counterparts do. Across the board, participants agreed
that an employee who felt a sense of belonging would be more engaged, more collaborative, and
overall, more productive in their work.

131
As an antecedent to the effective cultivation of belonging, the industry’s DEI practices
were included in this study. Managers could generally not articulate the industry’s goals in this
realm other than an effort to increase representation of women and people of color; participants
offered little to no input on their company’s efforts to create an inclusive environment or to
address equity issues related to the hiring process. This aspect of the study is important because
cultural transformation and a sense of belonging for marginalized employees will not magically
appear while the majority of employees are still White men unaware of their position of power.
Intentional actions to center the voices, experiences, and needs of marginalized employees is a
necessary step down the long road of transformation. Organizations must both clearly define and
subsequently commit to their DEI goals; in companies that are plagued by White supremacy
culture, these goals are likely to feel lofty and unreachable. Perhaps if these goals were easily
attainable, these organizations would not know just how far they could push themselves in the
fight for equality in the workplace.
Finally, Managers described how they assimilated to the norms of White supremacy
culture in their organizations and ways they refrained from bringing their full, authentic selves in
the workplace. This assimilation process prevents true diversity of thought, regardless of
managers’ backgrounds and lived experiences. The impact of this is two-fold: managers do not
feel a sense of belonging in the workplace, and the diverse ideas and perspectives they bring to
the conversation are not heard and cannot be acted on. Ultimately, this leads to attrition of the
talented marginalized employees that DEI efforts seek to attract and retain, as well as continues
to center the White, male voices of the current leadership demographics.
The large, legacy aerospace defense companies are not demonstrating that they value
diversity of thought, and until they do so are poised to become stale and outdated. Companies

132
with homogenous employee perspectives will never evolve in their line of thinking, resulting in a
loss of innovation and a deteriorating customer base. To stay relevant in this fast-moving
industry and to maintain the interests of national security, these organizations must not only
embrace, but intentionally seek out, the diversity of thought that White supremacy culture and
institutional resistance has encouraged them to fear and control.

133
References
Agocs, C. (1997). Institutionalized resistance to organizational change: Denial, inaction and
repression. Journal of business ethics, 16, 917-931.
Anderson, G. (2021). A Case Study of Employee Engagement in the Aerospace Manufacturing
Industry. [Doctoral dissertation, Northcentral University]. ProQuest Dissertations
Publishing.
Appelbaum, S. H., Deguire, K. J., & Lay, M. (2005). The relationship of ethical climate to
deviant workplace behaviour. Corporate Governance: The international journal of
business in society.
Aragão, C. (2023, March 1). Gender pay gap in U.S. hasn’t changed much in two decades. Pew
Research Center. Retrieved March 29, 2023, from
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2023/03/01/gender-pay-gap-facts/
Ashikali, T., Groeneveld, S., & Kuipers, B. (2021). The role of inclusive leadership in
supporting an inclusive climate in diverse public sector teams. Review of Public
Personnel Administration, 41(3), 497-519.
Ashkenas, R. (2015, January 15). We Still Don’t Know the Difference Between Change and
Transformation. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved January 21, 2024, from
https://hbr.org/2015/01/we-still-I-know-the-difference-between-change-and-transform
ation
Ayala, M. J., Carter, J. K., Fachon, A. S., Flaxman, S. M., Gil, M. A., Kenny, H. V., ... &
Volckens, J. (2021). Belonging in STEM: an interactive, iterative approach to create and
maintain a diverse learning community. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 36(11), 964-967.
Babapour Chafi, M., Hultberg, A., & Bozic Yams, N. (2022). Post-pandemic office work:

134
Perceived challenges and opportunities for a sustainable work environment.
Sustainability, 14(1), 294.
Badri, S. K. Z., Yap, W. M., & Ramos, H. M. (2022). Workplace affective well-being: gratitude
and friendship in helping millennials to thrive at work. International Journal of
Organizational Analysis, 30(2), 479-498.
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: desire for interpersonal
attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological bulletin, 117(3), 497.
Bayer, P., & Charles, K. (2018). Divergent paths: A new perspective on earnings differences
between black and white men since 1940. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 133(3),
1459-1501.
Bertrand, M., & Mullainathan, S. (2004). Are Emily and Greg more employable than Lakisha
and Jamal? A field experiment on labor market discrimination. American economic
review, 94(4), 991-1013.
Blum, S. (2022, July 6). Getting workers back to the office is proving difficult for these large
companies. HR Brew. Retrieved March 11, 2023, from https://www.hrbrew.com/stories/2022/07/06/getting-workers-back-to-the-office-is-proving-difficult-forthese-large-companies
Boeing (n.d.). Helping Our People Soar. Boeing Benefits. Retrieved March 19, 2024, from
https://www.boeingbenefits.com/candidate/candidate.html
Boeing (2022). Boeing–Thurgood Marshall College Fund Partnership. Retrieved July 16,
2023, from https://jobs.boeing.com/TMCF
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Chapter 4: Qualitative data. In Qualitative research for
education: An introduction to theories and methods (5th ed.) (pp. 117-129). Boston,

