University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

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

(USC Thesis Other)

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

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

“A Thread Throughout”: The KMO Influences on Implementing DEI Strategic Plans in
State and Municipal Governments

Jessica Kallin

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education

May 2023

© Copyright by Jessica Kallin 2023
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Jessica Kallin certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Patrick Cates
Cathy Krop
Adrian Donato, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2023

iv
Abstract
This study acknowledged the underperformance of state and municipal level government
agencies in the implementation of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) strategic plans in the
United States and learned from government officials regarding the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational (KMO) influences on their ability to implement these plans. The analysis focused
on the KMO influences related to achieving the field goal. This study utilized a gap analysis
framework, using systematic and analytical methods to clarify stakeholder goals and identify
gaps between the current performance of DEI strategic planning and the preferred performance
level in the field. Assumed KMO influences on stakeholder capacity were generated based on
context-specific research as well as general learning and motivation theory. These influences
were explored through data analysis. This mixed-methods field innovation study combined
qualitative and quantitative data through a sample of state and municipal employees designated
to do DEI work for their agencies. The strategies of inquiry included a quantitative survey,
qualitative interviews, and qualitative document analysis. The KMO influences were determined
to either be assets or needs, and context-specific recommendations were identified based on
learning and information processing principles.

v
Acknowledgements
I would like to acknowledge the support and invaluable guidance from my committee
members, Dr. Patrick Cates, Dr. Cathy Krop, and especially my chair, Dr. Adrian Donato. I am
incredibly grateful for the resources, check-ins, and words of encouragement from them all
throughout this process. I would also like to share appreciation for my classmates who provided
unwavering motivation, and constant inspiration: Monica L’Esperance, Michelle Gundy, and
Amber Wright. Finally, with the utmost gratitude, I would like to acknowledge the support and
sacrifices made by my partner and husband, Zach Hardy, without whom this would not have
been possible.

.

vi
Table of Contents
Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... iv
Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................... v
List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. ix
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. xi
Chapter One: Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1
Field Context and Mission ................................................................................................... 1
Field Performance Status ..................................................................................................... 2
Related Literature ................................................................................................................ 3
Importance of Addressing the Problem ............................................................................... 4
Global Field SMART Goal ................................................................................................. 5
Description of Stakeholder Groups ..................................................................................... 5
Stakeholder Group of Focus and Performance Goal for the Study ..................................... 6
Purpose of the Project and Questions .................................................................................. 7
Overview of the Conceptual and Methodological Framework ........................................... 7
Definitions ........................................................................................................................... 9
Organization of Project ...................................................................................................... 11
Chapter Two: Review of Literature ............................................................................................... 12
History of Public-Sector Strategic Planning ...................................................................... 12
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Initiatives in the Public Sector ...................................... 16
Influencing Organizational Change ................................................................................... 25
DEI Agents of Change, The Chief Diversity Officer ........................................................ 27
Conceptual Framework ..................................................................................................... 28
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences ................................ 29
Summary ............................................................................................................................ 42
Chapter Three: Methods ................................................................................................................ 44

vii
Conceptual and Methodological Framework .................................................................... 44
Overview of Design ........................................................................................................... 45
Participating Stakeholders ................................................................................................. 46
Data Collection and Instrumentation ................................................................................. 52
Data Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 55
Credibility and Trustworthiness ........................................................................................ 56
Validity and Reliability ..................................................................................................... 57
Ethics ................................................................................................................................. 57
Role of Investigator ........................................................................................................... 58
Chapter Four: Results and Findings .............................................................................................. 60
Participating Stakeholders ................................................................................................. 60
Determination of Assets and Needs .................................................................................. 63
Results and Findings for Knowledge Influences ............................................................... 63
Results and Findings for Motivation Influences ............................................................... 81
Results and Findings for Organization Influences ............................................................ 99
Summary of Validated Influences ................................................................................... 115
Chapter Five: Solutions and Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan ............................ 118
Field Context and Mission ............................................................................................... 118
Change Agent SMART Goal ........................................................................................... 119
Stakeholder Group of Focus and Performance Goal for the Study ................................. 119
Purpose of the Project and Questions .............................................................................. 120
Overview ......................................................................................................................... 120
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences .......................................... 121
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan ............................................................. 134
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach .................................................................... 148
Limitations and Delimitations ......................................................................................... 148

viii
Future Research ............................................................................................................... 149
Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 150
References ................................................................................................................................... 151
Appendix A: Pre-Interview Recruiting Communications ........................................................... 164
Pre-interview Initial Email to Request Study Participation ............................................ 164
Pre-interview Email to Confirm Participation for Study ................................................. 165
Appendix B: Information Sheet for Exempt Research ................................................................ 166
Appendix D: KMO Survey Protocol ........................................................................................... 171
Appendix F: KMO Interview Protocol ........................................................................................ 177
Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 177
Opening Questions .......................................................................................................... 178
Transition ......................................................................................................................... 178
Interview Conclusion ....................................................................................................... 180
Appendix G: KMO Document Analysis Protocol ....................................................................... 181
Appendix H: Immediate Evaluation Instrument .......................................................................... 183
Appendix I: Blended Evaluation Tool ......................................................................................... 184

ix
List of Tables
Table 1: Mission and Goals ............................................................................................................. 7
Table 2: Summary of Assumed Knowledge Influences on Stakeholder’s Ability to Achieve
the Performance Goal .................................................................................................................... 33
Table 3: Summary of Assumed Motivation Influences on Stakeholder’s Ability to Achieve
the Performance Goal .................................................................................................................... 38
Table 4: Summary of Assumed Organization Influences on Stakeholder’s Ability to Achieve
the Performance Goal .................................................................................................................... 42
Table 5: Data Sources .................................................................................................................... 46
Table 6: Participant Criteria .......................................................................................................... 47
Table 7: Participant Place of Employment and Agency DEI Strategic Plans ............................... 62
Table 8: Participant Position Responsibilities ............................................................................... 62
Table 9: Survey Results for Matching the Word or Concept With the Definition or
Description, n = 12 ........................................................................................................................ 64
Table 10: Factual Knowledge Interview Summary, n = 8 ............................................................. 67
Table 11: Survey Results for Procedural Knowledge Item, n = 12 ............................................... 70
Table 12: Procedural Knowledge Interview Summary, n = 8 ....................................................... 73
Table 13: Survey Results for Metacognitive Knowledge, n = 12 ................................................. 75
Table 14: Metacognitive Knowledge Interview Summary, n = 8 ................................................. 79
Table 15: Survey Results for Question I Consider DEI Work Valuable for Myself, n = 12 ........ 81
Table 16: Value Interview Summary, n = 8 .................................................................................. 83
Table 17: Survey Results for Confidence in Leading Organization Through Strategic
Planning, n = 11 ............................................................................................................................. 86
Table 18: Self-Efficacy Interview Summary, n = 8 ...................................................................... 89
Table 19: Survey Results for Confidence in Others implementing DEI, n = 12 ........................... 91
Table 20: Collective Efficacy Interview Summary, n = 8 ............................................................. 93
Table 21: Survey Results for Question I Have Clear Goals Related to the Production of My
DEI Strategic Plan, n = 12 ............................................................................................................. 95
Table 22: Goals Interview Summary, n = 8 .................................................................................. 97

x
Table 23: Survey Results for Senior Leadership in my Organization Supports the
Implementation of a DEI Strategic Plan, n = 12 ......................................................................... 100
Table 24: Cultural Settings: Resources Interview Summary, n = 8 ............................................ 103
Table 25: Survey Results for My Organization Has Agency-Wide Policies That Align With
the DEI Strategic Plan, n = 12 ..................................................................................................... 105
Table 26: Cultural Settings: Policies, Processes, and Procedures Interview Summary, n = 8 .... 108
Table 27: Survey Results for My Organization is Committed to Strategically Planning and
Implementing Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion efforts, n = 12 ................................................... 110
Table 28: Cultural Models: Organizational Commitment Interview Summary, n = 8 ................ 113
Table 29: Knowledge Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data ............................................ 115
Table 30: Motivation Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data ............................................. 116
Table 31: Organization Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data .......................................... 116
Table 32: Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations ...................................... 122
Table 33: Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations ....................................... 126
Table 34: Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations .................................... 131
Table 35: Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes ...................... 136
Table 36: Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation ............................. 137
Table 37: Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors ......................................................... 139
Table 38: Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program. ..................................... 143
Table 39: Components to Measure Reactions to the Program .................................................... 145
Appendix C: KMO Survey Crosswalk ........................................................................................ 169
Appendix E: KMO Interview Crosswalk .................................................................................... 175
Table G1: Document Analysis .................................................................................................... 181

xi
List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework .................................................................................................. 29
Figure 2: Gap Analysis Chart Process ........................................................................................... 45
Figure 3: Responses to Item: “How Long Have You Been in Your Current Role?” n = 20 ......... 61
Figure 4: Projected Training Program Findings .......................................................................... 147

1

Chapter One: Introduction
The problem of practice was state and municipal level government agency
underperformance in the implementation of their diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) strategic
plans and initiatives in the United States. This study learned from government officials regarding
the ways they implemented and created DEI strategic plans and the efforts in the field to
determine what was being done and what gaps existed that were necessary to address. There is a
field goal for federal government agencies to have adopted a DEI strategic plan, but the gap in
performance at the state and municipal levels was unknown. Research revealed that several
factors are necessary for the successful implementation of DEI strategic plans, including a
commitment from leadership, participation from employees, knowledge of the concepts, and a
connection to organizational goals (Wyatt-Nichol & Antwi-Boasiako, 2012). Studies show that
without organizational support, most public-sector change communications are limited to those
involved directly in the related initiative (Al-Alawi et al., 2019). Jin et al. (2017) suggested that
DEI relies on the relationship between policy development and implementation, workplace
culture, and inclusive leadership. By analyzing the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
factors that limit implementation, the way government offices develop and implement DEI
strategic plans can be changed, which will be beneficial for creating more equity and
representation in the public sector.
Field Context and Mission
In June 2021, President Biden released an executive order on diversity, equity, inclusion,
and accessibility in the federal workforce (The White House, Office of the Press Secretary,
2021). This executive order mandated government-wide diversity, equity, inclusion, and
accessibility (DEIA) strategic plan be created. This strategic plan defined standards of success
for DEIA efforts, identified strategies to advance DEIA and eliminate barriers to equity in the
2

workforce, included a framework to address workplace harassment and promoted data-driven
approaches to transparency and accountability. While the Executive order on DEIA in the federal
workforce (The White House, Office of the Press Secretary, 2021) also required executive
departments and agencies to implement the DEIA strategic plan and assess their current practices
in relation to it, state-level government agencies were not included in this mandate.
State and municipal government agencies are beginning to address the demographic
changes and the diversity of the communities they serve (Nishishiba, 2012). While diversity
goals and initiatives are being acknowledged more at the local level, there is still little research
on the degree to which and how agencies implement DEI strategic plans (Nishishiba, 2012). This
research also identified three common activities in the literature related to DEI initiatives:
diversity in the composition of the agency, better addressing how to serve diverse citizens and
communities, and integrating and valuing a diverse workforce. These activities were defined
within the DEI strategic plan that determines goals, objectives, action items, expected dates to
accomplish them, and the individuals responsible (Bryson et al., 2018; Nishishiba, 2012). There
is more research needed on the ability of individuals hired at state and municipal government
offices and their ability to implement DEI strategic plans.
Field Performance Status
The field performance problem was that state and municipal government agencies were
not required to implement DEI strategic plans, resulting in inconsistencies across the agencies.
Hur et al. (2010) detailed factors that influence the implementation of diversity plans, including
demographic characteristics of the communities the governments serve and the tone set by town
and city managers. Washington state’s diversity plan acknowledges the representation of women,
racial and ethnic minorities, people with disabilities, people over age 40, and veterans (Wyatt-
Nichol & Antwi-Boasiako, 2012). This plan extends to the workforce outside of just public-
3

sector employees and has been shown to offset negative opinions of affirmative action programs
in their state. In 2008 the governor of Pennsylvania issued an executive order to create an office
of diversity management and to hire a chief diversity officer to create and implement a statewide
DEI strategic plan (Wyatt-Nichol & Antwi-Boasiako, 2012). A study by the National Governors
Association (NGA)in 2020 assessed DEI practices, future goals, and challenges of state
governments to determine the actions they have taken toward implementing DEI initiatives
(NGA, 2021). The survey had a response from 23 states, with only 11 with developed DEI
strategic plans that were incorporated into agency strategy. While many states were working to
increase the implementation of strategic plans focusing on DEI, there was still a lack of state and
municipal government offices producing reports highlighting what was being done and how
(Nishishiba, 2012).
Related Literature
The history of strategic planning in the public sector began in the 1980s and has become
a standard practice in organizations (Bryson et al., 2018). Strategic planning aims to create
decisions and actions to guide an organization on what it aims to do and how. Specifically, in the
public sector, strategic planning seeks to determine agency purpose and goals, create agreed-
upon objectives, analyze outcomes and policies, and connect theory with practice while
acknowledging stakeholders. Government agencies developing strategic plans may define their
approaches and concepts in functional terms while setting timelines for their objectives. Studies
on DEI strategies in state and municipal governments focus on specific activities related to
categories of individuals rather than DEI as a strategic plan throughout the agency (Nishishiba,
2012).
A study across state and local government agencies with DEI strategic plans showed that
the responsibility for managing the plans primarily falls to human resource departments 73% of
4

the time, with 66% of respondents reporting that the strategies are measured annually (Wyatt-
Nichol & Antwi-Boasiako, 2012). This same study showed that 97% of organizations included
race, 94% included sex, 77% included disability, and 76% included age in their diversity plans.
Fewer organizations included sexual orientation (43%) and social class (19%) in their
considerations of diversity. This is important as 81% of study respondents reported their
government agency used workforce demographics as a measure to develop their DEI strategic
plan. Wyatt-Nichol and Antwi-Boasiako (2012) also noted that only 39% of municipal agencies
surveyed reported having diversity as part of their strategic plan compared to 54% of the state-
level agencies. A study by the NGA showed that out of 23 state respondents, only 10 reported
building organizational infrastructure to advance DEI, and 13 reported having a DEI strategic
plan (NGA, 2021).
Importance of Addressing the Problem
The DEI strategic plans are important to increase representation at government agencies
and build the capacity of public-sector employees through diversity initiatives (Hur et al., 2010).
Representation in government increases democracy and legitimacy (Riccucci & Van Ryzin,
2017). When historically marginalized communities have a seat at the decision-making table, it
also leads to more equitable policy development (Krumholz & Hexter, 2020). Marginalized
communities then have increased trust in government decision making when there is more
representation (Koch, 2018). The evidence highlights that only 32% of full-time positions in the
U.S. Department of State during fiscal year 2018 were held by racial or ethnic minorities
(Government Accountability Office [GAO], 2020). This problem is important to address because
research has linked higher diversity in the workplace to better organizational performance and
decision making (Moon & Christensen, 2019).
5

Lack of diversity also affects the organizational performance and ability to implement
DEI initiatives and strategic plans. A lack of effective implementation of DEI initiatives in state-
level government has been recognized through several studies (Wyatt-Nichol & Antwi-Boasiako,
2012). Government agencies have begun hiring DEI directors and other designated change
agents to address equity concerns. Internal change agents are crucial to effectuate change in
government through technical and organizational knowledge to reduce bureaucratic barriers and
develop networks to advance their initiatives (Bankins et al., 2017). Without organizational
support, 37.3% of public-sector employees surveyed indicated that communication about
initiatives for change is limited to those directly concerned (Al-Alawi et al., 2019). Active
representation is important in government agencies due to individuals acting on their shared
values and interests of the social group they represent (Bradbury & Kellough, 2011).
Global Field SMART Goal
By 2025, state and municipal government agencies will model their DEIA strategic plan
after the federally normalized DEIA strategic plan. Executive departments and agencies shall
implement the government-wide DEIA Plan and assess their state of DEIA. While there is a
mandate at the federal government level to implement a DEIA strategic plan, this does not
extend to state and municipal level government offices (The White House, Office of the Press
Secretary, 2021). This goal was established based on the unknown of the performance gap but
following the direction of the U.S. federal government and executive departments. While some
state leaders have begun implementing DEI strategic plans across the nation, some states and
municipal governments are doing this better than others, and some are not doing it at all.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
Typically, strategic planning and organizational change are top-down processes in an
organization, requiring support and communication from leadership (van der Voet et al., 2016;
6

Wyatt-Nichol & Antwi-Boasiako, 2012). Within state and municipal government agencies, this
would be someone in leadership or a senior staff position, such as the Governor, Mayor, Chief of
Staff, and others. Another stakeholder group is the agency employees, as buy-in, perception of
DEI, and effort from all members of an organization are necessary to implement a strategic plan
(Barker et al., 2018). Ultimately, the third group of stakeholders at the epicenter of power
regarding DEI strategic plan implementation are the hired change agents, often with the title DEI
Director, Chief Equity Officer, and similar, who are brought into an agency to strategically blend
DEI work into current processes and plans. These hired change agents are given the job at the
agency to be innovative and create value by integrating DEI work into current practices (Risvik
& Hakon, 2018).
Stakeholder Group of Focus and Performance Goal for the Study
While the combined efforts of all stakeholders will contribute to the successful
implementation of a DEI strategic plan in state and local government organizations, the change
agents’ current capacity with regard to implementing DEI strategic plans is of particular interest.
Therefore, the stakeholders of focus for this study were individuals in positions dedicated to DEI
at state and municipal government offices. These positions are beginning to grow at the local
government level, with just over one in four of the 250 largest cities in America hiring Chief
Diversity Officer positions in 2018 (Cooper & Gerlach, 2019). The stakeholders’ goal is that by
2025, hired change agents at the local and state levels of government agencies will have
implemented a DEI strategic plan (Table 1). The goal exists, but the field study needed to
determine to what degree the goal is being met and how to improve on that performance. The
gap in performance is unknown.

7

Table 1
Mission and Goals
Field mission
Government should have a workforce that reflects the diversity of the American people.
Field performance goal
By 2022, state and municipal government agencies will model their DEIA strategic plan after
the federally normalized DEIA strategic plan
Change agent performance goal
By 2025, hired change agents at the local and state levels of government agencies will
implement a DEI strategic plan.

Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this study was to identify the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences on change agents at state and municipal agencies achieving their field goal to
implement a DEI strategic plan. While a complete performance evaluation would focus on all
stakeholders, for practical purposes, the stakeholder focused on in this analysis was hired change
agents at local and state levels of government agencies. Based on the need for research on state
and municipal level government’s ability to implement DEI strategic plans, the two research
questions aligned with Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis methodology:
1. What are the knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational influences related
to hired change agents implementing a DEI strategic plan?
2. What are the recommended knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational
solutions related to hired change agents implementing a DEI strategic plan?
Overview of the Conceptual and Methodological Framework
Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis, a systematic, analytical method that helps to
clarify organizational goals and identify the gap between the actual performance level and the
8

preferred performance level in an organization, was implemented. Assumed knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences that impact stakeholder capacity were generated based
on context-specific research as well as general learning and motivation theory. These influences
were explored by using a survey, interviews, and document analysis. Research-based solutions
were recommended and evaluated in a comprehensive manner.
Local government agencies function in an environment that has many stakeholders,
differing priorities, and complex political influences (van der Voet, 2014). Clark and Estes
(2008) explained that success in changing organizational environments and assessing
performance gaps includes three key factors: knowledge, motivation, and organization (KMO).
Knowledge refers to the information and skills needed to achieve performance goals. Motivation
is the internal process that keeps people going and moving forward. Organization refers to the
resources and processes related to the organization itself to assist in achieving performance goals
(Clark & Estes, 2008). Through the lens of KMO, this research specified KMO factors at state
and municipal government offices implementing DEI strategic plans.
The specific KMO factors that addressed this research topic were broken down into the
three different categories. The knowledge factors included the awareness of vocabulary,
concepts, and data related to what the organizational needs are. Wyatt-Nichol and Antwi-
Boasiako (2012) stated that the knowledge necessary for implementing DEI initiatives also
includes cultural competence and that workplace diversity is important for results and
representation. Factors of knowledge also included metacognitive factors, such as the ability to
reflect on organizational problems to make meaning of the DEI data and organizational needs.
Motivational factors looked at what change agents need to have, including self-efficacy and
intrinsic value. This meant individual change agent motivation was impacted by their expectancy
or belief that they can implement a DEI strategic plan and how much they value doing so (Elliot
9

et al., 2018). Collective efficacy was also important, with the individual belief in the organization
and teams to implement the DEI strategic plan (Borgogni et al., 2011).
The organizational factors included cultural models and settings. DEI leadership
positions and their ability to effectuate change related to prioritized initiatives at the agency, the
creation of a culture of psychological safety and trust, and giving DEI leadership roles the tools
they need to create change (Boon et al., 2021). Risvik and Hakon (2018) posited that change
agents require organizational backing in the integration of change initiatives across agency
departments to be successful. Thus, DEI strategic plans also require leadership commitment,
measurement, employee buy-in, and alignment with agency goals (Wyatt-Nichol & Antwi-
Boasiako, 2012).
Definitions
● Accessibility is defined as the design, development and maintenance of facilities,
information and communication technology, programs, and services, so all
individuals, including people with disabilities, can fully and independently use them
(The White House, Office of the Press Secretary, 2021).
● Change agent is an individual who oversees the job of initiating and managing
change in an organization and can be an internal employee or a new employee hired
to oversee a change process (Lunenburg, 2010).
● DEI strategic plan creates and defines standards of success and implementation of
DEI efforts at an agency (Hur et al., 2010; The White House, Office of the Press
Secretary, 2021).
● Diversity is the differences between individuals based on race, ethnicity, gender, age,
disability, national origin, sexual orientation, socio-economic status, religion, and
disability, and includes other unique characteristics and experiences (Wyatt-Nichol &
10

Antwi-Boasiako, 2012). The White House, Office of the Press Secretary (2021) also
defined it as “the practice of including the many communities, identities, races,
ethnicities, backgrounds, abilities, cultures, and beliefs of the American people,
including underserved communities” (para. 7).
● Diversity management is an organizational strategy to increase inclusiveness of
differences and be responsive to the needs of diverse groups of employees while
creating initiatives that emphasize organizational performance, recruitment, retention,
and development strategies to address underrepresentation (Wyatt-Nichol & Antwi-
Boasiako, 2012).
● Equity is defined by The White House, Office of the Press Secretary (2021) as the
consistent and systematic fair, just, and impartial treatment of all individuals,
including individuals who belong to underserved communities that have been denied
such treatment.
● Inclusion means the appreciation and acknowledgement of the expertise and skills of
individuals from all backgrounds (The White House, Office of the Press Secretary,
2021).
● Local or municipal governments are government agencies in towns and cities (Hur et
al., 2010).
● State government includes government agencies that make decisions regarding how
much power and authority the local governments in a state will have (Bowman,
2017).
● Strategic plan means planning efforts that are deliberate and disciplined to create
decisions and actions that determine and guide an organization on what it is, what it
does, and the reason why (Bryson et al., 2018).
11

Organization of Project
Five chapters are used to organize this study. This first chapter provided the reader with
the key concepts and terminology commonly found in a discussion about DEI strategic planning
in the public sector. The field mission, goals, and stakeholders, as well as the initial concepts of
gap analysis, were introduced. Chapter Two provides a review of the current literature
surrounding the scope of the study and details the assumed influences. Topics of strategic
planning and management, DEI strategic planning and management, organizational change, and
change agent positions like chief diversity officers will be addressed. Chapter Three describes
the methodology regarding the choice of participants, data collection, and analysis. In Chapter
Four, the data and results are assessed and analyzed. Chapter Five provides solutions, based on
data and literature, for closing the perceived gaps as well as the formulation of an integrated
implementation and evaluation plan for the solutions.

