University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Diversity management in local government: a gap analysis

(USC Thesis Other)

Diversity management in local government: a gap analysis

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content 1
Diversity Management in Local Government: A Gap Analysis
by
Robert Lennox
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

DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT 2
© Copyright by Robert Lennox 2024
All Rights Reserved

DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT 3
The Committee for Robert Lennox certifies the approval of this Dissertation
Rudolph Crew
Edwina Welch
Maria Ott, Committee Chair
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2024

DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT 4
Abstract
Public agencies are challenged to sustain meaningful diversity management initiatives that
encourage equity and inclusion of minority populations. Diversity management involves the
recognition, effective deployment and synchronization of individual employee values and
cultures. Successful diversity management helps managers to maximize employees’ knowledge
and expertise to better achieve organizational objectives. Diversity can stem from a wide range
of factors including gender, ethnicity, personality, cultural beliefs, social and marital status,
disability, or sexual orientation. Studies reveal that while a majority of local and state
government agencies in the United States employ active diversity management practices, few
reported using consistent performance measures to track progress toward diversity goals.
Moreover, even fewer reported a formal organizational policy linking diversity to a strategic plan
with accountability goals; including diversity in management recruitment and quality training
opportunities. Despite the existence of diversity management initiatives, inconsistent
commitment to programs has discouraged interest and engagement of women and people of
color in local government careers and representation. This study examines the gaps in
knowledge, motivation, and organizational structures that contribute to ineffective diversity
management initiatives in local government. The recommendations offered in Chapter
Five are intended to increase stakeholder’s knowledge and motivation and reduce gaps in
organizational influences to achieve local governments’ diversity management goals.
Keywords: Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, DEI, Diversity Management, Local Government,
Municipal, City, Culture, Multicultural, Human Resources, Public Service Motivation, Public
Administration

DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT 5
Dedication
To public sector workers of all backgrounds who strive for equity, excellence, and empathy in
the workplace. Your commitment to public service and community engagement are invaluable in
the pursuit of representative government.

DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT 6
Acknowledgements
A USC Rossier professor once told me that leadership is a thinking person’s discipline. I
heard this early on in my doctoral journey and the adage stuck with me, not only throughout the
program, but during my daily work. I had read several non-academic books and articles on
leadership, primarily opinionated perspectives on what leadership is and how to do it effectively.
While I recognized that there are many styles of leadership, I had never really contextualized the
research on leadership, specifically in the local government setting. The USC Rossier Doctorate
in Organization Change and Leadership curriculum and this dissertation have been instrumental
in my growth and understanding of how to lead, inspire, and teach those who have entrusted me
with that responsibility. For that, I am grateful beyond words, and I will be sure to practice the
art and science of leadership with humility and servitude. Thank you to my committee chair Dr.
Maria Ott for her encouragement and patience throughout this process.
To my children, Andre and Xavier; I know this process was difficult as my time was split
between work, school, and both of you but I am confident your patience and understanding will
pay off as you both continue in your own academic journeys. I am always here to help you grow,
learn, and I hope you appreciate everything this world has to offer you. Thank you for making
me earn the title, Dr. Dad.
To my wife Dinah, we simultaneously tackled new academic degrees later in life and
nearly lost our collective cool a few times. Thank you for being my study partner and motivator
in life. Being smart is tough work. If it were easy then everyone would be doing it.
Congratulations graduate! I love you.
To Robert W. Lennox, the man who made me who I am today and instilled in me an
insane work ethic; thank you Dad. You didn’t know it and you likely weren’t intentional about

DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT 7
it, but your consistency and presence at the University when I was growing up was a critical
factor in my academic ambitions. You kept me honest and focused through it all and I appreciate
the strong example you always set. Ever present, balanced, and calm. Thank you.
As an undergraduate at UC San Diego, I literally stumbled into the field of ethnic studies
as I transitioned from a major in mechanical engineering. Following the sudden death and
murder of my older brother, Joseph Lennox, I found myself at a crossroads trying to understand a
society that would tolerate inequity, discrimination, and intolerance. I was incredibly fortunate to
find a second family in the UCSD Cross Cultural Center where center director Dr. Edwina
Welch graciously welcomed me. There was no judgement or speculation, only care and
understanding. Thank you, Dr. Welch, for giving me purpose at such a critical and vulnerable
moment in my life. I know I am a better father, husband, friend, and leader for it. I am forever
grateful to you.

DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT 8
Table of Contents
Abstract........................................................................................................................................... 4
Dedication....................................................................................................................................... 5
Acknowledgements......................................................................................................................... 6
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ 10
List of Figures............................................................................................................................... 11
Chapter One: Introduction to the Problem of Practice.................................................................. 12
Background of the Problem .............................................................................................. 13
Field Context and Mission................................................................................................ 15
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions.................................................................. 16
Importance of the Study.................................................................................................... 16
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology .................................................. 17
Definitions......................................................................................................................... 19
Organization of the Dissertation ....................................................................................... 20
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ........................................................................................ 21
Diversity Management...................................................................................................... 21
Representation: Bureaucracy, Influence, and Decision Making.................................. 23
Equality: Advancement, Pay, and Treatment............................................................... 25
Job Satisfaction: Public Service Motivation ................................................................ 27
Leadership: Social Equity and Organizational Culture................................................ 28
Diversity Management Best Practices and Challenges..................................................... 30
Policy and Enforcement: Legal Imperatives................................................................ 32
Human Resources Management................................................................................... 34
Organizational Values and Culture .............................................................................. 36
Opposition and Resistance ........................................................................................... 38
Clark and Estes Gap Analysis Model ............................................................................... 40
Knowledge and Skills .................................................................................................. 41
Motivational Factors .................................................................................................... 42
Organizational Values and Beliefs............................................................................... 44
Conceptual Framework..................................................................................................... 45
Knowledge ................................................................................................................... 48
Motivation.................................................................................................................... 48
Organizational.............................................................................................................. 50
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 53

DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT 9
Chapter Three: Methodology........................................................................................................ 55
Research Questions........................................................................................................... 55
Overview of Methodology................................................................................................ 55
The Researcher.................................................................................................................. 56
Data Source: Survey ......................................................................................................... 57
Participants................................................................................................................... 57
Instrumentation ............................................................................................................ 59
Data Collection Procedures.......................................................................................... 59
Data Analysis.................................................................................................................... 60
Validity and Reliability..................................................................................................... 61
Ethics................................................................................................................................. 62
Chapter Four: Findings................................................................................................................. 64
Participating Stakeholders ................................................................................................ 65
Findings Research Question 1: What knowledge do public managers have of
diversity, equity, and inclusion concepts and how to implement them in the
workplace? ........................................................................................................................ 66
Knowledge Influences.................................................................................................. 67
Findings Research Question 2: What factors influence the motivation of managers
to implement diversity management programs in the workplace? ................................... 74
Motivation Influences .................................................................................................. 75
Research Question 3: What agency practices support diversity management
program outcomes for managers?..................................................................................... 82
Organization Influences............................................................................................... 82
Summary........................................................................................................................... 90
Chapter Five: Recommendations.................................................................................................. 94
Discussion of Findings...................................................................................................... 94
Recommendations for Practice ......................................................................................... 96
Recommendation 1: Train Managers to Deliver Diversity Programs.......................... 97
Recommendation 2: Provide Social Identity and Cultural Awareness Training ..Error!
Bookmark not defined.
Recommendation 3: Task Managers to Organize Cultural Affinity Groups............. 100
Recommendation 4: Implement Workforce Diversity Campaigns............................ 102
Recommendation 5: Incorporate Diversity Metrics in Performance Evaluations ..... 104
Recommendation 6: Adopt Diversity Management Goals and Objectives ............... 105
Limitations and Delimitations......................................................................................... 107
Future Research .............................................................................................................. 108
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 109
References................................................................................................................................... 112
Appendix A: Survey Protocol..................................................................................................... 127

DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT 10
Appendix B: Informational Sheet for Exempt Research ............................................................ 134

11
List of Tables
Table 1: Gap Analysis Conceptual Framework Diversity Management Variables....................... 47
Table 2: Managers’ Roles.............................................................................................................. 65
Table 3: Managers’ Diversity Definitions..................................................................................... 67
Table 4: Manager’s Equity Definitions......................................................................................... 68
Table 5: Managers’ Self-reported DEI Understanding ................................................................. 71
Table 6: Managers Self-reported Knowledge of How to Implement DM Programs ................... 72
Table 7: Mean and Standard Deviation for Survey Items on Metacognitive Knowledge ........... 74
Table 8: Belief in Cultural Affinity Groups to Enhance Employee Outcomes............................. 77
Table 9: Managers’ Interest in Learning About Impacts of DEI Concepts and Programs............ 80
Table 10: Managers’ Perceptions of Agencies’ Allocation of Diversity Resources...................... 83
Table 11: Managers’ Accountability of Diversity Initiatives........................................................ 85
Table 12: Strategic Plan Includes Diversity Management Goals and Objectives......................... 87
Table 13: Knowledge Influences Gap Analysis Summary ........................................................... 91
Table 14: Motivation Influences Gap Analysis Summary ............................................................ 92
Table 15: Organizational Influences Gap Analysis Summary ...................................................... 93
Table 16: Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation of Managers.......... 98
Table 17: Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors of Managers...................................... 99
Table 18: Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes...................... 101
Table 19: Ideas to Communicate Agency Vision of Diversity.................................................... 103
Table 20: Strategic Planning: Diversity Goals and Objectives................................................... 106

12
List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework ................................................................................................. 52
Figure 2: Number of Employees Supervised by Managers.......................................................... 66
Figure 3: Responsibility for Agency Budget and Services........................................................... 66
Figure 4: Managers’ Inclusion Themes......................................................................................... 70
Figure 5: Manager Background/Identity Informs Understanding and Approach to Implementing
Diversity............................................................................................................................ 73
Figure 6: Managers’ Confidence to Implement DM..................................................................... 76
Figure 7: Managers’ Opinion of Diversity Accountability in Performance Evaluations.............. 79
Figure 8: Manager Interest in Learning How to Implement Diversity Programs......................... 81
Figure 9: Managers’ Perceptions of Agencies’ Allocation of Diversity Resources...................... 84
Figure 10: Strategic Plan Includes Diversity Management Goals and Objectives....................... 87
Figure 11: Managers’ Estimate of Agencies’ Diversity Programs Budget Allocation.................. 88

13
Chapter One: Introduction to the Problem of Practice
Public agencies are challenged to sustain meaningful diversity management initiatives
that encourage equity and inclusion of minoritized populations. Diversity management involves
the recognition, effective deployment, and synchronization of individual employee values and
cultures (Choi & Rainey, 2010; Köllen, 2021). Successful diversity management helps managers
to maximize employee's knowledge and expertise to better achieve organizational objectives
(Allen et al., 2004). Diversity can stem from a wide range of factors including gender, ethnicity,
personality, cultural beliefs, social and marital status, disability, or sexual orientation (Shen et
al., 2009). In a 2012 study of 500 local and state government agencies in the United States, over
three-quarters of the organizations employed active diversity management practices (WyattNichol & Antwi-Boasiako, 2012). The study also revealed that 33% of the surveyed municipal
agencies reported using consistent performance measures to track progress toward diversity
goals. Moreover, Wyatt-Nicol and Antwi-Boasikao (2012) found that 23% of respondents
working in local governments reported a formal organizational policy linking diversity to a
strategic plan with accountability goals, including diversity in management recruitment and
quality training opportunities.
Despite the existence of diversity management initiatives, inconsistent commitment to
programs has discouraged interest and engagement of women and people of color in local
government careers and representation. Harris (2012) highlighted that the roots of diversity
programs in local government are often merely symbolic, largely initiated from the top down and
in response to changing leadership, employee grievances, and threat of litigation. A subtle trend
in American cities is the recruitment of Chief Diversity Officers (CDO) tasked with monitoring
and achieving diversity goals, whether those goals are adopted in the organizational vision and

14
action plan or not. However, in a survey of 250 municipalities only one quarter of those agencies
employed a CDO responsible for implementing diversity management practices (Cooper &
Gerlach, 2019). Consequently, local government diversity management initiatives demand
significant evaluation to assess efficacy, critique implementation, measure engagement, and
chart a course that will maximize equity and inclusion goals.
Background of the Problem
Scholars of diversity management have agreed on several defining characteristics of
diversity management and its benefits to civic operations. Diversity management is the practice
of maintaining an environment characterized by the inclusiveness of individual differences and
responsiveness to the needs of diverse groups of employees, by way of recruitment, retention,
and development strategies beyond the legal framework of Equal Employment Opportunity and
Affirmative Action (Wyatt-Nichol & Antwi-Boasiako, 2012). Cooper and Gerlach (2019) add
that diversity management is the ability of top management to develop strategies as well as
programs and policies to manage and accommodate diversity in their workplaces. Moreover, a
commitment to diversity management creates an environment that helps every employee of both
dominant and minoritized groups to fully utilize their potential to contribute to their organization
(Choi & Rainey, 2014). In his Multicultural Organization Development (MCOD) model, Jackson
(2008) defined inclusion as an organization’s ability to move from exclusionary practices
maintaining the majority group’s dominance and privilege, to multicultural initiatives committed
to the full inclusion of all social identity groups as well as social justice and inclusion in the
larger society.
A notable disparity exists in the representation of minoritized groups within the city
management discipline. Despite a concerted effort by agencies to meet legal imperatives to

15
attract and retain women and people of color in leadership roles, 82% of city managers in the
Unites States are White and 70% are male (Zippia.com, 2023). In progressively leaning
California, women represent just 24% of city managers despite comprising over half of the
state’s population. Similarly, people of color represent 15% of leaders in the profession
compared to 64% of their White counterparts despite Whites comprising 41% of the state’s
population (ICMA, 2021). Consequently, local government has a unique opportunity to leverage
workforce and constituent diversity to improve service delivery and performance by way of
understanding the values and norms of target populations the organization serves, particularly for
public employees in service delivery organizations.
A variety of models and frameworks have been developed by scholars to guide
organizations with genuine Diversity management practices that effectively improve perceptions
of agency equity and inclusion. Cooper and Gerlach (2019) present a three-pronged model that
prioritizes recruitment and outreach, values cultural differences, and implements pragmatic
policies and programs. Shen et al. (2009) expand upon that model with a prescription for line
managers to implement at the strategic, tactical, and operational level. The strategic level focuses
on organization culture, vision, mission, values, policies, measurement and auditing. The tactical
level prioritizes staffing, training, appraisal, remuneration. The operational level prescribes
education, networks/community, and flexibility in work-life balance. Both scholars’ models
require a degree of human resource competency in diversity management that values
contributions from all employees, leverages staff diversity for strategic advance, and enforces a
policy of no tolerance for prejudice (Wyatt-Nichol & Antwi-Boasiako, 2012). To advance these
conceptual approaches, scholars have developed a variety of best practices for application in
workplace settings. These best practices are intended to address gaps in diversity management

16
initiatives at the local government level, of which this study seeks to integrate through an
examination of existing efforts by agency managers.
Field Context and Mission
Incorporated cities exist to serve the needs of the constituents within their jurisdiction.
The local government sector has a tradition of Mayor, City Council, and City Management
organizational structure. Much like private businesses, municipalities with a council-manager
form of government operate under the leadership of a Chief Executive Officer or City Manager,
who receives direction and policy priorities from the City Council (Lee et al., 2021). While there
is no standard of minimum population for incorporated cities, most constituencies reflect
significant ethnic, religious, and cultural diversity (Miller et al., 2010). The typical local
government mission is to provide high-quality municipal services to ensure a safe, inclusive, and
livable community (Guyadeen et al., 2023). Additionally, many agencies’ strategic plans support
the racial, ethnic, religious, sexual orientation, identity, geographic, and other attributes of
diversity. Guyadeen et al. (2023) determined that diversity, equity, and inclusion goals and
objectives were one of 11 prominent emerging themes in agencies that are committed to
advancing the fairness of treatment, recognition of rights, and equitable distribution of services
to ensure every member of the community has equal access to share in the benefits of community
progress.
Municipalities are accountable to their diverse residents and employees to deliver on
specific diversity management outcomes. However, management’s ability to achieve those
deliverables is contingent upon the interactions between stakeholders within the agency.
Ontological accountability is the manner and method in which those stakeholders negotiate their
relationships with performance improvement in mind (Bovens et al., 2014). It is estimated that

17
the local government workforce is 10% immigrant (Lewis, 2014), 64% White, 8% Hispanic or
Latino, 4% Asian, 3% African American, and 29% other (ICMA, 2021). Moreover, minoritized
local government workers are disproportionally represented in in-service and maintenance level
jobs when compared to management and administration roles (EEOC, 2011).
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions
The purpose of this study is to evaluate needs in the implementation of diversity
management programs in local government from the perspective of agency managers. Utilizing
the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework, the project will explore individual and
institutional Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization (KMO) influences on diversity
management initiatives. The research questions that will guide the study can be categorized by
the KMO framework as follows:
1. What knowledge do public managers have of diversity, equity, and inclusion concepts
and how to implement them in the workplace?
2. What factors influence the motivation of managers to implement diversity
management programs in the workplace?
3. What agency practices support diversity management program outcomes for
managers?
Resulting data from the study will provide a roadmap for local government in the
implementation of diversity management programs. The results of this study may be
generalizable to other municipalities.
Importance of the Study
Local governments have embraced diversity management practices in the past two
decades largely due to the changing demographic of their citizenry, legal compliance, and

18
organizational effectiveness (Nishishiba, 2012). By adopting these practices, agencies access
changing demographic markets by mirroring increased diversity in the population. In turn,
organizations gain a competitive advantage and improve bureaucratic legitimacy, moving
agencies from passive to active representation (Cooper & Gerlach, 2019). Furthermore, diversity
in the local government workplace fosters creativity and innovation from varied perspectives,
with new approaches to problem-solving. Unfortunately, Diversity management practices have
also been met with skepticism by some minoritized workers. A 2014 survey of 221,479 local
government employees revealed that many minorities viewed their agencies’ diversity
management efforts as disingenuous due to perceived bias in the implementation (Choi &
Rainey, 2014). Workers also acknowledge that Diversity management practices have seemingly
been created in response to political pressure or an attempt to appear that they are adapting to a
social demand for diversity (Harris, 2013). To combat this perception, agencies have an
opportunity to employ wholistic diversity management approaches that exceed traditional legal
requirements.
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
Clark and Estes (2008) posited a Gap Analysis framework that can effectively identify
deficiencies in several organizational elements limiting DMP efficacy in the public sector
setting. The model prescribes an evaluation of knowledge, motivation, and organizational
(KMO) influences that may contribute to the DMP disparities. An examination of knowledge
gaps in diversity awareness can focus on factual, procedural, and conceptual capacities of
managers in municipal government tasked with implementing diversity initiatives. Additionally,
the model can assess the motivation of municipal leaders who may question their own ability to
effectively administer diversity management, or even auge their interest in the subject matter.

19
Lastly, a gap analysis can examine the cultural models and settings of the organization by
assessing the values, goals, and institutional structures that may inhibit diversity programs from
being effective over time. Practically, this alludes to an agency’s ability to set and achieve
published diversity goals and objectives, to comply with legal statutes for maintaining a diverse
workforce, and a commitment to implementing recuring and meaningful diversity sensitivity
training for the workforce (Ewoh, 2013).
Through a quantitative research method this study will collect and measure the existence
of diversity management variables through a survey questionnaire. Johnson and Christensen
(2014) posit that questionnaires are a self-reporting data-collection instrument that each research
participant fills out as part of a research study. The postpositivist philosophical paradigm focuses
on the logical relationships between factors and the likelihood that one behavior or action (or
lack thereof) influences another (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The study will use a questionnaire
to obtain information about municipal managers’ thoughts, feelings, attitudes, beliefs, values,
and perceptions of diversity management initiatives in their own agency. The survey aims to
assess manager knowledge of DEI concepts and diversity management program best practices,
assess their motivation to implement diversity management programs, and evaluate agencies’
policies as they relate to diversity management programs in the organization. While the survey
questionnaire will be sent to several categories of municipal workers, manager survey responses
will be the study participant group of focus given the unique role that stakeholder group plays in
the implementation of diversity initiatives. Managers operate in the middle ground as a fulcrum
between policy creation and practical application. Managers are best positioned to negotiate
relationships with councilmembers and field staff within the constitutiveness, relationality,
ethicality, spatiality, and temporality of the civic environment (Dubnick, 2011). Survey

20
invitations will be sent electronically to managers who are members of various industry
associations within California including: National League of Cities, Municipal Management
Association of Southern California, International City/County Management Association, League
of California Cities, American Society for Public Administration, California City Management
Foundation, California Contract Cities Association.
Definitions
This section provides definitions of frequently used terms used throughout the research
study and the dissertation:
• Diversity, Equity, Inclusion (DEI) is a term used to describe policies and programs that
promote the representation and participation of different groups of individuals, including
people of different ages, races and ethnicities, abilities and disabilities, genders, religions,
cultures and sexual orientations (Bonner, 2022):
o Diversity refers to the representation of different demographic groups with a
range of differences, both seen and unseen, that make people unique.
o Equity is the guarantee of fair treatment, access, opportunity, and advancement for
all, while striving to identify and eliminate barriers that have prevented the full
participation of some groups.
o Inclusion refers to the action of creating an environment that engages, respects,
and values multiple perspectives, ideas, and individuals.
• Diversity Management Practices (DPM) refer to the recognition, effective deployment
and synchronization of individual employee values and cultures. Successful diversity
management helps managers to maximize employee's knowledge and expertise to better
achieve organizational objectives (Allen et al., 2004)

21
• Multicultural Organizational Development (MCOD) is a process that supports an
organization moving from a monocultural, or exclusive organization, to a multicultural,
or inclusive, diverse and equitable organization (Holvino et al., 2014; Jackson, 2005).
• Public Service Motivation (PSM) is an individual’s predisposition to respond to motives
grounded primarily or uniquely in public institutions and organizations (Perry & Wise,
2010).
Organization of the Dissertation
Five chapters were used to organize this study. This chapter provided the reader with the
problem of practice being researched, the organization’s mission, goals, and stakeholders, as well
as the initial concepts of gap analysis adapted to needs analysis. Chapter Two provides a review
of current literature surrounding the scope of the study. Chapter Three details knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences to be examined, as well as the methodology for
selecting participants, data collection, and analysis. Chapter Four features a discussion of the
data collected including an assessment and analysis of the data. Finally, Chapter Five provides
solutions, based on data and literature, for closing the perceived gaps as well as
recommendations for an implementation and evaluation plan for the solutions.