135
MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Brown, B. (2017). Braving the Wilderness. Penguin Random House LLC.
Bridges, W., & Mitchell, S. (2000). Leading transition: A new model for change. Leader to
leader, 16(3), 30-36.
Bureau of Labor Statistics (2023, May 5). Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population
Survey. United States Department of Labor. Retrieved May 13, 2023, from
https://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea13.htm
Burkholder, G. J., Cox, K. A., Crawford, L. M., & Hitchcock, J. H. (Eds.). (2019). Chapter 10:
Interviewing essentials for new researchers. In Research Design and Methods: An
Applied Guide for the Scholar-Practitioner (pp. 147-159). Sage.
Byrd, M. Y., & Sparkman, T. E. (2022). Reconciling the business case and the social justice
case for diversity: A model of human relations. Human Resource Development Review,
21(1), 75-100.
Callwood, K. A., Weiss, M., Hendricks, R., & Taylor, T. G. (2022). Acknowledging and
supplanting white supremacy culture in science communication and STEM: the role of
science communication trainers. Frontiers in Communication, 35.
Caniëls, M. C., Semeijn, J. H., & Renders, I. H. (2018). Mind the mindset! The interaction of
proactive personality, transformational leadership and growth mindset for engagement at
work. Career development international.
Casad, B. J., Petzel, Z. W., & Ingalls, E. A. (2019). A Model of Threatening Academic
Environments Predicts Women STEM Majors’ Self-Esteem and Engagement in STEM.
Sex Roles, 80(7-8), 469-488. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-018-0942-4
Cenkci, A. T., Zimmerman, J. M., & Bircan, T. (2019). The Effects of Employee Resource

136
Groups on Work Engagement and Workplace Inclusion. The International Journal of
Organizational Diversity, 19(2), 1.
Census Bureau. (2020, 15 December). Census Bureau Releases 2020 Demographic Analysis
Estimates. [Press Release].
https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2020/2020-demographic-analysisestimates.html
Center for Disease Control. (2020.) Disability and Health Overview. Retrieved April 9, 2023,
from https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/disabilityandhealth/disability.html
Chang, A., Martin, R., & Marrapodi, E. (2020, August 16). Summer Of Racial Reckoning. NPR.
Retrieved March 16, 2023, from
https://www.npr.org/2020/08/16/902179773/summer-of-racial-reckoning-the-match-lit
Chen, T. P., & Weber, L. (2023, July 21). The Rise and Fall of the Chief Diversity Officer. Wall
Street Journal. Retrieved March 19, 2024, from
https://www.wsj.com/business/c-suite/chief-diversity-officer-cdo-business-corporations-e
110a82f
Chin, C. (2019). The concept of belonging: Critical, normative and multicultural. Ethnicities,
19(5), 715-739.
Ching, H. Y., Fang, Y. T., & Yun, W. K. (2022). How New Nurses Experience Workplace
Belonging: A Qualitative Study. SAGE Open, 12(3).
Cialdini, R., Li, Y. J., Samper, A., & Wellman, N. (2021). How bad apples promote bad barrels:
Unethical leader behavior and the selective attrition effect. Journal of Business Ethics,
168, 861-880.
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right

137
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Cohen, S. M., Hazari, Z., Mahadeo, J., Sonnert, G., & Sadler, P. M. (2021). Examining the effect
of early STEM experiences as a form of STEM capital and identity capital on STEM
identity: A gender study. Science education, 105(6), 1126-1150.
Congressional Budget Office. (2023, January 11). Long-Term Implications of the 2023 Future
Years Defense Program. Congressional Budget Office. Retrieved May 12, 2023, from
https://www.cbo.gov/publication/58579
Creswell, J., & Creswell, J. (2018). Research Design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed
methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA; Sage.
Davis, L., Ahn, B., Dong, Y., & Campbell, R. N. (2020, June). Factors that affect retention and
satisfaction among newly hired aerospace engineers. In ASEE annual conference.
Deloitte (2022, May 17). The Deloitte Global 2022 Gen Z and Millennial Survey. Retrieved
March 12, 2023, from
https://www.deloitte.com/global/en/issues/work/genzmillennialsurvey.html
Demographics Report. (2021). 2021 Demographics: Profile of the Military Community. Military
One Source. Retrieved March 15, 2023, from
https://download.militaryonesource.mil/12038/MOS/Reports/2021-demographics-report.
Pdf
Del Boca, D., Oggero, N., Profeta, P., & Rossi, M. (2020). Women’s and men’s work,
housework and childcare, before and during COVID-19. Review of Economics of the
Household, 18, 1001-1017.
Denier, N., & Waite, S. (2019). Sexual orientation at work: Documenting and understanding
wage inequality. Sociology Compass, 13(4), e12667.