12

Chapter Two: Review of Literature
The problem of practice for this study was the low implementation of DEI strategic plans
at state and municipal government agencies in the United States. There are many inconsistencies
across the field of DEI work, with many organizations beginning to first develop statements, then
work toward strategic plans and initiatives. According to a survey administered by the Society
for Human Resource Management, only 39% of public-sector respondents reported an official
diversity definition for their organization (Wyatt-Nichol & Antwi-Boasiako, 2012). The first
section of this chapter will review the influences on this problem of practice, which includes the
background of strategic planning, DEI, the public sector, best practices, and challenges. It will
also detail the role of state and municipal government change agents, often titled chief diversity
officers. The second section of this chapter will review the conceptual framework and
explanation of the KMO influences used in this study. The chapter will end by addressing the
designated DEI change agents’ KMO influences.
History of Public-Sector Strategic Planning
To understand DEI strategic planning, it is beneficial to see how it emerged in the context
of strategic planning and the development of this work in the public sector. This section will
address the factors and variables that influence the degree that state and municipal government
change agents are implementing DEI strategic plans.
Strategic planning is used as a formal tool to determine stakeholders, agency direction,
and future actions and implementation required to guide the broader organizational practice
(Albrechts & Balducci, 2013; Bryson et al., 2018; Elbanna et al., 2016; George, 2020; George et
al., 2019; Kools & George, 2020). Starting in the 1960s, for-profit organizations began
developing processes, procedures, and tools for strategic planning (Bryson et al., 2018). The
Harvard policy model was among the first strategic planning models and introduced the strength,
13

weakness, opportunity, and threat analysis (George et al., 2019). Within this sector, strategic
planning aims to maximize performance and revenue and can be misconstrued as procedural
when really, it is a thorough approach to strategy formulation (Bryson et al., 2018; George et al.,
2019). Strategic planning can be done at an organizational level or within different departments
to determine priorities and goals (Bryson et al., 2018). The traditional approach includes the
formulation of strategic planning and then the implementation in sequential order (Elbanna et al.,
2016). The formulation of the plan assists with the implementation through developed action
plans that translate into short- and long-term steps toward implementation. The strategic
planning process includes a systematic approach to creating strategies, facilitating internal and
external analysis, solidifying goals, and creating plans (George et al., 2019). Research also
showed that outside of the formality of strategic planning, the two other components include the
degree to which participation in strategic planning occurs and the comprehensiveness of the
process.
George (2020) posited that strategic planning is not a set of fixed steps but has variation
due to the people involved, what the process looks like, and what plans are developed. In other
words, adopting strategic planning does not always lead to successful implementation and
requires stakeholder involvement, reflection, and putting strategy into practice. The steps for the
procedure of strategic planning include determining who should be involved, gathering internal
and external information, thorough analysis, and developing the plan (George, 2020; George et
al., 2019). Ultimately, when organizations utilize strategic planning, they are looking at two
important features: shifting from being comprehensive to selective in regard to the mission and
vision and being action- and project-oriented (Albrechts & Balducci, 2013).
14

Strategic Planning in the Public Sector
Beginning in the 1970s, strategic planning at government agencies became a common
practice due to changes in the political and public-sector environment (Berry & Wechsler, 1995;
Bryson et al., 2018; George, 2020; George et al., 2019; Poister et al., 2010; Poister & Streib,
1999). The idea was that if strategic planning worked in the private sector to increase
performance, then it would do the same in the public sector (George et al., 2019). It was also
noted that strategic planning may be more difficult in the public sector due to the high amount of
organizational and employee commitment required and the rules and laws in the field. While
strategic planning in the for-profit sector aimed to increase revenue, in the public sector, it
aligned goals, created continuity in efforts, and helped determine what organizations should be
doing and how (Bryson et al., 2018). This sector focus was due to reasons of accountability and
compliance as well. Federal agencies were required to participate in strategic planning through
the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 and the Government Performance and
Results Modernization Act of 2010 with the intent to increase agency performance.
Strategic planning in the public sector seeks to provide clarification of values and
objectives, reframe policy development with the end goal in mind, and analyze policy and goal
attainment. (George et al., 2019). There is a significant amount of variation in strategic planning
in the public sector due to jurisdictions, public authorities, management levels, and external
stakeholders (Poister et al., 2010). It also varies in terms of scope, breadth, timelines, and amount
of information collected. Bryson and Roering (1988) studied eight government agencies and
found that successful strategic planning in government includes the following elements: a strong
process sponsor, a champion or change agent, a planning team, expectations of delays or
disruptions, flexibility regarding plan development, and willingness to create and listen to
arguments around different evaluative standards. Bryson (2010) discovered benefits in the public
15

sector include improved decision making, increased organizational effectiveness and
responsiveness, improved effectiveness in broader societal structures like cross-sector
collaboration, human and social capital building, and improved competency.
Strategic Management
While strategic planning is considered the big picture, strategic management is an
extension of this, referring to the broader scope of managerial decision making and prescriptive
actions that determine organizational performance (Donald et al., 2001; Kools & George, 2020;
Poister et al., 2010; Poister & Streib, 1999). Strategic planning can help identify change
strategies, but it does not bring about the implementation of them, which is why strategic
management is necessary (Kools & George, 2020). Key attributes of strategic management
involve resource management, implementation, and evaluation on an ongoing basis (Poister &
Streib, 1999). To get to this stage and implement the big-picture strategic planning, organizations
must assess their capacity in areas like leadership capability, culture, and organizational
structures. Although leadership is necessary for strategic management, it actually operates
through all levels and administrative systems. Unlike strategic planning, strategic management is
not a linear process and requires continual monitoring, communication with internal and external
stakeholders, creating strategic agendas at all levels of the agency, and guiding all management
processes to support the strategic planning agendas. Poister and Streib (1999) stated,
The overall purpose of strategic management is to develop a continuing commitment to
the mission and vision of the organization. Nurture a culture that identifies with and
supports the mission and vision and maintain a clear focus on the organization’s strategic
agenda throughout all its decision processes and activities. (p. 312)
Strategic management approaches can include using established operating plans and anchoring
performance management processes in strategic goals and objectives while using project
16

management to braid the strategic planning agenda into all departments and mobilize support
through internal communications, external stakeholders, and legislation (Poister et al., 2010).
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Initiatives in the Public Sector
Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) is a term that is used to characterize organizational
policies and initiatives that aim to increase both the participation and representation of groups of
people who are historically marginalized (Dixon-Fyle et al., 2020; Garg & Sangwan, 2021;
Grissom, 2018; Ramirez, 2021; Westover, 2021; The White House, Office of the Press
Secretary). Diversity refers to the differences between, and the practice of including, individuals
with respect to communities, backgrounds, cultures, race, ethnicity, gender, age, disability,
national origin, sexual orientation, socio-economic status, religion, and other unique
characteristics and experiences (The White House, Office of the Press Secretary; Wyatt-Nichol
& Antwi-Boasiako, 2012). The White House, Office of the Press Secretary (2021) defined equity
as “the consistent and systematic fair, just, and impartial treatment of all individuals, including
individuals who belong to underserved communities that have been denied such treatment”
(para. 8). Inclusion refers to the appreciation and acknowledgement of the expertise and skills of
individuals from all backgrounds (The White House, Office of the Press Secretary, 2021).
Initiated through affirmative action and an argument of justice and equality, DEI work
has had a rhetorical switch between the business case, stating the economic benefits of a diverse
workforce, and the intrinsic argument moving beyond the business case (Dixon-Fyle et al., 2020;
Miller, 1995). This change was due to market competition, labor demands, and an increased need
for innovation. Studies showed that organizations with more than 30% women in senior
leadership show significantly better performance than those with 10–30%, with a 48%
performance differential between the most and least gender-diverse organizations (Dixon-Fyle et
al., 2020). This same study showed that organizations in the top quartile of ethnic and cultural
17

diversity outperformed organizations in the fourth quartile by 36%, with higher performance
differences with ethnicity than gender. Beyond the business case, DEI asks for social justice
through advancing staff development and inclusion and supporting equal opportunities
(Bleijenbergh et al., 2010). Moving beyond the business case is the need for all individuals to
feel a sense of belonging, which is when individuals feel a sense of comfort and that their
presence and participation are wanted (Westover, 2021). Belonging can also be considered the
intersection of DEI, where the values, views, and beliefs of all are engaged and integrated into
the culture of the organization. When employees feel that they are valued and belong, it increases
organizational diversity and staff retention and leads the way for more representation (Westover,
2021).
Representative Bureaucracy
Racial and ethnic representation and diversity in government offices are important to
increase legitimacy, democracy, and equitable policy creation (Mosher, 1968; Riccucci & Van
Ryzin, 2017). There is a need for ethnic and racial diversity in government systems so that all
communities have the same access to resources and support to succeed (Hero, 2017). Racial and
ethnic representation has a direct impact on the development and implementation of political life
and public policy in the United States (Michener, 2019). Mosher (1968) stated that government
performance and policy can be significantly improved by both passive and active representation
through the lens of representative bureaucracy. Riccucci and Van Ryzin (2017) argued that
passive, active, and symbolic types of representation in government are crucial. Passive
representation is shown through diversified staff and workplaces when the makeup of a
government office is reflective of the social composition of the community it serves and
promotes social equity. Active representation is seen when this diversity turns to public policy,
and symbolic representation is defined as passive activities affecting policy, which then increases
18

government legitimacy. Passive representation can turn to active representation when diverse
individuals are considered in outputs and outcomes of decision making and policy creation.
Representation is active in decision making due to individuals acting on their shared values and
interests of the social group they represent (Bradbury & Kellough, 2011). Each form builds off
the other for the effective functioning of government, and all forms of representation promote
diversity internally and encourage equity nationally (Riccucci & Van Ryzin, 2017).
In addition, Hero (2017) included descriptive, substantive, and symbolic as key forms of
representation. Descriptive representation looks at the basic presence of an individual, which
alone is not enough to create real representation and relies on a more substantive presence while
also noting active and symbolic representation. The different forms are interrelated and depend
on each other for success. GAO’s (2020) analysis showed that in the Department of State, the
proportion of African American employees was 15% in 2018, while the proportion of Hispanic
employees was 7% in 2018. The analysis also stated that White counterparts for Department of
State positions were more likely to be promoted even when education and professional service
were comparable. In comparison to their White counterparts, racial minorities were 4% less
likely to get a promotion, while ethnic minorities were 29% less likely to get a promotion (GAO,
2020).
Shanton (2014) also discussed descriptive representation, when the demographics of an
organization reflect the demographics of the community, and how it fosters engagement between
the community and government agencies to encourage more policies that speak for said
community members. Specifically noted, African American residents are more likely to watch
and participate in local elections when the representation is descriptive (Shanton, 2014).
Representation in different forms improves the effectiveness of government and increases
19

democratic participation. Diversity creates opportunities for individuals in government to create
equitable policies for their communities.
Historically minoritized communities have increased trust in the decisions and policies of
government offices when there is racial representation (Koch, 2018). The increase in diversity
initiatives can lead to passive representation, while active representation is seen through decision
making that reflects the interests of social groups. Bradbury and Kellough (2011) posited that
racial and ethnic representation in government not only leads to active representation but also
affects the decision making of majority government staff following interactions with staff who
are historically minoritized. The social origins of government staff influence the outcomes
citizens experience (Riccucci & Van Ryzin, 2017). Through the lens of representative
bureaucracy, a first step in working toward social equity is diversity in the organization through
passive representation, with an intent toward active representation by including more voices at
the table.
DEI Strategic Planning and Diversity Management
Creating a strategic plan that focuses on DEI has become a big-picture organizational
practice, including goals regarding hiring, recruiting, and retention aimed at increasing
representation, DEI training, data gathering, employee participation initiatives, mentoring,
inclusive cultures, and improved agency communication (Bryson et al., 2018; FDIC, 2021;
Grissom, 2018; Matton & Hernandez, 2004; Thomas, 2004; Westover, 2021). Since successful
organizational change can take years, creating a diversity plan is essential to institutionalize the
work (Hur & Strickland, 2015). DEI strategic plans tend to focus on culture, career,
communication, consistency, and community (FDIC, 2021). The culture of an organization is
important to foster belonging and representation and prioritize DEI through leadership support
and funding priorities (Thomas, 2004). Career focuses include recruiting and hiring strategies
20

and reviews, professional development and education, career advancement, and retention (FDIC,
2021; Thomas, 2004). Communication about DEI initiatives with an agency is also necessary for
successful plan development and implementation (Bryson et al., 2018; Westover, 2021). In a
study of 10 companies, 60% of respondents said communication is crucial for DEI, but only 20%
stated this as a key initiative at their company (Matton & Hernandez, 2004). The same study
showed that data gathering and sharing were discussed by 70% of companies, and targets,
milestones, and goal setting were discussed by 50%, with 40% of all companies citing these as
key initiatives. Information gathering, data collection, and organizational evaluations and
analysis enhance consistency measures (Matton & Hernandez, 2004).
Organizations implement diversity plans as more of a big picture centered around
affirmative action and equal employment opportunities, while diversity management is a
component of this referring to the actions at the agency focusing on representation,
inclusiveness, fairness, and performance (Ashikali & Groeneveld, 2015; Hur & Strickland, 2015;
Lorbiecki, 2001; Wyatt-Nichol & Antwi-Boasiako, 2012). Similar to strategic management,
diversity management is the operationalizing of the overall strategic plan that has been
developed. Diversity management typically involves the following managerial tasks and
components: equal opportunity and representative hiring; diversity training for employees; task
forces to discuss inclusion and opportunities for employees who are historically
underrepresented; inclusion of groups who are minoritized at the decision-making table; affinity
groups; and mentoring programs (Dobbin et al., 2011; Fujimoto & Härtel, 2017). Diversity
management aims to increase the representation of minoritized and marginalized groups at an
agency and create a culture of inclusiveness where employee differences are valued (Ashikali &
Groeneveld, 2015; Soldan & Nankervis, 2014).
21

DEI Strategic Planning and Diversity Management in the Public Sector
With increasing racial and ethnic diversity in the United States, public sector
organizations began creating DEI-focused plans to address growing workforce diversity,
discrimination, and federal requirements like equal employment opportunities and affirmative
action (Kim & Park, 2017; Matton & Hernandez, 2004; Pitts, 2005; Pitts et al., 2010). Diversity
management and planning are much more common in the public sector than in the private sector
due to legislative requirements (Kim & Park, 2017). While legislation aimed to decrease
discrimination in the workforce, DEI strategic plans aim to eliminate bias and obstacles to
inclusion and advancement. Diversity management in the public sector seeks to improve decision
making to best serve citizens and communities through representative democracy (Kim & Park,
2017; Pitts, 2005).
Strategic planning around DEI in the public sector has a heavy focus on equal
opportunity, hiring, and retention, to increase diverse representation, which leads to more
equitable policy development (Edmonds et al., 2020; Flores, 2019; Gillborn, 2020; Hero, 2017).
Edmonds et al. (2020) reviewed assumptions in policy models and acknowledged that
stakeholders tend to look for models that mirror their own views. The risk for ethnocentric
decision making stems from politicians using their own bias and experiences to inform decisions
while making assumptions that their experience is universal. Hero (2017) argued that policy can
be defined as racial, party racial, or implicitly racial, requiring racial representation in the
creation and decision making. Accordingly, racial and ethnic diversity in government agencies
leads to a better depiction of community interests in legislation. Flores (2019) also highlighted
how personal experiences and opinions affect policy development.
22

Federal Government
Executive Order 13583 on DEIA in the federal workforce required that a DEIA strategic
plan be created government-wide at the federal government level for the first time in history
(The White House, Office of the Press Secretary, 2021). While it was most recently mandated as
a whole-of-government initiative at the federal level, many federal agencies have been
incorporating plans to increase DEI in their agencies since the 1990s (Wyatt-Nichol & Antwi-
Boasiako, 2012). A 1999 study of 120 federal agencies that had reported having diversity
initiatives showed that 72% connected those initiatives to the strategic plan. Having DEI as part
of the strategic plan ensures it is part of the organizational goals, rather than being standalone,
risking being cut if funding is an issue. A study conducted in 2004 found that nearly 90% of
federal agencies surveyed had reported having a diversity management program, but with large
variations regarding their components (Pitts et al., 2010). The variations create obstacles to
practical implementation across the public-sector field, especially as it moves into the state and
municipal levels.
State and Municipal Governments
DEI plans and diversity management have started to emerge at state and local levels due
to the number of direct services provided to communities and an interest in increasing agency
representation and legitimacy (Hur et al., 2010; Nishishiba, 2012; Wyatt-Nichol & Antwi-
Boasiako, 2012). State and local governments opt to adopt strategic plans to address
environmental demands and agency direction with innovation (Poister & Streib, 1999). Research
has demonstrated that local governments that do have a DEI or diversity plan show significantly
higher rates of diverse or non-White hires than governments that do not have a plan (Hur &
Strickland, 2015). Feeney and Camarena (2021) found that, in 2016, higher level management in
local government was still primarily led by White males, with women accounting for 20% of
23

mayors and 25.8% of department heads, and people of color accounting for only 17% of mayors
in medium and small cities in the United States. This study posits that agencies led by groups
that are homogenous are not as likely to be guided by diverse interests, values, and perspectives.
State leaders have been working to increase DEI efforts with calls for action from
communities during COVID-19 and the Black Lives Matter movement (NGA, 2021). A study
conducted in 2020 assessed the DEI goals, activities, and challenges of state governments to
determine the actions they have taken toward DEI efforts. Out of the 23 states who responded to
the survey, 11 states said they had developed DEI strategic plans and incorporated DEI into their
current strategic plans. The initiatives cited by state governments most included building an
organizational infrastructure to support DEI work, surveys, and issuing statements of DEI
commitment. A total of 18 states cited a lack of expertise and training as a challenge to
successfully creating and implementing diversity management initiatives. Cooper and Gerlach
(2019) discovered that not even one-fourth of the large cities they sampled had hired positions
designated for DEI work, which reflects the DEI adoption challenges at the state level as well.
While state agencies may have diversity management policies in place, there is a
disconnect between how agencies share that diversity is valued. A study reviewing state
government websites showed only 15 states, or 30%, had job listings that included language
related to diversity (Rubaii-Barrett & Wise, 2007). The same study reviewed agency mission
statements to discover 44% of their sample included no mention of diversity, while 20%
included diversity language with no mention of its importance. Research has also shown a gap
between the messaging of diversity management and the experiences of employees at state
agencies (Soldan & Nankervis, 2014). This study determined that while government agencies
have shown a commitment to diversity management, there is little evidence of effective
implementation. This problem is highlighted in a recent study of 35 local government offices
24

with diversity management policies still showing White populations overrepresented as the
majority of employees (Hur & Strickland, 2015).
Best Practices
Research shows that successful diversity management and DEI plan implementation
include factors like employee involvement, leadership support, a strong diversity-focused
mindset, professional training, and data (Konrad et al., 2016; Matton & Hernandez, 2004; Risvik
& Hakon, 2018; Sanyal et al., 2015; Thomas, 2004; van der Voet et al., 2016). Initiatives that
focus on increasing diversity rely on the interrelationships of policy development and
implementation, an agency culture of change, and inclusive leadership (Jin et al., 2017). A
strength of strategic planning in the public sector is the reduction in uncertainty, requiring
leadership and management to forecast the future and examine the impact to create appropriate
actions in response (Elbanna et al., 2016). Best practices for successful implementation include
organizational resources, both personnel and financial, and incorporate specific stakeholders with
cross-organizational expertise (George et al., 2019). Organizations are more likely to succeed in
DEI strategic planning when they have leadership and employee support, as well as the financial
investment of a designated change agent or champion focused primarily on the work. Another
study emphasized communities of practice, where acting and learning happen in communities
and practices are sustained or changed over time (Bryson, 2010). Incorporating training and
community groups to discuss DEI strategic planning assists with developing a plan
representative of the organization’s needs.
Challenges
Challenges to the successful implementation of DEI plans include lack of leadership
support, employee attitude and buy-in with diversity initiatives, strategic alignment of DEI with
agency goals, and negative perceptions of individuals tasked with diversity management
25

(Bankins et al., 2017; Nishishiba, 2012; Pour et al., 2018; Westover, 2021). Another challenge is
the disconnect in the public sector between the DEI strategic planning formulation and its
implementation, which can be caused by differing political priorities and stakeholders (Elbanna
et al., 2016). There is also research noting a challenge that while there may be more government
agencies at the local and state level creating strategic plans, there is a lack of clarity about what
that means in practice (Bryson, 2010). Often, departments or organizations that most need
strategic planning to increase effectiveness are the least likely to engage in the practice, creating
a paradox discovered by Bryson and Roering (1988) and discussed in later research (Bryson,
2010). A significant challenge for DEI strategic planning and diversity management is that it can
occur as standalone or add-on policies that are seen as extra and, therefore, not incorporated into
the daily operations of the organization (Bleijenbergh et al., 2010). Diversity policies are often
an agency goal themselves rather than being connected with agency goals, which does not
translate into implementation and makes them less effective (Groeneveld & Verbeek, 2012).
Influencing Organizational Change
The drivers influencing organizational change in government agencies include internal
pressures from staff, external pressures from communities and stakeholders, and industry norms
(Dobbin et al., 2011; Hur et al., 2010; Pitts et al., 2010). With increasing diversity in the
American workforce, internal pressures on staff can influence the adoption of diversity
management, with research showing support from women and people of color (Dobbin et al.,
2011). Among internal pressures, Hur et al. (2010) included city and town manager influences
like their age, gender, race, ethnicity, and education level. External pressures include the
demographic makeup of the constituent community, population size, and political environment.
Dobbin et al. (2011) observed that organizations are also more likely to adopt change initiatives
and practices that become common across the industry. As public-sector DEI strategic plans gain
26

popularity across the United States, governments would be more inclined to adopt similar
strategic planning (Pitts et al., 2010).
Organizational performance is also a strong rationale for adopting diversity management
(Dobbin et al., 2011; Moon & Christensen, 2019; Rabl et al., 2020; Riccucci & Van Ryzin,
2017). Higher diversity benefits organizational performance and decision making. Moon and
Christensen (2019) stated that organizational performance suffers through conflicts with a lack of
racial diversity. While one focus of their study discussed the benefits of organizational diversity
on performance, they also reviewed contrasting views on how it shapes performance. The results
of their study showed that racial diversity was positively linked to performance, while gender
and age were not as much of a performance indicator. Rabl et al. (2020) claimed that
organizations with a commitment to diversity and successful implementation create employees
with more positive behaviors. Results of their study showed that perceived organizational
inclusion efforts made employees believe the organization was more ethical, which affected their
own judgements and behaviors toward other employees and the organization. Riccucci and Van
Ryzin (2017) noted in their research that racial and ethnic diversity is also positively associated
with job satisfaction. This quantitative study determined a positive correlation between diversity
and job satisfaction and stressed workforce diversity as an asset to the organization. Public sector
organizations then seek to invest in diversity management for the many benefits to which it is
tied. Diversity in management also increases performance by supporting inclusion efforts
(Riccucci & Van Ryzin, 2017). This diversity results in a representative bureaucracy, creating
legitimacy and democracy in government agencies. As discussed, there are many reasons to
adopt DEI strategic planning, hire individuals to act as change agents, and facilitate plan
implementation in the public sector (Konrad et al., 2016).
27

DEI Agents of Change, The Chief Diversity Officer
A strong diversity-focused professional facilitates agency direction and DEI planning and
implementation (Bryson, 2010; Cooper & Gerlach, 2019; Hancock, 2018; Konrad et al., 2016;
Matton & Hernandez, 2004; Ng et al., 2021; Nishishiba, 2012). Effective change process
champions have been cited as a core element for successfully implementing strategic plans since
the 1980s (Bryson & Roering, 1988). A recent study showed that change momentum in the
public sector is originally created through top-down support, maintained by the specified change
agents, and further advanced by others accepting the change (Barker et al., 2018). An example of
strong leadership support is the development or creation of these specific DEI change agents who
have access to senior leadership and expertise in the field (Matton & Hernandez, 2004).
Typically, change agents designated to DEI work hold senior-level administrative
positions at organizations (Gravley-Stack et al., 2016). These roles are most successful when
built on a solid foundation of commitment and resources. Characteristics of successful diversity
change agents in organizations include extensive skills and experience in their field of work and
personal value systems that are aligned with diversity and inclusion and inform an agency
philosophy of such (Gravley-Stack et al., 2016; Matton & Hernandez, 2004). Ng et al. (2021)
posited that change agents in the DEI field, or chief diversity officers, have great success when
they have strong relationship-building capabilities and can make connections among groups to
identify organizational issues and barriers. A national study of chief diversity officers in higher
education sectors showed that 57% were women, 87% were people of color, and 98% reported
working in predominantly white institutions (Nixon, 2017).
Bankins et al. (2017) posited that designated internal change agents effectuate change in
government through technical and organizational knowledge to remove bureaucratic barriers and
utilize networks to advance their initiatives. These individuals also spark motivation in others
28

which leads to sustainability change (Bryson, 2010). Chief diversity officer positions identify
issues of inclusion and advocate for change aligning with the strategic plan and appropriate
policies (Arnold & Kowalski-Braun, 2011). With governments being majority white, these
positions are necessary to push DEI work forward but are ineffective on their own without
additional support and resources.
Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework for this study used the gap analysis methodology of Clark and
Estes (2008). This proposed that successful organizational change, stakeholder study, and
performance gap assessments include the KMO factors. Problem-solving through these factors
was founded on two processes: (a) understanding stakeholder goals regarding the organizational
goal and (b) identifying assumed performance influences in the KMO areas based on general
theory, context-specific literature, and an understanding of the field. Knowledge refers to the
information and skills the stakeholder needs to achieve performance goals. Motivation is the
internal process that keeps people going and moving forward, which can be stakeholder-specific
or collective of a group. Organization refers to the resources and processes related to the
organization itself to assist in achieving performance goals. Figure 1 details the conceptual
framework of this study, with the lighter gray rectangle including the KMOl assumed influences
on change agent ability and, ultimately, the implementation of DEI strategic plans. The figure
represents the conceptual framework adapted from the gap analysis KMO framework (Clark &
Estes, 2008).