22
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
The purpose of this research project is to evaluate needs in the implementation of
diversity management programs in local government from the perspective of agency managers.
The first section examines foundational concepts of bureaucratic representation, equity, and
Public Service Motivation. The second section examines best practices and challenges of
diversity management in the municipal setting. This section explores legal imperatives, the
human resources management discipline, organizational values, and opposition and resistance to
implementation. The third section introduces Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis model, applied
against agency managers’ specific knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences toward
the pursuit of diversity management initiatives. Finally, a conceptual framework is presented to
contextualize the diversity management discipline as a strategy toward an equitable and inclusive
work environment, or what Holvino et al. (2014) termed as a multicultural organization.
Diversity Management
Wyatt-Nichol and Antwi-Boasiako (2012) defined diversity management as the practice
of maintaining an environment characterized by the inclusiveness of individual differences and
responsiveness to the needs of diverse groups of employees, but Köllen (2021) contended that
there are two crucial areas of dissent or ambivalence within the diversity management discourse:
dimensionality of diversity and legitimacy. Diversity does not restrict itself to the dimensions of
sex (or gender) and race but is open to any category or trait that people share with certain other
individuals, which makes them, as a group, differ from other individuals (Klarsfeld et al., 2016).
That said, other dimensions, such as age, ethnicity, disability status, sexual orientation, gender
identity, and religion, have gained more and more visibility (Sabharwal et al., 2018).

23
Diversity management is seen as desirable and legitimate in its efforts to implement
measures that will make the workforce of an organization more diverse. On the other hand, if the
diverse structure of the workforce is seen as a given point of departure, diversity management
has to address the question of how to make the workplace as inclusive as possible for an already
presumed diverse organization (Köllen, 2021). Moreover, the organization has to assess to what
extent diversity management practices help achieve the underlying goals of improving services,
products, and profits (Ellis & Keys, 2015). Arguably, that improvement may come down to
representation for those who are making decisions or influencing organizational change;
municipal managers.
The municipal manager role (e.g., city manager, city administrator) was established in the
United States in the late 19th century (Stillman, 1974). The municipal manager serves at the
pleasure of the elected officials. They serve as chief administrative officers (CAOs) to implement
the city council's policies and oversee the municipal government's daily operations and serve as
prominent participants and influencers in the policy making and implementation process (Sun et
al., 2021). England (2003) observed that the role of city managers in a council-manager form of
government evolved in response to both strong and week mayor-council forms, which were more
vulnerable to political and ethical challenges. Additionally, the council-manager approach
resembles a traditional military command structure, with department, division, and task/project
delegation. Beyond the CAO/manager, department and division managers became more
involved and influential in agency services (England, 2003), thus broadening the scope and
responsibilities of the manager stakeholder membership. The literature on diversity management
explores historical and emerging trends in local government efforts and how municipal managers
influence and navigate the opportunities and challenges. This section provides an overview of

24
representation, equality, job satisfaction, and the role of agency leadership in implementing
diversity initiatives.
Representation: Bureaucracy, Influence, and Decision Making
A notable trend in local government is the underrepresentation of women and people of
color in positions of management and leadership. Traditionally, political, executive, and
management-level positions have been disproportionately held by White males, despite the
workforces they lead and the citizenry they serve being comprised of ethnically diverse
populations (Feeney & Camarena, 2019). A survey of 2,500 managers from 500 cities found that
women held just 25.8% of executive and political leadership positions. Additionally, only 16%
of management and department head positions were held by people of color (Feeney &
Camarena, 2019).
Despite the notable underrepresentation of minoritized workers in the local government
sector, there has been an increase in their employment in the past twenty years, but their roles
have been limited to social service and maintenance trade roles. Generally, these roles come with
lower pay and less advancement opportunity (Feeney & Langer, 2016). According to 2011 data
from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Blacks composed 12.6% of the general
population, and yet just 6.4% of administrator roles in state and local governments were held by
Black women and 5.5% by Black men. Moreover, Blacks made up 20% of administrative staff
and 30% in-service maintenance positions. Minoritized females have also been traditionally
underrepresented in managerial roles. According to a study of 102 municipalities, Miller et al.
(2010) discovered that 75% of surveyed cities had no Latinas employed as administrators and
managers. The lack of leadership diversity is not limited to women and people of color, as
immigrants have also been substantially underrepresented in state and local government. United

25
States census data from 2009 to 2011 revealed that only 9% of federal, state, and local
government employees were immigrants, while immigrants composed 18% of the for-profit and
13% of the nonprofit workforce (Lewis et al., 2014). It is clear that although citizen diversity has
increased in recent decades, managerial diversity has remained low for many public agencies.
Despite this disparity, studies have shown that diversity in the employment and
recruitment of foreign-born Americans has a positive impact on citizen engagement and
perception of agency effectiveness. Moreover, Lewis et al. (2014) asserted that diverse
representation in the public sector can raise governments’ legitimacy and perceived social
empathy. According to the 2000 Census, 16.3% of native-born Americans worked for
government, compared to 10.3% of immigrants. Additionally, immigrants make up fewer than
10% of local government workers, but account for more than 30% of all workers (Lewis et al.,
2014). Causally, gender, ethnicity, and age of applicants to top administrative positions matter to
how they are assessed by their political council. Although outside of the United States, a survey
of 1,688 elected politicians in Flemish municipalities revealed that agencies with leadership that
are predominantly conservative and White were less likely to support affirmative action practices
in hiring processes (George & Baekgaard, 2018). By comparison, American cities whose elected
officials are from racial and ethnically diverse groups tend to employ more minorities in
leadership roles (Kerr et al., 2013). For example, U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission data from 1987 to 2001 revealed that cities with African-American mayors or
managers tend to have a greater percentage of African-American administrators in financial
administration, fire, housing, and streets departments. Despite this trend, there remains a lack of
bureaucratic representation which perpetuates homogeneous public agency leadership that does
not look like its constituency or reflect its diverse values in decision making.

26
The consensus of literature and scholars is that a government’s workforce should be
representative of the public that it serves, noting that diversity allows for the production of better
products and services (U.S. MSPB, 2009). Additionally, agencies should empower female
managers to champion these initiatives as gender diversity can increase organizational
performance, perception of trust and fairness, inclusion, job satisfaction, and lower turnover
(Feeney & Camarena, 2019).
Equality: Advancement, Pay, and Treatment
Despite the recommendation of scholars to promote and empower women and other
minoritized workers to lead diversity management change in local government, there remains a
gap in the compensation for these employees when compared to their White and male
counterparts. Although late twentieth century workforce data revealed a notable disparity in
college education levels of minoritized citizens, by the 2010’s 36.4% of women and people of
color had obtained advanced degrees; up from 11.2% two decades prior (U.S. Bureau of the
Census, National Center for Education Statistics, 2017). However, women have been challenged
to attain positions of influence and comparable compensation due to positional segregation,
occupational segregation, and lack of political descriptive representation (Reese, 2019).
Alkadry and Tower (2011) described these segregations as the stereotyping of women to
disciplines and agencies with perceived caring and nurturing missions, which are historically
lower paying industries and professions. They expanded by highlighting how women account for
17% to 28% of state legislators and 10% to 20% of governors at any point in time although they
are approximately 51% of the national population.
Research at the local government level has revealed the benefits of diversifying agency
leadership to promote bureaucratic representation for the workforce and citizenry. A study by

27
Funk and Molina (2022) revealed that municipalities with female mayors and larger proportions
of women on the city council have smaller gender wage gaps in the municipal executive
bureaucracy than those with men mayors and few female councilmembers. The study also
revealed that male mayors that hold progressive attitudes do not reduce gender disparities to the
same degree as most female mayors. Moreover, a 2017 survey of local politicians found that the
impact of ethnicity and gender on recruitment preferences is conditional on politicians’
ideological predispositions: progressive politicians consider ethnic minority candidates more
competent, whereas conservative politicians consider them less representative and are less
inclined to invite them for job interviews than candidates from the ethnic majority (Baekgaard &
George, 2018). Overall, both studies highlighted biases by political leadership to recruit and
promote executive candidates with racial, gender, and partisan positionalities similar to their
own.
It should be noted, however, that selective recruitment and promotion by the majority
White American electorate has deep roots in racial and gender discrimination. Discrimination
continues in the workplace despite being outlawed in the United States by the Equal Pay Act of
1963 and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Bobo & Fox, 2003; Deitch et al., 2003;
Paradies, 2006) and by the visible results of unequal pay (Reese & Warner, 2012). Despite the
legal imperatives, discrimination does not exist in a vacuum. Anecdotally, “... we all think we are
playing on a level playing field when we are not. The cultural domain of power helps
manufacture messages that playing fields are level, that all competitions are fair, and that any
resulting patterns of winners and losers have been fairly accomplished” (Collins & Bilge, 2016,
p. 11). As a result, the treatment of minoritized workers in local government has had a relational
impact on the motivation of municipal employees to commit to public service.

28
Job Satisfaction: Public Service Motivation
Integral to any successful municipal operation is the dedication of public employees
providing services to the community. The literature highlights the evolution of Public Service
Motivation (PSM) and how employee satisfaction with workplace equality affects workers’
sense of belonging and purpose. In 1990, foundational scholar James Perry defined Public
Service Motivation as “an individual’s predisposition to respond to motives grounded primarily
or uniquely in public institutions and organizations” (Perry et al., 2010, p. 682. Vandenbeele
(2007) expanded on this definition to include the belief, values and attitudes that go beyond selfinterest and organizational interest to incorporate the interest of a larger political constituency or
community. Perry’s (2010) early work also postulated that the greater an individual’s public
service motivation, the more likely the individual will seek membership in a public organization.
Moreover, there are positive outcomes of PSM including job satisfaction, organization citizen
behavior, and staff performance (Ritz et al., 2016). As a result, agencies serving a diverse
populous of citizens have a responsibility to promote membership that is inclusive and
representative.
More recent studies suggest that selective membership by minoritized workers is
conditioned upon their perception of agency fairness and equity. For example, a 2016 survey of
2,583 English local government employees revealed that minoritized staff had a significantly
lower assessment of agency fairness and pay equity than that of their White counterparts (Wang
& Seifert, 2020). The findings also highlighted the generally lower job satisfaction of
minoritized workers due to their perception of agency diversity management initiatives focused
narrowly on legal compliance rather than treating diversity as an agency value.

29
Many agencies have attempted to combat this imbalance by managing diversity through
organizational fairness practices in the workplace. While these efforts have been positively
associated with job satisfaction for many government employees, they have not been as effective
in convincing minoritized employees of their success (Choi & Rainey, 2014). As the 2016 survey
highlighted, this distrust stems from the perception that White management is biased and
influences institutions to preserve existing power structures. This problem is important to address
because diversity in government can increase organizational performance, perception of trust and
fairness, inclusion, job satisfaction, lower turnover intention, and increase empowerment for
women and people of color (Feeney & Camarena, 2019).
Leadership: Social Equity and Organizational Culture
The literature has catalogued a variety of models and methods that attempt to address the
disparity of social equity and inclusive cultural values in local government. Traditional public
administration research has largely focused on the deficits of inclusive government practices,
while more contemporary studies have proposed an evidence-based performance management
approach (Gooden, 2017). For example, the Stanford Center on Poverty and Inequality (2011)
published 20 Facts about U.S. Inequality that Everyone Should Know which highlighted specific
examples of injustice and discrimination in U.S. communities. However, the publication did not
provide any recommendations on how to solve these problems or even attempt to understand
why the challenges exist. The core question for public administrators is no longer how much
inequity exists but rather the extent to which governments are doing something about it. Johnson
and Svara (2011) suggested that if local government leaders are to be effective at advancing
diversity management in their agencies, they will need to do more than identify diversity
disparities and transition to using data to understand how and why social inequities occur; with

30
an eye on crafting solutions and tracking progress over time. They posit four benchmark
categories for tracking social equity: procedural fairness, access, quality, and outcomes.
Monitoring progress toward equity goals in local government requires the use of
assessment tools that hold agencies accountable. For example, Blessett et al. (2017) developed
the Sustainability Tools for Assessing and Rating (STAR) Communities Rating System, which is
recognized as the nation’s leading comprehensive framework and certification program for
evaluating local sustainability, encompassing economic, environment, and social performance
measures. Another proven evaluation model was developed by the Government Alliance on Race
and Ethnicity (GARE, 2014). The Alliance created the Racial Equity Toolkit focused on six core
areas: proposal program or practice, data, community engagement, analysis and strategies,
implementation, and accountability and performance. Specific performance measurements
include (1) quantity: how much has been achieved? (2) quality: how effective was the program?
(3) outcomes: is anyone better off as result of the initiative?
The literature underscores the importance of transformational leadership in the delivery
of diversity management and benchmarking social equity goals for the municipal workforce. As
mentioned earlier, scholars have determined that employee satisfaction is tied to perceptions of
how and why human resources management is implemented in agencies. As such, the role of
agency managers, and more specifically management’s leadership style becomes integral in the
successful implementation of diversity management programs (Gilbert et al., 2011). Leadership
style affects the causal chain between human resources management, employee and work-related
outcomes, and performance. Research on diversity management has underscored the importance
of leadership style in influencing the relationship linking diversity, diversity management, and
positive outcomes (Ashikali & Groeneveld, 2015; Choi & Rainey, 2014). While traditional

31
diversity management outcomes have focused on representation and equal opportunity and
affirmative action measurements, more progressive benchmarks for leaders center around
affective commitment employees have with the agency; an emotional bond (Meyer et al., 2002).
Affective commitment is seen as an outcome of diversity management because diversity
management focuses on recognizing and valuing employee differences.
Transformational government leaders are uniquely positioned to impact and effectuate
diversity management imperatives given their ability to influence employees’ affective
commitment and institute organizational culture changes. The transformative leader inspires
followers to believe in and subscribe to the leader’s vision through application of four factors:
idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized
consideration (Northouse, 2019). In short, leading by example, inspiring through communication
of goals and vision, encouraging innovation and creativity, and providing undivided attention to
individual follower’s needs. Transformational leadership has an indirect effect on work-related
outcomes and performance through its influence on organizational culture (Moynihan et al.,
2012; Sarros, Cooper, & Santora, 2008). As a result, transformational leaders in local
government contribute to the underlying investment in Multicultural Organizational
Development (MCOD); a process that supports an organization moving from an exclusive
monocultural organization to an inclusive, diverse and equitable organization (Holvino, 2014).
Diversity Management Best Practices and Challenges
The literature catalogues an abundance of strategic real-world applications that showcase
the positive effects of DMP in action. Scholars agree on a broad set of concrete practices that
positively impact equity and inclusion in the workplace. The following have been identified by
researchers as being among the best practices for managing diversity and creating an inclusive

32
work environment (Allen et al., 2004; Ewoh, 2013; Nishishiba, 2012; Pitts, 2007; Shen et al.,
2009; Wyatt-Nichol & Antwi-Boasiako, 2012):
• Incorporate diversity goals and objectives in strategic plan
• Implement affirmative action in recruitment and hiring
• Communicate diversity priorities to all levels of the organization
• Provide recurring diversity trainings
• Hold managers accountable to diversity initiatives; commitment from leadership
• Implement formal mentoring of minority employees and minority/student internship
programs
• Allocate resources specifically for diversity initiatives
• Establish a diversity management review committee, task forces, and minority
support networks
Each of these best practices have shown effectiveness in creating favorable outcomes for
public organizations. For example, an organizational commitment to diversity management can
increase both job satisfaction and work group performance (Pitts, 2007). Moreover, diversity
management can also influence representative bureaucracy, civic engagement, and local
initiative success. Filla and DeLong (2014) have argued that greater ethnic diversity in larger
cities may result in more local initiatives as citizenry is more politically homogeneous. As a
result, agency administrations are obligated to adopt policies and employ staff that are more
diverse and inclusive. In these instances, Diversity management practices are driven by resident
demand fueling a shift of power from singular dominate groups to more ethnically diverse
groups forming new majorities (Filla & DeLong, 2014). These best practices have been derived
and expand upon a host of legal imperatives that were adopted in the mid-to-late twentieth

33
century, and while their enforcement and implementation have been periodic, their importance
has left a notable impression on the public sector. The following sub-section inspects a variety of
legal, human resource, and organizational best practices that have been attempted as well as
contemplating prominent challenges and opposition to the discipline.
Policy and Enforcement: Legal Imperatives
A foundational understanding of diversity management principles is germane to the
competency of diversity, equity and inclusion in local government management. Existing
literature outlines successful diversity management that helps managers to maximize employee's
knowledge and expertise to better achieve organizational objectives (Allen et al., 2004). As
mentioned previously, diversity can stem from a wide range of factors including gender,
ethnicity, personality, cultural beliefs, social and marital status, disability, or sexual orientation
(Shen et al., 2009). The local government Human Resources Management (HRM) discipline has
a history of accommodating diversity initiatives in workplace application. Affirmative Action
(AA) and Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) legislation were early mandates aimed at
improving workforce diversity. However, these campaigns have been limited to legalistic
directives, focused on representation equity rather than agency principles. Pitts (2007) outlined
three types of diversity management that span the HRM spectrum:
1. Legislating diversity: the laws regulating anti-discrimination, hiring, termination
(AA/EEO);
2. Valuing diversity: norms and values focused on inclusion, awareness, tolerance, and
acceptance; and
3. Managing diversity: adopted policies and strategies to help diverse employees
succeed.

34
Ewoh (2013) identified these categories as concrete practices with three distinct
intentions: policy and enforcement, employment requirements, and cultural awareness. This
continuum highlights a movement away from legal imperatives to diversity and toward a
productivity and resource maximization method (Ewoh, 2013). This approach also presents
various motivations for local government to pursue diversity management that focuses on
inclusion and equity in the workplace.
Historically, these landmark pieces of legislation were intended to address equity, access,
and treatment of marginalized citizens in the United States. The Civil Rights Act of 1964
included title VII, a section focused on employment, which prohibits discrimination in hiring,
firing, and promotion on the basis of race, religion, or national origin. This legislation influenced
the establishment of affirmative action directives which enacted official and unofficial
institutionalized statements and imperatives of nondiscrimination (Gonzalez & Sweeney, 2010).
A significant amount of litigation followed the enactment of this legislation within employment
of the local government law enforcement professionals. Miller and Segal (2012) highlighted the
increase in Black and female police officers in all ranks by six percentage points between 1968
and 2008 as a result of lawsuits wherein courts imposed affirmative action plans. About half of
all local government affirmative action employment plans ended by 1993, while others continued
through 2005. Despite the relatively short-lived implementation, Charles and Guryan (2008)
found that temporary affirmative action in municipal law enforcement hiring practices had a
lasting impact when greater exposure to Black coworkers eliminated negative stereotypes and
reduced taste-based discrimination by employers.
As a supplemental legislation, the Equal Employment Opportunity Act became law on
March 24, 1972 and amended Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, to give the Equal Employment

35
Opportunity Commission (EEOC) authority to conduct its own enforcement litigation. The
Commission strongly influenced the judicial interpretation of civil rights legislation (Grossman,
1973). Grossman referenced Commonwealth of Pennsylvania et al. v. O’Neill et al., Contractors
Ass’n of Eastern Pa. v. Secretary of Labor, Griggs et al. v. Duke Power Co., U.S. v. Central
Motor Lines, Inc., U.S. v. N.L. Industries, and several other landmark cases that tested the
constitutionality and applicability of the legislation to enact preferential treatment for historically
marginalized citizens and organizations relative to labor, employment, as well as contract and
procurement law. Despite the impact of both laws, there remains a disparity in the recruitment
and retention of women and people of color in municipal leadership. A study by Bishu and
Headley (2020) found that women and other marginalized groups faced covert barriers that
adversely impact their daily occupational experiences and outcomes. Additionally, the research
concluded that even with legislative and administrative tools in place to level the playing field,
the underlying design of work, informal organizational culture, norms, and interactions still
perpetuate White male advantages in local government employment practices. Although
significant progress has been made in employment opportunities, minoritized workers lag behind
white men in their ability to reach the highest ranks of public administration, receive comparable
wages, and work in agencies free of discrimination (Selden, 2006).
Human Resources Management
In addition to bureaucratic representation, local governments face an aging workforce
which will require significant backfill in the future decades. Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (2011) data, U.S. Census (2018) data, and International City/County Management
Association (2021) data all suggest that management in the public sector will progressively age
out while population diversity will continue to increase by the late 2020’s. Notably, from 1997 to

36
2007, local government employment increased by 18% to 14.1 million (U.S. Census, 2011) and
is projected to double in the next decade. As a result, human resources managers are tasked with
workforce planning that prioritizes five strategic areas: staffing, infrastructure, organizational
design, organizational culture, and risk management (Goodman et al., 2015). Selden (2009)
defined workforce planning as the ability to identify the gap between public service demands and
the available labor supply to continue providing quality services. Selden added that’s succession
planning should focus on leadership continuity for critical positions within an organization,
training and development, as well as an emphasis on diversity management. A 2009 survey of
184 municipal human resources directors revealed that nearly 80% of survey respondents
indicated that managing diversity was an important or very important part of modern human
resources management (Goodman et al, 2015). The study highlighted that managing for diversity
and workforce planning are complementing disciplines for local governments to prioritize.
Studies have validated the importance of diversity management especially in municipal
law enforcement hiring and retention. A review of employment records from 180 police
departments found that representation of minorities in political office and their presence in police
leadership positions are among the most influential predictors of line officer diversity
(Gustafson, 2013). The data revealed that while representation was instrumental in the
recruitment of minoritized officers, it was insignificant in the promotion rate of officers from
similar backgrounds; suggesting that political demands may have been satisfied by the
appearance of officers who proportionally represent the constituency they serve at the front-line
level. The police officer recruitment example suggests that the human resources management
needs to progress beyond hiring practices and in focus on systemic organizational changes that
will impact public services.