138
Derous, E., & Ryan, A. M. (2019). When your resume is (not) turning you down: Modelling
ethnic bias in resume screening. Human Resource Management Journal, 29(2), 113-130.
DeSmet, A., Dowling, B., Mugayar-Baldocchi, M., & Schaninger, B. (2021, September 8).
‘Great Attrition’ or ‘Great Attraction’? The choice is yours. McKinsey & Company.
Retrieved March 7, 2023, from
https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/people-and-organizational-performance/our-insig
hts/great-attrition-or-great-attraction-the-choice-is-yours
De Vincenzi, C., Pansini, M., Ferrara, B., Buonomo, I., & Benevene, P. (2022). Consequences
of COVID-19 on Employees in Remote Working: Challenges, Risks and Opportunities
An Evidence-Based Literature Review. International Journal of Environmental Research
and Public Health, 19(18), 11672.
Dixon-Fyle, S., Doyle, K., Hunt, V., & Prince, S. (2020, May 19). Diversity wins: How
inclusion matters. McKinsey. Retrieved May 13, 2023, from
https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/diversity-and-inclusion/diversity-wins-howinclusion-matters
DoD Civilian Careers (n.d.). Engineering. DOD Civilian Careers. Retrieved March 16, 2023,
from https://www.dodciviliancareers.com/engineering
DoD STEM (2023). DoDSTEM. Department of Defense. Retrieved March 16, 2023, from
https://dodstem.us/
Donahoo. (2023). Working with style: Black women, black hair, and professionalism. Gender,
Work, and Organization, 30(2), 596–611. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12838
Elci, M., Şener, İ., Aksoy, S., & Alpkan, L. (2012). The impact of ethical leadership and
leadership effectiveness on employees’ turnover intention: The mediating role of work

139
related stress. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 58, 289-297.
Farr, M. (2018). Power dynamics and collaborative mechanisms in co-production and co-design
processes. Critical Social Policy, 38(4), 623-644.
Feeko, P., & Fuller, S. (2021, December 15). 2021 Aerospace and Defense (A&D) workforce
study. EY. Retrieved March 29, 2023, from
https://www.ey.com/en_us/aerospace-defense/2022-aerospace-and-defense-workforcestudy
Ferdman, B. M. (2017). Paradoxes of inclusion: Understanding and managing the tensions of
diversity and multiculturalism. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 53(2),
235-263.
Fernandez, R. M., & Fernandez-Mateo, I. (2006). Networks, race, and hiring. American
sociological review, 71(1), 42-71.
Flory, J. A., Leibbrandt, A., Rott, C., & Stoddard, O. (2021). Increasing workplace diversity
evidence from a recruiting experiment at a Fortune 500 company. Journal of Human
Resources, 56(1), 73-92.
Forecast International. (2023, February 22). Top 100 Defense Contractors 2022. Retrieved
March 10, 2023, from https://dsm.forecastinternational.com/wordpress/2023/02/22/top100-defense-contractors-2022/
Galenianos, M. (2014). Hiring through referrals. Journal of Economic Theory, 152, 304-323.
Gallimore, R. & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
31(1), 45-56.
Gamble, D. R. (2020). Toward a racially inclusive military. The US Army War College

140
Quarterly: Parameters, 50(3), 7.
Garamone, J. (2022, March 28). Fiscal 2023 Budget Funds Military for Today, Future. DOD
News. Retrieved March 16, 2023, from
https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/Article/2980669/fiscal-2023-budget
-funds-military-for-today-future/
Gates, D. (2023, December 13). Boeing shifts policy, wants all employees back in the office full
time. Seattle Times. Retrieved January 21, 2024, from
https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/boeing-shifts-policy-wants-all-e
mployees-back-in-the-office-full-time/
General Dynamics. (2024). Benefits. General Dynamics. Retrieved March 19, 2024, from
https://www.gd.com/careers/benefits
Georgeac, O. A., & Rattan, A. (2023). The business case for diversity backfires: Detrimental
effects of organizations’ instrumental diversity rhetoric for underrepresented group
members’ sense of belonging. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 124(1), 69.
Gill, G. K., McNally, M. J., & Berman, V. (2018, September). Effective diversity, equity, and
inclusion practices. In Healthcare management forum (Vol. 31, No. 5, pp. 196-199).
Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.
Green, J., & Hand, J. (2021). Diversity Matters/Delivers/Wins Revisited in S&P 500 Firms.
Social Science Research Network. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3849562
Goldstein, D., Grewal, M., Imose, R., & Williams, M. (2022, November 18). Unlocking the
potential of chief diversity officers. McKinsey. Retrieved February 8, 2023, from
https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/people-and-organizational-performance/our-insig
hts/unlocking-the-potential-of-chief-diversity-officers

141
Gordon, A. (2023). You just need to lose weight: And 19 other myths about fat people. Beacon
Press.
Goswami, P. (2015). Employee value proposition: a tool for employment branding. International
Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, 5(12), 263-264.
Gould, J., & Losey, S. (2022, October 31). Labor shortage still pinching aerospace and defense
sector. Defense News. Retrieved March 16, 2023, from
https://www.defensenews.com/industry/2022/10/31/labor-shortage-still-pinchingaerospace-and-defense-sector/
Grant, A. (2021). Think again: The power of knowing what you don’t know. Penguin Group
(USA) LLC.
Graham, R. J. (1980). Management Science Process–On the Death of Theory Y. Interfaces,
10(3), 76-79.
Green, J., & Hand, J. (2021). Diversity Matters/Delivers/Wins Revisited in S&P 500 Firms.
Social Science Research Network. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3849562
Guillory, M. E. (2001). Civilianizing the force: is the United States crossing the Rubicon? Air
Force Law Review, 111+.
Haldorai, K., Kim, W. G., Phetvaroon, K., & Li, J. (2020). Left out of the office “tribe”:
The influence of workplace ostracism on employee work engagement. International
Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 32(8), 2717-2735.
Hall, N. (2011). " Give It Everything You Got": Resilience for Young Males Through Sport.
International Journal of Men's Health, 10(1).
Hastings, R. (2011, February 15). Employee Resource Groups Drive Business Results. Society
of Human Resource Management. Retrieved July 16, 2023, from

