University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Facilitators for the advancement of Hispanic/Latinx employees in corporate security

(USC Thesis Other)

Facilitators for the advancement of Hispanic/Latinx employees in corporate security

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Facilitators for the Advancement of Hispanic/Latinx Employees in Corporate Security
Ely A. Albalos
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
December 2023

© Copyright by Ely A. Albalos 2023
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Ely A. Albalos certifies the approval of this Dissertation
Richard Grad
Esther Kim
Cathy Krop, Committee Chair
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2023

iv
Abstract
This qualitative study examines the facilitators that can help overcome systemic barriers that
have otherwise contributed to the underrepresentation of Hispanic/Latinx employees in senior
leadership positions within corporate security of technology (tech) companies. This study
utilized Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems model to examine the complexities of
interconnected environmental systems within corporate security organizations of tech companies
to examine three research questions. First, what barriers do Hispanic/Latinx corporate security
employees report having encountered on their path to attaining senior leadership positions and
other job promotions? Second, what coping methods do Hispanic/Latinx corporate security
employees employ to navigate their promotion to senior leadership positions? Third, what
resources did Hispanic/Latinx corporate security employees find most useful in supporting them
on their promotion path to senior leadership positions? The research questions explore the career
experiences of 10 Hispanic/Latinx current or former corporate security senior leaders within tech
companies. The interviews revealed eight findings that led to three recommendations: change
promotion criteria and practices within corporate security tech organizations, create programs
that support access to mentors and role models, and create processes that strengthen and
encourage networking internally and externally to the organization. Findings from this study are
intended to help identify facilitators corporate security organizations can put into place to
improve racial diversity at the senior leadership level. Improving racial disparity in corporate
security organizations can improve employee interactions with leadership, create environments
of acceptance, and lead to different insights that can improve performance in an organization.

v
Dedication
To my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, all things are possible through you. To my wife and
soulmate, I can never thank you enough for your unending support. You are my rock and were
my lifeline when doubt, fear, anxiety, and imposter syndrome were beating down my door
during this process. This study would never have happened if I did not have you in my corner.
To my sons, daughters-in-law, and grandchildren, let nothing stand in your way when you set
your sights on a goal. To everyone else who is not mentioned above but supported me with
words of encouragement, participated in my study, shared my research, and believed in me when
I did not believe in myself, this finished work is as much yours as it is mine; thank you. To my
mother, whose love and personal sacrifice got us through the rough times growing up, I did it; I
love you.

vi
Acknowledgments
I want to extend my deepest gratitude and appreciation for my dissertation committee Dr.
Cathy Krop (Chair), Dr. Richard Grad, Dr. Esther Kim, and Dr. Jennifer Phillips. Dr. Krop,
thank you for your openness, availability at all hours, and support in my times of need. To my
committee, your wisdom, insight, and feedback was invaluable. Thank you for believing in me
and trusting in my abilities to research a valuable topic.

vii
Table of Contents
Abstract.......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication....................................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgments.......................................................................................................................... vi
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. ix
List of Figures................................................................................................................................. x
List of Abbreviations ..................................................................................................................... xi
Chapter One: Introduction to the Study.......................................................................................... 1
Background of the Problem ................................................................................................ 2
Field Context and Mission.................................................................................................. 3
Purpose of the Study ........................................................................................................... 5
Significance of the Study.................................................................................................... 5
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology .................................................... 6
Organization of the Study ................................................................................................... 8
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature .......................................................................................... 9
Growth and Role of Corporate Security ............................................................................. 9
Lack of Diversity at the Senior Leadership Level ............................................................ 15
Facilitators to Advancement ............................................................................................. 20
Conceptual Framework..................................................................................................... 26
Summary........................................................................................................................... 32
Chapter Three: Methodology........................................................................................................ 34
Overview of Methodology................................................................................................ 34
Interviews.......................................................................................................................... 35
Credibility and Trustworthiness........................................................................................ 38
Ethics................................................................................................................................. 39

viii
The Researcher.................................................................................................................. 40
Chapter Four: Findings................................................................................................................. 42
Participating Stakeholders ................................................................................................ 42
Results for Research Question 1: What Barriers Do Hispanic/Latinx Corporate
Security Employees Report Having Encountered on Their Path to Attaining
Senior Leadership Positions and Other Job Promotions? ................................................. 44
Summary of Findings for Research Question................................................................... 54
Results for Research Question 2: What Coping Methods Do Hispanic/Latinx
Corporate Security Employees Employ to Navigate Their Promotion to Senior
Leadership Positions? ....................................................................................................... 55
Summary of Findings for Research Question 2................................................................ 61
Results for Research Question 3: What Resources Did Hispanic/Latinx Corporate
Security Employees Find Most Useful in Supporting Them on Their Promotion
Path to Senior Leadership Positions?................................................................................ 63
Summary of Findings for Research Question 2................................................................ 71
Summary of Chapter Four ................................................................................................ 73
Chapter Five: Discussion of Findings and Recommendations for Practice.................................. 74
Discussion of Findings...................................................................................................... 74
Recommendations for Practice ......................................................................................... 84
Limitations and Delimitations........................................................................................... 93
Future Research ................................................................................................................ 94
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 95
References..................................................................................................................................... 98
Appendix A: Background/Eligibility Questionnaire .................................................................. 113
Appendix B: Interview Questions............................................................................................... 114
Appendix C: Top 100 Tech Companies by Market Cap (as of May 8th, 2023)......................... 115
Appendix D: Codebook Utilized for Transcribing Interviews ................................................... 118

ix
List of Tables
Table 1: Self-Revealed Backgrounds of Candidates 44
Table 2: Three-Letter Agency Barrier: Lived Experiences Shared by Participants 48
Table 3: Working Harder for Validation and Recognition: Participants’ Workplace Exp. 58
Table 4: Value of Networking as Expressed by Participants 66
Table 5: Key Findings: Barriers, Coping Methods, and Resources for Ascension 72
Table 6: Key Recommendations 86
Appendix A: Background/Eligibility Questions 113
Appendix B: Interview Questions 114
Appendix C: Top 100 Tech Companies by Market Cap (as of May 8th, 2023) 115
Appendix D: Codebook Utilized for Transcribing Interviews 118

x
List of Figures
Figure 1: Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Model as Adapted for this Study 28
Figure 2: Conceptual Framework for an Employee’s Collective Burden 31
Figure 3: Breakdown of Tech Companies Represented by Participants 43

xi
List of Abbreviations
BIPOC Black, Indigenous, people of color
EEOC U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
FACI Financial accounting and corporate investigation industry
HL Hispanic/Latinx
Tech Technology
VUCA Volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous

1
Chapter One: Introduction to the Study
This study examined facilitators that can help overcome systemic barriers that have
otherwise contributed to the underrepresentation of Hispanic/Latinx (HL) employees in senior
leadership positions within corporate security of technology (tech) companies. In this study, a
tech company refers to companies that are in the field of technology driving global innovation.
As tech companies expand their presence across the world, each new environment brings with it
a variety of economic, political, and socio-cultural risks (Petersen, 2013). With that
globalization, companies require corporate security professionals who can focus on the private
space of tech companies, without the public safety burden beholden within traditional law
enforcement, and who can make company safety a priority regardless of the geographic location
a company occupies (Walby & Lippert, 2013). A study by the U.S. Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission (U.S. EEOC), presenting the latest data available, showed that White
men and women held 83% of executive positions in tech companies compared to 16% held by
Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) men and women (U.S. Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission [EEOC], 2014). Globalization has allowed for tech companies to
increase their presence to nearly every corner of the world. Despite the global omnipresence,
corporate security executive positions have been dominated by White men and women, and the
talent of leaders is identified by the color of their skin (Dugan & Leonette, 2021). Without a
highly diverse leadership team, organizations are missing the benefits of strategic problem
solving and decision-making capabilities as well as access to a broader network of talented
resources (Roberson & Hyeon, 2007).

2
Background of the Problem
Understanding and eliminating racial barriers to employment remains a priority for many
companies (Igbaria & Shayo, 1997; Parham, 2018). What remains to be resolved is removing
organizational barriers that have hindered historically marginalized employees from progressing
to senior level positions once hired (Obenauer & Langer, 2019). Employees who are members of
historically marginalized groups are subject to differential treatment when it comes to expanding
career opportunities (Amis et al., 2020; Greenhaus et al., 1990). An element that has contributed
to unequal promotional opportunities is group and racial likeness. Managers garner more favor
toward individuals who are like themselves (Castilla, 2011; Ertug et al., 2022). Castilla (2011)
highlighted that managers of marginalized employees have the power to control job assignments,
performance ratings, and promotional decisions. Preferential treatment for one person over
another, due to group and racial likeness, can result in disparities of pay and promotion.
Racial likeness is an issue for historically marginalized corporate security professionals,
as the desired professional background for corporate security professionals corresponds with
professions where most employees are White. According to Petersen (2013), “a questionnaire
completed by 87 [corporate] security managers from the largest U.S. companies reveals that 74%
of the [corporate] security managers have a background in the armed forces, police, or
intelligence services” (p. 225). According to the Military One Source (2020), a report on the
profile of the military community, 68.9% of military members identified as White. Similarly, a
Data USA report (2020) showed that 61.9% of police officers in the United States identified as
White. Further, a 2021 Statista (2021) report showed that 71.9% of intelligence officers in the
United States identified as non-minorities. With 74% of corporate security professionals

3
originating from the armed forces, police, or intelligence services (Petersen, 2013), a racial
disparity paves the way for racial likeness to be an issue for corporate security professionals.
It is important for organizations to understand how leadership positions, and the
privileges of power, can contribute to inequity (Ashikali et al., 2021; Ospina & Foldy, 2009).
According to Ospina and Foldy (2009), “If society, communities, and individuals are all
informed by race, then leadership must be as well” (p. 876). As Ospina and Foldy (2009, p. 877)
further explained,
Attending to race brings an understanding of power not only as a resource for individuals,
but also as a web of institutionalized inequities that systematically, and at the expense of
others, provides privilege to some communities and some perspectives. At the same time,
examining leadership—since leadership is fundamentally about agency—helps us
understand how individuals and collectives have resisted, and in some cases transformed,
these inequities- creating spaces where marginalized voices become powerful.
It is essential for corporate security organizations to understand the importance of representation
of historically marginalized groups in senior leadership positions to reduce the existing
disparities in advancement. The shift in representation can lead to an improved distribution of
power and agency (Ashikali et al., 2021; Liu, 2019; Ospina & Foldy, 2009).
Field Context and Mission
Corporate security employees within tech companies are considered in-house
professionals, meaning they are employed directly by the company and are focused on the safety
and well-being of the core companies’ employees and assets. According to ASIS International
(ASIS, n.d.), a globally recognized professional security organization, there are a variety of roles
that would qualify within corporate security as management and executive level jobs including

4
but not limited to: director of security, regional security manager, and corporate security
manager. A corporate security professional balances protecting physical security assets, securing
company buildings, and maintaining access control to ensure company employees are safe and
able to work unhampered (Brooks, 2010). While most corporate security professionals have
experience in public safety, tech companies operate in the private space, and in the private space,
corporate security professionals are more autonomous and have the freedom to focus on
company priorities (Walby & Lippert, 2013). Corporate security professionals serve as an
essential intermediary between public safety and the corporate company itself to keep company
assets and employees safe while also cooperating with public safety to assist with criminal
investigations when needed (Walby & Lippert, 2013, 2016). As a result, corporate security
professionals are an essential part to keeping a tech company, and its employees, safe and
productive.
Employment of corporate security professionals within tech companies is essential for
adding safety assurances for employees, but employment of White men and women remains
higher than their historically marginalized counterparts. In the context of corporate security
within tech companies and throughout this study, historically marginalized refers to a racial
imbalance between those who identify as being White and other non-White races. The focus of
this study will be on a specific marginalized, non-White, community of corporate security
employees that identify as HL. As of 2014, tech companies employed 5.3 million people, and of
those, 69% were White and approximately 14% could be classified as HL (EEOC, 2014). Data
on corporate security managers, a specific role within tech companies, showed that 66% are
White and approximately 13% could be classified as HL, further illustrating a racial divide in
corporate security organizations (Zippia, 2022).

5
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to explore the experience of HL corporate security
employees in their ascension to senior leadership positions. Research has demonstrated there are
many barriers of entry into senior leadership positions for marginalized employees, including in
technology industries. What remains to be known are the specific barriers for HL professionals
that are in the specialized field of corporate security and the facilitators that can help break down
impediments to promotion. This study seeks to understand actions existing senior leaders, who
identify as HL, in corporate security took to progress in their careers. The findings will be used
to create scalable solutions for marginalized professionals in corporate security to improve
diversity at the most senior levels. The following research questions supported the purpose of
this study.
1. What barriers do Hispanic/Latinx corporate security employees report having
encountered on their path to attaining senior leadership positions and other job
promotions?
2. What coping methods do Hispanic/Latinx corporate security employees employ to
navigate their promotion to senior leadership positions?
3. What resources did Hispanic/Latinx corporate security employees find most useful in
supporting them on their promotion path to senior leadership positions?
Significance of the Study
The problem of systemic barriers for access to corporate security senior leadership
positions for marginalized employees in corporate tech companies is important to address. As a
result of systemic bias and racial likeness, historically marginalized employees may be
overlooked once hired leading to fewer opportunities for advancement (Hiemstra et al., 2013).

6
This will contribute to a cycle where the racial majority are being selected for promotion over
equally qualified historically marginalized candidates, perpetuating inequality, and a lack of
diversity in the top leadership positions (Ashikali et al., 2021; Liu, 2019).
Racial influence in an organization offers an opportunity to improve interactions with
leadership lending to improved psychological makeup and relationships with leadership
(Ashikali et al., 2021; Liu, 2019; Ospina & Foldy, 2009). Improving acceptance and
relationships with leadership by reducing a bias for racial likeness and by improving diversity
can create environments where employees feel free to share their perspectives, improving an
organization’s performance. When examining the benefits of diversity, Ely and Thomas (2001, p.
265) noted, “diversity is a potentially valuable resource that the organization can use … [to] give
rise to different life experiences, knowledge, and insights, which can inform alternative views
about work and how to best accomplish it.” Findings from this study are intended to help identify
facilitators corporate security organizations can put in place to improve racial diversity at the
leadership level. Improving racial disparity in corporate security organizations can improve
employee interactions with leadership, create environments of acceptance, and lead to different
insights that can improve performance in an organization.
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems model considers the complex interactions within a
working environment and explains that an individual is not separate from their environment but
instead interconnected with and impacted by that environment (Gardiner & Kosmitzki, 2010).
According to Bronfenbrenner (1981, p. 11), the model, “seeks to provide a unified but highly
differentiated conceptual scheme for describing and interrelating structures and processes in both
the immediate and more remote environment as it shapes the course of human development.”

7
The five nested systems of the Bronfenbrenner ecological systems model are the microsystem,
mesosystem, exosystem, macrosystem, and chronosystem (Bronfenbrenner, 1981). The
microsystem is concerned with how the individual interacts with others daily. The mesosystem is
where multiple microsystems of an individual’s environment interact. The exosystem involves
the impact the environment has on an individual, focused on factors beyond the individual’s
control. An important aspect of the exosystem is that “it involves two or more settings that the
individual is not directly involved in, but which still impact the individual” (DeCino et al., 2021,
p. 57). The macrosystem represents the attitudes and societal ideologies that influence the
individual. The chronosystem represents the changes to an individual across all systems over
time.
Given the complex working environment corporate security professionals in the
technology industry face, balancing identities and priorities between micro and macro level
demands, Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems model provides insight into the barriers
confronting HL employees within the competing nested systems and opportunities to overcome
barriers at different levels of the ecosystem. The focus of this study was HL corporate security
senior leaders in technology companies. A semi-structured interview method was used to gather
data. The interview focused on understanding the perceived barriers HL corporate security
professionals have encountered in their workplaces related to their advancement. The interview
also sought to build a deeper understanding of the coping methods and resources that have aided
those HL corporate security professionals as they navigated the complex ecological systems and
attained senior leadership roles. By examining the interactions within and among the systems,
the study will help to identify specific facilitators existing HL senior leaders called on, including

8
coping mechanisms and organizational and other supports, to achieve their success, allowing for
scalable solutions across the corporate security industry.
Organization of the Study
This study includes five chapters, with Chapter One introducing the problem, the context
of the study, and the theoretical framework that was employed to guide the investigation. A
review of the literature follows in Chapter Two, introducing the globalization of the corporate
security industry, discussing the lack of diversity at the senior leadership level, introducing
facilitators to advancement, and presenting the conceptual framework that guided this research.
Chapter Three describes the study methodology, including the selection of the industry and
participants, as well as methods for data collection and analysis. Chapter Four follows with
analysis of the data and findings. The study concludes in Chapter Five with a discussion of
recommendations for practice to facilitate advancement of HL professionals in the corporate
security industry to senior leadership positions as well as suggested areas for subsequent
research.

9
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
This study examines facilitators that can help overcome systemic barriers that have
otherwise contributed to the underrepresentation of HL employees in senior leadership positions
within corporate security of tech companies. The chapter will begin by introducing several
factors that have led to the growth and role corporate security has in the tech industry. Historical
influences and a shared appreciation for company security has led to increased adoption of
corporate security professionals addressing company priorities and trends. Next, the lack of
diversity at the senior leadership level within corporate security organizations will be reviewed.
Several causes have contributed to the marginalization of diverse representation within the
highest ranks of corporate security organizations, leading to reduced diversity that brings with it
many consequences. Lastly, evidence on facilitators to advancement for marginalized employees
will be examined. The chapter ends with a discussion of the conceptual framework, supported by
Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems model (Bronfenbrenner, 1981), that will be used to guide
the study as well as to propose scalable solutions within different system levels to facilitate the
advancement of historically marginalized employees in corporate security.
Growth and Role of Corporate Security
Tech companies continue to expand to new corners of the world, and with that expansion,
there are risks that need to be identified and resolved (Petersen, 2013). To address those risks,
corporate security professionals, with a background in risk identification and resolution,
currently represent a mainstay for tech companies to provide safe working environments
regardless of the tech companies’ geographic location (Walby & Lippert, 2013, 2016). The
dependance on corporate security professionals in tech companies has resulted in dedicated
resources at par with a company’s growth and technological advancements. There are currently

10
over 45,000 corporate security jobs in the United States, with a projected job growth of 38%
from 2018–2028 (Zippia, 2023). The proliferation of the use of corporate security professionals
did not happen overnight, but when companies realized the value corporate security
professionals brought to the organization, regular adoption increased and can be seen as related
to some key milestones.
Contributing Milestones
The industrial revolution was a milestone that paved the way for modern day corporate
security guarding and investigations (McCrie, 2004, 2010). According to McCrie (2010), the
reason for this is, “in early centuries, protecting the entire community was the responsibility of
the king or elected leaders in republics. … They could and did hire people to protect their
possessions” (p. 543). Allan Pinkerton is looked to as a founder of what standard corporate
security services are today (McCrie, 2010). An entrepreneur, self-starter, and civic-minded
individual, Allan Pinkerton started a security agency in 1850 after having worked as a deputy
sheriff (McCrie, 2010). Following the establishment of his company, he worked with local
businesses to solve counterfeit money and theft cases, worked with the railroad protecting
property and solving theft cases, worked undercover with the U.S. Post Office, and was the first
to provide executive protection for a U.S. President, Abraham Lincoln (McCrie, 2010).
Following the wake of the industrial revolution, businesses and companies began to take
responsibility for protecting their assets with the use of dedicated assistance, particularly when
needs fell outside of the duties of the local sheriff or government agency (McCrie, 2010). As
technology advanced, the capabilities of providing security for people and businesses was
enhanced through remote alarm monitoring.