37
As previously mentioned, transformational leaders have the ability to influence
organizational change grounded in diverse and inclusive agency goals and objectives. Ewoh
(2013) prescribed a strategic planning process that infuses diversity management action items
throughout the organization’s workplan and DNA. Proper diversity management consists of three
primary components: recruitment and outreach, valuing differences, and pragmatic policies and
programs (Pitts, 2007). However, the ability for any agency to construct and implement these
components is contingent upon its ability to empower transformational leaders within the
organization to innovate and inspire the workforce. Cooper and Gerlach (2019) recommended
local governments employ a Chief Diversity Officer (CDO) tasked with diversity management
advocacy within the organization. Organizations with designated diversity advocates, who
promote diversity initiatives, send a strong signal of support for workplace diversity, and help
ensure that leadership at the top retains its commitment to addressing diversity issues (Hur &
Strickland, 2012). Beyond the issues, the organization’s commitment to consistently value and
promote a culture of equity and inclusion are critical to the CDO and agency’s diversity
management success.
Organizational Values and Culture
Expanding upon the empowerment of diversity advocates within local governments,
management’s value orientation is pivotal in delivering inclusive public services. Additionally,
agencies that lack diversity are more likely undervalue inclusion and participate in
discriminatory practices that will inevitably alienate the diverse communities they serve
(Baekgaard & George, 2018). That said, there is a notable difference between the value
orientation of minoritized and non-minoritized managers in municipal government that has
significant impacts on the method and delivery of public programs. Feeney and Langer (2016)

38
highlighted a disparity in the views of White vs minoritized managers on the importance of
traditional advancement factors including merit, connections, and representation. A Survey of
2,500 municipal managers revealed that 25% of non-White government employees saw race as
an important influence on advancement, as compared with only 7% of Whites that concurred
(Feeney & Langer, 2016). Additionally, non-Whites reported they were significantly more likely
to report gender as an important factor in advancement. This data suggests that minority workers
perceive that a bias exists favoring White employees in agency recruitment and promotion
practices. Moreover, research has also found that White led agencies are challenged to
effectively manage diversity and perceived organizational fairness among diverse workers and
constituents. A Choi and Rainey (2014) survey of 221,479 public employees revealed that
minority workers are not convinced diversity management efforts are genuine and fair, largely
because they distrust the White leadership administering it.
By comparison, agencies led by minoritized managers have yielded better results so far as
the workforce and public’s perception of community interests. Specifically, female and nonWhite managers lead with decision making that balanced both tradition and social equity values
in public service. Stazyk et al. (2017) confirmed this in a study of 1,538 managers in 545
agencies which found that minoritized administrators placed equal importance on traditional and
social equity values, while their White counterparts focused solely on traditional public
administration values. As a result, decision making has been largely limited by White managers’
value orientation, resulting in ineffective diversity management practices for the workforce and
insufficient social equity initiatives for communities.

39
Opposition and Resistance
As mentioned in chapter one, diversity management has experienced opposition and
resistance in the public sector. Recalling the 2014 survey of 221,479 local government
employees which revealed that minoritized workers viewed their agencies’ diversity
management efforts as disingenuous due to perceived bias in the implementation (Choi &
Rainey, 2014). Some employees have also acknowledged that initiatives have seemingly been
created in response to political pressure or an attempt to appear that they are adapting to a social
demand for diversity (Harris, 2013). Despite these perceptions, a more historical opposing
viewpoint centers around the validity and necessity of affirmative action in the recruitment of
agency managers.
While diversity management efforts in recruitment and retention seek to expand access
and opportunity for non-White managers, diversity in human resources management isn’t limited
to biological characteristics of employees. Scholars have classified diversity into two broad
categories: biodemographic diversity and job-related diversity (Moon & Christensen, 2020).
Biodemographic diversity refers primarily to biological attributes such as gender, race, age,
ethnicity, whereas job-related diversity identifies task and competency related traits such as
skills, tenure, experience and training (Horwitz & Horwitz, 2007). Opponents to diversity in
manager recruitment suggest that prioritizing biodiversity over job-related diversity ultimately
hinders and negatively impacts organizational performance.
Moon and Christenson (2020) have explained the risks of monocultural group favoritism
and how it can alienate and create bias in the categorization processes leading to relational
conflict, communication difficulties, decreased social integration, and increased affective
conflict. When the pursuit of biodiversity results in a monocultural workforce, organizational

40
performance may be undermined; suggesting a “negative relationship between biodemographic
diversity and organizational performance because individuals primarily categorize other group
members and distinguish “us” from “them” based on observable differences, such as race,
gender, and age” (p. 144). Understandably, research has struggled to find balance between both
diversity types in attaining an ideal organizational performance model that accounts for both
diversity in ability or merit and biology or demographics.
Prior to equal employment opportunity legislation, merit principals in government human
resources were implemented to protect from political influences in hiring, firing and promotion
within the industry (Woodward, 2005). Park and Lang (2020) have studied the confluence of
diversity management and merit principals in government to assess organizational performance.
They catalogued opponents’ views that diversity management undermines the basic tenants of
meritocracy as being fair and equitable in the human resources management process. A 2006
survey of over 250,000 government employees found that merit-based practices and diversity
management efforts have independent positive impacts on the organizational performance (Park
and Lang, 2020). However, findings also concluded that there is no significant independent
effect of workforce diversity in terms of gender or race/ethnicity, on organizational performance.
The difficulty in measuring diversity management impacts is the intangible nature of its
performance metrics, like improved communication and teamwork (Lockwood, 2010).
Moreover, calculating a return on investment requires a degree of subjectively assessing which
diversity initiatives are imperative and most impactful, and what the appropriate costs are to
deliver them as there is not always a clear connection to productivity and profits (Kirkpatrick et
al., 2003).

41
Perhaps equally challenging is determining who is best equipped to create, monitor and
track diversity management metrics in the government setting. As mentioned earlier, Cooper and
Gerlach (2019) suggested that agencies who employ a Chief Diversity Officer to champion
diversity management initiatives are well positioned to maximize best practices for the benefit of
the workforce. However, Harris (2012) argued that women and employees of color are
deliberately assigned to manage diversity programs for a variety of reasons:
1. Out of symbolic demonstration and in efforts to silence critics or satisfy a political
directive.
2. Out of a false belief that marginalized employees are the best equipped to handle
diversity matters.
3. To further segregate and control work groups who may challenge the dominate
political and administrative power centers of government.
4. To consolidate the success or failure of such initiatives upon marginalized workers.
5. To minimize resource allocation for diversity programs, that in turn, starve chances of
success.
Regardless of who leads diversity management efforts, it is clear that local governments
need to complete a gap analysis to determine what appetite exist to move programs from theory
to practice in pursuit of organizational change.
Clark and Estes Gap Analysis Model
Clark and Estes (2008) posit the Gap Analysis framework that can be very effective at
identifying deficiencies in several organizational elements limiting diversity management in the
public sector setting. The model prescribes an evaluation of knowledge, motivation, and
organizational (KMO) influences that may contribute to diversity management disparities. An

42
examination of knowledge gaps in diversity awareness can focus on factual, procedural, and
conceptual shortcomings of manager in municipal government tasked with implementing
diversity initiatives. Additionally, the model can assess the motivation of managers who may
question their own ability to effectively administer diversity management, or even auge their
interest in the subject matter. Lastly, a gap analysis can examine the cultural models and settings
of the organization by assessing the values, goals, and institutional structures that may inhibit
diversity programs from being effective over time. Practically, this alludes to an agency’s ability
to set and achieve published diversity goals and objectives, to comply with legal statutes for
maintaining a diverse workforce, and a commitment to implementing recuring and meaningful
diversity sensitivity training for the workforce (Ewoh, 2013). The Gap Analysis framework is
appropriate to examine this problem due its focus on benchmarking knowledge, motivation, and
organizational (KMO) elements that influence the development and efficacy of diversity
management programs in public agencies.
Knowledge and Skills
Researchers have defined four types of knowledge: factual, conceptual, procedural, and
metacognitive (Krathwohl, 2002). Each knowledge type plays a unique role in learning and
development of diversity management best practices in the municipal setting. Factual knowledge
describes the knowing of specific terminology and details; for example, diversity, equity, and
inclusion. Conceptual knowledge is represented in the form of theories, principles, and
categorizations. Procedural knowledge includes techniques, skills, and instruction in how to
complete tasks. Metacognitive knowledge describes the level of self-awareness that one
possesses (Krathwohl, 2002).

43
Social cognitive theory, in which the Gap Analysis framework is anchored, postulates
that reciprocal interactions among personal, behavioral, and social/environmental factors are key
elements of learning. People use various vicarious, symbolic, and self-regulatory processes as
they strive to develop a sense of purpose and belonging (Bandura, 1977). These interactions can
occur through enactive and vicarious learning opportunities. Enactive learning is learning by
doing and experiencing the consequences of actions (self-regulation of behavior, goal directed
behavior, self-monitoring) (Schunk & Usher, 2019). Vicarious learning is learning through
observation of others in their social environment. This occurs through response facilitation
(desire to adapt and fit in), inhibition or disinhibition (consequences and rewards), and
observation (motivation and value assumption) (Schunk & Usher, 2019). For the social cognitive
theory to be effective, learning must be competent, credible, similar (relatable), positive,
enthusiastic, and fair for learners (Schunk & Usher, 2019). Upon learning, individuals elicit
evidence of cognition through symbolic processes, self-regulation, and ultimately motivational
goal setting for the future that reflects the subject matter they have absorbed. Moreover, effective
learning transitions the individual from merely self-regulating thoughts, feelings, and actions to
influencing an individual's confidence in his or her knowledge capacity, goal attainment, and
control over one's own motivation. This transformational development is what Bandura (1977)
defines as self-efficacy.
Motivational Factors
Efforts to close gaps in performance require both knowledge and motivation (Clark &
Estes, 2008). Clark and Estes (2008) described motivation as reflective of three key factors:
active choice, persistence, and mental effort. Active choice is about initiation and starting, not
just stating the intention to do so, while persistence is the continuation in the face of distractions

44
or competing challenges (Clark & Estes, 2008). Mental effort is the focus of acquiring new or
additional knowledge, the acceptance of mistakes, and continuing to push forward (Clark &
Estes, 2008). Understanding the underlying theories of motivation and applying them to diversity
management initiatives is critical. Bandura (1977) posited that learners who intentional about
developing their skills and knowledge, and have high expectation for success, positively
influence their motivation to learn and develop. Understanding this relationship and interplay
between motivation and knowledge helps identify solutions when gaps in performance occur.
Elliot et al. (2018) outlined expectancy value theory to postulate that motivation for a
given task or behavior is determined by two factors: expectancy and value. Expectancy describes
an individual’s decision to attempt a task conditioned by effort, confidence in abilities, and
perseverance. Moreover, it outlines an individual’s expectations of outcomes and the belief that a
given behavior may lead to a given outcome, including expectations of success. Value describes
how much an individual appreciates the desired outcome and task achievement, addressing an
individual’s interest in attempting said task (Elliott et al., 2018). Eccles-Parsons et al. (1983)
further differentiated task value into four components: attainment value (i.e., importance of
doing well), intrinsic value (i.e., personal enjoyment), utility value (i.e., perceived usefulness for
future goals), and cost (i.e., competition with other goals). The expectancy value theory can help
individuals develop programs that leverage learner desire (value) to enthusiastically engage
subject matter, against learner self-efficacy (expectancy) and confidence in ability to absorb and
retain subject matter (Ambrose et al., 2010).
Clark and Estes (2008) also proposed four factors that increase motivation (p.90):
1. Personal and team confidence;
2. Beliefs about organizational and environmental barriers to achieving goals;

45
3. The emotional climate people experience in their work environment;
4. The personal and team values for their performance goals.
Organizational Values and Beliefs
The culture of an organization influences all facets of its operational existence, internal
functioning, goal attainment, interface with external entities, and adaptation to its environment
(Schein, 2010). Organizational culture amplifies influence, directly impacting how future
mangers are selected for development, how they are developed, and what determines their
success and longevity. Moreover, tangible assets and resources such as equipment, time, funding,
work process and procedures, as well as the human capital that is experienced, knowledgeable,
and motivated are critical to achieving organizational goals (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011).
Clark and Estes (2008) posited that when misalignment among an organization’s work processes,
policies, procedures, and culture, gaps in goal attainment and high-performance result.
Schein (2010) viewed culture from an evolutionary perspective and as a result of social
learning. Viewing culture as a product of social learning and acknowledging that cultures can
and do evolve over time, positions Schein’s (2010) definition of culture as reflecting a pattern of
shared basic assumptions developed through group social learning. These shared assumptions
and beliefs become the foundation for approaching and solving the challenges and problems
faced by groups within the given culture. Furthermore, new entrants into the culture are
assimilated and taught these cultural norms so they can function effectively within the new
organization environment (Schein, 2010). These norms become the organization’s cultural
models or shared mental schema and governing beliefs about how the agency functions and
behaves; they reflect the thinking and responses of the agency to external challenges. While
cultural models are considered tacit, they develop and evolve slowly over time, remaining in the

46
unconscious background to those who follow them, and illustrate what is considered normal and
customary (Rueda, 2011).
Conceptual Framework
For the purposes of any given study, a conceptual framework provides an explanation of
the interplay and connections between the numerous elements that make up that subject
(Maxwell, 2013). The goal of the conceptual framework is to create an understanding and
working theory of the interactions by integrating the concepts offered in the literature (both
theoretical and empirical) with one's own experience and thinking exercises (Rocco &
Plakhotnik, 2009). This theorized framework is then contextualized with the body of prior
research to see where new insights might be gained or how the study can add to the existing
literature (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The conceptual framework not only provides a rationale for
the study, but also helps researchers zero in on the best approach for answering their questions
(Maxwell, 2011).
Identifying organizational shortcomings is the first step toward developing and
implementing a transformation strategy. Organizational performance gaps can be identified and
addressed with the use of the gap analysis approach developed by Clark and Estes (2008).
Knowledge, motivation, and organizational (KMO) factors are the three areas into which the
gaps in organizational performance identified by Clark and Estes can be classified. Accordingly,
this study will employ a revised gap analysis paradigm as its theoretical basis. Potential
organizational strengths and weaknesses can be evaluated using the aforementioned three
categories, which will lead the organization toward appropriate and effective approaches to
strengthen the detected inadequacies. Without this guideline, an organization risks poorly

47
conceived and executed transformational initiatives. In addition to failing to boost organizational
performance, premature solutions may serve to worsen existing disparities.
Attempting to distinguish the nature of influence and the means of measuring it, the
knowledge, motivation, and organizational impacts are arranged separately from one another.
Although the detected influences have been classified according to three distinct categories—
knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors—there is a relationship between each that
suggests an influence may actually apply to another categorization (Sun et al., 2022). Sun et al.
(2022) suggested that knowledge and knowledge-sharing impacts could be affected by
motivation factors, and vice versa. Specifically, when employees do work that they are interested
in and comfortable with, they feel more confident in their skills and are able to come up with
new and better ways of doing things. They are also more likely to take action to solve problems
and deal with the unknown risks they face during the innovation process, which leads to higher
creative performance and knowledge sharing (Sun et al., 2022). Furthermore, stakeholders' levels
of knowledge and motivation may be affected by the workplace culture and organizational
factors. Managers in municipal governments, for instance, require motivation to introduce
diversity management efforts within their agencies, and may or may not possess familiarity with
diversity, equity, and inclusion concepts and the advantages they provide. If earlier attempts to
establish diversity management programs have failed due to the organization's culture not
accepting it, this may be the result of historical prejudices or institutional traditions.
The theoretical underpinnings of this investigation imply that stakeholder impacts,
including their knowledge and motivation, are integral elements of and connected to
organizational influences and the achievement of organizational goals as a whole. An
organization's stakeholders' levels of engagement (knowledge and motivation) can be influenced

48
by workplace culture and the effects of the persons in the organization (Schunk & Usher, 2019).
McInerney and King (2018) defined culture as the beliefs and value systems of people that can
influence motivation and learning. As such, stakeholders' knowledge and motivation can shape
the cultural milieu and the external factors that shape organizations. Table 1 provides an outline
of the specific variables of KMO examined in this study.
Table 1
Gap Analysis Conceptual Framework Diversity Management Variables
Factor Variable Description Manager measurement
Knowledge Declarative Data or facts Understanding of DEI concepts
Procedural Ability / Competency Delivery of diversity
management programs
Metacognitive Self-identify Self-awareness and cultural
perspective; adapting to
context and positionality
Motivation Self-Efficacy Confidence to execute,
control of motivation
Educational resources, coaching,
feedback
Expectancy
Value
Intrinsic value of
diversity
Valuing cultural
differences
Relevance to local government
work / community benefit
Maintaining differential
relationships with subordinates
Interest Interest in
implementing
diversity programs
Finding meaning and real-world
application / purpose
Organization Cultural Models Norms, values, rules
and standards
Agency communication, vision,
ethics, beliefs, space and time
Cultural setting:
Accountability
Expectations /
Deliverables
Performance evaluations /
measures, task progress
Cultural setting:
Policies and
practices
Strategic planning,
legal imperatives
Diversity goals and objectives
present in policy documents,
resource allocation, training
and development, programs

49
Knowledge
Local government managers need to know how to implement diversity programs and
understand the concepts, such as diversity, equity, and inclusion, that inform these programs.
Notably, agency employees are emersed in a work environment that requires persistent
interaction and observation of peers, community members, and agency leadership (Bourey,
2022). As a result, managers’ knowledge includes vernacular unique to public administration
settings as well as a mastery of agency norms, standards, and practices. This knowledge is
informed by human behavior that emphasizes learning from the social environment (Bandura,
1977; Schunk & Usher, 2019). While this may assist in creating a consistent public service
delivery model, it is heavily dependent upon a work culture that values diversity, equity, and
inclusion for both employees and the community.
In addition to learning, managers’ prior knowledge is particularly important in assessing
diversity management competencies. Notably, metacognitive knowledge allows learners to
connect their own positionality and interpretations of current events to implications in the
workplace (Ambrose et al., 2010), to ultimately frame preconceptions of diversity concepts. As a
result, this gap analysis focuses on examining the declarative and procedural knowledge of
managers; building a strong foundation for the understanding among agency managers of equity
issues. The section titled Diversity Management Best Practices and Challenges in this literature
review outlined the key knowledge components required by managers to successfully implement
diversity management programs.
Motivation
Agency managers need to believe they are capable of launching diversity programs and
that those programs possess value for the workforce and organization. Personal and team

50
confidence relate directly to self-efficacy and managers’ perception of subject matter mastery.
Providing educational resources, team coaching, and performance feedback to managers as a
means of building confidence and competency lead to positive outcomes of self-efficacy
(Bandura, 2000). By contrast, agencies that do not provide sufficient diversity resources, tolerate
prejudice, or who maintain policies that compromise or contradict equity in the workplace will
undermine individual manager motivation. Clark and Estes (2008) suggested that encouraging
collaborative decision-making and involving employees in program decisions is critical to
motivation. Clark and Estes continued by outlining the importance of interest and utility value in
promoting motivation and influencing the values and beliefs of organizations toward achieving
goals. This is to say that managers will pursue what peeks their interests, what they believe they
can influence, and what they believe will be useful in the execution of their professional
government work.
Finding meaning in work through differential relationships of managers and subordinates
is contingent upon managers’ abilities to reconcile social and demographic differences they may
have with staff (Nishii & Mayer, 2009). Nishii and Mayer (2009) posited that managers’
emphasis on inclusion and status differentials within the workforce yielded a positive
relationship between diversity and group turnover. This suggests that the more intentional
managers are at fostering an equitable and inclusive workplace through their subordinate
interactions, the more likely diverse employees, both in demographics and tenure, are to remain
with the agency and find meaning in their work. These findings suggest a competency of
managers who are able to reconcile “I” and “We” cultural differences, to avoid stereotyping and
manage conflicting cultural beliefs in the workplace (Clark & Estes, 2008).

