University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Underemployment among U.S. military veterans in the private sector after transitioning from the military

(USC Thesis Other)

Underemployment among U.S. military veterans in the private sector after transitioning from the military

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Underemployment Among U.S. Military Veterans in the Private Sector After Transitioning
From the Military
Cody Paul Marcus
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 Cody Paul Marcus 2024
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Cody Paul Marcus certifies the approval of this Dissertation
Richard Grad
Lawrence Picus
Maria Ott, Committee Chair
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2024

iv
Abstract
This study examined the transition of veterans from military service to employment in the private
sector, focusing on addressing gaps in existing research regarding the challenges veterans face,
particularly in relation to how private sector workplaces perceive them. Framed by social identity
theory (Islam, 2014; Ruben & LaPiere, 2022), self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1977), and
stereotype threat theory (Inzlicht & Schmader, 2012; Steele, 2011; Sue, 2003), this study utilized
qualitative interviews to describe the lived experiences of 10 military veterans who have
transitioned into private sector employment. The findings revealed common themes, including
veterans feeling stereotyped as violent, hesitating to disclose their military background or any
associated challenges like a disability or PTSD, and experiencing a sense of alienation due to
perceived militaristic traits. Based on these insights, this study offers practical recommendations
to enhance awareness among employers, emphasize non-financial incentives for hiring veterans,
and dispel misconceptions about them. Additionally, it proposes avenues for further research,
such as identifying specific obstacles and successes in the transition process, exploring ways to
support veterans earlier in their journey, and documenting lessons learned to inform broader
strategies for addressing the challenges veterans encounter in the private sector workforce. By
highlighting the nuanced experiences of veterans navigating the transition to civilian
employment, this study contributes to a more comprehensive understanding of the barriers they
face and provides valuable insights for both practice and future research aimed at supporting
their successful integration into the private sector workforce.
Keywords: private sector employment, transitioning veterans, social identity theory, selfefficacy theory, stereotype threat theory, unconscious bias, military transition

v
Dedication
To my incredibly intelligent, beautiful, free-spirited daughter, Kendall Shea. I am beyond
grateful for your patience and understanding. You have given me incredible motivation to
accomplish this goal and to improve myself every day. I hope you learn from this that anything is
possible and if you want to, you can change the world for better. Thank you for your kindness,
love, and faith in me, I love and adore you.
To those who served this country and returned a different person. I believe every single one of
you can live the best version of your life, free of unnecessary burdens that unfairly disadvantage
you. You, too, can make the process better for future veterans. Believe in yourself, help others,
and always ask for help if you are struggling. This nation needs you even when you are out of
uniform. Thank you for your service, let this be an opportunity to pay it forward.
To Special Agent Michael Cinco and all the members of Hustler 6, Special Agent
Vorderbruggen, Special Agent Taub, Special Agent McBride, Special Agent (Hon) Lemm, and
Special Agent (Hon) Bonacasa: Thank you for your service to this nation; it will never be
forgotten. Cinco, I think on a near daily basis about how selfless you were to volunteer for my
deployment as a result of my request to not go back so soon, in an attempt to bond with my
daughter who lived nearby before I moved to Japan. Your sacrifice, your family’s pain, and the
loss to the nation will never be lost on me. I hope you see this as me paying it forward by
attempting to help other Veterans.

vi
Acknowledgements
This adventure never would have been possible without people in my life who believed in
and saw potential in me. This path started with a desire to understand how and why organizations
succeeded and failed in managing staff. Through good and bad, my time in various organizations
and personal experience separating from the military culminated in this dissertation.
To Scott, Mom, and Dad, I could not have achieved this without your love and guidance.
Thank you for your unwavering support throughout the years. Thank you for always acting
interested in my extrapolations on how the world could and should be better. Just listening was
impactful, but you went beyond and showed interest. Mom, thank you for always being willing
to listen to pages upon pages of scholarly material and encouraging me, even if you were
confused about what I was saying (I believed you). Thank you all for getting me here, I love you.
To my family and many friends. Every single person left a unique and essential mark on
me throughout my journey to this point in life. Without your impact in my life, I do not know
how I would have accomplished this. Thank you for teaching me the lessons you did, sharing
your life stories with me, and always accepting me.
To Nicole, you have consistently shown a level of love, commitment, and hope in me that
has positively changed who I am and allowed me to now help others. You saw in me things I
could not see in myself. Thank you for trusting, motivating, loving, supporting, and many times
carrying me in my most vulnerable hours. I love you and will always be grateful for your
presence in my life.
To Cohort 20, my dissertation committee, and all my professors, thank you for pushing
me through this, I always felt the never-ending love and support, and I am eternally grateful. No
Doctor Left Behind (NDLB), Fight On…

vii
Table of Contents
Abstract.......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ....................................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgements........................................................................................................................ vi
List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. 1
List of Figures................................................................................................................................. 2
Chapter One: Introduction to the Problem of Practice.................................................................... 3
Background of the Problem ................................................................................................ 3
Field Context and Mission .................................................................................................. 6
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions.................................................................... 6
Importance of the Study...................................................................................................... 7
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology .................................................... 8
Definitions........................................................................................................................... 9
Organization of the Dissertation ....................................................................................... 10
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ........................................................................................ 12
Reluctance to Employ veterans Impact on Private Sector................................................ 12
National Reliance on the Private Sector for Technology Development and
veterans ............................................................................................................................. 14
Stigmatization and Stereotypes veterans Face .................................................................. 19
Veterans and Private Sector Success Stories .................................................................... 22
Successful Transition for Veterans From Military to Civilian Careers............................ 24
Theoretical Frameworks ................................................................................................... 29
Conceptual Framework..................................................................................................... 32
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 37
Chapter Three: Methodology........................................................................................................ 38
Research Questions........................................................................................................... 38

viii
Overview of Methodology................................................................................................ 39
The Researcher.................................................................................................................. 39
Data Source: Interview ..................................................................................................... 41
Data Analysis.................................................................................................................... 43
Credibility and Trustworthiness........................................................................................ 44
Ethics................................................................................................................................. 44
Limitations and Delimitations........................................................................................... 45
Chapter Four: Findings ................................................................................................................. 47
A Review of the Study’s Purpose ..................................................................................... 47
Participants........................................................................................................................ 48
Participant Summaries ...................................................................................................... 50
Research Question 1: Findings ......................................................................................... 55
Stigmatizations.................................................................................................................. 55
Research Question 1: Discussion...................................................................................... 60
Research Question 2: Findings ......................................................................................... 62
Stereotypes........................................................................................................................ 62
Research Question 2: Discussion...................................................................................... 68
Research Question 3: Findings ......................................................................................... 69
Research Question 3: Discussion...................................................................................... 74
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 75
Chapter Five: Discussion .............................................................................................................. 78
Summary of Findings........................................................................................................ 79
Recommendations for Practice ......................................................................................... 81
Limitations and Delimitations........................................................................................... 86
Recommendations for Research ....................................................................................... 87

ix
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 90
References..................................................................................................................................... 93
Appendix A: Recruitment Message ............................................................................................ 115
Appendix B: Interview Protocol ................................................................................................. 116

1
List of Tables
Table 1: Participant Demographics 49
Table 2: Participant’s Experiences With Stigmatization 56
Table A1: Interview Protocol Crosswalk 117

2
List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework of Transitioning Veterans Seeking Private 34
Sector Employment

3
Chapter One: Introduction to the Problem of Practice
This study addresses the macro problem of unemployment and underemployment among
United States military veterans in the private sector after transitioning from the U.S. military.
Struggles with social identity, stereotypes, and stigmatizations toward veterans directly influence
their opportunities in private sector employment (Harrell & Berglass, 2012; Peat & PerrmannGraham, 2022; Stern, 2017; Stone et al., 2018). These issues may cause veterans to remain in the
military or work in contracted positions for the federal government rather than seeking private
sector employment. If that is the case, the private sector, an area which the United States is
increasingly looking to focus on to advance the country technologically, will never benefit from
their valuable background skills and experience (Roberts & Schmid, 2022).
Background of the Problem
This study explores this problem through the community of individuals who identify as
U.S. veterans, specifically those individuals who have or have attempted to transition to private
sector employment upon leaving the military. In 2021, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)
disclosed that 23% of veterans filled roles in government (federal, state, and local) compared to
only 13% of non-veteran counterparts (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics [BLS], 2022). Most
disproportionate was 11% of federal government roles filled by veterans compared to 2% by
non-veterans. Important to note is that BLS considers veterans who work for defense contractors
to work in the private sector. To highlight the magnitude of defense contractors, the top five
largest defense contractors account for approximately 642,000 employees, with an average of
20% veterans filling their workforce (GDIT, n.d.; Kness, 2021; Lockheed Martin, 2023). The
percentage of veteran workforce in the five largest private sector corporations was unavailable;
however, for comparison, one corporation with 372,000 employees reported 7% veterans in their

4
workforce (Berkshire Hathaway, n.d.). Demonstrating the extent of this challenge is the fact that
the Office of Secretary of Defense contracted a federally funded research and development
center to create a robust 101–page book highlighting the skills, competencies, and value that
veterans have to offer civilian workforces (Hardison et al., 2017). Veterans who do not want to
work for a government entity (or defense related entity) may be more likely to face financial
hardship because they may have fewer opportunities compared to non-veteran counterparts. As
of 2021, veterans accounted for 13% of all U.S. homeless adults and 20% of all U.S. homeless
men (HUD Public Affairs, 2022; NCHV, 2021). This study utilized social identity theory (Islam,
2014; Ruben & LaPiere, 2022), self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1977), and stereotype threat
theory (Inzlicht & Schmader, 2012; Steele, 2011; Sue, 2003) to explore the impact of negative
stereotypes and stigmatizations experienced by veterans transitioning from military to the private
sector. It proposes that the veteran search for employment in the private sector is a journey with
milestones, and these three theories are the foundation of that journey.
Bias and negative stereotypes directly influence veteran’s opportunities to work in private
sector employment upon leaving the military. Studies have shown that stereotypes exist among
hiring managers who associate veterans with violent tendencies and have difficulty associating
skills from the military to potential employment opportunities (Harrell & Berglass, 2012; Society
for Human Resource Management, 2012; Stern, 2017). In one study of 359 randomly selected
Human Resource professionals, 42% of participants expressed concerns associated with Post
Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and the mental health of veterans (Society for Human
Resource Management, 2012). As of August 2021, 4.9 million veterans or 27% of all veterans
identified as having service-connected disabilities (U.S. Department of Labor, 2021). In a 1986
study conducted by Bordieri and Drehmer, researchers asked 108 supervisors and managers to

5
review applicant resumes for potential employment. The study found that an applicant’s
disabilities impacted recommendations made by reviewers (Bordieri & Drehmer, 1986). While
this study did not exclusively research veterans, it indicates the level of bias facing those with
disabilities, included many modern veterans.
Stereotyping can negatively impact self-efficacy, or an individual’s belief in their ability
to complete a task successfully (Sweida et al., 2013). Given this fact, veterans experiencing
stereotyping may become less self-efficacious as a result, directly impacting their resilience and
perseverance to obtain private sector employment. Research suggests veterans expect society to
treat them differently than nonveterans, altering the way they behave, and potentially impacting
career opportunities (Stone & Stone, 2015). Veterans are aware stereotypes exist amongst the
general population, including nonveteran hiring managers, and understand employers may view
them through a stereotypical lens. Stereotype threat exhibits itself in the fact that the beliefs of a
hiring manager may dictate their behaviors, which may be subject to a nonfactual media
portrayal of veterans (Shepherd et al., 2021). Stereotype threat can potentially impact selfefficacy as well. People under the belief they are perceived as member of a negatively
stereotyped group may experience a persistent burden and constant expenditure of cognitive
resources and result in an attempt to disidentify (Schmader & Johns, 2003; Shepherd et al., 2021;
Steele, 1997). Further, due to fear of judgment, veterans with mental health issues may conceal
their issues and fail to seek professional assistance (Britt et al., 2007; Dickstein et al., 2010;
McFarling et al., 2011; Pietrzak et al., 2009; Stecker et al., 2007). Another stigmatization facing
veterans may be their inability to adjust and reintegrate to society after experiencing combat in
the military. The expended resources on handling mental health issues without treatment and

6
attempting to disidentify with a known group may directly impact proficiency and effectiveness
in the workplace.
Field Context and Mission
The field of focus in this study is United States veterans who are leaving military service
for private sector employment. The latest report from the Office of Personnel Management
shows that veterans made up about 31% of the federal workforce as of fiscal year 2018 and
946,515 veterans were employed by various government contractors or their subsidiaries in 2010
(U.S. Office of Personnel Management, 2020; U.S. Senate Fact Sheet, 2010). These numbers are
not negative, in fact it shows our government and contractors are hiring veterans which
remediates the homelessness issue. Still, it shows that we need to improve the ways in which the
private sector thinks about veterans and their experiences. In 2009, President Obama’s White
House issued Executive Order 13518, which mandated annual training of federal offices
regarding prioritization and hiring of veterans (National Archives and Records Administration,
2009). These are momentous steps; however, as the United States increasingly looks to the
private sector to expeditiously create novel technologies to maintain our status as a hegemonic
power, the country needs the intangible skills, background, and experiences of veterans in the
private sector (Hiller & Russell, 2013; Trump, 2017).
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions
The purpose of this study was to explore and understand how veterans’ perceived
stigmatization effects employment opportunities for modern veterans transitioning out of service
to the private sector. Therefore, the study explored major barriers facing veterans during their
transition from the military to the civilian workforce. Also, this study sought to identify coping
strategies that could ease the transition for veterans as the leave the military and enter the civilian

7
workforce. Ultimately, this study provides a role for the U.S. government. This study sought to
answer the following research questions:
1. In what ways do veterans perceive stigmatization from potential private sector
employers?
2. What stereotypes do veterans encounter while seeking private sector employment?
3. How does exposure to negative stereotypes influence veteran’s reported self-efficacy
for seeking private sector employment?
Importance of the Study
This study addresses the community of individuals who identify as U.S. military veterans
who have or have attempted to transition to private sector employment upon leaving the U.S.
military. Not addressing unemployment and underemployment among United States military
veterans in the private sector after transitioning from the U.S. military allows the continued
discrimination of a protected class, specifically protected veterans as identified by the Vietnam
veterans’ Readjustment Assistance Act and the Department of Labor Office of Federal Contract
Compliance Programs (U.S. Department of Labor, n.d.). Additionally, without remediation, the
United States will continue to overlook veterans with PTSD, a protected class, per the Americans
with Disabilities Act and the Family and Medical Leave Act (U.S. Department of Labor, n.d.). A
large-scale analysis of PTSD in 60,000 Post 9/11 veterans, found a 13.5% positivity rate while
other studies point to as high as 20–30% with PTSD (Eber et al., 2013; Reisman, 2016; Tanielian
& Jaycox, 2008; U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs, 2015).
Studies have shown that some companies prefer to hire veterans for reasons such as
dependability, resiliency, trustworthiness, integrity, maturity, and ability to lead while providing
purpose to the task (Harrell & Berglass, 2012). Without addressing unemployment and

8
underemployment among United States military veterans in the private sector after transitioning
from the military, private sector organizations will be less capable of leveraging the unique and
difficult-to-obtain, intangible skills that so many veterans have come to acquire through their
years of service. The gap the private sector will continue to experience without remediation
includes management and supervisory experience that veterans bring with them from the
military, which veterans often learn during high-pressure situations throughout their careers
(Davis & Minnis, 2017).
Not addressing this unemployment and underemployment among military veterans in the
private sector after transitioning from the U.S. military will further the misunderstanding of the
unique skillsets that U.S. military veterans possess, especially the impact veterans can have in
private sector cultures. Exemplifying the current misunderstanding that plagues veterans seeking
employment is a government-funded 101–page crosswalk document titled What Veterans Bring
to Civilian Workplaces: A Prototype Toolkit for Helping Private-Sector Employers Understand
the Nontechnical Skills Developed in the military (Hardison et al., 2017). Further, federal
incentives have been implemented to assist with the underemployment and unemployment of
veterans, such as The Returning Heroes Tax Credit (up to $5,600) and Wounded Warrior Tax
(up to $9,600) that are available and aid in providing work to veterans who are without jobs
(Hardison et al., 2017; Harrell & Berglass, 2012).
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
The theoretical frameworks utilized in this study are social identity theory, self-efficacy
theory, and stereotype threat theory. Collectively, this study will explore the impact of negative
stereotypes and stigmatizations experienced by veterans transitioning from military to the private
sector and propose that veterans navigate the various aspects of these theories during that

9
process. Social identity theory proposes that group membership has a profound impact at the
individual level and results in ingroups and outgroups (Hogg & Abrams, 2006). The way in
which members view themselves is based upon norms and traditions within the group. Members
of the group can depart the group but then identify as an individual or a member of another
group. Self-efficacy theory proposes that the essential condition of being human involves selfreflection and subsequent belief in one’s own capability to succeed (Bandura, 1997). Once belief
exists in one’s own ability, individuals then make efforts to achieve the level of success
perceived to be possible to succeed. Stereotype threat theory proposes that stereotype threats
directly affect an individual’s perceived ability and subsequent ability (Inzlicht & Schmader,
2012). Research shows that stereotypes, once activated can undermine the performance of the
stereotyped individual (Spencer, 2016). Military members may feel falsely inadequate and
incapable of bettering their life by working in private sector employment once stereotypes of not
fitting in or inaccurate associations prompted by media overshadow the prospect of receiving
employment (Marvin, 2014).
This qualitative study utilized interviews of individuals who identify as U.S. military
veterans who have or have attempted to transition to the private sector from the military. I
interviewed 10 individuals to explore their experiences transitioning to the private sector from
the military. Advocates for veterans and human resource practitioners can use data from this
study to inform on how to provide private sector employment opportunities more effectively for
veterans.
Definitions
This section highlights key terms important to better understanding this study.

10
Private sector refers to the part of a country’s economic system that individuals and
companies, rather than a government entity, control (Lutkevich & Wigmore, 2022).
Stigmatization refers to describing or identifying in abusive or vitriolic terms (MerriamWebster, n.d.).
Stereotype refers to rigid and inaccurate preconceived notions held about all people who
are members of a particular group, whether the group is based on racial, religious, sexual, or
other lines (Sue, 2003).
Transitioning veteran refers to an individual separating or retiring from the U.S. Armed
Forces, specifically within 12 months of separation or within 24 months of retirement (Law
Insider, n.d.).
Unemployment refers to people who are jobless, actively seeking work, and available to
take a job (BLS, 2015).
Underemployment refers to the condition in which people in a labor force are employed
at less than full-time or regular jobs or at jobs inadequate with respect to their training or
economic needs (Merriam-Webster, n.d.).
Veteran refers to a person who served in the active military, naval, air, or space service
and whom the military discharged or released therefrom under conditions other than
dishonorable (Cornell Law School, n.d.).
Organization of the Dissertation
This dissertation includes five chapters. This first chapter is the introduction into the
purpose, importance, context, key definitions, and justification regarding the chosen theoretical
frameworks. Chapter Two consists of a review of literature associated to this problem of practice
and particular field. Chapter Three consists of the methodology and design regarding my

11
research. Chapter Four consists of my findings, a presentation of what the research from this
study shows along with context and analysis. Finally, Chapter Five consists of a summarization,
potential implications, and recommendations for further research.

12
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
This chapter will highlight common themes associated with the difficulty veteran
encounter while departing military service in search of private sector employment. Common
themes found in research consist of stereotypes, bias, and the effects on efficacy and
performance. Further, I discuss social identity as a commonly referenced challenge for veterans
to understand. These themes can and do become barriers to employment for veterans in the
private sector. Lastly, I describe theoretical frameworks of social identity theory (Islam, 2014;
Ruben & LaPiere, 2022), self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1977), and stereotype threat theory
(Inzlicht & Schmader, 2012; Steele, 2011; Sue, 2003) as well as a conceptual framework
wherein each theory sequentially has a role in a veteran’s journey to the private sector.
Reluctance to Employ veterans Impact on Private Sector
Veterans are capable of positively impacting private sector employers’ efficiency and
culture if given an opportunity. A study of 69 individual companies showed the top reasons
businesses seek to hire veterans include their strong character, their expertise in a variety of
areas, capable leadership and teamwork skills, knowledge of and comfort with structure and
discipline, their ability to be effective, loyal, and resilient, and their demonstrated success
(Harrell & Berglass, 2012). Unfortunately, the same study indicated numerous challenges and
risks in hiring veterans, including skill translation, negative stereotypes, skill mismatch,
difficulty acclimating, and concern about future deployments for National Guard and Reservists
(Harrell & Berglass, 2012). These challenges equate to reluctance to hire veterans in many
private sector businesses, which limit the ability of private sector organizations to utilize the
skills and experience that veterans can bring to bear.

13
Research suggests another significant obstacle or perceived risk to employers considering
hiring veterans is the possibility of veterans having PTSD or other mental health issues (SHRM;
2012). In a survey of 359 human resource professionals, approximately 40% reported specific
concerns regarding PTSD and mental health, reporting those were challenges with hiring
veterans (SHRM, 2012). Marvin (2014) asserted that media and television coverage of traumatic
events, especially coverage that connects it to military service, contributes to society’s
understanding that PTSD is a direct result of military service. Additionally, research has shown
that disability explicitly associated with mental health can dissuade employers (Bordieri &
Drehmer, 1985). The magnitude of veterans with disabilities adds context, in August 2021, 4.9
million veterans had a service-connected disability (U.S. DOL, 2021). A prior study of 108 job
applicants showed that upon review of resume and cover letter, bias did exist upon identification
of existing disability by supervisors and mid-level managers (Bordieri & Drehmer, 1986).
Incentivization has reduced some veteran unemployment, as seen through various federal
directives such as the Wounded Warrior Tax Credit and Returning Heroes Tax Credit (Hardison
et al., 2017; Harrell & Berglass, 2012). Analysis of veteran employment disclosed that
oftentimes companies hire veterans out of a sense of patriotism and social responsibility (Harrell
& Berglass, 2012). However, employers must also consider the business case for hiring veterans,
including their unique skillsets and performance capabilities. A large barrier to veteran
employment in the private sector is difficulty accurately and effectively translating skills and
experience qualitatively, while also focusing on technical, vocational, and professional
certifications (Harrell & Berglass, 2012).