29

Figure 1
Conceptual Framework

In this study, Clark and Estes’s (2008) framework was adapted as a needs analysis for
innovation of the implementation of DEI strategic plans at state and municipal government
agencies. The following section will detail the stakeholder-specific KMO assumed influences.
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences
This section will discuss in detail the KMO influences that impact the ability of change
agents in state and local governments to implement DEI strategic plans.
Knowledge and Skills
As the practice of DEI strategic planning is not standardized across any sector yet,
change agents in state and municipal governments, or the stakeholder of this study, will need to
30

have significant knowledge in this area to create and implement these plans. Krathwohl (2002)
distinguished four separate categories of knowledge, including factual, conceptual, procedural,
and metacognitive. Factual knowledge is what the content is, including concepts and vocabulary.
Conceptual knowledge explains the content, and procedural knowledge is how it is done or
completed, while metacognitive is reflection and awareness of one’s own understanding. There
are six assumed knowledge influences that relate to change agents, which have been categorized
by the four types to which the literature was applied.
Factual Knowledge Influence: Stakeholder Knows the Concepts and Vocabulary of Diversity,
Equity, and Inclusion Work
Factual knowledge refers to terminology and specific details and elements of a topic
(Krathwohl, 2002). In the context of implementing a DEI plan, change agents overseeing this
work will need to have knowledge of vocabulary and concepts related to the development and
application of DEI and strategic planning. Without having the factual knowledge of what key
concepts mean and how to apply them, these plans cannot be created or implemented in an
organization. There is one factual knowledge influence related to achieving the stakeholder goal.
First, if change agents are to contribute to DEI initiatives and the strategic planning of
how DEI will be incorporated at their government agency, they will need to know the concepts
and vocabulary of DEI work (Garg & Sangwan, 2021; George, 2020; Konrad et al., 2016; Miller,
1995; Nishishiba, 2012; Ramirez, 2021). Without prior expertise and skill in diversity work,
individuals who are tasked with leading agency efforts would not be able to appropriately define
and articulate the work for their organization.
31

Procedural Knowledge Influence: Stakeholder Needs to Know How to Follow the Steps of
Strategic Planning Process
Procedural knowledge refers to knowing how to do something, the techniques, and the
criteria for appropriate procedures (Krathwohl, 2002). Procedural knowledge is critical for both
the planning and the implementation of diversity management, as it is the how within the
knowledge influences in Clark and Estes’s (2008) framework. This type of knowledge also
provides the ability to understand how to build upon the conceptual knowledge influences to
establish how to create and implement DEI strategic plans. In addition, it creates more clarity
into the techniques and skills necessary to complete the work focused on DEI. Procedural
knowledge assists in identifying the influences noted throughout the literature along with Clark
and Estes’s (2008) framework. The following section details the procedural knowledge influence
found in the literature.
When it comes to strategic planning, change agents will need to know how to follow the
appropriate steps, both generally through the process of development and specifically through
their organizational procedures (Berry & Wechsler, 1995; Buick et al., 2017; Donald et al., 2001;
George, 2020; Jin et al., 2017; Pitts et al., 2010; Shahi et al., 2019). The general steps of strategic
planning vary based on model and organizational sector. The procedural knowledge necessary
for developing a strategic plan includes knowing the process of planning based on best practices
in the field. It also requires that change agents are familiar with the strategic planning steps at
their organization, including who is involved, how often it occurs, areas of focus, and how it is
reviewed and approved.
32

Metacognitive Knowledge: Stakeholder Needs to Plan Their Use of DEI Data to Meet
Organizational Needs
Metacognitive knowledge is strategic and involves an awareness of one’s own cognition
(Krathwohl, 2002). Specifically, metacognitive knowledge is the ability to reflect on or make
meaning of skills, including planning the approach and monitoring progress. Metacognition
requires an awareness of one’s own cognition in relation to a subject. This knowledge influence,
based on the literature, requires stakeholders to make meaning of DEI data and initiatives at an
agency. Metacognition also assists stakeholders in creating plans that reflect the needs and
opportunities that arise from said data. This knowledge type relies on an understanding of an
individual’s own thought processes and how they may create meaning out of the factual and
conceptual knowledge they have. Metacognitive knowledge also looks to improve on knowledge
in new ways and learn from the knowledge an individual may already have. There is one
identified metacognitive knowledge influence.
Relating to DEI strategic planning and diversity management, change agents will need to
plan their use of DEI data to meet the needs of their organization (Ashikali & Groeneveld, 2015;
Birk, 2020; George, 2020; Hur & Strickland, 2015; Konrad et al., 2016; Lorbiecki, 2001; Pitts,
2005; Wyatt-Nichol & Antwi-Boasiako, 2012). change agents will need to be able to reflect on
the data on staff demographics and diversity regarding recruiting, hiring, advancement, and
retention. This extends to job satisfaction, employee engagement, and accessibility as well.
Change agents will also need to know the most important principles of workplace diversity
(Bradbury & Kellough, 2011; Krumholz & Hexter, 2020; Miller, 1995; Moon & Christensen,
2019; Nishishiba, 2012; Riccucci & Van Ryzin, 2017). Having this knowledge will allow better
strategic planning by creating a business case and rhetorical justification for the development and
implementation of diversity and inclusion initiatives. Change agents need to know how to use
33

this data to plan the organizational approach and progress monitoring of DEI work and strategic
planning. Table 2 shows the stakeholder’s specific knowledge factor influences and the related
literature.

Table 2
Summary of Assumed Knowledge Influences on Stakeholder’s Ability to Achieve the
Performance Goal
Assumed motivation influences Research literature
Factual (terms, facts, concepts)
Stakeholder knows the concepts and
vocabulary of DEI work.
George, 2020; Garg & Sangwan, 2021; Konrad
et al., 2016; Miller, 1995; Nishishiba, 2012;
Ramirez, 2021
Procedural (follow steps, follow procedures, know how to)
Stakeholder needs to know how to follow
the steps of strategic planning process.
Berry & Wechsler, 1995; Buick et al., 2017;
Donald et al., 2001; George, 2020; Jin et al.,
2017; Pitts et al., 2010; Shahi et al., 2019
Metacognitive (reflect, monitor, improve on knowledge in new ways)
Stakeholder needs to plan their use of
DEI data to meet organizational needs.
Ashikali & Groeneveld, 2015; Birk, 2020;
George, 2020; Hur & Strickland, 2015;
Konrad et al., 2016; Lorbiecki, 2001; Pitts,
2005; Wyatt-Nichol & Antwi-Boasiako,
2012

34

Motivation
While knowledge and skills create the foundation for DEI strategic planning, motivation
is what energizes it and creates focus on goals and outcomes (Clark, 2005). Motivation includes
attitude, believing knowledge is worth knowing and having the skills from the training,
confidence and self-efficacy, and a commitment to apply what is learned to job duties. The
assumed influences for change agents implementing DEI strategic plans at state and municipal
agencies are placed into four categories in motivation theory: value, self-efficacy, collective
efficacy, and goals.
Value: Stakeholder Needs to Consider Conducting DEI Work Useful for Themselves
Clark and Estes (2008) explained that within motivational influences, performance is
higher when the person involved values the work being done. This research detailed four types of
value, including interest, utility, importance, and benefit. Interest is the pleasure and satisfaction
that someone gets from doing work or a task (Elliot et al., 2018). Interest is also the intrinsic
value that an individual holds relating to the task at hand. Motivation and performance are
increased when an individual takes satisfaction in working on DEI initiatives (Elliot et al., 2018;
Pintrich, 2003). Individuals who are intrinsically motivated will often feel more autonomy and
self-determination related to achievement as well (Pintrich, 2003). The literature shows that there
is a crucial value influence for the successful implementation of DEI strategic plans. This
influence of intrinsic value and interest is detailed below.
Since DEI work is reflective and personal, change agents must consider conducting DEI
work useful for themselves (Birk, 2020; Bradbury & Kellough, 2011; Konrad et al., 2016; Moon
& Christensen, 2019; Mosher, 1968; Nishishiba, 2012; Rabl et al., 2020; Riccucci & Van Ryzin,
2017; Risvik & Hakon, 2018). Individuals tasked with the job of effectuating change in the DEI
context, and creating strategic planning to reflect such a change, typically have both personal and
35

professional ties to the work, which creates expertise in the area. This work must be seen as
beneficial and important to the individual conducting it at state and municipal agencies. Change
agents tasked with this work often gain their experience early on from their own personal
experiences highlighting the value of DEI.
Self-Efficacy: Stakeholder Needs Confidence in Leading Teams Through Change Initiatives
Self-efficacy is an appropriate lens by which to examine the problem of ineffective
diversity management practices in state government because of the impact belief in achievement
has on motivation and performance. Self-efficacy is a person’s belief in their ability to perform
or achieve (Bandura, 2000). This belief reflects their opinions and expectations about their
individual capacity and ability in their actions toward the achievement of a goal or for the desired
performance. Self-efficacy reflects the effort a person spends on an activity and influences self-
regulatory processes (Elliot et al., 2018). These processes include goal setting and the use of
strategy to accomplish a performance goal or outcome. Self-efficacy also affects the persistence
of an individual. If an individual does not believe that they can complete a task successfully, they
may convince themselves to prioritize something else and put little effort into the task (Clark,
2005). Also, a person’s level of learning and self-regulation impacts the self-efficacy they feel
when creating thoughts and behaviors in regard to achieving goals (Schunk & Usher, 2019).
In the case of DEI strategic planning, change agents need confidence in their ability to
lead teams through change initiatives (Bandura, 2000; Buick et al., 2017; Elliot et al., 2018;
Koch, 2018; Schunk & Usher, 2019). The efficacy of change agents in state and municipal
governments should be appropriate in that it is generally optimistic, but task specifics are
grounded in reality and reasoning (Pintrich, 2003). Individuals who have positive self-efficacy
also contribute positively toward the collective efficacy of a group (Borgogni et al., 2011).
36

Collective Efficacy: Stakeholder Needs to Have Confidence That All Involved Staff in Their
Team/Department/Group Possess the Skills to Implement Diversity Management Initiatives
Collective efficacy is the shared belief of a group of individuals or a team in their
collective power to produce results (Bandura, 2000). Individuals in teams have differing goals
and expectations and can be harder to motivate than individuals alone (Clark, 2005). Teams are
defined as two or more people working together through different roles and with different skills
to accomplish a common goal. Clark (2005) recommended five goals for motivating teams that a
leader should strive for: fostering mutual respect; helping weaker individuals believe their work
is crucial for the success of the group; facilitating a shared belief in the collaborative abilities of
the group; holding individuals accountable for their efforts; and directing the group’s
competitiveness outside their team and organization. Higher perceptions of collective efficacy
correlate with higher motivational investment, persistence, and, ultimately, better
accomplishments (Clark, 2005). Teams are motivated most when they trust the expertise and
collaboration of the other individuals involved, which increases their confidence to meet a goal
(Clark, 2005). The interrelationships of individuals in a group influence their performance as a
team and what the team can accomplish (Jackson & LePine, 2003). This is important as
collective voice is a component of local government agencies and can increase the effectiveness
of diversity management initiatives.
Staff need to have confidence that they can be successful in diversity management work
(Bandura, 2000; Borgogni et al., 2011; Bradbury & Kellough, 2011; Buick et al., 2017; Dobbin
et al., 2011; George, 2020; Konrad et al., 2016; Pitts, 2005; Shanton, 2014). Individuals who are
involved in diversity management can feel discouraged when initiatives do not produce changes
quickly, which in turn affects self-efficacy and the persistence to continue diversity management.
Increased time and effort devoted to evaluating DEI work in organizations and creating strategic
37

options increase staff confidence that the process outcome will be positive (Elbanna et al., 2016).
Initiatives like hiring diverse workforces and mentoring programs can increase self-efficacy by
way of modeling and creating opportunities for success (Hur & Strickland, 2015). Diversity
management initiatives that increase racial and ethnic diversity in hiring and promotion can build
efficacy among employees through representation and shared values (Bradbury & Kellough,
2011). When organizational leaders create and outwardly support diversity initiatives, it
increases the collective efficacy of staff and positively affects the persistence of the individuals
(Konrad et al., 2016).
Goals: Stakeholder Needs Clear Goals Related to the Production of the DEI Strategic Plan
Clear, relevant, and challenging goals serve to increase motivation and performance
(Pintrich, 2003). The establishment and agreement upon these goals serve to motivate and direct
staff toward a common outcome with purpose. Clark and Estes (2008) discussed how goal
setting influences effective performance improvement. Additionally, a performance goal must tie
into the organizational goals with clear linkages. The way in which goals are structured has a big
impact on acceptance, with the most effective goals being concrete, challenging, and current.
When goals are not very clear, people tend to focus on tasks specific to their own work rather
than the work of the organization. DEI work sets out to accomplish many goals relating to
organizational performance and achievement, social justice, and intrinsic value and belonging
(Dixon-Fyle et al., 2020; Miller, 1995).
Change agents need clear and measurable goals related to the production of the DEI
strategic plan to be successful (Albrechts & Balducci, 2013; Bryson et al., 2018; Dixon-Fyle et
al., 2020; Dobbin et al., 2011; Donald et al., 2001; George, 2020; Jin et al., 2017; Poister et al.,
2010; van der Voet et al., 2016). This means that while the DEI plan and diversity management
at the organization will have their own set of goals and objectives, there needs to be clarity and
38

direction provided specific to the production of the plan, aligning with the vision and mission of
the organization. Table 3 shows the stakeholder’s motivation influences and the related literature.

Table 3
Summary of Assumed Motivation Influences on Stakeholder’s Ability to Achieve the Performance
Goal
Assumed motivation influences Research literature
Value
Stakeholder needs to consider
conducting DEI work useful for
themselves.
Birk, 2020; Bradbury & Kellough, 2011;
Konrad et al., 2016; Moon & Christensen,
2019; Mosher, 1968; Nishishiba, 2012; Rabl
et al., 2020; Riccucci & Van Ryzin, 2017;
Risvik & Hakon, 2018
Self-efficacy
Stakeholder needs confidence in their
ability to lead teams through change
initiatives.
Bandura, 2000; Buick et al., 2017; Elliot et al.,
2018; Koch, 2018; Schunk & Usher, 2019
Collective efficacy
Stakeholder needs to have confidence
that all involved staff in their
team/department/group possess the
skills to implement diversity
management initiatives.
Bandura, 2000; Borgogni et al., 2011;
Bradbury & Kellough, 2011; Buick et al.,
2017; Dobbin et al., 2011; George, 2020;
Pitts, 2005; Konrad et al., 2016; Shanton,
2014
Goals
Stakeholder needs clear goals related to
the production of the DEI strategic
plan.
Albrechts & Balducci, 2013; Bryson et al.,
2018; Dixon-Fyle et al., 2020; Dobbin et al.,
2011; Donald et al., 2001; George, 2020; Jin
et al., 2017; Poister et al., 2010; van der Voet
et al., 2016

39

Organization
Clark and Estes (2008) explained that addressing organizational work processes and
resources is necessary for assessing performance gaps. Organizational culture is the most
important work process in organizations as it decides how employees work collaboratively to
achieve their goals (Clark & Estes, 2008). Cultural models describe core values, attitudes, goals,
and processes (Schein, 2017). Cultural settings are things you can hear and see that are visible
manifestations of the cultural models. Culture exists in settings where two or more people
connect (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). Both cultural settings and models influence the way in
which staff interact with each other, leadership, and initiatives at their agencies. Gallimore and
Goldenberg (2001) defined the different components of organizational gaps, including cultural
settings (resources, policies, and procedures) and cultural models (espoused beliefs and values).
The assumed organizational influences for change agents implementing DEI strategic plans are
divided among these categories, with one resource influence, one policy and procedure
influence, and one culture model-related influence. These organizational influences are identified
below.
Resources: Stakeholder Needs Leadership Support to Implement DEI Strategic Plan (Cultural
Settings)
Resources are necessary to achieve performance goals in an organization (Clark & Estes,
2008). Resources can include time, funding, people, and more, and are the cultural settings that
you can see, hear, and feel. This type of cultural setting is developed from cultural models, with
the espoused beliefs, values, and taken-for-granted assumptions of the organization determining
their development (Schein, 2017). Resources are required by organizations in tangible and
intangible forms to achieve goals. Tangible forms of resources in this study include professional
40

development training. For DEI strategic planning, the literature details the need for supportive
leadership behavior. The assumed resource influence for change agents is detailed below.
Leadership support is an essential need for change agents to implement DEI strategic
plans (Al-Alawi et al., 2019; Bankins et al., 2017; Barker et al., 2018; Bryson et al., 2018; Jin et
al., 2017; Nishishiba, 2012; Pour et al., 2018; van der Voet et al., 2016). Research shows that
best practices commonly cite leadership buy-in and strong commitment as factors in the
achievement of diversity management initiatives and embedding DEI work in strategic plans
(George et al., 2019; Jin et al., 2017). While change agents are often designated to launch and
uphold initiatives, these roles are limited without the investment from organizational leadership
(Buick et al., 2017). Leadership can help set the tone for organizational priorities like training,
communication, and information to increase the ability of designated change agents.
Policies and Procedures
Policies and procedures are types of cultural settings in an organization (Clark & Estes,
2008). These artifacts detail the visible phenomena and structures of the organizational setting
(Schein, 2017). Processes specify how people, resources, and values connect and interact specific
to the organization. Policies set the parameters and rules of the organization for employees to
follow. Lastly, procedures tell groups or individuals how to do something properly in their
organization. Sustaining change characteristics relate to the development of systems and policies
that help the change initiative persist (Costanza et al., 2016). The influence related to policies
and procedures is identified below.
Stakeholder Needs to Have Agency Policies That Align With DEI Strategic Plans
and Initiatives (Cultural Settings). Change agents need to have agency policies that align with
DEI strategic plans and initiatives to effectuate sustainable change (Birk, 2020; Buick et al.,
2017; Groeneveld & Verbeek, 2012; Jin et al., 2017; Kim & Park, 2017; Pitts et al., 2010; Risvik
41

& Hakon, 2018; Shahi et al., 2019). Policies that inhibit participation, do not support the DEI
strategic plan’s steps and goals, or, worse, are contradictory influence the cultural models and the
motivation of those involved. Organizational policies should either support or incorporate the
DEI strategic plan and its components for it to be successful and sustaining. When there is a lack
of alignment between the agency’s vision and goals and DEI-specific vision and goals, the work
is often seen as an add-on to the agency’s status quo. This, in turn, creates a trade-off between
equity and efficiency, where the cohesion of the two seems like work in itself, and employees
may feel they do not have the ability to do both (Andersen & Maibom, 2020).
Stakeholder Needs Organizational Commitment to DEI Strategic Planning
(Cultural Models). Along the same trajectory, change agents need strong organizational
commitment to DEI strategic planning (Al-Alawi et al., 2019; Bankins et al., 2017; Buick et al.,
2017; Jin et al., 2017; Konrad et al., 2016; Nishishiba, 2012; Risvik & Hakon, 2018; van der
Voet et al., 2016; Westover, 2021). From this perspective, the ability of change agents to
effectuate change in local government is reliant on the government organization’s involvement
and investment in the change initiative. Diversity management relies on a reciprocal relationship
with policy development and how it is enacted at each agency. In addition, diversity management
depends on an organization consistently committing to the DEI plan that is developed (Jin et al.,
2017). Organizational commitment can also look like resource allocation, including funding
sources for diversity management initiatives, support staff to implement projects, and financial
and time investments in developing a comprehensive DEI strategic plan specific to the agency's
needs. Table 4 presents a summary of the assumed organization influences.

42

Table 4
Summary of Assumed Organization Influences on Stakeholder’s Ability to Achieve the
Performance Goal
Assumed organization influences Research literature
Cultural settings: resources
Stakeholder needs leadership support to
implement DEI strategic plan.
Al-Alawi et al., 2019; Bankins et al., 2017;
Barker et al., 2018; Bryson et al., 2018; Jin
et al., 2017; Nishishiba, 2012; Pour et al.,
2018; van der Voet et al., 2016
Cultural settings: policies, processes, and procedures
Stakeholder needs to have agency policies
that align with DEI strategic plans and
initiatives.
Birk, 2020; Buick et al., 2017; Groeneveld &
Verbeek, 2012; Jin et al., 2017; Kim &
Park, 2017; Pitts et al, 2010; Risvik &
Hakon, 2018; Shahi et al., 2019
Cultural models
Stakeholder needs organizational
commitment to DEI strategic planning.
Al-Alawi et al., 2019; Bankins et al., 2017;
Buick et al., 2017; Jin et al., 2017; Konrad
et al., 2016; Nishishiba, 2012; Risvik &
Hakon, 2018; van der Voet et al., 2016;
Westover, 2021

Summary
Although the rationale behind DEI work has evolved over time, the importance and value
of DEI strategic planning and diversity management have only increased (Dixon-Fyle et al.,
2020). Specific to the public sector, diversity improves organizational performance, legitimacy,
equitable policy development, and positive employee perceptions (Michener, 2019; Mosher,
1968; Riccucci & Van Ryzin, 2017). As DEI is becoming more of an industry norm, the practice
of hiring individuals tasked with the oversight of diversity management is also increasing
(Matton & Hernandez, 2004). These designated change agents work to implement DEI strategic
43

plans and braid diversity management into organizational policies and procedures. While these
change agents are part of senior leadership in state and municipal governments, they have KMO
needs that must be met for them to be successful. These influences identified in Chapter Two
will be used as the foundation for methodology and data collection in Chapter Three.

44

Chapter Three: Methods
The purpose of this study was to identify the KMO influences on change agents at state
and municipal agencies achieving their field goal to implement a DEI strategic plan. While a
complete performance evaluation would focus on all stakeholders, for practical purposes, the
stakeholder focused on in this analysis was hired change agents at local and state levels of
government agencies. Based on the need for research on state-level government’s ability to
implement DEI strategic plans, the questions that guided this gap analysis are the following:
1. What are the knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational influences related
to hired change agents implementing a DEI strategic plan?
2. What are the recommended knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational
solutions related to hired change agents implementing a DEI strategic plan?
Conceptual and Methodological Framework
This study utilized Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis framework, using systematic
and analytical methods to clarify organizational goals and identify gaps between the current and
the preferred performance. Assumed KMO influences that impact stakeholder capacity were
generated based on context-specific research as well as general learning and motivation theory.
These influences were explored by using surveys, interviews, and document content analysis.
Research-based solutions will be recommended and evaluated in a comprehensive manner in
Chapter Five.

45

Figure 2
Gap Analysis Chart Process

Note. Adapted from Turning Research into Results: A Guide to Selecting the Right Performance
Solutions, by R. E. Clark & F. Estes, 2008. Information Age Publishing, Inc. Copyright 2008 by
Information Age Publishing, Inc.

Overview of Design
This was a mixed methods field innovation study, combining both qualitative and
quantitative data (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The strategies of
inquiry included a quantitative survey, qualitative interviews, and qualitative document analysis
(Table 5). This research design aligned with the purpose of the study by identifying KMO factors
influencing the implementation of government DEI strategic plans and providing recommended
solutions to meet the performance goal (Clark & Estes, 2008). Utilizing qualitative interviews
emphasized the lived experiences and KMO influences on the stakeholder of focus (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). The method of qualitative interviews acknowledged the commitment to social
justice through a tenet of critical race theory that centralizes experiential knowledge through self-
narration (Solórzano & Yosso, 2002).
46

Table 5
Data Sources
Research questions Survey Interviews
Document
analysis
What are the knowledge and skills,
motivation, and organizational influences
related to hired change agents
implementing a DEI strategic plan?
X X X
What are the recommended knowledge and
skills, motivation, and organizational
solutions related to hired change agents
implementing a DEI strategic plan?
X X

Participating Stakeholders
The participants in this study were individuals in leadership positions specifically
designated to do DEI-related work at state and municipal government offices. These designated
change agents provided the most to be learned from regarding the development and
implementation of, and KMO influences on, DEI strategic planning as it was their responsibility.
The individuals in these roles were also responsible for the majority of DEI planning for the
entirety of the agency and are the epicenter of change in this work. Position titles included chief
diversity officer, chief equity officer, DEI director, and EDIA director. Change agents were
sampled using three criteria presented in Table 6.