11
Initially proposed in a patent in 1852, electronic alarm systems remain a staple in modern
day corporate security designs and are used to create remote alarm monitoring. According to
McCrie (2004), a patent was filed by Augustus R. Pope in 1852 explaining Pope’s “improvement
in electro-mechanic alarms … [where] Pope’s electric alarm would sound a continuous tone if a
door or window was opened without authorization” (p. 13). Alarm monitoring remains largely
unchanged, except for hardline systems being replaced with the wireless technology afforded
currently, and its ultimate purpose is to provide a signal when an unauthorized event or
emergency is triggered (McCrie, 2004). Alarm monitoring is an essential application corporate
security professionals use to protect people, places, and property and can be used to supplement
traditional staffed positions (Seungmug Lee, 2010). Alarm monitoring when coupled with
capable employees, with requisite safety and security backgrounds, helped create the opportunity
for companies to absorb certain security tasks internally rather than outsource them.
Some security matters are considered private and not for public disclosure, and as a
result, companies, like tech companies, desire proprietary security, otherwise known as corporate
security professionals, to deal with concerns internally. Examples of the types of matters handled
internally include ethical training programs, background screening, emergency and disaster
management and training, and information technology security (McCrie, 2004). The proprietary
nature of corporate security was manifested based on real-world necessity and not out of
traditional educational and academic activities. Corporate security professionals are sought after
to solve real world company problems, particularly those problems that ensure employee safety,
and sometimes ones that need to remain out of the public purview (Dalton, 2003; Sennewald,
2012; Walby & Lippert, 2014). According to Dalton (2003, p. 2), “Security, as a corporate
function, requires forethought and deliberateness of execution just the same as any other business

12
unit. A true and comprehensive security program entails the ability to address the entire
continuum of real and potential threats.” Corporate security professionals are viewed as essential
contributors to a company’s business objectives, particularly where matters of company security
are concerned (Ludbey et al., 2017).
Purpose of Corporate Security Organizations
Within Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, there is a lower order need for safety, and safe
working environments provide employees with the security they need to perform efficiently and
effectively (Jerome, 2013). The historical development of corporate security organizations grew
because tangible assets, including a company’s employee population, needed to be safeguarded
as did their intangible assets, like intellectual property. Corporate security, and the professionals
within the industry, have the responsibility of safeguarding company assets, including employee
personnel, and reducing the effects of disruption in ever-changing environments across the world
(McCrie, 2004; Sennewald, 2012; Walby & Lippert, 2014). To meet this responsibility,
corporate security organizations have been seeded with employees with a background in national
security to quickly establish processes that address microlevel and macrolevel company security
(Petersen, 2013; Shyra et al., 2021). Corporate security professionals serve to mitigate the
multitude of internal and external threats against company assets that include, but are not limited
to, key business areas like protecting shareholder value, managing political instability in
respective company operating environments, and asset protection (Sennewald, 2012; Shyra et al.,
2021). When tech companies enter new market spaces to gain a competitive advantage, they are
not always concerned with the risks those environments bring with them. The value corporate
security professionals bring to tech companies is the ability to adapt to unforeseen risks,

13
remaining nimble and vigilant, and understanding constant change requires continuous risk
assessment and mitigation.
The nature of society’s ever shifting landscape means the primary purpose of corporate
security is to continually assess and manage risk throughout the company. Within increasingly
volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA) operating environments, corporate security
organizations have received more credibility as their professionalism and expertise have grown
(Marquez-Tejon et al., 2022). Credibility and value have increased because organizations can
depend on their corporate security professionals to anticipate and respond to situations by
leveraging internal and external company resources (Marquez-Tejon et al., 2022). How this
translates into day-to-day functionality is that tech companies do not need to be at the mercy of
external municipal or government aid to support employees. VUCA incidents like the Ukraine
war and social instability in international countries have helped cement the underlying value, and
development, of corporate security organizations because as internal assets corporate security
professionals can be called upon to develop and implement solutions rather than rely solely on
external support for aid (Shyra et al., 2021). According to Bennett and Lemoine (2014, p. 317),
VUCA environments are on the rise because “global recession has blunted repeated bursts of
optimism for the return to a path of prosperity … [and] there are challenge[s] of digesting
technological advancements that impact industry … [and] consequences of demographic shifts in
the workplace.” Where before corporate security was looked at as a reactionary response,
company leaders increasingly understand that for a company to reach its goals, a convergence
must occur with corporate security being integrated throughout the many company functions to
deal with VUCA incidents (Marquez-Tejon et al., 2022). Opinions have started to shift as leaders
increasingly understand that the best way to respond in times of crisis, or VUCA incidents, is to

14
have dedicated company resources with the expertise, knowledge, and financial resources readily
available to respond at a moment’s notice (Bennett & Lemoine, 2014).
Utility of Corporate Security Professionals
As corporate security organizations continue to gain attention from the most senior
leaders in a company and their professionalism increases, they continue to expand at a fast pace.
To keep up that pace, corporate security personnel are recruited from a number of specialized
fields. For example, some corporate security professionals possess a national security
background and are looked at as vital assets and called upon to leverage their contacts from their
former national security experience to mitigate company threat (Ludbey et al., 2017). Wolf et al.
(2007) questioned the responsibility corporate companies have when their products may
contribute to domestic and international conflicts. At the forefront of the study was a question of
under what circumstances and when a corporate security organization company should play a
role in deconfliction when the companies’ products either contribute to or can inhibit a conflict
(Wolf et al., 2007). While Wolf et al. (2007) did not offer a conclusive answer, it does suggest
that corporate companies and their respective corporate security organizations “can make
meaningful contributions to new forms of [corporate] security governance” (p. 314).
Further, Williams (2005) examined the utility of corporate security organizations and
highlighted that the unique background of corporate security professionals uniquely positions
them to resolve corporate company problems. The focus of the study was an examination of the
bifurcation between private and public corporate security investigations within the financial
accounting and corporate investigation industry (FACI). Williams (2005) offered a justification
for utilizing corporate security professionals to focus on internal company matters when those

15
matters overburden the local law enforcement, wasting public resources and not leading to
criminal conviction, asserting,
Beyond the political risks and liabilities associated with unwanted intrusions into
“legitimate” business, investigating financial crime also provides little in the way of
symbolic rewards for the police, this given public apathy about financial crime, the
inherent difficulties of dramatizing these types of investigative activities and outcomes,
and the view that financial wrongdoing falls outside of the organizational ambit of
“capturing criminals” and “controlling crime.” (p. 333)
While Williams (2005) examined corporate security through the lens of finance, Dorn
and Meerts (2009) applied the findings of the study to corporate company reputational risk.
According to Dorn and Meerts (2009), “by employing corporate security services, companies
maintain control of investigations and of any actions taken … [and] they keep embarrassing
matters private, and they thereby safeguard their public reputation [and] consumers’ loyalties”
(p. 98). A company’s dedicated corporate security professionals can absorb some of the
investigative burden that may otherwise damage reputational risk or overburden public resources
(Dorn & Meerts, 2009).
Lack of Diversity at the Senior Leadership Level
A 2014 report, the latest one available, published by the U.S. EEOC (EEOC, 2014),
showed that 69% of all employees working for tech companies identified as White. When also
considering 66% of corporate security managers are people who identify as White and 14% as
Hispanic or Latinx (Zippia, 2022), the numbers illustrate HL employees struggle for
representation in the corporate security industry within tech companies. Cox (1993) discussed
the need to improve diversity as a moral imperative stating,

16
The representation of culture groups in the overall work population, and especially in the
most powerful positions is highly skewed. … In the United States, White men are
dominant. This fact and the pervasive tendency for in-group members to be favored over
out-group members in human transactions combine to make dominance-subordination
and other equal opportunity issues prominent aspects of diversity work in organizations.
(p. 6)
With the expansion, professionalism, and globalization of the corporate security industry,
there is an opportunity to improve career opportunities by improving diversity for those in the
field. To do so would mean identifying the multiple barriers that contribute to a lack of
diversification at the senior level ranks of leadership. Corporate security organizations have an
opportunity to remove inhibitors to the career growth of HL employees that could reduce the
consequences of a racial majority and lead to improved diversity.
Inhibitors of Career Growth
There are multiple barriers that inhibit the career growth of HL employees, including
within corporate security, and, specifically, corporate security in the tech industry. Barriers like
muting, unequally distributed resources, and unfair procedural policies can contribute to stunted
career growth. According to Meares et al. (2004), muting occurs when the majority are in
positions of power muting marginalized voices below. Muting can take place when the majority
can distort or trivialize marginalization by controlling the narrative and outcomes of data and
discourse (Meares et al., 2004; Tye-Williams & Krone, 2015). Ely and Thomas (2001) explain
how muting can appear in the workplace as follows,
When a work [organization] views cultural differences as having the potential to make
only a marginal or negative contribution to work, the dominant cultural group likely

17
defines the prevailing expectations, norms, and assumptions about work, and conflicts, if
not suppressed, are settled by power. (p. 267)
Interactional, distributive, procedural, and systemic practices are among the contributing
factors that remain as roadblocks for equitable treatment of marginalized groups (Meares et al.,
2004). Meares et al. (2004) defined the terms as, “interactional, interpersonal mistreatment by an
authority figure … distributive, lack of access to resources … procedural, unfair policies or
procedures that influence the distributive decision … and systemic, unfair systems within the
larger organization” (p. 6). Distributive lack of resources can occur when the majority relegates
those in the minority to prescribed roles, especially those requiring lower qualifications and
experience, regardless of the true measure of qualification thereby limiting equal access to senior
level positions (King et al., 2022). Unfair procedural policies, particularly when considering
promotion, can lead to an increase in discrimination against those marginalized employees that
were passed over for someone in the majority (Nag et al., 2022). A variety of unfair systemic
issues contribute to the career disadvantages facing HL employees like unclear promotional
practices and a disproportionate balance of workload serving to dilute workplace contributions
(Domingo et al., 2022). The many inhibitors to career growth bring with them consequences of
not maintaining an equitable work environment.
Consequences of Lack of Diversity
As technology companies continue their growth into different regions of the world, the
employee demographics have become more diverse. If the senior level ranks within the
supporting corporate security organization do not align with the diversity of the company, there
can be an effect on the performance of the organization. Roberson and Hyeon (2007) suggested,
“diversity in senior management will help firms to effectively align business strategies with

18
current and future demographic and market trends to achieve organizational growth and
profitability” (p. 549). In organizations with a disproportionate White employee base, there
exists underlying issues of a lack of trust and sense of belonging and feelings of tokenism
(Settles et al., 2022).
Feeling unsafe in a group that does not foster trust can lead to an unwillingness to
communicate openly, lack of desire to invest the time and energy required to collaborate on a
goal, and disengagement with others (Poort et al., 2022). Multicultural disconnects, like differing
methods of communication style, where those who are not from the majority may have cultural
differences that do not blend well with the majority, may lead to a perception that one is
dishonest or untrustworthy (Poort et al., 2022). A sense of belonging is essential for establishing
trust, and without a sense of belonging, an employee can feel reticent to be their authentic self,
thereby feeling ostracized from the majority (Adejumo, 2021). Tokenism is a well-documented
byproduct of being from a historically marginalized group, excluded from the majority, and only
included for the sake of appearances (Reynolds et al., 2022). Tokenism brings with it heightened
pressures like a lack of belonging, publicized mistakes, and increased scrutiny (Reynolds et al.,
2022). According to Roberson and Hyeon (2007), organizations that have limited numbers of
leaders who are racial minorities “may experience decreases in performance as such individuals
may serve as tokens without their unique perspectives and skills integrated in decision-making
processes” (p. 563). Corporate security organizations are at the frontlines, needing to keep pace
with a company’s expanding global footprint. Doing so requires constant innovation, but a lack
of trust, belonging and feelings of tokenism negatively impact innovation.

19
Impact on Innovation
Organizations struggle to find a solution for getting productive people to work
productively as a team, leading to a costly gap of innovation within (Chatzi et al., 2022).
Corporate security professionals are thrust into unknown VUCA operating environments where
they need to innovate, but their ability to innovate could be negatively affected if they are left
feeling detached from the organization. Ely and Thomas (2001) suggested, “when group
members share common goals and values, cultural diversity leads to more beneficial outcomes”
(p. 234). When team collaboration and cultural acceptance are achieved by teams that are
accepting of diverse backgrounds and unique opinions, innovation can be achieved (Abiew et al.,
2022). Corporate security professionals from historically marginalized groups, like HL
employees, who feel empowered with cultural acceptance can tap into their creativity when not
burdened by worry of judgment. Improving diversity on a team alone will not make significant
strides on innovation. Instead, organizations need to consider improving the power dynamics and
moving historically marginalized groups into positions of power to communicate a commitment
to change (Ely & Thomas, 2020). According to Thomas and Ely (1996),
When allowed to, members of [historically marginalized groups] can help companies
grow and improve by challenging basic assumptions about an organization’s functions,
strategies, operations practices, and procedures. And in doing so, they are able to bring
more of their whole selves to the workplace and identify more fully with the work they
do, setting in motion a virtuous circle. (p. 2)
Further, according to Kochan et al. (2003), while racial diversity alone cannot guarantee
improvement in performance and innovation, there is an opportunity for organizations to
improve impact when the respective environment “promotes learning from diversity” (p. 17).

20
Similarly, Stahl et al. (2010) suggested that diversity within organizations can lead to increased
creativity. The types of situations, like VUCA incidents, that corporate security professionals
operate in require them to develop creative solutions to previously unknown problems. When
organizations do not create environments of cultural acceptance, learning from the diverse
thoughts and experiences of historically marginalized professionals, like HL employees,
innovation will suffer.
Facilitators to Advancement
While there is a lack of diversity in the corporate security industry, generally, and among
senior leadership, specifically, there is evidence of practices that can support greater diversity at
the senior leadership level. Facilitators include the use of role models, networking, and
mentoring to provide the support historically marginalized populations need to persevere through
organizational barriers. According to Ospina and Su (2009), “evidence does suggest that leaders
of color do have strategic capacity to find ways to transcend the negative outcomes” (p. 157).
Those leaders who identify with historically marginalized groups, including HL employees in
corporate security, are best positioned to influence the next generation of diverse leaders. In a
working relationship between an organizational leader and an employee, a leader can help an
employee overcome organizational barriers through meaning making and by sharing their lived
experience (Ospina & Su, 2009).
Role Modeling and Mentoring
Employees are better prepared for positive career growth when leaders serve as role
models, as an example to emulate (Wallo et al., 2022). Within corporate security, the lack of
historically marginalized leader role models, including HL role models, created by the gap of
those holding the majority contributes to continued marginalization as organizational norms

21
dictate a standard where the White majority continues to maintain positions of power. To disrupt
a White majority, having historically marginalized role models that employees can identify with
can reduce the apprehension for seeking promotional opportunities caused by a racial imbalance
(Cortland & Kinias, 2019). When employees can connect with someone of similar race, they are
more likely to identify with them and mimic their career path (Covarrubias & Fryberg, 2015;
Karunanayake & Nauta, 2004). A study by Ainsworth (2010) raised a counterpoint that in
situations where there is a White majority, with few other historically marginalized role models,
the White majority can serve as effective role models with the appropriate organizational
processes. In the case of corporate security, until an equitable balance in leadership is
established, historically marginalized employees, like HL employees, are left to rely on
improving organizational processes that shift the existing imbalance.
Relying on improved organizational processes and a dependance on existing White role
models within corporate security organizations will not be enough to make a difference in the
long run. One reason is stereotype threat, where those who identify with a historically
marginalized group may have a concern about confirming a negative stereotype about their racial
group (Hoyt & Murphy, 2016; Marx et al., 2009). Marx et al. (2009) explained, “ingroup role
models may be capable of buffering stereotyped targets from the adverse effect of stereotype
threat when targets attend to those role models’ counter-stereotypic behaviors” (p. 953). When
faced with stereotype threat, employees try to ignore their feelings and distance themselves from
their feared stereotype by working harder and longer than others, but those same employees do
not end up increasing their performance because they do not address their underlying negative
stereotypes (Hoyt & Murphy, 2016; Roberson & Kulik, 2007).

22
Role models can offer a gateway for historically marginalized corporate security
professionals to access senior leadership positions. In the short term, corporate security
organizations are required to put in place effective organizational processes that rely on the
White majority to serve as role models. However, if significant strides are to be made,
historically marginalized employees, like HL employees, within corporate security organizations
will require ingroup members that they can identify with who successfully overcame negative
stereotypes in their corporate security career as they secured their position as a senior leader.
Mentoring is also a key to success for many individuals in the workplace. Mentoring, as
explained by Randel et al. (2021), is recommended for historically marginalized groups, like HL
employees, because of its ability to “advance protégé career trajectories, provide psychosocial
support (e.g., providing friendship and support), and facilitate growth and career development”
(p. 106). The amount of mentoring received from a mentor in a position of power is a strong
predictor of early career success (Bagdadli & Gianecchini, 2019; Blickle et al., 2009). Mentoring
can be even more meaningful and productive to those who have been historically marginalized,
like HL employees, leading to improved upward mobility and career satisfaction (Somani &
Tyree, 2021). Given that many organizations lack historically marginalized employees serving as
mentors, mentors are even more important in organizations where there is an identified racial
minority (Somani & Tyree, 2021). Corporate security organizations, with a distinct White
majority in positions of power, make it difficult for historically marginalized employees, like HL
employees, to find appropriate mentors to help them navigate career barriers.
Navigating interpersonal and organization barriers is easier for historically marginalized
groups when an in-group mentor, someone of similar race, is available for support, motivation,
and guidance (Somani & Tyree, 2021). In organizations, like corporate security, where there is a

23
noticeable White majority, challenges in the workplace can be overcome with appropriate
support from a mentor. Randel et al. (2021) explained the benefit of a mentor’s support during
times of out-group, or “cross-race” encounters, saying,
When individuals in cross-race encounters are able to demonstrate their capabilities and
qualifications with the backing of the mentor, both mentor and protégé are able to realize
identity authenticity and facilitated information processing on the way to accomplishing
career advancement goals. … Through these interactions, both mentors and protégés
engage in joint sensemaking, which allows protégés to see themselves as legitimate,
engage in their full self, and progress toward career advancement goals. (p. 119)
Aside from the career benefits afforded by mentoring, mentoring has an ability to
permeate change beyond the initial mentor-protégé relationship. Those that serve as a protégé
take those inspirational learning lessons and leverage them to impact their community (Brooms
et al., 2021). A study by Brooms et al. (2021) revealed that historically marginalized Latino
males became change agents for their community when participating in mentoring activities. The
study revealed that a positive mentoring experience created a sense of purpose and desire to give
back to the community (Brooms et al., 2021). When applied to corporate security organizations,
those protégés who receive structured mentoring and benefit from the support and backing of a
mentor in cross-race encounters can spark an organizational change allowing the protégé to
become a future mentor, sharing learned lessons and becoming a positive agent for change.
Networking
Networking has a unique way of empowering others, particularly those who identify as a
member of a historically marginalized group. Gino et al. (2020) defined networking and its
associated behaviors as, “individuals’ efforts to develop and maintain relationships with others

24
who can potentially provide assistance to them in their career or work” (p. 1221). Networks have
a way of disrupting negative power relations, especially for those who are marginalized, by
connecting with others with diverse experiences and coming together in a shared space (Church
et al., 2003; Mandell et al., 2017; Miles et al., 2012). The challenge in corporate security,
because it is a tight knit group with few role models for historically marginalized employees, is
that there is a stigma for self-promoting achievements with a goal of career advancement. Gino
et al. (2020) translated that stigma for self-promoting as being viewed as, “inauthentic, impure,
and even dirty when attempting to create and maintain relationships with other people with the
clear purpose of finding or strengthening support for their professional goals and work tasks” (p.
1235). In their study, Gino et al. (2020) discovered there is a balance that can be achieved to
overcome that stigma of self-promoting achievements for the sake of self-promoting when the
emphasis is instead placed on career inspiration and personal development associated with career
promotion, stating,
Despite the well-demonstrated and well-known benefits that creating and maintaining
professional connections can have on the diversity and size of one’s network, people
often shy away from engaging in instrumental networking to pursue professional goals.
… Such [actions] are often detrimental to their development and job performance
because they do not allow people to access valuable information, resources, and
opportunities that are important to their careers. … People who are motivated to network
professionally for the growth, advancement, and accomplishments they can achieve
through their connections network more frequently and experience decreased feelings of
moral impurity [associated with self-promoting]. (p. 1235)