142
https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr-topics/behavioral-competencies/global-andcultural-effectiveness/pages/employeegroupsdrivebusinessresults.aspx
Henly, M., & Brucker, D. L. (2020). More than just lower wages: intrinsic job quality for
college graduates with disabilities. Journal of Education and Work, 33(5-6), 410-424.
Herspring, D. R. (2011). Creating shared responsibility through respect for military culture: the
Russian and American cases. Public Administration Review, 71(4), 519-529.
Hewlett, S. A., Marshall, M., & Sherbin, L. (2013). How diversity can drive innovation.
Harvard business review, 91(12), 30-30.
Hofstra, B., Kulkarni, V. V., Galvez, S. M.-N., He, B., Jurafsky, D., & McFarland, D. A. (2020).
The Diversity–Innovation Paradox in Science. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences - PNAS, 117(17), 9284–9291.
Hodson, J., Jackson, S., Cukier, W., & Holmes, M. (2018). Between the corporation and the
closet: Ethically researching LGBTQ+ identities in the workplace. Equality, Diversity
and Inclusion: An International Journal, 37(3), 283-297.
Holmes, J., & Marra, M. (2002). Having a laugh at work: How humour contributes to workplace
culture. Journal of pragmatics, 34(12), 1683-1710.
Hudson, M. (2021). The Interrelationship between the Millennial Generation’s Aerospace Work
Engagement and Their Employer Retention [Doctoral dissertation, Pepperdine
University]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
Hunt, V., Layton, D., & Prince, S. (2015, January 1). Why diversity matters. McKinsey.
Retrieved May 13, 2023, from
https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/people-and-organizational-performance/our-insig
hts/why-diversity-matters

143
Hunt, V., Yee, L., Prince, S., & Dixon-Fyle, S. (2018, January 18). Delivering through diversity.
McKinsey. Retrieved May 13, 2023, from
https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/people-and-organizational-performance/our-insig
hts/delivering-through-diversity
Inoue, Y., Wann, D. L., Lock, D., Sato, M., Moore, C., & Funk, D. C. (2020). Enhancing older
adults’ sense of belonging and subjective well-being through sport game attendance,
team identification, and emotional support. Journal of Aging and Health, 32(7-8), 530-
542.
Irving, J. A. (2005). Servant leadership and the effectiveness of teams. Regent University.
Johnson, I. R., Pietri, E. S., Fullilove, F., & Mowrer, S. (2019). Exploring identity-safety cues
and allyship among black women students in STEM environments. Psychology of
Women Quarterly, 43(2), 131-150.
Jones, K., Arena, D., Nittrouer, C., Alonso, N., & Lindsey, A. (2017). Subtle Discrimination in
the Workplace: A Vicious Cycle. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 10(1),
51-76.
Jones, N., Marks, R., Ramirez, R., & Ríos-Vargas, M. (2021, August 12). 2020 Census
Illuminates Racial and Ethnic Composition of the Country. U.S. Census Bureau.
Retrieved April 21, 2023, from
https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2021/08/improved-race-ethnicity-measures-reveal
-united-states-population-much-more-multiracial.html
Kaiser, C. R., Major, B., Jurcevic, I., Dover, T. L., Brady, L. M., & Shapiro, J. R. (2013).
Presumed fair: ironic effects of organizational diversity structures. Journal of personality
and social psychology, 104(3), 504.

144
Kearney, E., & Gebert, D. (2009). Managing diversity and enhancing team outcomes: the
promise of transformational leadership. Journal of applied psychology, 94(1), 77.
Kelloway, E. K., & Day, A. L. (2005). Building healthy workplaces: what we know so far.
Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du
comportement, 37(4), 223.
Keller, S. B., Ralston, P. M., & LeMay, S. A. (2020). Quality output, workplace environment,
and employee retention: the positive influence of emotionally intelligent supply chain
managers. Journal of Business Logistics, 41(4), 337-355.
Kennedy, J., & Jain-Link, P. (2020). The Power of Belonging. Coqual. Retrieved March 16,
2023, from
https://coqual.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/CoqualPowerOfBelongingKeyFindings09
0720.pdf
Ketzner, L., Aaronson, M., & Juliano, L. (2019, June 4). How Women Can Help Close the
Talent Gap in Aerospace and Defense. Boston Consulting Group. Retrieved March 16,
2023, from https://www.bcg.com/publications/2019/women-close-talent-gap-aerospacedefense
Kim, J. Y., & Meister, A. (2022). Microaggressions, interrupted: The experience and effects of
gender microaggressions for women in STEM. Journal of Business Ethics, 1-19.
King, E. B., Mendoza, S. A., Madera, J. M., Hebl, M. R., & Knight, J. L. (2006). What's in a
name? A multiracial investigation of the role of occupational stereotypes in selection
decisions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36(5), 1145-1159.
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick's four levels of training evaluation.
Association for Talent Development.