14
National Reliance on the Private Sector for Technology Development and veterans
The U.S. Government’s reliance on the private sector for technology development has
increasingly become more prevalent over the past decade. This is visible especially in the era of
cyber threats, a reinvigoration in space dominance, and the global COVID–19 pandemic (DoD,
2020; The White House, 2022). Through these three avenues, covered in sub-sections below, the
private sector has proven an invaluable partner and essential resource to ensuring success,
innovation, and efficiency for the U.S. government.
The Private Sector and U.S. Government Collaboration in Cyber Space
The shift in cybersecurity threats evolved gradually at first; however, over the past 5–10
years the push for governmental collaboration with the private sector has become more
compelling and pressured from the U.S. government through a significant increase in contractual
and financial incentives (Manley, 2015). In 2001, the article Cybersecurity in the Private Sector
(2001), argued that many corporations in the private sector had a laissez-faire position regarding
increased crime occurring in cyberspace due to uncertainty whether the U.S. government was
exaggerating the significance of threats (Etzioni, 2001). At the same time, the article highlighted
the need for regulation and policy to allow increased collaboration as well as a perspective that it
was “impossible to imagine a secure United States in which security is provided only to the
computers and Internet used by the public sector” (Etzioni, 2001, p. 58).
Scholars have identified private-public partnerships in cybersecurity as a complicated but
essential endeavor requiring decision-makers to create regulations and policies to allow for
cooperation in cyber deterrence (Carr, 2016; Christensen & Petersen, 2017; Lilli, 2021; Manley,
2015). In developing these partnerships, experts conceptualized that cyber expands beyond
activity within cyberspace and includes any use of information and communications technology

15
(ICT), leading to the nation’s deterrence in land, sea, air, and space (Lilli, 2021). The breadth of
this definition and the weight placed on integrating private sector thinking and solutions into
government strategy is novel for the U.S. government (Manley, 2015). The desire for
collaboration was largely because the groundbreaking research and development of ICT occurred
mostly within private sector and the U.S. government regularly purchased cyber tools and
weapons from the private sector. Additionally, the private sector owned and operated most of the
cyberspace infrastructure which the U.S. government was concerned with protecting (Carr, 2016;
Lilli, 2021; Manley, 2015).
The private sector can contribute to a partnership by providing services, hardware, and
software that will bolster homeland security and national defense (Lill, 2021). These provisions
are desired due to the optimal placement and expertise of private sector firms as well as their
ability to expedite the U.S. government’s access to state-of-the-art solutions. One tangential
benefit is allowing government resources to be available for other responses which the private
sector may not be able to partake in. Lastly, Lilli (2021) highlighted the private sector’s ability to
replace alternative technologies which we are otherwise reliant upon, some of which are known
to represent national security threats.
Research into the top five nations succeeding at Critical Infrastructure Protection listed
the United States as second. Of note, the research highlighted a significant commitment from
Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency to
collaborate and work with the private sector to achieve the goals of the 2018 National
Infrastructure Protection Plan (Tvaronavičienė et al., 2020). These efforts conform to the 2017
National Security Strategy of the United States of America (The Office of the Secretary of
Defense, 2017), which called for collaboration to implement novel technologies from the private

16
sector (Hiller & Russell, 2013; Trump, 2017). In large part, the success seen in these partnerships
in anchored on significant trust amongst stakeholders (Manley, 2015).
U.S. Government Reliance on the Private Sector in Space
Reliance upon the private sector by the U.S. government is also apparent in the
hyperfocus on space dominance and exploration beginning in the early 21st century. During a
2010 speech by President Barack Obama on Space Exploration in the 21st century, he set forth
expectations and plans for a new space strategy for the nation. He highlighted creating
relationships and dependencies on a “growing array” of private companies to enable easier and
more affordable access to space (The White House, 2010). The President referred to an already
present reliance on private sector on space transportation vehicles; however, he explained a new
strategy of purchasing space transportation services as well from private sector. By doing so,
competition would build amongst private companies accelerating the pace of innovation to
transport people and materials to and from space (Jones, 2018; The White House, 2010). This
new strategy would allow the nation to reach space faster, more frequently, and at a reduced cost,
which is essential to long term sustainability of space flight (The White House, 2010; Vernile,
2018). Lastly, the United States placed a significant emphasis on the rapid transformation of U.S.
space capabilities to the groundbreaking and innovative research of private companies while
vowing increased partnership with industry (Jones, 2018; The White House, 2010).
In addition to innovative, novel ideas, the private sector can deliver space access at a
significant cost reduction. Between 1971 and 2010, the U.S. government spent $192 billion on
the Space Shuttle program with an average cost of $1.2–$1.5 billion per launch (Vernile, 2018).
In stark contrast, SpaceX could perform a successful launch at $62 million in 2018 (Jones, 2018).
This significant cost savings exemplified the long-term sustainability highlighted in President

17
Obama’s new strategy on space. With the DoD requirements and National Security Strategy
emphasizing collaboration amongst U.S. government and private sector to achieve greater
dominance in space exploration, there is great benefits in utilizing veterans to bridge the gap.
veterans who have experience from the government side would be a great asset to understanding
the complicated government processes that may otherwise confuse the private sector.
Private Sector Innovation During COVID–19 Pandemic
U.S. Government reliance on the private sector for innovation is visible even in
nontraditional national endeavors, such as during the global COVID–19 pandemic. Analysis of
the pandemic’s impact suggests COVID–19 is certainly a threat to national security for many
reasons (Albert et al., 2021). Between early 2020 and 2023, 1.2 million Americans have died
because of COVID–19 (CDC, 2023). In contrast, the AIDS epidemic was responsible for the
deaths of 700,000 Americans between 1981–2021 and the Clinton Administration declared AIDS
a threat to national security in 1993 (CDC, 2021; KFF.org, 2022; Clinton Digital Library, n.d.)
The COVID–19 pandemic showed the United States’ potential vulnerability to bioterrorism in
the era of globalization, the consequences for under resourced first responders and medical
facilities, and how swiftly outside factors can significantly curtail our armed forces’ response to
internal and external threats (Oshewolo, 2020). The widespread impact of COVID–19, including
exacerbated mental health concerns, political strife, and significant supply chain disruptions,
affected all industries. Amidst the U.S. government’s scramble to save the most lives possible
through policy and emergency response, the private sector stepped forward to provide testing,
aid the ill, and create vaccinations.
In 2022, The White House released a National Security Memorandum highlighting that
COVID–19 is a national security threat, uniquely able to affect all industries catastrophically

18
while costing trillions of dollars in economic loss and crippling of global healthcare systems
(The White House, 2022). The memorandum advocates in the nation’s best interest “to prepare
for, prevent, detect, respond to, and recover from biological threats at home and abroad” (The
White House, 2022, para. 1).
Supplies provided through public-private collaboration and more explicitly dire need of
the nation consisted of hand sanitizer and medical face masks. Upon exhausting international
import of face masks, the U.S. government turned to domestic firms who could assist. At double
the normal manufacturing capacity, firms could provide 50 million of the 290 million projected
masks needed (Vecchi et al., 2020). Companies such as 3M, which is well known for their
production of industrial face masks, received liability waivers as well as waivers for a mandatory
3–month approval of prototypes to expedite production (Vecchi et al., 2020). At the same time of
dire need, distillers of vodka and other spirits reconfigured warehouses and began making hand
sanitizer, essential products amongst many others that was near impossible to find (Saenz &
O’Keeffe, 2020).
Through the examples of cybersecurity, space exploration, and global pandemics, it is
apparent the U.S. government is dependent upon the private sector for safety, security,
efficiency, and survival. Not only are these all exemplified throughout recent years, but national
security strategies have highlighted all three topics, including creating and implementing
partnerships with the private sector. The specific experience and skills of veterans can bridge the
gap between understanding, forecasting, and knowing how to optimally respond to the U.S.
government’s dependency on private sector innovation (Harrell & Berglass, 2012). The number
of veterans who remain in government service, are employed by a government contractor, or

19
whom private sector employers dissuade and do not accept impacts the ability to utilize veterans
as a bridge in these partnerships.
Stigmatization and Stereotypes veterans Face
Stereotypes and stigmatization (stigma) impact veterans and affect their equitable access
to private sector employment. In some cases, without regard to experience and skills, veterans
are determined through preconceived notions to be a good or bad fit in a company or industry, to
be safe or dangerous, or even effective or noneffective (Stone et al., 2018; Ward, 2020).
Understanding the impact stigma and stereotypes have on veterans is critical to determining how
to overcome them.
In addition to facing stigmas and stereotypes, internalization also impacted veterans. To
better understand stigma, I am using Goffman’s (1963) seminal definition that stigma is “an
attribute that is deeply discrediting” (p. 3). Stigmas, a type of stereotype, possess a negative
connotation and may dehumanize individuals (Goffman, 1963). A stereotype is a widespread,
overgeneralization about a group of people. Stigmas are known to significantly impact those with
mental illness (Mittal et al., 2013), a finding that may put veterans at risk given the percentage of
veterans who present some form of mental illness due to PTSD (Wade & Vogel, 2022). Focus
group research by Mittal et al. (2013) of 16 treatment–seeking combat veterans analyzed their
identified self-stigmas. Mittal et al.’s research (2013) indicated veterans perceived themselves as
dangerous, violent, and crazy upon seeking mental health assistance for PTSD. Scholars
determined stigmas toward mental health function as a barrier to healthcare for veterans as these
stigmas can impact a veteran’s willingness to seek initial treatment as well as continuous
treatment (Kulesza et al., 2015; Pietrzak et al., 2015; Rodrigues et al., 2014). Individuals who

20
society stigmatizes often use the stigma as a reason they could not succeed in certain endeavors
(Goffman, 1963).
Stigma and stereotypes affect veteran employment opportunities in the private sector as
others often perceive veterans negatively, frequently because of mental health-related stigma
associated to veterans. Examples of stigma toward veterans consist of employer concerns about
the effects of combat stress, PTSD, anger management, and violent tendencies (Berglass &
Harrell, 2012). Other stigmas include that combat veterans are ticking time bombs, crazy, and
damaged, all of which veterans may be conscious of which exacerbates the consequences
(Gonzalez & Simpson, 2021). For example, veterans may attempt to isolate from their identity as
a veteran if they experience stigma during the employment process.
A recent, intriguing qualitative study of 40 veterans across 12 organizations utilized the
lens of social identity theory and discovered that not only do veterans deal with negative
stereotypes but they are also at times socially aggrandized and placed on a pedestal (Peat &
Perrmann-Graham, 2022). veterans in the study felt separated by co-workers who had assumed
they saw combat, had significant PTSD, were politically conservative, or that experiences were
the same as other family and friends. The study found that this casting out left veterans in the
workplace feeling pigeonholed with a potential for negative impact on their tenure in the
workplace (Peat & Perrmann-Graham, 2022). Another study of 250 veterans highlighted that
identity disruption that occurs during a veteran’s reintegration to society is highly impactful. For
instance, veterans reported feeling loss of meaning or purpose; loss of self-worth; and a
disconnect between past, present, and future self (Mitchell et al., 2020). In one example, a
respondent stated, “There is nothing in civilian life that will ever be as fulfilling or important as
what I did in the military. I have never felt as proud or as special and I will never feel that way

21
again” (Mitchell et al., 2020, p. 2159). Scholars theorized that this disruption in identity is
associated to the shift in social identity that veterans undergo when transitioning to private sector
employment (Mitchell et al., 2020). Oftentimes, veterans entered the military at 18 years old;
after 4–20 years of service, they undergo identity shifts as they may now have spouse(s) and/or
children. As veterans attempt to re-integrate, they may experience that the individuals they
associated with prior to the military are different from them. The reconstruction of the veteran’s
social identity and/or ability to connect the present and future identity may prove valuable to
veterans transitioning from military service to the private sector (Mitchell et al., 2020).
Uncertainty in how stereotypes (both negative or positive) and stigmas may present
during the employment-seeking process can cause increased confusion for a veteran. Stereotypes
can be positive and may include strong leadership abilities, critical thinking skills under pressure,
and organizational skills (Berglass & Harrell, 2012). As discussed in this section, negative
stereotypes and stigma clearly exist. Uncertainty may exist whether people will meet a veteran
with positive or negative preconceived notions.
Stigmas and stereotypes can have significant impact on veterans who are seeking privatesector employment. The irony in the profound impact of stereotypes and stigma is that in many
cases the oppressor may not even be aware they are stigmatizing or stereotyping, and they may
in fact have good intentions (Sue, 2003). Veterans transitioning out of the military may already
feel a burden of trying to secure a new identity and way of life, and having to overcome
stereotype and stigma only exacerbates their struggle. By understanding the way stigma and
stereotype impact veterans can face, veterans can take steps to overcome these barriers and
secure private sector employment.

22
Veterans and Private Sector Success Stories
There are plenty of success stories to draw from which highlight veteran transitions to
private sector business. Ideally, a veteran moved into a role they were sincerely enthusiastic
about while simultaneously providing immense value to an employer. This is often the case as
the experience and skills veterans possess arm private businesses with a level of leadership that
is difficult to replicate.
In cases where veterans have been able to work within the private sector and bridge the
gap to the U.S. government, there are many cases of remarkable success. One example is of the
former U.S. Army Medical Research and Development Command’s medical liaison officer to the
Pentagon who was able to secure an internship with a company that “developed vaccines and
antibody therapeutics for infectious diseases and opioid overdoses” (Dortek, 2022, para. 1).
Exemplifying the reliance and the importance of the veterans as a bridge, the U.S. government
awarded this company a $600 million contract to develop COVID–19 vaccinations as part of
Operation Warp Speed (Kansteiner, 2021). This placement in an internship program was logical
for an accomplished medicinal chemist who provided leadership to the private company’s
defense affairs team, leveraging her 20 years of experience (U.S. Army, 2023).
Veterans offer private sector companies highly desired skills, especially in leadership.
Literature reports these skills to be instrumental in both crisis action situations and status quo
day–to–day competition with similar companies. In addition to outperforming other companies,
research suggests employers largely believe veteran employees outperform non-veteran peers in
the same workplace (Curry Hall et al., 2015).
Analysis of 144 U.S. based public corporations who had been through a securities class
action lawsuit between the 2002–2012 revealed value in veteran directors due to their human

23
capital (Simpson & Sariol, 2018). The results showed a high likelihood in appointing a director
with military experience following crises. The rationale for hiring veteran directors was due to
the ability to effectively make decisions under pressure as well as exemplify ethical behavior,
which scholars believe to increase the likelihood of harboring stakeholder trust (Simpson &
Sariol, 2018). To better understand veteran leader effectiveness, a white paper compiled by
Korn/Ferry International and the Economist Intelligence Unit (Korn/Ferry, 2006) sought to see if
a link existed between military experience and effectiveness, including executive performance
and leadership of CEOs. Without exception the interviewed S&P 500 CEOs attributed their
military experience to their success as CEOs citing the direct leadership, organizational skills,
and resource planning the military exposed them to was not as readily available in the private
sector (Korn/Ferry, 2006).
A deeper dive into the qualities a veteran brings to corporate leadership revealed
significant diversity among the various military branches as well as at the individual level (HBR,
2014). HBR conducted a review of 45 S&P 500 companies with veteran leaders in 2014 to
clarify a 2009 poll wherein 82% of respondents stated they had “a great deal” or “quite a lot” of
confidence in the military, as opposed to 16% who had confidence in big business (HBR, 2014).
The 2014 review revealed that while veteran CEOs are in large part successful at leading private
organizations, it is also important to consider the diversity identified in leadership styles as a
critical component (HBR, 2014). They specifically recognized that U.S. Army and U.S. Marine
leaders excel with smaller organizations where direction and guidance is easier to provide while
U.S. Navy and U.S. Air Force excel in large, process-oriented organizations (HBR, 2014).
In addition to providing impeccable leadership both during a crisis and day to day work,
veterans also appear to excel at running their own businesses. In 2016, Forbes conducted

24
research to identify the top veteran-owned startups. Through outreach with investors, founders,
and industry experts, they narrowed 85 nominations down to 25. Overwhelmingly, company
owners agreed lessons learned in the military were attributable to their success, including nothing
is impossible, sense of mission, desire for camaraderie, clearly defined objectives, and striving to
improvise, adapt, and overcome (Rockefeller, 2017).
Due to the successes at the field and leadership level when incorporating veteran hires,
some companies have invested in hiring veterans. In 2011, a group of private sector employers
created an effort called Joining Forces wherein Amazon pledged to hire 25,000 veterans; AT&T,
Sprint, Verizon, and T-Mobile pledged to hire a combined 25,000 veterans; and approximately
30 other private tech and telecommunications companies pledged to hire veterans. After 5 years,
Joining Forces declared their companies had hired or trained 1.2 million veterans and their
spouses through the initiative (Hanson, 2016; NARA, 2016).
Hiring veterans into private sector businesses has proven beneficial to small businesses,
large corporations, and veterans. Society continuously references the unique leadership
characteristics, experience, and skillsets veterans possess as valuable, hard to find, and
instrumental in success for companies. The case for making private sector employment more
accessible and normalized to veterans is clear but in need of a wider audience of both employers
and veterans.
Successful Transition for Veterans From Military to Civilian Careers
Some limited evidence suggests there is a dichotomy where private sector companies
outperform their competitors when led by veterans, who are the same group that experiencing
stigma and uncertain of their capabilities and fit within the private sector (Curry Hall et al.,
2015). Not enough evidence exists though to make a clear case for this claim. With evidence of

25
success, it should be an easier, more obvious, and unobstructed transition for veterans to obtain
private sector employment. Identifying steps for success for both veterans and employers as well
as gaining an understanding of theories that support the path veterans navigate during this
transition is helpful in carving a path forward.
Steps for Success for Veterans
Arguably, the most common themes for success identified for transitioning veterans are
networking, participating in outreach, and utilizing resources such as mentorship programs
(James, 2017; Ward, 2020). Research suggests three out of four veterans spend 6 months or more
seeking civilian employment upon departing the service (Alonso et al., 2021; Pew Research
Center, 2019). Research suggests veterans create and maintain a network of family, fellow
veterans, civilians, and formal resource personnel who each provide a different resource,
including love/friendship, respect, money, goods, information, and services. Veterans should
build, maintain, and utilize these networks while approaching transition (up to 1 year prior),
while navigating the transition, and upon assessing the transition for optimal success with
securing employment and maintaining a grasp on identity during the transition (Alonso et al.,
2021; Kintzle & Castro, 2018). The next section discusses networking, mentorship, and outreach
program participation as key facilitators of veteran transition.
Networking is a critical resource that veterans must consider as they attempt to secure
employment. Networking and subsequent employment provides a sense of purpose and assists
with transitioning the individual’s identity from military member to a veteran and civilian
(Kintzle & Castro, 2018). A qualitative study of 10 veterans highlighted that without exception
developing and maintaining a strong network as well as possessing a close support system were
key components to a successful transition from military to civilian employment (James, 2017). A

26
robust network is critical for knowing about job opportunities, internal recommendations, and
knowing how others have navigated the transition. Also essential, the support system ensures a
veteran can expand their identity while maintaining emotional and psychological support during
a critical time of uncertainty (Dobrow & Higgins, 2005).
Mentorship programs offer veterans a unique opportunity to learn how to begin
navigation into civilian life. One company, American Corporate Partnerships (ACP) allows
veterans to select a corporate executive mentor based upon set criteria, such as cultural
(race/ethnicity/gender/location), work sector, position, and others (ACP, 2022). This opportunity
allows for the veteran to be comfortable while the team navigates creating a civilian resume;
translating military skills to civilian skills; interviewing practice; and strategizing securing
employment, raises, or starting a business (ACP, 2022). Programs such as this provide a means
for a veteran to peer into the corporate sector through the eyes of a corporate leader, to
understand how that field perceives their background and experience, and how to optimally
posture themselves for success in the private sector. To increase retention of veteran employees
entering private sector, mentorship, especially when led by other veterans, is essential (Poteet et
al., 2021). Further, mentorship when leveraged appropriately increases the likelihood of
successfully incorporating veterans into leadership roles (Goulart, 2021). Veterans also see an
increase of successful transition to new environments when they partake in mentorship and
affinity groups when attending college upon leaving the service (Eells, 2017).
Veterans transitioning from the military receive a variety of benefits that the military may
or may not advertise to them. One of these benefits is the opportunity to fulfill up to a 6–month
paid internship with an approved company while still serving on active duty. The DoD
SkillBridge program offers military members the opportunity, with their commander’s approval,

27
to work at for up to 180 days while maintaining their military pay at nearly 3,000 pre-authorized
organizations (DoD Skillbridge, 2022). Benefits for the military member consist of identifying
the pros and cons of the sector and employer they choose; for the employer, the program
provides an opportunity to determine if the member is a good fit in the organization and where
they can best be successful. In 2017, over 2,000 veterans had participated in DoD Skillbridge
with a greater than 90% had successfully securing employment (U.S. Department of Defense,
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, 2018). In 2021, 1,900
participants in the sister program, Hiring Our Heroes saw an employment success rate of 85%
with average salary of $105,000 (Hiring our Heroes, 2022). Additionally, the military mandates
attendance at a Transition Assistance Program (TAP) class varying from three to seven days
depending on branch of service and seniority (Legal Information Institute, n.d.). TAP provides an
opportunity for veterans to learn how to create a resume, the process of transitioning, numerous
benefits available, and interviewing skills, but research has found it is too broad and does not
consider cultural differences and impacts to transitioning members (Keeling et al., 2018).
Further, other research suggests that individualized, professional assistance may yield more
positive results for transitioning veterans (Troutman & Gagnon, 2014).
Veterans can utilize the many resources available while transitioning to the private sector
by building networks, participating in outreach, and finding a mentor. Through these actions, a
clear strategy moving forward is possible as well as optimized mental health, reduced stress, and
mitigated uncertainty (Alonso et al., 2021; Dobrow & Higgins, 2005; Keeling et al., 2018;
Kintzle & Castro, 2018; Ruben & LaPiere, 2022). While some of the resources in place are not
the best or a one size fits all application, when utilized in parallel, veterans may have a better
chance at a successful transition (Harrell & Berglass, 2012; Troutman & Gagnon, 2014). Lastly,

28
veterans should understand that, during the transition period, they are navigating from one
identity to another. Research suggests that veterans transition most successfully if they can be
proud of the service they provided and be confident in their decision to leave the military. Such
an experience will positively affect their social identity, reduce PTSD symptoms, and enhance
their quality of life (Ruben & LaPiere, 2022).
Steps for Success for Private Sector Businesses
Both small business and large corporations can benefit from the unique experiences and
skillsets that veterans possess in addition to filling vacancies. This is only possible is both
veterans and businesses are seeking one another out, improving accessibility to the civilian
sector. veterans bring with them leadership skills and traits that are not readily available in the
private sector, including the ability to think critically under pressure, work resiliently, and lead
by example (Stackhouse, 2020). A study of Virginia small businesses found that between 2014-
2016, approximately 80% of veterans transitioned without securing civilian employment in a
period when 64% of new small business job opportunities became available (Stackhouse, 2020;
U.S. SBA, 2017; Zogas, 2017). Business and veteran interaction may be helpful to better place
veterans in civilian sector job roles. Research shows businesses that conduct networking with
military entities and veteran organizations regularly hire veterans (Oswald et al., 2019). A study
of 69 companies revealed 11 common traits veterans bring to the workforce consisting of
leadership, teamwork, character, structure, discipline, effectiveness, proven success, resiliency,
loyalty, and public relations value (Harrell & Berglass, 2012). In the same study, employers
stated veterans regularly had difficulty translating their skills (Harrell & Berglass, 2012). This
section will explore the role of veteran placement programs and other resources available to
business to support their hiring of veterans.