25
Effective networking opportunities often elude existing corporate security professionals because
of a faulty stigma. When done correctly, networking can create alliances with others and provide
access to a group of like-minded professionals with whom an employee can rely on for guidance
(Mandell et al., 2017; Marshall, 2001; Miles et al., 2012).
Networking goes above and beyond merely connecting people face to face, or virtually,
for the sake of knowing another person. Instead, networking with others involves developing
trust, committing time to work on ways to overcome challenges, and active participation (Church
et al., 2003; Mandell et al., 2017). The benefits of networking are not a one-way street.
Professionals, like those in corporate security, must feel empowered to take an active role in
improving their career. Empowerment using networks provides a sense of moral support and
validation from others who have had similar concerns and experienced similar situations
(Pendleton & Gibson, 2022). When an employee does feel empowered, a shift occurs, as
explained by Simmons et al. (2022), where “those with higher needs for achievement (who strive
for high performance and career success) participate more extensively in both internal and
external networking behaviors” (p. 13). The benefits of networking for historically marginalized
professionals, like HL employees in corporate security, is that a shift in career challenges
inspired by a supportive network can lead to new opportunities and opportunities for success. In
a study by Simmons et al. (2022), significant career benefits did take place and they outlined,
Changes in challenge were significantly related to increases in salary, promotions,
promotion rate, and career satisfaction. Those focused on challenges are interested in
obtaining stimulating work assignments that offer opportunities for learning and growth
that should impact career satisfaction. Those who perform effectively and achieve goals

26
are more likely to be promoted and earn salary increases, which also should result in
higher career satisfaction. (pp. 13–14)
While understanding career satisfaction goes beyond the focus of this study, the benefits
networking has on a person’s career is well documented in the Simmons et al. (2022) study.
Eliminating the stigma associated with job self-promotion by focusing on career promotion can
help HL employees in corporate security embrace the benefits of a well-established career
network. An appropriate network will help reduce the racial gap by empowering existing
corporate security professionals to take on new challenges leading to a higher income and
attainment of a hierarchical leadership position.
Conceptual Framework
This study examines the facilitators that can help overcome systemic barriers that have
otherwise contributed to the underrepresentation of HL employees in senior leadership positions
within corporate security of tech companies. Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems model
considers the complex interactions within a working environment and explains that an individual
is not separate from their environment but instead interconnected with and impacted by that
environment (Gardiner & Kosmitzki, 2010). The five nested systems of the Bronfenbrenner
ecological systems model are the microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, macrosystem, and
chronosystem (Bronfenbrenner, 1981). According to Bronfenbrenner (1981), the model “seeks to
provide a unified but highly differentiated conceptual scheme for describing and interrelating
structures and processes in both the immediate and more remote environment as it shapes the
course of human development” (p. 11). The microsystem is concerned with how the individual
responds to others within their immediate environment and the mesosystem examines the
interactions and influences with others. The macrosystem considers the attitudes and societal

27
ideologies that influence the individual between microsystem and mesosystem exchanges. The
exosystem represents the impact the environment has on an individual, specifically factors
beyond the individual’s control. The chronosystem considers the changes to an individual across
all systems over time.
Figure 1 represents a visual representation of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems model
and the nested systems within. Figure 1 illustrates the microsystem at the heart of
Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems with the other systems encompassing one another, nested,
through to the outer exosystem layer. Figure 1 differentiates between the lived experience of a
person, at home, and their work experience as they navigate the various ecological systems,
illustrated by the two halves of the circle. Exploring how a person’s home life interacts with their
work life, while important to understand, is beyond the focus of this study. For this study,
research will focus on HL corporate security employees’ experiences in their work settings as
they navigated the challenges presented throughout the nested ecological systems.

28
Figure 1
Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Model as Adapted for this Study
Note. Adapted from “The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design,”
by U. Bronfenbrenner, 1981, Harvard University Press. Copyright 1981 by the Harvard
University Press.
Given the complex working environment corporate security professionals in the tech
industry face, balancing identities, and priorities between micro-, meso-, macro-, and exosystem demands, Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems model (1981) provides insight into the
barriers confronting HL employees within the competing nested systems and opportunities to
overcome barriers at different levels of the ecosystem. Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems
model (1981) helps see how complex interconnected environmental systems create the barriers
HL corporate security employees encounter on their path to attaining senior leadership positions,
and the value that role models and mentoring can play in successful career development,
managing stereotype threat, and personal growth. Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems model

29
(1981) further demonstrates how HL corporate security employees might leverage resources to
overcome barriers and maximize coping methods to navigate complex interconnected
environmental systems within corporate security organizations of tech companies. The
microsystem serves as a pattern of activities, roles, and interpersonal relationships experienced
by the developing person in the environments they frequent. Networking can be described as a
microsystem interaction as the activities and interpersonal relationships created during
networking opportunities serve as a valuable resource for interactions outside of that networking
interaction.
Figure 1 outlines respective workplace interactions and factors that could impact HL
employees in their desire to pursue a senior leadership position within corporate security
organizations of tech companies. While Figure 1 demonstrates how each corresponding system is
nested within the other, the visual representation of a circle places the microsystem at the center.
With the microsystem at the center, a HL corporate security employee in the tech workplace
must successfully navigate the roles, relationships, and activities to be prepared to interact with
the next radiating layer, the mesosystem, and so forth. What Figure 1 does not do is emphasize
the impact each corresponding layer has on the employee as they attempt to navigate their way
through the systems. This study will introduce a conceptual framework that examines the nested
ecological systems as a collective burden, representing a series of challenges on an employee.
The conceptual framework used for this study will expand the original version of the
Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems model (Bronfenbrenner, 1981). As demonstrated in Figure
2, thought of as a two-dimensional (2D) model of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems, this
study examines each ecological system as a level of its own. Even though the levels are nested
among each other, each level represents a unique burden by its own right that a HL corporate

30
security tech employee must overcome to successfully progress through their career into a
leadership position. Figure 2 represents the levels extracted from one another starting with the
microsystem at the lower level and then emanating upwards through the mesosystem and
exosystem. With the visual representation, this study proposes that as a HL employee navigates
each level successfully and interacts with challenges at the next subsequent level, each brings
with it more complex interrelated challenges.
Starting with the microsystem, at the lowest level in Figure 1, a person in the workplace
must successfully balance responsibilities, roles, and activities. When applied to corporate
security in tech companies, the way those responsibilities, roles, and activities manifest for a HL
employee are through organizational design, interpersonal barriers, and manager support. The
microsystem is the most intimate ecological system HL employees will interact with, and while
interactions at this level can be difficult, Figure 2 demonstrates the collective burden at this level
is the least. At the mesosystem level, the collective burden increases for a HL employee as they
seek appropriate mentors, role models, and networks to support career growth. What this
conceptual framework seeks to demonstrate, as it is depicted in Figure 2, is that the mesosystem
level is not something that is navigated independently after the HL employee “successfully”
navigates the microsystem. Instead, there is a collective burden of having to navigate the
mesosystem while still navigating the microsystem. The microsystem does not disappear for a
HL employee, instead, it remains an ever-changing landscape that represents real workplace
experiences for them while they are interacting with aspects of the mesosystem. As a HL
employee progresses in their career, and they encounter new challenges at the meso- and exosystem level, changes in their microsystem could also occur emphasizing a necessity to
continually address their respective collective burden.

31
Figure 2
Conceptual Framework for an Employee’s Collective Burden in Corporate Security
At the exosystem level, the collective burden is at its highest for a HL employee in
corporate security organizations of tech companies as they navigate organizational norms, like
that of a White male majority, promotional processes, and resource constraints. Like when
balancing the collective burden at the mesosystem and microsystem levels, the exosystem
introduces lived challenges for HL employees with elements they must balance while also
competing against challenges at the mesosystem and microsystem levels. However, the
exosystem represents the biggest challenge because it largely consists of elements beyond a HL

32
employees’ control and can influence other levels of the ecological system through developed
processes, institutional practices, and organizational norms that permeate throughout.
Examining a HL employees’ position, as depicted in Figure 2, within an organization and
considering the burden each corresponding level has on them allows a different perspective from
Figure 1. Where Figure 1 illustrates radiating circles beginning at the microsystem, the
conceptual framework illustrated in Figure 2 introduces a top-down impact on a HL employee
beginning at the exosystem. This perspective helps to illustrate the impact each ecological
system has on them.
By introducing a different perspective, this study will offer insights into introducing
facilitators at the various levels that can improve representation for HL employees in senior
leadership positions of corporate security organizations in tech companies. Additionally, this
study will illustrate the varying impact of facilitators based on the level of focus: micro-, meso-,
macro-, or exo-. The collective burden of some levels will be more significant for an employee
than others. Targeted facilitators, based on organizational challenges, need to be specific to
provide the most impact based on the collective burden, rather than ceremonially targeting
inconsequential improvements.
Summary
This study examines the facilitators that can help overcome systemic barriers that have
otherwise contributed to the underrepresentation of HL employees in senior leadership positions
within corporate security of technology companies. As tech companies expand their presence
across the world, each new environment brings with it a variety of economic, political, and
socio-cultural risks (Petersen, 2013). Companies require corporate security professionals who
can focus on the private space of tech companies, making company safety a priority regardless of

33
the geographic location a company occupies (Walby & Lippert, 2013). With the expansion,
professionalism, and globalization of the corporate security industry, there is an opportunity to
expand the previously narrow-focused promotional practices of the past and increase
representation of HL employees in senior leadership positions. To do so would mean identifying
the multiple barriers that contribute to a lack of diversification at the senior level ranks of
leadership. Given the complex working environment corporate security professionals in the tech
industry face, balancing identities, and priorities between micro-, meso-, macro-, and exo-system
demands, Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems model provides insight into the barriers
confronting HL employees within the competing nested systems and opportunities to overcome
barriers at different levels of the ecosystem.

34
Chapter Three: Methodology
This study examines facilitators that can help overcome systemic barriers that have
otherwise contributed to the underrepresentation of HL employees in senior leadership positions
within corporate security of tech companies. The industry being examined is tech companies,
with an emphasis on the corporate security organizations within them. The goal of the research is
to identify facilitators utilized by HL employees within corporate security organizations to
achieve career success. This chapter discusses the research methods and data sources that were
used to answer this study’s research questions and the processes that were put in place to
maximize credibility and trustworthiness of the study. The considerations for addressing the
positionality, biases, and assumptions of the researcher are also addressed within the chapter.
The following research questions guided the study:
1. What barriers do Hispanic/Latinx corporate security employees report having
encountered on their path to attaining senior leadership positions and other job
promotions?
2. What coping methods do Hispanic/Latinx corporate security employees employ to
navigate their promotion to senior leadership positions?
3. What resources did Hispanic/Latinx corporate security employees find most useful in
supporting them on their promotion path to senior leadership positions?
Overview of Methodology
Data was collected through qualitative interviews with HL senior leaders from the
corporate security industry working in tech companies. The interviews were conducted in a semistructured format, with pre-established questions and additional probing questions to dive further
into key concepts as needed. Qualitative semi-structured interviews were an appropriate

35
approach for this study to capture the lived experiences of corporate security professionals who
have faced adversity and overcame organizational barriers to rise to senior leadership positions.
According to Merriam & Tisdell (2016), a semi-structured format, “allows the researcher to
respond to the situation at hand, to the emerging worldview of the respondent, and to new ideas
on the topic” (p.111). Using 11 questions, I sought to understand how employees who identify as
HL have been able to overcome systemic barriers in the corporate security workplace to attain
senior leadership positions. The responses were used to identify the barriers, coping mechanisms,
and resources that affected the roles, activities, and responsibilities of HL corporate security
employees on their journey toward attaining a senior leadership position.
Interviews
The goal of this research was to understand the experiences of HL corporate security
professionals as they rose to senior leadership positions in corporate security organizations
within tech companies. A semi-structured interview format allowed for respondents to explain
their experiences openly without standardization (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This method of
interviewing was beneficial for this research as it allowed space for the unique responses and
explanations participants had in recounting their lived experiences.
Participants
The population for the study was corporate security professionals from, or formerly from,
tech companies who identify as HL and serve, or served, in senior leadership positions. For this
study, senior leadership positions were those positions with responsibilities and/or a title
equivalent to, for example, senior manager, director, or vice president. Participants were actively,
or formerly, working for one of the top 100 global tech companies, based on market cap as of
May 8th, 2023 (see Appendix C). The minimum work experience expected of participants was 3

36
years in a corporate security organization with a qualified tech company. This population was
appropriate because the purpose of the study was to understand perspectives from the position of
those who identify as HL and the barriers, coping methods, and resources that hindered or
enabled them to achieve career success to senior leadership positions within corporate security
tech companies.
Instrumentation
Interviews included 11 open-ended questions (see Appendix B) that addressed the key
concepts outlined by the research questions. There were different purposes for the interview
questions. Specifically, one question asked about the interviewees’ overall career, three questions
addressed perceived barriers when seeking promotion, two sought to understand the potential
coping mechanisms utilized when seeking career opportunities, one sought to understand the
impact of role models, and four asked about the types of resources utilized along their path to
senior leadership positions.
Data Collection Procedures
Participants were selected from a convenience sample within LinkedIn with additional
participants found through a snowball/network sampling for a total of 10 interviews. To be
eligible for participation, participants had to identify as HL. Participants were also members, or
former members, of a corporate security organization within a top 100 global tech company (see
Appendix C), and actively served, or had served, in a senior leadership position.
To capture a purposeful sample from various corporate security organizations serving a
variety of tech companies, LinkedIn was used as the primary recruiting tool. A short recruitment
questionnaire (see Appendix A) was used to assess qualification for participation in the study and
was sent from my LinkedIn account that currently has 1500+ connections. Beginning with a post

37
on my LinkedIn page in June 2023, I described an opportunity to participate in a research study.
Within the post, I provided a brief description of the target audience and purpose of the research.
Included in the post, I notified potential participants that participation in an interview was
voluntary, confidential and would occur during an approximately 60-minute Zoom meeting.
Those who were interested followed an active link leading to a Qualtrics recruitment
questionnaire. The target sample size for the study was 10–12 participants. The post remained
active on my LinkedIn profile for 6 weeks, with two reposts, until 10 eligible participants were
identified and interviewed.
The 10 interviews were conducted over 4 weeks during July 2023. Using contact
information gathered from the recruitment questionnaire, I contacted each person individually to
determine the best time and date for a Zoom interview, according to their availability. A Zoom
recording allowed me to review the session later, aligning interviewees’ responses to asked
questions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The Zoom sessions were recorded upon interviewee
consent and stored on my laptop which was password protected and only used by me. The
recordings were transcribed via Zoom’s software capabilities, and I reviewed them for accuracy.
Identifying information of the interviewees was kept separate from the Zoom recordings, aside
from the participants’ first names. Audio recordings were destroyed upon transcription.
Data Analysis
Semi-structured interviews allowed for unique responses based on a participant’s specific
experiences. I leveraged the interviews to identify common themes shared among participants as
responses related to the established research questions. As the interviews progressed, I
categorized the emerging themes to understand where, based on the Bronfenbrenner ecological
systems model and the five nested systems (Bronfenbrenner, 1981), the barriers existed, and

38
potential solutions could be targeted and implemented to support HL employees in their career
progression and reaching senior leadership positions within corporate security in tech companies.
Analysis of the data followed a five-step process established by Creswell and Creswell
(2017). The first step began with gathering and organizing all the data. This included transcribing
interviews and typing up field notes. The second step was to understand the data by reviewing all
the collected information and identifying emerging themes. The third step was to code the data
by bracketing themes into categories. Additional in vivo codes were created based on participant
responses (Creswell & Creswell, 2017). The fourth step was to create a description of the setting
and generate emerging themes from the study. The fifth and final step was to represent the
description and themes, discussed in detail in Chapter Four and Chapter Five, advancing a
qualitative narrative on the findings.
In coding the data, I started with broad categories for perceived barriers, coping methods,
and resources. As responses from participants were coded, I allowed additional broad categories
to form, and removed irrelevant categories, with additional related sub-categories to form a
codebook (see Appendix D). Once the categories were established, after several interviews with
no new information, I reviewed responses and created a count tracking frequencies of comments
related to the established codebook using an online software system, ATLAS.ti.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
This study ensured the ability to produce credible and trustworthy results. Maintaining a
standard of credibility and trustworthiness allows other readers, practitioners, and researchers to
be assured the findings in this study were gathered ethically, with careful attention to this study’s
conceptualization, and with enough detail to draw appropriate conclusions (Merriam & Tisdell,

39
2016). The trustworthiness of a qualitative study can be determined by assessing its credibility
and its consistency (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
The first method I used to help ensure credibility and trustworthiness was to provide rich,
thick descriptions of participant perspectives and responses. As participants shared experiences,
care was taken to capture detailed descriptions of participants’ reactions and sentiments during
responses providing recorded results that were realistic and rich with participant detailed
perspectives (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The second method to help establish credibility and
trustworthiness was adequate engagement in data collection and transparent interpretation
through my position as the researcher, also known as reflexivity (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
According to Merriam and Tisdell (2016), reflexivity occurs when the researcher is forthright
about their biases, dispositions, and assumptions regarding the study, thereby offering a clear
understanding of how the researcher interpreted data. The goal with the 10 interviews was to
identify common themes across a variety of respondents to help ensure consistency of the
findings (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Given that I am intimately familiar with the corporate
security industry, rich thick descriptions and reflexivity helped me remain objective, keeping my
biases at bay.
Ethics
Data collection was conducted following approval by the University of Southern
California’s (USC) International Review Board (IRB) on June 6th, 2023, with the obligation to
the potential participants that any experiences shared was used with the utmost confidentiality
and integrity to do no harm and maintain informed consent (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). I ensured
that sufficient information was provided to potential participants to make an informed decision
regarding their participation in the study. An information sheet for exempt research, with details

40
about the research, was sent via email at the initial recruitment and again prior to the interview
for them to make informed decisions about the risks and benefits of participating in the study.
Consent to record the interview data via Zoom software was asked and received, for nine out of
the 10 interviews, before each interview began. One participant opted out of a recording. I
advised participants that they had the right to withdraw from the study at any time. The study
was designed to eliminate any unnecessary risks to research participants. Before commencing the
study, I obtained IRB certification from the Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative (CITI)
to become a qualified investigator to conduct the study.
At the time of the study, I held a senior leadership position in a corporate security
organization within a top 100 global technology company. I ensured that I did not hold any
authoritative power over participants. Participants were informed that the primary purpose of the
study was to identify perceived barriers, coping mechanisms, and resources that can be used to
facilitate racial diversity within senior leadership positions of corporate security organizations
within tech companies. Personal identifiable information (e.g., names, company, positions/titles)
obtained during the study remained confidential and anonymized. Recordings were stored on my
laptop, which was password protected and used solely by me, and they were destroyed upon
transcription. The goal was to ensure that participants were comfortable sharing their experiences
and could trust that I would uphold the highest values and maintain the utmost of sensitivity with
shared information (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
The Researcher
I have spent 13 years in the corporate security industry, with all my experience working
for corporate security organizations within top 100 global technology companies. In that time, I
have worked for three of the largest tech companies in the world and have had first-hand

41
knowledge of their respective corporate security organizations. As a result of that professional
experience, I have seen and been impacted by the organizational barriers being researched in this
study. Due to this intimate working knowledge, my positionality is important in three areas.
First, due to company restrictions, I was not allowed to interview anyone from my current place
of employment. Company policy restricts the publication of findings. Therefore, to circumvent
complications, I did not interview employees from my company. Second, not only am I
intimately familiar with corporate security, but I also identify as a Hispanic/Latinx man. This
type of familiarity will help me gain access to those who may be weary of speaking with a
member of the dominant group (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Third, to remain reflective of my
positionality, I needed to continually assess my effect on the findings and rely on member rich
thick descriptions and reflexivity ensuring consistency of the findings to remain objective and to
avoid potential biases ((Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). As an HL senior leader, I was aware that my
own biases could affect the study because I experienced the same barriers discussed by
participants. However, I ensured that I did not make leading comments to reach desired
responses. Instead, I offered support when participants offered emotionally charged responses
and relied on my pre-established list of open-ended questions to guide the interview.