145
Kochan, T., Bezrukova, K., Ely, R., Jackson, S., Joshi, A., Jehn, K., Leonard, J., Devine, D., &
Thomas, D. (2003). The effects of diversity on business performance: Report of the
diversity research network. Human Resource Management: Published in Cooperation
with the School of Business Administration, The University of Michigan and in alliance
with the Society of Human Resources Management, 42(1), 3-21.
Konrad, A., Prasad, P., & Pringle, J. K. (2006). Handbook of workplace diversity. SAGE.
Korte, R., & Lin, S. (2013). Getting on board: Organizational socialization and the contribution
of social capital. Human relations, 66(3), 407-428.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into practice,
41(4), 212-218.
Krivkovich, A., Liu, W. W., Nguyen, H., Rambachan, I., Robinson, N., Williams, M., & Yee, L.
(2022, October 18). Women in the Workplace 2022. McKinsey & Company. Retrieved
March 12, 2023, from
https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/diversity-and-inclusion/women-in-the-work
place
Kulkarni, M., & Lengnick-Hall, M. L. (2014). Obstacles to success in the workplace for people
with disabilities: A review and research agenda. Human Resource Development Review,
13(2), 158-180.
Kyzer, L. (2023, February 8). National Security Career Predictions for 2023. Clearance Jobs.
Retrieved March 13, 2023, from
https://news.clearancejobs.com/2023/02/08/national-security-career-predictions-for-2023/
Landivar, L. (2013, September). Disparities in STEM Employment by Sex, Race, and Hispanic

146
Origin. US Census Bureau. Retrieved March 10, 2023, from
https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2013/acs/acs-24.html
Leekha Chhabra, N., & Sharma, S. (2014). Employer branding: strategy for improving employer
attractiveness. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 22(1), 48-60.
Li, P., Chen, X., & Yao, Q. (2021). Body Mass and Income: Gender and Occupational
Differences. International journal of environmental research and public health, 18(18),
9599.
Liu, Y., & Keller, R. T. (2021). How Psychological Safety Impacts R&D Project Teams’
Performance: In a psychologically safe workplace, R&D project teams perform better,
more readily share knowledge and engage in organizational citizenship behavior, and are
less likely to leave. Research-Technology Management, 64(2), 39-45.
Lockheed Martin (2024). A Career That's Built For You. Lockheed Martin. Retrieved March 19,
2024, from https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/careers/why-lm/LM_Benefits.html
Lorenzo, R., Voigt, N., Tsusaka, M., Krentz, M., & Abouzahr, K. (2018, January 23). How
Diverse Leadership Teams Boost Innovation. Boston Consulting Group. Retrieved
February 8, 2023, from
https://www.bcg.com/publications/2018/how-diverse-leadership-teams-boost-innovation
Manley, K., Sanders, K., Cardiff, S., & Webster, J. (2011). Effective workplace culture: the
attributes, enabling factors and consequences of a new concept. International Practice
Development Journal, 1(2), 1-29.
Marra, M. (2022). Laughing along?. The European Journal of Humour Research, 10(2),
135-151.
Martinez, A., & Christnacht, C. (2021, January 26). Women Making Gains in STEM

147
Occupations but Still Underrepresented. United States Census Bureau. Retrieved March
21, 2023 from https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2021/01/women-making-gains-instem-occupations-but-still-underrepresented.html
Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. (3rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks: SAGE.
Maume, D. J. (2008). Gender differences in providing urgent childcare among dual-earner
parents. Social Forces, 87(1), 273-297.
McCallaghan. (2022). Work-place diversity climate: Its association with racial microaggressions
and employee work-place well-being. Journal of Psychology in Africa, 32(6), 560–568.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14330237.2022.2121476
McCausland, T. (2023). Creating Psychological Safety in the Workplace. Research-Technology
Management, 66(2), 56-58.
McDonald, S. (2011). What's in the “old boys” network? Accessing social capital in gendered
and racialized networks. Social networks, 33(4), 317-330.
McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social
networks. Annual review of sociology, 27(1), 415-444.
Meidav, N. (2021). Ethical behavior is the antidote to toxic culture. Strategic HR Review.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. (4th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Marginalize. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary. Retrieved May 2,
2023, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/marginalize
National Science Board (2023). The State of U.S. Science and Engineering 2022. National

148
Science Foundation. Retrieved March 16, 2023, fromhttps://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/
nsb20221/data
National Science Foundation (2022). Science and Engineering Degrees Earned. National
Science Foundation. Retrieved July 16, 2023, from
https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsf23315/report/science-and-engineering-degrees-earned#over
all-s-e-degrees-earned-by-underrepresented-minorities
NBSE. (2023). Career and College Fairs. National Society of Black Engineers. Retrieved
March 19, 2024, from https://convention.nsbe.org/career-fair-list/
Nelson, S. (2023). The Relationship between Leadership Styles and Work-Life Balance of
Millennials in Virtual Work Settings] Doctoral dissertation, Alliant International
University]. ProQuest Dissertation Publishing.
Neville, H. A., Oyama, K. E., Odunewu, L. O., & Huggins, J. G. (2014). Dimensions of
belonging as an aspect of racial-ethnic-cultural identity: An exploration of indigenous
Australians. Journal of counseling psychology, 61(3), 414.
Ng, E. S., Sears, G. J., & Arnold, K. A. (2021). Exploring the influence of CEO and chief
diversity officers' relational demography on organizational diversity management: An
identity-based perspective. Management Decision, 59(11), 2583-2605.
Northouse, P. G. (2022). Leadership: Theory and practice. Sage publications.
Northrop Grumman. (2024). Total Rewards and Benefits. Northrop Grumman. Retrieved March
19, 2024, from https://www.northropgrumman.com/who-we-are/total-rewards-benefits
Okrent, A., & Burke, A. (2021, August 31). The STEM Labor Force of Today: Scientists,