51
Municipal managers need to find value in adopting organizational cultural norms and
models that embody diversity, equity, and inclusion. The lens of expectancy value theory is ideal
for addressing this challenge due to its focus on personal outcomes and self-efficacy. The theory
illuminates how diversity in the workplace can improve work satisfaction through intrinsic
values (Bandura, 2000; Elliot et al., 2017). From an organizational standpoint, once diversity
goals and objectives are integrated with agency strategic plans, managers can see the utility of
such programs in their work tasks given that they are held accountable to making progress on
those goals and objectives (Bovens et al., 2014). Local government agencies’ implementation
strategies should focus on communicating the importance and value of diversity in public service
by designing initiatives that are relevant to real world experiences with a diverse constituency.
Moreover, programs should be tracked and measured in their ability to model equity and
inclusion practices, set expectations around tolerance and understanding, and reinforce a culture
of empathy for diverse populations being served.
Organizational
Like any sector, local government has an obligation to provide cultural settings that allow
employees of all backgrounds to thrive in the workplace. Russian psychologist Lev Vygotsky
contemplated Sociocultural theory as a context for individual and group learning (Searle, 2017).
Sociocultural theory relies on collective group involvement and innovation in problem framing
and solving; a culture of communal resolution on shared challenges and learning opportunities
(Searle, 2017). Clark and Estes (2008) expanded by proposing how values, beliefs, attitudes, and
norms of a group establish cultural models and expectations. To effectively implement diversity
initiatives, local government managers need to communicate cultural models by sharing
agencies’ visions of diversity in the workplace. Moreover, managers have an obligation to share

52
how the agency is committed to tenets of bureaucratic representation and equality for all
employees.
Local government is accountable to its residents and its employees to deliver on specific
diversity management outcomes. However, management’s ability to achieve those deliverables is
contingent upon the interactions between stakeholders within the agency. Ontological
accountability is the manner and method in which those stakeholders negotiate their relationships
with performance improvement in mind (Bovens et al., 2014). Managers can be encouraged to
commit to and deliver on diversity management practices through performance evaluations
which should include specific metrics on diversity management activities within the workgroup.
More specifically, agency managers are subject to judgment by the general public and must
provide a justification for decisions influencing or influenced by diversity (Tetlock, 1992). In
local government there are two sides to the accountability coin. Epistemological accountability
refers to the practical accountability of diversity management expectations, expressed and carried
out through relational binaries in the workplace (Dubnick, 2011). Hentschke and Wohlstetter
(2004) defined accountability as a contractual relationship where a director, has power to reward,
punish or replace the provider, who produces a good or service. Local government is comprised
of managers (directors) who are tasked with monitoring and motivating subordinate employees
(providers) to achieve agency diversity goals. Regardless of which end of the binary managers
fall on, diversity management accountability should be systematic and institutionalized to ensure
success.
To the defense of municipal managers, accountability is contingent upon agencies
providing sufficient resources and adopting specific policies and procedures to maximize
diversity management opportunities. Guyadeen et al. (2023) posited that policies begin with a

53
systematic process of information-gathering, consultation, goal setting, and implementation
analysis to improve decision-making and enhance organizational effectiveness; also known as
strategic planning. Diversity goals emanating from strategic planning should be paired with
sufficient resources to deliver and execute on. Agencies should set aside resources specifically to
meet diversity planning goals (Hur et al., 2010). This can include agencies hiring a Chief
Diversity Officer (Cooper & Gerlach, 2019), instituting affirmative action recruitment practices,
and mandating routine diversity training for all staff (Shen et al., 2009). Figure 1 presents the
conceptual framework of this study.
Figure 1
Conceptual Framework

54
Success in achieving the organizational goal of delivering effective diversity management
programs with a key outcome of multicultural organizational development, is depicted in the
conceptual framework (Figure 1) above. The framework portrays the knowledge and motivation
of local government managers interacting with organizational influences. Two of
three assessment factors in achieving the organizational goal are shown, and they are knowledge
and motivation. Managers' abilities to interpret and implement diversity management initiatives
can be hampered by gaps in any of the knowledge or motivation influences. The positioning of
the organizational influences, the knowledge, and motivation encompassing managers serves to
highlight the fact that all three influences have an equal and reciprocal impact on managers’
diversity management leadership.
The cultural model, cultural settings, agency accountability to workers and community,
and agency policies and practices are all examples of organizational influences. Both declarative
(facts and concepts) and procedural (how to do something) knowledge play a role in influencing
manager understanding as well as their metacognitive awareness. Finally, characteristics like
expectancy value, interest, and self-efficacy have an impact on a managers' motivation. Changes
in managers' knowledge has a ripple effect on their level of motivation and vice versa, it's
important to view the relationship between these two factors as a whole and a recursive one.
Conclusion
The purpose of this literature review sought to provide the reader with a general overview
of diversity management in local government and how concepts of diversity, equity, and
inclusion are applied and practiced in the public sector. Concepts of bureaucratic representation,
equity, and public service motivation were presented to set a foundation of knowledge on
historical practices and nomenclature surrounding municipal efforts to achieve diversity

55
imperatives in the public sector. An overview of diversity management best practices and
challenges was presented to expose the reader to the existing contexts and opportunities within
the government sector to interrogate agency achievements and obstacles. This included legal
imperatives, the human resources management discipline, organizational values, and opposition
and resistance to implementation. The literature review also included an overview of the gap
analysis model, applying Clark and Estes’ framework against agency managers’ specific
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences toward the pursuit of diversity
management initiatives. The knowledge assessment explores diversity management cognition,
self-efficacy, and learning capacity. Motivational factors examine how expectancy and task
value correlate with managers’ choice, persistence, and mental effort as an influence on manager
and employee meaningfulness. And lastly, organizational influences are presented in the context
of how agencies and managers are accountable to the values and beliefs of the diverse
constituencies they serve. The discussions from the literature used in this review provide context
to understand the problem of practice and research questions.

56
Chapter Three: Methodology
The purpose of this research project was to evaluate needs in the implementation of
diversity management programs in local government. Utilizing a gap analysis theoretical
framework, the study examines the impact of individual and institutional Knowledge,
Motivation, and Organization (KMO) influences on diversity management initiatives. This
chapter outlines the following elements of the research study: research design and methodology,
data collection and instrumentation, and data analysis.
Research Questions
1. What knowledge do public managers have of diversity, equity, and inclusion concepts
and how to implement them in the workplace?
2. What factors influence the motivation of managers to implement diversity
management programs in the workplace?
3. What agency practices support diversity management program outcomes for
managers?
Overview of Methodology
The postpositivist philosophical paradigm focuses on the logical relationships between
factors and the likelihood that one behavior or action (or lack thereof) influences another
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018). More specifically, it suggests that reality is the result of social
phenomenon that can be measured by quantifying conditions. Through a quantitative research
method this study will collect and measure diversity management variables through surveys and
questionnaires. Johnson and Christensen (2014) posit that questionnaires are a self-reporting
data-collection instrument that each research participant fills out as part of a research study. The
study used a survey to obtain information about municipal managers’ thoughts, feelings,

57
attitudes, beliefs, values, and perceptions of implementing diversity management initiatives in
their own agency. The survey identified gaps in manager knowledge of diversity, equity, and
inclusion (DEI) concepts, assess manager motivation to implement diversity management
initiatives, and evaluate agencies’ policies as they relate to supporting managers in the
implementation of diversity management programs. While the survey reached several levels of
municipal workers due to the data collection strategy, manager survey responses were the
participant group of focus given the unique role that stakeholder group plays in the
implementation of diversity initiatives. Only data from individuals who met the inclusion criteria
for the study were analyzed and included in the findings.
The Researcher
My own positionality and experience in public administration has the potential to
complicate the survey creation and administration. As a researcher, I am aware that I must be
cognizant of my own bias and make a concerted effort to suspend assumptions that could taint
research questions, methodology, and analysis of data. I have an inherent expectation that the
study data will validate my expectation that monocultural approaches to organizational
leadership within local government have suppressed a multicultural model of change. As such,
my examination of diversity management is posited from a deficit approach despite the premise
that public administration exists to serve a diverse populace. In short, a perspective of
homogeneous public leadership that is resistant to change is the antithesis of public service.
A theory of change is a method that explains how a given intervention, or set of
interventions, is expected to lead to specific development change, drawing on a causal analysis
based on available evidence (Reinholz & Andrews, 2020). As a researcher of this problem, my
own positionality and professional experience in the public sector have formed assumptions of

58
local government as monocultural and resistant to the type of change diversity management may
instigate. This is based on a perceived disparity of women and people of color in government
leadership roles the relegation of minoritized workers to service positions, the lack of diversity
sensitivity education in human resources training curriculum, and organizational ambivalence to
issues of implicit bias and discrimination in the workplace. The counter opinion would suggest
that public administration lacks the resources and discipline to implement diversity management,
that current bureaucratic representation does not support diversity initiatives, that sufficient legal
mechanisms are already in place to ensure workplace equity, or that topics of diversity are
divisive and may further polarize the workforce. In short, the theory of change for this study is
premised on my assumption that structural and institutional barriers have limited opportunity for
diversity initiatives to challenge existing monocultural power structures in public administration.
Data Source: Survey
Survey was the method of data collection for this study. The primary goal of sampling in
quantitative research is to enable reliable speculations to the entire population (Johnson &
Christenson, 2014). Therefore, broad conclusions about the local government management
population were made with respect to survey questions about knowledge, motivation, and
organizational factors related to diversity management programs afforded by the quantitative
survey data in this study. All eligible managers who are members of one or more of the public
administration professional associations were invited to participate in the survey.
Participants
The population of individuals who were expected to meet the selection criteria for this
study was approximately 1,500 municipal managers with various levels of responsibility in local
government organizations. Managers were identified as ideal participants for the survey given

59
their unique roles within local government as fulcrums of decision making, program application,
and authority within agencies’ accountability binaries. Quantitative designs draw conclusions
about a general population using a participant sample (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The current
study sought a purposeful sample of 306 surveys solicited from the total population of
approximately 44,000 municipal managers throughout the United States. The minimum number
of surveys was calculated using a sample calculator to meet a desired 95% confidence level with
+/- 5% confidence interval assuming 1,500 municipal managers from among the total population
meet the study criteria.
Participants were filtered with screening questions at the start of the survey to isolate the
target stakeholder group. The study limited the respondent pool to municipal mangers who
oversee workgroups of five or more full-time direct reports. Additionally, selected managers
must have been responsible for some portion of their agencies’ annual budget and service
delivery. The intention in filtering the sampled group was to ensure respondents were truly
influential in the planning, implementation, and delivery of existing or potential diversity
management efforts. It should be noted that the responsibility for service delivery, like the other
criterion items, was reliant on self-reporting of respondents in the survey. There was no
minimum length of time that an individual must have been in a managerial position to be eligible
to participate in the study. Because titles and position classifications can vary between agency,
nominal screening questions provided categorical classifications for respondents to choose from.
Any respondents that did not meet the manager criteria based on responses to screening
questions (2-5), were exited from the survey.

60
Instrumentation
Including criteria screening and demographic questions, the survey included 29 questions
of various types and formats. Screening questions included four nominal questions, one interval,
and one demographic interval question to collect information regarding agency size, allowing for
filtered analysis and to effectively screen for eligible respondents within the targeted stakeholder
group of municipal managers. The remaining 23 questions included 16 ordinal items with Likertscale response options, one ratio percentage item, and six open ended response items.
The dimensions of the associated questions on the survey were screening (questions #1,
2, 3, 4, and 5), demographic (question #6), knowledge (questions #7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13),
motivation (questions #14, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19), and organizational influences (questions #20,
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, and 29). A survey protocol was developed with questions
formatted and uploaded into the Qualtrics MX platform. The survey protocol is attached as
Appendix A to this study. The majority of questions were ordinal Likert-scale items to collect
and assess respondents’ feelings and beliefs on each of the gap analysis factors and associated
variables being examined in the study. To avoid asking survey participants for information that
they may not have known, the survey questions focused on capturing stakeholder’s opinions on
KMO factors that related to diversity management concepts. The factors were linked to the
conceptual framework variables, municipal manager outcomes, and the topic specific literature
on diversity management.
Data Collection Procedures
As an active and representative member of the target population, I accessed email address
databases from the following public administration professional associations:
• National League of Cities (20,000+ members)

61
• Municipal Management Association of Southern California (800 members)
• International City/County Management Association (13,000+ members)
• League of California Cities (479 member cities)
• American Society for Public Administration (10,000 members)
• California City Management Foundation (318 members)
• California Contract Cities Association (80 member cities)
An introductory email was sent to the approximately 44,000 members from the above
listed associations to solicit their participation in the study. The email included a link to the
survey hosted on the Qualtrics MX platform, available 24 hours a day. The email also included a
notice of participant informed consent via the University of Southern California, Rossier School
of Education Information Sheet (Appendix B). The survey was accessible for four consecutive
weeks in April and May of 2023. The minimum of 306 responses was not initially received, and
as such the data collection period was be extended for two additional weeks with a supplemental
email reminder sent to the membership. Ultimatley, 460 responses were received and the study
solicitation did not need to be expanded to alternative discipline-specific municipal management
associations and professional networks to increase response rates.
Data Analysis
The purpose of data analysis is to derive meaning from the data collected (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). Data analysis included initial review of the quantitative data garnered via the
closed-ended items from the survey. Descriptive statistics, such as mean, median, and mode, are
commonly used when analyzing the results of surveys (Salkind, 2017). Because the majority of
the survey for this study included closed-ended ordinal items, percentage, mode, and frequency
were also calculated. The data was reported in the narrative as well as displayed via tables and

62
figures. The open-ended survey items was coded and tallied using Qualitrix MX analysis tools as
well as Microsoft Excel. Analyzing open-ended responses typically involves coding the data and
identifying themes that help answer the research questions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Typed
survey responses to open-ended items were used to code and categorize for this study and linked
to variables of interest expressed in the research questions and the study’s conceptual framework.
In order to achieve a 95% confidence level with a confidence interval of +/- 5% the
minimum sample size required was 306 completed surveys. The minimum number of surveys
was identified using a sample size calculator based on the equation ss = Z2*(p)*(1-p)/c2 where
the term, ss was the sample size, Z was the value 1.96 for a 95% confidence level, p was the
percentage picking a choice (0.5) and c was the confidence interval.
Validity and Reliability
Salkind (2014) defined validity as the degree to which a survey measures what it is
supposed to measure, and reliability as the degree to which the results would be similar if the
survey were administered again. In order to address the validity of this survey, questions were
constructed within Qualtrics to assess respondents’ anonymous perspectives on knowledge,
motivation, and organizational implications of diversity management in the workplace.
Questions were composed with careful consideration to exclude any researcher bias through a
series of ordinal levels of measurements that rank the feelings, confidence, agreement, and
understanding on a number of diversity management topics as recommended by Salkind (2014).
Additionally, the survey’s ability to be replicated was reinforced by the respondent recruitment
through professional public sector management associations, convenience sample, that can be
polled generally, by agency type, or by geography; quota sampling (Pazzaglia et al., 2016).

63
Moreover, the survey itself also included several prescreening questions to ensure the respondent
sample group could be filtered to the targeted manager stakeholder group, if ever repeated.
Ethics
The University of Southern California is committed to exhibiting respect of the rights and
dignity of all persons (University of Southern, 2004). I have complied with the University’s
Code of Ethics, specifically within the Common rule as defined by the US Department of Health
and Human Services’ Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects (Title 45, Part 46, Subparts A
and C). The research relied significantly on information available to the public. Survey responses
and data had the potential to expose confidential data that may not be available through other
means. Information divulged is completely dependent upon the confidentiality and security of
the online questionnaire platform.
Research indicates the following are best practices to follow (Creswell & Creswell,
2014):
1. Issues related to consent - informed consent statement provided in advance, provided a
copy during online survey, reminded participants they could stop at any time.
2. Confidentiality - use of pseudonyms chosen by participants, scrubbed all questionaries
for names/identifying information, kept responses password protected
3. Compensation/incentives – there will be no compensation or incentives as participants
are prohibited from being compensated for their participation. All participation is
voluntary
4. Power dynamics/coercion - explain researcher positionality, provide assurances that
purpose of study was to support employee safety and success

64
5. IRB process - Researcher participates in IRB training/workshop, receives guidance from
Chair, and reviewed IRB guidelines
Convenience sampling (Pazzaglia et al., 2016) of management-level employees in the public
sector was used based on their accessibility and membership in professional associations. As
such, the anonymity of participants was protected at all times. Information obtained through
research activities was protected from improper disclosure and was only used for the expressed
purpose of the study. Moreover, this study is classified as an Exempt Study by the University of
Southern California Institutional Review Board; as such, I used the Informational Sheet for
Exempt Research, herein attached in Appendix B of this study.
The research outcomes aimed to support all municipal employees of diverse
backgrounds. However, the underlying intent was to ensure that those employees who are
historically underrepresented in local government are provided access and equitable outcomes in
their professional careers. Traditional power centers in public administration have
overwhelmingly been slanted toward White male stakeholders in positions of authority and
influence (Feeney & Langer, 2016). As such, the study intended to challenge and disrupt the
status quo make up of municipal leadership. A potential result of broader more meaningful
diversity management programs is a shift of control at the executive level, which may inherently
reduce the share of power previously enjoyed nearly exclusively by White male managers. As a
minoritized manager in local government and as the researcher, I disclose my own bias and
positionality. To mitigate potential bias, quantitative methods were used to restrict researcher
influence. Survey questions were constructed in neutral and impartial language to ensure candid
uninfluenced responses.

65
Chapter Four: Findings
The purpose of this research was to assess local government managers’ needs in the areas
of knowledge, motivation, and organizational (KMO) resources relative to diversity management
initiatives in their relative agencies. The Clark and Estes (2008) Gap Analysis model was used as
the framework to study the KMO needs of managers who are uniquely positioned to report on the
implications of diversity management in the public sector. Through a quantitative research method
this study collected and measured diversity management variables through surveys and
questionnaires. The survey instrument obtained information about municipal managers’ thoughts,
feelings, attitudes, beliefs, values, and perceptions of implementing diversity management
initiatives in their own agencies. Additionally, the survey aimed to identified gaps in manager
knowledge of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) concepts, assessed manager motivation to
implement diversity management initiatives, and evaluated agencies’ policies as they relate to
supporting managers in the implementation of diversity management programs. The survey was
comprised of six screening and demographical questions, 19 ordinal/ratio quantitative questions,
and six open-ended questions.
This chapter presents the results of the survey that support suggestions for knowledge,
motivation, and organizational needs. The survey was sent to over 44,000 public sector managers
via a solicitation email containing a link to the survey hosted online via the Qualtrics MX platform.
The study survey targeted 1,500 eligible managers, out of which 460 responded. It should be noted
that when analyzing survey questions, 66% was the threshold considered for determining needs
and strengths in this gap analysis.