29
Some large corporations have veteran placement programs in place, which are an
effective means for veterans in transition from the military. For example, Verizon Wireless, a
“Top 3 Military Friendly Company for the Past Five Years” according to Military Friendly,
provides veterans the ability to apply through a separate application channel than non-veterans
and to sign up for an email list for jobs fitting one’s military skillset (Verizon Wireless, 2023).
These programs have shown effectiveness in securing employment for veterans. A study
determining effectiveness of employment programs found that of 48,965 veterans, 50% reported
utilizing a total of 819 employment programs in their first 90 days of transition from the military.
Additionally, 60% reported successful employment in their first 90 days of military transition
(Perkins et al., 2020). Another study, encompassing 12 months and 42 participants resulted in
76% of participants securing competitive employment during use of individualized employment
placement programs (Davis et al., 2012).
Much like the need for veterans to utilize the resources available to them in parallel,
private sector employers also stand to benefit in a variety of ways by utilizing resources available
to them. Research suggests that strategies that seek to bridge the gap and meet veterans where
they are by understanding the problem, knowing how to translate veteran experience, becoming
part of the employment recruiting programs offered by the military, or creating an avenue for
veterans to apply directly and speak with a representative that can help them navigate application
can help to address the problem of veteran underemployment and unemployment (DoD
Skillbridge, 2022; Hardison et al., 2017; Keeling et al., 2018; Mitchell et al., 2020).
Theoretical Frameworks
This study leverages social identity theory, self-efficacy theory, and stereotype threat
theory to form a conceptual framework that creates a visualization of the process veterans

30
navigate to gain private sector employment upon leaving the military. Prior to discussing the
conceptual framework, it is critical to understand the three theoretical frameworks and their role
in the overall conceptual framework.
Social Identity Theory
According to Islam (2014), social identity theory says that individuals are part of an ingroup, or an out-group, based on how they define their own identities in relation to a social
group. Group membership within the military is particularly strong; however, the degree of
belonging varies based upon one’s perspective of their value, role, and connection within the
group (Ruben & LaPiere, 2022). A critical factor in current social identity work is private regard,
one’s own thoughts of their value, and public regard, one’s perspective of how the public views
their value (Ruben & LaPiere, 2022). The categorizing of groups is inevitable and natural
according to social identity theory and individuals engage in the behavior to seek positive
distinctiveness and improve one’s self-concept (Wagner et al., 1986). Most notable is that when
one feels marginalized, prejudiced, or discriminated, they may adopt a social mobility strategy,
such as departing one group for another (Wagner et al., 1986). Another alternative solution is
adopting a social change belief system, such as challenging the status quo to make the group’s
position more valuable (Wagner et al., 1986). The process of transitioning identities is difficult
and exacerbated specifically for veterans by several factors, such as time in service, culture,
combat experience, and highly specialized training, such as those who receive training for the
Special Forces (Dolan et al., 2022). Scholars have compared the significance of a military social
identity to that of an ethnicity due to the depth of involvement, faith, and commitment required
of military members and their families (Daley, 1999).

31
Self-Efficacy Theory
Self-efficacy theory posits that an individual’s self-perception of their capability can
predict behavior more accurately than their own actual inherent capability (Bandura 1997;
Brown et al., 2016). Self-efficacy theory suggests that an individual's expectation to succeed
determines engagement in behavior (Bandura, 1977). Self-efficacy can improve entrepreneurial
success (Santoro et al., 2020). Performance evaluations, vicarious experiences, verbal
persuasion, and physiological information form the identification of self-efficacy levels
(Bandura, 1977; Schunk, 2009). The impact of self-efficacy is great, and research has found it to
be a determinant in motivational levels, amount of effort, performance, and emotions (Bandura,
1986). Brown et al. (2016) demonstrated a correlation between diminished self-efficacy in
veterans and PTSD symptoms (Brown et al., 2016). Specifically, among combat veterans
research shows success in increasing self-efficacy by digging into specific events that have
caused PTSD due to a reliance on overgeneralization by veterans as an innate coping
mechanism. Overgeneralizing past events experienced by veterans increases the likelihood of
overgeneralizing the future, which subsequently decreases self-efficacy (Brown et al., 2016).
Stereotype Threat Theory
Stereotype threat theory holds that stereotype threats directly affect an individual’s
perceived ability and subsequent performance (Inzlicht & Schmader, 2012). Scholars have
probed this theory and consider it a daily part of life for many groups of people; however, the
theory also sheds light on a path forward to overcome potential negative effects of the theory,
such as diminished belief in ability or substandard performance (Steele, 2011; Swab et al., 2022).
Microaggressions are inadvertent oppressive activities and behaviors individuals engage in. They
cause great psychological harm by denying marginalized communities their reality (Sue, 2003).

32
Microaggressions may result from stereotypes and preconceived notions. Stereotype threat
theory can provide a means to analyze the problem and identify potential ways forward that
empower veterans to overcome stereotype threat, increase their quality of life, and provide
organizations with the unique skills and capabilities that veterans possess.
The three theories of social identity, self-efficacy, and stereotype are critical to the
conceptual framework of this study. The impact that individuals experience from these theories
can also be a part of exploring the veteran transition process. When navigating the transition
from military to private sector employment, veterans navigate and work to overcome the effects
found within these theories.
Conceptual Framework
Visualized in Figure 1 is a conceptualization of the gauntlet a veteran must traverse
through from military service to private sector employment. The process takes place sequentially
from military service through social identity theory, self-efficacy theory, and stereotype threat
theory to potentially secure the end goal of private sector employment. The impact of each of the
theories on the veteran may dissuade or set them back as they encounter obstacles.
Private and public regard, adapted from social identity theory, may affect a veteran’s
mental health. Specifically, higher public regard is associated with more PTSD symptoms
according to research by Ruben and LaPiere (2022). This means if a hiring manager or
supervisor draws out or isolates an employee or prospective employee’s veteran status
negatively, it may prompt negative mental health symptoms. Social identity theory helps to
explain why veterans may be affected by feeling marginalized upon departing military service
for the private sector. These feelings of marginalization may make them vulnerable to social
mobility strategy where they might seek to find a group where they feel comfortable, such as a

33
government contractor or the U.S. military as a civilian employee, rather than seeking other
private sector employment.
In a study of 40 veterans, they ranked self-efficacy as second most impactful on their
work (Kukla et al., 2014). Scholars found that for people with mental illness, having high levels
of self-efficacy can predict success in work (Corbiére et al., 2011; Kukla et al., 2014). Though
not all veterans experience some form of mental illness, a post-deployment adjustment study by
Elbogen et al. (2013) of 1,388 Iraq and Afghanistan veterans found that 43% of these veterans
suffered from PTSD, major depression, or alcohol misuse (Elbogen et al., 2013). The unique
struggle some veterans face may be based on perceived obstacles and need not be grounded in
reality to affect behavior and decision-making (Albert & Luzzo, 1999; Corbiére et al., 2004).

34
Figure 1
Conceptual Framework of Transitioning Veterans Seeking Private Sector Employment
As informed by social identity theory transition, the veteran encounters the need to
separate from the identity of a military member and identify as an individual upon separation
from the military. During this transition, ideally, the veteran becomes a member of another
group, such as where they potentially gain employment. The first identity they will assume is
that of veteran; eventually, this identity accompanies their new civilian employment role or
identity. Such a prominent obstacle requires the veteran to be deliberate and self-confident in
their ability to be successful when encountering barriers to self-efficacy.
As veterans transition, they may experience internal doubt about their private sector
employability driven by environmental cues as they attempt to determine if they can succeed in
the transition to private sector employment. The belief in their own ability to overcome
encountered obstacles along the transition to private sector employment is paramount. When

35
individuals consider what is and is not in the realm of possible, they may evaluate the success of
others they consider to be relatable to them. Research on this social comparison has shown that
when one compares themselves to peers, their self-efficacy is protected if peers are of similar age
(Baltes & Baltes, 1986; Schwarzer, R., 2014). However, veterans are not always exposed to
peers of the same age. Several factors, such as years in service, occupation in the military, level
of education, and family circumstances, create difficulty in social comparisons that might
otherwise provide clear role models that might support veterans’ self-efficacy. If faced with
frequent inability to conduct social comparisons, a veteran may feel isolated and unsure of their
own ability to succeed. Research on the correlation of feedback and high self-efficacy has shown
that higher performance can be attributed to providing feedback to individuals with higher selfefficacy while those with low self-efficacy would benefit more from individualized training to
raise self-efficacy (Karl et al., 1993).
For veterans transitioning from the military to the private sector, guidance and counseling
may be of benefit until self-efficacy is present while feedback may more greatly benefit veterans
who already possess high self-efficacy. Once self-efficacy is clearly present, leaders who
exemplify it as well as self-awareness are more likely to be able to manage turmoil effectively
and logically both within life and a place of business (Caldwell & Hayes, 2016). veterans
regularly witness military peers leave military service and work for defense contractors or as
DoD civilian employees. This re-enforces a mindset that those who have served should continue
to support the DoD, despite research showing motivations for enlistment beyond patriotism,
including access and funding for college, pay, benefits, and a lack of other employment
opportunities (Kearl, 1990; Kelty, 2009; Woodruff et al., 2006). A mindset and stereotype that
one is just a service member and one’s role is to continue work for the government may lead to

36
feeling falsely inadequate and incapable of bettering their life through private sector
employment. Further, because of these engrained stereotypes, veterans may not actually see the
potential benefits they can bring to an organization, such as an ability to improvise, adapt, and
overcome mentality (Rockefeller, 2017). If they are not successful in managing the transition of
their identity, they may experience self-doubt. This self-doubt is detrimental and has a negative
impact on performance (Elbogen et al., 2013; Kukla et al., 2014).
An example of microaggressions and stereotype that veterans face could be an individual
finding out a veteran had been to Afghanistan and responding with an apology for what the
veteran must have dealt with or how it may be a difficult daily battle. Stereotypes,
overgeneralizations, and assumptions of veterans by the public including human resource
professionals and employers may make veterans feel unwelcome, as if they are not a good fit,
and do not belong in the private sector. Resumes with indications of combat, Iraq, Afghanistan,
weapons, and some measures of success for the military are not only difficult to translate but
may promote depictions and thoughts from media about the military (Marvin, 2014). Research
shows that identification of service-connected disability can prompt concerns by employers
regarding mental health, career identity, and other stereotypes and stigmas which function as
barriers to employment (Stern, 2017). In a study of 72 supervisors reviewing three resumes of a
non-disabled person, a paraplegic, and a person with mental health, supervisors rated the person
with mental health last despite all qualifications being the same (Bordieri & Drehmer, 1985).
Research overwhelmingly shows bias and concern regarding veteran’s mental health
subsequently acting as a barrier to employment (Bordieri & Drehmer, 1985, 1986; Harrell &
Berglass, 2012; Loughran, 2014; Peat & Perrmann-Graham, 2022; SHRM, 2012; Stern, 2017;
Stone & Stone, 2015; Stone et al., 2018). Throughout interaction with hiring authorities, veterans

37
are at risk of becoming victim to the stereotypes and stigmas. Encountering stereotypes may
negatively impact a veteran’s perceived ability and actual performance (Inzlicht & Schmader,
2012; Steele, 2011; Swab et al., 2022). Research has shown that hiring managers do have bias
and stereotype when reviewing resumes that indicate military experience, which subsequently
affects perceived job fit within an organization (Stone et al., 2018; Ward, 2020).
Finally, as veterans participate in the interview process, attempts at networking, and even
during conversations confiding in family and friends, they continue to face barriers and supports.
Stereotypes are highly prevalent and, while not purposefully meant to dissuade, research show
they significantly impact individuals and their performance (Sue, 2003). If a veteran fails during
this phase, they may question their ability to attain civilian employment and/or their group
identity again.
Summary
This chapter explained the common themes of stereotyping, bias, and overgeneralization
and how their effects on self-efficacy and performance. Discussion of social identity theory
(Islam, 2014; Ruben & LaPiere, 2022), self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1977), stereotype threat
theory (Inzlicht & Schmader, 2012; Steele, 2011; Sue, 2003), and the conceptual framework
depicting what veterans must navigate to obtain private sector employment exemplified the
critical issue of supporting our Nation in need while isolating those who are best suited to fill the
role. It is essential to understand if veterans perceive stigmatization for private sector employers,
how stereotypes and self-efficacy effect one another in veterans seeking private employment,
and to what extent veterans feel stereotyped while seeking private sector employment.

38
Chapter Three: Methodology
This study addresses the macro problem of unemployment and underemployment among
United States military veterans in the private sector after transitioning from the U.S. military.
Struggles with social identity, stereotypes, and stigmatizations toward veterans directly influence
their opportunities in private sector employment (Harrell & Berglass, 2012; Peat & PerrmannGraham, 2022; Stern, 2017; Stone et al., 2018). These issues may cause veterans to remain in the
military or work in contracted positions for the federal government rather than seeking private
sector employment. If that is the case, the private sector is never able to learn from the valuable
background skills and experience of veterans, an area which the United States is increasingly
looking to in hopes of advancing the United States technologically (Roberts & Schmid, 2022).
This chapter will study how veterans perceive stigmatization from potential private sector
employers, how stereotypes and self-efficacy effect veterans seeking private employment, and to
what extent veterans report feeling stereotyped while seeking private sector employment. This
research problem has the potential to show to what degree perceived negative stereotypes of
veterans by private employers influences veterans’ job seeking behaviors.
This qualitative study used interviews with veterans to seek information regarding the
lived experiences of veterans who have faced the transition from military service to the private
sector. The interview process revealed common trends and themes that help to understand the
impacts of perceived stigma and stereotypes on veterans seeking private sector employment.
Interviews in this study were semi-structured, leaving the opportunity for revisions and
deviations from the interview protocol as required.
Research Questions
The following research questions guided this study:

39
1. In what ways do veterans perceive stigmatization from potential private sector
employers?
2. What stereotypes do veterans encounter while seeking private sector employment?
3. How does exposure to negative stereotypes influence veteran’s reported self-efficacy
for seeking private sector employment?
Overview of Methodology
The purpose of this study was to explore and understand how veteran’s perceived
stigmatization effects employment opportunities for modern veterans transitioning out of service
to the private sector. Therefore, the study explored major barriers facing veterans during their
transition from the military to the civilian workforce. Also, this study sought to identify coping
strategies that could ease the transition for veterans as the leave the military and enter the civilian
workforce. Ultimately, this study provides a role for the U.S. government.
The Researcher
I am a disabled veteran, an advocate, and volunteer mentor for separating military
members. Considering one’s positionality and intersectionality is critical to understanding how
bias may affect a researcher during their research. Specifically, following Secules et al.’s (2021)
guidance, I focused on the areas of research topic, methodology, communication, epistemology,
relation to participants, and ontology. Identifying, assessing, and transparently highlighting
positionality is an integral process in qualitative research (Holmes, 2020). I am a White,
heterosexual, male who had a highly specialized occupation as a Special Agent in the Air Force.
I departed active military service after 13 years with a master’s degree while living in the
sprawling metropolis of Los Angeles and have since been in the reserves for 5 years. During my
transition, I felt stereotypes as an enlisted member and not an officer, as well as for leaving prior

40
to fulfilling 20 years of service. The mismatch of skills was readily apparent during the interview
process for civilian employment, and I struggled to understand how private sector potential
employers did not see my value. I had been responsible for saving and protecting countless lives,
protecting billions of dollars of technology, and providing justice to the vulnerable.
This positionality is critical for me to remain cognizant of as I conduct this research.
These experiences were significantly impactful on me even though I was successful in my
transition. I am sensitive to my positionality and intersectionality, and I understand the role it
may have played in my success. I also understand that I do not know what a marginalized or
conventional military member living in a rural area may have experienced during their transition.
Considering my positionality, a product of my above stated intersectionality, highlights my
motivation for conducting this research. This reflection on my own positionality is an important
consideration in determining if I am the correct person for this role as well as if this topic is
correct for me to interrogate, according to the work of Parson (2019) and Strunk and Locke
(2019). Given my closeness to this topic I am cognizant of the need to remain open-minded
throughout this study.
The philosophical worldview of inquiry I align closest with is constructivism. This
paradigm of inquiry is one based on multiple socially constructed realities. According to
Creswell and Creswell (2018), humans construct subjective meaning based on their experiences.
I fully recognize the information I uncover may not support the experiences that I personally had.
My goal is to better understand if and how this problem exists and to what extent, if applicable.
To overcome potential for bias, my dissertation committee carefully reviewed my interview
protocol to ensure no leading questions were present. Research suggests honestly and

41
transparently conducting a self-evaluation of one’s perspective as a researcher is essential for
overcoming potential assumptions and bias in research (Grossmann, 2019).
Data Source: Interview
This study consisted of semi-structured interviews conducted with 10 individuals who
identify as veterans and have transitioned from the U.S. military in the past 5 years. I conducted
interviews via virtual meetings. Interview questions were semi-structured and mostly openended.
Participants
I selected participants via purposeful sampling utilizing existing networks through my
network on social media and through work. This purposeful sampling is appropriate for this
problem of practice as it allows a researcher to discover, learn, and gain insight from a sample
that possesses the greatest resources in terms of knowledge and experience applicable to the
problem (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Due to the nature of the study, this populace was ideal for
understanding the lived experiences of veterans undergoing the above-described transition. This
study also utilized convenience sampling (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) by recruiting participants
from among individuals I have come into contact through my experiences during and after the
military. After 13 years of active duty and 5 years of reserves in the military, my network of
military colleagues and associates both known, and unknown is quite large. This network
alleviates concerns with access as described by Creswell and Creswell (2018). I contacted
participants through email to determine their willingness to participate. I selected 10 participants
to participate based on their identification as a veteran who has transitioned from the U.S.
military in the past 5 years and their availability for an interview.