47

Table 6
Participant Criteria
Required criteria
Individuals in leadership positions designated to do DEI work for the agency
Individuals in these positions at a state or municipal government agency
Individuals who have been in these positions for at least a year

Participants were initially identified through a purposive sampling procedure, where I had
access to a list of these individuals and could sample them directly (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
Recruitment was done through national and state collaborative meetings and working
relationships to identify participants that qualified. Additional recruitment was done through the
LinkedIn platform to identify individuals in these roles in state and municipal government
agencies for survey and interview participation where it was necessary. This study aimed to
survey at least 20 people and exceeded that by six individuals, but ultimately only 20 met the
criteria and were included in the data analysis. After the survey was complete, eight participants
were interviewed, ending with the document analysis of two individuals’ organizational
materials. All instrument collections were entirely separate processes.
Survey Sampling Criteria and Rationale
The following sections detail the survey sampling criteria and rationale.
Criterion 1
The first criterion was that individuals were in leadership positions designated to do DEI
work for the agency. This meant that the purpose of the individual’s position at the agency was
to work on DEI plans and initiatives. They were intended to be the hired individual to create and
implement DEI strategic plans, along with guiding the diversity management activities
48

throughout the agency. To successfully answer the first research question and establish an
understanding of what impact the assumed KMO influences have on success, the survey
respondents held these types of positions.
Criterion 2
The second criterion was that individuals in these positions were employed at a state or
municipal government agency. As this study sought to identify the KMO influences on
implementing DEI strategic plans in state and municipal governments, the participants must have
been employed in DEI leadership roles in this field. Although there were similarities in diversity
management in the private and public sectors, the emphasis of this research was on the local
level of government organizations. As such, all survey respondents were employed in this sector
to qualify to participate.
Criterion 3
The third criterion was that individuals in these positions were in their role for at least a
year to have a thorough understanding of the agency procedures and culture. Strategic planning
and strategic management, in general, require a comprehension of agency policies, procedures,
and culture. While background or expertise in strategic planning or project development was not
necessary, familiarity with the agency and the internal processes was. The criterion for
participation was not based on this background or expertise but was based on holding the
position. As many agencies began hiring for DEI change agent roles, there was a risk that both
the position and the initiatives related to DEI would not be established or consistent within the
first year of development. Individuals who participated in the survey were in their position for a
minimum of 1 year to qualify to take the survey, as they were better equipped to share their
perception of the KMO influences on implementing DEI strategic plans and diversity
management at their agency.
49

Survey Sampling Strategy and Rationale
The sampling strategy for the survey was purposive, utilizing established collaboratives
and working relationships and using the LinkedIn platform for additional recruitment (Creswell
& Creswell, 2018). 55 individuals were identified to receive the survey, with the goal that a
minimum of 20 would participate. This number of participants was chosen to provide a more
consistent response regarding Research Questions 1 and 2, establishing a baseline and the KMO
influences. As additional participants were needed, a snowball approach was used, which
involved asking participants to recommend others who qualified to take the survey. This
approach might have led to sampling bias, where those recommended may have had similar traits
to those who had already participated. To avoid sampling bias, this study began with an original
sample that was as diverse as possible (Kirchher & Charles, 2018). The best defense against bias
is when the initial sample is sufficiently varied, and chain referral sampling can be utilized so
that if a snowball approach is necessary, it is built upon variety. The survey recruitment was
broad across many state and municipal government agencies. The survey was administered at the
beginning of data collection after institutional review board (IRB) approval. The survey was
created in Qualtrics and administered via an anonymous link sent by email or LinkedIn
messaging.
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale
The following sections detail the interview sampling criteria and rationale.
Criterion 1
The first criterion was that individuals were in leadership positions designated to do DEI
work for the agency. This meant that the purpose of the individual’s position at the agency was
to work on DEI plans and initiatives. They were intended to be the hired individual to create and
implement DEI strategic plans, along with guiding the diversity management activities
50

throughout the agency. To successfully answer the first research question and establish an
understanding of what impact the assumed KMO influences have on success, the interviewees
held these types of positions.
Criterion 2
The second criterion was that individuals in these positions were employed at a state or
municipal government agency. As this study sought to identify the KMO influences on
implementing DEI strategic plans in state and municipal governments, the participants must have
been employed in DEI leadership roles in this field. Although there were similarities in diversity
management in the private and public sectors, the emphasis of this research was on the local
level of government organizations. As such, all interviewees were employed in this sector to
qualify to participate.
Criterion 3
The third criterion was that individuals in these positions were in their role for at least a
year to have a thorough understanding of the agency procedures and culture. Strategic planning
and strategic management, in general, require a comprehension of agency policies, procedures,
and culture. While background or expertise in strategic planning or project development was not
necessary, familiarity with the agency and the internal processes was. The criterion for
participation was not based on this background or expertise but was based on holding the
position. As many agencies began hiring for DEI change agent roles, there was a risk that both
the position and the initiatives related to DEI would not be established or consistent within the
first year of development. Individuals interviewed were in their position for a minimum of 1 year
to qualify to be interviewed, as they were better equipped to share their perception of the KMO
influences on implementing DEI strategic plans and diversity management at their agency.
51

Interview Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
The sampling strategy for the interviews was purposeful convenience through working
relationships and researcher knowledge in the field (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). A snowball
approach was also used as necessary to gain adequate participation by asking individuals who
were interviewed to recommend someone they knew who could be interviewed. Emails were
sent to individuals to request study participation (Appendix A). Eight individuals were
interviewed for this study. Individuals who participated in interviews may have also taken the
survey but were not required to do so to be selected for an interview. As the sample was small,
qualitative interviews were the most effective method to collect data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
The interviews were conducted after the survey was completed and created a wide-ranging
understanding of the perceptions and experiences of the designated change agents tasked with
implementing DEI strategic plans. The interviews also allowed me to identify the recommended
solutions to address the gaps identified through the KMO framework.
Document Analysis Sampling Criteria and Rationale
The following sections detail the document analysis sampling criteria and rationale.
Criterion 1
The first criterion was that the document provided was a state or municipal agency
strategic plan or publicly available document related to DEI strategic planning. This criterion
was necessary to make a comparison and see the relation between the strategic plan and
processes and how DEI was, or was not, embedded in the big-picture goals and policies of the
agency. This document for analysis focused on the implementation of DEI at the specific agency.
This criterion was necessary to create a thorough understanding of the current DEI strategy and
diversity management related to the organization. This document analysis identified the KMO
influences and needs for the successful plan implementation, addressing Research Question 1.
52

Criterion 2
The second criterion was that the document came from the organization of an individual
who participated in an interview. The documentation was provided by an individual who
participated in a semi-structured interview or made publicly available via the internet to provide
a more comprehensive understanding of their responses and to provide documentation to back
their responses, showing the opportunities for recommended solutions and thus addressing
Research Question 2.
Document Analysis Sampling Strategy and Rationale
The document analysis sampling was done through the interviewees. Two individuals
were identified to provide their DEI strategic plan along with their agency-wide strategic plan for
the study. The two individuals then either emailed the plans to me after the completed interview
or provided a link to the plans if they were publicly available online. The participants prepared
the strategic plans for me after the study had begun (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Access to these
documents allowed a more comprehensive analysis of KMO-related performance gaps while also
identifying priorities and possible solutions (Bowen, 2009).
Data Collection and Instrumentation
The data collection methods used in this study included a survey, semi-structured
interviews, and document analysis. The triangulation of data for this study promoted more
credibility and validity (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) while providing thorough data sets to identify
the KMO needs and recommended solutions. After IRB approval, the survey was administered.
Separate from the survey data collection, the interviews were scheduled after IRB approval as
well.
53

Surveys
Surveys were created and administered through the Qualtrics software. All surveys were
in English and did not require interpretation. The Information Sheet for Exempt Research was
embedded in the survey and required acknowledgement to continue to the questions. See
Appendix B: Information Sheet for Exempt Research. There were 20 survey questions aligned
with the following categories: background/demographic, knowledge, opinions and values, and
experience and behavior (Patton, 2002). The first three questions detailed the participant and
their role and experience. Each subsequent question was directly related to an influence
identified in Chapter Two (See Appendix C). To avoid cognitive overload, the survey items
asked only one question and used appropriate language to maximize participant comprehension
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The survey had five open-ended items. Three questions required
selection from a list or ordering items, and the remainder of the questions included Likert scales
or degree markers (Appendix D). Six of the questions related to the knowledge influences, four
questions related to the motivation influences, and seven questions related to the organizational
influences. These questions assisted in identifying the KMO needs in the field study gap
analysis. The survey respondents were identified and recruited upon IRB approval in July 2022.
The Qualtrics survey link was emailed to participants in August and September of 2022. The
survey stayed open for 15 days, with a reminder email being sent to participants to complete the
survey after 5 days, notifying them they had an additional week to participate. After the 15 days,
there were not 20 participants, so a snowball sampling approach was used to ensure substantial
participation. After additional recruitment, to reach the minimum participant number, the survey
closed at the end of September 2022.
54

Interviews
Eight one-time semi-structured interviews were conducted with people who were in DEI
leadership roles at state and municipal government agencies. The number of participants was
important for gaining multiple perspectives (Johnson & Christensen, 2015). Semi-structured
interviews support two-way communication and are flexible for respondents to provide more
information for each question asked (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The semi-structured
interviews used an interview guide with open-ended questions to allow respondents to share
experiences related to the research questions with additional prompts and to elicit follow-up
questions not included in the guide (Johnson & Christensen, 2015; Patton, 2002). The semi-
structured approach aligned the questions with the KMO influences identified in the research but
also allowed individuals to expand on their perceptions (see Appendix E). The categories of the
interview questions included background, experience and behavior, knowledge, opinions, and
values (Patton, 2002). Six of the questions related to the knowledge influences, four questions
related to the motivation influences, and seven questions related to the organizational influences.
See Appendix F: KMO Interview Protocol. Interviews were scheduled for 1 hour each in
September 2022, allowing for flexibility in timing to encourage rich descriptive responses.
Interviews aimed to be around 30 minutes total but were scheduled for 60 minutes to allow for
additional time when necessary. Interviews were conducted one per day over 2 weeks.
Interviews were conducted by video conference via Zoom and were audio recorded with the
informed consent of the participants. The audio recordings were transcribed and then analyzed
for common themes and coding in a Google Drive spreadsheet.
Documents
This study collected documents from two agencies for analysis. The documents used
were DEI strategic plans and whole-agency strategic plans provided by the change agents
55

responsible for DEI at state or municipal government offices (Appendix G). These documents
were obtained through the selected interviewees and were either emailed to me after the
interview, or the participant shared a link via the Zoom chat feature if the documentation was
publicly available online. Additional documents used were publicly available through internet
searches and hosted on the agency website. The additional documents included were news
articles and interviews, meeting minutes, training presentations, progress reports, committee
documentation, and other material related to DEI. The document analysis provided the context of
the field in which the participants operated, provided supplementary data to support the survey
and interview responses, and also verified findings (Bowen, 2009). The analysis of these
documents produced a more thorough understanding of the KMO influences identified in
Chapter Two and throughout the survey and interview data analysis. The document analysis also
yielded data that synthesized important themes.
Data Analysis
The assumed KMO influences detailed in Chapter Two were used as a priori codes
during the initial analysis, and then axial and pattern codes were created to thoroughly analyze
the data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The coding and analysis were done through a Google Drive
spreadsheet. Survey data was analyzed in Qualtrics to show themes, commonalities, and outliers
in responses. Identified patterns and themes from the Qualtrics survey reports were added within
the a priori codes in the Google Drive spreadsheet. During interviews, I took notes and reflected
on the participants’ reactions, my reactions, emergent theories, possible connections and
overlaps, as well as patterns and common themes (Saldaña & Omasta, 2018). These notes and
reflections were also added to the spreadsheet as researcher notes. Once interviews were
completed, they were transcribed and coded in Google Drive documents, then analyzed and
coded initially through the a priori codes of assumed influences, with additional codes
56

determined as they emerged. Document analysis came last after the completion of surveys and
interviews. Analyzing these documents began with a relevance determination, evaluation of
completeness, and the evaluation of the instruments and framework from which it was created
(Bowen, 2009). This analysis also determined what elements of the DEI strategic plan were
absent or incomplete and what should have been considered while noting what existed. Data was
reviewed and coded twice to ensure thorough analysis.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
I engaged in several methods to enhance the credibility of this study and ensure its
trustworthiness. During data collection, I routinely used member checking and rich description to
ensure credibility in the research while checking to make sure their interpretation of the research
was correct (Creswell & Miller, 2000). In each interview, I used member checking by
summarizing the interview in their own words to each interviewee, giving them an opportunity to
correct or add anything they felt necessary. I also used peer debriefing through their dissertation
chair, dissertation assistant, and classmates by asking questions and seeking advice throughout
the research (Creswell & Miller, 2000). I brought my own biases into this study as someone who
had listened to both positive and negative experiences of individuals at the epicenter of DEI
work at government agencies. As a previous state government employee who dedicated time to
DEI, I brought with me a bias through their own experiences and those of people with whom
they had interacted. While I acknowledged my positionality in this research, I included
reflexivity as a credibility measure to allow readers to know as well (Creswell & Miller, 2000).
To add to the study’s credibility, negative or discrepant information was also presented, and
codes were cross-checked by an individual different than me (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
57

Validity and Reliability
This research design aligned with the purpose of the study by identifying KMO factors
influencing the implementation of government DEI strategic plans. I used internal validity
checks through peer review to determine whether the surveys and interview questions were
measuring what was intended (Salkind, 2014). This study aimed to construct validity to identify
the theoretical framework of KMO in the lived experiences and perceptions of the stakeholder of
focus. Validity strategies were incorporated throughout data analysis by triangulation with the
three data sets: survey, interviews, and document analysis. These data sets were analyzed to
build common themes through coding, member checking to ensure the accuracy of interviews,
and reflexivity of researcher bias to investigate interpretations and how themes were shaped
based on researcher experience (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Consistency measures utilized
included peer review or examination and a thorough audit trail (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Ethics
The responsibility of the researcher is to ensure the study is ethical in regard to the
individuals participating. This study did not anticipate that participants would experience more
risk than normally encountered during daily life, but several considerations and measures were
employed to protect participants. Prior to beginning this study, I completed the CITI training and
obtained a certificate. Next, as recommended by Creswell and Creswell (2018), all interview and
survey respondents received an informed consent form prior to participation in the research. This
informed consent included permission to record interviews for the purpose of transcription and
analysis (Glesne, 2011). Participation in the study was voluntary, and I explained consent to all
participants as well as how they were involved and how they could exit the study. All
participants could have decided not to participate at any time. Participants were not direct reports
to me, as that could create coercion of power to encourage participation. As such, no one who
58

participated had a direct work relationship with me (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Glesne (2011)
suggested that participants have a right to privacy and an expectation that the researcher will
protect their confidence and maintain their anonymity. All participants were given pseudonyms,
ranging from Participant 1 to 8 (P1–8), and organizations were categorized into either state or
municipal governments without locations or agency names. All data were kept confidential and
saved on a password-protected device only I had access to on an encrypted cloud drive. All audio
recordings, video recordings and transcripts were kept on password-protected devices for which
only I had the passcode and backed up on an encrypted cloud drive. There were no physical
copies of documents, and all virtual forms were stored on a device for which only I had the
password and were saved to an encrypted cloud drive to protect confidentiality. Lastly, the study
was submitted to IRB for review and approval prior to any data collection to ensure the
appropriate precautions were taken for the participants (Glesne, 2011).
Role of Investigator
Being a White English-speaking American woman grants me comfort in being
represented in the dominant culture, in the creation of most policies, and in government
expectations that perpetuate the oppression of communities to which I do not belong. I am also a
state government employee, with my own perceptions and lived experiences of the research topic
at my agency and cross-agency collaborations. My positionality created a blind spot and limited
my understanding of equity as I could never comprehend the full extent of barriers and
challenges that public policy and lack of government representation create. My positionality also
created an undue burden of emotional labor for participants who might have been people of color
experiencing inequities to share with the researcher to better understand and advocate. I needed
to consistently analyze and be aware of the way I was viewed by others and what discomfort my
presence created in certain spaces, and what I was asking of those who participated. I also
59

needed to make sure to locate and identify how my views and values showed in the research
design and methodology and sought to understand my part in challenging public policy and
government planning that did not represent all citizens (Holmes, 2020). Individuals who
participated in this research could have experienced much more salient identities being on the
axis of oppression, and I worked to avoid oversimplifying language, continuously analyze the
space they occupied, and seek other viewpoints (Chandler, 2020).
This study required a reciprocal relationship between the participants and me. I needed to
be aware of discrimination among communities and work to understand different cultures and
ethical views (Mertens, 2012). This study sought to engage participants as partners in research
and utilized ongoing member checking during interviews to ensure the way value was given to
the study purpose was truly representative of participants’ knowledge and existence. It was vital
to work with participants to define what counts as knowledge through their experience and be
aware that knowledge is subjective and political and will be influenced by my political beliefs as
well (Hinga, 2019).

60

Chapter Four: Results and Findings
This chapter shares the results and findings of this study. Results in this chapter were
organized according to the KMO influences described in Chapter Two. Multiple sources of
quantitative and qualitative data were collected to validate the assumed influences. In this study,
survey, interview, and artifact data were collected to understand the KMO influences on the
ability of change agents in state and municipal governments to implement DEI strategic plans.
First, influences were documented through survey responses, and second through the analysis of
the answers to the qualitative interviews. The first research question guided data collection and
framed this chapter: What are the knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational
influences related to hired change agents implementing a DEI strategic plan?
The second question in this study will be answered in Chapter Five: What are the
recommended knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational solutions related to hired
change agents implementing a DEI strategic plan?
Participating Stakeholders
This study’s participants held leadership positions specifically designated to do DEI-
related work at state and municipal government offices. Their position titles included chief
diversity officer, chief equity officer, DEI director, and EDIA director. They were required to
meet three criteria presented in Table 6. The survey was shared with 55 individuals, with 26
participating, for a 47% response rate. Of the 26 respondents, six reported being in their role for
less than 1 year, 13 stated they were in their roles for 1 to 3 years, three were in their roles for 3
to 5 years, and four were in their roles for 5 or more years. Due to the participation criteria, six
respondents were excluded from the survey, creating a new sample size of 20 for the survey.

61

Figure 3
Responses to Item: “How Long Have You Been in Your Current Role?” n = 20

The eight interviewees were in their roles for at least 1 year (Table 7). To ensure
confidentiality and anonymity, the interviewees are referred to as P1 through P8 in the following
sections. The total number of individual respondents from both the survey and the interviews
was 28. The participants were split, with 50% being employed through a state government and
50% being employed through a municipal government. It was unknown how many survey
respondents had established DEI strategic plans for their agencies, but five out of the eight
interviewees discussed having these formal plans.

62

Table 7
Participant Place of Employment and Agency DEI Strategic Plans
Method Total number of
participants
State
government
Municipal
government
Agency had DEI
strategic plan
Survey 20 10 10 Unknown
Interview 8 4 4 5

Out of the survey respondents, 15 reported being entirely responsible for DEI work at
their agency, while five reported they also had other responsibilities on top of their DEI work
(Table 8). Of the eight interviewees, seven were entirely responsible for DEI, with one being
assigned DEI agency work on top of other responsibilities.

Table 8
Participant Position Responsibilities
Method Employee entirely
responsible for DEI
Employee with multiple
responsibilities, including DEI
Survey 15 5
Interview 7 1

63

Determination of Assets and Needs
The data collection methods used in this study included a survey, semi-structured
interviews, and document analysis. The triangulation of data for this study promoted more
credibility and validity (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) and provided thorough data sets to identify the
KMO needs. I sought to interview eight to 10 individuals and completed eight, as the others did
not follow through with participation. Within the survey responses, an asset was identified if
70% or more of the participants were in agreement. A need was quantified as below 70%. Assets
in interviews were identified where there was 70% agreement among participants. In relation to
interviews, a need reflects topics that some but not most identified. Document analysis supported
areas of assets where there were easily accessible and identifiable materials to provide evidence
of the assumed influences.
To further determine assets or needs, each instrument was weighted against one another.
Interview data was weighted at 50%, survey data was weighted at 30%, and document analysis
data at 20%. The rationale for the instrument weighting was due to the rich data obtained from
the semi-structured interviews. The interviewees’ engagement, along with the thorough
responses, gave this instrument a higher weight. The survey questions varied in the quantity of
participant responses, and although there were more participants, they did not answer every
question or go into detail through the quantitative instrument. Lastly, document analysis was
weighted with the lowest number as it was dependent on publicly available documentation and
was not an all-encompassing representation of the organizations analyzed.
Results and Findings for Knowledge Influences
The results and findings are reported in the following section using the knowledge
categories and the assumed needs or assets for each category. The findings will be organized into
sections representing the data collection methodology.
64

Factual Knowledge
The factual knowledge influence was that the stakeholder knows the concepts and
vocabulary of diversity, equity, and inclusion work.
Survey Results
Change agents were asked to identify the appropriate definitions of six words and
concepts used in DEI work. These items were diversity, equity, inclusion, accessibility, DEI
strategic plan, and diversity management. The accurate identification of these definitions ranged
from 50% for one item to 92% for another item. There were 12 responses to this survey question.
Participants met the cut score of 70% for five out of six definitions. For this influence to be
determined an asset, all definitions must have met the cut score. Accordingly, this influence is
determined in the survey as a need (Table 9).

Table 9
Survey Results for Matching the Word or Concept With the Definition or Description, n = 12
Factual knowledge item Percentage Count
Diversity 83% 10
Equity 92% 11
Inclusion 75% 9
Accessibility 83% 10
DEI strategic plan 92% 11
Diversity management 50% 6

65

Interview Findings
All eight interviewees were able to define the key vocabulary and explain the concepts of
DEI work. Interview responses covered specific definitions to conceptually how DEI applies to
their organization, but all responses showed a thorough comprehension of the terms and
concepts. Starting with diversity, P2 said,
Diversity within our team is defined as representation. So, having diverse identities, both
hidden and visible, and lived experience in the city as well as obviously in the city itself
staff-wise, making sure that leadership is as diverse, and we can get a plethora of great
ideas and perspectives.
This definition closely aligns with how diversity is defined by the federal government and
throughout the literature cited in previous chapters. Comparably, P4 posited,
Diversity is acknowledging and celebrating our differences because we all have
differences, whether that be race, ethnicity, religion, where we’re from, the type of
families that we grew up in. And so, diversity is also, to me, diversity of thought and
perspective.
P4 went on to discuss this in relation to inclusion when they said,
Inclusion is creating a safe space for, so that people, all people, feel like they can be
involved and all people feel valued as part of a process or part of a part of an organization
or part of a culture. It’s actually putting the celebration of diversity and the equity work
into action to make people feel safe and welcomed in a space.
The responses showed a cognition of the vocabulary and the ability to conceptualize the work in
the DEI field. While some participants individually defined the terms, some defined them in
relation to each other. For example, P7 defined DEI by stating:
66

It’s acknowledging the, the differences, the unique cultures, backgrounds, needs, abilities,
identities of the people that are organized within a context, a culture, a geographic region,
a workplace, a school, so some kind of community and their group together. And within
any sort of social context, there’s going to be a lot of variety of backgrounds and needs.
And it’s about making a space for all of those individuals.
This response showed a thorough understanding of the terminology and intersection of the terms
regarding DEI work. Other interviewees also described the concepts of DEI work in relation to
each definition while expanding on how that looked in their specific roles and organizations. P5
described this by saying,
I look at it as along the same common continuum with diversity really being sort of the
who, the characteristics of who exist in our spaces and environments. Inclusion being
how those individuals are able to participate, and equity being what is the outcome of
their participation. … I generally look at accessibility as a factor of inclusion in order to
be able to participate, is access made available.
P5’s response shows a coherent knowledge of the terminology in relation to the work being
done, described as on a continuum. This concise understanding and application of the concepts
was similarly mirrored by P8, who said,
So, for me, equity through the lens of organizations, equity is your policy, procedures are
accommodations to make sure that people are treated and receive the resources, allocate
them to be the most successful. So, with an organizational lens, equity is your policy and
procedure and accommodates diversity. That’s really your quantitative side. So, that is
representation for both internal and external stakeholders specifically in recruiting there.
And then inclusion would be our culture.
67

This comprehension shows the presence of the factual knowledge of DEI vocabulary and
concepts. P2 also explained the terms in relation to their work by saying,
Inclusion is a way to really have people’s voice be included in the process. So, not just to
have people be in the room, but then also have people feel a sense of belonging, a sense
of purpose, power, and voice. And then, with equity, which is the most important
component, is a matter of trying to understand is there power distribution amongst all
communities? Are there still systemic inequities in current data outcomes? So, equity is
really about how I think of its structure. And so, making sure that if you were to have a
program, the outcomes wouldn’t be predicted by race, gender, and other identities.
While the definitions and explanations varied in how they were framed, this was determined to
be an asset as all participants had knowledge of the concepts and vocabulary of DEI work (Table
10).

Table 10
Factual Knowledge Interview Summary, n = 8
Participant Defined
yes/no
Quote
P1 Yes The way that I define equity and inclusion here under the office
of diversity and inclusion is to amplify the way that we look
at service.

It is really about service delivery, advocacy, ensuring that
they’re able to get access to resources that will help amplify
the message and the distribution of what that office in service
provides.
P2 Yes Diversity within our team is defined as representation.

Inclusion is a way to really have people’s voice be included in
the process.

68

Participant Defined
yes/no
Quote
[Equity] is a matter of trying to understand is there power
distribution amongst all communities.
P3 Yes It’s not all about skin color, and we don’t even dive into this
idea of diversity unless we go past that to include
socioeconomic status, country of origin, age. There’s just so
many different things that go into it.

In our profession, it’s about bringing folks together.
P4 Yes Diversity is acknowledging and celebrating our differences. …
Equity is ensuring that people get what they need in order to
thrive. … Inclusion is creating a safe space so that people, all
people, feel like they can be involved, and all people feel
valued as part of a process of an organization or part of a
culture.
P5 Yes Diversity really being sort of the who. … Inclusion being how
those individuals are able to participate and equity being what
is the outcome of their participation.