66
Participating Stakeholders
As described in the previous chapter, managers were ideal participants for the survey given
their unique roles within local government as fulcrums of decision making, program application,
and authority within agencies’ accountability binaries. For the purposes of this study and the
survey, managers were broadly defined by scope of responsibility, number of direct reports, budget
oversight, and size or type of agency. Table 2 identifies the level of managers that participated in
the study with 392 or 92% of respondents self-reporting a management level position eligible to
participate in the survey. Additionally, Figure 2 reflects that 95% of the responding managers had
one or more direct reports, while 91% oversaw staff and workgroups indirectly. Finally, Figure 3
highlights that 96% of these managers were responsible for some portion of their agencies’ annual
budgets and service delivery.
Table 2
Managers’ Roles
Position/Title n %
Chief Administrative Officer 68 16.0
Deputy/Assistant Chief Administrative Officer 22 5.2
City Manager/General Manager 62 14.6
Deputy/Assistant City Manager 24 5.6
Department Director 76 17.8
Deputy/Assistant Department Director 38 8.9
Division or Section Manager/Superintendent 40 9.4
Other Management Position 64 15.0
Not in a Management Role 32 7.5

67
Figure 2
Number of Employees Supervised by Managers
Figure 3
Responsibility for Agency Budget and Services
Findings Research Question 1: What knowledge do public managers have of diversity,
equity, and inclusion concepts and how to implement them in the workplace?
Foundational to the understanding of diversity management practices is a baseline
competency of DEI concepts, data, and the ability of managers to place themselves in the context
of a diverse workplace. This research question sought to examine participant managers’
understanding of diversity vernacular, how diversity programs are implemented, and how their
own identities and perspectives are contextualized in public sector diversity.
18
126
122
46
48
32
52
32
20
224
0
1 to 4
5 to 10
11 to 15
16 or more
Directly Indirectly
96%
370
4%
14 n
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
no yes

68
Knowledge Influences
Managers’ Declarative DEI Knowledge Largely Well Informed. Chapter one outlined
definitions for specific DEI concepts to recognize established vernacular for terms and ideas that
have been previously researched and adopted in academia. Notably, Bonner (2022) defined
Diversity as the representation of different demographic groups with a range of differences, both
seen and unseen, that make people unique. Survey participants offered 104 open-ended responses
that were largely consistent with this definition, with 97% of managers’ statements supporting
this definition through key themes and terms identified in Table 3.
Table 3
Managers’ Diversity Definitions
Diversity Themes n %
Backgrounds 29 27.9
Ethnicity 14 13.5
Gender 13 12.5
Group 12 11.5
Race 9 8.7
Experiences 7 6.7
Age 6 5.8
Religion 6 5.8
Differences 5 4.8
Other 3 2.9
Note. n = frequency theme was identified in responses
Managers’ responses displayed a clear resonance with the adopted definition thus
suggesting significant declarative knowledge on the characterization of Diversity. One
respondent wrote, “Diversity refers to the presence and representation of different individuals or
groups with varied characteristics, backgrounds, and perspectives within a particular setting or

69
context.” Another respondent expanded by adding how diversity “embracing[es] differences in
backgrounds and experiences including age, race, gender, religion, ability, language, sexual
orientation, social status (economic, marital, veteran).” And a third respondent expressed that
diversity is “A group that possesses members with varying backgrounds, genders, sexual
orientations, races, ethnicities, socioeconomic status, education, age, etc.” All 104 manager
responses to this question were consistent with and paralleled the established definition.
Bonner (2022) defined Equity as the guarantee of fair treatment, access, opportunity, and
advancement for all, while striving to identify and eliminate barriers that have prevented the full
participation of some groups. Two thirds of participating manager responses to this question
were aligned with the published definition, as the main themes of access, fairness, and ensuring
outcomes for people (employees) who receive the same resources as all others. Table 4
identifies terms used by 102 respondents which supported Bonner’s meaning.
Table 4
Manager’s Equity Definitions
Equity Themes n %
People 41 40.0
Resources 33 32.0
Treatment 23 23.0
Access 16 16.0
Fairness 15 15.0
Organization 14 14.0
Outcomes 12 12.0
Employees 11 11.0
Equity 6 5.9
Practices 6 5.9
Services 4 3.9
Goals 4 3.9
Barriers 3 2.9
Education 3 2.9

70
Note. n = frequency theme was identified in responses
Manager definitions emphasize a strong declarative knowledge of Equity with responses
such as “Focuses on ensuring fairness in the treatment and opportunities for all individuals
understanding that there may different needs or circumstances to acknowledge and/or
accommodate.” Note the parallel understanding of fairness and treatment in this respondent’s
characterization. Moreover, this participant also acknowledges the realty that some individuals
may have different needs [barriers] to account for when considering equity imperatives. Another
manager adds that equity is “ensuring that everyone has the necessary resources to achieve their
desired goals, while understanding the varying support each individual or group may need.”
Perhaps a more poignant response stated that equity is, “Providing access, resources, and
opportunities to help level the playing field especially for people who are at a disadvantage,
thereby ideally achieving an equal outcome.” More than 67% of manager responses revealed a
high declarative knowledge on the definition of equity.
Inclusion refers to the action of creating an environment that engages, respects, and
values multiple perspectives, ideas, and individuals (Bonner, 2022). A total of 101 managers
provided open-ended responses to this survey question with a varied and diverse span of
definitions. As such, themes emerged that characterized inclusion in generic but clear terms that
were consistent with Bonner’s definition. Notably, 26 managers identified that inclusion should
incorporate “everyone” as decision makers and contributors, paralleling the multiple perspectives
component of the accepted definition. Additionally, 29 managers expressed how inclusion
should invite and support groups and individuals to contribute to the organization in both
membership and activity. One respondent expressed that “all members of the organization are
kept informed on the latest information and provided equal opportunity to perform and succeed.”

71
Another manager stated that Inclusion is “active steps to ensure all groups/identities feel
welcome to participate and have buy in, in the organization.”
Moving beyond the academic definition, 16 respondents articulated that inclusion
fostered a sense of belonging in the organization. For example, one stated that inclusion is
“Creating a work environment where all employees feel that they belong and that their voices
can and should be heard.” Another elaborated with, “Universal participation leading to sense of
universal belonging - appropriate boundaries not barriers to contribution to mission and decision
making.” Figure 4 shows the distribution of themed responses from survey participants that
reinforce managers’ declarative knowledge of the Inclusion definition.
Figure 4
Managers’ Inclusion Themes
Managers elicited a firm declarative knowledge of each of the DEI terms as mentioned
above. Moreover, Table 5 provides a definitive view of respondents self-reported understanding
16
14%
26
23%
18
16%
29
26%
23
21%
Belonging Everyone Opportunities Organization People

72
of DEI concepts, with more than 230 (83%) of 276 mangers claiming satisfactory or complete
understanding of each concept when responding to the Likert scale question on Understanding.
Table 5
Managers’ Self-reported DEI Understanding
Response Diversity Equity Inclusion
n % n % n %
No Understanding 0 0.0 2 0.7 0 0.0
Limited Understanding 2 0.7 2 0.7 6 2.2
Some Understanding 30 10.9 34 12.3 34 12.3
Satisfactory Understanding 158 57.2 146 52.9 152 55.1
Complete Understanding 86 31.2 92 33.3 84 30.4
Total 276 100.0 276 100.0 276 100.0
Managers Lack Knowledge on How to Deliver Diversity Programs. Procedural
knowledge includes techniques, skills, and instruction in how to complete tasks (Krathwohl,
2002). It should be noted that this survey asked managers to self-report if their level of
knowledge was sufficient enough to implement diversity programs rather than actually assessing
the skills and techniques they may possess to deliver such initiatives. That said, there is a
distinction between the declarative understanding of DEI concepts and the procedural
competency to actually administer successful diversity campaigns. Regardless, 166 of 316
(52.6%) responding managers agreed and strongly agreed that they possessed the knowledge
needed to implement diversity management (DM) programs as depicted in Table 6 below. By
comparison to the asset of respondents’ declarative knowledge, their procedural knowledge of
implementing diversity programs did not meet the 66% threshold as a true strength. As such,

73
respondents’ procedural understanding was determined to be a gap in knowledge according to
the survey results.
Table 6
Managers Self-reported Knowledge of How to Implement DM Programs
Response n %
Strongly Disagree 10 3.2
Disagree 48 15.2
Neither Agree nor Disagree 92 29.1
Agree 132 41.8
Strongly Agree 34 10.8
Managers Indifferent to Positionality in Metacognitive Knowledge. Ambrose et al.
(2010) highlights that metacognitive knowledge allows learners to connect their own
positionality and interpretations of current events to implication in the workplace. Survey data
supports this theory as more than half of respondents reported that their personal
background/identity informs their understanding of diversity and approach to implementing
diversity programs in the workplace. Notably, 65% of 322 respondents agreed or strongly
agreed that their background informs their understanding of diversity at work. Similarly, 62% of
the same 322 respondents agreed or strongly agreed that their background informs their approach
to implementing diversity programs. Conversely, while over half of stakeholders felt that
personal identity is instrumental in workplace diversity efforts, the threshold of a large majority
(66%) of respondents that agreed was not met, demonstrating a potential area for development.
In each metacognitive knowledge survey question, a subset of respondents appeared to be
indifferent to their personal backgrounds informing diversity understanding (25%) or informing

74
their approach to implementing (29%) diversity programs. Figure 5 provides a summary of both
metacognitive questions results.
Figure 5
Manager Background/Identity Informs Understanding and Approach to Implementing Diversity
To reinterate, the question results reflected an indifference of survey respondents (25%
and 29% respectively) regarding their view of positionality on diversity in the workplace. Table
7 highlights the mean for each question to further demonstrate the subsection of respondents who
remained indecisve when answering. As such, the results suggest there is a poential gap in select
respondents’ ability to be self-aware, cultutaly cognizant, and adaptable to the context of a
diverse workforce; otherwise known as metacognitive knowledge.
6.2%
20 3.7%
12
24.8%
80
46.0%
148
19.3%
62
5.0%
16
4.3%
14
28.6%
92
45.3%
146
16.8%
54
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree Nor
Disagree
Agree Strongly Agree
Background/Identity Informs Understanding of Diversity
Background/Identity Informs Approach to Implementing Diversity Programs

75
Table 7
Mean and Standard Deviation for Survey Items on Metacognitive Knowledge
Items
Strongly Disagree (1), Disagree (2), Neither Agree nor Disagree (3),
Agree (4), Strongly Agree (5)
Mean Standard
Deviation
My personal background/identity informs my understanding of
diversity in the workplace 3.68 1.02
My personal background/identity informs my approach to
implementing diversity programs in the workplace 3.65 0.97
Data collected and analyzed from research question one regarding knowledge influences
revealed that managers appeared to be well informed of their declarative knowledge about
diversity management. However, managers’ procedural knowledge showed significant gaps in
their understand of how to implement diversity programs in the workplace. Lastly, the data
revealed that managers’ metacognitive knowledge was unclear, with over one quarter of
respondents not definitively identifying if their background or identify impacts their
understanding of and approach to implementing diversity programs.
Findings Research Question 2: What factors influence the motivation of managers to
implement diversity management programs in the workplace?
Based on the research of Clark and Estes (2008), the inquiry of motivation with respect to
diversity management is contingent upon managers pursuing what peeks their interests, what
they believe they can influence, and what they believe will be useful in the execution of their
professional government work. As such, this research question sought to examine participant
managers’ confidence, value orientation, and general interest in diversity management initiatives.

76
Motivation Influences
Managers Confident in Ability to Implement Diversity Management. Bandura (1977)
expressed that self-efficacy is an individual's confidence in his or her knowledge capacity, goal
attainment, and control over one's own motivation. In contemporary local government settings
managers, in practice, are expected to elicit signs of confidence, having mastery over their own
subject matter expertise. However, for the purposes of this survey, respondents were managers
from a variety of governmental disciplines, of which may or may not have included diversity
management competency. Regardless, responding managers shared a moderate to high level of
confidence in their ability to implement diversity initiatives with a notable majority of
respondents reporting quite confident (31%) and somewhat confident (31%) self-evaluations.
Additionally, nearly one quarter (23%) of the 326 managers that answered this survey question
reported a very confident rating, suggesting a high level of confidence in their own ability to
implement diversity initiatives as outlined in Figure 6. The responses suggest a potential
heightened level of comfort by managers to deliver diversity programs.

77
Figure 6
Managers’ Confidence to Implement DM
Managers Value Diversity but are Cautious on Details and Accountability. Bandura
(2000) and Elliot et al. (2017) both suggest that diversity in the workplace can improve work
satisfaction through intrinsic values. Additionally, Nishii and Mayer (2009) posited that
managers’ focus on inclusion and status differentials within the workforce yield positive
correlations between diversity and turnover. As such, it is not surprising that survey data found
strong support by responding managers for diversity programs. Specifically, 234 (71%) of
respondents believe that it is important to implement diversity management within their
workgroups, suggesting that managers on whole see value in such initiatives.
Stakeholders were slightly less consistent when presented with the opportunity to
introduce cultural affinity groups in efforts to enhance morale, sense of belonging, and
74
23%
100
31%
102
31%
34
10%
16
5%
Very Confident Quite Confident Somewhat Confident
Slightly Confident Not At All Confident

78
meaningfulness. On the topics of employee morale and meaningfulness, the 304 responses
revealed that manager support (agree and strongly agree) logged 63% and 64% respectively but
fell short of a two-thirds majority. Conversely, 73% (222 responses) of surveyed managers did
feel that cultural affinity groups enhance employees’ sense of belonging (73%). While
disagreeing responses did account for less than 10% of the data in each topic, the notable
inconsistency is evident in the number of indifferent answers: morale (23%), sense of belonging
(14%), meaningfulness (22%). Table 8 provides a summary highlighting the inconsistent
respondents’ beliefs on the value of cultural affinity groups’ ability to enhance each outcome for
employees.
Table 8
Belief in Cultural Affinity Groups to Enhance Employee Outcomes
Response Morale Sense of
Belonging Meaningfulness
n % n % n %
Strongly Disagree 14 4.6% 18 5.9% 20 6.6%
Disagree 30 9.9% 22 7.2% 22 7.2%
Neither Agree nor Disagree 70 23.0% 42 13.8% 66 21.7%
Agree 142 46.7% 144 47.4% 144 47.4%
Strongly Agree 48 15.8% 78 25.7% 52 17.1%
Mean 3.59 3.80 3.61
Standard Deviation 1.02 1.08 1.06
For the stakeholders that selected disagree or strongly disagree (<10%) to any of the
employee outcome topics, the survey employed an optional open-ended question to collect
sentiments on why they felt as such. Of the 27 respondents who provided open-ended
responses, 11 (40%) remarked that cultural affinity groups were divisive, encourage segregation,

79
and silos individuals. The general sentiment was negative with one manager sharing, “We
should celebrate the diversity in our workplace but not create silos using that diversity. Hard to
embrace when you are purposefully separating.” Others questioned the linkage to
meaningfulness and belonging with comments such as, “If your employees need to belong to a
cultural affinity group to have a sense of belonging, positive meaningfulness in their job or have
better morale... you're doing it wrong.” Given that the survey did not collect personal
demographic information, it was not possible to consider the full perspective of these responses.
For example, to find out if contrary opinions were provided by individuals from a dominate
racial, sexual, or social economic group, versus opinions from managers with traditionally
marginalized backgrounds.
A cautious perspective of manager expectancy value was also reflected in responses to
the question of whether managers’ performance evaluations should include an assessment of
contributions to workplace diversity programs. While 148 (49%) of 300 respondents did agree
or strongly agree with this accountability proposition, the remaining 150 respondents did not see
value tying their individual performance related to diversity initiatives to their work plan
expectations. One assumption is that while managers may value diversity programs in concept,
they are not motivated to embrace diversity goals and objectives as a core component of their
profession. Figure 7 provides a summary of respondents’ hesitancy to accept diversity
requirements in their own performance reviews.

80
Figure 7
Managers’ Opinion of Diversity Accountability in Performance Evaluations
Manager Curiosity About Diversity Initiatives Persists. As previously stated, managers
will pursue what piques their interest, what they believe they can influence, and what they feel
will be useful in their profession. The International City/County Management Association
reported that the local government workforce demographics are changing, and while Whites still
comprise a 64% majority of the public workforce, the remaining 46% of minoritized employees
is growing (ICMA, 2021). The survey data reflect a consistent and genuine curiosity about
diversity in the workplace. A 69% (164 responses) majority of managers agreed or strongly
agreed that they would like to learn more about DEI concepts as they apply to the local
government workforce. That super-majority appeared even larger in a survey question gauging
managers’ interest in understanding how diversity programs impact employees and their public
service. A total of 190 respondents (80%) agreed or strongly agreed that they have a genuine
8.0%, 24
20.7%, 62
22.0%, 66
40.7%, 122
8.7%, 26
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree

81
interest in understanding these programs. Table 9 elaborates on the responses to both survey
questions, with notably fewer disagree and strongly disagree responses when compared to other
motivation questions within the survey.
Table 9
Managers’ Interest in Learning About Impacts of DEI Concepts and Programs
Response
Would Like to Learn More
About DEI Application in
Workforce
Genuine Interest in How
Diversity Programs Impact
Employees and Service
n % n %
Strongly Disagree 12 5.0% 6 2.5%
Disagree 10 4.2% 8 3.4%
Neither Agree nor Disagree 52 21.8% 34 14.3%
Agree 106 44.5% 108 45.4%
Strongly Agree 58 24.4% 82 34.5%
Mean 3.79 4.06
Standard Deviation 1.02 0.92
The survey data regarding manager interest showed a similar supportive pattern relative
to stakeholders’ desire to learn about how to implement diversity programs. For example, 238
(73%) of the 326 question responses depicted managers as very interested or somewhat
interested in learning how to deliver such programs. Survey data from the procedural knowledge
question previously mentioned highlighted a gap in managers’ understanding on how to
implement diversity programs. As such, it was not unexpected that the data revealed the asset of
higher manager interest in learning this skill, as depicted in Figure 8 below.

82
Figure 8
Manager Interest in Learning How to Implement Diversity Programs
Data collected and analyzed from research question two regarding motivation influences
revealed that managers’ self-efficacy and confidence in their ability to implement diversity
management programs remained high. However, managers’ expectancy value highlighted
hesitancy and caution as respondents shared concerns regarding program accountability and
workplace affinity groups despite believing that diversity is beneficial for the workforce. Lastly,
the data revealed that managers’ interest in diversity management programs endures as 68%
shared a desire to learn more and 79% conveyed a genuine interest in programs.
6.20%
128
3.70%
110
24.80%
56
46.00%
16
19.30%
16
Very Interested
Somewhat Interested
Not Very Interested Neutral
Not At All Interested

83
Research Question 3: What agency practices support diversity management program
outcomes for managers?
Local governments have an obligation to provide structure and systems that help maintain
service delivery for their citizens and a healthy work environment for their employees. Clark
and Estes (2008) suggest that values, beliefs, attitudes, and norms of an organization establish
cultural models and expectations. Those norms and models become the foundation of
government operations as cornerstones of accountability for managers and the teams they lead.
The extent to which agencies adopt diversity management policies and practices is a direct
reflection of management’s acceptance or denial of diversity initiatives in the workplace. As
such, this research question assessed managers’ opinions of their organizations’ diversity
infrastructure, or lack thereof.
Organization Influences
Managers not Convinced their Agencies’ Priorities Include Diversity. A leading
indicator of an organization’s commitment to diversity is the adoption of standard
communication practices, vision sharing, ethics, cultural beliefs, and the allocation of time, space
and resources to allow diversity to flourish in the agency; otherwise known as cultural models.
When asked if their agencies clearly communicate a vision of diversity in the workplace, 63% of
respondents disagreed or were not aware enough to decide. Given that the largest proportion of
respondents (35%) were unable to agree or disagree about communication, the assertion is that
respondents’ agencies have not done a sufficient job of informing the workforce of diversity
initiatives.
The survey identified six different organizational resources as measurements of agencies’
commitment to standards that may support diversity management in the workplace. According to

84
managers’ responses, all six resource areas lacked sufficient commitment by agencies toward
diversity priorities. As a whole, less than 25% of respondents reported that their agencies
allocated any of the resources to diversity programs, either “always” or “often”. Conversely,
respondents felt that their agencies never or rarely allocated the six resources: Funding (53%),
Training (38%), Time (42%), Advertising (61%), Personnel (46%), Space/Location (47%).
It should be noted that when combining the “sometimes” responses with “often” and
“always”, the data revealed that training and time were being allocated moderately according to
respondents. Specifically, 62% of respondents identified training as an occasional resource and
58% identified time as another occasional resource. These two data points suggest that agencies
may be providing diversity training and the associated time for employees to attend them, but
there is inconsistency in the frequency of those sessions. Table 10 summarizes the results of
managers’ perception of their agencies’ commitment to diversity resources. Additionally, Figure
9 portrays the distribution of managers’ responses on this survey question, highlighting a gap in
agencies’ cultural modeling of diversity management initiatives.
Table 10
Managers’ Perceptions of Agencies’ Allocation of Diversity Resources
Resource Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always Mean Standard
Deviation
Funding 84 66 78 30 26 2.46 1.27
Training 50 58 106 44 26 2.78 1.18
Time 66 54 98 40 26 2.67 1.23
Advertising 108 66 62 30 18 2.24 1.24
Personnel 74 56 88 38 28 2.61 1.27
Space/Location 80 54 82 38 30 2.59 1.31

85
Figure 9
Managers’ Perceptions of Agencies’ Allocation of Diversity Resources
Managers’ Accountability Omits Diversity Benchmarking. Dubnick (2011) asserts that
epistemological accountability is the practice of setting expectations, expressed and carried out
through relational binaries in the workplace. Local government, like other industries, supports
traditional accountability binaries between supervisor and subordinate employees, elected
officials and agency management. These hierarchy expectations are set based on service
demands, attempted by the workforce, and then evaluated for achievement in a time bound cycle.
Similar to the motivation influence of manager expectancy value, 206 (69%) respondents
overwhelming noted that their performance evaluations never or rarely included contributions
made toward workplace diversity programs. It should be noted that this accountability survey
question recorded the prevalence of evaluations currently reflecting diversity deliverables,
whereas the motivation survey question collected managers’ opinions on having their
performance evaluations include diversity management metrics to begin with.
30%
18%
23%
38%
26%
28%
23%
20%
19%
23%
20%
19%
27%
37%
35%
22%
31%
29%
11%
15%
14%
11%
13%
13%
9%
9%
9%
6%
10%
11%
Funding
Training
Time
Advertising
Personnel
Space/Location
Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always

86
Two related survey questions sought to evaluate the frequency of managers’ obligation to
deliver diversity performance updates to their leaders with results revealing similar response
patterns from stakeholders. For instance, 234 (79%) respondents reported that their
leaders/supervisors never or rarely ask them for verbal or written updates on the progress of
diversity programs they oversee. Likewise, 254 (85%) respondents stated that their
leaders/supervisors never or rarely require them to track specific diversity management
performance measures within their workgroup. The survey data from all three accountability
questions provides clear evidence that managers experienced a gap in the organizational
accountability of diversity initiatives within their agencies as portrayed in Table 11 below.
Table 11
Managers’ Accountability of Diversity Initiatives
Response
My Supervisor Asks for
Updates on Diversity
Programs I Oversee
My Supervisor Requires Me to
Track Diversity Performance
Measures
n % n %
Never 188 63% 198 66%
Rarely 46 15% 56 19%
Sometimes 40 13% 22 7%
Often 18 6% 12 4%
Always 6 2% 10 3%
Mean 1.68 1.59
Standard Deviation 1.04 1.02

Managers Acknowledge Shortfalls in Diversity Policies and Procedures. Policies begin
with a systematic process of information-gathering, consultation, goal setting, and
implementation analysis to improve decision-making and enhance organizational effectiveness;
also known as strategic planning (Guyadeen et al., 2023). Diversity goals emanating from

87
strategic planning should be paired with sufficient resources to deliver and execute on. Agencies
should set aside resources specifically to meet diversity planning goals (Hur et al., 2010). In the
final survey questions, respondents were asked to reflect on what degree of planning and
resources their agencies had committed to diversity programs for their workforces. The findings
discussed in the following paragraph highlight manager’s perception of their agencies’ deficient
investment in resource planning for diversity.
Like the earlier cultural modeling survey question on resources agencies allocated to
diversity programs, the respondents shared conservative perspectives on their organizations
strategic planning efforts as it relates to diversity management. Managers’ perceptions of their
agencies’ strategic planning process including specific diversity management goals and
objectives reflected average responses of “never” and “rarely” in six key planning areas:
Employee Recruitment (39%), Employee Retention (49%), Committees/Commissions (47%),
Marketing (53%), Budgeting (56%), Professional Development (42%). The mean and standard
deviation of this survey question reflected in table 12 and figure 10 further illustrate that
managers are observing a gap in their agencies’ strategic planning to include diversity initiatives.