42
Chapter Four: Findings
The study’s objective was to examine the facilitators that can help overcome systemic
barriers that have otherwise contributed to the underrepresentation of HL employees in senior
leadership positions within corporate security of tech companies. The purpose was to explore the
experiences of HL corporate security employees in their ascension to senior leadership positions.
Through qualitative interviews, in a semi-structured format, this study sought to capture the lived
experiences of corporate security professionals who have faced adversity and overcame barriers
to rise to senior leadership positions. The discussions in this chapter contextualize the findings,
identifying the barriers encountered by participants as they sought to navigate their own career
without equal resources available to a majority. Additionally, this chapter provides an overview
of the study participants followed by key findings for the following research questions:
1. What barriers do Hispanic/Latinx corporate security employees report having
encountered on their path to attaining senior leadership positions and other job
promotions?
2. What coping methods do Hispanic/Latinx corporate security employees employ to
navigate their promotion to senior leadership positions?
3. What resources did Hispanic/Latinx corporate security employees find most useful in
supporting them on their promotion path to senior leadership positions?
Participating Stakeholders
This qualitative study consisted of 10 HL participants. Each was assigned an
alphanumeric designation to help protect their identity. The study was focused on a specific
segment of the corporate security industry and detailed information about any participant could
reduce anonymity and confidentiality. The study included two women and eight men from five

43
corporate security organizations among the pre-established top 100 tech companies by market
cap (see Appendix C). At the time of the interviews, six participants were actively employed in a
corporate security organization within a tech company and four were former employees. Two
of the 10 participants had been employed by the same tech company throughout their career,
while eight had been employed at two or more tech companies. All participants served, or had
served, in a corporate security senior leadership position. Figure 3 provides a breakdown of the
tech companies represented by participants and a count illustrating how many participants
worked at the identified company. Additionally, Table 1 provides insight into each candidate
based on their backgrounds from their self-revealed stories and responses.
Figure 3
Breakdown of Tech Companies Represented by Participants
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Apple Meta Google Cisco Dell
Count
Top 100 Global Tech Company

44
Table 1
Self-Revealed Backgrounds of Participants
Participant Description
A First generation corporate employee; no degree
B First generation corporate employee and college graduate
C First generation corporate employee and college graduate in the
USA
D First generation corporate employee and second-generation college
graduate
E First generation corporate employee and college graduate in the
USA
F First generation corporate employee and college graduate in the
USA
G First generation corporate employee and second-generation college
graduate
H First generation corporate employee and college graduate in the
USA
I First generation corporate employee and third generation college
graduate in MX
J First generation corporate employee; no degree
Results for Research Question 1: What Barriers Do Hispanic/Latinx Corporate Security
Employees Report Having Encountered on Their Path to Attaining Senior Leadership
Positions and Other Job Promotions?
The first research question sought to understand the perceived barriers HL corporate
security employees experienced throughout their career as they ascended to senior leadership
positions. Questions such as, “What barriers, if any, have you faced in attaining a senior

45
leadership position or job promotion in corporate security within tech companies?” and “As a
person who identified as Hispanic/Latinx, what has your promotional experience been within the
tech security industry?” were constructed to gather responses. Four key findings emerged
through data analysis.
1. The established majority makes it difficult to ascend.
2. Lack of knowledge about the corporate environment slows career progress.
3. Lack of existing HL role models and mentors creates a gap in career progression.
4. Hiring and recruitment panels polarize potential candidates.
Finding 1: Established Majority Makes It Difficult to Ascend
All participants openly discussed the existing majority within corporate security
organizations that makes it difficult to ascend to senior leadership positions. All 10 participants
acknowledged a White male majority holding the senior most leadership positions, and
importantly, the very specific professional background of the majority. The background, as
described by the participants as gaining the upper hand and being prevalent among senior
leadership, is one of law enforcement, military, or government agency experience. A
colloquialism the participants suggested is common in the corporate security industry and was
heard throughout all interviews was reference to a “3-letter agency.” What is meant by the phrase
is a shorthand reference to any government agency that is referred to by their three-letter initials
like FBI, CIA, DSS, or DOJ, among others. During the interview, Participant J stated, “When I
started corporate security, I wasn’t ex-law enforcement or ex-government in my background, and
I knew that was going to be a barrier.” Later, Participant J further elaborated:
There were seasons of my life where I knew I was the most qualified for a position. I
knew the inner workings of the organization and had all the stakeholder attention that I

46
needed to get the job done. However, time and time again external candidates would be
selected for a role with less experience than I had but they had some, even a minimal
amount, of law enforcement, military, or 3-letter agency experience.
Participant E acknowledged the same perceived barrier explaining, “I can count on my
fingers and toes the number of times I trained entry level matters to my supervisors that were
promoted over me only because they originated from a 3-letter agency.” With visual agitation
and frustration in their voice, Participant E continued,
I felt missed opportunities and promotions were because I wasn’t in the White place, at
the White time, with the White background, at the White location. … Even the interview
panels set up to evaluate me as a candidate for promotion were all White male of the
same background.
Participant H had a similar experience and, when speaking about the perceived majority
explained, “It’s funny you ask, I always ignored the possibility until I saw a picture of all our
senior leaders recently, the picture was of four White males all with a known background in law
enforcement or military.”
Only one out of the 10 participants in the study, Participant D, had a military background,
but with minimal experience in the military, they felt that their background did not provide them
with an edge. When asked to explain perceived barriers, Participant D revealed:
Yes, I had military experience, but I was never provided career direction after leaving.
When I sought senior leadership positions, military experience wasn’t the issue. Instead,
there were cultural issues. They [hiring managers] spoke a different language from good
schools and had very social college experiences putting them on a different

47
communication level compared to my minimal military experience and very different
college background.
Finding 1 revealed that a barrier faced by HL corporate security employees on their path
to senior leadership positions included not only the majority of senior leaders in corporate
security organizations being White males, but, unique to the corporate security industry, there
was also a specific background among the majority that included possessing previous experience
in law enforcement, military, or from a government agency referred to by participants as a “3-
letter agency.” Table 2 highlights comments made by participants further explaining the
recognized barrier of an established majority making it difficult to ascend to senior leadership
positions.

48
Table 2
Three-Letter Agency Barrier: Lived Experiences Shared by Participants
Q3: What barriers, if any, have you faced in attaining a senior leadership position or job
promotion in corporate security within tech companies?
Participant F
“I always thought if you did X and Y, you would promote but overtime I
realized they wanted a certain background.”
“After 4 to 5 years of doing the same thing, I realized there was definitely
something wrong with the system, or the way they orchestrated
selection, and it didn’t have anything to do with me.”
Participant C
“There was inconsistency with how others get promoted. Some dudes
would get there twice as fast with half as much experience and
education as me, but they looked like everyone else.”
“The majority is the majority because it is the most represented group. It’s
been like that in security for some time now and will always be
imbalanced.”
Participant B
“It’s a male dominated industry and there is this good ole boys’ network.”
“Not coming from law enforcement is a barrier. Even having a minimal
amount of law enforcement experience in this industry automatically
offers you a certain amount of credibility and respect. I didn’t get that
automatically.”
“Even trying to gain new skills in this industry means you are in classes
with people that are former law enforcement, military, etc. It’s
intimidating constantly trying to prove myself.”
Finding 2: Lack of Knowledge About the Corporate Environment Slows Career Progress
Participants expressed a lack of knowledge about the corporate environment that also
slowed their career progress. While they described corporate security as being a demanding job,
with a constant need to be “by your phone,” it was not the challenges associated with job
responsibility that diminished their opportunity for advancement. Instead, eight participants
expressly mentioned growing up in “less than” or “humble” home environments where parents
did not have an advanced education or have any knowledge about navigating the corporate

49
environment. Participant H revealed the challenges of overcoming their home environments and
low expectations of them, including from their parents, when they affirmed:
My parents didn’t work in corporate environments and when I mentioned I had obtained
a job with [a tech company] they were excited. They expected me to be happy with my
job and expect nothing else from my employer. This opportunity was more than they ever
had and because of their expectations of me I spent 4 to 5 years not pursuing
opportunities. But I noticed people around me gaining new positions and getting
promoted so I knew I was doing something wrong.
Connected to this, some participants expressed the barrier as a lack of access to
information. Participant B was the first person in their family to graduate from college. While
their parents always supported them and helped them to push beyond barriers, when they sought
information on navigating the corporate environment, they could not find anyone who could
provide them that information. Participant B explained, “Back when I started in the 90s, if you
weren’t a White male, you couldn’t find someone to share information.” Participant B witnessed
specific customs and practices of leaders in corporate security organizations, stating,
It was customary of those from a law enforcement or military background to have a beer
after work and hang out at a bar. If you didn’t drink or were comfortable hanging out
with a bunch of White guys after work, you couldn’t get access to information that would
be a benefit to your career growth.
None of the participants had parents with experience from the tech environment or
corporate security. All participants struggled to learn how to navigate their career when their
parents felt they should be happy where they were, as Participant H stated, “with a good
paycheck with a good company.” When they started their career, Participant A believed the

50
family rhetoric because, “There was no one in senior leadership that looked like me.” Participant
A provided a deeper lens into their circumstances when they explained:
I was looking at BLS [Bureau of Labor Statistics] a few years ago and I realized that a
large percentage of Hispanic/Latinx employees occupied the entry level and middle level
positions. There are a lot of folks that sit in those buckets and maybe not deliberately but
subconsciously. Hispanic/Latinx people are doers, and I was one of those doers that was
pigeonholed into a middle management position and not knowing any better I continued
to be a good doer while I was stuck not knowing any better.
Finding 2 revealed that a lack of knowledge about the corporate environment slowed
career progress. While each participant had different exposure to how they experienced that lack
of knowledge, all attributed stalled career growth to the environments in which they were raised,
family influences and expectations, and being told to be content with an opportunity without
seeking more. Participants felt that they had to intentionally focus on obtaining access to
information, by any means necessary, to change their thought process and approach.
Finding 3: Lack of HL Role Models and Mentors Create a Gap in Career Progression
Participants identified a significant lack of role models and mentors contributing to
missed opportunities. Consistently across all interviews, role models were described as members
of the HL community whom they could use as inspiration, and mentors were described as allies
that could help serve as a “soundboard” to “bounce ideas off of” and help with career guidance.
Across all 10 interviews, participants expressed a concern for the lack of HL senior leaders they
could emulate as role models and a lack of HL mentors with corporate security experience to
help guide their career. Nine participants communicated either having to rely on members of the
majority to serve as mentors and allies, or the necessity to find HL mentors in other industries to

51
gain career advice. One participant shared they had never had a mentor, and felt it contributed to
their “slow career growth.” Only one of the participants had worked for a HL senior leader that
could be a role model to them.
Participant H explained, “People are being hired externally with 3-letter agency
experience and because they have a similar background to senior leadership are mentored right
from the start. Twelve months later you are seeing them get promoted.” In a sorrowful tone,
Participant H added, “In a way, the organization shows you who is really important and it’s a
slap in the face to everyone else.” Participant H’s explanation provided insight into the feeling an
HL employee has when they feel that they are not being mentored the same as others in the
organization.
Participant C had a similar experience with the lack of mentors and explained, “Mentors
can serve as key individuals in the organization that have the authority, power, and influence to
drive your career.” However, Participant C explained the need to mentor future HL leaders
requires more than just “mentorship” when they revealed:
Mentorship is focused on sharing experiences where you are talking through potential
actions that may or may not accelerate a person’s career. On the other hand, I feel that
mentorship needs to evolve to a sponsorship. Moving beyond talking about action
through mentorship, sponsorship is taking action with your mentor. Sponsorship would
mean tangible actions where your mentor takes you to different events, meetings, and
social networking events. In a way, the sponsorship is a mentor’s actual statement to
others that you are worthy of being paid attention to.
Participant A’s experience with a mentor and role model was the closest to emulate Participant
C’s theory about sponsorship, because their mentor and role model was a HL senior leader, and

52
that leader did not have a corporate security background. When discussing the impact of having a
HL mentor and role model, Participant A explained, “There is no opportunity for you to even
think you belong in senior leadership until you see someone that looks like you in those roles
that you aspire to be in.” When speaking about their mentor and role model, a HL CEO,
Participant A, affirmed with admiration, “They recognized my potential and encouraged me to
continue my development and took a hard investment in guiding me toward learning
opportunities.” Among all other interviews, Participant A’s experience was unique. Their
experience was a testament to the value of having a role model and mentor that was HL taking an
active interest in guiding a person’s career.
The third finding revealed that most of the participants were lacking effective role models
and mentors. One of the participants had neither a role model nor a mentor and harbored some
resentment of the fact. Unique among the participants was the benefit one of the participants had
from an HL leader that was both a role model and mentor. A consistent theme among the
participants was a desire to be “invested in” and having the ability to confide in a HL leader to
help them navigate their corporate career.
Finding 4: Hiring and Recruitment Panels Polarize Candidates
While the focus of the research was to identify the barriers, coping methods, and
resources for corporate security employees already established within an organization, there was
an unexpected perceived barrier revealed by participants, operating in the microsystem of their
workplaces. Three participants spoke of the barriers to entry into the industry with a specific
emphasis on hiring and recruiting panels. Highlighted were participant experiences of not being
interviewed by “anyone like them.” When probing to understand more about the phenomenon,
Participant E explained with frustration in their voice and visible stress in their face:

53
I didn’t have the right skin color, background, or pedigree of the panel in front of me.
Interview panels would consist of all White males, with no one that looked like me and
based on how they spoke all had some type of 3-letter agency experience. It was like the
panel showed you the “silhouette” you should have if you wanted a job within their
company.
Connected to this is the challenge corporate security employees have with the intersection
of being HL and a woman in a male dominated field. Participant B explained, “As a woman, you
feel like your chances for hire are limited.” When asked to elaborate, Participant B added,
When you are in an interview and you see three big White guys asking you questions,
you feel like you are being sent a message. … as if I didn’t already feel small in stature, I
leave the interview feeling even smaller.
Participant I had similar experiences as Participant B, as related to hiring and recruiting
panels, but added they felt microaggressions at times early in their career. Participant B
explained,
You could tell who the majority was based on who was interviewing you, but I would get
questions about how I dress and based on how they “looked” [participant emphasized
with air quotes] at me I could tell they wanted to hire only woman that had an appealing
look.
Participant B paused after their explanation, and added, “It is just sad.”
Finding 4 was an emerging finding, since only three of the participants themselves
brought it up as a barrier, and it was the few women participants in the study who had the
intersecting identities who discussed this finding. Specifically mentioned was the composition of
the hiring and interview panels who were majority White and male, and the implication of the

54
types of employees hired. When considering the intersectionality of being a HL candidate and a
woman, participants explained feeling less than adequate and sexualized. While the focus of the
study was on corporate security employees already established within an organization, the
impact of hiring and interview panels on HL employees is relevant and meaningful to
understand.
Summary of Findings for Research Question 1
Research Question 1 sought to understand the perceived barriers HL corporate security
employees experienced throughout their career as they ascended to senior leadership positions.
Four key findings were revealed in connection with the perceived barriers toward attaining a
senior leadership position. Those findings included the following:
1. The established majority makes it difficult to ascend.
2. Lack of knowledge about the corporate environment slows career progress.
3. Lack of HL role models and mentors creates a gap in career progression.
4. Hiring and recruiting panels polarize candidates.
The findings provided insight into the lived experiences of HL corporate security
employees as they navigated their career in tech companies. Unique to the corporate security
industry is the specific background among the majority that included possessing previous
experience in law enforcement, military, or from a government agency, referred to by
participants as a “3-letter agency.” Organizational norms, like an affinity for employees with 3-
letter agency experience, are examples of barriers that rest within the exosystem as they are
largely out of the control of employees. One revelation was that even when a HL corporate
security employee had military background, they were still not readily accepted by the majority.
Lack of knowledge about the corporate environment also contributes to slower career progress.

55
While each participant had different exposure to how they experienced that lack of knowledge,
all attributed stalled career growth to family influence and being told to be content with an
opportunity without seeking more. Participants felt that they had to intentionally focus on
obtaining access to information to change their thought process and improve their career
trajectory. Most of the participants were lacking effective role models and mentors. A consistent
theme among the participants was a desire to be invested in and having the ability to confide in a
HL leader to help them navigate their corporate career. One participant did have an HL leader
that was a role model and mentor, and their career success was more positive than other
participants. An emerging finding was the impact hiring and interview panels have on potential
candidates before becoming an employee. Participants felt organizations were demonstrating the
likeness for potential employees by the make-up of hiring and interview panels. In addition,
female prospects felt certain micro-aggressions during the interview process.
Results for Research Question 2: What Coping Methods Do Hispanic/Latinx Corporate
Security Employees Employ to Navigate Their Promotion to Senior Leadership Positions?
The second research question sought to understand the types of coping methods HL
corporate security employees implemented to help navigate their career toward promotion into
senior leadership positions. Questions such as, “Tell me about the types of coping methods you
have employed to overcome barriers in job promotion and advancement in corporate security”
and “If you were to travel back in time, what advice would you give your younger career self to
reduce obstacles they will face as a Hispanic/Latinx employee” were used to spark reflection and
consideration about their career that led to two key findings:
1. Work harder than others to gain validation and recognition.
2. Leave a company or move laterally within for greater opportunities.

56
The discussions in this section contextualize the findings, revealing participant coping
methods to assist with navigating career complexity in an industry with an established majority.
Finding 1: Work Harder Than Others to Gain Validation and Recognition
All the participants revealed that their family and upbringing instilled in them a work
ethic of “hard work.” Nine out of 10 participants revealed that their family taught them to “not
take anything for granted” and the only way to excel in life was “to work harder than the next
person.” As a coping method, participants internalized challenging situations and powered
through with grit and determination. By doing so, participants were able to successfully
overcome stressful situations that could have otherwise halted career growth. Participant B
reflected fondly on their father and commented, “My father never allowed me to quit and when I
wanted to do something that was challenging and different then my siblings, he always supported
me but never let me quit even when things got tough.” Participant B further reflected on how that
upbringing helped them cope with work challenges when they elaborated, “I worked harder than
everyone else around me so that I could produce results, sometimes I would have to ignore
harassment and comments that I was making others look bad.” When discussing some of the
frustrations they felt in the workplace because they had to work harder to gain recognition,
Participant B stated with some resentment, “Sometimes you just need to endure.”
Participant J echoed Participant B’s sentiment when stating, “I had to keep my head
and eyes up on the future I wanted for myself and continue to work hard even when other
employees were chosen for promotion even when I had more tenure and experience.” Participant
J used air quotes when mentioning “other employees” and after probing about who they were
referring to elaborated, “members of the White male majority from 3-letter agencies.”

57
When asked about their experience when they did finally gain recognition deserving of a
promotion, Participant B explained,
The majority of the time, I was basically sat down and told in not so many words, “We
are taking a chance on you.” The insinuation was that I wasn’t really qualified for the
promotion and opportunity, so there was a lot of pressure on me to perform. I felt like I
needed to work even harder than those around me to prove I was worthy of the
promotion. I also felt like I had to prove that a Hispanic without 3-letter agency
experience is just as capable of the majority.
I asked Participant B to elaborate on why they felt their management did not think they
had qualifications for the promotion and added, “because I wasn’t a White male with law
enforcement, military, or 3-letter agency experience.” One participant, Participant D, did have
military experience that they felt should have given them equal opportunities as those in the
identified majority, but they continued to strive for acceptance. Participant D revealed, “Even
with some military experience, I decided to put myself through police academy.” Participant D
continued, “I was never able to be a full-time police officer, so I still constantly felt like I had to
make myself more relevant in the industry.” Table 3 highlights comments made by other
participants in reference to working harder than others to gain equal recognition and validation as
the majority.