42
It was not possible to provide some variety in intersectionality of age and gender based
on the number of volunteers, thus a limitation of the study remains that the findings are not
generalizable to the wider population of veterans. There were two criteria for selection to the
study: Each individual must be a (a) veteran of the U.S. military who has (b) attempted to
transition from the military to the private sector in the past 5 years, regardless of their success in
obtaining employment or not.
Instrumentation
Interviews were semi-structured because, due to the personal and potentially emotional
nature of the interview, the likelihood of deviating from the listed questions into tangential topics
is high. Semi-structured questions were appropriate for these interviews because the more
informal structure allowed respondents to describe their experiences in their own unique ways
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). I created the protocol, and assessed and refined it through a series of
mock interviews with a set of candidates who do not meet the criteria for the study. The literature
review informed the interview questions. Appendix B includes the interview protocol.
Data Collection Procedures
I scheduled interviews via email to alleviate discussing more than the purpose of the
interview. After confirming the interview day and time, I met with each participant. Interviews
lasted between 45–60 minutes on average. This amount of time allowed for discussion regarding
the semi-structured protocol questions without becoming too tangential. I conducted interviews
via Zoom. With consent from each participant, I recorded the audio of each interview and then
created transcripts from the audio recordings. Next, I moved the data collected from interviews
into a Microsoft Word document on my laptop and it remained in my personal custody while I

43
conducted an analysis of the data. I justified the decision to put notes into my laptop because of
my personal habits of work and research, resulting in more efficiency.
Data Analysis
The primary objective of data analysis is to make sense out of collected data through
consolidating, reducing, and interpreting (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In this qualitative study, I
implemented the data analysis process simultaneously with data collection to increase efficiency
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). If not conducted simultaneously, information may have become
repetitive and unfocused (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). I analyzed the data to search for
commonalities and trends in the collected data. Specifically, I wanted to ensure that information
highlighted during analysis met two characteristics in accordance with Lincoln & Guba (1985),
(a) it stood alone with no other information and (b) it was heuristic, revealing information about
this study while stimulating further thought (Lincoln & Gupta, 1985; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Finally, I categorized the collected data based on the type of information it included and then I
sorted, coded based on trends and commonalities, and analyzed it to understand its impact across
the participant population.
The coding process for this study commenced with a systematic a priori approach,
encompassing terms inherently linked to the three foundational theories within the conceptual
framework. These terms initially revolved around stereotypes, stigmatization, and self-efficacy.
Subsequently, an iterative expansion of this coding schema was undertaken, delineating between
positive and negative manifestations across various dimensions. Specifically, the coding
framework was refined to discern nuances in internal referrals for job opportunities, the
multifaceted impacts stemming from stereotypes and stigmatization, and the corresponding
ramifications—whether advantageous or detrimental—on individuals’ self-efficacy. This coding

44
methodology facilitated a comprehensive analysis, enabling a nuanced exploration of the
intricate interplay between these fundamental constructs within the research domain.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
Qualitative validity is synonymous with trustworthiness, authenticity, and credibility
(Creswell & Miller, 2000). I ensured credibility in this study through analyzing data via themes,
trends, and commonalities, respondent validation, and peer debriefing. I utilized respondent
validation as it is effective in providing the opportunity for participants to verify that the data
analyzed, summarized, and presented in this study is a factual representation of their experience
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Through peer review, I addressed
reliability in this study. Due to the qualitative nature of this study, I could not use replication as a
determination for reliability. Instead, I considered determination of reliability through consensus
that given the data collected, findings are logical to outsiders (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Ethics
The USC institutional review board (IRB) ensured the ethical conduct of this study to
include the protection of all human subjects involved in the research. No email contact, survey
distribution, or interviews took place prior to receiving approval from the USC IRB. As the
research focused on input from individuals not acting as organizational representatives, no
universities or military services required any additional IRB process. No conflict of interest was
present between me and the research subjects. There was no shared military or academic chain of
command between me and the research subjects which could contribute to power dynamics.
Lastly, while I did not receive any immediate financial benefit from this research, it is important
to acknowledge how the development of a professional network may lead to possible future
employment opportunities.

45
I sought permission to record each interview upon initial contact during the interview. I
discussed voluntary participation of all participants and provided them with the USC Information
Sheet for Exempt Research (Appendix C) during recruitment and again at the beginning of each
interview. I ensured confidentiality by utilizing a numbering system (code) to code the interview
transcripts and remove identifying information from transcripts. I destroyed the video recordings
and audio recordings once I produced the interview transcripts and verified the content for
accuracy. The findings include only the field of employment and position, if I deemed it to be an
essential piece of information; however, I did not disclose specific organizations of the
participants. I maintained recordings on an encrypted external hard drive and kept in my personal
custody until I reformatted it upon acceptance of this dissertation. Ethically, I reported all
information in this study transparently and honestly while remaining cognizant of my potential
biases based on positionality.
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations are the constraints and weaknesses, generally not in the researchers control
and attributed the design of the study that could affect study outcome (Simon & Goes, 2013;
Theofanidis & Fountouki, 2018). A key limitation of this study was external validity, or the
generalizability of the study. It would be an error to assume the results of this study are a
duplicative representation of all military members leaving the service. Accounting for variables
such as race, gender, age, occupation, and other aspects of intersectionality would be far too in
depth to replicate identically for this study.
Delimitations are the parameters set by the researcher and allow exploration of answers
to the underlying questions of the study (Simon & Goes, 2013; Theofanidis & Fountouki, 2018).
An intentional delimitation was the method of utilizing my robust network of veterans who

46
possess the experiential information to satisfy the purpose of this study. Additionally, sample
size was a delimitation and boundary to maintain a smaller study that could work within the
confines of the available time for this project. While this study was small, if it is anywhere near
an accurate representation of the ratio of smooth vs. arduous transitions, it certainly is not
accurately reflected at TAPS or within the minds of transitioning veterans. The theoretical
frameworks were also delimitations; however, the various lenses were essential to understanding
the problem of practice. Finally, the focus areas in this study were delimitations that speak to the
larger overall problem of practice.

47
Chapter Four: Findings
This chapter begins with a review of the study’s purpose, research questions, and a
synopsis of the participants. The following sections address the research questions in order. This
chapter includes the summarized findings as well as detailed discussions of the relationships
between the study’s discoveries, literature review, and conceptual framework. After these
discussions, the study presents common trends and themes. This chapter concludes with a
summary of all findings. All individual and institution names are pseudonyms.
A Review of the Study’s Purpose
The purpose of this study was to explore and understand how veteran’s perceived
stigmatization effects employment opportunities for modern veterans transitioning out of service
to the private sector. This study utilized a three-part conceptual framework highlighting social
identity theory (Islam, 2014; Ruben & LaPiere, 2022), self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1977), and
stereotype threat theory (Inzlicht & Schmader, 2012; Steele, 2011; Sue, 2003) to exemplify the
process and obstacles veterans experience upon leaving military service and attempting to secure
private sector employment. Additionally, this research explored how veterans feel they are
perceived as well as how they perceive themselves and peers during this process.
Three research questions guided this study:
1 . In what ways do veterans perceive stigmatization from potential private sector
employers?
2 . What stereotypes do veterans encounter while seeking private sector employment?
3 . How does exposure to negative stereotypes influence veteran’s reported self-efficacy
for seeking private sector employment?

48
Participants
Of the 18 survey responses received, 12 candidates met the initial screening criteria. Out
of the 12 candidates, 10 candidates committed to and participated in interviews. The interview
candidates met suitability criteria by identifying as a veteran who has or has attempted to
transition from the military to civilian sector and sought employment in the private sector.
While this study did not explicitly collect racial, ethnic, or gender demographics, the data
revealed research limitations discussed in Chapter Five. For example, all the participants
presented as men, seven of the 10 participants presented as White, and only three participants
were officers in the military while the remaining seven interviewees were enlisted members. The
interviewees represented four of the six military branches and were a mix of officer and enlisted
ranks with varying fields of expertise and durations of military service ranging between 4 to 27
years. Table 1 contains participant information.

49
Table 1
Participant Demographics
Note. O = officer; E = enlisted
a Periods of service defined by U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2022, April 21). Employment
situation of veterans – 2021 [Press release]. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/vet.pdf
The 10 eligible military veterans interviewed for this study fulfilled a variety of job
specialties, ranks, and time in service. Equally diverse are the geographical locations throughout
the country where they ended up upon departing the service as well as the types of occupations
and/or education they pursued and obtained. Nine of the 10 interviewees were in the military
after September 11, 2001 (Iraq and Afghanistan contingency era), while one interviewee was
enlisted during the Gulf War.
Name Rank Branch Field Years of Svc. Period of service a
Allen O USAF Aviation Security 18 Gulf War II
Kevin E USMC Law Enforcement 6 Gulf War II
Paul O USAF Logistics 27 Gulf War II
Rami E USA Intelligence 4 Gulf War II
Shane O USA Infantry 10 Gulf War II
Seth E USMC Infantry 4 Gulf War II
Rick E USAF Engineering 4 Gulf War I
Dale E USAF Medical 6 Gulf War II
Sid E USMC Support 5 Gulf War II
Ralph E USN Special warfare 20 Gulf War II

50
Differing Experiences Amongst Common Backgrounds
Interviewed participants were military veterans with unique and diverse experiences
throughout a variety of years in service where they had varied skill sets, ranks, occupations,
opportunities, and motivations. Throughout interviews, some commonalities were present, each
interviewee’s experience and perception during transition out of the military varied. While some
interviewees recalled positive experiences during their transition from the military, others
highlighted significant frustrations, fears, and inevitable feelings of doom and failure.
Varying Perceptions and Experiences
The 10 interviewees in this study represented four of the six military branches, were
either enlisted personnel or commissioned officers, and had served in the military for periods of
time ranging from 4–27 years between the years of 1993 and 2023. Interviewees were veterans
of the UMSC (n = 3), USA (n = 2), USN (n = 1), and USAF (n = 4). While a more even split
would have been preferable, there was an uneven division amongst the study participants
between enlisted (n = 7) and commissioned officer (n = 3) ranks. The majority (n = 9) of
individuals served during Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom, and one
served during Desert Storm (n = 1). Out of the 10 participants, two entered service prior to the
events of September 11, 2001. One interviewee was medically retired after sustaining an injury
in combat, another was medically retired for non-combat related issues, and two retired from
their respective branches after serving 20 or more years. The following
case comparison highlights the breadth of their military experiences.
Participant Summaries
The participant summaries include descriptions of each participant and exemplify the
diversity in experiences and perspectives among just a small handful of veterans who left the

51
military and attempted to obtain civilian employment. Variation in status (enlisted versus
commissioned officer), branch, time in service, and skill sets are just a few factors impacting
their experiences. A deeper review of their experiences and perceptions as they pertained to
stereotypes, judgment, motivation, successes, and failures provides more fidelity when analyzed
with critical factors contained in the conceptual framework.
Participant Summary: Paul
Paul, the oldest subject, is a White man who voluntarily commissioned in the U.S. Air
Force and attended the U.S. Air Force Academy. He served for 27 years in the logistics field, as
well as in numerous leadership roles. Paul relayed a feeling of slight anxiety despite having
confidence that he would obtain an acceptable role upon departing the service. His confidence
was due to his knowledge of and involvement with an organization that exclusively assists
military service academy graduates with job placement upon leaving the military. Paul said he
had little difficulty obtaining a senior level leadership role for a globally recognized large
manufacturing corporation. Paul asserted that being a veteran was an important part of his
identity.
Participant Summary: Rami
Rami is an American man of Lebanese decent who enlisted in the U.S. Army, where he
served as both a linguist and a human intelligence collector. He served 4 years, three of which
were in Iraq. Upon departing the military, he struggled to obtain a similar occupation, eventually
selling automobiles until departing America for cheaper cost of living in Lebanon.
Participant Summary: Sid
Sid is a White man who enlisted in the U.S. Marine Corps where he filled various
administrative support roles throughout his 5–year enlistment. Sid departed the service feeling

52
unprepared despite having a bachelor’s degree. He described himself as a “stereotypical
homeless veteran” who was at one point cleaning restrooms in the evenings due to struggles with
suicidal ideations and insomnia exacerbated by difficulty obtaining a job with sustainable pay.
Participant Summary: Kevin
Kevin is a White man who enlisted as a law enforcement member in the U.S. Marine
Corps. He separated after 6 years and became a full-time college student while delivering liquor
and landscaping to make financial ends meet. He described feeling like a victim of circumstances
because he was still in the Marine Reserves and employers seemed apprehensive due to potential
overseas deployments at the time (approximately 2002–2008). Approximately 4 years post
separation, he felt comfortable with the amount of financial income he was earning although he
drove nearly 2 hours round trip daily to maintain the job role.
Participant Summary: Dale
Dale is a White man who enlisted as an emergency medical technician (medic) in the
U.S. Air Force. He served 6 years prior to separating and attending college. While attending
college, he worked as a medical assistant and taught part time to make ends meet. He described
having a challenging time making adequate pay until 6 years later when he possessed a master’s
degree and worked as a health technology specialist. Despite the prolonged battle to earn
adequate pay, he felt he would have struggled significantly more had he not had a somewhat
common and transferrable skill set in the medical field.
Participant Summary: Ralph
Ralph is a White man who enlisted as a parachute rigger in the U.S. Navy where he
supported countless special operations with Navy SEAL teams. He retired after 20 years before
having significant difficulty obtaining a job. Most of his career consisted of learning new tasks in

53
training, executing the tasks to mastery, and then teaching the tasks to new employees as a
subject matter expert. After separating, he worked one role obtained through friends; however, at
the time of our interview was anxious to hear back about working at a fast-food establishment.
Ralph stated clearly that he could follow direction, be punctual, and physically accomplish tasks,
but he felt employers were not interested in those basic skills let alone his decades of leadership
and executing tasks under pressure.
Participant Summary: Shane
Shane is a White man who commissioned as an officer in the U.S. Army after graduating
from college. He was medically retired after 10 years, after experiencing an injury in combat
overseas. Shane described his transition out of the military as a negative experience where he felt
unsupported and unprepared while leaving the military and felt like he did not belong and was
not welcome once in the civilian sector seeking employment.
Participant Summary: Seth
Seth is a Black man who enlisted in the U.S. Marine Corps as a field artillery mechanic.
He served from 2007–2011 prior to separating and attending college. While in school, he worked
as a pizza delivery person. He recalled applying to multiple positions at breweries, coffee shops,
and gyms but never being the person selected for the role. He described feeling like an outcast in
college and stigmatized as military and aggressive due to his military affiliation. He recalled
classmates asking him how many people he had killed and feeling judged based on his veteran
status more than his character and individual attributes. Seth proclaimed he “worked hard to get
away from the violent veteran stigma” and that he uses different avenues for interpersonal
communications and refined nomenclature to disassociate from the veteran stigma. Seth asked

54
and received assistance from some classmates who helped him to change some of his engrained
habits to fit in more socially.
Participant Summary: Rick
Rick is a White man who enlisted in the U.S. Air Force after graduating high school. He
specialized as an engineering assistant and served 4 years. Shortly before leaving the service, he
attended mandatory preparation training where the military told him to go on unemployment and
select a state with high monthly payments. He felt uncomfortable with the guidance and obtained
employment; however, felt he received low pay due to his recent military separation and
employers assuming he had few options and needed employment. Rich felt undervalued and
unappreciated in his first role leaving the military and recalled making less money than he would
have if he had received unemployment.
Participant Summary: Allen
Allen is a White man who commissioned in the U.S. Air Force after graduating from a
civilian college. He served for 18 years total, 6.5 years on active duty. He described being
willing to accept a low paying police officer position because he felt he had no other options or
skill sets. Allen explained he learned years later that he possessed skills that he never considered
while he was in the military or once he had separated.

55
Research Question 1: Findings
Research Question 1 focused on how veterans perceive stigmatization from potential
private sector employers. Five of the interview questions in the interview protocol (Appendix B)
pertained to this research question and addressed essential elements of the conceptual
framework, specifically related to social identity theory (Islam, 2014; Ruben & LaPiere, 2022),
self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1977), and stereotype threat theory (Inzlicht & Schmader, 2012;
Steele, 2011; Sue, 2003). Responses from participants indicated a variety of stances which could
they attributed to a variety of factors such as time in service, branch of service, or their
individual status as an officer or enlisted member. Common stigmatizations included the
perception that veterans are militant, aggressive, and a risk to self or others. Shared impacts
included receiving lower compensation than expected or significant difficulty obtaining quality
employment as well as exacerbation of pre-existing mental health issues.
Stigmatizations
Of the study’s 10 participants, eight mentioned some form of experienced stigmatization
during their transition from military while seeking civilian employment. Of these eight, the
experiences varied; however, some shared commonalities such as identifying as a disabled
veteran or questions regarding combat experiences and a general disconnect from what a veteran
realistically did in the military. Also varied were the impacts of the experienced stigmatizations
on the veterans.

56
Table 2
Participant’s Experiences With Stigmatization
Exacerbation of Mental Health Issues
Seth felt stigmatized in college after his time in the U.S. Marine Corps. Classmates asked
Seth how many people he had killed, if he had killed people, and if he would attend parties with
them to be a bodyguard of sorts should any trouble arise. Seth felt others thought he was
“militant,” “aggressive,” “morally different,” and “enjoyed fighting” due to his background. Seth
deliberately did not tell many stories of his experience to alleviate exacerbating the
stigmatizations he felt and due to not being able to relate to other classmates through his
experiences.
Rami felt stigmatized while in the military due to his Arab descent. Amongst various
experiences, leaders told him to walk with local national forces to render a potential explosive
device safe as his military teammates stayed back in safe positions. This was not normal as Rami
Name Stigmatization Impactful
Allen Yes Yes
Kevin No No
Paul Yes No
Rami Yes Yes
Shane Yes Yes
Seth Yes Yes
Rick Yes Yes
Dale No No
Sid Yes Yes
Ralph Yes Yes

57
was a linguist, not an explosives ordinance professional, and this stuck with him mentally,
making him feel less valued due to his ethnicity. Upon separating, people asked Rami “which
military” he served in, further exacerbating his perception of stigmatizations. Due to his
ethnicity, Rami felt stigmatized by both Americans and others from the Levant.
Shane described his perceived stigmatizations after combat injuries and medically
retiring. He struggled to think of stories that were not related to combat to exemplify his
experience to assist with avoiding others viewing him as “crazy” and “harmful.” He felt that
behind his back others would use such information against him and use factors such as PTSD or
owning firearms as a reason to be careful around him. He specifically said he could not share
stories that affected him most with others. The United States awarded Shane with numerous
purple hearts, but he found himself fabricating how he earned them to avoid making others
fearful. Shane felt that he was victim to different standards than others; for instance, others could
get angry or passionate at the office, but if Shane did, he would (did) receive a human relations
complaint.
Sid explained he felt categorized and ostracized during the employment search process
when employers asked him numerous times if he had PTSD, what war was like, and what was
the hardest thing he experienced in the military. He stated he felt like they were asking such
questions to make sure “he was not going to blow up the workplace.” Ralph felt slightly
stigmatized when co-workers considered him to be “too rigid” when first starting a new role after
leaving the military without adequate time to accurately assess him. Further, he heard co-workers
saying that another veteran only received his job offer because of his veteran status. Ralph
assumed co-workers were thinking or saying similar statements behind his back as well.

58
Deliberate Omission of Truth
Common amongst many interviewees was deliberately or strategically omitting facts
about themselves and their background associated with combat, PTSD, or status as a veteran or
disabled veteran. By omitting specific information, interviewees felt they were in a better
position to gain employment or remediate negative bias. Additionally, interviewees felt in some
cases that omitting specific military related information would lessen the chances of them not
fitting in with other work colleagues.
Allen deliberately omitted his status as a disabled veteran with PTSD because of the
impact it could have on his ability to perform and fit into the police force. Shane also described
omitting his status as a disabled veteran or using it as a strategy based on the perceived needs of
an employer as they could view it both negatively and positively. Sid recalled using his status as
a disabled veteran strategically, and he noticed if he did indicate he was a disabled veteran, he
did not receive a call back. Ralph identifies as a disabled veteran; however, he does not ask for
accommodations for fear of employer’s perceiving him negatively or as an inevitable workman’s
comp case. He recently started to not list that he was a disabled veteran because it may give him
a better shot. He does not want to say he has PTSD on job applications because he feared
workplaces think he will “shoot the place up.”
Omitting truth about one’s service to the nation should not be a strategic move to increase
employment opportunity or acceptance in the workplace. Identification as a disabled veteran
should not be a potential barrier to employment; however, aligns with existing research
indicating veteran mental health is a large concern for employers more so than other disabilities
(Bordieri & Drehmer, 1985, 1986; Harrell & Berglass, 2012; Loughran, 2014; Peat & PerrmannGraham, 2022; SHRM, 2012; Stern, 2017; Stone & Stone, 2015; Stone et al., 2018).

59
Difficulty Gaining Employment and Lower Compensation
Allen reported that being a veteran was his only status and that he felt employers spoke to
him differently and that he needed to alter responses regarding PTSD and disability to not
negatively influence chances of hiring. He did not want others to view him as a “crazy veteran”
and recalled a friend of his who the police academy removed once they disclosed having PTSD
from the military.
Paul described his first initiation with his initial civilian role after retiring from the
military. Paul’s subordinates were very hesitant with Paul and seemed to think he would “come
into the workplace like a drill sergeant” due to movies they had seen. One subordinate departed
for a new role with a different company because of their hesitation with Paul’s background.
Outside of this experience, Paul recalled his background and experience as a positive attribute to
his transition to include his status as a disabled veteran.
When asked about feeling stigmatized, Allen reported although the term seemed more
negative than he recalled the experience, he was willing to take a low paying police officer job
because he did not feel he had other options. Rick only felt stigmatization regarding the salary he
received in his first job outside of the military. He felt that his employer strategically paid him
less than he may have received elsewhere due to his recent separation from the military. Rick felt
that his status as a veteran was otherwise beneficial to his transition and evolution through
civilian employment.
No Stigmatization
This study disclosed that some participants did not experience what they perceived to be
stigmatization. Out of the 10 interviewees, two declined experiencing negative stigmatization

60
during their transition. They found their status as a veteran, their background, and military
experience to be particularly helpful.
Dale did not feel stigmatized and found his background as a veteran to be particularly
helpful during his transition. Dale specifically thought his background in the military as a medic
assisted in obtaining teaching roles. He never experienced a situation he deemed to be negative
due to his association with the military and background as a veteran.
Kevin never felt stigmatized for being a veteran and found that other perceived it
positively. He attributed this positive perception to living in a town with a dense population of
military and veterans. Kevin considered his background to be helpful in his search for
employment.
Research Question 1: Discussion
Data collected in response to the first research question revealed common trends for
veterans seeking private sector employment. Of the 10 interviewees, eight recalled experiencing
stigmatizations and seven found them to be impactful. The most common theme was veterans
feeling that potential employers, human resources, work colleagues, and fellow students viewed
them as violent or as a risk by. Participants reported omitting information such as being a
disabled veteran and having PTSD due to fear of negative implications. Participants reported
others asking them invasive questions such as, “how many people have you killed,” “what was
war like,” and “what was the hardest thing you experienced in the military.” Additionally,
participants reported they felt they were asked those questions and/or omitted information for a
variety of reasons, such as, to make sure “he was not going to blow up the workplace,” concerns
he may “shoot the place up,” to ensure they were not a “crazy veteran,” and to make sure they
were not “crazy” and “harmful.” Others reported feeling ostracized or outcast after employers

61
told them they were “too rigid” or admonished them for being too serious (e.g., smacking hand
on desk) at work. Two participants reported deliberately avoiding discussing military stories
during and after their transition to mitigate or remediate any preconceived notions about them.
One participant reported a subordinate leaving the workplace for new employment due to
concerns the participant would come into the workplace like a “drill sergeant.”
Overall, these trends are important for consideration since they are representative of all
four interviewed military branches: U.S. Army, U.S. Air Force, U.S., Marine Corps, and U.S.
Navy. Further, the most concerning quoted perceptions come from both enlisted and
commissioned officers with varied service periods (20, 18, 10, and 4 years), with no two
identical job roles. The only commonality amongst the reporting participants is being in the
military after September 11, 2001, during conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. Regarding social
identity, scholars must consider the effects of stigma and feeling like an outcast from society for
a group that is already unique (veterans make up 6% of U.S. population in 2022; Schaeffer,
2023). Equally important to consider is the fact that the stigmatizations are known to be deeply
discrediting and dehumanizing particularly to a group predisposed to mental illness (Goffman,
1963; Mittal et al., 2013). Negative stigmatizations can further exacerbate apprehensions or
preconceived notions about the job seeking experience and transition from the military that
veterans may already have from hearing stories such as those listed above from friends and
family. This could exacerbate an already arduous task of taking on a new social identity or mixed
identity for transitioning veterans. An example of this is how one participant omitted information
regarding disability because his friend previously provided that information and a company
declined to hire him. Beyond the effects on the job seeking experienced, living with a
stigmatization as a veteran (with mental illness) negatively impacts the likelihood veterans will

62
seek and continue mental health treatment (Kulesza et al., 2015; Pietrzak et al., 2015; Rodrigues
et al., 2014). This effect can transcend other aspects of this research and inevitably end with
veterans hiding their true selves and experiences to adapt to the unrealistic expectations and
stigmatizations found in this transition process. Due to stigmatizations and their impact, some
participants admitted to trying to disassociate from identity and past as a veteran.
Research Question 2: Findings
Research Question 2 focused on identifying the stereotypes encountered by veterans
while seeking private sector employment. Three of the questions in the interview protocol
(Appendix B) answered this research question and addressed stereotype threat theory (Inzlicht &
Schmader, 2012; Steele, 2011; Sue, 2003) elements of the conceptual framework. From the
participant’s responses emerged some commonalities in both positive and negative stereotypes
experienced.
Stereotypes
This study revealed that participants felt stereotypes upon transitioning from the military
into private sector employment as well as college. Participants experienced both positive and
negative stereotypes. In some cases, participants described impacts to them from stereotypes that
affected them mentally.
Positive Stereotype
Allen described feeling stereotyped in a positive way when potential employers (law
enforcement) communicated with him candidly. Allen believed this communication was due to
his prior experience in military law enforcement where he was a K–9 handler operating with
special forces in combat zones.