88
Table 12
Strategic Plan Includes Diversity Management Goals and Objectives
Diversity
Goal/Objective Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always Mean Standard
Deviation
Employee
Recruitment 68 40 78 50 40 2.83 1.37
Employee
Retention 84 50 66 50 26 2.58 1.33
Committees/
Commissions 90 40 84 38 24 2.51 1.30
Marketing 94 52 64 46 20 2.44 1.30
Budgeting 92 62 60 36 26 2.43 1.32
Professional
Development 74 62 84 46 30 2.70 1.32
Figure 10
Strategic Plan Includes Diversity Management Goals and Objectives
25%
30%
33%
34%
33%
27%
14%
18%
14%
19%
22%
15%
28%
24%
30%
23%
22%
30%
18%
18%
14%
17%
13%
17%
14%
9%
9%
7%
9%
11%
Employee Recruitment
Employee Retention
Committees/Commissions
Marketing
Budgeting
Professional Development
Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always

89
The survey data highlighted a notable gap in managers’ ability to observe budgeting
goals and objects for diversity programs, with 56% of respondents conceding there is little to no
effort by their agencies to do so. A follow up ordinal survey question asked managers to provide
an estimate of how much of their agencies’ budget is allocated for diversity programs. Survey
data discovered that 69% of respondents claimed that their agencies allocate less than 3% of their
organizations’ budgets to diversity management tasks. However, it should be stated that
budgeting for all government services is a task afforded to the authority of elected bodies that
preside over each agency and jurisdiction. As such, manager influence on the budgeting process
is limited but not insignificant. Figure 11 portrays the distribution of diversity programs
budgeting efforts from the perspective of managers.
Figure 11
Managers’ Estimate of Agencies’ Diversity Programs Budget Allocation
Another highlight of the strategic planning survey data is the assertion by 30% of
respondents that their agencies “sometimes” include professional development goals and
objectives in the planning process that focus on diversity training. In a separate survey question,
82
64
22 22
8
40
4 2
14
2 2
8 4 2
0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% 7% 10% 14% 17% 20% 25% 51%
n = Respondents
Percent of Agency Budget

90
105 (36%) respondents shared that their agencies provide training and development for managers
to learn and develop diversity management programs. While this may seem coincidental, a
follow up open-ended survey question asked respondents to reflect on what kinds of training or
development programs are currently offered to managers. Consequently, 187 responses were
received resulting in five main themes of the types of trainings managers claim they are
receiving: General DEI (30), Implicit Bias (20), Online (17), Conferences (19), General
Leadership Training (39). The responses reflected a narrow scope of how managers interpret
their agencies’ diversity training curriculum only in terms of race and ethnicity as 68% of the
comments were limited to this vernacular rather than broader concepts of diversity in other
identities like gender, religion, age, ability, and others.
The General Leadership Training responses reflected the practice of diversity topics
being introduced into a larger leadership curriculum, giving managers brief exposure to the
subject matter. One respondent stated, “We provide facilitated training programs for the
leadership group including bias, emotional intelligence. We are in the process of selecting
consultants to assess and formalize our diversity program and imbedding it into the
organization”. The Conferences theme reflected the practice of managers attending workshops at
industry conferences wherein there are brief sessions dedicated to diversity in the workplace.
For example, managers attend “Sessions at professional conferences, courses offered through Cal
JPIA, occasional courses offered in-house. Professional organization dues are paid and a tuition
reimbursement program is available for additional training or education.”
Data collected and analyzed from research question three regarding organizational
influences revealed that managers felt their agencies were deficient in providing cultural
structures to institutionalize diversity management. Survey responses to the policies and

91
practices survey questions revealed a moderate gap in managers’ ability to influence bureaucratic
systems that have traditionally dominated local government operations. Managers did not feel
that their agencies sufficiently communicate a diversity vision to the workforce. Similarly,
respondents reported that accountability did not include evaluating leadership on their progress
toward diversity goals. Lastly, there appears to be a gap in resourcing diversity programs so that
managers can better educate their workgroups and be held accountable for their own efforts to
advance diversity campaigns in their own agencies.
Summary
The survey data generated from this study revealed significant strengths and weaknesses
for managers tasked with diversity management in their agencies. Each influencing factor of the
Clark and Estes gap analysis framework contained substantial shortfalls in government
investments in diversity programs. While managers believe they possess the declarative
understanding of DEI concepts, they also lacked the procedural competency to deliver diversity
programs in the workplace. Additionally, managers were notably indifferent to the role their
own positionality plays in contextualizing diversity and workforce humanity in their agencies,
reflecting their metacognitive knowledge. Table 13 provides a summary of the knowledge
influence assessment.

92
Table 13
Knowledge Influences Gap Analysis Summary
Variable Description Manager Measurement Assessment
Declarative Data or facts Understanding of DEI concepts Asset
Procedural Ability / Competency Delivery of diversity
management programs
Gap
Metacognitive Self-identify Self-awareness and cultural
perspective; adapting to
context and positionality
Gap
Survey data supported better outcomes for motivational influences impacting manager
investments in diversity management initiatives. The data showed that managers were confident
in their own ability to implement diversity programs despite lacking the procedural knowledge of
how to do so. According to the data, the expectancy value of managers was mixed as
respondents clearly value diversity but remain cautious about fully implementing some
components, like cultural affinity groups and their own accountability to adopt and implement
programs as part of their formal performance reviews. Despite these hesitancies, managers
remain curious about diversity initiatives as they cited a desire to learn how to implement
diversity programs for their own agencies. Table 14 provides a summary of the motivation
influence assessment.

93
Table 14
Motivation Influences Gap Analysis Summary
Variable Description Manager Measurement Assessment
Self-Efficacy Confidence to execute,
control of motivation
Educational resources, coaching,
feedback
Asset
Expectancy
Value
Intrinsic value of
diversity
Valuing cultural
differences
Relevance to local government
work / community benefit
Maintaining differential
relationships with subordinates
Asset/Gap
Interest Interest in
implementing
diversity programs
Finding meaning and real-world
application / purpose
Asset
The survey data exposed the largest gaps for organizational influences related to agency
cultural models, manager accountability, and agency policies and procedures. Managers cited
limited planning, resources, and communication of agencies’ vision to include diversity
priorities. Operationally, managers suggested that they were not systemically required to
evaluate or be evaluated on the attainment of diversity goals and objects for their agencies.
And finally, managers acknowledge significant shortfalls in their agencies’ ability to institute
policies and procedures that promote and support diversity initiatives for their workgroups,
including funding, training, time, resources, and personnel. Without these critical operational
tools, managers are at a disadvantage in implementing agency directives. Table 15 provides a
summary of the organizational influence assessment.

94
Table 15
Organizational Influences Gap Analysis Summary
Variable Description Manager Measurement Assessment
Cultural Models Norms, values, rules
and standards
Agency communication, vision,
ethics, beliefs, space and time
Gap
Cultural setting:
Accountability
Expectations /
Deliverables
Performance evaluations /
measures, task progress
Gap
Cultural setting:
Policies and
procedures
Strategic planning,
legal imperatives
Diversity goals and objectives
present in policy documents,
resource allocation, training
and development, programs
Gap

95
Chapter Five: Recommendations
While the previous chapter
analyzes the study’s survey findings, this chapter prescribes specific recommendations to address
the needs identified in the gap analysis. This study assumes that the participating stakeholders
represent an acceptable sample of public sector managers and their agencies to which the proposed
recommendations may be helpful in improving overall workplace satisfaction among workers. An
organizational commitment to diversity management can increase both job satisfaction and work
group performance (Pitts, 2007). The survey data identified a total six gaps in the following KMO
influences:
• Knowledge: procedural, metacognitive
• Motivation: expectancy value
• Organizational: cultural models, accountability, policies and practices
As such, this chapter makes five corresponding recommendations to address deficiencies in
manager and agency KMO influences of diversity management. Procedural and metacognitive
knowledge recommendations are combined due to similarity in implementation strategy.
Discussion of Findings
The purpose of this study was to evaluate needs in the implementation of diversity
management programs in local government form the perspective of agency managers. Utilizing
the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework, the project explored individual and
institutional knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences on diversity management
initiatives. Research questions were framed around a total of nine KMO sub-factors; three for
each main influence. Survey findings revealed deficiencies in six sub-factors of the KMO
framework as mentioned above. Several of the diversity management best practices referenced

96
in chapter two provide relevant remedies to each of the identified gaps. Conversely, the study
also identified four KMO sub-factors that were determined to be assets for managers. It should
also be noted that the sub-factor of “expectancy value” was considered both an asset and a gap
due to manager perspective supporting the concept of diversity while still rejecting the
responsibility of implementation and results for programs.
The literature review highlighted areas of opposition that were not evident in this study’s
findings. For example, Choi and Rainey’s (2014) research revealed that minoritized workers
viewed agencies’ diversity management efforts as disingenuous. Harris (2013) also remarked
that initiatives were perceived to have been created in response to political pressure or merely
symbolic. This study’s findings did not reflect that opposition as most respondents provided
positive perspectives about their agencies’ efforts being genuine. However, some open-ended
responses did convey sentiments of disapproval for manager accountability as well as
implementation of cultural affinity groups as two potential diversity activities. Ironically, the
literate review discussed Moon and Christenson’s (2020) warning of monocultural group
favoritism and its potential to alienate and create bias; albeit not in the context of cultural affinity
groups. Some open-ended responses mirrored this perspective and suggested that cultural affinity
groups would serve to further segregate the workforce rather than provide a sense of belonging
and inclusion.
The problem of practice posited in this study is that public agencies are challenged to
sustain meaningful diversity management initiatives that encourage equity and inclusion of
minoritized populations. Diversity management in the practice of maintaining an environment
characterized by the inclusiveness of individual differences and responsiveness to the needs of
diverse groups of employees, by way of traditional human resources management strategies

97
(Wyatt-Nicole & Antwi-Boasiako, 2012). Moreover, diversity management is the ability of top
management to create and implement a culture that incorporates programs and policies aimed at
fostering diversity in the workplace (Cooper & Gerlach, 2019). This study’s findings illustrate
how managers perceive their agencies’ ability to foster diversity as well as a reflection of
managers’ own competencies toward implementation.
Recommendations for Practice
Recommendations within this chapter are informed by each of the gaps identified in the
analysis of the survey results. Each recommendation revisits a survey finding and provides a
proposed specific remedy for implementation. Best practices from literature reviewed in chapter
two are referenced to provide credible actions and outcomes. Additionally, recommendations are
contextualized through levels of the New World Kirkpatrick Model. Initially created in 1952 by
Don Kirkpatrick, the model is a recognized method of evaluating the results of training and
learning programs. It assesses both formal and informal training methods and rates them against
four levels of criteria: reaction, learning, behavior, and results (Kirkpaptrick & Kirkpatrick,
2016). In the context of diversity management, each level assesses agencies’ abilities to
effectively teach relevant subject matter to ensure learner cognition, retention, and transferability
of diversity and equity concepts to real world applications. Given that the study examined survey
responses from public agency managers, the recommendations and learning outcomes are
intended for managers and agency leadership as they are organizational decision makers with the
authority to enact change within their administrations.

98
Recommendation 1: Train Managers to Deliver Diversity Programs, Reflect on Social
Identities and Cultural Awareness
Of the 460 managers surveyed in this study, 52.6% agreed and strongly agreed that they
possessed the knowledge needed to implement diversity management programs. The
complimenting 47.4% either disagreed or were indecisive, suggesting that nearly half of the
managers lacked the procedural understanding of how to deliver programs. Additionally,
45% of respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed that their background informs their
understanding of diversity at work, and 38% disagreed or strongly disagreed that their
background informs their approach to implementing diversity programs. A subset of
respondents appeared to be indifferent to their personal backgrounds informing diversity
understanding (25%) or informing their approach to implementing (29%) diversity programs.
The recommendation is to provide trainings to managers on how to deliver diversity programs
through a series of “train the trainer” modeled workshops and recurring tasks to formalize
manager investment in diversity outcomes.
Given that the survey results highlighted significant declarative knowledge of diversity
concepts, the proposed training opportunities should focus on skills and techniques managers can
use to encourage awareness, inclusiveness, and overall learning of the workgroups they oversee.
Allen et al. (2004) identified recurring diversity trainings with management facilitation as a best
practice. This recommendation is intended to utilize level three of the New Kirkpatrick Model:
Critical Behaviors. It is imperative that agency managers prioritize and elicit four key critical
behaviors in the pursuit of diversity deliverables for their agencies. Each behavior requires
consistency in the frequency of action to ensure timely and relevant application to the agency’s
diversity management goals as outlined in Table 16 below.

99
Table 16
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation of Managers
Critical Behavior Metric(s) Data Collection
Method(s) Timing
1. Promote DEI
values and
programs
throughout
agency
The number and
frequency of
announcements from
managers to
workforce
Tally the frequency of
announcements and
contacts/impressions to
subordinate staff
Monthly reporting
2. Plan, create, and
refine diversity
initiatives
2a. The number of
popular and impactful
DEI initiatives created
Prepare programs in
response to workforce
needs and demographic
data; participation stats,
surveys
Annual planning of
specific programs;
revisited and refined
quarterly
2b. Number of
diversity plans in
process
Routinely meet to
coordinate and build
existing programs
Annual count of
specific programs in
some stage of
development/implem
entation
2c. Number of refined
diversity initiatives
Update and revisit
programs based on
participation and post
learning survey data
Quarterly collect and
review post training
data
3. Implement and
deliver on
diversity
initiatives
The number of
diversity initiatives
offered to employees
Track the volume of
specific diversity tasks
Monthly reporting
4. Record feedback
on DEI outcomes
Number of
respondents; answer
tallies and percentage
of employee
satisfaction
Conduct surveys of
employees and complete
statistical analysis of
responses
Quarterly surveys
Required Drivers
Table 17 outlines recommended drivers that may reinforce, encourage, reward, and
monitor mangers’ efforts to institute diversity programs for the agency. Each driver represents a
category of value for managers’ competency (through knowledge, motivation, and organization)

100
of diversity management focused on the factual, procedural, and conceptual ability of
administrators to deliver diversity initiatives.
Table 17
Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors of Managers
Method(s) Timing
Critical
Behaviors
Supported
Reinforcing
Provide templates for planning and delivering Diversity
trainings; training manuals, speakers, etc.
Ongoing 1, 2, 3, 4
Require manager participation in minority mentoring and
internship programs
Quarterly 1, 3, 4
Provide informational pamphlets about recruitment
advertisements/ brochures; tailored to minorities
Ongoing 1, 3, 4
Encouraging
Create incentive opportunities for managers to promote
DEI; bonuses, performance review ratings, etc.
Ongoing 1, 3, 4
Allocate time for managers to organize minority support
group meetings
Monthly 1, 3
Provide managers sufficient budget to plan and deliver
culturally diverse community events
Ongoing 1, 2, 3
Rewarding
Manager Performance Evaluations Annual 4
Agency recognition; “Diversity Heroes” in the workplace Monthly 1, 4
Monitoring
Agency/DEI strategic planning Annual 1, 2
Diversity management review committee/task force to
assess agency managers’ performance
Monthly 1, 2, 4
Allocation of DEI budget by agency Annual 1, 2, 3

101
Recommendation 2: Task Managers to Organize Cultural Affinity Groups
Although the study revealed that motivation influences were considered an asset for
managers given that 71% of respondents believe that it is important to implement diversity
management within their workgroups, stakeholders were slightly less consistent when presented
with the opportunity to introduce cultural affinity groups in efforts to enhance morale, sense of
belonging, and meaningfulness. Over 35% of respondents disagreed with the importance of such
groups and another 23% were indifferent to their purpose. Of the disagreeing respondents, 11
(40%) remarked that cultural affinity groups were divisive, encourage segregation, and silos
individuals. Dosal-Terminel et al. (2024) asserts that cultural affinity group implementation
results in four distinct outcomes for participants: identity as a construct, antiracism as a
construct, learning through sharing and connection, and having difficult conversations and being
uncomfortable. Each of these outcomes are considered a “learning experience” for employees to
better understand themselves, each other, and the public they serve in local government setting.
As such, the recommendation is to require managers to organize cultural affinity groups
reflective of the demographic make-up of the workforce.
The chapter two literature review included a diversity management best practice from
Ewoh (2013) that recommended establishing diversity management review committees, task
forces, and minority support groups to assist with program compliance and retention of
minoritized employees. As such, managers should prepare and communicate an assessment of
the entire agency to understand how it can better represent the community and workforce to
ensure retention of marginalized groups like women and minorities within the organization,
middle management, and at the executive level. Level four of the New World Kirlpatrick model
is ideal for assessing this task given its focus on outcomes and indicators of success.

102
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
Level four measures progress against the agencies’ DEI outcomes and key performance
indicators that may be established before programs are initiated. Table 18 shows the proposed
results and leading indicators in the form of outcomes, metrics, and methods for both external
and internal tasks for agencies’ managers to impact and assess agencies’ abilities to support
underrepresented employees.
Table 18
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
Outcome Metric(s) Data Collection Method(s)
External Outcomes
Celebrate and acknowledge
the demographics of the
city’s residency
The number of community events
that celebrate the diverse cultural
backgrounds of its citizens
Count of events conducted by
cultural category
Internal Outcomes
Improve retention of women
and minority employees
The number of women and people
of color in middle and upper
management roles
Quarterly count of minority
employees in management
positions with rate of turnover
The number of minority employees
and student interns engaging in
mentorships
Track participation in mentoring
and internship programs by
race/ethnicity/gender
The number of minority support
groups and meetings
Count of meetings held/hosted by
each cultural support group
Increase accountability of
managers to diversity
initiatives
The number and frequency of
diversity management review
committee/task force meetings
Count of meetings held/hosted by
each group; policy
recommendations made to City
Council and City Management
Celebrate and acknowledge
the demographics of diverse
workforce
The number of employee events
that celebrate the diverse cultural
backgrounds of its staff
Count of events conducted by
cultural category
Improve morale and sense of
belonging of employees
Number of positive qualitative and
quantitative employee feedback
data points
Quarterly employee satisfaction
surveys with questions specific to
‘belonging’ and peer acceptance

103
Recommendation 3: Share Diversity Vision and Commit Resources
Survey data revealed that 63% of managers did not believe or could not determine if their
agencies clearly communicated a vision of diversity in the workplace. Another 35% were unable
to agree or disagree about communication, suggesting that respondents’ agencies have not done a
sufficient job of informing the workforce of diversity initiatives. As such, the recommendation is
for managers to share agencies’ vision on diversity for the workplace through internal
distribution methods and tools. The recommendation is intended to inform the workforce of
diversity priorities and remind employees of the agency cultural norms that place high
importance on diversity, equity, and inclusion.
Nishishiba (2012) asserts that a critical diversity management best practice is to
communicate diversity priorities to all levels of the organization. Perhaps more instrumental is
agencies’ ability to characterize diversity priorities as mandatory policy compliance, as they do
with other traditional bureaucratic disciplines. Stillman (1974) suggests that managers’ ability to
not only develop a vision for the organization, but also disseminate that vision, is critical to the
development of a positive corporate culture. Moreover, accessing commonly utilized modes of
communication to distribute vision is paramount as outlined in table 19 below which provides
examples of engagement activities agencies can employ to better share their diversity vision.