149
Engineers, and Skilled Technical Workers. National Science Board. Retrieved March 10,
2023, from https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20212/participation-of-demographic-groups-instem
Okun, T., & Raffo, S. (n.d.). A conversation about white supremacy and belonging. [Video].
White Supremacy Culture. Retrieved March 7, 2023, from
https://www.whitesupremacyculture.info/what-is-it.html
Østergaard, C. R., Timmermans, B., & Kristinsson, K. (2011). Does a different view create
something new? The effect of employee diversity on innovation. Research policy, 40(3),
500-509.
Özçelik, G. (2015). Engagement and retention of the millennial generation in the workplace
through internal branding. International Journal of Business and Management, 10(3), 99.
Patrick, H. A., & Kumar, V. R. (2012). Managing workplace diversity: Issues and challenges.
Sage Open, 2(2), 2158244012444615.
Pearson, N., Godwin, A., & Kirn, A. (2018, October). The effect of diversity on feelings of
belongingness for new engineering students. In 2018 IEEE Frontiers in Education
Conference (FIE) (pp. 1-7). IEEE.
Peters, J. (2023, February 17). Amazon is the latest company to bring staff back to the office
three days a week. The Verge. Retrieved March 11, 2023, from
https://www.theverge.com/2023/2/17/23604485/amazon-return-to-office-three-days-aweek
Phillips, K. W., Medin, D., Lee, C. D., Bang, M., Bishop, S., & Lee, D. N. (2014). How
diversity works. Scientific American, 311(4), 42-47.
Pietri, E. S., Hennes, E. P., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V. L., Bailey, A. H., Moss-Racusin, C. A.,

150
& Handelsman, J. (2019). Addressing unintended consequences of gender diversity
interventions on women’s sense of belonging in STEM. Sex Roles, 80, 527-547.
Pintrich, P. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 667–686.
Post, C., & Byron, K. (2015). Women on boards and firm financial performance: A
meta-analysis. Academy of management Journal, 58(5), 1546-1571.
Proudman, B. (2011). The Roots of White Male Culture: From the British Isles Through the
American Prairie to the Boardroom. White Men as Full Diversity Partners. Retrieved
March 12, 2023, from
https://wmfdp.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/roots-of-white-men-culture.pdf
Ram, R., & Fuller, S. (2022, October 11). 2022 Aerospace and Defense (A&D) workforce study.
EY. Retrieved February 26, 2023, from
https://www.ey.com/en_us/aerospace-defense/2022-aerospace-and-defense-workforcestudy
Randel, A. E., Galvin, B. M., Shore, L. M., Ehrhart, K. H., Chung, B. G., Dean, M. A., &
Kedharnath, U. (2018). Inclusive leadership: Realizing positive outcomes through
belongingness and being valued for uniqueness. Human Resource Management Review,
28(2), 190-203.
Reina, C. S., Rogers, K. M., Peterson, S. J., Byron, K., & Hom, P. W. (2018). Quitting the boss?
The role of manager influence tactics and employee emotional engagement in voluntary
turnover. Journal of leadership & organizational studies, 25(1), 5-18.
Roehling, P. V., Roehling, M. V., Vandlen, J. D., Blazek, J., & Guy, W. C. (2009). Weight
discrimination and the glass ceiling effect among top US CEOs. Equal Opportunities

151
International, 28(2), 179-196.
Rosenberg M. & McCullough B. C. (1981). Mattering: Inferred significance and mental health
among adolescents. Research in Community & Mental Health, 2, 163-182.
RTX. (2024). Our Benefits. Raytheon Technologies Corporation. Retrieved March 19, 2024,
from https://careers.rtx.com/global/en/benefits
Rubin, M., Paolini, S., Subašić, E., & Giacomini, A. (2019). A confirmatory study of the
relations between workplace sexism, sense of belonging, mental health, and job
satisfaction among women in male‐dominated industries. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, 49(5), 267-282.
Russell, R., & Stone, G. (2002). A review of servant leadership attributes: developing a practical
model. Leadership & Organization Development Journal. 23(3), 145-157.
Russen, M., & Dawson, M. (2023). Which should come first? Examining diversity, equity and
inclusion. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 36(1), 25-40.
Samuel, M. O., & Chipunza, C. (2009). Employee retention and turnover: Using motivational
variables as a panacea. African journal of business management, 3(9), 410.
Serenko, A. (2022). The Great Resignation: the great knowledge exodus or the onset of the
Great Knowledge Revolution?. Journal of Knowledge Management, (ahead-of-print).
Sharp, J. (2022). Workplace Belonging in the Public Service Sector [Doctoral dissertation,
William James College]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
Shore, L. M., Cleveland, J. N., & Sanchez, D. (2018). Inclusive workplaces: A review and
model. Human Resource Management Review, 28(2), 176-189.
Singh, B., Winkel, D. E., & Selvarajan, T. T. (2013). Managing diversity at work: Does
psychological safety hold the key to racial differences in employee performance?.