58
Table 3
Working Harder for Validation and Recognition: Participants Workplace Experience
Q6: Tell me about the types of coping methods you have employed to overcome barriers in
job promotion and advancement in corporate security?
Participant B
“As a Latino, you always feel like you need to be perfect. It’s not that I
am perfect, it’s just that I am smart, and I am capable or else I wouldn’t
be here. Why do I need to act different to be accepted?”
“There is a double standard. I need to work harder to sell myself. If it’s
interviews or trying to find allies, I need to do more work than others.”
Participant F
“I have to speak differently, I need to use my government name that is
more neutral and less Hispanic, and I have to act more approachable to
be validated.”
Participant E
“I had to overcome many obstacles and prove myself, with work ethic,
by starting at the bottom.”
“I would apply for a job and have to take a job one step below what I
applied for. But I would work hard and after a couple months
management would realize I was overqualified for a role I was in. I
would get a promotion and management would act like it was a great
thing. It was the same job I originally applied for.”
Despite the barrier of competing with the majority, many of the participants mentioned
they “were better for the challenges.” Each of the participants added a caveat after
acknowledging learning from the challenges when stating something like Participant I who said,
“I just wish I didn’t have to always work harder to be on equal footing as the majority.” When
asking Participant H why they were better for the challenges, they elaborated,
I didn’t allow the stress of failure in the face of the majority to keep me down, instead I
took the high road and assumed maybe I just needed to work even harder, a little longer,
to prove I was ready for the role.
When probed further, participants explained that while they had a natural inclination to give
everything to their job, based on their family values, operating in the Bronfenbrenner’s (1981)

59
described macrosystem wherein lie family values and culture, they had to put in even more effort
just to be recognized by the majority. Around them, within their respective corporate security
organizations, participants would witness other employees from the majority and with 3-letter
agency backgrounds immediately being invested in by senior leadership and moving on with
their career. Witnessing the inequitable investment from senior leadership created a void and
desire within participants to want the same. The need to work harder to gain validation and
recognition over the recognized majority was not only a way to advance their career but a cry for
belonging. As a coping method, participants internalized challenging situations and embraced
family values which helped them overcome stress in the workplace. Doing so helped participants
successfully deal with situations that could have otherwise halted career growth.
Finding 2: Leave a Company or Move Laterally Within for Greater Opportunities
Study participants discussed the need to either leave a company to seek an opportunity
for promotion or remain within a company but move laterally to a different department, without
promotion, to gain an opportunity in the future. As a coping method, participants expressed that
to take control of their career, “leaving the company” or “transferring” to a different department
was the best option for them. Participant H stated, “For 4 to 5 years I had no opportunities for
me, and when I was confident enough, I transferred over to another department.” Participant H
explained that the change, “was a nice upgrade” because they were given an opportunity to
showcase their talents with another department. Participant H further elaborated, “Maybe it
wasn’t the best option for me, but I didn’t know any better and felt it was the best option.” Six
participants had the same sentiment, unsure if leaving or transferring to another department
laterally was the best career choice but also feeling like they had no other option to overcome
career barriers.

60
Participant C explained their strategy of lateral transfers within a larger backdrop of a
lack of career development. Participant C revealed, “In the past 10 years with this company, I
have had 11 managers.” In their tenure with the same company, Participant C described their
promotional experience as, “The first promotion was good because I actually had a supportive
manager, but the second was because the whole department was redesigned so I was lucky.”
While Participant C was able to obtain two promotions, they provided insight into the challenges
along the way:
I have had to transfer to multiple different departments and only obtained two
promotions. Recently I applied to another department for a role that would be another
promotion. I didn’t get it, and I think it’s a matter of exposure. If you don’t have the
exposure within a new department, you lack the relationships of key individuals within
the organization.
Others, including Participant G and Participant F, echoed Participant C’s experience with
the inability to decipher the appropriate formula for inter-departmental transfers for promotion.
Participant B did not have the same experience with promotions as Participant C even with an
established tenure within their company. Participant B revealed, “I have not had very many
promotions in my career. I had to leave a company after being overlooked just to obtain a
promotion.” Participant A had a similar experience as Participant B in seeking new
opportunities. Participant A explained, “I had to bounce from company to company to find the
right opportunities and most of the time I took a lower-level position, but it would lead to a
promotion.” Participant A explained they felt they had to be, “in the right place at the right time.”
Among the participants, all had to base their career decisions on taking chances through
lateral or new career moves for promotional opportunities based on the opportunities they had

61
gained throughout their career. Participant G experienced what they referred to as “trial and
error.” Participant G had only a couple of promotions within the same company describing their
approach as,
Most of my growth has been internal with the same company. I would apply for a
promotional role and most of the time I wouldn’t get it. I wouldn’t let the missed
opportunity affect me but would try harder for the next one. It has taken me longer to
promote, but I focus on lateral transfers for a management level equal to my current. I
have never tried to apply for a more senior role.
Among the participants, a consistent theme for coping with promotional barriers was
relying on non-traditional paths to address the lack of direct promotional opportunities. Some
participants remained within their company gaining tenure until obtaining promotion laterally in
another department. Other participants sought other companies leaving one role for another
promotional role in another company. The constant among all participants was the need for
movement as there was not a clear career path toward promotion by remaining in the same
corporate security department. Revealed by all participants was the frustration associated with
the need to move, either laterally or externally to another company, to advance their career.
Participants were not able to ascend and near their ceiling for advancement, which would lend
itself naturally for the need to move. Instead, constant movement, as described by participants,
was a method for salvaging their career from stalling.
Summary of Findings for Research Question 2
Research Question 2 sought to understand the types of coping methods HL corporate
security employees implemented to help navigate their career toward promotion into senior

62
leadership positions. Two key findings revealed specific actions taken by participants to navigate
career growth and seek new opportunities:
1. Work harder than others to gain validation and recognition.
2. Leave a company or move laterally within for greater opportunities.
The findings identified distinct actions HL corporate security employees took to control
their career growth. Consistent among all participants was the need to work harder to gain
validation and recognition over the recognized majority. All participants spoke of family values
and how those values helped shape their coping methods to overcome stressful situations. Each
of the participants embraced adversity and felt better for it but, at the same time, had conflicting
emotions wishing they did not have to work as hard just to attain equal footing as the majority.
The constant among all participants was the need for change as they pursued a “non-traditional”
career path to cope with career barriers. None of the participants described a clear career path
toward promotion by remaining within the same corporate security department. Promotional
processes are examples of barriers that rest within the exosystem within Bronfenbrenner (1981),
in the sense that they are deep-seated, have a profound influence, and are largely out of the
control of employees, but also within the microsystem, or immediate environment where policies
and practices could be changed. The need to seize control of their career growth and explore
opportunities through trial-and-error overlaps with Finding 2 and Finding 3 related to Research
Question 1, around not having knowledge of the corporate environment or HL role models to
help with career progression.

63
Results for Research Question 3: What Resources Did Hispanic/Latinx Corporate Security
Employees Find Most Useful in Supporting Them on Their Promotion Path to Senior
Leadership Positions?
The third research question was focused on understanding the types of resources that
were the most useful for HL corporate security employees within tech companies as they
successfully ascended into senior leadership positions. Questions like, “How have role models, if
any, impacted your career progression in corporate security?,” “What internal career resources
have been of most benefit to you in advancing to a senior leadership position in corporate
security?,” and “What additional resources, if any, do you wish were available to you to support
your career advancement?” were asked to understand facilitators that were the most beneficial.
Responses by participants led to the following three key findings:
1. Networking with other professionals is invaluable.
2. Additional education through accredited universities or sanctioned professional
certificates increases confidence.
3. Allies are essential.
The discussions in this section contextualize the findings, explaining participant
sentiment in their appreciation for the facilitators that aided career growth and assisted in
overcoming obstacles toward senior leadership positions in their corporate security workplaces.
Finding 1: Networking With Other Professionals Is Invaluable
Across all interviews, there was unanimous agreement that the best career facilitator in
overcoming obstacles the HL corporate security leaders in tech faced was building a robust
professional network. As outlined in previous findings, HL corporate security employees must
navigate a complicated industry feeling the need to work harder than the majority without the

64
same resources. Appropriate professional networks are a way for HL corporate security
employees to find support in their career. Participant F found support when networking with
other marginalized communities and explained, “When networking with other [professional]
minoritized groups you feel a sense of support, like the people I truly identify with are members
of the Black community because I think our work experiences go hand in hand.” When asked to
elaborate on how they collaborate with other marginalized communities, Participant F added, “I
reach out to specific communities on LinkedIn, or I will find a specific organized group at work
and step into that community.” Participant F identified their efforts as “social activism” and
enforced that the tech environment is a venue “for corporate America” emphasizing their need to
act rather than wait for opportunities.
Participant D experienced similar positive effects from networking as Participant F, from
a knowledge sharing perspective rather than social activism. Participant D explained the value of
actively developing a professional network and the benefits to them:
Professional networks have really been helpful. It’s just finding the right one. I would
attend a variety of professional networks that were on the periphery and not only focus on
corporate security networks. In that way there was more the collaboration with other
professionals that was really beneficial from an external perspective. It is invaluable
having a rolodex of people you can call and bounce ideas off of.
Participant D outlined the benefits of communicating with like-minded professionals
from across a variety of industries to help them find obscure solutions and to overcome
“dynamic” challenges. Participant B also found networking invaluable but participated in the
practice in a different manner. Participant B explained that at an early age their father “ingrained
in me that you might not always remember people’s names, but you can help them remember

65
you and show appreciation by leaving personalized cards and handwritten messages.” Participant
B described their networking practices as a way of leaving their mark on others, but also
showing appreciation for those professionals, with a small gesture and token of time spent with
them. Participant B revealed,
When networking, I have been very fortunate in speaking with CEOs, C-suite
professionals, and owners of a variety of companies and each time I gain new insight into
what I can do differently to grow my career. … Leaving a thank you card ensures they
remember me.
Participant C had a different method of networking but equally as impactful as other
participants. Participant C developed their own network of local professionals using a
mainstream social media application. Describing their drive and motivation, Participant C
explained,
I found a lot more excitement and a real willingness for others to offer help when you are
working with a network outside your organization than within. You don’t have policy
boundaries or policy friction points. People tend to feel safer speaking with outsiders, and
they are more likely to give you honest feedback about your positives and negatives.
Then you can take away the feedback and implement it safely within your organization.
While all participants agreed that the best career facilitator in overcoming obstacles was having a
robust professional network, what was unique among the interviews was that each participant
had a different method of developing and interacting with their established network. There was
no one size fits all approach and each person surrounded themself with the professional networks
that were most useful for them. Regardless of the method of networking, HL corporate security
tech professionals used their network(s) to find support they needed to assist in furthering their

66
career. Table 4 highlights some of the many comments about networking and its value made by
participants.
Table 4
Value of Networking as Expressed by Participants
Q9: What external career resources have been of most benefit to you in advancing to a
senior leadership position in corporate security?
Participant J
“External resources have been the most beneficial and my current
company is very supportive of professional conferences and trade
shows.”
“[My company] always says go network, go benchmark, go ask people
how they do it, go info share.”
Participant G
“I am grateful I have an employer that helps for stuff like networking
events. Even if it’s not necessarily security focus and its more on the
business side of things networking groups are helpful.”
Participant E
“Learning how to utilize your network around you is a big benefit.”
“Maybe it’s because, I am Latino but I’m very social. I want to know not
only how others can help me, but how I can help others.”

67
Finding 2: Additional Education Through Accredited Universities or Sanctioned
Professional Certificates Increases Confidence
A resounding theme among participants was the need to seek continued professional
development through an accredited university or an institution offering professional certificates
to improve confidence. As a foundation, seven out of 10 participants emphasized the need to
further their educational aspirations to gain new skills and “validate” their abilities. The
overwhelming benefit as expressed by the participants was the confidence they gained that they
could have “a seat at the table.” All 10 participants agreed that supplementing with formal
education, or as an alternative to graduate level education obtaining professional certificates, was
a need they had to further their career. On top of the confidence afforded with increased
education, each participant spoke fondly of the recognition the corporate security industry has on
professional certifications. Participant H explained that after their career was stagnant, “I sought
to improve my business development skills by gaining an MBA.” Participant H elaborated on
their motivation stating, “I felt like a big reason for it was to just feel more confident and it
improved my motivation to seek more job responsibilities and a promotion.” Participant H added
more detail and explained the benefit, after the fact, of advancing their education:
I was tired of being passed upon and not really looked at for promotion. My education
taught me that I was prepared for the next level, and I learned to be more vocal about the
desires for me career. I started asking for more responsibility and with the education to
back up my abilities management started to listen.
Participant A felt their lack of knowledge was a detriment and it took years to correct.
Participant A thought carefully about their early career and solemnly affirmed,

68
I didn’t have a degree and I know for a fact it was a barrier because I was told formally
by management I needed it for promotion, especially because I didn’t have a law
enforcement background or experience in a 3-letter agency.
Participant A’s experience was different from others interviewed in that they learned early on the
value of gaining professional certificates. Participant A improved their confidence by obtaining
professional certificates and elaborated:
Not only did I lack formal education and the background like the majority, but I realized
there was no one that looked like me in management. As early as I can remember I gave
myself the goal of achieving certain professional certificates that would help me gain
recognition. As soon as I was eligible, I passed the CPP [Certified Protection
Professional] and had validation that I could occupy the same space or room as other
guys in the industry.
Both Participant H and Participant A refined their expertise by expanding their abilities
and knowledge in different manners. However, each expressly confirmed that education was a
way to validate their abilities to others and gain confidence that regardless of how they entered
their industry, they had a place in management. Participant J sought to expand their knowledge
solely by dedicating time to study for professional certificates and did not have the ability to seek
graduate level education. Participant J explained, “I really had to commit to spending time
studying and reading a variety of books especially on leadership,” and added, “If you really
commit to educating yourself with an end goal in mind, I think it really opens up your mind and
thought process.”
Corporate security is unique in that there are many sanctioned professional certificates
employees can obtain to improve their knowledge. Given the barriers identified by participants,

69
each found value in improving their knowledge through accredited universities or sanctioned
professional certificates to increase their confidence in the workplace. There was no single
approach to how participants expanded their knowledge. Instead, each participant identified the
meaningful method that was appropriate for their circumstances, and all expressed feeling
increased validation and confidence through their additional education that helped them feel able
to sit around the table with peers.
Finding 3: Allies Are Essential
Without HL senior leaders to serve as role models and mentors in tech corporate security,
participants relied on allies in the majority to bridge the gap. HL corporate security employees
leveraged coping methods, maintained an ethic of working harder than others, and sought to
improve their confidence in a variety of ways to validate their presence in the workplace.
However, having allies in the majority was identified as an additional valuable resource in the
absence of HL senior leaders. Participant E spoke fondly of an experience that helped put them
“on the map.” When speaking of leveraging allies in the majority, Participant E explained:
I wasn’t the first or second choice for a specific project. I was the third and last choice
because of a staffing shortage. However, I would have never even been considered if it
wasn’t for a VP that told my management to give me the project. I completed the project,
and my management and VP were blown away at my abilities. I was finally on the map
and after 6 years I was gaining the recognition I deserved.
Participant E went on to explain that the project opened other opportunities that they
would not have had if it was not for the vice president, who was a member of the majority.
Participant I had a similar experience in the workplace and described it as “having someone to
vouch for you.” Participant I elaborated, “I hate that, but sometimes you need someone with buy

70
in who knows who you are and the work you have done.” Participant I added, “They [alluding to
management] will never admit or say it openly but you have to have a very good relationship
with another leader to give their approval to be accepted.” Participant I explained their
frustration with the need to have someone as an ally and expressed a desire for that not to be the
case, but admitted without that support they never would have been able to ascend to senior
leadership positions in the organization.
Participant D further spoke about the benefits of having an ally in the majority and
recalled the experience fondly because they were “hungry” to learn from a senior leader, but as
stated by Participant D, there were none “like me.” Participant D recalled their development
when working for a chief financial officer (CFO):
I had a CFO that would really press me and force me to give not just a detailed budget
but with an accompanying explanation. They were an Ivy League CFO and I had never
worked so closely with that type of leader. I learned to speak the business language better
and over time I learned the skills to anticipate how they think and the type of analysis I
would have to present.
When comparing their experience with the CFO to experiences working for other
managers of the majority, Participant D explained, “Sometimes other types of managers just shut
you down and create environments where you aren’t comfortable asking for help.” Participant B
found similar benefits of working with allies as Participant D, but Participant B relied on allies
outside of their immediate organization. When working with allies outside of their organization,
Participant B explained, “Allies, like mentors, can be the motivation and hope you need,
providing confidence to overcome self-doubt and showing you respect as you work with them to

71
improve opportunities.” In both cases, Participant D and Participant B leveraged support from
allies of the majority as a resource to improve their skill and support their career growth.
Without HL senior leaders to serve as role models and mentors in corporate security,
participants relied on allies in the majority to bridge the gap. Each participant had experience
leveraging an ally as a resource. One participant spoke of it as a requirement, and while they
would choose to not have reliance on an ally, admitted they never would have been able to
ascend without it. As the HL corporate security employees in tech companies continue to gain
senior manager positions, allies will remain a valuable resource.
Summary of Findings for Research Question 2
Research Question 3 focused on understanding the types of resources that were most
useful for HL corporate security employees within tech companies as they successfully ascended
into senior leadership positions. Responses by participants led to the following three key
findings:
1. Networking with other professionals is invaluable.
2. Additional education through accredited universities or sanctioned professional
certificates increases confidence.
3. Allies are essential.
All participants agreed that the best career facilitator in overcoming obstacles was having
a robust professional network. Networking and the use of allies are examples of mesosystem
interactions and influences with others. There was no one size fits all approach and each person
surrounded themselves with the professional network that was most useful for them. Given the
barriers identified by participants, each found value in improving their knowledge, through
accredited universities or sanctioned professional certificates, to increase their confidence in the

72
workplace. Ultimately, all participants expressed their appreciation for learning new skills and
gaining confidence that helped them feel able to sit around the table with peers. As the HL
corporate security employees in tech companies continue to gain senior manager positions, allies
will remain a valuable resource. Table 5 summarizes the eight key findings of this study.
Table 5
Key Findings: Barriers, Coping Methods, and Resources for Ascension
Key finding RQ1 RQ2 RQ3
RQ1: What barriers do
Hispanic/Latinx
corporate security
employees report
having encountered
on their path to
attaining senior
leadership position
and other job
promotions?
RQ2: What coping
methods do
Hispanic/Latinx
corporate security
employees employ to
navigate their
promotion to senior
leadership positions?
RQ3: What resources
did Hispanic/Latinx
corporate security
employees find most
useful in supporting
them on their
promotion path to
senior leadership
positions?
Key Finding 1 Established majority
makes it difficult to
ascend.
Work harder than others
to gain validation and
recognition.
Networking with other
professionals is
invaluable.
Key Finding 2 Lack of knowledge
about the corporate
environment slows
career progress.
Leave a company or
move laterally
within, for greater
opportunities.
Formalized education
through accredited
universities or
sanctioned
professional
certificates is
necessary.
Key Finding 3 Lack of HL role
models and mentors
creates a gap in
career progression.
Allies are essential.
Key Finding 4 Hiring and recruiting
panels polarize
candidates.

73
Summary of Chapter Four
This chapter provided an overview of findings related to the three research questions for
this study. Revealed were the experiences, including perceived barriers, coping methods, and
resources HL corporate security professionals called on as they ascended into senior leadership
positions within tech companies. The participants spoke in detail about their career path
providing lived examples of where they experienced success, frustration, and overcame
obstacles. All participants spoke affectionately about the impact their upbringing had on their
ability to navigate ambiguity. While each participant identified the existing majority and their
frustration of having to operate differently to be on equal ground, each highlighted their
perseverance to ascend in their career. This study generated eight key findings that identified
barriers within the workplace, coping methods to overcome barriers and challenges, and
resources that were the most beneficial for ascending into senior leadership positions.