63
Paul recalled positive stereotypes impacting his “incredibly smooth” transition into
private sector employment. His employer seemed to understand the needs and uniqueness of a
transitioning veteran of 27 years. His employer had a seasoned employee who was also a veteran
sit in on his hiring panel to assist with explanations where needed. He felt this inclusion of a
relatable party was solely in place due to his background as a veteran. Paul felt his employer
gave him a larger scope and set of responsibilities once he settled into his position after a few
months. Paul found comfort in a large contingent of veterans at the workplace that had a
regularly scheduled group get together for interested veteran employees. He strongly highlighted
his status as a veteran and found it to always be advantageous with employers. Paul identified as
a disabled veteran and found it to be inconsequential to his workplace treatment and belonging.
Upon experiencing job interviews, Seth found that identifying as a veteran seemed
helpful, something he attributes to getting his first job as an athletic trainer. Seth deemed that job
to be pivotal to lead him on the path to becoming a Physical Therapist with the Department of
Veteran Affairs. He recalled the athletic trainer position employer was very pro-military and Seth
did not think he would have obtained the job without his status as a veteran.
Dale declined experiencing negative stereotypes; however, he recalled some positive
examples. He received a positive reaction from others when they found out he was a veteran.
Dale credited the positive reception to his sustained motivation and an overall productive
transition. He hypothesized his life would be different if he were to experience negative
stereotypes during his transition. Although Dale’s medical experience was not a direct
correlation from military to civilian sector (he was legally able to do more invasive and technical
work in the military), he found that being a veteran was highly beneficial in his teaching role. He

64
recalled students seemed to perceive him positively when they found out he was a veteran, and
they enjoyed his stories from his years in service.
Kevin recalled that in any private sector job he has been in, he was instantly a top
performer for what he described as listening and following instructions, completing tasks, and
showing up on time. He described a difference between his non-veteran work peers and himself
as well as other veterans in the workplace. He explained that in many cases, non-veteran peers
did not possess the same level of efficiency and motivation, seemed lackadaisical, and tended to
drag out tasks to fill the shift period instead of just getting the job done. Kevin felt this was a
customary practice within his workplace and he always found being a veteran to be
advantageous. Kevin felt like the people where he lived respected him, and they often thanked
him for his service.
Negative Stereotype
Sid described his life altering experience and vague stereotypes he felt upon transition
from the military. Sid departed the service with a bachelor’s degree in criminal justice but found
himself struggling to obtain sustainable employment. He first worked at a car dealer that misled
him into thinking he would be salaried only to find that he would be commission based after
completing training. He repossessed cars in the middle of the evening for $8 per hour, and he
cleaned commercial restrooms for unsustainable pay. In each of these circumstances, Sid felt
employers took advantage of him and only gave him a job because he was vulnerable and
accepted low pay. After losing his home and moving with his wife into his parent’s house, he
began a master’s degree program to bring in some income from the G.I. Bill. Sid described what
was initially a feeling of pride serving his country as a traumatic reminder of how insignificant,
unworthy of income, and outcast he felt. Sid stated his veteran pride had become a source of

65
anger and disappointment. He found a contract position through a temporary agency that he
excelled at, but, unfortunately, due to his efficiency and work ethic, the role ended early because
he completed the tasks faster than the company expected. He obtained a real estate license only
to bring in a total of $1200 of income on his 2018 tax return. He also worked a commission
insurance sales job from a call center. Sid often wondered why he struggled so much and began
to question not only his own value, but his very existence. Finally, he found a mentor who
believed in him and saw his motivation and determination, subsequently paying for him to obtain
a project management certification. His mentor told Sid he personally experienced something
similar upon leaving the military and wanted to pay it forward. Upon obtaining the certification
he struggled to obtain a role due to lack of project management experience but began teaching
project management courses for the program from which he had just graduated. This opportunity
of meaningful employment changed Sid’s life. While Sid did not point to specific instances of
stereotypes, overall, he felt as though nobody valued his background, experience, determination,
or clear ability to take on and master new tasks. After receiving the opportunity, he succeeded.
Sid now possesses an MBA and multiple doctoral degrees. He owns and operates a nationwide
business that directly changes the lives of and assists veterans who are undergoing the traumatic
experiences he once traversed. Once Sid received the opportunity, he immediately began
changing the trajectory of many lives. Today, Sid experiences positive stereotypes partly due to
the past trauma such as being credible in his line of work and sincerity in helping other veterans.
As a service-disabled veteran owned small business, he feels set apart in a positive way from
other similar businesses.
Allen explained he did not identify as himself to potential employers as a disabled
veteran with PTSD because he felt they would perceive the disability as a limitation to physically

66
and mentally completing required tasks. Seth described feeling negative stereotypes during his
transition from military to civilian employment. He felt as though others viewed him as a
“militant,” “violent” individual; for example, the university’s rugby team asked him to join
because he was a former Marine and thus must be aggressive and “tough as nails.” He explained
that baseline expectation from others was challenging, and he eventually (while in college)
stopped identifying himself as a veteran to alleviate problems. Although Seth experienced
stereotype of being violent attributed to his background in the U.S. Marine Corps, he worked
hard to differentiate himself as an individual in both communication and action. He described
himself as a diverse individual who did serve his country as a Marine but also enjoys
performance dancing and providing therapeutic medical care to those in need.
Shane experienced stereotypes that he attributed to his time in combat and medical
retirement sustained from injury in combat. Employers made him feel that he desired promotion
“too quickly,” he was “too angry,” and “too military.” Shane felt the stereotypes he experienced
were a result of others exposure to media, news, and movies, and a form of “unconscious bias.”
One specific memory Shane recalled was a story he told about a situation in combat wherein a
terrorist was using a child as a human shield and Shane authorized a soldier to take action to save
the child. Shane thought this story would exemplify his ability to think and lead under extreme
stress; however, he relayed that interviewer perceived it differently. Later, Shane’s mentor
explained to him that his story may have come across as Shane authorizing an execution and that
ordinary stories representing decision making under stress were much more relatable such as
relationship arguments. Shane obtained his first role through a connection he had and was based
on his background in the U.S. Army. Shane described the environment as one with a lot of
yelling, and he felt they selected him for the role because he would be acclimated to yelling.

67
Shane recalled many interviews in which the interviewer told him they thought he would be
bored in the role due to his background.
Rami identified negative stereotypes associated with his ethnic background as a Lebanese
male despite having significant intelligence related work background and possessing a high-level
security clearance. During interviews, employers asked Rami “which Army” he served in which
he attributed to his ethnic sounding last name. These negative stereotypes made him feel as
though he did not belong in the geographic areas in which he was searching for jobs. He stated
he felt like a “second class citizen.”
Rick felt like he was not a valuable tasset or a necessary part of his first job after the
military. He felt like they hired him because he accepted what he later learned was low pay for
his role. He attributed his job offer with low pay to the fact he was straight out of the military.
Rick strategically stopped highlighting his military experience in job interviews and discovered
employers offered him higher pay than when he included the military experience. Although Rick
felt his veteran status was insignificant or negative initially upon departing the service, today, he
considers it advantageous.
Ralph described feeling that others thought of him as too rigid due to his status as a
veteran. Ralph felt there was an expectation that he would perform better than his work peers. He
never felt like he received an interview or job offer because of positive stereotypes despite
searching for general, physical work that did not require significant technical knowledge. Ralph
felt that he was negatively stereotyped because he did not possess a college degree despite
working for 20 years and being retired from the military. Ralph stated employers do not seem to
understand that leaders do not learn leadership in a college classroom, it is through adversity and
practice.

68
Research Question 2: Discussion
The data collected to answer this study’s second research question identified trends for
both positive and negative stereotypes. Positive stereotypes highlighted by participants consisted
of helping obtain employment (n = 3), feeling included and comfortable in a workplace that
creates space for veterans (veteran in interview to translate and veteran groups at work),
employers being more candid than with non-veteran peers (specifically, one participant
mentioned law enforcement), and working harder and more efficiently than non-veteran peers.
Negative stereotypes highlighted consist of discovering that placing PTSD or disabled veteran on
applications was counterproductive to getting a call back from employers (n = 5). This aligns
with research due to fear of judgment, veterans with mental health issues may conceal their
issues and fail to seek professional assistance (Britt et al., 2007; Dickstein et al., 2010;
McFarling et al., 2011; Pietrzak et al., 2009; Stecker et al., 2007). Some participants who felt
both positive and negative stereotypes felt conflicted such as being asked to participate in rugby
and attend parties because they must be violent and could be a bodyguard of sorts. An employer
advised one participant the role they were interviewing for would bore them because of their
background; however, the participant was personally eager and anxious to work the role. Some
also received feedback about trying to promote too quickly, assumingly a byproduct of their
work ethic. Some participants felt employers paid them low rates initially because they were
newly out of the military which historically does not pay commensurate with similar civilian
sector roles.
Overall, employers did not receive the efficiency, motivation, and willingness to
accomplish undesirable the way participants communicated it during their transition. Conflict
arises mentally when they want to accomplish the task at hand, but employers simultaneously

69
make them feel othered, or that they are trying too hard or more than the norm. In only one
instance, a participant felt their transition was flawless with an employer who ensured there was
a sense of belonging and others who understood their uniqueness present to assist. Stereotype
threat theory tenets show that fear of judgment feeling a stereotype can exacerbate its impacts.
Stereotype threat theory proposes that stereotype threats directly affect an individual’s perceived
ability and subsequent ability (Inzlicht & Schmader, 2012). For a group that may already feel
misunderstood, unappreciated/underappreciated, perceived as violent, or pigeonholed into
military roles, stereotypes can be virulent. Stereotypes can affect veterans in the transition
process by denying them their reality as others define them with preconceived notions (Sue,
2003). The impact of not embracing a group that is traditionally able to accomplish tasks of all
difficulty levels despite the circumstances is counterproductive to most organization’s bottom
line. In a mental state where veterans feel less than confident in their ability to transition
successfully and succeed in the workplace, stereotypes can be detrimental.
Research Question 3: Findings
Research Question 3 focused on identifying how exposure to negative stereotypes
influences the reported self-efficacy of veterans for seeking private sector employment. Three of
the questions in the interview protocol (Appendix B) answered this research question and
addressed self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1977) elements. This section also includes a discussion
of how interviewees perceived their status as a veteran to impact their transition into private
sector employment as well as to what degree they consider veteran to be part of their identity.
Paul never experienced a deficiency in self-efficacy and had an underlying belief that his
experience and status as not only a veteran but also a senior leader would turn his transition into
a positive experience. Throughout his experience, Paul utilized an organization administered and

70
supported by the Alumni Associations and Association of Graduates of the U.S. Military
Academy, the U.S. Naval Academy, the U.S. Air Force Academy, the U.S. Coast Guard
Academy, and the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy. They host the only job fair exclusively for
service academy alumni. Paul’s association with this organization boosted his confidence and led
to a job offer with only one emailed resume to the organization that sent it to a candidate
company. Paul described his experience as “incredibly smooth” during transition, and, thus, he
never doubled himself. Paul thought his status as a veteran was advantageous to his transition
into private sector employment. One aspect Paul highlighted as beneficial to his self-efficacy was
knowing other veterans who successfully transitioned from similar military roles into private
sector positions, making the task seem not only possible but common.
Dale minimally struggled with self-efficacy during his transition due partly to a lack of
direct correlation between his military job skillset and the civilian equivalent but not due to
stereotypes or stigmatization. During his transition, he switched from a private sector role to a
civilian role working for the military and back again to private sector positions. Dale doubted
himself when he eventually began working in management but did not directly attribute the selfdoubt to stereotypes. He stated that if he had experienced negative stereotypes, it would have
certainly affected his confidence and his trajectory in school and work as a result. Dale felt his
association to the military and status as a veteran were advantageous to his experience
transitioning from the military.
Ralph stated he “did not think it would be this hard to find a job” after serving over 20
years in the military. Ralph experienced impacts to his confidence and self-efficacy during and
after his transition from the military. From the start, while attending mandatory pre-separation
training, he felt the course was a “check the box process” that did not prepare him for a job

71
search. The lack of concern he felt from the pre-separation class turned into an exhaustive search
for someone to see value in his background and experience. He felt that employers did not
understand or seem concerned with the leadership skills, punctuality, knowledge of IT platforms,
ability to present and brief leadership, and experience working in both small and large
organizations that he possessed and executed over two decades. He never wanted to work within
the government again once retired but is now putting in for a job that will require him to move
because he feels he has run out of options. Although a private sector job described Ralph as “too
rigid,” he did not feel it impacted his belief in his ability to succeed because the military taught
him, “if you want to do something, you’ll find a way to get it done.”
Kevin experienced issues with self-efficacy when he realized he was overqualified for
entry level roles while at the same time not qualified for leadership roles due to lack of
experience in the civilian sector but not impacted by stereotypes or stigmatization. He found that
employers appreciated when he described experiences and stories from the military. Kevin
considered his status as a veteran to always have been advantageous throughout his transition
into private sector employment and an important part of his identity.
The transition into private sector employment negatively impacted Shane’s self-efficacy.
He felt as though employers viewed him with an unconscious bias derived from media that made
others think he was a risk in the workplace. This mindset along with the 2–year long struggle to
secure employment led to a lack of self-efficacy and onset of depression and self-doubt, feeling
as though he was “placed into a box” because of his background as an injured veteran. When he
could not find a job, he described going through a “major crisis of confidence” as he could not
pay rent. Shane had many interviews but struggled to secure employment. The stereotypes and
bias he perceived were also part of workplace issues he experienced. Shane believed when others

72
thought he was overly aggressive and received Human Resources complaints, it was based off
stereotypes and a double standard from that of his peers. Until he could prove himself, Shane
started at a lower leadership tier than he believed he was capable of. He felt that was a result of
his veteran background and the employer wanting to ensure he could lead in a corporate setting
since it was different than the military. Although he found his veteran status mostly
disadvantageous during his transition, Shane considers his veteran background a large part of his
identity.
Rick considers his veteran status an important part of his identity and found it to be both
advantageous and disadvantageous during his transition. He described a positive impact to his
self-efficacy as it greatly aided his transition to private sector employment. He found his veteran
status to be most advantageous as it gave him the ability to start a small business and indicate its
ownership as ‘disabled veteran owned,’ which set him apart from other businesses. He found it
to be disadvantageous when it came to compensation and found when he stopped mentioning his
veteran background, he received offers for higher pay.
Rami felt that his status as a veteran had a negative impact to obtaining employment. He
attempted to utilize his background and security clearance but eventually experienced
diminishing hope as he dealt with unwelcome assumptions based on his ethnic background.
While attempting to fulfill various contracting positions overseas for the U.S. government, he
continued to experience what he considered stigmatizations regarding his ethnicity which caused
a “paranoia.” Over a period of 11 years after leaving the military, Rami eventually felt incapable
of obtaining an intrinsically rewarding, sustainable job and left to live with family in Lebanon
due to lower cost of living and acceptance.

73
Seth explained the military engrained a mindset of no option for failure in him. As a
result, stereotypes and stigmatization did not impact his self-efficacy. He felt stigmatized by
younger people in college, morally outcast, and viewed negatively because he was a former U.S.
Marine in an area considered to be overwhelmingly non-conservative. His veteran status is a part
of his identity although he worked diligently to encompass a varied, multi-faceted identity after
separating from the military.
Allen felt his status as a veteran was advantageous and considered it an imperative part of
his identity. Allen’s background positively impacted his self-efficacy from his background. For
instance, he felt employers spoke to him more candidly and positively than non-veteran peers
would have experienced. Upon departing service, Allen limited his own options mentally due to
his background and thought he would only be able to work in law enforcement. Later, he realized
he also had inherent experience in project management, leadership, and entrepreneurship. In
addition, he proactively omitted information about certain aspects of his background, such as
being a disabled veteran, because he worried about negative impacts on employment. Although
stereotypes or stigmatization did not impact his self-efficacy, he proactively took steps to alter
information about himself and what roles he could fulfill due to his perception of himself.
Sid’s transition into private sector greatly impacted his self-efficacy. In the military, Sid
fulfilled numerous administrative roles such as executive assistance, legal clerk, postal chief, and
funeral director. Sid recalled feeling “hopeless” and being in a bad mental place when he
continuously failed to obtain sustainable employment. He described a slight impact to selfefficacy when asked what was like or what was the toughest thing you did in the military as it
made him consider if he was on the right track or in the right place. Sid considers his veteran
status important because of his business wherein he assists veterans in need; however, after his

74
experiences transitioning from the military, he views his sacrifices and sustained trauma during
transition as a reminder for what needs to change in America.
Research Question 3: Discussion
The data collected to answer this study’s third and final research question identified that
some participants reported no impact from stereotypes and stigmatization to their self-efficacy (n
= 3), some reported positive impact (n = 3), two reported negative (n = 3), and one reported both
(n = 1). A commonality was found amongst the group who identified no impact to self-efficacy.
Two of those participants indicated the military engrained a mindset of “no failure” and “if you
want to get something done, you will find a way to accomplish it.” The participant who reported
only negative impact to self-efficacy said at one point he felt desperate and hopeless and his
drive to continue was because he had a daughter he needed to support. The participants who
reported both positive and negative impacts felt positive because of living in a pro-military
community that thanked veterans and because of a mentor who identified a veteran in need and
provided the means to gain training and employment. The negative aspects identified were not
being considered a leader in the private sector and continuously being undervalued and judged
based on concerns about mental health. The reports of positive only impacts included having a
better chance of employment in law enforcement than non-veteran peers and being considered a
senior leader due to military leadership and the reputation of the veteran placement organization.
Many of the reported experiences can be associated with an overgeneralized perception of PTSD
which can be damaging according to research. According to Brown et al. (2016), delving into
causal events of PTSD increases self-efficacy while overgeneralization not only decreases selfefficacy but also exacerbates chances of future overgeneralization.