152
Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 86(2), 242-263.
Slepian, M. L., & Jacoby-Senghor, D. S. (2021). Identity threats in everyday life: Distinguishing
belonging from inclusion. Social psychological and personality science, 12(3), 392-406.
Steiner, S., Cropley, M., Simonds, L., & Heron, R. (2020). Reasons for staying with your
employer: Identifying the key organizational predictors of employee retention within a
global energy business. Journal of occupational and environmental medicine, 62(4),
289-295.
Sturm, S. (2006). The architecture of inclusion: Advancing workplace equity in higher
education. Harv. JL & Gender, 29, 247.
Stych, A. (2019, February 27). HR professionals are overwhelmingly white women. The
Business Journals. Retrieved March 18, 2024, from
https://www.bizjournals.com/bizwomen/news/latest-news/2019/02/hr-professionals-areoverwhelmingly-white-women.html
Sull, D., Sull, C., & Zweig, B. (2022). Toxic culture is driving the great resignation. MIT Sloan
Management Review, 63(2), 1-9.
SWE (2023). List of Committed Exhibitors. Society of Women Engineers. Retrieved March 19,
2024, from https://we23.swe.org/exhibitor-sponsor/list-of-committed-exhibitors/
TCMF (2022). Boeing - TCMF Scholar Program. Thurgood Marshall College Fund. Retrieved
July 16, 2023, from
https://www.tmcf.org/students-alumni/corp-scholar-programs/boeing-scholar-program/
United States Department of Defense. (28 May, 2021). The Department of Defense Releases the

153
President’s Fiscal year 2022 Defense Budget [Press Release].
https://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/45/Documents/defbudget/FY2022/FY2022_Press
_Release.pdf
Valasik, M., & Reid, S. E. (2021). The Alt-Right Movement and US National Security.
Parameters (Carlisle, Pa.), 51(3), 3.
Velasco, M., & Sansone, C. (2019). Resistance to diversity and inclusion change initiatives:
Strategies for transformational leaders. Organization Development Journal, 37(3), 9-20.
Vujko, A., Vuković, D., Demirović Bajrami, D., Zečević Stanojević, O., & Zečević, L. (2022).
The Nexus between Employee Engagement and Performance Management
Processes–Fruška Gora National Park (Serbia) Case Study. Sustainability, 14(18),
11489.
Vyas, L. (2022). “New normal” at work in a post-COVID world: work–life balance and labor
markets. Policy and Society, 41(1), 155-167.
Wang, C. N., Nguyen, X. T., Le, T. D., & Hsueh, M. H. (2018). A partner selection approach for
strategic alliance in the global aerospace and defense industry. Journal of Air Transport
Management, 69, 190-204.
Waters, S. (2021, May 11). Here’s how to build a sense of belonging in the workplace. Better
Up. Retrieved March 9, 2023, from https://www.betterup.com/blog/belonging
Widner, D., & Chicoine, S. (2011, December). It’s all in the name: Employment discrimination
against Arab Americans 1. In Sociological Forum (Vol. 26, No. 4, pp. 806-823). Oxford,
UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Yang, Y., & Carroll, D. W. (2018). Gendered Microaggressions in Science, Technology,
Engineering, and Mathematics. Leadership and research in Education, 4, 28-45.

154
Yeardley, T. (2017). Training of new managers: why are we kidding ourselves?. Industrial and
Commercial Training, 49(5), 245-255.
Yogeeswaran, K., & Dasgupta, N. (2010). Will the “real” American please stand up? The effect
of implicit national prototypes on discriminatory behavior and judgments. Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(10), 1332-1345.
Zimmerman, N. (2021). What matters most: a grounded theory of belongingness at work.
[Doctoral dissertation, University of Canterbury]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.

155
Appendix A: Interview Protocol
The following script will be used for the interviews, which are to be conducted over
Zoom. Interviewees are managers with a minimum of five direct reports in a STEM field within
the aerospace defense industry. The parentheses indicate conceptual framework and are for
researcher notes only; they will not be shared with the interviewees.
Introduction
Thank you for agreeing to be interviewed. The purpose of the study is to explore the
effect of a manager’s ability to cultivate a sense of belonging through the lens of diversity,
equity, and inclusion. I am looking to understand your experience and your perspective of the
subject; there are no right or wrong answers to these questions. I’ll ask questions about what you
know about belonging, what drives you in your role as a manager, and about the environment
you work in.
The information you give me is confidential and I will be using a pseudonym to help
disassociate any of your answers from your real identity. Your information will not be shared
with anyone beyond my dissertation committee (using the pseudonym). Your responses will be
stored on a password protected computer that only I have access to, and will be destroyed when
this study is complete. The interview will take about an hour, and you can end it at any point, or
decline to answer any questions you do not wish to address.
I would like to record our conversation so that I can create a transcript to refer back to,
and the recording will be deleted. I will also be taking notes as we talk. May I have your
permission to record our conversation? Do you have any questions or do you need any
accommodations before we begin?