74
Chapter Five: Discussion of Findings and Recommendations for Practice
The purpose of this study was to examine facilitators that helped overcome systemic
barriers that have otherwise contributed to the underrepresentation of HL employees in senior
leadership positions within corporate security of tech companies. A key focus was understanding
how HL corporate security employees overcame perceived organizational barriers, utilized
coping methods, and leveraged resources in their ascension to senior leadership positions within
tech companies. This study included semi-structured interviews with 10 former and current HL
senior leaders in corporate security organizations within tech companies. Although research has
documented challenges for historically marginalized populations in rising to corporate leadership
positions with a distinct majority in the workplace, little research has been done to specifically
look at the issues HL employees face within the growing corporate security industry, with a
focus in tech companies.
The purpose of this chapter is to discuss the study’s findings in relation to prior research
and Bronfenbrenner ecological systems model (1981). Additionally, this chapter aims to offer
recommendations for practice to best support HL employees in corporate security within tech
companies as they seek to continue ascending into senior leadership positions. This chapter will
also discuss the limitations and delimitations of this research and suggest areas for future
research before concluding the study.
Discussion of Findings
This section discusses the findings from the study within scholarly literature and
Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems (1981) conceptual framework. The research questions that
guided this study were:

75
1. What barriers do Hispanic/Latinx corporate security employees report having
encountered on their path to attaining senior leadership positions and other job
promotions?
2. What coping methods do Hispanic/Latinx corporate security employees employ to
navigate their promotion to senior leadership positions?
3. What resources did Hispanic/Latinx corporate security employees find most useful in
supporting them on their promotion path to senior leadership positions?
Discussion of Findings Related to Research Question 1
The first research question addressed how HL corporate security employees in tech
perceived barriers throughout their career as they ascended to senior leadership positions.
Revealed were the challenges of dealing with a distinct White male majority. Unique to the
corporate security industry within tech companies was the affinity for a background from a 3-
letter agency as a requirement for positive career progression, which many of the HL employees
did not have. Contributing to the slow career growth HL employees experienced was the lack of
knowledge about the corporate environment. Participants spoke of the impact their
socioeconomic backgrounds had on contributing to a knowledge gap. Participants also regarded
that lack of mentors with HL backgrounds as creating a lag in career progression. Understanding
how HL perceive workplace barriers is critical to intervene effectively and assist with achieving
desired career goals (BarNir et al., 2011; Rivera et al., 2007). Study participants explained the
obstacles they faced as HL corporate security employees within tech companies in their career
growth and ascension to senior leadership positions.
Within the workplace, there exists a struggle for certain groups when there is an
established racial dominance (Chrobot-Mason & Thomas, 2002; Jansen et al., 2016). The

76
participants identified a White male dominance within corporate security organizations, and
unique to tech companies, identified an affinity for senior leaders with 3-letter agency
experience. A colloquialism the participants suggested is common in the corporate security
industry and that was heard throughout all interviews was reference to a 3-letter agency, a
shorthand reference to any government agency with three initials like FBI, CIA, DSS, or DOJ,
among others.
A resounding finding, among the barriers discussed by participants, was the lack of
appropriate knowledge to effectively navigate their career to advance toward senior leadership
positions. Participants expressed frustration that they had no leaders to discuss career stagnation
and attributed the inability to openly request career guidance to slowed progress. Jin et al. (2023)
similarly explained weak career development, “When employees are hierarchically plateaued,
they believe that they are less likely to achieve career promotion and advancement in their
organizations” (p. 4). For participants in this study, they felt like their career was not developed
by a leader and that they were not prepared for advancement. Instead, participants in this study
felt like they were hierarchically plateaued into junior leadership positions. Career development
includes behaviors like planning, entering, and adjusting to educational programs or roles across
the span of a person’s career (Chan et al., 2015; Flores & Obasi, 2005; Gonzalez, 2015).
Participants attributed a lack of career progression to the lack of available HL role models and
mentors, specifically within corporate security organizations of tech companies, to emulate or to
help with career development. Instead, participants relied on influential mentors and role models
from the majority, outside of their own corporate security organizations.
Similarly, Chan et al. (2015) found mentors are successful when they provide support
customized to the needs of the mentee specific to the context of their working environment. Chan

77
et al. (2015) also discussed how mentoring relationships were vital for providing validation,
giving access, and offering career and personal support. Nine participants in this study expressly
communicated the positive impact having a mentor and role model in their network was for their
career, even when mentors and role models were not HL.
An emerging finding was the impact of hiring and recruitment panels prior to being hired
by an organization. In fields where the majority represents a tendency toward an established
majority, White men in the case of corporate security organizations, systemic biases may arise
during consideration for hire. Depending on an organization’s makeup, hiring managers will be
influenced by the majority creating a negative experience for marginalized candidates, like HL
candidates, thereby leading to a reduced likelihood for hire (Lancee, 2021). Three participants in
this study described negative experiences with hiring panels that left them feeling unworthy and
less than adequate and unhired. During interviews for women, hiring managers may approach
conversations with different emphasis to dissuade a candidate’s interest (Oc et al., 2021). While
a candidate may have exceptional qualifications, interview questions may be designed in a
manner that portrays racial and gender dominance of the host organization (Sensoy & DiAngelo,
2017). One participant described microaggressions during interviews when they would be asked
questions unrelated to their experience with a focus on their dress and appearance diminishing
their education and experience.
Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems model (1981) helps to see how complex
interconnected environmental systems create the barriers HL corporate security employees
reported having encountered on their path to attaining senior leadership positions and other job
promotions. Barriers of a White male majority with affinity for 3-letter agency backgrounds are
created in the larger environment of cultural and societal contexts, values and attitudes that see

78
White males in leadership positions and denigrate HL to lesser positions. This then feeds into the
positions, and interactions, available to HL individuals without the established 3-letter agency
standard. As explained in describing the conceptual framework, introduced in Chapter Two, the
collective burden HL face throughout the ecological system is compounded by an established
majority that then creates organizational norms, policies, and practices within the microsystem,
as identified by participants, that indirectly and directly influence promotional processes for HL
employees. The norms established within larger systems likewise impact the lack of HL mentors
and champions and appropriate administrative structures ensuring fair promotional practices and
equitable career development.
Discussion of Findings Related to Research Question 2
To overcome perceived barriers in the workplace, participants report implementing
coping methods to internalize challenging stressful situations and overcoming them with focus
and determination. Coping methods, as defined by Dewe and Guest (1990), are “cognitive and
behavioral efforts to master, reduce, or tolerate the internal and/or external demands that are
created by the stressful [situation]” (p. 136). Individual personality and types of coping abilities
are dictated by the type of job performed and the complexity of work stress (Parkes, 1994;
Srivastava et al., 2015). The HL senior leaders used a variety of coping methods to respond to
the stressful challenges within corporate security organizations of tech companies.
When discussing minorities and their efforts for advocating change, in the eyes of a
majority, Shaffer and Prislin (2011) explained, “minorities seek to convince majorities to expand
their latitudes for acceptance” (p. 757). Participants described a requirement of constantly
attempting to validate their abilities in the eyes of the majority. Specifically, participants
referenced the need to strive for recognition against peers with 3-letter agency experience in their

79
skill set so that they would be viewed just as capable without equivalent experience. Common
among responses was a desire to prove the value of being a HL employee without 3-letter agency
experience to pave the way for future HL employees.
Participants discussed leveraging one’s family values and feeling the need to work harder
based on those values. For participants in this study, their family values, which included working
harder than others, carried over into their work lives and served as a valuable coping method.
Participants framed their desire to work harder as an effort to change how senior leaders can
value a HL employee who does not have 3-letter agency experience. Shaffer and Prislin (2011)
provided insight into how minorities influence change:
It is important to recognize that a minority’s ultimate goal is not merely to convince any
one individual of their opinion, but rather to institute social change by convincing many.
When they are successful at winning over a sufficient number of majority members, the
resultant outcome is change within the group. (p 756)
In addition to having a desire to change opinions of the majority, participants explained
their hard-working nature was a result of family upbringing. Motivation for success is a factor
greatly influenced by family and culture-related expectations within ethnic minorities (Isik et al.,
2021). Participants intently and regularly expressed their family-based motivation to gain more
in the workplace and as a way of paving a path for the future. In addition, participants explained
their desire to change the opinions of the majority, helping them realize that HL employees are
just as capable as others, in the majority, even without 3-letter agency experience.
Despite their best efforts, participants explained that there was only so much effort and
time they could spend trying to overcome barriers and to cope with their current situation.
Sometimes it meant leaving their current position for another. Cheramie et al. (2007) described a

80
boundaryless career as one where each person manages their own career seeking opportunities
that will enhance their skill set and make them more marketable. Participants explained that to
receive additional opportunities for advancement, they had to either make a lateral transfer
within their current company or find opportunities in another company for advancement.
Cheramie et al. (2007) discussed individual desires to seek better opportunities when explaining,
“individuals seek to manage their own careers by taking advantage of opportunities to maximize
their success” (p. 359). For advancement and better opportunities within one’s organization,
Guerrero and Posthuma (2014) found that HL employees are more successful when roles are
well defined in an organization, provide access to mentoring opportunities, and there is diversity
in leadership. While there were participants who attempted to remain within the same
organization or company for the long run, all revealed that ultimately, they had to take their
career in their own hands because of stagnant or slow progress. Participants explained that
promotions as a HL were difficult to achieve and believed that being in the right place at the
right time was essential, but also connected their coping methods as a reaction to the distinct
White male majority in corporate security employees in tech as a barrier.
The findings show how the White male majority and organizational norms created in the
exosystem influence other areas within Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems model (1981). The
HL corporate security employees developed coping methods to overcome the stress induced
within complex interconnected environmental systems. With multiple facing challenges
embedded within the ecological model of corporate security, the way HL employees dealt with
the collective burden was to vacate an existing position in search of something offering more
potential. In this case, participants felt like they had no control over the promotional process, and

81
their only option was to escape the situation to another environment that would potentially be
more conducive to positive career growth.
The findings in Research Question 2 connect with the perceived barriers described by
participants in Research Question 1. A distinct White male majority with similar backgrounds
from 3-letter agencies has caused participants to implement different coping methods to manage
the stress of slow career growth. The lack of education and information about corporate
environments, especially the niche of corporate security within tech companies, has meant that
HL employees revert to their upbringing and family values to cope, choosing to work harder than
others for validation and recognition. Successful ascension for HL employees has meant leaving
jobs and transferring laterally or leaving a company all together for advancement opportunities.
Discussion of Findings Related to Research Question 3
To overcome perceived barriers in the workplace and to support coping methods,
participants described networking, education, and allies as valuable resources that contributed to
career ascension. The resources described were essential in helping HL participants adapt to the
challenges of navigating career growth within the corporate security industry of tech companies.
Neureiter and Traut-Mattausch (2017) explain career adaptability resources are needed to cope
with evolving career changes. Neureiter and Traut-Mattausch (2017) explained career
adaptability resources, saying they
Refer to psychological strengths that influence self-regulation in coping with tasks,
transition, and traumas. … These resources have been shown to be particularly important
… as they have a positive effect on various career-related outcomes such as job search
self-efficacy, employment status and person-environment fit perceptions. (p. 57)

82
Participants intentionally developed and leveraged a vest network to brainstorm ideas,
seek validation, and find job opportunities. Networking behaviors varied among participants and
took the form of either internally focused, within their company, externally focused, or a
combination of the two. Simmons et al. (2022) defined networking behavior as, “individuals
attempt to develop and maintain relationships with others who have the potential to assist them
in their work or career” (p. 2). For participants in this study, their networking efforts were not a
surety for any type of specific outcome. Instead, as Simmons et al. (2022) pointed out, there was
the “potential” of value creation. That potential was considered essential and mostly positive for
participants in this study. Mendez et al. (2022) found that when facing adversity in the
workplace, HL professionals leveraged their networks to connect with other people of color to
reduce feelings of isolation and boost confidence in their abilities.
Education plays a pivotal role in providing access to full-time employment, higher
salaries, and job access (Edgerton et al., 2011; Reynolds & Ross, 1998; Vela et al., 2018).
Improving education increases a person’s analytical skills, helps them deal with constraints,
explore new opportunities, and provides the confidence of a sense of achievement (Edgerton et
al., 2011). All participants in this study agreed supplementing their skills with formal education
programs and/or obtaining professional certificates was essential for giving them the confidence
they needed to feel like they could compete with the majority. Vela et al. (2018) found that for
HL employees, in particular, academic pursuits increased perseverance, optimism, and curiosity,
creating a positive effect on career development. HL corporate security professionals in this
study leveraged education as a resource to overcome the barrier of lacking knowledge. The
positive effect of advancing education through accredited universities or by completing
professional certificates increased participant well-being by improving their confidence that they

83
were as capable as those in the majority. There was a noticeable synergy between the value
participants placed on education and how they leveraged allies in a parallel to improving
knowledge enhancing the value placed on academic achievement.
Participants relied on allies both within their industry and within similar industries as a
source of information sharing, validation, and for career networking. For HL corporate security
employees in this study, allies were essential for gaining visibility when seeking career
advancement and for helping HL employees navigate career growth. Collier-Spruel and Ryan
(2022) characterized effective allyship as, “increasing inclusion and acceptance, effectively
challenging bias, empowering the recipient, and advocating for them” (p. 1). Those participants
who had allies spoke fondly of the long-lasting impact on their career. At the heart of the matter
was a desire to feel accepted by the majority, but without allies, that would not have happened
for the HL senior leaders in this study. Effective allies can enhance the psychological safety for
those they support (Collier-Spruel & Ryan, 2022). Kutlaca et al. (2020) found that groups in the
majority can facilitate career growth and support, but only when there is no intergroup conflict in
the workplace. For this study, there was no mention of intergroup conflict among participants.
Instead, participants reflected positively on the presence of intergroup allies.
For participants, allyship was a benefit that also fostered accountability. Balakrishnan et
al. (2023) explained, “allyship promotes individual and groups’ accountability in creating a
culture of inclusion through purposeful actions” (p. 9). In this study, participants discussed their
reliance on allies in helping improve knowledge, feeling supported, and obtaining career
guidance. All participants mentioned using allyship as a resource, taking purposeful actions
based on the feedback obtained, and all viewed themselves accountable for the resulting actions

84
and results. HL corporate security senior leaders in this study leveraged allies as a resource to
assist with career navigation.
Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems model (1981) demonstrated how HL corporate
security employees might leverage resources to overcome barriers and maximize coping methods
to navigate complex interconnected environmental systems within corporate security
organizations of tech companies. The microsystem includes a pattern of activities, roles, and
interpersonal relationships experienced by the developing person in the environments they
frequent. Networking can be described as a microsystem interaction as the activities and
interpersonal relationships created during networking opportunities serve as a valuable resource
for interactions outside of that networking interaction. For HL corporate security employees,
networking activities provided the support they needed to overcome barriers at the meso- and
exo- system levels.
The mesosystem is composed of relationships existing between two or more settings.
Within corporate security organizations of tech companies, HL employees have a relationship,
mesosystem, between their own immediate day to day environment, microsystem, and its
demands and that of their leadership. HL employees were able to overcome the collective burden
of multiple challenges throughout the ecological systems model by improving their knowledge
through education, thereby increasing their confidence. Improving knowledge and gaining
confidence influences the mesosystem level between leader and employee, where the employee
has more confidence in their abilities to increase their career opportunities.
Recommendations for Practice
The purpose of this study was to explore the experience of HL corporate security
employees in their ascension to senior leadership positions. Based on the interview data and

85
related findings that were identified within Chapter Four and discussed in this chapter, three
recommendations for practice are proposed.
This section offers three recommendations for supporting facilitators for the advancement
of HL employees to senior leadership positions within corporate security technology companies.
Table 6 summarizes the three recommendations for practice connected to the study findings. The
first is a change in promotion criteria and practices within corporate security tech organizations.
The second, given the value participants placed on having mentors and role models, is for
corporate security organizations within tech companies to create programs that support access to
mentors and role models. Given the different experiences participants had with mentors,
programs need clearly defined activities, actions, and objectives providing consistent and
equitable results. Finally, corporate security organizations within tech companies need to create
structures that strengthen and encourage networking internally and externally to the organization.

86
Table 6
Key Recommendations
Recommendation Applicability to RQ 1 Applicability to RQ 2 Applicability to RQ 3
Recommendation 1:
Change
promotion
criteria and
practices within
corporate security
tech
organizations.
Applicable Applicable
Recommendation 2:
Create programs
that support
access to mentors
and role models.
Applicable Applicable
Recommendation 3:
Create processes
that strengthen
and encourage
networking
internally and
externally to the
organization.
Applicable
Recommendation 1: Change Promotion Criteria and Practices Within Corporate Security
Tech Organizations
Corporate security organizations within tech companies serve as an asset for protecting
company interest. The nature of society’s ever shifting landscape means the primary purpose of
corporate security professionals is to continually assess and manage risk throughout the
company. In this study, HL participants described the drive and desire they have for doing the
hard work that needs to be done to satisfy company needs as professionals in the field. At the

87
same time, all participants spoke of the perceived barrier the existing majority plays in allowing
HL corporate security professionals to ascend and bring value to the organization. Existing
decision makers within corporate security need to understand the sentiments of existing HL
corporate security professionals so that they may better understand how to change promotional
practices and criteria.
A promotional practice that may be changed is providing transparent processes that
clearly outline how selections will be made and outline how selections that have been completed
were made. In addition, if existing HL employees feel the need to advance their education
through academic programs or professional certificates, just to be on equal footing as the
majority, they should be compensated so that they are provided the best opportunity for
advancement. Participants in this study spoke of the lack of articulated rigor involved in the
process to select candidates. If processes are clearly defined and criteria for selections are
outlined, candidates that are not selected may then be provided feedback on specific areas for
improvement to increase potential success in the future. Additionally, research on the benefits of
ethnic diversity in leadership, found that bringing people together from different ethnic and
professional backgrounds is conducive to improving leadership representation (Lu, 2022).
Existing leadership needs to have robust interview panels and include existing leaders from
different ethnic and professional backgrounds when making final promotional decisions.
Participants in this study felt there was a lack of ethnic and professional diversity when in front
of interview panels determining promotion.
Equally as important to understand is the impact of hiring and interview panels consisting
of only the majority. The gaps in opportunities for HL men and women in the workplace have
become predictable, and systemically acceptable, based on race (Horsford, 2012). If purposeful

88
efforts are not made to change systemic racial preference and emphasize qualifications over race
the ethnic disparity within organizations will persist (Sensoy & DiAngelo, 2017). When
preparing hiring and interview panels, for new and existing employees, organizations need to
ensure there is appropriate diversity of the panel to improve a sense of racial belonging. To
disrupt the existing method of selecting and appointing promotions, which favors the White male
majority with 3-letter agency experience, corporate security organizations in tech must
reexamine existing promotional criteria, qualifications, selection processes, and race of panelists.
Clearly defined processes and selection criteria, with appropriate checks and balances for
selecting new leaders need to be created, implemented, and audited.
Recommendation 2: Create Programs That Support Access to Mentors and Role Models
Participants in this study were dependent on mentors and role models to gain a sense of
validation, obtain information, and for career advancement. Mentoring, as explained by Randel
et al. (2021), is recommended for historically marginalized groups, like HL employees, because
of its ability to “advance protégé career trajectories, provide psychosocial support (e.g.,
providing friendship and support), and facilitate growth and career development” (p. 106).
Having historically marginalized role models that employees can identify with can reduce the
apprehension for seeking promotional opportunities caused by a racial imbalance (Cortland &
Kinias, 2019). For these HL corporate security leaders, finding mentors and role models was
intentional and purposeful. The participants explained that it was their responsibility to find
suitable and willing mentors and role models. While they took on this responsibility themselves,
other HL employees may not have had similar access to or ability to find a mentor or role model,
stalling or curtailing their ascent to higher leadership ranks. Corporate security organizations
need to create programs that support access to mentors and role models. The participants

89
expressed a desire to feel included and welcomed as an equal to those in the majority. By
creating programs that provide support, guidance, and accessibility to role models and mentors,
corporate security organizations can support HL employees in their sense of belonging and in
having allies. Given the different experiences participants had with mentors, programs need
clearly defined activities, actions, and objectives providing consistent and equitable results. By
providing clear operating boundaries with which mentors and role models are selected, trained,
and paired with HL employees, corporate security organizations in tech can ensure such
programs are providing benefits as intended.
Collier-Spruel and Ryan (2022) discussed allyship to increase inclusion, acceptance, and
empowerment of recipients. They discussed how allies can enhance psychological safety and
provide employee support. Senior leaders need to focus on improving HL employee experience
in the workplace and view access to mentors and role models, and the creation of clear program
goals and boundaries, as a long-term investment in employee growth and well-being. Even with
the lack of HL leaders to serve as mentors and role models, as indicated by participants in this
study, the existing majority can serve to bridge that gap when supported by appropriate
organizational processes (Ainsworth, 2010).
Participants in this study took initiative to find appropriate mentors and role models who
were invaluable to their career. The relief expressed by participants when having effective
mentors and role models aligns with research by Wallo et al. (2022) and Randel et al. (2021).
Wallo et al. (2022) found that HL employees have positive career growth when emulating ingroup leaders and Randel et al. (2021) found that when marginalized groups are provided
psychosocial support from mentors, they are more successful. Notably, participants described
improved confidence in overcoming systemic barriers in the face of adversity. By creating