75
The results of this portion of the interview were interesting because the level of impact to
self-efficacy identified was relatively low compared to the level of stereotypes and
stigmatizations experienced by veterans. Although only two participants referenced the
engrained mindset of resilience and perseverance, it is worth noting that research shows
psychological resilience is an important predictor of self-efficacy (Bingol et al., 2019; Hamill,
2003). The lack of reference to impact to self-efficacy could also be low because participants do
not want to express what they could view as a sign of weakness or low self-confidence. Research
shows that veterans are more likely than others to omit that which society may view as a sign of
weakness due to traditional masculine values and stigma (Lorber & Garcia, 2010; Israelashvili &
Westwood, 2023). Some participants referenced feeling capable due to witnessing others succeed
at the same objective which aligns with self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1977).
Summary
This study consisted of interviews of 10 veterans with an average of 10.4 years of
service across four of the six military branches, Interviews revealed common trends that they
felt viewed as violent, risky, and/or mentally incapable by potential private sector employers,
human resource professionals, and some work peers. Eight of the 10 interviewees disclosed
they experienced stereotypes and stigmatizations. Participants reported omitting certain
information if they felt it would negatively impact their employment opportunity such as being
a disabled veteran. Participants felt hiring authorities asked them specific questions to
determine if they were a significant workplace violence risk. Other themes consisted of
veteran’s perception that their compensation was less than what their non-veteran counterparts
may have received, and that this was a result of recently separating from the military. Further,
participants reported feeling they worked harder and more efficiently than other non-veteran

76
employees. Interviews disclosed that six of the 10 participants felt an impact to their selfefficacy because of experiencing stigmatizations and stereotypes; however, three were positive
impacts, two were negative and one participant reported both. The self-efficacy impacts are a
slight deviation from what would be expected from the reported stereotypes and
stigmatizations. The interview responses indicated that mental resilience and perseverance of
participants played a role in this outcome.
This study discussed the impact of stereotypes and stigmatization to self-efficacy in
veterans transitioning to private sector from the military. One factor worthy of highlighting is
the impact to mental health and ability for this process to induce and/or exacerbate potential
mental health issues. When one participant was asked about veteran friendly companies, he
doubted the sincerity of the concept of federal incentives and stated the incentives were present
because it looks bad when veterans are homeless, jobless, or “start sucking shotguns because
they are depressed.” Another participant shared that he voluntarily cleaned toilets in the
evening because for those 2 hours he felt worth something and had a purpose since he could
not obtain employment. He stated, “without something to do in the night, I would have quite
literally probably taken my own life.” Comments quoted in this study express the dichotomy
participants faced when called the Nation’s heroes while experiencing the opposite. Even if the
reasons for being asked the questions were not explicitly stated, the veterans perceived the
thought and intent of the comments they shared with me. The most successful reported
transition was an individual who was pleased with the space that his employer made for him as
a veteran not only in his interview but also in the workplace. Lastly, several participants
reported feeling that companies interview veterans for incentives only and some participants
reported a distrust in the sincerity of veteran friendly companies. In general, they believed the

77
strategy was a marketing tactic to get incentives primarily and not necessarily to help veterans
who are in need during the transition process.

78
Chapter Five: Discussion
This study stemmed from my personal journey transitioning from active-duty military
service. Throughout my transition, I encountered a profound cultural gap and a lack of mutual
comprehension between my military experience and civilian employers. Despite securing
sustainable employment relatively smoothly, I consistently felt misunderstood and occasionally
unfairly judged. Attempts to articulate how my experiences as a Special Agent in a lesser-known
military agency translated into valuable skills garnered over 14 years were often met with
confusion. I frequently received advice suggesting that if I did not want to complete a full 20–
year military career leading to retirement, my only viable options were government contracting
or a civilian role within the government. Feeling alienated by my peers and simultaneously
misunderstood by potential employers, I grappled with a shifting sense of identity and a
persistent unease about my decisions from the outset. What was supposed to mark my first
“break” in 14 years quickly morphed into one of the most stressful and challenging periods of
my life. As I navigated through this transition, I found myself oscillating between extreme
gratitude for the opportunities I did secure and utter bewilderment at the unnecessary complexity
of the process. As I conclude this dissertation, I remain perplexed as to why the seemingly
straightforward connections between military experience and civilian employment are not more
readily apparent and accessible.
This study sought out to explore the macro problem of unemployment and
underemployment among United States military veterans in the private sector after transitioning
from the U.S. military. By researching and analyzing veterans who transitioned into private
sector employment, this study also identifies gaps in research and recommends future research.

79
This study utilized qualitative, semi-structured, one on one interviews to obtain
information regarding lived experiences of veterans who transitioned from the military into
private sector employment. The questions asked informed the three-part conceptual framework
consisting of social identity theory (Islam, 2014; Ruben & LaPiere, 2022), self-efficacy theory
(Bandura, 1977), and stereotype threat theory (Inzlicht & Schmader, 2012; Steele, 2011; Sue,
2003). Three research questions guided this study:
1. In what ways do veterans perceive stigmatization from potential private sector
employers?
2. What stereotypes do veterans encounter while seeking private sector employment?
3. How does exposure to negative stereotypes influence veteran’s reported self-efficacy
for seeking private sector employment?
Summary of Findings
Information derived during interviews is seen in a few common themes addressing this
study’s research questions and proposed conceptual framework. First, interviewees seem to have
unique experiences that show success and failure are not pre-determined but rather an outcome
from preparation and persistence. One repeatedly mentioned factor was transferability of job
skills from the military that veterans possess.
Second, veterans in large part found flaws in TAPS that limit its effectiveness.
Interviewees referred to the program as a check the box requirement that did not provide
substantially valuable awareness and realistic expectations about the transition process. The
negative references to TAPS program were consistent with both officers and enlisted individuals
with no significant differentiation in experience regardless of years in service.

80
Third, veterans had trouble adjusting social identity when transitioning out of the
military. One example showed that workplaces that welcomed veterans and provided space for
them showed the only example of a consistently, positively perceived experience in this study.
This aligns with existing research showing success from companies that have solidified programs
to recruit and incorporate veterans (Davis et al., 2012; Harrell & Berglass, 2012; Hanson, 2016;
NARA, 2016).
Fourth, veterans largely felt that hiding characteristics that spoke to their background and
experiences was essential to getting in the good graces of potential private sector employers.
Fifth, some veterans indicated that trying too hard, being too motivated, and not working at a
“civilian pace” could be counterproductive. Sixth, veterans felt they needed to hide their status as
disabled or use it strategically along with status as a veteran due to inconsistency in perception
form potential employers. Lastly, a handful of interviewees felt that companies who claimed they
were veteran friendly were more concerned with financial incentivization than solely assisting
veterans.
This study disclosed transitioning military veterans do experience a social identity shift
during transition, making adjustment difficult. Additionally, stigmatizations and stereotypes do
occur regardless of branch of service, enlisted or officer, job type, or years in service. The
stigmatizations and stereotypes result in veterans taking specific actions to either associate or
disassociate with their status as veteran depending on the job they are applying for and whether
they feel it would be advantageous or disadvantageous to their end goal of private sector
employment.

81
Recommendations for Practice
The reported experiences of this study’s interviewees in conjunction with previously
published research highlights three recommendations for practice with a focus on ensuring
equitable private sector employment opportunities for transitioning veterans (Bandura, 1986;
Harrell & Berglass, 2012; Inzlicht & Schmader, 2012; Rockefeller, 2017; Ruben & LaPiere,
2022; Sue, 2003). First, increased awareness across all stakeholders (DoD, Employers, veterans)
would spark conversation about the problem and impact to all and highlight the significance of
the problem. Revising existing tools such as TAPS could improve applicability for veterans in
addition to incorporating other potential networks deigned to assist veterans such as job
placement organizations specifically catered to military. Second, highlighting incentives beyond
financial for potential employers could improve likelihood of employment as well as utilization
of veterans by highlighting soft skills, such as leadership and task mastery. Further, stakeholders
should explore how utilizing existing tools focused on translating applicable skills and
experiences can be impactful. Lastly, highlighting reality and common preconceived notions to
both employers and veterans would remove the element of surprise and allow both sides to work
toward a mutual understanding of what a veteran transitioning from service generally brings to
an employer.
Recommendation for Practice 1: Increase Awareness
Increasing awareness across all stakeholders (DoD, Employers, veterans) allows an
opportunity to work toward remediating the negative experiences veterans may experience while
increasing likelihood of incorporating hard to find skills into a workplace that could potentially
benefit (McDonald, 2017). The resounding common recommendation from interviewed veterans
was to plan ahead and be prepared for the transition both financially and mentally. Only one

82
interviewee indicated experiencing a streamlined process and went closely to what they had
planned and prepared for. Currently, Title 10 U.S. Code Section 1142, pre-separation counseling
requires that military member attend TAPS “as soon as possible during the 24–month period
preceding the anticipated retirement date. In the case of a separation other than a retirement, preseparation counseling shall commence not later than 365 days before the anticipated date”
(Cornell Law School, n.d.). Factors not considered that are applicable to some of this study’s
interviewees are medical retirements or otherwise unforeseen circumstances where the military
does not place veterans into TAPS with applicable time for them to prepare. The military should
consider a shift in how they design and implement the TAPS process for military members to
know that separation and retirement are always possible, including workforce fluctuations when
the military promotes early retirement or separating specific jobs that are not essential at the time
(O’Conner et al., 2023). Military members could receive training at the beginning and during
their time in the service to remind them of their skills and their application outside of the
military. The military should teach members how to build resumes, search for employment, and
conduct interviews prior to the time in which they are separating which is often stressful.
In addition to revising the TAPS timeline to include earlier preparation, the military
should also members expose members to networks that exist with a focus on assisting veterans
with obtaining employment. The only example of a close to perfect transition in this study was
an individual who sent his resume to an organization that focused on veterans and had ties with
numerous reputable employers in need of the specific leadership and stress acclimated
backgrounds that veterans possess. A variety of companies exist that focus on assisting veterans
based on their associated military branches, rank, job skill sets, and specific geographic areas.
This type of information should be readily available to veterans by TAPS or another entity

83
before and during their transition. By incorporating greater awareness and honesty about the
transition, planning further ahead, and utilizing existing tools even after revamping, the amount
and impact of struggles that veterans experience obtaining private sector employment could
decrease over time.
Recommendation for Practice 2: Highlight Incentives (Beyond Financial)
Ensuring awareness of the benefits of recruiting and hiring veterans to private sector
employers can also be conducted while increasing awareness of the overall problem. Many
corporations are aware of financial incentives such as The Returning Heroes Tax Credit (up to
$5,600) and Wounded Warrior Tax (up to $9,600) that are available and aid in providing work to
veterans who are without jobs (Hardison et al., 2017; Harrell & Berglass, 2012). Unfortunately,
despite significant prior research showing a desire for the leadership skills that veterans possess,
(Berglass & Harrell, 2012; Curry Hall, 2015; Stackhouse, 2020) the majority of interviewees in
this study did not readily know of their own value and the soft skills or intangible skills they
possessed nor did they experience employers who seemed to be aware of the fact that most
veterans possessed such skills. Beyond tax incentives, veterans increase effectiveness and
efficiency, possess hard to obtain leadership skills and stress coping skills, as well as a strong
ability to learn new tasks quickly, master them, and be able to teach them to others.
Part of recommendation 1, increased awareness and highlighting incentives, is ensuring
private sector employers are familiar with veterans, their associated skills, and how they benefit
companies. A concerted effort to push messaging to private sector employers should be taken.
Messaging should ensure employers understand benefits both financially and otherwise so that
they can benefit by recruiting and hiring veterans (RAND Corporation, 2012). This could be
accomplished by revamping already existing tools such as the government–funded 101–page

84
crosswalk document titled What veterans Bring to Civilian Workplaces: A Prototype Toolkit for
Helping Private-Sector Employers Understand the Nontechnical Skills Developed in the military
(Hardison et al., 2017). Unfortunately, these tools were not known by any of the interviewees, all
of whom went through TAPS at various locations with differing instructors. Knowledge of
existing tools along with how to utilize them to translate skills and background from military
jargon to private sector lingo needs to be broadcast to both transitioning veterans and private
sector employers and human resource departments. One potential remedy is to make these tools
available in the same location that information on financial incentives resides. Another potential
remedy is to encourage private sector employers to highlight their benefits and lessons learned
for other potential employers. Lastly, a referral program that recognizes one potential employer
who brings in another employer that would like to participate in deliberate hiring and recruitment
of veterans could decrease pain points and overall veteran joblessness statistics.
Recommendation for Practice 3: Explain Reality vs. Preconceived Notions
Part of the veterans’ experiences from this study was the impact that presence or lack of
knowing or witnessing other similar people attempt and fail or succeed at obtaining private
sector employment. In one case, an interviewee felt confident because he knew it was possible
and common amongst colleagues to go the same path he chose. In other cases, veterans felt
outcast, struggling alone, or otherwise a victim of the circumstances that they were currently in.
Advertising the reality of the transition and the mental impact it can have should be a focus as it
has shown great benefits in other applications (Collins, 2001). If veterans receive more robust
advice about the obstacles they may encounter, they can plan accordingly and even remediate
negative impacts.

85
Additionally, stakeholders should make veterans aware of the preconceived notions they
may encounter during their effort to transition. By readying them with more accurate
information, they can prepare for and know how to respond confidently when encountering
stigmatization, stereotypes, unconscious bias, or preconceived notions. During the transition
period, it’s crucial for veterans to understand the significance of embracing a growth mindset.
This involves acknowledging and welcoming opportunities for personal development and
advancement, rather than feeling limited by rigid beliefs or initial impressions. Those who are
mindful of their mindset and any preconceived notions can actively engage in challenging and
modifying them. This proactive approach requires frontend awareness but can foster enhanced
adaptability, resilience, and achievement during transition (Dweck, 2006). This could provide a
teaching opportunity for human resource professionals or potential employers as veterans could
respond from an educated and non-threatened position instead of potentially freezing up or
shutting down as research on stereotype threat has shown in other demographics (Cadinu, 2005;
Sue, 2003). Topics which could relay and highlight reality vs. preconceived notions consist of
employers’ perceived risks hiring veterans, how to address skill translation, existing negative
stereotypes, skill mismatches, difficulty acclimating, PTSD, disabilities, and concern about
future deployments for National Guard and Reservists. Some previous research addresses aspects
of these topics to some degree but not in an effective, concerted attempt to increase knowledge
and awareness of the negative perceptions (Harrell & Berglass, 2012). For example, in a survey
of 359 human resource professionals, approximately 40% reported specific concerns regarding
PTSD and mental health, reporting those were challenges with hiring veterans (SHRM; 2012).
The research in the aforementioned survey aligns with the findings in this study wherein
employers asked veterans questions pertaining to their mental health and experiences that are

86
arguably not appropriate or have potential effect on the mindset of veterans. These research
statistics and experiences such as those captured in this study could greatly benefit future
transitioning veterans by allowing them to prepare adequately.
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations are potential weaknesses that are usually outside of the control of a
researcher but still associated to a research design (Theofanidis & Fountouki, 2018). Limitations
of this study included the researcher’s background and experience with this specific problem of
practice as a veteran who transitioned into private sector employment and the study’s failure to
equally represent gender, race, ethnicity, experiences, geographical location, and occupation
background as well as various other intersectionality factors. This is important to note as
intersectionality and positionality are impactful in diverse ways depending on how they affect an
individual (Secules et al., 2021; Holmes, 2020). The intent of interviewed individuals who
volunteered is unknown and some may have participated because of traumatic experience during
transition, which if true could potentially result in increased negative findings.
The size of this study, 10 participants, is a delimitation; however, it was a purposeful
boundary to allow for completion of this study in the established parameters of the associated
degree program. This study did not inquire or address perspectives and experiences of potential
employers, human resource professionals, or any individual associated with the U.S.
Government and the TAPS pre-separation program. This study only accounts for the lived
experiences of 10 volunteers who transitioned from the military and attempted, successfully or
unsuccessfully to obtain private sector employment.

87
Recommendations for Research
This study is novel in its attempt to understand how veterans perceive stigmatization,
stereotypes, and unconscious bias and consequently if and how it impacts their efforts during
transition from military to private sector employment. There are many options for further
research to better clarify and understand how to close the gap between potential private sector
employers, human resources professionals, society, and the nation’s veterans. Three
recommendations for research are identifying obstacles and successes, identifying ways to
empower early on, and capturing lessons learned, benefits, and obstacles.
Recommendation for Research 1: Identify Obstacles and Successes
Further research should consist of identifying specific obstacles, causes, and remedies.
Previously conducted research confirms findings in this study, such as a widely experienced
difficulty in effectively translating veteran background and experiences in a way that the private
sector easily understands. This lack of translation limits potential employers from clearly
understanding where and how a veteran applicant may fit into their organization. Tools such as
the crosswalk conducted by the RAND Corporation exist, but veterans, employers, and human
resources seem to not be utilizing them (Hardison et al., 2017). Understanding how to narrow the
gap of skills possessed and potential placement and skill utilization in private sector is still
needed for both veterans and employers. Understanding best practices taken by veterans who
have been successful throughout their transition would be beneficial despite the multitude of
factors that could affect individual experiences (Shepherd et al., 2021). While creating a
prescriptive formula for veterans to successfully transition is not likely an option, understanding
a few best practices and ensuring they are clear would be beneficial. Therefore, to more
accurately assess obstacles which prevent a military veteran from transitioning to private sector

88
employment, scholars should conduct additional research. Recommended research questions
include:
1. What obstacles most commonly impact veterans transitioning from service to private
sector employment?
2. What are best practices commonly seen in veterans who have successfully
transitioned from service to private sector employment?
Recommendation for Research 2: Identify Ways to Empower Early
This study highlighted concerns with the overall effectiveness and impact that
interviewees experienced from pre-separation training from the military. Previous research
indicates TAPS can be overly general and a broad application that loosely applies to some but
not a direct application for most. Some research indicates a more personalized approach could
yield better benefits for transitioning veterans who are often determining if they want to go to
college, work private sector, work in the government, or choose an entrepreneurial route
(Troutman & Gagnon, 2014).
By adjusting the format of pre-separation awareness and training, veterans could have an
option to serve their country while also aware they have value outside the military and feel
prepared if they decide to separate. Teaching military members during service, specifically upon
entering the military and/or every other year would allow them to have a resume established,
learn how to interview, job search, and understand the realities of separating. A great benefit of
this would be not cramming all things related to separating such as job search, resumes, and
moving into a finite, exceptionally stressful period. By spreading the preparation and awareness
over a greater period, veterans can preserve mental faculties, assisting with critical thinking.

89
Researching how this could impact overall effectiveness and mitigate current concerns would be
valuable.
Another option is having a private corporation or non-profit reach out to veterans amid
their service to teach bootcamp style courses on this topic. Veterans who have the confidence in
their choices and ability to continue helping their nation while not feeling stuck or victim to
circumstances would benefit them, their families, the military, and private sector employers.
Specifically, conducting research to determine where the private sector can adjust existing
infrastructure to better support veterans. This could include interviewing leaders who implement
TAPS to gain their insights for changes to the existing approach. The following research
questions could assist in structuring a pre-separation format that empowers veterans early on:
1. To what degree are veteran confidence, perceived struggle, and perceived success
improved or mitigated by restructuring military pre-separation training to early, mid,
and end of service?
2. How is veteran self-efficacy effected by ensuing early and ongoing awareness of the
transition process to private sector?
Recommendation for Research 3: Capture Lessons Learned, Benefits, and Obstacles
Currently, incentives exist for private sector employers who hire veterans; however, the
data does not capture the experience, struggles, and successes of both veterans and employers.
By broadly capturing datasets of veterans and employers who have transitioned and who have
been in place for a period of 6 months or 1 year would allow for visibility on what is and what is
not working well. If companies who receive an incentive reported data on this topic, a living
dataset would exist that could show best practices for both veterans and employers. Scholars
should conduct research to capture data from the many veterans who depart service and have

90
experiences to share. Interviewees in this study did share their lessons learned for both veterans
and for potential employers, many of which were common but none of which were common
knowledge for them until they experienced transitioning on their own. The following research
questions could capture lessons learned, benefits, and obstacles from employers and veterans?
1. What did you find to be the most valuable factor in obtaining private sector
employment?
2. What did you find to be the biggest hindrance or obstacle in obtaining private sector
employment?
3. What specific rationale prompted you to hire this veteran to work in your
organization?
4. What value have you seen from the veteran you hired to work in your organization?
5. What would you tell other private sector employers in regard to hiring veterans, their
strengths or weaknesses, and how they fit in the organization?
Conclusion
In 2023, the United States ranked as the strongest military in the world (Baker &
Spirlet, 2023). The United States has long balanced international conflict with economic
prowess and technological advancement. Paramount strategic documents such as National
Security Strategies (The Office of the Secretary of Defense, 2017), Cyber Security Strategies
(Tvaronavičienė et al., 2020), and Space Strategies (The White House, 2010) have explicitly
called out an inherent dependence on private sector employees to innovate and take bold steps
to enable emerging, game changing technologies in the hands of today and tomorrow’s
warfighters (Hiller & Russell, 2013; Trump, 2017).

91
To incorporate private sector technological innovations to meet the governments
national security needs, a bridge or person familiar with government culture and requirements
is essential. These people function as conduits who understand the niche nuances and
bureaucracy in the government. Veterans leaving service for private sector employment not
only fit this role exceptionally well, but they also bring with them soft skills that are difficult to
obtain and that they develop over time rather than learn in a formal setting. Researchers have
identified these skills as being effective within organizations including accomplishing critical
tasks under stress.
Contradicting the above needs are statistics from just 2021 wherein veterans accounted
for 13% of all U.S. homeless adults and 20% or 1 in 5 of all U.S. homeless men (HUD Public
Affairs, 2022; NCHV, 2021). Equally contradicting is the fact that veterans interviewed in this
study indicated they feel outcast, judged, prejudged, or even unwelcome working in private
sector. Therefore, it is essential to reframe the narrative of the U.S. military veteran,
overcoming stigmatizations, stereotypes, and unconscious bias associated with wars such as
Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Today’s veterans operate innovative technology, conduct high
level project management, and possess skills not seen in most other backgrounds.
This study delved into the common challenges faced by veterans transitioning from
military to private sector employment. I utilized theoretical frameworks such as social identity
theory (Islam, 2014; Ruben & LaPiere, 2022), self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1977), and
stereotype threat theory (Inzlicht & Schmader, 2012; Steele, 2011; Sue, 2003), to understand
these challenges. By exploring the lived experiences of veterans through qualitative interviews,
the findings revealed that veterans encounter stigmatization, stereotypes, and unconscious bias
during their transition, impacting their self-efficacy and employment prospects. This study

92
underscored the need for comprehensive strategies to support transitioning veterans in the private
sector. This includes increasing awareness among stakeholders, enhancing support networks for
veterans, and fostering a better understanding of the skills and experiences veterans possess. By
bridging the gap between military and civilian cultures, addressing stereotypes and biases, and
providing targeted support throughout the transition process, stakeholders can work together to
ensure equitable employment opportunities for veterans in the private sector. The impact of this
can directly impact national security by enabling greater employment for individuals who are
capable of acting as conduits from private sector technology development to governments who
require innovative solutions.
Understanding the experiences, obstacles, and successes is just as essential as sharing
the information with the broader veteran community and private sector employers. Further
research into how adjusting existing infrastructure such as pre-separation training and skill
translation tools for greater awareness can be hugely beneficial. The nation’s position as a
global superpower tomorrow is dependent upon our ability to empower its heroes today.