I generally look at accessibility as a factor of inclusion in order
to be able to participate, is access made available.
P6 Yes Making sure we provide opportunity and not just provide
opportunity but let those underrepresented or underserved
groups know that things were attainable.
P7 Yes It’s acknowledging the differences, the unique cultures,
backgrounds, needs, abilities, identities of the people that are
organized within a context, a culture, a geographic region, a
workplace, a school, so some kind of community and their
group together.
P8 Yes With an organizational lens, equity is your policy and
procedure and accommodates diversity, … and then inclusion
would be our culture.

Document Analysis
The document analysis showed a clear understanding of the vocabulary and concepts of
DEI work through multiple sources while looking at the organizations of two interviewees. The
69

document analysis included the agency websites, strategic plans from two municipal offices,
several media interviews with the two participants, a presentation created by one interviewee, a
news article written on each agency and change agent role, and a strategic plan update report.
These documents showed concrete definitions of the terminology being used and the application
of the concepts at the agency. This was determined to be an asset.
Summary
The assumed influence that stakeholders need to know the concepts and vocabulary of
DEI work was determined to be a need in the survey results but was determined to be an asset in
the interview responses and the document analysis. There was only one definition that did not
meet the cut score of 70% on the survey, with all others exceeding that rate. Although this did
not meet the requirements of an asset, 100% of the interviewees understood and gave examples
of the terms and concepts while also relating them to their state or municipal agency. The many
document sources also provided evidence of this knowledge. Accordingly, this influence is
determined to be an asset.
Procedural Knowledge
The procedural knowledge influence was that the stakeholder needs to know how to
follow the steps of strategic planning process.
Survey Results
The change agents were asked to describe the strategic planning process at their agency.
This survey question showed 83% of respondents were able to detail the process and procedures
of strategic planning in their organizations. The responses included details about who was
involved, the planning steps, metrics or indicators, and outcomes. The responses that did not
detail the processes stated a lack of involvement in developing strategic plans, with one response
70

noting the process was ineffectual. Overall, the survey responses were 13% above the cut score
of 70%, showing this influence as an asset (Table 11).

Table 11
Survey Results for Procedural Knowledge Item, n = 12
Procedural knowledge item: walk me through the strategic
planning process at your agency
Percentage Count
Demonstrated knowledge 83% 10
Did not know 17% 2

71

Interview Findings
All eight interviewees could provide a comprehensive description of the strategic
planning process at their organization. Interview participants responded with a range of
descriptions of the processes, including the purpose, individuals involved, steps in the process at
different levels of staffing, and review procedures. The procedural knowledge was also evident
in the specific details provided regarding agency strategic plans.
When discussing the initial process at their agency, P7 said, “How it starts is that the
board designs the goals that need to be discussed and that need to be addressed in the strategic
plan. So, they provide the agency with a framework.” They then shared, “They were just in that
process when I got here. And they pulled together different people from across the agency, …
And then we did a design thinking process to brainstorm some ways to start to operationalize
these goals.” This top-down leadership approach was also discussed when P2 shared,
We have a diversity advantage plan. It’s a citywide plan that was voted in and approved
by city council back in 2014. And that plan went through a number of community
stakeholders, also internal staff, input work planning. And it developed 60 points. So,
from that plan, it lays sort of the map for how we want to do this work.
The development of the strategic plan will have many different stakeholders involved depending
on the agency structure and procedures. These include leadership, agency departments,
community members and groups, and staff members. P3 posited, “the purpose of strategic
planning is really to decide where we’re going. And part of the strategic planning process brings
all the voices together because strategic planning cannot be done in a vacuum.” They expanded
and said, “The president and the board need to decide what we’re going to do with all these
voices and how we can bring them together and what our opportunities are moving forward…
72

It’s about capturing that in a single document.” P4 discussed the alignment of leadership working
with stakeholders outside of their agency and said,
The strategic plan starts off as a draft, and each team member is supposed to bring their
goals to the conversation as it aligns with the mayors and then bring an action plan to put
in that strategic plan. And then, it goes through a review process, so the administration
gets to review it. The departments that we work with, we oftentimes run our strategic
plan by department, and then we also work with our community partners to make sure
that the work that we’re doing is not duplicative, but also it’s supportive of their efforts in
the community because we know that a lot of people are already doing the work that we
are doing.
The emphasis on community engagement and feedback in the strategic planning process was
echoed by P5 as well. P5 described their agency's strategic planning process by stating:
So, because I have a whole-of-government responsibility, our strategic planning is really
focused on all of the functions of our county government. So, countywide, we conducted
a strategic plan engaging residents in our community in an inclusive way. So, I think
that’s an aspect of the role that I play in the county to identify what we ended up with 10
factors that would make us successful as a county. Nine focused on outcomes affecting
the community, and then one focused on how we function as a government, so effective
and efficient government and utilizing that frame and the metrics associated with each of
those outcome areas.
The specific description of the process of strategic planning is evident in these responses. The
understanding of the current plan as well as the procedures required to develop it was also
apparent. While the processes were different at each agency and those involved as well, the steps
and components followed were similar (Table 12).
73

Table 12
Procedural Knowledge Interview Summary, n = 8
Participant Detailed
yes/no
Quote
P1 Yes When there’s a need to consult and initiate conversations of
how we can change things, that’s when I come in and bring
those leaders to the table. … See who’s going to be a partner
in ensuring that the work that we do, whether it is culturally
getting the buy-in for people to do the actual work that we
want them to do or to figure out who are partners to create a
policy and essentially operationalize the need.
P2 Yes We have a diversity advantage plan. … A citywide plan that
was voted in and approved by city council back in 2014. And
that plan went through a number of community stakeholders,
also internal staff, input work planning. And it developed 60
points. So, from that plan, it lays sort of the map for how we
want to do this work.
P3 Yes The purpose of strategic planning is really to decide where
we’re going. And part of the strategic planning process brings
all the voices together because strategic planning cannot be
done in a vacuum.

The president and the board need to decide what we’re going to
do with all these voices and how we can bring them together,
and what our opportunities are moving forward. … It’s about
capturing that in a single document.
P4 Yes The strategic plan starts off as a draft, and each team member is
supposed to bring their goals to the conversation … and then
bring an action plan to put in that strategic plan. … It goes
through a review process … and then we also work with our
community partners to make sure that the work that we’re
doing is not duplicative, but also, it’s supportive of their
efforts in the community.
P5 Yes Our strategic planning is really focused on all of the functions
of our county government. … We conducted a strategic plan
engaging residents in our community in an inclusive way. …
We ended up with 10 factors that would make us successful
as a county. Nine focused on outcomes affecting the
community … one focused on how we function as a
government.
P6 Yes Our strategic process includes building a foundation. … It’s a
74

Participant Detailed
yes/no
Quote
real thought-out approach in that the foundation will be laid.
… We have policy, and we have results-based accountability.
… Strategy overall is a long way of saying policy, results-
based accountability vetting of certain information and also in
a presentation.
P7 Yes The board designs the goals that need to be discussed and that
need to be addressed in the strategic plan. So, they provide
the agency with a framework. … We did a design thinking
process to brainstorm some ways to start to operationalize
these goals
P8 Yes Our strategic planning is our mission to bring in the best talent
that we can into the state to achieve our mission. … when we
look at strategic planning, we always focus first on what the
mission and vision is.

Document Analysis
The document analysis showed a clear understanding of the strategic planning process
through multiple sources while looking at the organizations of two interviewees. The document
analysis included the agency’s strategic plans from two municipal offices, DEI-focused plans,
several media interviews with the two participants, and a strategic plan update report. These
documents provided details regarding the steps to develop the plan, the reporting mechanisms,
and progress update expectations. The documents also detailed the individuals involved and their
roles in developing and implementing the plan. This was determined to be an asset.
Summary
The assumed influence that stakeholders need to know how to follow the steps of the
strategic planning process was determined to be an asset in the survey results and was
determined to be an asset through the interview responses and the document analysis. The survey
responses showing the existence of this procedural knowledge influence totaled 83%. This
75

exceeded the cut score of 70% by 13%. Additionally, 100% of the interviewees detailed the
process while providing information specific to their agency planning and procedures. The many
document sources also provided evidence of this knowledge. Accordingly, this influence is
determined to be an asset.
Metacognitive Knowledge
The metacognitive influence was that the stakeholder needs to plan their use of DEI data
to meet organizational needs.
Survey Results
Change agents were asked to reflect on their strategic plan after reviewing their agency’s
DEI data. This survey question showed 50% of respondents were able to share how they
demonstrate adjusting their strategic planning to meet the needs shown in the DEI data. The half
that showed the ability to reflect on the data and make meaning of that knowledge to create a
plan accordingly did so through examples in their agency and specific programming. The half
that were not able to demonstrate metacognitive knowledge and did not respond to the prompt or
said they could not answer. Overall, the survey responses were 20% below the cut score of 70%,
showing this influence as a need (Table 13).

Table 13
Survey Results for Metacognitive Knowledge, n = 12
Metacognitive knowledge item: After reviewing your agency’s
DEI data, you note the strategic plan you created for your
organization needs fine tuning. Write down a few of your
reflections related to the adjustments you plan to make.
Percentage Count
Demonstrated knowledge 50% 6
Did not know 50% 6

76

Interview Findings
Not all interviewees were able to clearly describe the way in which they plan their use of
DEI data to meet organizational needs. Out of the eight total responses, five discussed their
ability to reflect in this knowledge area which determined this influence as a need. One
respondent discussed their process to reflect on what data is necessary to collect. P2 said,
“We’ve been trying to really push to work backwards from visioning, goal making, to figuring
out from this goal what metrics do we need to find, then hopefully, we can start collecting data
that would help satisfy that measure.” P8 shared how they identified organizational needs
through their data by saying:
We take data as a strategic-level instrument. What I mean by that is the data can show
that an agency might be lacking representation. It might be a lack of representation in
who we bring in, who we’re interviewing, who’s on the interviewing board,
representation of who’s in positions, all those kinds of different things. And so how we
utilize the data is to bring the data in and to show the agencies, hey, we noticed
something here.
The description of using data as a strategic instrument to shape the organization was mirrored by
P1 regarding two surveys used to assess the work in their agency. P1 shared,
When you’re looking at those two surveys, while in one survey, people will see
themselves and the other, it reflects that there is a disparity between diversity and
inclusion. Ultimately you can see that there’s clear gaps that have intersections. When
you’re looking at that framework, that’s exactly how our programming is able to identify
certain gaps, you know, what are the economic development, what are ways we can
identify where the service needs to take place, and how often it has been delivered to the
most appropriate community.
77

While some agencies have more data related to DEI strategy and initiatives, individuals must act
as change agents to make meaning of the data and create a strategy from that information. The
evidence of this knowledge was clear when P8 said,
As we look at the race and ethnicity side, we’re underrepresented compared to the census.
So, what that tells me is why are we there from that question, the why becomes a little bit
more digging to where I go, if we don’t have this type of representation, why is that? I
look at further data? Is it a policy procedure issue? Is it a recruitment issue? And as you
can see, the why turns into what I need to track, and then those automatically turn into
some strategic goals.
When asked about reflecting on agency data, P7 said, “So, internally, I’m a part of it, but I’m not
necessarily directing anything. And so, it’s sort of this ambiguous.” Although the internal data
reflection was not clear, the participant also discussed external DEI work. P7 shared,
So, externally, well, I don’t want to say it’s easier, but I have more data available. And I
can use it to guide technical assistance with the local agencies with, you know,
professional learning. I can use it to target interventions, to target resources and to share
in communication with my relationships within the field.
Several respondents discussed that they did not have access to data that was relevant to their
work. Although the absence of data existed, one respondent shared how they used this as an
opportunity to reflect on their organizational needs to identify what data is necessary for their
plan. P4 detailed,
We are in Phase 1 of gathering data, and we find that some places or some spaces where
we go to gather data, they’re nonexistent. Others are way ahead, and they have a lot of
data. And so, we are currently doing an audit for our equity plan to figure out if data
exists. If it does, is there enough for us to make an analysis off of, or do we have to start
78

over and begin collecting new data? And we use that data then to determine where the
disparities and the gaps are or where we need to focus more attention. We also use the
data to see in what areas might we be doing well that we could continue or expand
services.
This response shows that although this process is in the initial stages, the reflection and meaning
making of the data are evident in their strategic planning (Table 14).

79

Table 14
Metacognitive Knowledge Interview Summary, n = 8
Participant Detailed
yes/no
Quote
P1 Yes When you’re looking at those two surveys… It reflects that
there is a disparity between diversity and inclusion… There’s
clear gaps that have intersections. … That’s exactly how our
programming is able to identify certain gaps. … What are
ways we can identify where the service needs to take place
and how often it has been delivered to the most appropriate
community.
P2 Yes We’ve been trying to really push to work backwards from
visioning, goal making, to figuring out from this goal what
metrics do we need to find, then hopefully, we can start
collecting data that would help satisfy that measure
P3 No –
P4 Yes We are in phase one of gathering data, and we find that some
places or some spaces where we go to gather data, they’re
nonexistent. Others are way ahead, and they have a lot of
data.

We use that data then to determine where the disparities and
the gaps are or where we need to focus more attention. We
also use the data to see in what areas might we be doing well
that we could continue or expand services.
P5 No –
P6 No –
P7 Yes So, externally, … I have more data available. And I can use it
to guide technical assistance with the local agencies with, you
know, professional learning. I can use it to target
interventions, to target resources and to share in
communication with my relationships within the field.
P8 Yes We take data as a strategic level instrument… And so how we
utilize the data is to bring the data in and to show the
agencies, hey, we noticed something here.

80

Document Analysis
The document analysis showed some ability to plan the use of DEI data to meet
organizational needs. The document analysis included the agency’s strategic plans from two
municipal offices, DEI-focused plans, both agencies’ DEI department websites, two DEI plan
progress reports and updates, a presentation by one interviewee, and several media interviews
with the two participants. These documents provided details of data available in the respective
government agencies and geographic areas. Although each presented the data, only a few made
meaning of the data in relation to the organization. The presentation created by one participant
showed how the data related to the organization’s planning and goals. The progress reports also
did this and showed what was needed to meet the performance measures indicated. Out of the 11
documents reviewed and accessible for this influence, only six showed the use of DEI data to
meet organizational needs, totaling 54% which is 16% below the cut score. This was determined
to be a need.
Summary
The assumed influence that stakeholders need to plan their use of DEI data to meet
organizational needs was determined to be a need through the survey results, interview
responses, and document analysis. The survey responses showing the existence of this
metacognitive knowledge influence totaled 50%. This was below the cut score of 70% by 20%.
Additionally, only five out of eight of the interviewees, or 62.5%, were able to provide examples
or explain how they use DEI data in their organizations. This is below the 70% cut score by
7.5%. The many document sources did not provide substantial evidence of this knowledge.
Accordingly, this influence is determined to be a need.
81

Results and Findings for Motivation Influences
The results and findings are reported in the following section using the motivation
categories and the assumed needs or assets for each category. The findings will be organized into
sections representing the data collection methodology.
Value
The value-related influence was that the stakeholder needs to consider conducting dei
work useful for themselves.
Survey Results
The change agents were asked the frequency of how they consider the DEI work they do
valuable for themselves. The Likert scale measured from never, rarely, often, to always. There
were 12 responses to this survey question, and 91% of respondents answered often or always.
The responses exceeded the cut score of 70%. As such, this influence is determined in the survey
as an asset (Table 15).

Table 15
Survey Results for Question I Consider DEI Work Valuable for Myself, n = 12
Response Percentage Count
Never 0% 0
Sometimes 8% 1
Often 25% 3
Always 67% 8

82

Interview Findings
All eight interviewees were able to speak to the value of DEI work for themselves. As for
personal value, P1 said, “I think that there has always been a question of how I can make an
impact in the community.” This participant expanded on the reason they do DEI work by saying,
“When I find myself in this work, it’s about really trying to figure out are there other ways other
than through ephemeral principles to really provide communities resources that are most
immediate in creating effective change in their lives.” The value of DEI work for personal
reasons was connected to the overarching theme of community betterment. P2 explained,
Seeing the impact that I was making kind of got me more involved. And it taught me that
there are so many issues in government that if we aren’t the voice to advocate for those
changes and for those that are often silenced, then we’re not going to have any policy
changes, and things are going to get worse and worse.
P4, who spoke of their childhood experiences, seeing the complexities of race relations, and
witnessing gaps in government responses, said,
I wanted to make sure that I had some type of role that was a role to make a difference as
far as policy is concerned and make policy recommendations, especially in spaces where
certain people’s voices or perspectives are missing from the table.
When asked about some of their reasons for doing DEI work, P5 shared that “the why is the
fundamental belief that everybody deserves access to the opportunities that will enable them to
thrive.” This sentiment was similarly discussed by P6, who said, “I want to be a champion and a
voice for individuals who don’t know, don’t have resources, or just don’t think things are
attainable.” After continued discussion on why DEI work was valuable to this participant, P6
declared, “You have to have motivation, and you have to have a passion for it.” This same
passion was clear when interviewing P7, who shared,
83

If your heart’s not there and your passion, your drive, if that’s not there, what really
matters is that you have that hope and that in your heart that if you persist and you keep
pushing forward, that you can change the social divide between the haves and the have
nots.
The dedication to DEI work and the personal value was clearly present with all interviewees.
When discussing their reasons for getting involved in DEI-related work, P8 said,
I noticed that the more places I went, the more I’ve seen how differences can cause
people, and the lack of understanding how to work with those differences causes so much
hate, discontent, and loss in those areas. And it really started making me think about what
I can do to help in these specific areas. What can I do to help people feel more like part of
the team, more included in there? How can I bridge that gap to help people just get along
better?
It was determined that this assumed influence is an asset with eight out of eight
interviewees detailing how they consider DEI work valuable for themselves (Table 16).

Table 16
Value Interview Summary, n = 8
Participant Detailed
yes/no
Quote
P1 Yes I think that there has always been a question of how I can make
an impact in the community. … When I find myself in this
work, it’s about really trying to figure out are there other
ways other than through ephemeral principles to really
provide communities resources that are most immediate in
creating effective change in their lives.
P2 Yes Seeing the impact that I was making kind of got me more
involved. And it taught me that there are so many issues in
government that if we aren’t the voice to advocate for those
changes and for those that are often silenced, then we’re not
84

Participant Detailed
yes/no
Quote
going to have any policy changes, and things are going to get
worse and worse.
P3 Yes Sometimes it’s just the simplest conversations, but once you
can break down those communication barriers and bring
people together, that’s when the magic happens. … When I
put a team together, I don’t want five people that have the
same experiences. I want to diversify it because it truly does
make the team stronger.
P4 Yes I wanted to make sure that I had some type of role that was a
role to make a difference as far as policy is concerned and
make policy recommendations, especially in spaces where
certain people’s voices or perspectives are missing from the
table.
P5 Yes The why is the fundamental belief that everybody deserves
access to the opportunities that will enable them to thrive.
P6 Yes I want to be a champion and a voice for individuals who don’t
know, don’t have resources, or just don’t think things are
attainable.

You have to have motivation, and you have to have a passion
for it.
P7 Yes If your heart’s not there and your passion, your drive, if that’s
not there, what really matters is that you have that hope and
that in your heart that if you persist and you keep pushing
forward, that you can change the social divide between the
haves and the have nots.
P8 Yes I’ve seen how differences can cause people, and the lack of
understanding how to work with those differences causes so
much hate, discontent, and loss in those areas. And it really
started making me think about what I can do to help in these
specific areas. What can I do to help people feel more like
part of the team, more included in there?

85

Document Analysis
The document analysis showed evidence of stakeholders considering DEI work useful for
themselves through multiple sources while looking at the organizations of two interviewees. The
document analysis included the equity growth profile, two news articles on the change agent, a
municipal commission round table for one agency, and two news article interviews for the other
change agent. These documents provided anecdotes regarding the personal experiences and value
of DEI work each change agent saw for themselves and their organizations. This was determined
to be an asset.
Summary
The assumed influence that stakeholders need to consider conducting DEI work useful
for themselves was determined to be an asset in the survey results, the interview responses, and
the document analysis. The survey responses showed that 91% of respondents said they often or
always considered the DEI work they did valuable for themselves. This exceeded the cut score of
70% by 21%. Additionally, 100% of the interviewees detailed the process while providing
Information specific to their agency planning and procedures. The many document sources also
provided evidence of this motivation. As such, this influence is determined to be an asset.
Self-Efficacy
The influence related to self-efficacy was that the stakeholder needs confidence in
leading teams through change initiatives.
Survey Results
The change agents were asked the degree of which they are confident that they can lead
their organization through its strategic planning activities. The degree scale measured from one
to five. There were 11 responses to this survey question, and 82% of respondents answered
86

between 4 and 5. The responses exceeded the cut score of 70%. As such, this influence is
determined in the survey as an asset (Table 17).

Table 17
Survey Results for Confidence in Leading Organization Through Strategic Planning, n = 11
Survey question Response Percentage Count
To what degree are you confident that you can
lead your organization through its strategic
planning activities?
1 9% 1
2 0% 0
3 9% 1
4 46% 5
5 36% 4

87

Interview Findings
The interviews showed clearly that all participants felt confident in leading their teams
through change initiatives. Specifically, through change related to DEI work, there were
conversations around how difficult the work is to implement and progress through. Although this
is difficult, P2 said, “My confidence in this work is never wavering in a sense that we know there
are communities out there that depend on us to be their voice, and not just people of color.” The
challenge of overseeing DEI initiatives was also felt by participant seven. P7 commented,
Little wins feel like big wins in this area. And maybe that’s just because of where I’m at.
Maybe in other places, you have some big huge world shift, but here it’s like just getting
the word equity into anything feels like a success.
When they continued to discuss the progress in their agency, P7 added,
To have my ideas respected and to be listened to and to see at least little wins does bring
me confidence and encourages me to keep going … It’s hard to be confident that you’ll
make any progress. But it does. It really increases my confidence to have people be more
responsive and respectful and listen.
P6 shared where their confidence comes from by saying, “I mean, I get nervous talking in front
of three people, but I’m not nervous because I’m confident in the information, I’m confident in
the effort, and I’m confident in the backing that I have from leadership.” The support from others
in the agency was similarly a point of confidence in leading teams through change initiatives
with participant eight. P8 said,
I love a good fight. Don’t get me wrong. … I think the only time I ever really get down is
if I feel like I’m fighting alone. Even though there’s a strong group there. We are
dispersed amongst the different things. And sometimes you do feel alone in there. But a
88

lot of times, we get together, and that gets us through as well in there. So, it’s a fight
worth fighting.
All interviewees spoke about the motivation and the value of working in the DEI field. P5
shared,
I’m not motivated by checking the box or completing tasks. My motivation is a different
type of motivation. So, because of that, I think it helps you in terms of having confidence
and then just knowing that I know those basic definitions, that I have a solid equity
analysis, I have the ability to sort of look at my work and look at other people’s work and
help them be able to look at other people’s work. So, that’s what I feel competent in is
not necessarily the outcome but my ability to understand the issues and help other people
understand and address the issues.
Table 18 presents a summary of interview responses related to self-efficacy.
89

Table 18
Self-Efficacy Interview Summary, n = 8
Participant Defined
yes/no
Quote
P1 Yes I can say that I’ve successfully curated a culture that understands
those conversations more deeply. … It doesn’t feel like we’re
moving anything forward, but at least there is prosperity and
understanding that there will now be a history of those
conversations taking place because of the work that we do.
P2 Yes My confidence in this work is never wavering in a sense that we
know there are communities out there that depend on us to be
their voice and not just people of color
P3 Yes Being able to be the facilitator and then have one-off conversations
afterwards. It gave me an insight into different teams, and it
helped to heighten trust. I mean, it’s really what opens the front
door, that’s what it is.
P4 Yes It is a major boost of confidence and just excitement to know that
people are going to be able to resolve things quicker with the city
and also to interact and to have access to the necessary services
that they need in multiple languages.
P5 Yes Knowing that I know those basic definitions, that I have a solid
equity analysis, I have the ability to sort of look at my work and
look at other people’s work and help them be able to look at other
people’s work. … What I feel competent in is not necessarily the
outcome but my ability to understand the issues and help other
people understand and address the issues.
P6 Yes I get nervous talking in front of three people, but I’m not nervous
because I’m confident in the information, I’m confident in the
effort, and I’m confident in the backing that I have from
leadership
P7 Yes Little wins feel like big wins in this area. … To have my ideas
respected and to be listened to and to see at least little wins does
bring me confidence and encourages me to keep going.
P8 Yes I think the only time I ever really get down is if I feel like I’m
fighting alone. Even though there’s a strong group there. We are
dispersed amongst the different things. And sometimes you do
feel alone in there. But a lot of times we get together and that gets
us through as well in there. So, it’s a fight worth fighting.