104
Table 19
Ideas to Communicate Agency Vision of Diversity
Engagement Task Description Medium Timing
Diversity briefings Employees share elements of
social identities with coworkers; culture exchange
Team and division
meetings
Bi-weekly,
monthly
Publish diversity
statistics
Share recruitment and
employment statistics with the
workforce
Newsletter,
email/memo
Quarterly
Progress reports Share agency’s progress on
diversity performance measures,
goals and objectives
Email/memo Quarterly
Market
multiculturalism
Post diversity code of conduct,
best practices, and agency
expectations for employment
Email, posters, flyers Annual
“Diversity Hero’s”
program
Acknowledge exceptional acts
of equity and inclusion by
employees
Email,
department/division
meetings
Monthly
Use diverse
language/imagery
Publish critical notices in
multiple languages, ensure
printed collateral reflects variety
of social identities
Printed materials,
emails/memos
Weekly
The ability to share agencies’ diversity vision is contingent upon those agencies having
allocated sufficient resources, not only for the advertisement of multiculturalism, but also for
implementation of all other diversity program facets. Recall that survey data found that less than
25% of respondents reported that their agencies allocated six key resources to diversity
programs, either “always” or “often”. Conversely, respondents felt that their agencies never or
rarely allocated the six resources: Funding (53%), Training (38%), Time (42%), Advertising
(61%), Personnel (46%), Space/Location (47%). As such, the recommendation is for managers to
include resource earmarks for diversity programs in annual planning efforts. Pitts (2007)

105
prescribes the same best practice to allocate resources for diversity initiatives, institutionalize a
culture of inclusion.
Recommendation 4: Incorporate Diversity Metrics in Performance Evaluations
Survey data from three organizational influences questions revealed an overwhelming
gap in manager accountability to diversity initiatives. Nearly 70% of respondents stated that their
performance evaluations never or rarely included contributions made toward workplace diversity
programs. Additionally, 79% of respondents reported that their leaders/supervisors never or
rarely ask them for verbal or written updates on the progress of diversity programs they oversee.
And finally, 85% of respondents stated that their leaders/supervisors never or rarely require them
to track specific diversity management performance measures within their workgroup. As such,
the recommendation is for managers’ performance evaluations to include diversity goals and
objects, tracking of performance measures, and regular progress updates on diversity tasks
during one-on-one supervisor meetings.
For diversity management to succeed, leadership must make a commitment to hold
managers accountable to diversity initiatives (Shen et al., 2009). Ontological accountability is the
manner and method in which stakeholders negotiate their relationships with performance
improvement in mind (Bovens et al., 2014). Agency leadership relies on a constitutive structure
of the organization to set standards for how employees behave and perform in the workplace. For
example, employees report to work during prescribed business hours, take defined breaks, and
adhere to adopted personnel policies that have been established to govern the workforce.
Accordingly, managers should be required to meet set standards of behavior and performance as
it relates to diversity initiatives. Examples of manager accountability to diversity priorities may
include any combination of deliverables outlined in tables 16 through 19 of this chapter. The

106
more specific the performance metric and well defined the diversity goal, the more likely
managers are to genuinely attempt becoming proficient in them.
Recommendation 5: Adopt Diversity Management Goals, Objectives, and Funding
The culminating organizational influences survey data discovered that managers’
perceptions of their agencies’ strategic planning process, including specific diversity
management goals and objectives, reflected average responses of “never” and “rarely” in six key
planning areas: Employee Recruitment (39%), Employee Retention (49%),
Committees/Commissions (47%), Marketing (53%), Budgeting (56%), Professional
Development (42%). These ratings reflect an alarming disinvestment by public agencies in
diversity initiatives. When combined with managers’ sentiments on budget allocations to
diversity programs, the narrative suggests that respondents’ agencies have yet to fully commit to
a multicultural workforce campaign. On this point, the survey data underscored an alarming
underfunding of diversity programs, with 56% of respondents conceding there is little to no
effort by their agencies to do so. Additionally, 69% of respondents claimed that their agencies
allocate less than 3% of their organizations’ budgets to diversity management tasks. As such, the
recommendation is for managers to incorporate diversity goals and objectives into agencies’
strategic plans, and aggressively seek funding for diversity programs each budget cycle.
Guyadeen et al. (2023) recommend the best practice of establishing goals and objectives
in the agency strategic plan, creating a cultural setting that views diversity activities as a staple of
public service; similar to human resources, street paving, or recreation programs. Notably, goals
should be specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time specific (SMART). Wyatt-Nichol
and Antwi-Boasiako (2012) add that allocation of annual funding to diversity programs
demonstrate agencies’ commitment to diversity as a cultural norm and standard for public

107
service. Table 20 provides examples of diversity management goals and objectives that can be
incorporated in agencies’ strategic plans.
Table 20
Strategic Planning: Diversity Goals and Objectives
Objective Actions Who When Measurement
Goal: Workforce Diversity
Recruit from a
diverse, qualified
group of
candidates to
increase diversity
of thinking and
perspective
1.Advertise roles in a
broad range of
publications
2.Ensure a diverse range
of candidates are
represented at shortlist
stage
Human
Resources
Hiring
Managers
Per
recruitment
Increase in the
representation
of qualified
diverse
employees
Goal: Workforce Inclusion
Foster a culture
that encourages
collaboration,
flexibility and
fairness to enable
all employees to
contribute to their
potential and
increase retention
1.Provide inclusive
leadership training for
managers
2.Establish cultural
affinity groups
Senior
Leaders
Quarter 2 3 trainings, 3
affinity groups
Goal: Sustainability and Accountability
Resource diversity
programs,
dismantle barriers
to equity and
inclusion
1.Maintain budget
allocation to diversity
programs
2.Review policies and
procedures for
inclusion
3.Create diversity KPIs
for all managers
Elected
body
Managers
Senior
Leaders
Quarter 4 5% minimum
budget
Review all
policies
70% KPI
achievement by
managers

108
Limitations and Delimitations
There are limitations and delimitations a researcher must be aware of as a study
commences. Limitations are the factors that are not in the researcher’s locus of control that may
cast doubt as potential weaknesses in the research (Leedy et al., 2021). Some limitations that
exist for this study are:
• The study is dependent on the truthfulness of the respondents;
• Given the voluntary nature of questionnaire participation through solicitations via public
administration association membership databases with shifting membership numbers, it is
not possible to control or determine the exact total of the population from which
participants are drawn;
• The study was conducted during a relatively short period of time during the spring, a
traditionally busy time in local government wherein managers are typically emersed in
budget preparation for the upcoming fiscal year;
• Survey data were dependent on respondents’ mindset during the limited window of time
to participate and potentially in competition with other obligations and priorities that may
have influenced participation.
Delimitations are topics and subject matter the researcher does not intend to address in a
research project that may have implications for the study (Leedy et al., 2021). The delimitations
that affect this study include:
• Data collected were from public managers who hold membership in select general
government professional associations. The data did not include perspectives from
managers who are not members of professional associations or those that may be
members of other select associations tailored to unique subject matter expertise only; for

109
example National League of Cities (NLC) versus American Public Works Association
(APWA).
• The study was limited to managers within the local government discipline. However,
significant data may have been collected from county, state, and federal governments to
contribute to gap assessments for the diversity management problem of practice;
• Although questionnaires were solicited to all association members, only responses of
respondents self-reported as “managers” were included in the data analysis and study
findings;
• This study is bound by the use of the Clark and Estes (2008) Gap Analysis to evaluate
disparities in knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences. Other frameworks do
exist that may be effective at identifying disparities in local government diversity
management.
• This study employs a quantitative survey methodology. Qualitative and mixed-method
approaches may also yield significant data in researching this problem of practice.
Future Research
This study identified two distinct emerging themes that may warrant future research.
First, while it was evident that managers possessed a genuine interest in diversity management,
their agencies did not appear to have cultural norms or standards to hold managers accountable
for diversity initiatives. A future study may explore underlying traditions and practices that
entrench agency practices as standard operating procedures to determine if diversity priorities
may eventually become standardized in the local government discipline. Additionally, future
research may look to expand the scope of stakeholders to include elected officials who set policy
as bureaucratic representatives of the communities they serve. Given that managers implement

110
the direction of elected officials, an exploration of how elected officials balance political
obligations and maneuvering with supporting their ever-changing constituency would be more
enlightening.
The second theme that emerged was the absence of marginalized managers’ voices.
While the study did capture the sentiments of public sector managers, it did not cross reference
those sentiments against the social identities of respondents to identify trends and patterns. An
interesting hypothesis may posit that certain social identities are more or less likely to feel or
believe diversity management is good or bad for public sector operations. Findings of this
expanded scope would assist in further explaining the underrepresentation of marginalized local
government workers in management positions, as well as their retention and promotion.
Conclusion
The Purpose of this study was to evaluate the needs in the implementation of diversity
management programs in local government from the perspective of agency managers. Utilizing
the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework, the project explored individual and
institutional Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization (KMO) influences on diversity
management initiatives. The study employed a quantitative survey to collect local government
managers’ sentiments on diversity management concepts and implementation in their respective
agencies. Survey data discovered gaps in the procedural and metacognitive knowledge of
respondents, while also highlighting significant declarative knowledge for managers
understanding of DEI concepts.
Motivational influences also revealed positive self-efficacy, expectancy value, and
interest by managers in diversity management initiatives. Within the motivation influence there
was one exception as mangers were cautious about the idea of being accountable to diversity

111
deliverables in performance reviews. This remained consistent in the organizational influences
as survey data highlighted the absence of performance measures on managers’ performance
evaluations. Similarly, the data confirmed that managers did not observe agencies including
diversity goals and objectives in strategic planning, communicating a vision of diversity for the
organization, nor allocating sufficient agency resources to diversity programs.
In response, the study provides five recommendations to address the gaps in managers’
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences:
1. Knowledge (Procedural/Metacognitive) - Train Managers to Deliver Diversity Programs,
Reflect on Social Identities and Cultural Awareness
2. Motivation (Expectancy Value) - Task Managers to Organize Cultural Affinity Groups
3. Organization (Cultural Models) - Share Diversity Vision and Commit Resources
4. Organization (Accountability) - Incorporate Diversity Metrics in Performance
Evaluations
5. Organization (Policies and Procedures) - Adopt Diversity Management Goals,
Objectives, and Funding
The literature suggests that local governments have embraced diversity management
practices in the past two decades largely due to the changing demographic of their citizenry,
legal compliance, and organizational effectiveness (Nishishiba, 2012). By adopting these
practices, agencies access changing demographic markets by mirroring increased diversity in the
population. In turn, organizations gain a competitive advantage and improve bureaucratic
legitimacy, moving agencies from passive to active representation (Cooper & Gerlach, 2019).
Diversity in the local government workplace fosters creativity and innovation from varied
perspectives, with new approaches to problem-solving.

112
Despite these benefits, local governments have trailed behind other sectors in
adopting diversity management as a cultural norm. As mentioned, future research may examine
the role that elected officials play in supporting or hindering DEI efforts. Moreover, the
geography and demographics of each jurisdiction may play a part in how effective agencies are
at embracing diversity initiatives, considering conservative or progressive perspectives of each.
A concern shared by some is that reluctancy by agencies to support diversity management may
continue to limit access for employees from underrepresented groups. As a result, marginalized
workers may not aspire in numbers to the highest levels of government, thus perpetuating an era
of dominance and control by a select group of administrators who may no longer look and think
like the people they serve. Public employees who have been historically underrepresented in
local government need to be provided access and equitable outcomes in their professional
careers. Public leaders have traditionally been made up of White male management, particularly
in positions of authority and influence (Feeney & Langer, 2016). As such, this study was
intended to challenge and disrupt the status quo make up of municipal leadership by assessing
the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences driving their perspectives of diversity
management. An underlying benefit of diverse government leadership is to shift control at the
executive level, thus reducing the share of power previously enjoyed nearly exclusively by White
male managers. The ultimate outcome is to improve public service and provide a fairer
distribution of wealth; financial, physical, intellectual, and social.

113
References
Alkadry, M. G., & Tower, L. E. (2011). Covert pay discrimination: How authority predicts pay
differences between women and men. Public Administration Review, 71, 740-750.
Allen, R., Dawson, G., Wheatley, K., & White, C. (2004). Diversity practices: Learning
responses for modern organizations. Development and Learning in Organizations, 18(6),
13–15. https://doi.org/10.1108/14777280410564185
Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., & Norman, M. K. (2010). How
learning works. Jossey-Bass.
Ashikali, & Groeneveld, S. (2015). Diversity management in public organizations and its effect
on employees’ affective commitment: The role of transformational leadership and the
inclusiveness of the organizational culture. Review of Public Personnel Administration,
35(2), 146–168. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X13511088
Baekgaard, & George, B. (2018). Equal access to the top? Representative bureaucracy and
politicians’ recruitment preferences for top administrative staff. Journal of Public
Administration Research and Theory, 28(4), 535–550.
https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muy038
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 9, 75–78. https://doi:10.1111/1467-8721.00064
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice Hall.
Bishu, & Headley, A. M. (2020). Equal employment opportunity: Women bureaucrats in male‐
dominated professions. Public Administration Review, 80(6), 1063–1074.
https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13178

114
Blessett, Brandi, Marc Fudge, and Tia Gaynor. (2017). Moving from theory to practice: An
evaluative assessment of social equity approaches. Report submitted to the Center for
Accountability and Performance and National Academy of Public Administration’s
Standing Panel on Social Equity in Governance. https://aspacap.com/advancingmeasurement-of-social-equity/. [accessed November 10, 2022]
Bobo, L. D., & Fox, C. (2003). Race, racism, and discrimination: Bridging problems, methods,
and theory in social psychological research. Social Psychology Quarterly, 66, 319-332.
Bonner, D. (2022). In Their Own Words--DEFINING EQUITY FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
Dorla Bonner and other members of the ICMA Equity Officer Institute 2021-2022 cohort
explain what diversity, equity, and inclusion mean to them and their communities, as well
as the importance of this work. Public Management, 104(2), 26–28.
Bourey. (2022). A guidebook for city and county managers: Meeting today’s challenges. Taylor
and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003262756
Bovens, Goodin, R. E., & Schillemans, T. (2014). The Oxford handbook of public accountability
(1st ed.). Oxford University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199641253.001.0001
Charles, & Guryan, J. (2008). Prejudice and wages: An empirical assessment of becker’s the
economics of discrimination. The Journal of Political Economy, 116(5), 773–809.
https://doi.org/10.1086/593073
Choi, & Rainey, H. G. (2014). Organizational fairness and diversity management in public
organizations: Does fairness matter in managing diversity? Review of Public Personnel
Administration, 34(4), 307–331. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X13486489

115
Choi, & Rainey, H. G. (2010). Managing diversity in U.S. federal agencies: Effects of diversity
and diversity management on employee perceptions of organizational performance.
Public Administration Review, 70(1), 109–121. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-
6210.2009.02115.x
City Manager Demographics and Statistics [2023]: Number Of City Managers In The US.
(2022, September 9). https://www.zippia.com/city-manager-jobs/demographics/
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Collins, P. H., & Bilge, S. (2016). Intersectionality. Polity Press.
Cooper, C., & Gerlach, J. (2019). Diversity management in action: Chief diversity officer
adoption in America’s cities. State & Local Government Review, 51(2), 113–121.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0160323X19879735
Creswell, J. W. & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Sage Publications.
Deitch, E. A., Barsky, A., Butz, R. M., Chan, S., Brief, A. P., & Bradley, J. C. (2003). Subtle yet
significant: The existence and impact of everyday racial discrimination in the workplace.
Human Relations, 56, 1299-1324.
Dosal-Terminel, D., Kim Chang, M., Carter, H., Jiang, A. J., Robertson, A., & Mason, E. C. M.
(2024). A pilot implementation of affinity groups for white school counselors and its impact
on antiracist practice: The experiences of group members. Professional School
Counseling, 28(1a). https://doi.org/10.1177/2156759X241234905
Dubnick, M. J. (2011). Move over Daniel: we need some “accountability space”. Administration
& Society, 43(6), 704-716.

116
Eccles-Parsons, J. S., Adler, T. F., Futterman, R., Goff, S. B., Kaczala, C. M., Meece, J. L., et al.
(1983). Expectancies, values, and academic behaviors. In J. T. Spence (Ed.), Achievement
and achievement motivation (pp. 75–146). Freeman.
Elliot, A. J., Dweck, C. S., & Yeager, D. S. (2018). Handbook of competence and motivation.
Guilford Press.
Ellis, K. M., & Keys, P. Y. (2015). Workforce diversity and shareholder value: A multi-level
perspective. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 44, 191-212.
England. (2003). City managers and the urban bureaucracy. In Cities, politics, and policy: A
comparative analysis (pp. 196–195). CQ Press.
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483330006.n8
Ewoh, A. I. E. (2013). Managing and valuing diversity: Challenges to public managers in the
21st century. Public Personnel Management, 42(2), 107–122.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0091026013487048
Feeney, M. K., & Camarena, L. (2019). Gender, race, and diversity values among local
government leaders. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 0734371X1986500–.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371x19865009
Feeney, M., & Langer, J. (2016). Getting ahead in the public sector: perceptions of managers in
U.S. municipalities. American Review of Public Administration, 46(6), 683–699.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074015570037
Filla, J. A., & DeLong, D. F. (2014). Race and the use of local initiatives in American cities.
State & Local Government Review, 46(1), 3–12.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0160323X13508289

117
Funk, & Molina, A. L. (2022). Closing the gap: How mayors’ individual attributes affect gender
wage disparities in local bureaucracies. Review of Public Personnel Administration,
42(3), 553–573. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X211002610
George, B., & Baekgaard, M. (2018). Equal access to the top? Representative bureaucracy and
politicians’ recruitment preferences for top administrative staff. Journal of Public
Administration Research and Theory, 28(4), 535–550.
https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muy038
Gilbert, C., De Winne, S., & Sels, L. (2011). The influence of line managers and HR department
on employees’ affective commitment. The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 22(8), 1618-1637. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2011.565646
Gonzalez, & Sweeney, K. A. (2010). The color of affirmative action: Exploring contemporary
racial ideologies through public responses to affirmative action policies in Michigan. The
Journal of Race & Policy, 6(1), 105–121.
Gooden. (2017). Social equity and evidence: Insights from local government. Public
Administration Review, 77(6), 822–828. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12851
Goodman, French, P. E., & Battaglio, R. P. (2015). Determinants of local government workforce
planning. American Review of Public Administration, 45(2), 135–152.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074013486179
Government Alliance on Race and Equity. (2014). Racial equity toolkit: An opportunity to
operationalize equity. https://www.racialequityalliance.org/resources/racial-equitytoolkit-opportunity-operationalize-equity/ [accessed on November 10, 2022].
Grossman. (1973). The equal employment opportunity act of 1972, its implications for the state
and local government manager. Public Personnel Management, 2(5), 370–379.

118
https://search-ebscohostcom.libproxy1.usc.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=106054533&authtype=sso
&custid=s8983984
Gustafson. (2013). Diversity in municipal police agencies: A national examination of minority
hiring and promotion. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies &
Management, 36(4), 719–736. https://doi.org/10.1108/PIJPSM-01-2013-0005
Guyadeen, Henstra, D., Kaup, S., & Wright, G. (2023). Evaluating the quality of municipal
strategic plans. Evaluation and Program Planning, 96, 102186–.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2022.102186
Harris, G. (2013). Multiple marginality: How the disproportionate assignment of women and
minorities to manage diversity programs reinforces and multiplies their marginality.
Administration & Society, 45(7), 775–808. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399712445872
Hentschke, G. C., & Wohlstetter, P. (2004). Cracking the code of accountability. University of
Southern California Urban Education, Spring/Summer, 17–19.
Holvino, E., Jones, B., & Brazzel, M. (2014). Developing multicultural organizations. In The
NTL handbook of organization development and change (pp. 517–534). Wiley.
https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118836170.ch26
Horwitz S. K., & Horwitz, I. B. (2007). The effects of team diversity on team outcomes: A metaanalytic review of team demography. Journal of Management, 33(6), 987–1015.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307308587
Hur, Y., & Strickland, R. A. (2012). Diversity management practices and understanding their
adoption: Examining local governments in North Carolina. Public Administration
Quarterly, 36(3), 380-412.

119
https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A336604091/GRNR?u=usocal_main&sid=bookmarkGRNR&xid=734caf1f
Hur, Strickland, R. A., & Stefanovic, D. (2010). Managing diversity: Does it matter to municipal
governments? The International Journal of Public Sector Management, 23(5), 500–515.
https://doi.org/10.1108/09513551011058501
Jackson. (2014). Theory and Practice of Multicultural Organization Development. In The NTL
Handbook of Organization Development and Change (pp. 175–192). Wiley.
https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118836170.ch9
Johnson, Norman J., and James H. Svara. (2011). Social equity in American society and public
administration. In Justice for All: Promoting Social Equity in Public Administration, 3 –
25. M.E. Sharpe.
Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. B. (2015). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative,
and mixed approaches. (5th ed.). SAGE.
Kerr, B., Miller, W., Schreckhise, W. D., & Reid, M. (2013). When does politics matter? A
reexamination of the determinants of African-American and Latino municipal
employment patterns. Urban Affairs Review, 49(6), 888-912.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087412473433
Kirkpatrick, & Kayser Kirkpatrick, W. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation.
atd press.
Kirkpatrick, Phillips, J. J., & Patricia Pulliam Phillips. (2003). Getting results from diversity
training--in dollars and cents (Vol. 80, Issue 10, p. 3–). Institute of Management &
Administration.