90
programs that provide access to mentors and role models, with clearly defined program
objectives, corporate security organizations within tech companies can build a culture where HL
employees are included and welcomed by the majority.
Recommendation 3: Create Processes That Strengthen and Encourage Networking
Internally and Externally to the Organization
For participants in this study, networking provided a way of empowering participants.
Networking with other professionals provided supportive relationships and fresh insight and new
ideas. Gino et al. (2020) defined networking and its associated behaviors as, “individuals’ efforts
to develop and maintain relationships with others who can potentially provide assistance to them
in their career or work” (p. 1221). A robust professional network allowed HL corporate security
professionals to seek information or share concerns within their trusted network without fear of
judgment. Networks have a way of disrupting negative power relations, especially for those who
are marginalized, by connecting with others with diverse experiences and coming together in a
shared space (Church et al., 2003; Mandell et al., 2017; Miles et al., 2012). Corporate security
organizations need to create processes that strengthen and encourage networking internally and
externally to the organization. As described by participants, the benefit of a robust network and
rolodex of professionals to speak with was validation in their skills for advancement and
confidence to move into higher leadership positions.
Nine out of 10 participants found value and benefit from networking with members of the
majority. Whether networking with members of the majority within corporate security or with
other HL professionals from different industries, participants in this study expressed they would
not have ascended in their career if it were not for their robust networks. Gino et al. (2020)
determined networking relationships have the power to overcome negative stigma and self-doubt

91
when networking activity is focused on providing career inspiration and personal development.
By creating processes that encourage and strengthen networking opportunities internally and
externally to the organization, corporate security organizations within tech companies will
provide HL employees with resources and encouragement they need for supporting ongoing
networking efforts. To ensure HL employees feel networking is an opportunity to nurture
growth, rather than feeling forced, organizations could offer training sessions to illustrate the
value of networking and ensure they have the proper skills necessary to take full advantage of the
benefits. Follow up procedures could be as straightforward as providing a list of
recommendations to HL employees outlining key networking opportunities with other corporate
security organizations of other tech companies or similar industry partners. In addition, there
could be a monthly allotment where HL were released from day-to-day responsibilities to allow
for networking.
Processes for strengthening and encouraging networking internally, within a corporate
security organization within tech companies, can include brown bag lunches, meet and greets, or
fireside chats. Within tech companies brown bag lunches are a common practice where
employees bring their lunch and sit in on a short discussion with other employees in the
company. However, at top 100 tech companies, brown bag lunches, meet and greets, and fireside
chats are typically used for discussing the company’s financial performance, introducing a new
company product line, or introducing a new executive, and not customarily used to provide
employee networking opportunities.
Instead, the recommendation is to create more intimate settings specific to HL employees
within corporate security organizations that also serve as networking opportunities. Brown bag
lunches could serve as social and informal environments where a short presentation, on topics

92
like psychological safety, employee wellness, or career growth, can be provided, stimulating
conversation among employees within the organization or across different organizations. Meet
and greets could be short social gatherings where dessert, food and libation, or music is offered
as an employee mixer. Fireside chats could be slightly more formal but allow for employees to
hear a presentation from a different organization offering insight into the type of work they do,
skills required, and offer points of contact if employees are interested in learning how to become
part of that organization. By creating brown bag lunches, meet and greets, and fireside chats
These different types of events could be focused on all employees, and in some cases specifically
HL employees, where employees can be provided insights into career development, hear from a
HL senior leader, or be exposed to a completely new part of the company all of which would
provide HL corporate security employees an opportunity to expand their existing network.
Processes for strengthening and encouraging networking externally can include creating
criteria for approved external engagement and a report back to the host organization. For
example, the corporate security industry within tech companies is highly specialized and most
companies do not share industry trends. Existing leadership can create a process for approved
types of external engagement requiring some benefit to the organization. HL employees could be
encouraged to host other corporate security organizations for campus tours and a presentation on
security trends. Another example would be to sponsor HL employees for attendance to external
conferences on emerging security practices or technological trends. Benefits can be broad and
cover areas that are not directly tied to corporate security of tech companies, like project
management or data analytics, or they can be specific, like supply chain management or physical
site security. Regardless of the criteria chosen, a report back mechanism can be implemented
allowing for the participating employee to share what they learned and who they learned it from.

93
In this way, employees not only gain the opportunity to network externally but are empowered to
share their knowledge with peers providing validation and confidence for their efforts.
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations of the study are circumstances and influences beyond the researcher’s
control, while delimitations are circumstances and influences within the researcher’s control
(Price & Murnan, 2004). An example of a limitation is the participants’ truthfulness in
completing the recruitment questionnaire. Given the highly specialized niche that is corporate
security within tech companies, participants could seek to provide responses that paint them in a
positive light. Additionally, a limit to the study was the inability to verify the honesty of the
participants’ responses to the interview questions because of a potential desire for them to
answer in a socially desirable way. However, the corporate security community is small, so
participants gain nothing by lying when integrity is a cornerstone within the industry. A third
limitation of the study was the inability to account for the variation in the participant group due
to intersectional factors like gender, socio-economic status, and employment experience, among
other factors. Another limitation is the lack of research on barriers facing HL employees within
the corporate security sector in tech organizations by which to ground and provide a foundation
for this research. Finally, since the study focused only on the experiences of HL employees in the
niche that is corporate security within tech organizations, the findings are not generalizable.
A delimitation for this study was the fact that I used my own network of contacts.
Knowing participants’ backgrounds helped to ensure information received was relevant and
specific to the corporate security industry, but inclusion of individuals within my network may
have influenced their responses to the interview questions. Another delimitation was the small
sample size that limited the ability to assess whether participant responses were in congruence

94
with a larger group of HL corporate security employees or if there were outliers which affected
the quality of the information used to generate findings.
Future Research
Future research that may be helpful in improving representation of HL senior leaders in
corporate security organizations are gender barriers and changes to those barriers, particularly as
they relate to other intersecting identities. Within this study, two participants identified as
women and eight identified as men. In the interviews with the women, each identified significant
barriers to promotion based on the intersection of being HL and being a woman in a field
dominated by men. The focus of this study was not to explore gender differences within
corporate security organizations of tech companies. However, given the identified majority and
research explaining additional challenges women face in male dominated industries, it would be
beneficial to understand additional information about the intersection of being a woman and HL
within corporate security organizations within tech companies dominated by White men.
This study utilized Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems model to understand the nested
challenges HL corporate security professionals face when seeking promotion within corporate
security organizations of tech companies. Beyond the scope of this study, participants expressed
how their needs, desires, and resources changed throughout their career. An additional system
within Bronfenbrenner’s model (1981) is the chronosystem. The purpose of the chronosystem is
to understand how the nested layers, micro- meso- exo- macro-, change over the course of a
person’s lifetime and career (Bronfenbrenner, 1981). Future research could explore how
resources, and barriers, may be different based on time and where a person is at in their career.

95
Conclusion
The problem of systemic barriers for access to corporate security senior leadership
positions for HL employees in corporate tech companies is important to address. The corporate
security industry within tech companies continues to expand as global companies extend their
presence in VUCA environments. Innovative, confident, and capable leaders with diverse
backgrounds are needed to provide reliable solutions to ensure company and employee wellbeing. In this study, across 10 interviews, White men with 3-letter agency experience were
identified as the existing majority holding senior leadership positions within corporate security
organizations of tech companies. Participants explained the difficulty of remaining relevant,
recognized, and confident while attempting to ascend in their career within the existing majority.
With a portion of the workforce polarized from a sense of belonging and inclusion, corporate
security organizations within tech companies are overlooking valuable contributors who can
provide necessary insight to overcome unforeseen challenges when confronting global
challenges. To successfully address global challenges, corporate security organizations need a
diverse leadership team that is representative of the global environments in which they operate.
This study sought to understand how HL corporate security employees overcame
perceived systemic barriers on their path toward promotion to senior leadership positions.
Among the findings were that the established majority makes it difficult to ascend, lack of HL
role models and mentors creates a gap in career progression, and networking with other
professionals is invaluable. While participants were quick to identify challenges and resources
needed to overcome said challenges, each called on a variety of assets both within themselves
and in their larger ecosystems that fostered their ascension. Each had a resilient attitude and a
family that instilled an ethic of hard work. HL corporate security professionals in this study were

96
eager to prove their worth, earn their keep, and contribute to ensuring the safety of the company
and company employees. Understanding how to better support HL employees within corporate
security organizations of tech companies in their ascension to senior leadership positions will
provide diverse thought and improved innovation when facing unforeseen challenges across the
global landscape pursued by tech companies.
Based on the interview data and related findings that were identified, three
recommendations were offered for supporting facilitators for the advancement of HL employees
to senior leadership positions within corporate security technology companies. The first is a
change in promotion criteria and practices within corporate security tech organizations including
improving diverse representation on hiring and recruitment panels. The second, given the value
participants placed on having mentors and role models, corporate security organizations within
tech companies need to create programs that support access to mentors and role models. Given
the different experiences participants had with mentors, programs need clearly defined activities,
actions, and objectives providing consistent and equitable results. Finally, corporate security
organizations within tech companies need to create structures that strengthen and encourage
networking internally and externally to the organization.
HL security employees within the corporate security industry are passionate about the
work they do. With an ethic of hard work, strong family values, and a desire for success, HL
corporate security employees struggle for recognition in tech organizations. HL corporate
security professionals in senior leadership positions remain marginalized and continue to reach
the ceiling of middle management, yet more and more join the industry. More HL corporate
security professionals need to occupy senior level ranks to illustrate a security organizations
commitment to diversity and allow for in-group role models to guide the next generation of

97
leaders. When given the opportunity, HL corporate security employees will provide valuable
insight to company safety and innovate perspectives on overcoming volatile, uncertain, complex,
and ambiguous environments in an ever-changing security industry.
This study offers a glimpse into one population. While the study was focused on HL
employees, they are one segment of a broader marginalized community. This study offers insight
into the challenges similar marginalized populations may encounter on their career journey,
signaling a much larger systemic problem with corporate security organizations of tech
companies, as well as other organizations more generally.

98
References
Abiew, G., Okyere-Kwakye, E., & Ellis, F. (2022). Examining the effect of functional diversity
on organizational team innovation. International Journal of Innovation Science, 14(2),
193–212. https://doi.org10.1108/ijis-02-2021-0027
Ainsworth, J. W. (2010). Does the race of neighborhood role models matter? Collective
socialization effects on educational achievement. Urban Education, 45(4), 401–423.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085910372346
Adejumo, V. (2021). Beyond diversity, inclusion, and belonging. Leadership, 17(1), 62–73.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1742715020976202
Amis, J. M., Mair, J., & Munir, K. A. (2020). The organizational reproduction of
inequality. Academy of Management Annals, 14(1), 195–230.
Ashikali, T., Groeneveld, S., & Kuipers, B. (2021). The role of inclusive leadership in supporting
an inclusive climate in diverse public sector teams. Review of Public Personnel
Administration, 41(3), 497–519.
ASIS International. (n.d.). Career Pathways Guide. ASIS International.
https://www.asisonline.org/globalassets/professionaldevelopment/careers/documents/careerpathwaysguide.pdf
Bagdadli, S., & Gianecchini, M. (2019). Organizational career management practices and
objective career success: A systematic review and framework. Human Resource
Management Review, 29(3), 353–370.
Balakrishnan, K., Faucett, E., Villwock, J., Boss, E., Esianor, B., Jefferson, G., Graboyes, E.,
Thompson, D., Flanary, V., & Brenner, M. (2023). Allyship to advance diversity, equity,

99
and inclusion in otolaryngology: What we can all do. Current Otorhinolaryngology
Reports, OnlineFirst, 1–14.
BarNir, A., Watson, W. E., & Hutchins, H. M. (2011). Mediation and moderated mediation in
the relationship among role models, self‐efficacy, entrepreneurial career intention, and
gender. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41(2), 270–297.
Bennett, N., & G. J. Lemoine. 2014. What a difference a word makes: Understanding threats
to performance in a VUCA world. Business Horizons, 57(3), 311–317.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2014.01.001
Blickle, G., Witzki, A. H., & Schneider, P. B. (2009). Mentoring support and power: A three
year predictive field study on protégé networking and career success. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 74(2), 181–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2008.12.008
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1981). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and
design. Harvard University Press.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1999). Environments in developmental perspective: Theoretical and
operational models. In S. L. Friedmann & T. D. Wacks (Eds.), Measuring environment
across the life span: Emerging methods and concepts (pp. 3–30). American
Psychological Association.
Brooks, D. J. (2010). What is security: Definition through knowledge categorization. Security
Journal, 23(3), 225–239. https://doi.org/10.1057/sj.2008.18
Brooms, D. R., Franklin, W., Clark, J. S., & Smith, M. (2021). ‘It’s more than just mentoring’:
Critical mentoring Black and Latino males from college to the community. Race,
Ethnicity and Education, 24(2), 210–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2018.
1538125

100
Castilla, E. (2011). Bringing managers back in. American Sociological Review, 76(5), 667–694.
Chatzi, S., Nikolaou, I., & Anderson, N. (2022). Team personality composition and team
innovation implementation: The mediating role of team climate for innovation. Applied
Psychology: An International Review. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12408
Chan, A. W., Yeh, C. J., & Krumboltz, J. D. (2015). Mentoring ethnic minority counseling and
clinical psychology students: A multicultural, ecological, and relational model. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 62(4), 592.
Cheramie, R. A., Sturman, M. C., & Walsh, K. (2007). Executive career management: Switching
organizations and the boundaryless career. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 71(3), 359–
374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2007.09.002
Chrobot-Mason, D., & Thomas, K. M. (2002). Minority employees in majority organizations:
The intersection of individual and organizational racial identity in the workplace. Human
Resource Development Review, 1(3), 323–344.
Church, M., Bitel, M., Armstrong, K., Fernando, P., Gould, H., Joss, S., Marwaha Diedrich, M.,
de la Torre, A. L., & Vouhé, C. (2003). Participation, relationships, and dynamic change:
New thinking on evaluating the work of international networks. University College
London, Development Planning Unit.
https://wikiciv.org.rs/images/b/b3/Participation_Relationships_and_Dynamic_Change.pd
f
Collier-Spruel, L., & Ryan, A. M. (2022). Are all allyship attempts helpful? An investigation of
effective and ineffective allyship. Journal of Business and Psychology.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-022-09861-9
Cortland, C., & Kinias, Z. (2019). Stereotype threat and women’s work satisfaction: The

101
importance of role models. Archives of Scientific Psychology, 7(1), 81–89.
https://doi.org/10.1037/arc0000056
Covarrubias, R., & Fryberg, S. A. (2015). The impact of self-relevant representations on school
belonging for Native American students. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority
Psychology, 21(1), 10.
Cox, T. H. (1993). Cultural diversity in organizations: Theory, research, and practice. BerretKoehler.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and
mixed methods approaches. SAGE Publications, Inc.
Dalton, D. (2003). Rethinking corporate security in the Post-9/11 era: Issues and strategies for
today’s global business community. Gulf Professional Publishing.
Data USA. (2020). Police officers: Detailed occupation. https://datausa.io/profile/soc/policeofficers
DeCino, D. A., Waalkes, P. L., & Chang, V. (2021). Gatekeeper identity development: An
application of bioecological systems theory. Counselor Education and
Supervision. https://doi.org/10.1002/ceas.12225
Dewe, P. J., & Guest, D. E. (1990). Methods of coping with stress at work: A conceptual
analysis and empirical study of measurement issues. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 11(2), 135–150. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030110205
Domingo, C. R., Gerber, N. C., Harris, D., Mamo, L., Pasion, S. G., Rebanal, R. D., & Rosser, S.
V. (2022). More service or more advancement: Institutional barriers to academic success for
women and women of color faculty at a large public comprehensive minority-serving

102
state university. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 15(3), 365–379.
https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000292
Dorn, N., & Meerts, C. (2009). Corporate security and private justice: Danger signs? European
Journal of Crime, Criminal Law, and Criminal Justice, 17(2), 97–111.
Dugan, J. P., & Leonette, H. (2021). The complicit omission: Leadership development’s radical
silence on equity. Journal of College Student Development, 62(3), 379–382.
https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2021.0030
Edgerton, J. D., Roberts, L. W., & von Below, S. (2011). Education and quality of life.
Handbook of Social Indicators and Quality of Life Research, 265–296.
Ely, R., & Thomas, D. (2001). Cultural diversity at work: The effects of diversity perspectives
on work group processes and outcomes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(2), 229–
273.
Ely, R. J. & Thomas, D.A. (2020). Getting serious about diversity: Enough already
with the business case. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2020/11/getting-seriousabout-diversity-enough-already-with-the-business-case
Ertug, G., Brennecke, J., Kovács, B., & Zou, T. (2022). What does homophily do? A review of
the consequences of homophily. Academy of Management Annals, 16(1), 38–69.
Flores, L., & Obasi, E. (2005). Mentors’ influence on Mexican American students’ career and
educational development. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 33(3),
146–164.
Gardiner, H., & Kosmitzki, C. (2010). Lives across cultures: Cross-cultural human development.
Pearson.

103
Gino, F., Kouchaki, M., & Casciaro, T. (2020). Why connect? Moral consequences of
networking with a promotion or prevention focus. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 119(6), 1221–1238. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000226
Gonzalez, L. M. (2015). Barriers to college access for Latino/a adolescents: A comparison of
theoretical frameworks. Journal of Latinos and Education, 14(4), 320–335.
Greenhaus, J. H., Parasuraman, S., & Wormley, W. M. (1990). Effects of race on organizational
experiences, job performance evaluations, and career outcomes. Academy of Management
Journal, 33(1), 64–86. https://doi.org/10.2307/256352
Guerrero, L., & Posthuma, A. R. (2014). Perceptions and behaviors of Hispanic workers: A
review. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 29(6), 616–643.
Hiemstra, A. M. F., Derous, E., Serlie, A. W., & Born, M. P. (2013). Ethnicity effects in
graduates’ résumé content. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 62(3), 427–
453. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2012.00487.x
Horsford, S. D. (2012). This bridge called my leadership: An essay on Black women as
bridge leaders in education. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education
(QSE), 25(1), 11–22. https://.doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2011.647726
Hoyt, C. L., & Murphy, S. E. (2016). Managing to clear the air: Stereotype threat, women, and
leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 27(3), 387–399.
Igbaria, M., & Shayo, C. (1997). The impact of race and gender differences on job performance
evaluations and career success. Equal Opportunities International, 16(8), 12–23.
Isik, U., Wouters, A., Verdonk, P., Croiset, G., & Kusurkar, R. (2021). “As an ethnic minority,
you just have to work twice as hard.” Experiences and motivation of ethnic minority
students in medical education. Perspectives on Medical Education, 10(5), 272–278.