90

Document Analysis
There was no document analysis conducted for this influence that could provide evidence
of self-efficacy.
Summary
The assumed influence that stakeholders need confidence in leading teams through
change initiatives was determined to be an asset in the survey results and the interview
responses. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence. The survey responses
showed that 82% of respondents said they often or always considered the DEI work they did
valuable for themselves. This exceeded the cut score of 70% by 12%. Along with that rate, 100%
of the interviewees detailed the process while providing information specific to their agency
planning and procedures.
Collective Efficacy
The collective efficacy influence was that the stakeholder needs to have confidence that
all involved staff in their team possess skills to implement diversity management initiatives.
Survey Results
The change agents were asked about the degree to which they are confident that all
involved staff possess the skills to implement diversity management initiatives. The degree scale
measured from one to five. There were 12 responses to this survey question, and 67% of
respondents answered between 4 and 5. The responses were below the cut score of 70%. Due to
this response rate, this influence is determined in the survey as a need (Table 19).

91

Table 19
Survey Results for Confidence in Others implementing DEI, n = 12
Survey question Response Percentage Count
To what degree are you confident that
all involved staff in your
(team/department/group) possess the
skills to implement diversity
management initiatives?
1 8% 1
2 0% 0
3 25% 3
4 50% 6
5 17% 2

Interview Findings
Not all interviewees had confidence in all involved staff to implement diversity
management initiatives. Only four out of the eight participants shared that they were confident in
others doing the work and that the work would continue if they were no longer there to guide
initiatives. This means 50% spoke to collective efficacy in their agency, making this influence a
need. Speaking about their organization, P1 said,
I think that there would be a few people who would be able to continue asking the
questions, but I don’t know if there would be staff that would know how to think. But I
think those with confidence would be siloed. And what I think that my role offers is to
connect those efforts. And if we don’t have something or somebody that connects their
interagency collaborative efforts, it’s not going to continue very far.
This response showed the need for a change agent to connect the different initiatives and
departments in the work being done. Without this role in the participant’s agency, diversity
management initiatives would not have the knowledge and skills to implement the work.
92

Speaking to a similar concern regarding the necessary skills for diversity management, P7
posited,
To the level that I do, it has taken me a lot of research and time. But that is not the heart
of DEIA work. The laws are not the heart. They’re the backbone, maybe. So, there are
pieces of it that would still continue forward, and then there are pieces that I worry would
crumble and go away if I stopped.
This response mentions the knowledge component that is specific to their role and experience
that other staff in their agency do not have. The worry that the work being done around others’
ability to implement diversity management in their state or municipal agency was clear in half of
the interviewees. When asked why they didn’t feel other staff could successfully implement
these initiatives, P5 stated,
I know I’ve heard particularly through our equity leads that, you know, departments
might not, or department leadership might not see this as a priority. Like they see it like,
look, my main work is this, and this is extra.
While half of the interviewees did not have strong collective efficacy, the other half felt
confident in their organizations and specifically their team staff ability. In particular, they all
mentioned that having champions of DEI work made them confident in the ability of their
organization to implement the work, even if they were to step aside. P3 said,
I can’t leave the room forever. I have to come back every, every couple weeks and like,
hey, this, let’s redirect here, let’s add some more to it. So, we’ll continue to do that work.
… And so, because I have champions around the organization that can continue the
conversation without me, that’s what’s going to make it successful.
Likewise, participant four cited their confidence in others in their agency. P4 commented,
93

I’m very confident because we have had not only support from leadership but many of
our managers, our middle management staff and employees. They are all in. And I hear
feedback all the time and stories about how there may have been a conversation that
might have happened in the work setting that was uncomfortable, but it was necessary in
order to move a DEI effort forward.
Although some participants had confidence in all staff having the skills to implement
diversity management it was not enough to meet the cut score (Table 20).

Table 20
Collective Efficacy Interview Summary, n = 8
Participant Detailed
yes/no
Quote
P1 No I think that there would be a few people who would be able to
continue asking the questions, but I don’t know if there would
be staff that would know how to think. But I think those with
confidence would be siloed. … if we don’t have something or
somebody that connects their interagency collaborative
efforts, it’s not going to continue very far.
P2 Yes I think there’s a lot of great leaders and advocates outside of
our team. … There are many challenges for what we consider
to be the best way or the right way to do it, but I’m pretty
confident if we come together as a community that even if
there are mishaps that people could come together, support
each other, and can lean on one another even if there are
issues. So, I think collectively, they can solve big issues.
P3 Yes I can’t leave the room forever. I have to come back every,
every couple weeks, and like, hey, this, let’s redirect here,
let’s add some more to it. So, we’ll continue to do that work.
… And so, because I have champions around the organization
that can continue the conversation without me, that’s what’s
going to make it successful.
P4 Yes I’m very confident because we have had not only support from
leadership but many of our managers, our middle
management staff and employees. They are all in.
94

Participant Detailed
yes/no
Quote
P5 No I know I’ve heard particularly through our equity leads that,
you know, departments might not, or department leadership
might not see this as a priority. Like they see it like, look, my
main work is this, and this is extra.
P6 Yes I’m very confident, actually. Cause I know our leadership is
very bought in. Like, they are in full support.

Aside from me, there are various individuals who are allies to
improving equity, diversity, inclusion in access in the state.
P7 No It has taken me a lot of research and time. But that is not the
heart of DEIA work. The laws are not the heart. They’re the
backbone, maybe. So, there are pieces of it that would still
continue forward, and then there are pieces that I worry
would crumble and go away if I stopped.
P8 No My circle can touch everyone’s circle in one way or another.
The trick is to be able to identify where those circles touch
and then to bring them in, bring that person in that’s in charge
of that piece, bring them in with you so you can solve that
problem together.

Document Analysis
There was no document analysis conducted for this influence that could provide evidence
of collective efficacy.
Summary
The assumed influence that stakeholders need to have confidence in all involved staff to
implement diversity management initiatives was determined to be a need in the survey results
and the interview responses. Document analysis was not conducted for this influence. The survey
responses showed that 67% of respondents said they often or always considered the DEI work
they did valuable for themselves. This rate was below the cut score of 70% by 3%. Along with
that rate, only 50% of the interviewees stated that they were confident in all staff involved.
95

Goals
The goals-related influence was that the stakeholder needs clear goals related to the
production of the DEI strategic plan.
Survey Results
The change agents were asked about the frequency of having clear goals related to the
production of their strategic plans. The Likert scale measured from never, rarely, often, to
always. There were 11 responses to this survey question, and 91% of respondents answered often
or always. The responses exceeded the cut score of 70%. As such, this influence is determined in
the survey as an asset (Table 21).

Table 21
Survey Results for Question I Have Clear Goals Related to the Production of My DEI Strategic
Plan, n = 12
Response Percentage Count
Never 0% 0
Sometimes 9% 1
Often 64% 7
Always 27% 3

96

Interview Findings
Six out of eight interviewees could speak to clear goals when producing their DEI
strategic plan. This meant that 75% of participants had clear goals related to the production of
their DEI strategic plan. P5 discussed their approach to developing goals in their strategic plan
by saying:
We set and work toward universal goals, but we recognize that different people in
different places are situated differently. And then, we account for those differences
through targeted strategies. So, the goal isn’t different. How we position people in places
to achieve those goals might be different.
The scaffolding approach to goal setting in this agency and the DEI strategic plan shows an
established comprehension. Participant four also discussed developing goals for the production
of their strategic plan and who was involved. P4 said,
The goals are based on the needs of the people. So, based on the feedback that we’ve
received from people, also what we have observed to be gaps and barriers in the
community, and also the mayor’s goals. At the beginning of each year, the mayor
evaluates what her top priorities are based on the public. And so, those may be air quality
or better transportation, or one of the priorities clearly outlined is equity, celebration of
diversity. And so, we then take our cue from what the mayor has established for us as a
priority, and we build the goals based off of what we know we can affect.
Participant eight described a specific situation where goals were clear and connected to strategy.
P8 shared,
So, for example, if we want to have the best talent, and one of the goals that we come up
with is to make sure that we are reaching all of [the state]. What I do is take that goal, and
I add on a target improvement strategy that allows us to take that goal one step further of
97

how they actually execute that goal. And it really turns into almost kind of a lead
measure. … So, I’ve tied an EDI strategy or an EDI goal to something they need to do
that’s in their mission already.
P8 continued by saying, “I would never make a goal that’s standalone. I would take that goal and
tie it into what we need to do as an organization as a whole, so they can see that it’s part of it in
there.” The concept of the goals being connected directly to the strategic plan of the agency and
diversity management initiatives was also mentioned through an analytical lens by participant
two. P2 said,
Stakeholder community engagement and also looking at data. So, both qualitative and
qualitative data to ask yourselves, is there a problem in the city? Are there disparities in
current outcomes? Who’s utilizing a program? So, coming together as a group with
different leaders across different departments, having community advisory bodies,
stakeholders come together, we start to develop trends, and we start under identifying key
issues. That’s how we develop goals.
Table 22 presents a summary of interview responses related to goals.

Table 22
Goals Interview Summary, n = 8
Participant Detailed
yes/no
Quote
P1 Yes I’m lucky enough to participate in various conversations across
different agencies. So, you get the opportunity to see patterns
rise, questions that are coming up that may relate to diversity
inclusion. And then I build a workgroup around it and
identify, like, what is it that’s missing?
P2 Yes Stakeholder community engagement and also looking at data.
So, both qualitative and qualitative data. … coming together
98

Participant Detailed
yes/no
Quote
as a group. … We start to develop trends, and we start under
identifying key issues. That’s how we develop goals.
P3 Yes We do individual goals and things like that, but to me it’s just
woven in everywhere. So, it’s, do we have the right
language? … Every word holds meaning. So, are we using
inclusive language? Are we ensuring that all the voices are
that you can hear them in there? And why do you do that?
P4 Yes Based on the feedback that we’ve received from people, also
what we have observed to be gaps and barriers in the
community, and also the mayor’s goals. … Then, take our
cue from what the mayor has established for us as a priority,
and we build the goals based off of what we know we can
affect.
P5 Yes We set and work toward universal goals, but we recognize that
different people in different places are situated differently.
And then, we account for those differences through targeted
strategies. So, the goal isn’t different. How we position
people in places to achieve those goals might be different.
P6 No I’m here to help leadership figure out what information, the
right information, the appropriate information needs to be
disseminated. Like, that’s way above my pay grade to create
the strategy for the entire department.
P7 No They’re constantly getting sidetracked. I’m imagining a train
moving along the track, and they’re like, oh, sorry, you have
to go this direction now. And they’re, like, we have an
accident up here on the front, so now you have to go on this
track. … Not really derailed, but it feels like that.
P8 Yes One of the goals that we come up with is to make sure that we
are reaching all of [the state] … I add on a target
improvement strategy that allows us to take that goal one step
further of how they actually execute that goal. And it really
turns into almost kind of a lead measure.

99

Document Analysis
The document analysis showed evidence of stakeholders having clear goals related to the
production of the DEI strategic plan through multiple sources while looking at the organizations
of two interviewees. The document analysis included a PowerPoint presentation and training
created by one interviewee, the equity growth profile, the strategic plan update, a published
article by the interviewee describing progress, and a filmed interview by the same individual. It
also included the equity, inclusion, and belonging development plan, along with 2 years of plan
progress and updates and a data dashboard website from another interviewee’s agency. These
documents provided anecdotes of specific examples to be used in the plan and updates, clear
goals detailing success metrics and outcomes, and individual discussions regarding the calendar
year goals. This was determined to be an asset.
Summary
The assumed influence that stakeholders need to have clear goals related to the
production of their strategic plans was determined to be an asset in the survey results, the
interview responses, and the document analysis. The survey responses showed that 91% of
respondents said they often or always had clear goals related to the production of their DEI
strategic plan. This exceeded the cut score of 70%. Additionally, 75% of the interviewees
detailed the way in which goals were developed and how they related to creating or updating
their agency’s DEI plan. The many document sources also provided evidence of this motivation.
As such, this influence is determined to be an asset.
Results and Findings for Organization Influences
The results and findings are reported in the following section using the organizational
categories and the assumed needs or assets for each category. The findings will be organized into
sections representing the data collection methodology.
100

Cultural Settings: Resources
The influence related to resources was that the stakeholder needs leadership support to
implement DEI strategic plan.
Survey Results
The change agents were asked about the frequency of their senior leadership supporting
the implementation of their DEI strategic plans. The Likert scale measured from never, rarely,
often, to always. There were 12 responses to this survey question, and 83% of respondents
answered often or always. The responses exceeded the cut score of 70%. This influence is
determined in the survey as an asset (Table 23).

Table 23
Survey Results for Senior Leadership in my Organization Supports the Implementation of a DEI
Strategic Plan, n = 12
Response Percentage Count
Never 0% 0
Sometimes 17% 2
Often 58% 7
Always 25% 3

101

Interview Findings
Consistently through all eight interviews, the participants perceived leadership support as
necessary to implement their DEI strategic plan. When discussing the levels of leadership
involved, P1 said,
It isn’t just the will of the, the elected official that you’re under, but it’s also the, the buy-
in from the general elected officials that are, you know, whether it’s a DA’s office,
whether it’s a county council, whoever it might be, and if they just don’t see it, you just
have to be more strategic. Otherwise, it is, it’s an uphill battle.
They continued to discuss why leadership support may vary by saying, “I think that anybody in
this position will also be challenged by figuring out how to get that leadership to risk and to fight
for something that may be politically unsavory or that would make them feel unsafe politically.”
Speaking on the importance of leadership support in the DEI space, P3 commented,
We’re constantly talking about it, but it’s 100% up to leadership. And if leadership’s not
meeting these marks or not kind of talking about this, you know, we’re not going to move
forward on it. … This kind of initiative has to come from the top down. It cannot come
from bottom up because you need to make sure that you have the buy-in behind it.
Other interviewees mentioned the concept of top-down support as well. Discussing their
leadership support, P4 shared,
This really is a top-down priority. I know it’s usually hard for people to get things
moving if they don’t have support from those who are in leadership. But I will say the
mayor and the city council have been supporters from Day 1 of this. And not only have
they been supporters in word, they have been supporters in action by putting funding to
make sure we have the resources to make this possible.
102

The cultural setting of leadership support was felt by P4 through the messaging and through the
action of allocating resources. This type of support was discussed by P7 as well. P7 stated,
I trust our leadership more than a lot of people do that I hear. I see them walk this
tightrope because I really feel like whenever they can support an implementation, either
with resources or whether it’s funding or time or staff or whatever, I feel like if they can,
they will.
When resources are given from the top organization level to DEI change agents, it shows that the
work is a priority. Resources can mean different things depending on the need, as P8 mentioned:
“We talk about inclusive leadership, we talk about leadership styles, all that kind of stuff.
Looking at inclusive leadership is realizing that time and empathy are the two resources that your
people need more than anything else.” All interviewees emphasized leadership support. The
support of leadership sends a message that DEI matters throughout the organization, from the top
staff levels to the bottom. It was clearly emphasized when P6 said,
An essential component is leadership buy-in. And I’m not just talking about a couple of
supervisors and managers, like executive-level leadership buy-in. That needs to cascade
down … because leadership will help disseminate that message. If you don’t have the
buy-in from leadership, nobody else is going to follow along.
Table 24 presents a summary of interview responses related to resources.

103

Table 24
Cultural Settings: Resources Interview Summary, n = 8
Participant Detailed
yes/no
Quote
P1 Yes It isn’t just the will of the, the elected official that you’re under,
but it’s also the, the buy-in from the general elected officials
that are, you know, whether it’s a DA’s office, whether it’s a
county council, whoever it might be, and if they just don’t see
it, you just have to be more strategic. Otherwise, it is, it’s an
uphill battle.
P2 Yes Typically, we have leadership sponsor events, sponsor and
support different initiatives or sit on different groups. … If we
can get their feedback in the very beginning of a plan, get the
green light, then we have full confidence that they believe in
us, take that power and authority from them to then start doing
the work.
P3 Yes We’re constantly talking about it, but it’s 100% up to
leadership. And if leadership’s not meeting these marks or not
kind of talking about this, you know, we’re not going to move
forward on it. … This kind of initiative has to come from the
top down. It cannot come from bottom up.
P4 Yes This really is a top-down priority. … I will say the mayor and
the city council have been supporters from Day 1 of this. And
not only have they been supporters in word, they have been
supporters in action by putting funding to make sure we have
the resources to make this possible.
P5 Yes Every county department has a designated equity lead, and that
equity lead was appointed or assigned by department
leadership. The responsibility of that equity lead with their
department leadership is to develop an equity impact plan.
P6 Yes An essential component is leadership buy-in. … That needs to
cascade down … because leadership will help disseminate that
message. If you don’t have the buy-in from leadership,
nobody else is going to follow along.
P7 Yes I trust our leadership more than a lot of people do that I hear. I
see them walk this tightrope because I really feel like
whenever they can support an implementation, either with
resources or whether it’s funding or time or staff or whatever,
I feel like if they can, they will.
104

Participant Detailed
yes/no
Quote
P8 Yes We talk about inclusive leadership, we talk about leadership
styles, all that kind of stuff. Looking at inclusive leadership is
realizing that time and empathy are the two resources that
your people need more than anything else.

Document Analysis
The document analysis showed evidence of stakeholders having leadership support to
implement DEI strategic plans through multiple sources while looking at the organizations of
two interviewees. The document analysis included the DEI and agency strategic plan, equity
growth profile, news articles on the change agent, the DEI strategic plan, plan development
documentation, and 2 years of plan updates for the other organization. These documents
provided anecdotes of leadership being involved, letters of support and prioritization from top
leaders in the agencies, and resource allocation. This was determined to be an asset.
Summary
The assumed influence that stakeholders need leadership support to implement DEI
strategic plans was determined to be an asset in the survey results, the interview responses, and
the document analysis. The survey responses showed that 83% of respondents said they often or
always considered the DEI work they did valuable for themselves. This exceeded the cut score of
70% by 13%. Furthermore, 100% of the interviewees discussed leadership support and top-down
prioritization of DEI work at their agencies. The many document sources also provided evidence
of this cultural setting. Therefore, this influence is determined to be an asset.
Cultural Settings: Policies and Procedures
The influence related to policies, processes, and procedures was that the stakeholder
needs to have agency policies that align with DEI strategic plans and initiatives.
105

Survey Results
Change agents were asked about the frequency of having agency-wide policies that align
with the DEI strategic plan and initiatives. The Likert scale measured from never, rarely, often,
to always. There were 12 responses to this survey question, and 83% of respondents answered
often or always. The responses exceeded the cut score of 70%. This influence is determined in
the survey as an asset (Table 25).

Table 25
Survey Results for My Organization Has Agency-Wide Policies That Align With the DEI
Strategic Plan, n = 12
Response Percentage Count
Never 0% 0
Sometimes 17% 2
Often 66% 8
Always 17% 2

106

Interview Findings
It was emphasized by all interviewees that they need to have agency policies that align
with their DEI strategic plan for successful implementation. Although some participants
discussed how the alignment of agency and DEI policies was positive for their organization,
others mentioned that the lack of alignment created challenges. Both perspectives highlighted
whole-agency and DEI alignment, however. P2 shared,
So, for me, diversity, equity, inclusion ultimately is embedded in everything we do, in all
the plans we do. And I would also say that, and this might sound very controversial, that
we shouldn’t have a focus on a separate diversity, equity, inclusion office or a separate
diversity, equity, inclusion strategic plan. I think when you just get started, it makes
sense, but that should be a job for everybody, and that plan should be within the city’s
strategic plan. It shouldn’t be a separate diversity plan.
The idea that DEI work is sometimes viewed as separate from the whole of agency work was
discussed by P3 as well. The analogy of DEI being woven or braided into the organization or
being a thread through the tapestry was discussed by several participants. P3 stated,
Many times people want to do DEI work separately. So, they’ve got all the goals and all
the things they want to do, and, like, goal number seven is DEI, and that irks me to no
end because DEI can’t be a separate pillar. It does need to be woven into everything that
we do. And the moment we make it a separate pillar and measure very specific things,
people are going to put a lot of emphasis on making sure those numbers say what they
need to say. And in doing that, you lose a lot of the heart of why we do DEI initiatives, to
begin with.
Reflecting on their own agency in relation to their DEI work, P6 said, “The strategies are starting
to really come to light, and they want DEI to be weaved in, not take over the mission of each
107

section, but they want it to be weaved in.” Another analogy was having DEI baked into the cake
and not just the frosting on top. This descriptor was used by P4, who commented,
DEI is not what we do; it’s who we are. So, instead of looking at it as an additional ask or
an additional requirement, it should already be baked into who we are as a culture in [the
city]. … We want DEI to be a thread in everything that we do.
Following the same analogy of baking a cake, P7 stated, “I’ve wanted it not to be separate. I
wanted it to just be embedded and be the foundation so that it’s not something that we’re putting
on top, that it’s part of the cake, it’s not just the frosting.” The recipe for incorporating DEIA
into the workplace is difficult to perfect, but all participants shared it is crucial for it to not be
standalone. P8 remarked,
Too often, I found that having an EDI strategic plan separate from your strategic plan as
an organization is usually kind of a recipe for disaster. And since you’re still excluding
EDIA as its own entity instead of bringing in, it’s that lens versus mindset. It’s not there
yet.
Participant five discussed the positive aspects of being aligned with the larger organization and
the benefit of being braided into the larger strategy. When prompted, P5 said,
Why I particularly appreciate not being my own office but rather embedded in the county
executive’s office is because otherwise, I see it being assigned to a particular group as
opposed to being everybody’s work. … It’s braided in. It’s really a key element of the
strategic plan and, again, how we assess how we’re doing.
Table 26 presents a summary of interview responses related to policies, processes, and
procedures.
108

Table 26
Cultural Settings: Policies, Processes, and Procedures Interview Summary, n = 8
Participant Defined
yes/no
Quote
P1 Yes What I identify here is that by targeting relationships with
individuals who run programs, who are communications
managers, who are doing the work that serves as a tool to
implement some of these policies. … It will slowly become a
part of their everyday structure in a way that you’re
operationalizing the materials from a very different angle.
P2 Yes Diversity, equity, inclusion ultimately is embedded in
everything we do, in all the plans we do. … We shouldn’t
have a focus on a separate diversity, equity, inclusion office
or a separate diversity, equity, inclusion strategic plan. …
That should be a job for everybody, and that plan should be
within the city’s strategic plan. It shouldn’t be a separate
diversity plan.
P3 Yes Many times, people want to do DEI work separately… It does
need to be woven into everything that we do. And the
moment we make it a separate pillar and measure very
specific things, people are going to put a lot of emphasis on
making sure those numbers say what they need to say.
P4 Yes DEI is not what we do; it’s who we are. So, instead of looking
at it as an additional ask or an additional requirement, it
should already be baked into who we are as a culture in [the
city] … We want DEI to be a thread in everything that we do.
P5 Yes Why I particularly appreciate not being my own office but
rather embedded in the county executive’s office is because
otherwise, I see it being assigned to a particular group as
opposed to being everybody’s work … It’s braided in. It’s
really a key element of the strategic plan and, again, how we
assess how we’re doing.
P6 Yes The strategies are starting to really come to light, and they want
DEI to be weaved in, not take over the mission of each
section, but they want it to be weaved in.
P7 Yes I’ve wanted it not to be separate. I wanted it to just be
embedded and be the foundation so that it’s not something
that we’re putting on top, that it’s part of the cake, it’s not just
the frosting.
109

Participant Defined
yes/no
Quote
P8 Yes Too often, I found that having an EDI strategic plan separate
from your strategic plan as an organization is usually kind of
a recipe for disaster. And since you’re still excluding EDIA
as its own entity instead of bringing in, it’s that lens versus
mindset. It’s not there yet.

Document Analysis
The document analysis showed evidence of stakeholders having agency policies that
align with DEI strategic plans and initiatives through multiple sources while looking at the
organizations of two interviewees. The document analysis included the equity impact plan, DEI
and agency strategic plan, a DEI presentation created for multiple departments, an updated
article written by the interviewee, and the DEI strategic plan, plan development documentation,
and 2 years of plan updates for the other organization. These documents provided evidence of a
connection between the DEI plans and initiatives with the agency's strategic plan through policy
changes, department goals incorporating DEI, and state or municipal prioritization of diversity
management. This was determined to be an asset.
Summary
The assumed influence that stakeholders need to have agency policies that align with DEI
strategic plans and initiatives was determined to be an asset through the survey results, interview
responses, and document analysis. The survey responses showed that 83% of respondents said
they often or always considered the DEI work they did valuable for themselves. This exceeded
the cut score of 70% by 13%. In addition, 100% of the interviewees detailed the process while
providing information specific to their agency planning and procedures. The many document
110

sources also provided evidence of this cultural setting. Accordingly, this influence is determined
to be an asset.
Cultural Models
The cultural models influence was that the stakeholder needs organizational commitment
to DEI strategic planning.
Survey Results
Change agents were asked about the frequency of having the organization as a whole
committed to strategically planning and implementing DEI efforts. The Likert scale measured
from never, rarely, often, to always. There were 12 responses to this survey question, and 83% of
respondents answered often or always. The responses exceeded the cut score of 70%. This
influence is determined in the survey as an asset (Table 27).