156
Opening Questions
“I’m going to start by asking you a few questions about yourself.”
(Demographic) How long have you been a people manager?
(Demographic) How long have you been in your current manager role?
(Demographic) Are your employees onsite, hybrid or fully remote?
(Demographic) What gender do you identify as?
(Demographic) What race or ethnicity do you identify as?
Transition
“Thank you; next I will ask you a few questions about belonging in the workplace”
1. (knowledge: factual) How would you describe a feeling of belonging in your workplace?
Prompt (knowledge: conceptual): How do you think belonging relates to diversity, equity,
inclusion and belonging, if at all?
Prompt (knowledge: conceptual): How do you think belonging impacts employee
engagement, if at all?
Prompt: Do you feel like you belong in your workplace or in your workgroup? Why or
why not?
2. (knowledge: procedural) Next I’m going to ask you a series of questions about how you
cultivate belonging in your workplace as a leader.
a. What do you do to make people feel seen and appreciated?
b. How do you support your employees in their day to day roles?
c. How do you support your employees in their career growth?
d. How do you instill a sense of pride in your employees?
e. How do you encourage interpersonal connections amongst your employees?

157
f. What do you do to encourage your employees to be their authentic selves at work?
Prompt (cultural model): As an employee, do you feel that your leadership chain
values the aspects from this last series of questions?
3. (motivation: self-efficacy) Tell me about your level of confidence in your ability to foster
a sense of belonging in your current role.
Prompt: Can you give me an example from the last time you actively tried to cultivate
belonging?
“Thank you; now we’re going focus on your organization’s diversity, equity, and inclusion
efforts”
4. (knowledge: factual) Tell me about your organization’s DEI goals.
Prompt (cultural setting: resources): Have you had any formal DEI training, and what did
that look like?
5. (knowledge: metacognition) How has the DEI training you’ve received changed the way
you think about how you can contribute to the organization’s goals, if it has at all?
6. (motivation: goal content) Tell me about the leadership expectations placed on you in
your current role as they relate to DEI.
Prompt: How realistic does this feel to you?
7. (motivation: expectancy outcome) How do you see yourself contributing to the DEI goals
of your organization?
8. (cultural model) From your perspective, how do you know the company values DEI, if
you think they do at all?
9. (cultural settings: resources) What resources are available to you to support the
organization’s DEI goals?

158
“Just two more general questions:”
10. (motivation: task value) What motivates you to stay in your managerial role?
11. (cultural settings: incentives) What attributes do you think your organizational leaders are
looking for when they promote into senior and executive management?
Conclusion
That is the end of my questions for you. Do you have anything else to add that we did
not cover?
Thank you for taking the time to speak with me today. I really appreciate your insights
on the subject and your willingness to share your experiences and opinions. If I have any follow
up questions as I go over all my interview notes, is it ok if I contact you for clarification
questions? And is email the best way to do so?
Can you recommend anyone that would like to participate in this study?
Please reach out if you think of anything else you’d like to add, or if you have any
questions. Thank you for your time.

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The role of executives’ knowledge and motivation in enabling organizational supports for diversity, equity, and inclusion

PDF

For DEI practitioners of color who’ve considered leaving when the rainbow isn’t enough: the impact of DEI fatigue on the retention of Black women in big tech

PDF

The role of organizational leaders in creating sustainable diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in the workplace

PDF

The failure to attract and hire Millennials and Gen Zs within the U.S. aerospace & defense industry creates workforce scarcity

PDF

Post-secondary distance education: cultivating a sense of belonging through teaching presence

PDF

A thriving culture of belonging: organizational cultural intelligence and racial minority retention

PDF

Identifying diversity solutions for the cybersecurity workforce shortage: a phenomenological qualitative study

PDF

The case for leader self-reflection in the workplace

PDF

Leadership psychological safety: exploring its development and relationship with leader-member exchange theory

PDF

Belonging matters: exploring the impact of social connectedness on the academic success of immigrant and refugee children in the American school system

PDF

Canaries in the mine: centering the voices of Black women DEI practitioners in a period of DEI resistance

PDF

“Black” workplace belonging: an examination of the lived experiences of Black faculty sense of belonging factors in community colleges

PDF

The underrepresentation of Black women general officers in a U.S. military reserve component

PDF

Diversity management in local government: a gap analysis

PDF

Minding the gender gap: self-efficacy and women senior leadership roles in banking

PDF

Black leaders: the unicorns of the biopharmaceutical industry

PDF

"We belong": women of color in technology (WOCT)

PDF

Understanding queer leadership in corporate America

PDF

Experience of belonging for full-time hybrid physical therapy faculty

PDF

“A thread throughout”: the KMO influences on implementing DEI strategic plans in state and municipal governments

Asset Metadata

Creator Potter, Jennifer Lyn (author)

Core Title Cultivating workplace belonging through managerial impact

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2024-05

Publication Date 04/15/2024

Defense Date 02/29/2024

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

Tag aerospace defense,belonging,DEI,diversity equity inclusion,gap analysis,KMO,OAI-PMH Harvest,White supremacy culture

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Kim, Esther (committee chair), Canny, Eric (committee member), Pritchard, Marcus (committee member)

Creator Email jeny.potter@gmail.com,potterje@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC113872069

Unique identifier UC113872069

Identifier etd-PotterJenn-12811.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-PotterJenn-12811

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Potter, Jennifer Lyn

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20240415-usctheses-batch-1140 (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