93
References
Adamovic, M. (2020). Analyzing discrimination in recruitment: A guide and best practices for
resume studies. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 28(4), 445–464.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsa.12298
Adelson & McCoach, D. B. (2010). Measuring the mathematical attitudes of elementary
students: the effects of a 4–point or 5–point likert-type scale. Educational and
Psychological Measurement, 70(5), 796–807. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164410366694
Ahern J., Worthen, M., Masters, J., Lippman, S. A., Ozer, E. J., & Moos, R. (2015). The
challenges of Afghanistan and Iraq veterans’ transition from military to civilian life and
approaches to reconnection. PloS One, 10(7), e0128599–e0128599.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0128599
Albert, C., Baez, A., & Rutland, J. (2021). Human security as biosecurity. Reconceptualizing
national security threats in the time of COVID–19. Politics and the Life Sciences, 40(1),
83–105. https://doi.org/10.1017/pls.2021.1
Albert, K. A., & Luzzo, D.A. (1999). The role of perceived barriers in career development. A
social cognitive perspective. Journal of Counseling & Development.
https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6676.1999.tb02470.x
Alonso, N. A., Porter, C. M., & Cullen-Lester, K. (2021). Building effective networks for the
transition from the military to the civilian workforce: Who, what, when, and
how. Military Psychology, 33(3), 152–168.
Alwin, D. F. & Krosnick, J. A. (1991). The reliability of survey attitude measurement: the
influence of question and respondent attributes. Sociological Methods & Research, 20(1),
139–181. https://doi.org/10.1177/004912419102000100

94
American Corporate Partners. (2022). Find your next chapter. https://www.acp-usa.org/
Baker, S. (n.d.). The world’s most powerful militaries in 2023, ranked. Business Insider.
https://www.businessinsider.com/ranked-world-most-powerful-militaries-2023-
firepower-us-china-russia-2023-5#1-the-us-25
Baltes, M. M., & Baltes, P. B. (Eds.) (1986). The psychology of control and aging. Psychology
Revivals. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315760537
Baker, S., & Spirlet, T. (2023, December 18). The world’s most powerful militaries in 2023,
ranked. Business Insider. https://africa.businessinsider.com/military-and-defense/theworlds-most-powerful-militaries-in-2023-ranked/9yf5l36
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological
review, 84(2), 191.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs.
Bandura. (1997). Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. W.H. Freeman.
Bartee, R. L. & Dooley, L. (2019). African American veterans career transition using the
transition goals, plans, success (GPS) program as a model for success. Journal of
veterans Studies, 5(1), 1–. https://doi.org/10.21061/jvs.v5i1.122
Berkshire Hathaway. (n.d.). Number of Employees 2010–2022.
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/BRK.B/berkshire-hathaway/number-ofemployees
Bingöl, T. Y., Batik, M. V., Hosoglu, R., & Firinci Kodaz, A. (2019). Psychological resilience
and positivity as predictors of self-efficacy. Asian Journal of Education and
Training, 5(1), 63–69.

95
Britt, T. W., Greene-Shortridge, T. M., Britt, T. W., & Castro, C. A. (2007). The stigma of
mental health problems in the military. Military Medicine, 172, 157–161.
Bordieri, J. E., & Drehmer, D. E. (1985). Hiring decisions for disabled workers: The hidden
bias. Rehabilitation Psychology, 30(3), 157–164. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0091030
Bordieri, J. E., & Drehmer, D. E. (1986). Hiring decisions for disabled workers: Looking at the
cause. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 16, 197–208. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j
.1559-1816.1986.tb01135.x
Brown, A. D., Kouri, N. A., Rahman, N., Joscelyne, A., Bryant, R. A., & Marmar, C. R. (2016).
Enhancing self-efficacy improves episodic future thinking and social-decision making in
combat veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder. Psychiatry Research, 242, 19–25.
Bulmer, S., & Jackson, D. (2016). “You do not live in my skin”: Embodiment, voice, and the
veteran. Critical Military Studies, 2(1–2), 25–40.
https://doi.org/10.1080/23337486.2015.1118799
Caldwell, C., & Hayes, L. A. (2016). Self-efficacy and self-awareness: moral insights to
increased leader effectiveness. Journal of Management Development, 35(9), 1163–1173.
Cadinu, M., Maass, A., Rosabianca, A., & Kiesner, J. (2005). Why do women underperform
under stereotype threat? Evidence for the role of negative thinking. Psychological
science, 16(7), 572–578.
Carr, M. (2016). Public–private partnerships in national cyber-security strategies. International
Affairs, 92(1), 43–62.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2021, March 26). The AIDS epidemic in the United
States, 1981–early 1990s. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
https://www.cdc.gov/museum/online/story-of-cdc/aids/index.html

96
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2023). COVID data tracker weekly review. Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/coviddata/covidview/index.html
Christensen, K. K. & Petersen K. L. (2017). Public–private partnerships on cyber security: a
practice of loyalty. International Affairs, 93(6), 1435–1452.
Chyung, Roberts, K., Swanson, I., & Hankinson, A. (2017). Evidence‐based survey design: the
use of a midpoint on the likert scale. Performance Improvement (International Society for
Performance Improvement), 56(10), 15–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi.21727
Clinton Digital Library. (n.d.). An unprecedented problem: The Clinton administration and
HIV/AIDS in the United States. https://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/an-unprecedentedproblem-the-clinton-administration-and-hiv/aids-in-the-united-states
Collins, J. (2001). Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap … and Others Don’t.
Harper Business.
Corbiere, M., Merrier, C., & Lesage, A. (2004). Perceptions of barriers to employment, coping
efficacy, and career search efficacy in people with mental illness. Journal of Career
Assessment, 12(4), 460–478. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072704267738
Corbière, M., Zaniboni, S., Lecomte, T., Bond, G., Gilles, P., Lesage, A., & Goldner, E. (2011).
Job acquisition for people with severe mental illness enrolled in supported employment
programs: a theoretically grounded empirical study. Journal of Occupational
Rehabilitation, 21(3), 342–354. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-011-9315-3
Cornell Law School Legal Information Institute. (n.d.). 38 U.S. Code § 101 – Definitions. Legal
Information Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/38/101

97
Cornell Law School Legal Information Institute. (n.d.). 42 U.S. Code § 1142 – Pre-separation
counseling; transmittal of certain records to Department of veterans Affair. Legal
Information Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/1142
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Sage.
Curry Hall, K., Harrell, M., Bicksler, B., Stewart, R., & Fisher, M. P. (2015). Connecting
veterans and employers. RAND Corporation.
https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB9829.html
Daley, J. G. (1999). Understanding the military as an ethnic identity. In J. Daley (Ed.), Social
work practice in the military (pp. 291–303). Routledge.
Davis, L. L., Leon, A. C., Toscano, R., Drebing, C. E., Ward, L. C., Parker, P. E., Kashner, T.
M., & Drake, R. E. (2012). A randomized controlled trial of supported employment
among veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder. Psychiatric Services, 63(5), 464–470.
https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.201100340
Davis, V. E. & Minnis, S. E. (2017). Military veterans’ transferrable skills: An HRD practitioner
dilemma. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 19(1), 6–13.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422316682961
Dickstein, B. D., Vogt, D. S., Handa, S., & Litz, B. T. (2010). Targeting self-stigma in returning
military personnel and veterans: A review of intervention strategies. Military Psychology,
22, 224–236.
Dobrow, S. R., & Higgins, M. C. (2005). Developmental networks and professional identity: A
longitudinal study. Career Development International, 10(6), 567–583.
https://doi.org/10.1108/13620430510620629

98
DOD SkillBridge. (n.d.). Welcome to the SkillBridge Program. https://skillbridge.osd.mil/
Dolan, G., McCauley, M., & Murphy, D. (2022). Factors influencing the salience of
military/veteran identity post discharge: a scoping review. Journal of veterans
Studies, 8(1), 231. https://doi.org/10.21061/jvs.v8i1.333
Dortek. (2022, November 15). Emergent biosolutions: Pharmaceutical door projects. Emergent
BioSolutions. https://dortek.com/project/emergent-biosolutions/
Drehmer, D. E., & Bordieri, J. E. (1985). Hiring decisions for disabled workers: The hidden
bias. Rehabilitation Psychology, 30(3), 157–164. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0091030
Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. Random House.
Eber, S., Barth, S., Kang, H., Mahan, C., Dursa, E., & Schneiderman, A. (2013). The national
health study for a new generation of united states veterans: Methods for a large-scale
study on the health of recent veterans. Military Medicine, 178(9), 966–969.
Eells, J. L. (2017). Transitioning from military to civilian: The impact of veteran mentoring
programs on the transition of veteran students.
http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/dissertationstheses/transitioning-military-civilian-impact-veteran/docview/1937874959/se-2
Elbogen, E. B., Wagner, H. R., Johnson, S. C., Kinneer, P., Kang, H., Vasterling, J. J., Timko,
C., & Beckham, J. C. (2013). Are Iraq and Afghanistan veterans using mental health
services? New data from a national random-sample survey. Psychiatric Services, 134–
141. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.004792011
Elliott, R., & Timulak, L. (2005). Descriptive and interpretive approaches to qualitative
research. A handbook of research methods for clinical and health psychology, 1(7), 147–
159.

99
Etzioni, A. (2011). Cybersecurity in the private sector. Issues in Science and Technology, 28(1),
58–62. http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarlyjournals/cybersecurity-private-sector/docview/921634105/se-2
GDIT. (n.d.). General dynamics information technology. Veteran Community.
https://www.gdit.com/veteran-community/
Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: notes on the management of spoiled identity. Prentice-Hall.
Gonzalez, J. A., & Simpson, J. (2021). The workplace integration of veterans: Applying diversity
and fit perspectives. Human Resource Management Review, 31(2), 100775.
Goulart, M. (2021). Retention of veteran employees. Military Veteran Employment: A Guide for
the Data-Driven Leader, 287–304.
Grossmann, M. (2021). How social science got better: Overcoming bias with more evidence,
diversity, and self-reflection. Oxford University Press.
Hackett, G., & Betz, N. E. (1981). A self-efficacy approach to the career development of women.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 326–339.
Hamill, S. K. (2003). Resilience and self-efficacy: The importance of efficacy beliefs and coping
mechanisms in resilient adolescents. Colgate University Journal of the Sciences, 35(1),
115–146.
Hanson, C. (2016, September 10). Military veterans provide a new competitive advantage for
tech companies. TechCrunch. https://techcrunch.com/2016/09/09/military-veteransprovide-a-new-competitive-advantage-for-tech-companies/
Hardison, C. M., McCausland, T. C., Shanley, M. G., Saavedra, A. R., Clague, A., Crowley, J.
C., Martin, J., Wong J. P., & Steinberg, P. S. (2017). What veterans bring to civilian

100
workplaces: a prototype toolkit for helping private-sector employers understand the
nontechnical skill developed in the military. RAND Corporation.
Harrell, M. C., & Berglass, N. (2012). Employing American veterans: Perspectives from
business. Center for New American Society.
Harvard Business Review. (2014). Which of these people is your future CEO?: The different
ways military experience prepares managers for leadership. Harvard Business Review.
https://hbr.org/2010/11/which-of-these-people-is-your-future-ceo-the-different-waysmilitary-experience-prepares-managers-for-leadership
Heaton, P. (2012). The effects of hiring tax credits on employment of disabled veterans. Defense
Technical Information Center. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADA585435
Hiller, J. S., & Russell, R. S. (2013). The challenge and imperative of private sector
cybersecurity: an international comparison. Computer Law & Security Review, 29(3),
236–245.
Hiring Our Heroes. (2022, April 28). We’re doubling our efforts as hiring our heroes turns 11.
Hiring Our Heroes. https://www.hiringourheroes.org/hiring-our-heroes-turns-11/
Hogg, M. A. & Abrams, D. (2006). Social Identifications: A Social Psychology of Intergroup
Relations and Group Processes. Taylor and Francis.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203135457
Hogg, M. A. (2000). Subjective uncertainty reduction through self-categorization: a motivational
theory of social identity processes. European Review of Social Psychology, 11(1), 223–
255. https://doi.org/10.1080/14792772043000040

101
Holmes, A. G. D. (2020). Researcher positionality: A consideration of its influence and place in
qualitative research, a new researcher guide. Shanlax International Journal of
Education, 8(4), 1–10.
HUD Public Affairs. (2022). HUD releases 2021 annual homeless assessment report part 1. U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
https://www.hud.gov/press/press_releases_media_advisories/hud_no_22_022
Inzlicht, M., & Schmader, T. (2012). Stereotype threat theory, process, and application. Oxford
University Press.
Islam, G. (2014). Social identity theory. Journal of personality and Social Psychology, 67(1),
741–763.
James, A. (2017). A phenomenological study: Female veteran commissioned officers’ successful
transition to the civilian workforce (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). ProQuest
Dissertations & Theses Global.
Jones, H. (2018, July). The recent large reduction in space launch cost. 48th International
Conference on Environmental Systems.
Jones, K. L. (2018). Public-private partnerships: stimulating innovation in the space
sector. Center for Space Policy and Strategy.
Kansteiner, F. (2021, July 29). Emergent wins FDA all-clear to restart J&J covid-19 vaccine
production in Baltimore. Fierce Pharma.
https://www.fiercepharma.com/manufacturing/emergent-wins-fda-all-clear-to-restartproduction-j-j-covid-19-vaccine-baltimore
Karl, K. A., O’Leary‐Kelly, A. M., & Martocchio, J. J. (1993). The impact of feedback and self‐
efficacy on performance in training. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 14(4), 379–394.

102
Kearl, C. E. (1990). Delayed Entry Program (DEP) attrition: A microdata model (Vol. 889).
U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.
Keeling, M., Ozuna, S. M., & Millsap, C. (2018). Employment after the military. In E.
L. Weiss & C. A. Castro (Eds.), American military life in the 21st century: Social,
cultural, and economic issues and trends (pp. 497–509). ABC-CLIO, LLC.
Kelty, R. (2009, February). Citizen soldiers and civilian contractors: military outsourcing, unit
cohesion, and retention attitudes. In 7th Biennial DEOMI Equal Opportunity, Diversity,
and Culture Research Symposium (p. 154).
KFF.org. (2022). The HIV/AIDS epidemic in the United States: The basics.
https://www.kff.org/hivaids/fact-sheet/the-hivaids-epidemic-in-the-united-states-thebasics/
Kintzle, S., & Castro, C. A. (2018). Examining veteran transition to the workplace through
military transition theory. In P. D. Harms & P. L. Perrewé (Eds.), Occupational stress
and well-being in military contexts (Research in occupational stress and wellbeing) (Vol. 16, pp. 117–127). Emerald Publishing Limited.
https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-355520180000016009
Kness, Rob. (2021). Veteran employment in the defense contracting sector.
https://news.clearancejobs.com/2021/11/11/veteran-employment-in-the-defensecontracting-sector/
Korn/Ferry International. (2006). Is there a link? – Military MBA.
https://militarymba.net/resources/MilitaryCEOReport.pdf

103
Kukla, M., Bonfils, K. A., & Salyers, M. P. (2015). Factors impacting work success in veterans
with mental health disorders: A veteran-focused mixed methods pilot study. Journal of
Vocational Rehabilitation, 43(1), 51–66. https://doi.org/10.3233/JVR-150754
Kulesza, M., Pedersen, E. R., Corrigan, P. W., & Marshall, G. N. (2015). Help-seeking stigma
and mental health treatment seeking among young adult veterans. Military behavioral
health, 3(4), 230–239.
Law Insider. (n.d.). Transitioning service member definition.
https://www.lawinsider.com/dictionary/transitioning-service-member
Legal Information Institute. (n.d.). 10 U.S. Code § 1142 – Pre-separation counseling; transmittal
of Certain Records to Department of veterans Affairs. Legal Information Institute.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/1142
Lilli, E. (2021). Redefining deterrence in cyberspace: Private sector contribution to national
strategies of cyber deterrence. Contemporary Security Policy, 42(2), 163–188.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE.
Lockheed Martin. (2023, January 31). Military and veteran support.
https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/who-we-are/communities/military-veteransupport.html.
Lorber, W., & Garcia, H. A. (2010). Not supposed to feel this: Traditional masculinity in
psychotherapy with male veterans returning from Afghanistan and Iraq. Psychotherapy:
Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 47(3), 296. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2010-
20923-004
Lutkevich, B., & Wigmore, I. (2022, August 22). What is the private sector? WhatIs.com.
https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/definition/private-sector

104
Manley, M. (2015). Cyberspace’s dynamic duo: Forging a cybersecurity public-private
partnership. Journal of Strategic Security, 8(3), 85–98.
Marvin, C. (2014). Americans are viewing veterans all wrong. Official Blog of the U.S.
Department of veterans Affairs. https://www.blogs.va.gov/VAntage/16011/americansare-viewing-veterans-all-wrong
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design (3rd ed.). SAGE.
McDonald, R. A. (2017). The civilian lives of U.S. veterans: issues and identities. Praeger.
McFarling, L., D’Angelo, M., Drain, M., Gibbs, D. A., & Olmsted, K. L. R. (2011). Stigma as a
barrier to substance abuse and mental health treatment. Military Psychology, 23, 1–5
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and
Implementation (4th ed.). Jossey Bass.
Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Stereotype definition & meaning. Merriam-Webster.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/stereotype
Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Stigmatization definition & meaning. Merriam-Webster.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/stigmatization
Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Underemployment definition & meaning. Merriam-Webster.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/underemployment
Mitchell, L., Frazier, P., Sayer, N. A., & Dubow, E. (2020). Identity disruption and its
association with mental health among veterans with reintegration
difficulty. Developmental Psychology, 56(11), 2152–2166.
https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0001106
Mittal, D., Drummond, K. L., Blevins, D., Curran, G., Corrigan, P., & Sullivan, G. (2013).
Stigma associated with PTSD: Perceptions of treatment seeking combat

105
veterans. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 36(2), 86–92.
https://doi.org/10.1037/h0094976
Mohr, E. (2018, September 11). Be more: Buffering against gender stereotypes by building selfefficacy beliefs. University of Pennsylvania, Scholarly Commons.
https://repository.upenn.edu/mapp_capstone/150/?utm_source=repository.upenn.edu%2F
mapp_capstone%2F150&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages
National Archives and Records Administration. (2009, November 9). Executive order 13518 –
veterans Employment Initiative. National Archives and Records Administration.
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/executive-order-veteransemployment-initiative
National Archives and Records Administration. (2016, May 5). Fact sheet: As part of the 5th
anniversary of joining forces, First Lady Michelle Obama and dr. Jill Biden announce
new private sector hiring and training commitments for veterans and military spouses.
National Archives and Records Administration.
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2016/05/05/fact-sheet-part-5thanniversary-joining-forces-first-lady-michelle-obama
National Coalition for Homeless veterans. (2021, February 4). Veteran homelessness.
https://nchv.org/veteran-homelessness/
O’Conner, R., Schoeneberger, J., & Clark, D. (2023). Evaluation of the Transition Assistance
Program (TAP) Impact Study Report.
https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/OASP/evaluation/pdf/TAP/TAP%20Impact%20St
udy%20Report_508.pdf

106
Oshewolo, S. & Nwozor, A. (2020). COVID–19: Projecting the national security dimensions of
pandemics. Strategic Analysis, 44(3), 269–275.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09700161.2020.1767911
Oswald, F., Behrend, T., & Foster, L. (2019). Workforce readiness and the future of work.
Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
https://doi.org.libproxy1.usc.edu/10.4324/9781351210485
Parson, L. (2019). Considering positionality: The ethics of conducting research with
marginalized groups. Research methods for social justice and equity in education, 15–32.
Peat, D. M., & Perrmann-Graham, J. (2022). Where do I belong? Conflicted identities and the
paradox of simultaneous stigma and social aggrandizement of military veterans in
organizations. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 1–29.
Perkins, D. F., Aronson, K. R., Morgan, N. R., Bleser, J. A., Vogt, D., Copeland, L. A., Finley,
E. P., & Gilman, C. (2020). veterans’ use of programs and services as they transition to
civilian life: Baseline assessment for the veteran metrics initiative. Journal of Social
Service Research, 46(2), 241–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/01488376.2018.1546259
Pew Research Center. (2019). The American veteran experience and the post-9/11 generation.
https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2019/09/10/the-american-veteran-experience-and-thepost-9-11-generation/
Pietrzak, R. H., Johnson, D. C., Goldstein, M. B., Malley, J. C., & Southwick, S. M. (2009).
Perceived stigma and barriers to mental health care utilization among OEF-OIF veterans.
Psychiatric Services, 60, 1118–1122.
Poteet, M. L., & Allen, T. D. (2021). Veteran affinity groups and mentoring programs. Military
Veteran Employment: A Guide for the Data-Driven Leader, 189.

107
RAND Corporation. (2012). The effects of hiring tax credits on employment of disabled veterans.
https://www.rand.org/pubs/occasional_papers/OP366.html
Reisman, M. (2016, October). PTSD treatment for veterans: What’s working, what’s new, and
what’s next. P & T: A Peer-Reviewed Journal for Formulary Management.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5047000/
Roberts, & Schmid, J. (2022). Government‐led innovation acceleration: case studies of us federal
government innovation and technology acceleration organizations. The Review of Policy
Research, 39(3), 353–378. https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12474
Rockefeller, M. L. (2017, March 3). The top 25 veteran-founded startups in America. Forbes.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/marklrockefeller/2016/11/11/the-top-25-veteran-startupsin-america/?sh=2d246f626e84
Rodrigues, S., Bokhour, B., Mueller, N., Dell, N., Osei-Bonsu, P. E., Zhao, S., Glickman, M.,
Eisen, S., & Elwy, A. R. (2014). Impact of stigma on veteran treatment seeking for
depression. American Journal of Psychiatric Rehabilitation, 17(2), 128–146.
Ruben, M. A., & LaPiere, T. (2022). Social identity and the mental health and wellbeing of male
veterans. Health Psychology Report.
Saenz, H., & O’Keeffe, D. (2020). COVID–19: Protect, recover, and retool. Bain & Company,
Inc.
Santoro, G., Ferraris, A., Del Giudice, M., & Schiavone, F. (2020). Self‐efficacy and success of
disadvantaged entrepreneurs: The moderating role of resilience. European Management
Review, 17(3), 719–732.