Table 27
Survey Results for My Organization is Committed to Strategically Planning and Implementing
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion efforts, n = 12
Response Percentage Count
Never 0% 0
Sometimes 17% 2
Often 66% 8
Always 17% 2

111

Interview Findings
All interviewees noted that they need organizational commitment to DEI strategic
planning. Not only was the development and implementation of the plan mentioned, but the
diversity management initiatives were discussed as well. Organizational commitment from
departments that are not designated to facilitate and lead DEI work is important. The
responsibility to do DEI is a lot for one designated change agent to complete successfully.
Considering their work, P1 said,
I can’t do it on my own. It would be nearly impossible not only to kind of implement
those plans and to draft those plans on that large scale because of the politics, because of
the lack of resources, and also because I get pulled in so many different directions and
conversations that it would become an overwhelming experience.
Additional buy-in and support are necessary for diversity management and strategic plans to be
adopted and implemented. Discussing commitment across their agency, P2 reflected and said,
It’s hard for me to say that because I don’t know all the departments. We have a lot of
departments. I think 15 plus, and I’m not in every space. What I would say is that there
are departments that are doing very well. From my perspective, over the past 10 or so
months, the parks department has led the way in DEI work and also the community
services department.
Organizational commitment looked different depending on the department and the people as
well. Participant five contemplated the commitment throughout their agency and shared,
For some departments, the equity issues are very apparent. The community says those
equity issues are very apparent, and so that way, it becomes a much more significant
priority for those departments. For example, our police department is very focused on
this, our department of planning and development, our department of housing, our
112

department of health, because you can see, you know, really clearly what the issues are.
And that they know what they’re focusing on.
The successful implementation of DEI initiatives and strategic plans wasn’t discussed in relation
to organizational commitment as much as the commitment in general was. The sense that people
were willing to step in to do the work was talked about by P3 as well. P3 observed,
It’s all part of the process, it takes a while to do, but in every step of this process, it’s
about getting everyone together, really understanding the organization and how we can
be better together. And again, diversity’s just woven into all of this because if we
understand individually honestly, every single person that’s part of this, all of our
stakeholders and, and find a goal and a heading that can move us all forward, we’re just
going to be in a better spot.
Similarly discussed by P7, the willingness of others at their agency to participate in DEI
work created a sense of commitment. P7 posited,
I feel like we’re bringing everyone into the conversation now where they’re seeing that
there’s work to be done, even in their areas that they didn’t ever anticipate that didn’t
touch them before. And so, I actually feel like the agency is coming together a little bit
more in this effort in doing this work because they’re being targeted at every angle, and I
see an opportunity for us to come together to respond.
P4 mentioned the same concept of staff being willing to get involved in diversity-related
initiatives. Discussing the different individuals in their organization, P4 said,
They all come to these conversations at different levels. So, they’re doing amazing work,
and they’re also bringing a piece of vulnerability themselves to be like, I may not fully be
aware of what you’re asking me to do, but I’m more than willing to collaborate with you
to figure it out and also to make this a part of who we are in our department.
113

Table 28 presents a summary of interview responses related to organizational
commitment.

Table 28
Cultural Models: Organizational Commitment Interview Summary, n = 8
Participant Defined
yes/no
Quote
P1 Yes In order for me to operationalize IDA initiatives, even just
along the 17 different divisions under the mayor, I can’t do it
on my own. It would be nearly impossible not only to kind of
implement those plans and to draft those plans in that large
scale.
P2 Yes I can’t do it on my own. …What I would say is that there are
departments that are doing very well. From my perspective,
over the past 10 or so months, the parks department has led
the way in DEI work and also the community services
department.
P3 Yes It’s about getting everyone together, really understanding the
organization and how we can be better together. And again,
diversity’s just woven into all of this because if we
understand individually honestly, every single person that’s
part of this, all of our stakeholders and, and find a goal and a
heading that can move us all forward, we’re just going to be
in a better spot.
P4 Yes They all come to these conversations at different levels. So,
they’re doing amazing work, and they’re also bringing a piece
of vulnerability themselves. … Like, I may not fully be aware
of what you’re asking me to do, but I’m more than willing to
collaborate with you to figure it out and also to make this a
part of who we are in our department.
P5 Yes For some departments, the equity issues are very apparent. …
So, that way, it becomes a much more significant priority for
those departments. For example, our police department is
very focused on this, our department of planning and
development, our department of housing, our department of
health, because you can see, you know, really clearly what
the issues are.
P6 Yes I think the commitment across the different departments is still
114

Participant Defined
yes/no
Quote
being fleshed out as a strategy is being completed. But we’ve
started weaving health equity concepts in with the internal
EDIA concepts.
P7 Yes We’re bringing everyone into the conversation now where
they’re seeing that there’s work to be done, even in their areas
that they didn’t ever anticipate that didn’t touch them before.
… The agency is coming together a little bit more in this
effort in doing this work because they’re being targeted at
every angle.
P8 Yes It is absolutely a mindset where it’s always there. I don’t think
that every organization is to the point where they can do that
yet. You still have to remind them. Put your lens on until it
sticks right there. Until they realize you see better with the
lens all the time, and it changes their minds.

Document Analysis
The document analysis showed evidence of stakeholders having an organizational
commitment to DEI strategic planning through multiple sources while looking at the
organizations of two interviewees. The document analysis included the equity growth profile,
equity impact plan, two news articles on the change agent, a strategic plan update, and two news
article interviews for the other change agent. The multiple news articles discussed the support
and work of others across departments with DEI goal setting and planning. The strategic plan
update showed DEI goals incorporated into the strategic plans and initiatives of all agency
groups. These documents provided both anecdotes and plan alignment regarding the
organizational commitment to DEI strategic planning. This was determined to be an asset.
Summary
The assumed influence that stakeholders need organizational commitment to DEI
strategic planning was determined to be an asset in the survey results, the interview responses,
115

and the document analysis. The survey responses showed that 83% of respondents said they
often or always considered the DEI work they did valuable for themselves. This exceeded the cut
score of 70%. On top of that, 100% of the interviewees detailed the process while providing
information specific to their agency planning and procedures. The many document sources also
provided evidence of this cultural model. On that account, this influence is determined to be an
asset.
Summary of Validated Influences
Tables 29, 30, and 31 show the KMO influences for this study and their determination as
assets or needs.

Table 29
Knowledge Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data
Assumed knowledge influence Asset or need
Factual
Stakeholder knows the concepts and vocabulary of diversity,
equity, and inclusion work.
Asset
Procedural
Stakeholder needs to know how to follow the steps of
strategic planning process.
Asset
Metacognitive
Stakeholder needs to plan their use of DEI data to meet
organizational needs.
Need

116

Table 30
Motivation Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data
Assumed motivation influence Asset or need
Value
Stakeholder needs to consider conducting DEI work useful
for themselves.
Asset
Self-efficacy
Stakeholder needs confidence in leading teams through
change initiatives.
Asset
Collective efficacy
Stakeholder needs to have confidence that all involved
staff in their team possess the skills to implement
diversity management initiatives.
Need
Goals
Stakeholder needs clear goals related to the production of
the DEI strategic plan.
Asset

Table 31
Organization Assets or Needs As Determined by the Data
Assumed organization influence Asset or need
Cultural settings: resources
Stakeholder needs leadership support to implement DEI
strategic plan.
Asset
Cultural settings: policies, processes, and procedures
Stakeholder needs to have agency policies that align with
DEI strategic plans and initiatives.
Asset
Cultural models
Stakeholder needs organizational commitment to DEI
strategic planning.
Asset

117

Chapter Five will detail recommendations for solutions for these influences based on
empirical evidence from the literature.

118

Chapter Five: Solutions and Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
In Chapter Four, the study findings were identified and determined to either be assets or
needs through a completed survey, semi-structured interviews, and document analysis and
addressed Research Question 2. The findings were presented in themes and answered the first
research question. The findings also assisted in determining the KMO influences as an asset or a
need that affected change agents and their ability to implement DEI strategic plans. Chapter Five
addresses the second research question about the recommended knowledge and skills,
motivation, and organizational solutions. The study findings serve as the objectives that establish
evidence-based recommendations specific to the assets and needs identified. This chapter will
then use the new world Kirkpatrick model to develop an integrated implementation and
evaluation plan for the recommended study solutions (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). This
chapter starts by readdressing the study, as described in Chapter One, related to the field context
and mission, performance goals, stakeholders, and research questions that guided the study.
Field Context and Mission
In June of 2021, President Biden released an executive order on DEIA in the federal
workforce (The White House, Office of the Press Secretary, 2021). This executive order
mandated a government-wide DEIA strategic plan be created. This strategic plan defines
standards of success for DEIA efforts, identifies strategies to advance DEIA and eliminate
barriers to equity in the workforce, includes a framework to address workplace harassment, and
promotes data-driven approaches to transparency and accountability. While the order (2021) also
required executive departments and agencies to implement the DEIA strategic plan and assess
their current practices in relation to it, state-level government agencies were not included in this
mandate (The White House, Office of the Press Secretary, 2021).
119

State and municipal government agencies are beginning to address the demographic
changes and the diversity in the communities they serve (Nishishiba, 2012). While diversity
goals and initiatives are being acknowledged more at the local level, there is still little research
on the degree and ways in which agencies are implementing DEI strategic plans (Nishishiba,
2012). This research also identified three common activities in the literature related to DEI
initiatives, including diversity in the composition of the agency, better addressing how to serve
diverse citizens and communities, and integrating and valuing a diverse workforce. These
activities are defined in the DEI strategic plan that determines goals, objectives, action items,
expected dates to accomplish them, and the individuals responsible (Bryson et al., 2018;
Nishishiba, 2012). There is more research needed on the ability of individuals hired at state and
municipal government offices and their ability to implement DEI strategic plans.
Change Agent SMART Goal
By 2025, state and municipal government agencies will model their DEIA strategic plan
after the federally normalized DEIA strategic plan. Executive departments and Agencies shall
implement the government-wide DEIA Plan and assess the current state of DEIA in the agency.
While there is a mandate at the federal government level to implement a DEIA strategic plan,
this does not extend to state and municipal level government offices (The White House, Office of
the Press Secretary, 2021). This goal was established based on an unknown performance gap but
following the direction of the U.S. federal government and executive departments.
Stakeholder Group of Focus and Performance Goal for the Study
This study focused on the change agents’ capacity to implement DEI strategic plans. The
participants were in positions dedicated to DEI in state and municipal government offices. As
previously mentioned, these positions are beginning to grow at the local government level
(Cooper & Gerlach, 2019). The stakeholders’ goal is that by 2025, local and state levels of
120

government agencies’ change agents will have implemented a DEI strategic plan. The field study
sought to determine the degree to which the goal is being met and how to improve on that
performance.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this project was to evaluate the degree to which local and state
government agencies are achieving their field goal of implementing a DEI strategic plan. The
analysis focused on KMO influences. Based on the need for research on state and municipal
level government’s ability to implement DEI strategic plans, the research questions aligned with
Clark and Estes’s (2008) KMO gap analysis methodology:
1. What are the knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational influences related
to hired change agents implementing a DEI strategic plan?
2. What are the recommended knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational
solutions related to hired change agents implementing a DEI strategic plan?
Overview
The following sections describe the KMO solutions to address the results and findings of
Chapter Four. The recommendations will be implemented as a program to address the gaps or
areas for continued support. Recommendations will be provided for areas needing improvement
as well as areas upon which the organization needs to continue to do well for organizational
stability and overall performance improvement. Recommendations include providing
information through web page portals and job aids, providing opportunities to make meaning of
organization data, opportunities to discuss why change agents work in DEI, providing
demonstration training with practice and feedback, and collaboration and peer modeling with
debriefings. Based on the recommended solutions, the achievement of the stakeholder learning
goals will be met by a training program that explores evidence-based strategies for effective
121

change management and strategic planning through a DEI lens. The implementation of the
program will be evaluated through the Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) framework. This
framework includes four levels. Levels 3 and 4 relate to training effectiveness, job performance,
and organizational results, while Levels 1 and 2 measure the quality of the training and how
much knowledge and skill was gained (Kirkpatrick, 2015).
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences
The following sections detail the recommendations for the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences of the study.
Knowledge Recommendations
Three knowledge influences were analyzed for this study. These influences were factual,
procedural, and metacognitive, are essential to achieving the stakeholder goal, and are detailed in
Table 32. The factual knowledge influence of stakeholders knowing the concepts and vocabulary
of DEI work and the procedural knowledge influence of stakeholders needing to know how to
follow the steps of strategic planning were determined to be assets. The metacognitive
knowledge influence of stakeholders needing to know how to plan their use of DEI data to meet
organizational needs was determined to be a need. While the analysis of all three influences
showed that the stakeholders have mostly assets, it also showed that support is needed. These
knowledge influences were identified through the literature review and from Krathwohl’s (2002)
learning theory and will be used to make recommendations on how change agents can increase
their ability to implement DEI strategic plans.

122

Table 32
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed knowledge
influence
Need or
asset
Principle and citation Context-specific
recommendation
Stakeholder knows the
concepts and vocabulary
of diversity, equity, and
inclusion work (K-F).
Asset Lower order thinking
skills are subsumed
by, and provide the
foundation for, higher
order thinking skills
(Anderson &
Krathwohl, 2001).

Information learned
meaningfully and
connected with prior
knowledge is stored
more quickly and
remembered more
accurately because it
is elaborated with
prior learning
(Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).
Provide information to
stakeholders to define
DEI and related
concepts through web
page portal.

Stakeholder needs to know
how to follow the steps of
strategic planning process
(K-P).
Asset Learning tasks that are
similar to those that
are common to the
individual’s familiar
cultural settings will
promote learning and
transfer (Gallimore &
Goldenberg, 2001).
Provide a job aid that
captures the steps to
follow for the
strategic planning
process.
Stakeholder needs to plan
their use of DEI data to
meet organizational needs
(K-M).
Need The use of
metacognitive
strategies facilitates
learning (Baker,
2009).
Provide
opportunities/training
to stakeholders to
make meaning of
their organizational
data.

123

Factual Knowledge Solutions
The results and findings of this study indicated that all interviewees showed a clear
understanding of the factual knowledge of DEI work, while there is a need for more in-depth
knowledge by those who participated in the survey. A recommendation embedded in information
processing theory has been selected to strengthen and maintain this factual knowledge influence.
Schraw and McCrudden (2006) posited that information connected with prior or preexisting
knowledge is remembered more accurately due to building off prior learning. This would suggest
that providing learners with an information sheet or internet webpage portal of information
would support their learning. The recommendation then is to provide designated DEI change
agents with a web page portal with detailed vocabulary and concept maps to present the
necessary DEI-related factual knowledge to maintain this asset.
Nishishiba (2012) studied local government diversity initiatives in Oregon and what
made the efforts successful. Three themes emerged from the interviews: the types of activities
conducted, the factors affecting progress, and recommendations. Results showed all interviewees
detailed the need for diversity training for their public-sector agencies. The training includes
vocabulary and concepts related to the need and implementation of DEI work. This training
requires factual knowledge. The study supports the recommendation to provide a web page
portal with detailed vocabulary and concept maps to present the necessary DEI-related factual
knowledge to maintain this asset and continue to build on prior knowledge.
Procedural Knowledge Solutions
The results and findings of this study indicated that 100% of interviewees and 83% of
survey respondents showed a clear understanding of the procedural knowledge of their
organizations’ strategic planning process. A recommendation rooted in sociocultural theory has
been selected to maintain this knowledge influence. Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001) found that
124

learning tasks that are similar to common tasks in the individual’s cultural settings promote
learning and the transfer of knowledge. This would suggest that providing learners with a job aid
that captures the steps to follow for strategic planning processes at their agency would support
their learning. Procedural knowledge is central in both the planning and the implementation of
diversity management, as it is the “how” in the knowledge influences of Clark and Estes’s (2008)
framework. The recommendation then is to provide designated DEI change agents with a job aid
with detailed procedural steps to strategic planning at their agency to maintain this asset.
Albrechts and Balducci (2013) described critical features of strategic planning, including
the strategic planning process and objectives. They discuss that while the essence of strategic
planning can be generalized, the process and procedure of how it is conducted is not a single
concept across sectors and agencies. The objectives are also specific to the agency doing the
planning but typically include coordinating visions for long-term change. Individual knowledge
of their agencies’ processes leads to the ability to formulate a successful plan. Poister et al.
(2010) detail how planning processes vary considerably across the public sector and require
those involved to understand their agency in terms of who is involved, key external stakeholders,
required policies, boundaries, and more. The evidence affirms providing a job aid that captures
the steps to follow for the strategic planning process would support this asset.
Metacognitive Knowledge Solutions
The results and findings of this study indicated that 50% of survey respondents and 62%
of interviewees were able to clearly describe the way in which they plan their use of DEI data to
meet their organizational needs. The ability to reflect on the data and make meaning of it in
relation to their agency was determined to be a need. A recommendation embedded in
information processing theory has been selected to close this metacognitive knowledge gap.
Baker (2009) details that the use of metacognitive strategies facilitates learning. This would
125

suggest that providing learners with an opportunity to debrief the thinking process upon
completion of training would support their learning. The recommendation then is to provide
designated DEI change agents with training on making meaning out of DEI data and an
opportunity to debrief with others.
Bradbury and Kellough (2011) discussed the need to be able to reflect on the data on
staff demographics and diversity regarding recruiting, hiring, advancement, and retention. This
extends to job satisfaction, employee engagement, and accessibility as well. Change agents need
to know how to use this data to plan the organizational approach and progress monitoring of DEI
work and strategic planning (Riccucci & Van Ryzin, 2017). The study supports the
recommendation to provide training and opportunities to debrief to continue to learn and make
meaning of organizational data.
Motivation Recommendations
Four motivation influences were analyzed for this study. The influences included value,
self-efficacy, collective efficacy, and goals which are necessary to achieving the stakeholder goal
and detailed in Table 33. Three influences were determined to be an asset: stakeholders needing
to consider DEI work useful for themselves, stakeholders needing confidence in leading teams
through change initiatives, and stakeholders needing clear goals related to the production of DEI
strategic plans. The collective efficacy influence of stakeholders needing to have confidence that
all involved staff possess the skills to implement diversity management initiatives was
determined to be a need. The analysis of the four influences showed that the stakeholders have
mostly assets. However, it also showed that support is needed. These motivation influences were
discovered through the literature review, and Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis will be used
to make recommendations on how change agents can increase their ability to implement DEI
strategic plans.
126

Table 33
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Assumed motivation
influence
Need or
asset
Principle and citation Context-specific
recommendation
Stakeholder needs to
consider conducting DEI
work useful for
themselves (Value).
Asset Learning and
motivation are
enhanced if the
learner values the task
(Eccles, 2006).

Rationales that include
a discussion of the
importance and utility
value of the work or
learning can help
learners develop
positive values
(Eccles, 2006;
Pintrich, 2003).
Provide opportunities
to discuss why
change agents do
this work with
others in the agency.
Stakeholder needs
confidence in leading
teams through change
initiatives (Self-efficacy).
Asset Modeling to-be-learned
strategies or
behaviors improves
self-efficacy,
learning, and
performance (Denler
et al., 2009).
Provide demonstration
of change
management with
opportunity for
practice and
feedback.
Stakeholder needs to have
confidence that all
involved staff in their
(team/department/group)
possess the skills to
implement diversity
management initiatives
(Collective efficacy).
Need Social interaction,
cooperative learning,
and cognitive
apprenticeships (such
as reciprocal
teaching) facilitate
construction of new
knowledge (Scott &
Palincsar, 2006).
Collaboration and
peer modeling
during team
meetings
Stakeholder needs clear
goals related to the
production of the DEI
strategic plan (Goals).
Asset Focusing on mastery,
individual
improvement,
learning, and progress
promotes positive
motivation (Yough &
Anderman, 2006).
Provide demonstration
of DEI goal setting
with opportunity for
practice and
feedback.

127

Value Solutions
The results and findings showed that 91% of survey respondents and 100% of
interviewees were able to speak to the value of DEI work for themselves. A recommendation
founded in expectancy-value theory has been chosen to maintain this value asset. Researchers
have found that including discussions on the importance and value of the work being done can
help individuals develop positive values (Eccles, 2006; Pintrich, 2003). Eccles (2006) posited
that motivation is increased when an individual values the tasks. This would suggest that
providing change agents with the opportunity to discuss why they do DEI work would strengthen
value. The recommendation is for the agencies to provide opportunities for change agents to
present to others across the agency on why they conduct diversity management initiatives.
Clark and Estes (2008) explained that, within motivational influences, performance is
higher when the person involved values the work being done. Within the field of DEI,
motivation and performance are increased when an individual takes satisfaction in these
initiatives (Elliot et al., 2018; Pintrich, 2003). Pintrich (2003) posited that individuals who are
intrinsically motivated will often feel more autonomy and self-determination related to
achievement as well. Individuals responsible for effecting change in a public-sector agency and
creating strategic planning to reflect such change typically have both personal and professional
ties to the work. DEI work must be seen as beneficial and important to the change agent
responsible for successful diversity management in state and municipal agencies (Moon &
Christensen, 2019). From a theoretical perspective, there is a reason that increasing value for
change agents would increase performance and DEI strategic planning.
Self-Efficacy Solutions
The results and findings of this study indicated that 82% of survey respondents and 100%
of interviewees felt confident in leading their teams through change initiatives. The display of
128

self-efficacy was determined to be an asset. A recommendation grounded in self-efficacy theory
has been selected to maintain this motivation asset. Denler et al. (2009) discussed that modeling
strategies and behaviors can improve self-efficacy, learning, and also performance. This would
suggest that providing learners with a demonstration and opportunity to get feedback would
support their learning. The recommendation then is to provide designated DEI change agents
with training on making meaning out of DEI data and an opportunity to debrief with others.
High self-efficacy can positively influence motivation (Pajares, 2006). Self-efficacy also
affects the persistence of an individual. If an individual does not believe that they can complete a
task successfully, they may convince themselves to prioritize something else and put little effort
into the task (Clark, 2005). In the case of DEI strategic planning, change agents need confidence
in their ability to lead teams through change initiatives, or motivation to continue the work from
development to implementation will waver (Elliot et al., 2018). Borgogni et al. (2011) posited
that individuals who have positive self-efficacy also contribute positively toward the collective
efficacy of a group. From a theoretical perspective, increasing self-efficacy in change agents
would increase and strengthen their ability to implement DEI strategic plans.
Collective Efficacy Solutions
The results and findings of this study indicated that 67% of survey respondents and 50%
of interviewees had confidence in all staff involved in implementing diversity management
initiatives. The lesser display of collective efficacy was determined to be a need. A
recommendation grounded in sociocultural theory has been selected to close this motivation gap.
Scott and Palincsar (2006) found that social interactions, learning in cooperation with others, and
reciprocal teaching promote the development of new knowledge. This would suggest that
providing change agents with opportunities to collaborate and participate in peer modeling would
increase collective efficacy. The recommendation for this influence is for the organization to
129

provide peer modeling and opportunities to collaborate with others during team meetings to
facilitate new knowledge and strengthen confidence in each other.
Diversity management requires commitment across the agency for success, meaning the
self-efficacy of the change agent encourages others (Jin et al., 2017). The interrelationships of
individuals in a group influence their performance as a team and what the team can accomplish
(Jackson & LePine, 2003). This is important as collective voice is a component of local
government agencies and can increase the effectiveness of diversity management initiatives.
Individuals who are involved in diversity management can feel discouraged when initiatives do
not produce changes quickly, which in turn affects self-efficacy and the persistence to continue
diversity management (Elliot et al., 2018). Increased time and effort devoted to evaluating DEI
work at organizations and creating strategic options increase staff confidence that the process
outcome will be positive (Elbanna et al., 2016). Social interactions and peer modeling provide
opportunities for individuals in an agency to discover the ability of others, while reciprocal
teaching facilitates the retention of knowledge (Scott & Palincsar, 2006). From a theoretical
perspective, increasing collective efficacy would increase and close the gap of change agents
having confidence in all staff involved to implement diversity management initiatives.
Goal Solutions
The results and findings of this study indicated that 75% of interviewees and 91% of
survey respondents said or detailed having clear goals related to the production of their strategic
plans. This influence was determined to be an asset. A recommendation grounded in goal
orientation theory has been selected to maintain this motivation influence. Yough and Anderman
(2006) found that focusing on individual improvements, mastery, and progress facilitates
positive motivation. This would suggest that providing learners with a demonstration and
opportunity to get feedback on their proficiency would support their learning to create clear
130

goals. The recommendation then is to provide designated DEI change agents with training on
creating clear goals and an opportunity to debrief with others.
Goals motivate and direct students (Pintrich, 2003). Clark and Estes (2008) discussed the
role of goal setting in effective performance improvement. Additionally, a performance goal
must tie into the organizational goals with clear linkages. DEI work sets out to accomplish many
goals relating to organizational performance and achievement, social justice, and intrinsic value
and belonging (Dixon-Fyle et al., 2020; Miller, 1995). While the DEI plan and diversity
management at the organization will have their own set of goals and objectives, there needs to be
clarity and direction provided specific to the production of the plan, aligning with the vision and
mission of the organization. The evidence affirms providing DEI change agents with training on
creating clear goals and an opportunity to debrief with others would strengthen this asset and
increase the implementation of DEI strategic plans.
Organization Recommendations
Three organizational influences were analyzed for this study. The influences included
cultural settings through resources, cultural settings through policies, processes, and procedures,
and cultural models, which are necessary to achieving the stakeholder goal and are detailed in
Table 34. All three influences were determined to be an asset. The analysis of the three
influences showed that the stakeholders could utilize support to maintain these assets. These
motivation influences were discovered through the literature review, and Krathwohl’s (2002)
learning theory will be used to make recommendations on how change agents can increase their
ability to implement DEI strategic plans.