104
Jansen, W. S., Vos, M. W., Otten, S., Podsiadlowski, A., & van der Zee, K. I. (2016). Colorblind
or colorful? How diversity approaches affect cultural majority and minority
employees. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 46(2), 81–93.
Jin, Y., Lu, N., Deng, Y., Lin, W., Zhan, X., Feng, B., & Li, G. (2023). Becoming reluctant to
share? Roles of career age and career plateau in the relationship between ethical
leadership and knowledge sharing. Current Psychology: A Journal for Diverse
Perspectives on Diverse Psychological Issue. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04357-
y
Jerome, N. (2013). Application of the Maslow’s hierarchy of need theory; impacts and
implications on organizational culture, human resource, and employee’s
performance. International Journal of Business and Management Invention, 2(3), 39–45.
Karunanayake, D., & Nauta, M. M. (2004). The relationship between race and students’
identified career role models and perceived role model influence. The Career
Development Quarterly, 52(3), 225–234. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-
0045.2004.tb00644.x
King, D. D., Fattoracci, E. S. M., Hollingsworth, D. W., Stahr, E., & Nelson, M. (2022). When
thriving requires effortful surviving: Delineating manifestations and resource expenditure
outcomes of microaggressions for Black employees. Journal of Applied Psychology.
https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001016
Kochan, T., Bezrukova, K., Ely, R., Jackson, S., Joshi, A., Jehn, K., Leonard, J., Levine, D., &
Thomas, D. (2003). The effects of diversity on business performance: Report of the
diversity research network. Human Resource Management, 42(1), 3–21.
Kutlaca, M., Radke, H., Iyer, A., & Becker, J. (2020). Understanding allies’ participation in

105
social change: A multiple perspectives approach. European Journal of Social
Psychology, 50(6), 1248–1258.
Lancee, B. (2021). Ethnic discrimination in hiring: Comparing groups across contexts. Results
from a cross-national field experiment. Null, 47(6), 1181–1200.
Lease, S. H. (2004). Effect of locus of control, work knowledge, and mentoring on career
decision-making difficulties: Testing the role of race and academic institution. Journal of
Career Assessment, 12(3), 239–254. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072703261537
Lippert, R. K., Walby, K., & Steckle, R. (2013). Multiplicities of corporate security: Identifying
emerging types, trends, and issues. Security Journal, 26(3), 206–221.
https://doi.org/10.1057/sj.2013.12
Liu, H. (2019). Just the servant: An intersectional critique of servant leadership. Journal of
Business Ethics, 156(4), 1099–1112.
Lu, J. G. (2022). A social network perspective on the Bamboo Ceiling: Ethnic homophily
explains why East Asians but not South Asians are underrepresented in leadership in
multiethnic environments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 122(6), 959–
982. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000292
Ludbey, C., Brooks, D., & Coole, M. (2017). Corporate security: Identifying and understanding
the levels of security work in an organisation. Asian Journal of Criminology, 13(2), 109–
128.
Mandell, M., Keast, R., & Chamberlain, D. (2017). Collaborative networks and the need for a
new management language. Public Management Review, 19(3), 326–341.
Marshall, B. (2001). Working while Black: Contours of an unequal playing field. Phylon: The
Clark Atlanta University Review of Race and Culture, 49(3–4), 137–50.

106
Marquez-Tejon, J., Jimenez-Partearroyo, M., & Benito-Osorio, D. (2022). Security as a key
contributor to organisational resilience: a bibliometric analysis of enterprise security risk
management. Security Journal, 35(2), 600–627. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41284-021-
00292-4
Marx, D. M., Ko, S. J., & Friedman, R. A. (2009). The “Obama effect”: How a salient role
model reduces race-based performance differences. Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology, 45(4), 953–956. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.03.012
Meares, M. M., Oetzel, J. G., Torres, A., Derkacs, D., & Ginossar, T. (2004). Employee
mistreatment and muted voices in the culturally diverse workplace. Journal of Applied
Communication Research, 32(1), 4–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/0090988042000178121
Mendez, S. L., Starkey, K. E., Cooksey, S. E., & Conley, V. M. (2022). Environmental
influences on the STEM identity and career intentions of Latinx STEM postdoctoral
scholars. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 21(4), 367–385.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1538192721992436
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
McCrie, R. D. (2004). History of expertise in security management practice and
litigation. Security Journal, 17(3), 11–19.
McCrie, R. (2010). Allan Pinkerton (August 25, 1819–July 1, 1884): Founder of the security
services industry. Journal of Applied Security Research, 5(4), 543–552. https://doiorg/10.1080/19361610.2010.510127
Miles, S., Fefoame, G. O., Mulligan, D., & Haque, Z. (2012). Education for diversity: The role
of networking in resisting disabled people’s marginalisation in Bangladesh. Compare: A

107
Journal of Comparative and International Education, 42(2), 283–302.
Military One Source. (2020). 2020 Demographics: Profile of the military community.
https://www.militaryonesource.mil/data-research-and-statistics/military-communitydemographics/2020-demographics-profile/
Nag, D., Arena, David F., Jr, & Jones, K. P. (2022). How promotion loss shapes expectations of
discrimination: An intersectional approach. Gender in Management, 37(4), 441–456.
https://doi.org/10.1108/GM-02-2021-0048
Neureiter, M., & Traut-Mattausch, E. (2017). Two sides of the career resources coin: Career
adaptability resources and the impostor phenomenon. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 98, 56–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2016.10.002
Obenauer, W. G., & Langer, N. (2019). Inclusion is not a slam dunk: A study of differential
leadership outcomes in the absence of a glass cliff. The Leadership Quarterly, 30(6),
https://doi.org/101334.10.1016/j.leaqua.2019.101334
Oc, B., Netchaeva, E., & Kouchaki, M. (2021). It’s a man’s world! The role of political ideology
in the early stages of leader recruitment. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 162, 24–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp. 2020.10.017
Ospina, S., & Foldy, E. (2009). A critical review of race and ethnicity in the leadership literature:
Surfacing context, power, and the collective dimensions of leadership. The Leadership
Quarterly, 20(6), 876–896. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.09.005
Ospina, S., & Su, C. (2009). Weaving color lines: Race, ethnicity, and the work of leadership in
social change organizations. Leadership, 5(2), 131–170.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1742715009102927

108
Parham, S. N. (2018). The effects of age, gender, and race on the relationship between perceived
job-relatedness of the employment interview and perceived job performance [Doctoral
dissertation, The Chicago School of Professional Psychology].
Parkes, K. R. (1994). Personality and coping as moderators of work stress processes: Models,
methods, and measures. Work & Stress, 8(2), 110–129.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02678379408259984
Pendleton, S. M., & Gibson, R. (2022). The long-term value of networking and diverse
professional experience in online communication master’s cohorts: Strategic benefits of a
closed-cohort structure. Journalism and Mass Communication Educator, 77(2), 205–221.
https://doi.org/10.1177/10776958211055275
Petersen, K. L. (2013). The corporate security professional: A hybrid agent between corporate
and national security. Security Journal, 26(3), 222–235.
https://doi.org/10.1057/sj.2013.13
Poort, I., Jansen, E., & Hofman, A. (2022). Does the group matter? Effects of trust, cultural
diversity, and group formation on engagement in group work in higher education. Higher
Education Research and Development, 41(2), 511–526.
https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1839024
Price, J. H., & Murnan, J. (2004). Research limitations and the necessity of reporting
them. American Journal of Health Education, 35(2), 66–67.
Randel, A. E., Galvin, B. M., Gibson, C. B., & Batts, S. I. (2021). Increasing career advancement
opportunities through sponsorship: An identity-based model with illustrative application
to cross-race mentorship of African Americans. Group & Organization
Management, 46(1), 105–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601120978003

109
Reynolds, J. R., & Ross, C. E. (1998). Social stratification and health: Education’s benefit
beyond economic status and social origins. Social Problems, 45(2), 221–247.
https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.1998.45.2.03x0167k
Reynolds, R., Rogers, D., Crawley, L., Richards, H. L., & Fortune, D. (2022). Glass ceiling
versus sticky floor, sideways sexism and priming a manager to think male as barriers to
equality in clinical psychology: An interpretive phenomenological analysis
approach. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 53(3), 225–233.
https://doi.org/10.1037/pro0000456
Rivera, L. M., Chen, E. C., Flores, L. Y., Blumberg, F., & Ponterotto, J. G. (2007). The effects of
perceived barriers, role models, and acculturation on the career self-efficacy and career
consideration of Hispanic women. The Career Development Quarterly, 56(1), 47–61.
https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-0045.2007.tb00019.x
Roberson, L., & Kulik, C. T. (2007). Stereotype threat at work. The Academy of Management
Perspectives, 21(2), 24–40. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMP.2007.25356510
Roberson, Q. M., & Hyeon, J. P. (2007). Examining the link between diversity and firm
performance: The effects of diversity reputation and leader racial diversity. Group &
Organization Management, 32(5), 548–568.
Sennewald, C. A. (2012). Security consulting. Butterworth-Heinemann.
Sensoy, Ö, & DiAngelo, R. (2017). “We are all for diversity, but …”: How faculty hiring
committees reproduce Whiteness and practical suggestions for how they can
change. Harvard Educational Review, 87(4), 557–595.
Settles, I. H., Jones, M. K., Buchanan, N. T., & Brassel, S. T. (2022). Epistemic exclusion of

110
women faculty and faculty of color: Understanding scholar(ly) devaluation as a predictor
of turnover intentions. Journal of Higher Education, 93(1), 31–55.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2021.1914494
Seungmug Lee. (2010). Installation Trends and characteristics of residential burglar
alarms. Journal of Applied Security Research, 5(2), 176–207.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19361611003601058
Shaffer, E. S., & Prislin, R. (2011). Conversion vs. tolerance: Minority-focused influence
strategies can affect group loyalty. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 14(5), 755–
766. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430210395636
Shyra, T., Salyga, K., Derii, V., Prykhodko, I., & Shymkiv, S. (2021). The development of
corporate security in the context of countering threats to doing business. Verslas: Teorija
Ir Praktika, 22(1), 211–221. https://doi.org/10.3846/btp.2021.13396
Simmons, J., Wolff, H., Forret, M. L., & Sullivan, S. E. (2022). A longitudinal investigation of
the Kaleidoscope Career Model, networking behaviors, and career success. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 138, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2022.103764
Somani, I. S., & Tyree, T. C. M. (2021). Black broadcast journalists: Implications of mentorship
and race in the newsroom. Journalism and Mass Communication Educator, 76(2), 176–
201. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077695820947884
Srivastava, S. C., Chandra, S., & Shirish, A. (2015). Technostress creators and job outcomes:
Theorising the moderating influence of personality traits. Information Systems
Journal, 25(4), 355–401.

111
Stahl, G. K., Maznevski, M. L., Voigt, A., & Jonsen, K. (2010). Unraveling the effects of
cultural diversity in teams: A meta-analysis of research on multicultural work
groups. Journal of International Business Studies, 41, 690–709.
Statista. (2020). Distribution of workforce employed by national intelligence agencies in the
United States. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1266831/us-national-intelligenceagencies-distribution-workforce-race/
Thomas, D. A., & Ely, R. J. (1996). Making differences matter: A new paradigm for managing
diversity. https://hbr.org/1996/09/making-differences-matter-a-new-paradigm-formanaging-diversity
Tye-Williams, S., & Krone, K. J. (2015). Chaos, reports, and quests: Narrative agency and coworkers in stories of workplace bullying. Management Communication Quarterly, 29(1),
3–27.
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). (2014). Diversity in high tech.
https://www.eeoc.gov/special-report/diversity-high-tech#
Vela, J., Sparrow, G., Whittenberg, J., & Rodriguez, B. (2018). The role of character strengths
and importance of family on Mexican American college students’ career decision self‐
efficacy. Journal of Employment Counseling, 55(1), 16–26.
Walby, K., & Lippert, R. (2013). Introduction to special issue on new developments in corporate
security and contract private security. Security Journal, 26(3), 201–205.
https://doi.org/10.1057/sj.2013.11
Walby, K., & Lippert, R. K. (2014). Introduction: governing every person, place, and thing:
Critical studies of corporate security. In Corporate security in the 21st century: Theory
and practice in international perspective (pp. 1–13). Palgrave Macmillan UK.

112
Walby, K., Wilkinson, B., & Lippert, R. K. (2016). Legitimacy, professionalisation and expertise
in public sector corporate security. Policing & Society, 26(1), 38–54.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10439463.2014.912650
Wallo, A., Kock, H., Reineholm, C., & Ellström, P. (2022). How do managers promote
workplace learning? Learning-oriented leadership in daily work. Journal of Workplace
Learning, 34(1), 58–73. https://doi.org/10.1108/JWL-11-2020-0176
Williams, J. (2005). Reflections on the private versus public policing of economic crime. The
British Journal of Criminology, 45(3), 316–339.
Wolf, K., Deitelhoff, N., & Engert, S. (2007). Corporate security responsibility. Cooperation and
Conflict, 42(3), 294–320.
Zippia. (2022). Corporate security manager demographics and statistics [2022]: Number of
corporate security managers in the U.S. https://www.zippia.com/corporate-securitymanager-jobs/demographics/
Zippia. (2023). Corporate security manager projected growth in the United States.
https://www.zippia.com/corporate-security-manager-jobs/trends/

113
Appendix A: Background/Eligibility Questionnaire
Background/eligibility question Yes No
Do you identify as someone that is Hispanic or Latinx?
Do you have experience working as an employee for a
top 100 global tech company? Please reference the
attached link to confirm the company.
Do you have experience, currently or formerly, working
in a corporate security organization for at least 3
years?
Do you currently serve, or have served, in a corporate
security senior leadership position with a
title/position equivalent to a senior manager?

114
Appendix B: Interview Questions
Interview questions Potential probes RQ
1. Tell me about the company you
currently work for.
What other corporate security
companies have you worked
for previously, if any?
1, 2, 3
2. Describe your career path toward
obtaining a senior leadership position in
corporate security?
1
3. What barriers, if any, have you faced in
attaining a senior leadership position or
job promotion in corporate security
within tech companies?
1
4. As a person who identifies as being
Hispanic/Latinx, what has your
promotional experience been within the
tech security industry?
How, if at all, do you think your
career path has been different
from your White peers?
1
5. If you pictured an effective and fair
promotion process, what would that look
like?
1
6. Tell me about the types of coping
methods you have employed to
overcome barriers in job promotion and
advancement in corporate security?
Where did you learn your specific
coping methods?
2
7. How have role models, if any, impacted
your career progression in corporate
security, if at all?
Were those role models people in
your field or organization?
3
8. What internal career resources have
been of most benefit to you in advancing
to a senior leadership position in
corporate security?
Where did you learn about those
resources?
3
9. What external career resources have
been of most benefit to you in advancing
to a senior leadership position in
corporate security?
Where did you learn about those
resources?
3
10. What additional resources, if any, do
you wish were available to you to
support your career advancement?
How would those additional
resources have benefitted you?
3
11. If you were to travel back in time, what
advice would you give your younger
career self to reduce obstacles they will
face in their career as a Hispanic/Latinx
employee?
What could you do differently
now as you continue your
career?
1, 2, 3

115
Appendix C: Top 100 Tech Companies by Market Cap (as of May 8th, 2023)
Rank Name Rank Name
1 Apple 51 Cadence Design Systems
2 Microsoft 52 Vmware
3 Alphabet (Google) 53 KLA
4 Amazon 54 Dassault Syst√®mes
5 NVIDIA 55 Nintendo
6 Meta Platforms (Facebook) 56 Snowflake
7 Tesla 57 Fortinet
8 TSMC 58 SK Hynix
9 Tencent 59 Roper Technologies
10 Samsung 60 Adyen
11 Broadcom 61 Foxconn (Hon Hai Precision Industry)
12 Oracle 62 Sea (Garena)
13 ASML 63 Infineon
14 Alibaba 64 Workday
15 Salesforce 65 NXP Semiconductors
16 Cisco 66 Arista Networks
17 SAP 67 Baidu
18 Adobe 68 Constellation Software
19 AMD 69 Autodesk
20 Texas Instruments 70 Microchip Technology
21 Netflix 71 STMicroelectronics

116
Rank Name Rank Name
22 Intel 72 TE Connectivity
23 QUALCOMM 73 Murata Manufacturing
24 Intuit 74 Xiaomi
25 Keyence 75 MediaTek
26 Sony 76 Block
27 IBM 77 Marvell Technology Group
28 Meituan 78 IQVIA
29 Applied Materials 79 ON Semiconductor
30 Booking Holdings (Booking.com) 80 Electronic Arts
31 Schneider Electric 81 Atlassian
32 Analog Devices 82 Dell
33 ServiceNow 83 Fidelity National Information Services
34 Automatic Data Processing 84 GlobalFoundries
35 PayPal 85 SMIC
36 Pinduoduo 86 The Trade Desk
37 Shopify 87 Mobileye
38 Airbnb 88 CrowdStrike
39 Uber 89 Coupang
40 Fiserv 90 Amadeus IT Group
41 Lam Research 91 CoStar Group
42 Equinix 92 Wolters Kluwer
43 Micron Technology 93 HP

117
Rank Name Rank Name
44 MercadoLibre 94 Kuaishou Technology
45 Activision Blizzard 95 Veeva Systems
46 NetEase 96 Spotify
47 Palo Alto Networks 97 Global Payments
48 Tokyo Electron 98 Delta Electronics
49 Synopsys 99 DoorDash
50 Jingdong Mall 100 Renesas Electronics

118
Appendix D: Codebook Utilized for Transcribing Interviews
Code Definition
Barriers Obstacles contributing to difficult promotional/advancement
opportunities based on perceived or actual limitations
Access to information Desire for understanding more about corporate security and/or
promotional process
Organizational norms Male dominated industry: LEO & 3-Letter agency dominate
Education/training Advancing knowledge through formal educational institutions
or professional certificates
Lack of … Lack of something: role model, mentorship, network
Coping methods Strategies utilized to overcome stresses in the workplace to
include overcoming fear, anxiety, frustrations, or other
environmental debilitating factors
(in vivo) working harder Instilled family value of working hard than the next person
Ignoring harassment Internalizing the stress of harassment because they don’t fit a
specific mold
Validation Seeking to feel a sense of professional belonging and
appreciation for skillset brought to the workplace
Imposter syndrome Feeling as if they are not good enough regardless of their
proven experience, education, background
Resources Actions, attributes, or capabilities utilized to overcome
organizational/systemic barriers
Company programs Internal company programs that help foster employee
knowledge and career growth
(in vivo) totality of a person
for promotion
Inclusion of soft skills, experience, education, certification and
not just perceived “hard skills” gained from being in law
enforcement, military, or 3-letter agency
Recommendations Participant recommendations
Networking Building robust relationships with others that can offer
validation, career support, and even vouch for skills
Support Assistance provided or sought to improve promotional
opportunities or career advancement
Mentoring Investment from another person that can be a guide and serve to
brainstorm with mentees
Stretch opportunities Opportunities within the workplace that allow others to stretch
their skillset to learn more
Role models Someone that can be a beacon of hope with which others can
emulate
Allies Someone in the majority that can support career
growth/sponsorship within the workplace

119
Code Definition
Career navigation A method that helps individuals identify specific career goals,
develop action plans for achieving those goals, and make
informed decisions about the next steps in their career
(in vivo) Leaving out to go
up
An action of leaving one company for another offering
improved career growth

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Understanding queer leadership in corporate America

PDF

The underrepresentation of Black women in the senior executive service of the United States government

PDF

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

PDF

Understanding how organizational culture and expectations influence retention of managers

PDF

Secrets from the C-suite: women leaders on the bridging gap

PDF

The relationship between Latinx undergraduate students’ mental health and college graduation rates

PDF

The underrepresentation of African American women in corporate leadership roles

PDF

Leveraging the power of data-driven storytelling: C-suite executive leadership approaches to improving business performance

PDF

The case for leader self-reflection in the workplace

PDF

Black women in tech: examining experiences in tech industry workplaces

PDF

Institutional discrimination against Black men in Fortune 500 companies: a phenomenological study

PDF

Improving transfer of leadership training from the classroom to the corporate environment within the private sector in Saudi Arabia

PDF

The underrepresentation of Latinx in entrepreneurship and the identification of social, societal, and institutional barriers to close the gap

PDF

The paucity of women of color in senior leadership roles in higher education administration

PDF

Creating support infrastructure for women of color advancing toward clinical department administrator role

PDF

Participating in your own survival: a gap analysis study of the implementation of active shooter preparedness programs in mid-to-large size organizations

PDF

Somebody ought to say something: the role of the church in facilitating dialogue about race, racism, and diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts

PDF

Lack of Latinx senior executive service members in a federal government agency

PDF

The impact of dual enrollment programs on first-year college success for Hispanic students from low-socioeconomic-status communities: a promising practice

PDF

Examining the lack of equity in leadership opportunities for underrepresented employees in the pharmaceutical industry

Asset Metadata

Creator Albalos, Ely Anthony (author)

Core Title Facilitators for the advancement of Hispanic/Latinx employees in corporate security

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2023-12

Publication Date 12/05/2023

Defense Date 11/14/2023

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

Tag Bronfenbrenner,collective burden,corporate security,Hispanic,Latinx,leadership,Management,networking,OAI-PMH Harvest,promotion,Security,senior leaders,tech,tech companies

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Krop, Cathy (committee chair), Grad, Richard (committee member), Kim, Esther (committee member)

Creator Email ealbalos@usc.edu,ely@lionconsulere.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC113781781

Unique identifier UC113781781

Identifier etd-AlbalosEly-12519.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-AlbalosEly-12519

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Albalos, Ely Anthony

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20231205-usctheses-batch-1111 (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