108
Schaeffer, K. (2023, November 8). The changing face of America’s veteran population. Pew
Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/11/08/the-changingface-of-americas-veteran-population/
Schmader, T., & Johns, M. (2003). Converging evidence that stereotype threat reduces working
memory capacity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 440–452.
Schunk, D. H. (1984). Self‐efficacy perspective on achievement behavior. Educational
Psychologist, 19(1), 48–58.
Schwarzer, R. (2014). Self-efficacy: Thought control of action. Taylor and Francis.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315800820
Secules, S., McCall, C., Mejia, J. A., Beebe, C., Masters, A. S., L. Sánchez‐Peña, M., &
Svyantek, M. (2021). Positionality practices and dimensions of impact on equity
research: A collaborative inquiry and call to the community. Journal of Engineering
Education, 110(1), 19–43.
Shepherd, S., Sherman, D. K., MacLean, A., & Kay, A. C. (2021). The challenges of military
veterans in their transition to the workplace: a call for integrating basic and applied
psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(3), 590–613.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620953096
Simon, M. K., & Goes, J. (2013). Assumptions, limitations, delimitations, and scope of the
study. http://lucalongo.eu/courses/2022-
2023/researchDesign/semester2/material/Assumptions-Limitations-Delimitations-andScope-of-the-Study.pdf
Simpson, J., & Sariol, A. M. (2019). Squared away: veterans on the board of directors. Journal
of Business Ethics, 160, 1035–1045.

109
Society for Human Resource Management. (2012). SHRM poll: Military employment.
https://www.slideshare.net/shrm/shrm-poll-military-employmentfinal
Spencer, S. J., Logel, C., & Davies, P. G. (2016). Stereotype threat. Annual review of
psychology, 67, 415–437.
Stackhouse, J. (2020). Hiring strategies for small business owner to recruit veterans (A multiple
case study). Open Journal of Business and Management. https://www.scirp.org/html/10-
1531340_101369.htm
Stecker, T., Fortney, J. C., Hamilton, F., & Ajzen, I. (2007). An assessment of beliefs about
mental health. Psychiatric Services, 58, 1358–1361.
Steele, C. M. (1997). A threat in the air: how stereotypes shape intellectual identity and
performance. The American Psychologist, 52(6), 613–629. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-
066X.52.6.613
Steele C. M. (2011). Whistling Vivaldi: How stereotypes affect us and what we can do. WW
Norton & Company.
Stern, L. (2017). Post 9/11 veterans with service-connected disabilities and their transition to the
civilian workforce: a review of the literature. Advances in Developing Human
Resources, 19(1), 66–77. https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422316682928
Stone, C., Lengnick-Hall, M., Muldoon, J., Yancey, G., & Wisdom, J. (2018). Do stereotypes of
veterans affect chances of employment? The Psychologist Manager Journal, 21(1), 1–33.
https://doi.org/10.1037/mgr0000068
Strunk, K. K., & Locke, L. A. (2019). Research methods for social justice and equity in
education. Springer.

110
Sue, D. W. (2003). Overcoming our racism. In Overcoming Our Racism. John Wiley & Sons,
Inc.
Sue, D. W., Capodilupo, C. M., Torino, G. C., Bucceri, J. M., Holder, A. M. B., Nadal, K. L., &
Esquilin, M. (2007). Racial microaggressions in everyday life: Implications for clinical
practice. The American Psychologist, 62(4), 271–286. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-
066X.62.4.271
Swab, R. G., Javadian, G., Gupta, V. K., & Pierce, C. A. (2022). Stereotype threat theory in
organizational research: constructive analysis and future research agenda. Group &
Organization Management, 47(3), 530–570. https://doi.org/10.1177/10596011211016989
Sweida, G. L., Reichard, R. J., & Henry, C. (2013). Gender stereotyping effects on
entrepreneurial self-efficacy and high-growth entrepreneurial intention. Journal of Small
Business and Enterprise Development, 20(2), 296–313.
https://doi.org/10.1108/14626001311326743
Tanielian, T. & Jaycox, L. H. (2008). Invisible wounds of war: Psychological and cognitive
injuries, their consequences, and services to assist recovery. RAND Corporation.
Theofanidis, D., & Fountouki, A. (2018). Limitations and delimitations in the research
process. Perioperative Nursing-Quarterly Scientific, 7, 155.
https://doi.org/10.1177/10596011211016989163
The White House. (2022, October 18). National security memorandum on countering biological
threats, enhancing pandemic preparedness, and achieving global health security. The
White House. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidentialactions/2022/10/18/national-security-memorandum-on-countering-biological-threatsenhancing-pandemic-preparedness-and-achieving-global-health-security/

111
The White House. (2010, April 15). President Barack Obama on Space exploration in the 21st
Century. NASA. https://www.nasa.gov/news/media/trans/obama_ksc_trans.html
Thompson, & Surface, E. A. (2009). Promoting favorable attitudes toward personnel surveys:
The role of follow-up. Military Psychology, 21(2), 139–161.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08995600902768693
Troutman, K., & Gagnon, J. (2014). The role of professional coaching and resume writing in
successful veteran transitions. Career Planning & Adult Development Journal,
30(3), 210–214.
Trump, D. J. (2017). National Security Strategy of the United States of America. Executive
Office of The President.
Tvaronavičienė, M., Plėta, T., Della Casa, S., & Latvys, J. (2020). Cyber security management of
critical energy infrastructure in national cybersecurity strategies: Cases of USA, U. K.,
France, Estonia, and Lithuania. Insights into regional development, 2(4), 802–813.
U.S. Army (2023). DOD internship program helps transition veterans to private sector. U.S.
Army Medical Research and Development Command.
https://mrdc.health.mil/index.cfm/media/articles/2023/DOD_internship_program_helps_t
ransition_veterans_to_private_sector
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2022). Employment Situation of veterans – 2021. U.S. Bureau
of Labor Statistics. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/vet.pdf
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2015). Why does the government collect statistics on the
unemployed? U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
https://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm#def

112
U.S. Department of Defense Sexual Assault Prevention and Response. SAPR. (2021).
https://www.sapr.mil/
U.S. Department of Defense, Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness. (2018).
Defense manpower data center occupational database. U.S. Department of Defense,
Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness.
U.S. Department of Labor. (2022). Bureau of Labor Statistics news release: Employment
situation of veterans – 2021. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/vet.pdf
U.S. Department of Labor. (n.d.). Mental health and the FMLA. Fact Sheet #280.
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fmla/mental-health
U.S. Department of Labor Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs. (n.d.). Protected
veterans’ Rights – DOL. Protected veterans’ Rights.
https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ofccp/regs/compliance/factsheets/FACT_veterans
_Sept16_ENGESQA508c.pdf
U.S. Department of veterans Affairs (2015). PTSD in Iraq and Afghanistan veterans.
www.publichealth.va.gov/epidemiology/studies/new-generation/ptsd.asp.
U.S. Office of Personnel Management (2020). veteran’s Council.
https://www.fedshirevets.gov/veterans-council/veteran-employment-data/
U.S. Senate Fact Sheet. (2010). Chairman, subcommittee on contracting oversight, fact sheet,
veterans hiring by government contractors. Office of Senator Claire McCaskill.
https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/veterans%20Hiring%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf
U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA). (2018). Small Business Profile: Virginia. SBA.
https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/advocacy/2018-Small-Business-Profiles-VA.pdf

113
Vecchi, V., Cusumano, N., & Boyer, E. J. (2020). Medical supply acquisition in Italy and the
United States in the era of COVID–19: The case for strategic procurement and public–
private partnerships. The American Review of Public Administration, 50(6–7), 642–649.
Verizon Wireless. (2023). Civilian Jobs for military veterans. About Verizon.
https://www.verizon.com/about/careers/military
Vernile, A. (2018). The Rise of Private Actors in the Space Sector (1st ed.). Springer
International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73802-4
Wade, N. G. & Vogel, D. L. (2022). The Cambridge handbook of stigma and mental health.
Cambridge University Press.
Wagner, U., Lampen, L., & Syllwasschy, J. (1986). In‐group inferiority, social identity, and out‐
group devaluation in a modified minimal group study. British Journal of Social
Psychology, 25(1), 15–23.
Wakefield, J. R., Hopkins, N., & Greenwood, R. M. (2013). Meta-stereotypes, social image and
help seeking: Dependency-related meta-stereotypes reduce help-seeking
behaviour. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 23(5), 363–372.
https://doi.org/10.1002/casp.212
Walton, G. M. & Cohen, G. L. (2007). A Question of Belonging: Race, Social Fit, and
Achievement. Personal Social Psychology, 92(1), 82–96.
Ward, B. K. (2020). Major barriers facing veteran transition from military to civilian workforce:
Suggested Strategies. International Journal of Business and Public Administration, 17(2).
Westwood, M. J., & Israelashvili, M. (2023). Veteran transition to civilian life: Leveraging the
strengths of military culture. In Prevention of maladjustment to life course

114
transitions (pp. 341–363). https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-031-26700-
0_13
Zogas, A. (2017). U.S. military veterans’ difficult transition back to civilian life and the VA’s
response. Cost of War, 1–14. https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/papers/2017/usmilitary-veterans-difficult-transitions-back-civilian-life-and-va-s-response

115
Appendix A: Recruitment Message
My name is Cody Marcus, and I am currently studying at the University of Southern
California. I am researching the lived experiences of veterans who have transitioned from the
military to civilian sector, especially those who have sought employment in the private sector.
You may be eligible to participate in the study if you identify as a veteran who has transitioned
to civilian sector and has sought employment in the private sector.
The purpose of this study is to explore and understand how veteran’s perceived
stigmatization effects employment opportunities for modern veterans transitioning out of service
to the private sector. If you agree, I will ask you to participate in an interview about your
experiences. The interview will last between 45–60 minutes. The location will be determined
based upon your preferences: Zoom, telephonic, or in person.
To partake in this study, please contact me at codymarc@usc.edu or via my cell phone at
808-375-8138. Please forward this flier to anyone who qualifies and may be interested in
participating. Study participation will include no more than 10 participants and interviews.
If you have questions about the study, please reply or text directly at 808-375-8138.

116
Appendix B: Interview Protocol
Introduction to the Interview
Thank you for taking the time to speak with me today; I really appreciate it. My name is
Cody Marcus, and I am a doctoral student at the University of Southern California (USC) in the
Doctorate of Organizational Change and Leadership program. Thank you for your willingness to
participate in this study. We are here to discuss your lived experiences as a veteran, specifically
when you left the service and sought employment in the private sector. Just to confirm, are you
comfortable speaking with me about this today? Do you have any questions for me before we
begin? At this time, I am going to share my screen so that you can follow along as I read the
consent to participate in this interview.
Explanation of Interview Purpose
As I said, today we will discuss your firsthand experiences as a veteran, specifically
around the time when you sought employment in the private sector upon transitioning from the
military. This research study aims to better understand these experiences to assist veterans,
employers, and the government. By addressing areas where improvement may be possible, all
three of these entities can benefit.
Information Sheet
This document explains the following: (a) information exchanged today will be
confidential and maintained securely, (b) participation in this study is voluntary and of your own
free will. Please familiarize yourself with this information.
Request to Record

117
Do you mind if I record our conversation using the Zoom recording feature? Recording
helps me capture all the information we discuss in the event I miss some notes. Once I finish
transcribing any missed information, I will delete the recording.
Table A1
Interview Protocol Crosswalk
Interview questions Potential probes RQ addressed
1. Can you tell me about your first
job upon leaving the military, if
you have obtained employment?
How did you end up in this job? Ice breaker
2. How would you describe your
experience transitioning from
the military and seeking private
sector employment?
Can you share some examples of
both bad and good memories
during the transition and job
search?
To what extent, if at all, did you
ever feel stereotyped or
categorized due to your military
experience?
2
3. To what extent, if at all, do you
consider your status as a veteran
as part on your overall identity.
To what extent, if at all, did you
make known your status as a
veteran on employment
applications and in interviews?
1
4. How do you feel that being a
veteran influenced your
transition to private sector, if at
all?
Do you feel that being a veteran
was advantageous,
disadvantageous, or both? Did
you feel welcomed or a sense of
belonging when transitioning?
1
5. How, if at all, do you feel that
people perceived you or treated
in a particular way that may
have been associated to your
military status? How did you
respond to the feeling?
Did the way you people treated you
make you feel less capable than
you initially believed? Can you
provide some examples?
1
6. Can you share any instances, if
they occurred, where you felt
your status as a veteran had a
Did this feeling have an impact on
your belief in your ability to 2

118
positive impact on your
employment transition?
succeed in the job seeking
endeavor?
7. Can you share any instances, if
they occurred, where you felt
judged or stigmatized during
your transition into private
sector because of your status as
a veteran?
Do you think any potential
judgment was intentional or
instinctive (innate or nonintentional)?
1
8. What motivated, or de-motivated
if anything, you to continue to
private sector employment?
Do you have a highlight of both
feeling motivated and
demotivated during the
transition/job search?
Can you describe a time, if ever,
where you have felt a lack of
confidence in your ability to
secure employment based on the
way people treated you because
of your veteran status?
3
9. To what extent, if at all, have
you ever felt that employment
in private sector was not for you
or that you may have an easier
job search in a different area
given your military background
(e.g., government or
contracting)?
Why did you feel this way, what
impacted your motivation or goal
of obtaining private sector
employment?
3
10. How, if at all, do you feel that
advertising your status as a
veteran during the job seeking
process had any impact on your
workplace environment?
Describe a time where you felt a
lack of confidence in yourself
due to the way people treated
you, if ever?
3
11. (voluntary) If you identified, as
a disabled veteran, how do you
feel potential employers
perceived the info?
1, 2
12. What advice would you give to
other veterans seeking to
transition to private sector
employment?

119
13. What recommendations would
you make for private sector
employers to make transition to
private sector more accessible
for veterans?
Conclusion to the Interview
Thank you so much for taking the time to sit with me and discuss your experiences. I am
incredibly grateful and look forward to incorporating what we discussed in an especially
important study on the experiences that veterans undergo when leaving the service for private
sector employment. If you have any questions for me, please feel free to ask and if not, I hope
you have a wonderful day!

120
120
Appendix C: Information Sheet for Exempt Research
STUDY TITLE: Unemployment and underemployment among United States military veterans
in the private sector after transitioning from the U.S. military.
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Cody Marcus
FACULTY ADVISOR: Jennifer Phillips, DLS
I invite you to participate in this voluntary research study, and you may discontinue participation
at any time with no penalty. Your decision will not affect your relationship, university, or
employer. This document explains information about the study. Please ask any questions about
information that is unclear or needs clarification.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this study is to explore and understand how veteran’s perceived stigmatization
effects employment opportunities for modern veterans transitioning out of service to the private
sector. We hope to learn and better understand how stigma and stereotype transitioning military
members. I invite you to be a participant in this study because you fit the participation criteria:
Identify as a U.S. veteran, specifically those individuals who have or have attempted to transition
to private sector employment upon leaving the military.
PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
If you decide to take part in this study, I will first invite you to complete a Qualtrics-based online
recruitment questionnaire. The questionnaire should take approximately 5 minutes to complete.
At the end of the questionnaire, it will ask you to include your contact information if you are
interested in the possibility of a follow-on interview.
I will contact the first 10–15 veterans who respond to the recruitment questionnaire, and meet the
study criteria, via telephone or email to schedule and conduct interviews. If you decide to take
part, I will ask you to answer questions in a one-on-one interview either in person, or via
telephone or video call. No matter the interview format, the interaction will start with
acknowledgement and acceptance of audio recording to ensure accurate data collection. If
participants decline audio recording, the interview will cease, and no further participation will be
necessary. The interview will take place at a time and day most convenient, whether on a
weekday or weekend. I anticipate the length of each interview to last 45–60 minutes. Research
topics may include, but are not limited to:
• Perception of stigmatization and stereotypes.
• Stigma and stereotype effects on self-efficacy while seeking private sector employment.
• Sharing experiences of lived experiences transitioning from the military.
The information obtained from your interview may contribute to better understanding gender
inequality in the DoD by providing firsthand experiences of women in senior leadership
positions.

121
121
PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
You will not receive compensation for your participation, but we thank you for your potential
willingness to share your time and thoughts.
CONFIDENTIALITY
The members of the research team and the University of Southern California Institutional
Review Board (IRB) may access the collected data. The IRB reviews and monitors research
studies to protect the rights and welfare of research subjects. If I publish the results of the
research or discuss the results in conferences, I will not use any identifiable information.
I will store data from the questionnaire in a password protected Qualtrics account. I will save
any data moved from that account on a password protected computer and will destroy it after 3
years.
For interviews, I will ensure confidentiality by conducting one-to-one interviews in a private
setting. I will ask participants if I can audio-record the interview can. Once an interview is
complete, I will transfer the audio file to my computer and save it in a password-protected file
with a naming convention that further protects the participant’s identity. I will transcribe the
audio with speech-to-text software and delete the original audio file collected on the recording
device. Further, I will save the transcript using the same naming convention prior to data
analysis. The identities of participants will remain confidential through the replacement of
participants’ names with pseudonyms in all interview transcripts. Further, I will redact all
potential identifying information from transcription as well as field notes. You have the right to
review the interview transcript and make any edits you deem necessary.
If you choose to withdraw from the study at any time prior to or during the interview, I will
remove and delete any related data from my computer and will not utilize it in the study.
While I will make every effort to protect participation information, risk for a breach in
confidentiality, no matter how slim, may still exist.
INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about this study, please contact Cody Marcus at codymarc@usc.edu or
808-375-8138, or Dr. Phillips at jlp62386@usc.edu.
IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about your rights as a research participant, please contact the
University of Southern California Institutional Review Board at (323) 442-0114 or email
irb@usc.edu.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This study examined the transition of veterans from military service to employment in the private sector, focusing on addressing gaps in existing research regarding the challenges veterans face, particularly in relation to how private sector workplaces perceive them. Framed by social identity theory (Islam, 2014; Ruben & LaPiere, 2022), self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1977), and stereotype threat theory (Inzlicht & Schmader, 2012; Steele, 2011; Sue, 2003), this study utilized qualitative interviews to describe the lived experiences of 10 military veterans who have transitioned into private sector employment. The findings revealed common themes, including veterans feeling stereotyped as violent, hesitating to disclose their military background or any associated challenges like a disability or PTSD, and experiencing a sense of alienation due to perceived militaristic traits. Based on these insights, this study offers practical recommendations to enhance awareness among employers, emphasize non-financial incentives for hiring veterans, and dispel misconceptions about them. Additionally, it proposes avenues for further research, such as identifying specific obstacles and successes in the transition process, exploring ways to support veterans earlier in their journey, and documenting lessons learned to inform broader strategies for addressing the challenges veterans encounter in the private sector workforce. By highlighting the nuanced experiences of veterans navigating the transition to civilian employment, this study contributes to a more comprehensive understanding of the barriers they face and provides valuable insights for both practice and future research aimed at supporting their successful integration into the private sector workforce.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The employment of retired senior military officers with command experience

PDF

Exploring the satisfaction, experiences, institutional support of student veterans in transition to higher education: a case study

PDF

Chameleons and kungas: the perceptions and experiences of military veteran faculty members in their transitions to academic service

PDF

Development of higher education student affairs staff to assist U.S. military veteran college students

PDF

Intent to transition: practicioner intentionality in supporting veteran transition in a graduate business program

PDF

Unconscious name bias in workplace recruitment and hiring toward individuals with an ethnic name

PDF

Equity and access for veteran's students in the California community colleges

PDF

Mitigating veteran suicide: exploring connectedness in veterans repatriating into society as a means of increasing resiliency

PDF

Understanding barriers and resiliency: experiences from Latina leaders in local government

PDF

The leadership labyrinth: women's journey to chief future officer

PDF

Examining the underemployment of persons with disabilities in the workplace

PDF

The consequences of stereotype threat on Black and Latinx students in science and engineering

PDF

Transitional barriers from adult education to postsecondary education in California

PDF

Stories of persistence: illuminating the experiences of California Latina K–12 leaders: a retention and career development model

PDF

An online strategic career planning and leadership development curriculum for women in upper-division undergraduate and graduate programs

PDF

The lack of Black women in higher education executive leadership in four-year colleges and universities

PDF

Capital allocation to Black female technology entrepreneurs

PDF

The first-time manager journey: a study to inform a smoother leadership transition

PDF

The lived experiences of Hispanic students with disabilities transitioning to higher education

PDF

Applying Schlossberg’s transition theory to the student veteran transfer experience at the University of Southern California: a qualitative case study

Asset Metadata

Creator Marcus, Cody (author)

Core Title Underemployment among U.S. military veterans in the private sector after transitioning from the military

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2024-05

Publication Date 05/09/2024

Defense Date 05/08/2024

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

Tag military transition,OAI-PMH Harvest,private sector employment,self-efficacy theory,social identity theory,stereotype threat theory,transitioning veterans,unconscious bias

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Ott, Maria (committee chair), Grad, Richard (committee member), Picus, Lawrence (committee member)

Creator Email codymarc@usc.edu,codypmarcus@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC113925209

Unique identifier UC113925209

Identifier etd-MarcusCody-12901.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-MarcusCody-12901

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Marcus, Cody

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20240509-usctheses-batch-1149 (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