120
Klarsfeld, A., Ng, E. S. W., Booysen, L., Christiansen, L. C., & Kuvaas, B. (2016). Comparative
equality and diversity: Main findings and research gaps. Cross Cultural & Strategic
Management, 23, 394-412.
Köllen. (2021). Diversity Management: A Critical Review and Agenda for the Future. Journal of
Management Inquiry, 30(3), 259–272.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice,
41, 212–218.
Lee, Park, J., & Butler, J. S. (2021). Forms of government and municipal financial performance.
Public Money & Management, Advance Online Publication, 1–10.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2021.1923168
Leedy, P.D., Ormrod, J.E., & Johnson, L.R. (2021). Practical research: Planning and design.
Pearson.
Lewis, Liu, C. Y., & Edwards, J. T. (2013). The representation of immigrants in federal, state,
and local government work forces. Journal of International Migration and Integration,
15(3), 469–486. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12134-013-0282-8
Lockwood. (2010). Measuring ROI for diversity management - Case histories from a report from
the Society of Human Resource Management. Diversity Factor, 18(3), 1–. https://go-galecom.libproxy1.usc.edu/ps/i.do?p=PPDS&u=usocal_main&id=GALE|A241186461&v=2.1&
it=r
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. (3rd ed.). SAGE.
(Chapter 3)

121
McInerney, & King, R. B. (2018). Culture and self-regulation in educational contexts. In
Handbook of Self-Regulation of Learning and Performance (2nd ed., pp. 485–502).
Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315697048-31
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Meyer, Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective, continuance, and
normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and
consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61(1), 20–52.
https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.2001.1842
Miller, W., Kerr, B., & Reid, M. (2010). Descriptive representation by gender and race/ethnicity
in municipal bureaucracies: Change in US multiethnic cities, 1987-2001. Journal of Women,
Politics & Policy, 31(3), 217–242. https://doi.org/10.1080/1554477X.2010.496641
Miller, & Segal, C. (2012). Does temporary affirmative action produce persistent effects? A
study of Black and female employment in law enforcement. The Review of Economics
and Statistics, 94(4), 1107–1125. https://doi.org/10.1162/REST_a_00208
Moon, & Christensen, R. K. (2020). Realizing the performance benefits of workforce diversity in
the U.S. Federal Government: The moderating role of diversity climate. Public Personnel
Management, 49(1), 141–165. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091026019848458
Moynihan, Pandey, S. K., & Wright, B. E. (2012). Setting the table: How transformational
leadership fosters performance information use. Journal of Public Administration
Research and Theory, 22(1), 143–164. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mur024

122
Nishii, & Mayer, D. M. (2009). Do inclusive leaders help to reduce turnover in diverse groups?
The moderating role of leader-member exchange in the diversity to turnover relationship.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(6), 1412–1426. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017190
Nishishiba, M. (2012). Local government diversity initiatives in Oregon: An exploratory study.
State & Local Government Review, 44(1), 55–66.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0160323X12439475
Northouse, P. (2019). Leadership: Theory and practice (8th ed.). Sage.
Paradies, V. (2006). A systematic review of empirical research on self-reported racism and
health. International Journal of Epidemiology, 35, 888-901.
Park, & Liang, J. (2020). Merit, diversity, and performance: Does diversity management
moderate the effect of merit principles on governmental performance? Public Personnel
Management, 49(1), 83–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091026019848459
Pazzaglia, A. M., Stafford, E. T., & Rodriguez, S. M. (2016). Survey methods for educators:
Selecting samples and administering surveys (Part 2 of 3) (REL 2016-160).
Perry, Hondeghem, A., & Wise, L. R. (2010). Revisiting the motivational bases of public
service: Twenty years of research and an agenda for the future. Public Administration
Review, 70(5), 681–690. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02196.x
Pierce. (2012). Racing for innocence: Whiteness, gender, and the backlash against affirmative
action. In Racing for Innocence (pp. xii–xii). Stanford University Press.
Pitts, D. W. (2007). Implementation of diversity management programs in public organizations:
Lessons from policy implementation research. International Journal of Public
Administration, 30(12-14), 1573–1590. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900690701230192

123
Portillo, Bearfield, D., & Humphrey, N. (2020). The myth of bureaucratic neutrality:
Institutionalized inequity in local government hiring. Review of Public Personnel
Administration, 40(3), 516–531. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X19828431
Randolph-Seng, Cogliser, C. C., Randolph, A. F., Scandura, T. A., Miller, C. D., & SmithGenthôs, R. (2016). Diversity in leadership: race in leader-member exchanges.
Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 37(6), 750–773.
https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-10-2014-0201
Reese. (2019). The status of public sector pay equity for women of color in the United States.
Review of Public Personnel Administration, 39(4), 594–610.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X18761123
Reese, C. C., & Warner, B. (2012). Pay equity in the states: An analysis of the gender-pay gap in
the public sector. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 32, 312-331.
Reinholz, & Andrews, T. C. (2020). Change theory and theory of change: what’s the difference
anyway? International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1), 1–12.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-0202-3
Ritz, A., Brewer, G. A., & Neumann, O. (2016). Public service motivation: A systematic
literature review and outlook. Public Administration Review, 76(3), 414–426.
https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12505
Rocco, T. S., & Plakhotnik, M. S. (2009). Literature reviews, conceptual frameworks, and
theoretical frameworks: Terms, functions, and distinctions. Human Resource
Development Review, 8(1), 120-130.
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance. Teachers College Press.

124
Sabharwal, M., Levine, H., & D’Agostino, M. (2018). A conceptual content analysis of 75 years
of diversity research in public administration. Review of Public Personnel
Administration, 38, 248-267.
Salkind, N. J. (2014). Chapter 6: Just the truth. In Statistics for people who (think they) hate
statistics. (pp.105-128). Sage.
Sarros, Cooper, B. K., & Santora, J. C. (2008). Building a climate for innovation through
transformational leadership and organizational culture. Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Studies, 15(2), 145–158. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051808324100
Schein. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership (4. Aufl.). Jossey-Bass.
Schunk, U., & Usher, E. L. (2019). Social cognitive theory and motivation. In The Oxford
Handbook of Human Motivation (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190666453.013.2
Searle, K. (2017). Sociocultural theory. In K. Peppler (Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of out-ofschool learning (Vol. 1, pp. 728-732). SAGE Publications, Inc.,
https://www.doi.org/10.4135/9781483385198.n279
Selden, S. C. (2006). A solution in search of a problem? Discrimination, affirmative action, and
the new public service. Public Administration Review, 66(6), 911–923.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00659.x
Selden, S. C. (2009). Human capital: Tools and strategies for the public sector. In Human
Capital: Tools and Strategies for the Public Sector. CQ Press.
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483330754

125
Shen, J., Chanda, A., D’Netto, B., & Monga, M. (2009). Managing diversity through human
resource management: An international perspective and conceptual framework.
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 20(2), 235–251.
Stanford Center on Poverty and Inequality. 2011. 20 facts about U.S. inequality that everyone
should know. http://inequality.stanford.edu/publications/20-facts-about-us-inequalityeveryone-should-know [accessed November 10, 2022].
Stazyk, E., Davis, R., & Portillo, S. (2017). More dissimilar than alike? Public values
preferences across US minority and White managers. Public Administration (London),
95(3), 605–622. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12343
Stillman, R. J. (1974). The rise of the city manager: A public professional in local government.
University of New Mexico Press.
Sun, Hong, J.-C., & Ye, J.-H. (2022). The effects of employees’ perceived intrinsic motivation
on knowledge sharing and creative self-efficacy. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 762994–
762994. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.762994
Sun, Peng, S., & Liao, Y. (2021). Avoiding, obliging, asserting, or integrating? A survey
experiment on municipal managers’ choice of conflict management strategies. Public
Management Review, ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print), 1–24.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2021.1977525
Survey Research Datasets. (2023, June 2). icma.org. https://icma.org/survey-research-datasets
Tetlock, P. E. (1992). The impact of accountability on judgment and choice: Toward a social
contingency model. Advances in experimental social psychology, 25(3), 331-76.

126
University of Southern California. (2004). Responsible conduct of research: Office for the
protection of research subjects | USC. Retrieved from
https://oprs.usc.edu/education_certification/responsible-conduct-of-research/
Usher, & Schunk, D. H. (2019). Social cognitive theory and motivation. In The oxford handbook
of human motivation. Oxford University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190666453.013.2
U.S. Census Bureau (2020). State and local government job groups by sex and race/ethnicity for
residence geography, total population, 2018 American Community Survey 5-year
estimates data profiles. The Census Bureau. https://data.census.gov/table?d=ACS+5-
Year+Estimates+Equal+Employment+Opportunity&tid=ACSEEO5Y2018.EEOALL6W
The NCES Fast Facts Tool provides quick answers to many education questions (National
Center for Education Statistics). (2017). Ed.gov; National Center for Education Statistics.
https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=27
U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board. (2009). Fair and equitable treatment: Progress made and
challenges remaining. Author.
Vandenabeele, Wouter. 2007. Toward a public administration theory of public service motivation:
An institutional approach. Public Management Review 9(4): 545–56.
Wang, & Seifert, R. (2020). BAME staff and public service motivation: The mediating role of
perceived fairness in English local government. Journal of Business Ethics, 161(3), 653–
664. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3953-8

127
Woodard. (2005). Merit by any other name-Refraining the civil service first principle. Public
Administration Review, 65(1), 109–116. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-
6210.2005.00435.x
Wyatt-Nichol, H., & Antwi-Boasiako, K. (2012). Diversity management: Development,
practices, and perceptions among state and local government agencies. Public Personnel
Management, 41(4), 749–772. https://doi.org/10.1177/009102601204100409

128
Appendix A: Survey Protocol
Research Questions:
1. What knowledge do public managers have of diversity, equity, and inclusion concepts and how to implement them in the
workplace?
2. What factors influence the motivation of managers to implement diversity management programs in the workplace?
3. What agency practices support diversity management program outcomes for managers?
Target Population: Local Government Managers – Supervisory staff that oversee workgroups of five or more full-time employees and
are responsible for some portion of the agencies annual budget and service delivery unit.
Question
Open or
Closed?
Level of
Measurement.
(nominal, ordinal,
interval, ratio)
Response options (if closeended) RQ
Concept being
measured (from
emerging conceptual
framework)
1. By clicking the button
below, you acknowledge:
• Your participation in
the study is
voluntary.
• You are 18 years of
age.
• You are aware that
you may choose to
terminate your
participation at any
time for any reason.
Closed Nominal o I consent, begin the
study
o I do not consent; I do
not wish to participate
(if selected, then exit)
SQ Screening
2. Which classification best
describes your management
position/title in the agency?
Closed Nominal o Chief Administrative
Officer
o Deputy/Assistant Chief
Administrative Officer
o City Manager/General
Manager
SQ Screening

129
o Deputy/Assistant City
Manager
o Department Director o Deputy/Assistant
Department Director
o Division or Section
Manager/Superintendent
o Other Management
Position
o Not in a management
role (if selected, then
exit)
3. What type of public
agency do you work for?
Closed Nominal
o City/Town/Municipality o County o State (if selected, then
exit)
o Special District o Other: _________
SQ Screening
4. Are you responsible for
some portion of your
agency’s annual budget and
service delivery?
Closed Nominal
o Yes o No (if selected, then
exit)
SQ Screening
5. How many employees do
you directly supervise?
Closed Interval
o 0 (if selected, then exit) o 1-4 o 5-10 o 11-15 o 16 or more
SQ Screening
6. How many residents or
customers does your agency
serve?
Closed Interval
o Less than 10,000 o 10,001-50,000 o 50,001-75,000 o 75,001-100,000 o 100,001-250,000 o 250,001-500,000
DG Demographic

130
o Greater than 500,001
7. I believe it is important to
implement diversity
management programs
within my workgroup?
Closed Ordinal Strongly Disagree (1),
Disagree (2), Neither Agree
nor Disagree (3), Agree (4),
Strongly Agree (5)
RQ
2 Motivation (Value)
8. I am interested in the
details of implementing
diversity programs in my
agency.
Closed Ordinal Strongly Disagree (1),
Disagree (2), Neither Agree
nor Disagree (3), Agree (4),
Strongly Agree (5)
RQ
2 Motivation (Interest)
9. I am confident in my own
ability to implement
diversity initiatives for my
workgroup.
Closed Ordinal Strongly Disagree (1),
Disagree (2), Neither Agree
nor Disagree (3), Agree (4),
Strongly Agree (5)
RQ
2 Motivation (Selfefficacy)
10. My personal
background/identity informs
my understanding of
diversity in the workplace.
Closed Ordinal Strongly Disagree (1),
Disagree (2), Neither Agree
nor Disagree (3), Agree (4),
Strongly Agree (5)
RQ1 Knowledge
(Metacognitive)
11. My personal
background/identity informs
my approach to
implementing diversity
programs in the workplace.
Closed Ordinal Strongly Disagree (1),
Disagree (2), Neither Agree
nor Disagree (3), Agree (4),
Strongly Agree (5)
RQ1 Knowledge
(Metacognitive)
12. If you disagreed or
strongly disagreed with the
previous question, please
explain why.
Open N/A RQ1 Knowledge
13. I have the knowledge
needed to implement
diversity management
programs in my agency
.
Closed Ordinal Strongly Disagree (1),
Disagree (2), Neither Agree
nor Disagree (3), Agree (4),
Strongly Agree (5)
RQ1 Knowledge
(Procedural)
14. As a manager, what
incentives, if any, would
encourage you to better
Open N/A RQ
2 Motivation/Organizati
on

131
embrace diversity initiatives
with/for your workgroup?
15. I believe cultural affinity
groups for employees
enhance (please rate each
individually):
• Morale
• A sense of belonging
• Meaningfulness
Closed Ordinal Strongly Disagree (1),
Disagree (2), Neither Agree
nor Disagree (3), Agree (4),
Strongly Agree (5)
RQ2 Motivation (Value)
16. If you disagreed or
strongly disagreed with the
previous questions, please
explain why.
Open N/A RQ2 Motivation
17. I believe managers’
performance evaluations
should include an assessment
of contributions to workplace
diversity programs.
Closed Ordinal Strongly Disagree (1),
Disagree (2), Neither Agree
nor Disagree (3), Agree (4),
Strongly Agree (5)
RQ2 Motivation (Value)
18. My performance
evaluations include an
assessment of contributions I
make to workplace diversity
programs
Closed Ordinal Never (1), Rarely (2),
Sometimes (3), Often (4),
Always (5)
RQ3 Organization
(Accountability)
19. My leader asks me for
verbal or written updates on
the progress of diversity
programs I oversee.
Closed Ordinal Never (1), Rarely (2),
Sometimes (3), Often (4),
Always (5)
RQ3 Organization (Leader
accountability)
20. My leader requires me to
track specific diversity
management performance
measures within my
workgroup.
Closed Ordinal Never (1), Rarely (2),
Sometimes (3), Often (4),
Always (5)
RQ3 Organization (Leader
accountability)

132
21. My agency provides
training and development for
managers to learn and
develop diversity
management programs.
Closed Ordinal Never (1), Rarely (2),
Sometimes (3), Often (4),
Always (5)
RQ3 Organization
(Resources)
22. What kinds of training or
development programs are
offered to managers?
Open N/A RQ3 Organization
(Resources)
23. My agency allocates the
following resources to
support diversity
management programs
(please rate each
individually):
• Funding
• Time
• Advertising
• Personnel
• Space/Location
• Other: _________
Closed/Ope
n
Ordinal Never (1), Rarely (2),
Sometimes (3), Often (4),
Always (5)
RQ3 Organization
(Resources)
24. My agency clearly
communicates the agency
vision of diversity in the
workplace.
Closed Ordinal Strongly Disagree (1),
Disagree (2), Neither Agree
nor Disagree (3), Agree (4),
Strongly Agree (5)
RQ3 Organization
(Models)
25. My agency’s strategic
plan includes specific goals
and objectives that promote
diversity management in the
following areas (please rate
each individually):
• Employee
Recruitment
Closed Ordinal Never (1), Rarely (2),
Sometimes (3), Often (4),
Always (5)
RQ3 Organization
(Policy/Processes)

133
• Employee Retention
• Committees/Commis
sions
• Marketing
• Budgeting
• Professional
Development
26. What percentage of the
agency budget is dedicated to
diversity management
initiatives?
Closed Ratio Percentage
I do not know (alternative
option)
RQ3 Organizational
(Resources)
27. Please identify your level
of understanding of each of
the following terms:
• Diversity
• Equity
• Inclusion
Closed Ordinal No Understanding (1),
Limited Understanding (2),
Some Understanding (3),
Satisfactory Understanding
(4), Complete
Understanding (5)
RQ1 Knowledge
(Declarative)
28. In your own words,
please briefly define and
describe each term:
• Diversity
• Equity
• Inclusion
Open N/A RQ1 Knowledge
(Declarative)
29. I would like to learn
more about diversity, equity,
and inclusion concepts as
they apply to local
government workforce.
Closed Ordinal Strongly Disagree (1),
Disagree (2), Neither Agree
nor Disagree (3), Agree (4),
Strongly Agree (5)
RQ1/RQ2 Knowledge/Motivatio
n (interest)
30. I have a genuine interest
in understanding how
diversity programs impact
Closed Ordinal Strongly Disagree (1),
Disagree (2), Neither Agree
nor Disagree (3), Agree (4),
Strongly Agree (5)
RQ2 Motivation (interest)

134
employees and their public
service.
31. What diversity
management programs, if
any, would you like to see
introduced or enhanced in
your agency? Why?
Open N/A RQ
3 Organizational

DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT 135
Appendix B: Informational Sheet for Exempt Research
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
Waite Phillips Hall, 3470 Trousdale Pkwy, Los Angeles, CA 90089
INFORMATION SHEET FOR EXEMPT RESEARCH
STUDY TITLE: Diversity Management in Local Government: A Gap Analysis
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Robert Lennox
FACULTY ADVISOR: Maria Gutierrez Ott, PhD
You are invited to participate in a research study. Your participation is voluntary. This document
explains information about this study. You should ask questions about anything that is unclear to
you.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this study is to assess the role that government administration plays in the
implementation of diversity management practices and programs. As such, this study examines
the existence of diversity initiatives in public administration settings and to what extent agency
leadership is involved in implementation. We hope to learn about any gaps in the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences that support or detract from diversity management
efforts. You are invited as a possible participant because you have been identified as a potential
management level employee in local government with influence and decision-making authority
over resources and services.
PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
You will be asked to complete a brief 15-minute survey online to help us confidentially collect
your beliefs and opinions on your agency’s investment in diversity management initiatives. As a
manager you possess unique perspectives on agency priorities, cultural awareness, and job
satisfaction of the workforce. The survey includes a majority of multiple-choice Likert-scale
questions with a few open-ended response opportunities.
If you decide to take part, you will be asked to access the survey from a personal computer or
mobile device with web browser and internet connectivity.
PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
You will not be compensated for your participation.

DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT 136
CONFIDENTIALITY
The members of the research team and the University of Southern California Institutional
Review Board (IRB) may access the data. The IRB reviews and monitors research studies to
protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.
When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information will be used. Survey responses you provide are done so anonymously and no
personal or identifiable data will be collected or retained from your participation.
INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about this study, please contact Robert Lennox at rlennox@usc.edu or
(951) 368-8103.
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)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

Examining teachers’ perceptions of diversity, equity, and inclusion professional development

PDF

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

PDF

The continuous failure of Continuous Improvement: the challenge of implementing Continuous Improvement in low income schools

PDF

Applying best practices to optimize racial and ethnic diversity on nonprofit boards: an improvement study

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

Driving organizational transformation: empowering middle managers to prioritize diversity, equity, and inclusion within the healthcare sector

PDF

Evaluating collective impact in a local government: A gap analysis

PDF

Cultivating workplace belonging through managerial impact

PDF

Institutional diversity policy improvement through the lens of Black alumni stakeholder leadership: a gap analysis

PDF

Diversity initiatives in a California independent school: from plans to reality

PDF

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

PDF

Navigating race, gender, and responsibility: a gap analysis of the underrepresentation of Black women in foreign service leadership positions

PDF

Understanding the gaps for neurotypical managers to support college-educated autistic employees across industries

PDF

IT belongingness: from outcasts to technology leaders in higher education – a promising practice

PDF

Are students better off? An analysis of administrators’ commitment to serving transitional kindergarten students in multilingually diverse communities in Central Coast California

Asset Metadata

Creator Lennox, Robert (author)

Core Title Diversity management in local government: a gap analysis

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2024-05

Publication Date 05/07/2024

Defense Date 05/02/2024

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

Tag city,culture,DEI,diversity,diversity management,equity,human resources,inclusion,local government,multicultural,municipal,OAI-PMH Harvest,Public Administration,public service motivation

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Ott, Maria (committee chair), Crew, Rudolph (committee member), Welch, Edwina (committee member)

Creator Email rlennox@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC113925313

Unique identifier UC113925313

Identifier etd-LennoxRobe-12895.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-LennoxRobe-12895

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Lennox, Robert

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