131

Table 34
Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations
Assumed organization
influence
Need or
asset
Principle and citation Context-specific
recommendation
Stakeholder needs
leadership support to
implement DEI strategic
plan (cultural settings:
resources).
Asset Modeled behavior is
more likely to be
adopted if the model
is credible, similar,
and the behavior has
functional value
(Denler et al., 2009).
Collaboration and peer
modeling during team
meetings
Stakeholder needs to have
agency policies that
align with DEI strategic
plans and initiatives
(cultural settings:
policies, processes, and
procedures).
Asset Continued practice
promotes
automaticity and
takes less capacity in
working memory
(Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).
Provide
opportunities/training
to stakeholders to
align strategic plans.
Stakeholder needs
organizational
commitment to DEI
strategic planning
(cultural models).
Asset Activating and building
upon personal interest
can increase learning
and motivation
(Schraw & Lehman,
2009).
Provide opportunities to
discuss DEI strategic
planning during
collaborative
meetings.

Cultural Settings: Resource Solutions
The results and findings of this study indicated that 100% of interviewees and 83% of
survey respondents said they had clear goals related to the production of their strategic plans.
This influence was determined to be an asset. A recommendation grounded in social cognitive
theory has been selected to maintain this organizational influence. Denler et al. (2009) found that
modeled behavior has a higher likelihood of being adopted if the model is credible and the
behavior has a functional value. This would suggest that collaboration and peer modeling with
leadership would support change agent success in implementing DEI strategic plans. The
132

recommendation then is to provide designated DEI change agents the opportunity for peer
modeling and collaboration with leadership during team meetings to show leadership support.
Research commonly cites leadership buy-in and strong commitment as necessary for
achieving diversity management initiatives and embedding DEI work in strategic plans (George
et al., 2019; Jin et al., 2017). As change agents launch and uphold initiatives, lack of investment
from organizational leadership limits these roles (Buick et al., 2017). Leadership can set
organizational priorities to increase change agents’ ability. The theoretical perspective affirms
providing DEI change agents with an opportunity for peer modeling and collaboration with
leadership during team meetings to show leadership support would strengthen their ability to
implement DEI strategic plans.
Cultural Settings: Policy, Process, and Procedure Solutions
The results and findings of this study indicated that 83% of survey respondents and 100%
of interviewees detailed the need for agency policies that align with their DEI strategic plan. As
such, this influence was determined to be an asset. A recommendation grounded in information
processing theory has been selected to maintain this organizational influence. Schraw and
McCrudden (2006) posited that continued practice reinforces automaticity and, over time,
requires less capacity in working memory to implement. This would suggest that opportunities to
practice would support change agent success in implementing DEI strategic plans. The
recommendation then is to provide designated DEI change agents the opportunity to practice
aligning strategic plans at their agency to strengthen and maintain this asset.
Clark and Estes (2008) explained that addressing organizational work processes and
resources is necessary for assessing performance gaps. Diversity policies are often an agency
goal themselves rather than being connected with existing agency goals, which does not translate
into implementation and makes them less effective (Groeneveld & Verbeek, 2012). Policies that
133

inhibit participation, do not support the steps and goals outlined in the strategic plan, or are
contradictory influence the cultural models and the motivation of those involved. Schraw and
McCrudden (2006) suggested that providing experiences for individuals to make sense of
material rather than emphasizing memorization will promote continued learning. Breaking down
complicated tasks and facilitating the practice of strategic thinking will strengthen change
agents’ ability to align agency policies to their DEI strategic plan. The theoretical perspective
supports the recommendation to provide opportunities to practice this asset.
Cultural Model Solutions
The results and findings of this study indicated that 83% of survey respondents and 100%
of interviewees detailed the need for organizational commitment to DEI strategic planning. This
influence was determined to be an asset. A recommendation rooted in interest theory has been
selected to maintain this organizational influence. Schraw and Lehman (2009) observed that
building on personal interest can increase motivation. This would imply that providing
opportunities to discuss DEI in terms of personal work goals and initiatives would increase
organizational commitment across individuals. The recommendation is to provide opportunities
to discuss DEI strategic planning during collaborative meetings.
Diversity management relies on a reciprocal relationship with policy development and
how it is enacted at each agency. In addition, diversity management depends on an organization
consistently committing to the DEI plan that is developed (Jin et al., 2017). The ability of change
agents to effectuate change in local government is reliant on the organization’s involvement and
investment in the change initiative. Increasing interest is an important step in obtaining a
commitment from others across the organization and can be done by weaving together individual
interests of departments into the DEI strategic planning process. The theoretical perspective
134

affirms the recommendation to provide opportunities to discuss strategic planning in relation to
DEI during collaborative meetings across the agency to strengthen organizational commitment.
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
The following sections describe the implementation plan and the plan to evaluate based
on the findings and recommendations previously detailed.
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) posited the urgency of demonstrating the value of
training. As training is an underestimated contributor to job and organizational performance, it is
often overlooked and underfunded. Assessing training through the Kirkpatrick Implementation
and Evaluation Framework can improve programming, increase the transfer of learning to
behavior, and reveal the value of training to the organization (2015). This model will also
increase results linked to an organization’s mission and overall goals to add value to be a value-
added component (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). This new world model includes four levels.
Levels 1 and 2 measure the quality of the training and how much knowledge and skill were
gained, and Levels 3 and 4 relate to training effectiveness, job performance, and organizational
results (Kirkpatrick, 2015). It is recommended to start the implementation and evaluation plan
from Level 4 and then work down to Level 1.
Field Purpose, Need, and Expectations
The purpose of this study was to learn from government officials regarding the ways in
which they are implementing and creating DEI strategic plans and the efforts in the field to
determine what is being done and what gaps exist that must be addressed. Despite the goal of
adopting a DEI strategic plan, the gap in performance at the state and municipal levels is
unknown. Research reveals that several factors are necessary for the successful implementation
of diversity strategic plans, including a commitment from leadership, participation from
135

employees, knowledge of the concepts, and a connection to organizational goals (Wyatt-Nichol
& Antwi-Boasiako, 2012). Studies show that without organizational support, most public-sector
change communications are limited to those involved directly in the related initiative (Al-Alawi
et al., 2019). Jin et al. (2017) suggested that DEI relies on the relationship between policy
development and implementation, workplace culture, and inclusive leadership. If the KMO
factors that limit implementation are analyzed, then the way government offices develop and
implement DEI strategic plans can be changed, which will be beneficial for creating more equity
and representation in the public sector.
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
Level 4 looks at the degree to which outcomes occur as a result of the training
(Kirkpatrick, 2015). Table 35 shows the suggested Level 4 results and leading indicators in terms
of the outcomes, metrics, and methods for external and internal outcomes for the DEI change
agent stakeholder group. Internal outcomes are to be achieved to also achieve the external
outcomes.

136

Table 35
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
Outcome Metrics Methods
External outcomes
1. Increased training
opportunities for change
agents
1. Canvas course creation 1a. Quarterly agency reports on
development
1b. Survey 90 days after
completion
2. Increased
organizational approval
of DEI efforts
2. Department focus groups 2. Poll and qualitative responses
Internal outcomes
1. Change agents
participated in 2 hours
of strategic planning and
data training.
1. Number of change agents
with completed training
1. Quarterly agency reports
2. Improved relationships
among change agents
and other agency staff
2. Number of new relationships
among different departments
and change agent
2. Quarterly agency reports

Note. Items are numbered for organization purposes to connect the metrics and methods to the
appropriate external or internal outcome.

Level 3: Behavior
This level looks at the degree participants apply what has been learned to their job after
the training (Kirkpatrick, 2015). Two areas in this level will be addressed: critical behaviors and
required drivers. Critical behaviors are actions that have the biggest impact on results when done
consistently. Drivers are the processes that reinforce, reward, and monitor the critical behaviors
and can include mentoring, recognition, and pay incentives. The first critical behavior is that
change agents develop a DEI plan based on their agency’s data and needs assessment. This
determines the foundation of DEI work in the state or municipality. The second critical behavior
is that change agents pair the DEI strategic plan with the agency strategic plan. The success of
137

diversity initiatives is reliant on the influence of the whole organization, requiring an alignment
of both plans. Table 36 presents critical behaviors, metrics, methods, and timing.

Table 36
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation
Critical behavior Metric(s)
Method(s)
Timing
1. Change agents
develop a DEI plan
based on their
agency’s data and
needs assessment.
1. Completed DEI
plan based on data
findings
1. Plan submitted to
leadership over agency
vision
(Mayor/Governor/Chie
f of Staff/etc.)
1. Once annually
2. Change agents pair
DEI strategic plan
with agency
strategic plan.
2a. Number of times
change agents pair
the DEI strategic
plan with the agency
plan
2a. Report

2a. Quarterly to
leadership
2b. Number of
Change agents
monitoring and
evaluating DEI plan
progress
2b. Number of DEI plan
progress reports
submitted by each
individual
2b. Quarterly

Note. Items are numbered for organization purposes to connect the metrics and methods to the
appropriate external or internal outcome.

138

Required Drivers
Table 37 details the recommended drivers for reinforcing, encouraging, and supporting
the critical behaviors of change agents. These drivers will describe the KMO influences that are
needed to drive the achievement of the stakeholder goal. The required drivers were pulled
directly from the research findings and recommended solutions. These solutions, or required
drivers, are to be applied to the integrated implementation and evaluation plan.

139

Table 37
Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors
Methods Timing Critical behaviors supported
Reinforcing
Information sheet and web
page portal of DEI
vocabulary and concepts
Ongoing 1
Job aid including steps of
strategic planning
Ongoing 1, 2
Training covering data use
and how to make meaning
of organizational data
Bi-annual 1
Training team debrief for
opportunity to reflect on
organizational data
Bi-annual 1, 2
Encouraging
Provide opportunities to
discuss why change agents
do this work with others in
the agency.
1, 2
Provide demonstration of
change management with
opportunity for practice and
feedback.
Quarterly 1, 2
Collaboration and peer
modeling during team
meetings
Weekly 1, 2
Rewarding
Performance incentive when
DEI goals are set across
departments
Quarterly or project-based 1, 2
Public acknowledgement
through spotlight on agency
website
Quarterly 1, 2
Monitoring (org rec)
Observations from leadership Ongoing 1, 2
Provide opportunities to
discuss DEI during team
meetings.
Ongoing 1, 2

140

Organizational Support
Level 3 behaviors and drivers will be supported by stakeholders in state and municipal
government agencies. This would be someone in leadership or senior staff positions such as the
Governor, Mayor, Chief of Staff, and others. Another stakeholder group is the agency
employees, as buy-in, perception of DEI, and effort from all members of an organization are
necessary to implement a strategic plan successfully (Barker et al., 2018). The support provided
by these two organizational stakeholders will ensure that drivers are implemented. This will be
done by creating collaborative opportunities to connect all change agents addressing the work of
DEI and creating job aids and training materials that are accessible in multiple mediums to
accommodate a variety of learning styles. The organizational leaders will also support and
prioritize DEI to promote buy-in from staff, other senior leadership positions, and change agents
themselves. These senior leaders will also open lines of communication with change agents and
staff to connect to whole-agency strategic planning, training, and a way to recognize and
promote the work being done in the DEI space in their agencies.
Level 2: Learning
Level two looks at how the degree participants gain the anticipated knowledge, skills, and
motivation based on the training participation (Kirkpatrick, 2015). Motivation includes attitude,
believing it is worth knowing and having the skills from the training, confidence and self-
efficacy, and a commitment to apply what is learned to job duties. To support required drivers
and critical behaviors, a learning program has been created that targets and supports Level 3.
Learning Goals
After completing the DEI change agent training, the stakeholder subgroup will be able to
• summarize the concepts and vocabulary of DEI (K-F)
• summarize the steps of the strategic planning process (K-P)
141

• create a plan to use DEI data to meet the needs of the organization (K-M)
• apply steps to collect organizational DEI data (K-P)
• value completing diversity management initiatives (M, value)
• be confident in their ability to implement organizational change initiatives (M, self-
efficacy)
• create a plan with clear goals related to developing and implementing the DEI
strategic plan (M, goals)
Program
Based on the analysis and the learning goals provided, the achievement of the stakeholder
learning goals will be met by a training program that explores evidence-based strategies for
effective change management and strategic planning through a DEI lens. The learners are the
DEI change agents, who will explore three content areas: DEI concepts and initiatives,
interpreting DEI data about organizational needs and activities, and strategic planning
development and implementation. This program is a blended model that incorporates three self-
guided Canvas e-learning courses and one in-person or virtual workshop. The total time for
completion of the training program is roughly three and a half hours, with each self-guided
course taking around 45 minutes to complete and the workshop taking 75 minutes.
The e-learning courses will be hosted in Canvas as the learning management system
(LMS). Throughout the three courses, required drivers are provided that relate to KMO areas, as
stated in Table 37. A job aid will be included for each course that includes a glossary of terms,
an implementation guide for strategic planning, and a summary of DEI data components related
to diversity management initiatives. The courses will also have training videos and written
content. There will be either a few multiple-choice questions or a written text box response to
promote self-efficacy after the videos. These will switch between modules. The written
142

responses will be reviewed by the facilitator. These components of the LMS course are
reinforcing and knowledge related.
The 75-minute workshop will be offered both in person and virtually via Zoom for those
who are unable to attend in person due to travel, health, or other reasons. Workshops will occur
at separate times and will be offered quarterly upon the completion of the three LMS courses. At
the beginning of the workshop, all attendees will be required to take a ten-question pre-test. The
workshop will then consist of a 20-minute collaborative session to promote communities of
practice, reinforcing knowledge and increasing efficacy. There will then be a 20-minute
opportunity for all to discuss successes and challenges in the content areas and have peer
modeling and collaboration to address questions. This session relates to both encouraging, which
is motivation-related, and monitoring, which is organization related. The remaining time will
consist of small case-study breakouts that allow for the training facilitator to provide observation
and feedback.
At the end of the workshop, all attendees will take a 10-question post-test. Upon
completion of all four training components, change agents will receive recognition through a
DEI strategic planning endorsement. Change agents are rewarded for their participation which is
motivation related. Two weeks after the completion of the course, attendees will be sent a course
evaluation. Ninety days after the workshop completion, the facilitator will administer a survey.
Evaluation of the Components of Learning
Evaluating e-learning has become easier as administering and scoring can be automated
through the LMS system. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) posited that while pre-tests and
post-tests, along with tests within modules, are a great way to evaluate learning, using scenarios
or asking participants to apply the knowledge in a written response can be more engaging. Table
38 details the evaluation methods and timing that will be applied to evaluate the learning goals.
143

Table 38
Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program.
Methods or activities Timing
Declarative knowledge: “I know it.”
Multiple-choice knowledge checks During the LMS course modules
Pre-test and post-test Before and after workshop
Procedural skills: “I can do it right now.”
Demonstration of use of job aids to identify
steps to follow for the strategic planning
process
During LMS course modules and during the
small group work at the workshop
Written response prompts applying to
scenarios
During the LMS course modules
Small group collaboration During the workshop
Case-study scenario During the workshop
DEI data implementation guide During and after the workshop
Attitude: “I believe this is worthwhile.”
Discussion of change management strategies During the LMS written response prompts
Case-study observation During the workshop
Pre-test and post-test of workshop completion
surveying value of DEI work
Before, during, and after the workshop
Confidence: “I think I can do it on the job.”
Discussion in small group collaboration of
challenges and promising practices of DEI
During workshop
Mentoring and coaching During and after workshop
Pre-test and post-test survey questions about
strategic planning capability and capacity
During and after workshop
Commitment: “I will do it on the job.”
Discussions after collaboration, practice,
facilitator observation and feedback
During and after the workshop
144

Methods or activities Timing
Pre-test and post-test survey questions Before and after the workshop
Creation of an agency-specific
implementation outline (next steps)
During LMS course modules and after
workshop

Level 1: Reaction
Level one looks at the reaction of participants, specifically to what degree they react
favorably to the training (Kirkpatrick, 2015). Within this level, there are three dimensions:
participant satisfaction, engagement and the degree participants are involved and contributing,
and relevance or the degree participants can apply what they have learned. Kirkpatrick and
Kirkpatrick (2016) suggested embedding questions or evaluations in the learning experience to
record LMS activity to evaluate Level 1 through e-learning. Although the workshop can be
attended in person, having a virtual option also incorporates the need for frequent feedback on
the training program. Table 39 lists the methods that will be used to ascertain how change agents
react to the training.

145

Table 39
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program.
Methods or tools Timing
Engagement
Participation and engagement analytics of
LMS system
Ongoing
Completion of LMS courses Ongoing
Scoring of multiple-choice questions and
written responses
Ongoing
Workshop attendance During
Course evaluation Two weeks after the course
Relevance
Pulse check via discussion After each session during the workshop
Course evaluation Two weeks after the course
Customer Satisfaction
Pulse check via discussion After each session during the workshop
Course evaluation Two weeks after the course

Evaluation Tool: Immediately Following the Course and Workshop
During each of the three Canvas courses, the LMS will collect data regarding all
participants’ engagement and completion. This will help the facilitator know which courses may
need additional content, as multiple-choice questions or written responses may not support the
material or learning goal. During the workshop, the facilitator will provide opportunities to check
Level 2 learning by applying the content to a case study and providing feedback. Level 1
reactions will be addressed by monitoring engagement and who stays throughout the entirety of
the workshop, along with opportunities to provide feedback to the facilitator after each session.
See Appendix H: Immediate Evaluation Instrument.
146

Evaluation Tool: Delayed for a Period After the Workshop
Thirty days after the workshop completion, the facilitator will administer a scaled survey
to evaluate the KMO learning components. The survey will measure Level 1 reactions, including
participant engagement, satisfaction, and course relevance; Level 2 learning, including skills,
knowledge, and confidence in applying what they have learned; Level 3 behaviors to
successfully develop and implement a DEI strategic plan; and Level 4 methods for external and
internal outcomes for the change agent stakeholder group (Appendix I).
Data Analysis and Reporting
The Level 4 results and outcomes are measured by the percentage of change agent
completion in the training program and their knowledge and motivation to implement DEI
strategic plans. The facilitator will monitor the number of DEI strategic planning endorsements
given along with the increased number of diversity management initiatives in the agencies. These
findings will be shared through agency websites and DEI public-sector communities. Figure 4
presents the projected training program findings upon implementation.

147

Figure 4
Projected Training Program Findings

Note. Figure details implementation progress year over year.

Summary
This study used the new world Kirkpatrick model to plan, implement, and evaluate the
recommendations discovered through the gap analysis to achieve the stakeholder goal of change
agents implementing DEI strategic plans in state and municipal governments. The advantage of
using this framework is the ability to gather both quantitative and qualitative data sets throughout
the program to influence what happens and maximize results (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
In the end, integrating implementation and evaluation provides the chance to discover if each
asset meets expectations and creates internal benchmarks for progress.
148

Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach
This study utilized Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis framework, using systematic
and analytical methods to clarify organizational goals and identify gaps between current and
preferred performance. A strength of this framework is that assumed KMO influences that
impact stakeholder capacity are generated based on context-specific research as well as general
learning and motivation theory. Problem-solving through these factors was founded on
understanding stakeholder goals regarding the organizational goal and identifying assumed
performance influences in the areas of KMO based on general theory, context-specific literature,
and an understanding of the field. As the practice of DEI strategic planning is not standardized
across any sector yet, understanding stakeholder goals and the performance gap requires data
triangulation. While the resources required to utilize this approach for closing performance gaps
are significant, the advantages of using this framework include stakeholder participation, validity
and reliability, and the prescriptive nature of the recommended solutions.
Limitations and Delimitations
This study had limitations that could have had an impact, although outside of my control
(Creswell, 2014). In the DEI field and in the current political climate and rhetoric around this
work, participants may not have been as candid with responses if they are facing political
pushback in their community or agency. As government agencies answer to many constituents,
there are differing priorities and perceptions related to diversity management. Participants may
also have experienced something prior to engaging in the study that relates to their experiences
and perceptions of DEI strategic planning and thus influences the way in which they respond.
Delimitations of this study that could have had implications on the data included the sampling
criteria, as perspectives of those new to these positions were not included in the collection
methods. The survey and the interview questions were also founded in Clark and Estes’s (2008)
149

KMO gap analysis framework, which narrowed the influences and needs into these categories.
As I had experience both with DEI initiatives and the public sector, there was also a bias in this
work which could have influenced the way in which the study was bounded (Creswell, 2014). It
was necessary for the researcher to reflect on bias and utilize member checking to ensure
responses were accurate and representative of the participants.
Future Research
While there is thorough research into strategic planning and DEI work, there is not as
much research on the specific roles of individuals tasked with DEI change initiatives.
Furthermore, there is even less research on these roles, specifically in the public sector. Due to
this study’s focus on the DEI-specific roles, there was self-selection bias as to who participated.
The survey and interviewees in these positions demonstrated organizational commitment to DEI
with the fact that the positions themselves existed and were funded and staffed. It would be
worth exploring these influences in future research in organizations that did not already have
established DEI measures. Another recommendation for future research is to look at the possible
high self-efficacy problem of DEI change agents. The analysis of KMO influences may have
been affected by the respondents’ high self-efficacy. While there is a demonstrated commitment
to doing DEI work from the individuals who participated, an opportunity for future research
would be looking at the resilience and burnout rates of DEI change agents in the public sector,
and many interviewees spoke to these specifically. However, these comments were not included
in this study due to the purpose and structure of the research. As detailed in the findings and
recommended solutions, there is a need for a higher ability of metacognition. This is specifically
related to reflection on organizational diversity data in regard to meeting organizational needs.
Additionally, the literature reviewed touched on the differing roles of state and municipal
government agencies, but future research could identify the variance of diversity initiatives and
150

related change agents between the two governmental levels. Finally, there is an even greater need
for research on the variance of political players and their influence on diversity management and
change agent success.
Conclusion
This study explored the ability of change agents to implement DEI strategic plans in state
and municipal governments using Clark and Estes’s (2008) KMO framework. The purpose of
this study was to identify the KMO influences on change agents achieving their performance
goal of implementing DEI strategic plans in efforts to create a more equitable and representative
bureaucracy. Representation is crucial in government to increase democracy and include the
voices of communities who have been historically marginalized. Stakeholders of focus for this
study were individuals in positions dedicated to DEI in state and municipal government offices,
the individuals truly at the epicenter of change. Implementing a program to address the gaps or
areas for continued support provides these change agents in positions like DEI director, chief
equity officer, diversity director and more opportunities to be successful. With governments
being majority White, these positions are necessary to push DEI work forward but are ineffective
on their own without additional support and resources. Based on the recommended solutions, the
training program was developed to explore evidence-based strategies for effective change
management and strategic planning through a DEI lens.

151

References
Al-Alawi, A. I., Abdulmohsen, M., Al-Malki, F. M., & Mehrotra, A. (2019). Investigating the
barriers to change management in public sector educational institutions. International
Journal of Educational Management, 33(1), 112–148. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-03-
2018-0115
Albrechts, L., & Balducci, A. (2013). Practicing strategic planning: In search of critical features
to explain the strategic character of plans. DISP, 49(3), 16–27.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02513625.2013.859001
Andersen, T. M., & Maibom, J. (2020). The big trade-off between efficiency and equity—is it
there? Oxford Economic Papers, 72(2), 391–411. https://doi.org/10.1093/oep/gpz040
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing:
A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
Arnold, J., & Kowalski-Braun, M. (2011). The journey to an inaugural chief diversity officer:
Preparation, implementation and beyond. Innovative Higher Education, 37(1), 27–36.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-011-9185-9
Ashikali, T., & Groeneveld, S. (2015). Diversity management for all? An empirical analysis of
diversity management outcomes across groups. Personnel Review, 44(5), 757–780.
https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-10-2014-0216
Baker, L. (2009). Metacognition. http://www.education.com/reference/article/metacognition/
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 9, 75–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00064
Bankins, D., Denness, B., Kriz, A., & Molloy, C. (2017). Innovation agents in the public sector:
Applying champion and promotor theory to explore innovation in the Australian public
152

service. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 76(1), 122–137.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12198
Barker, L., McKeown, T., Wolfram Cox, J., & Bryant, M. (2018). More of the same? A dual
case study approach to examining change momentum in the public sector. Australian
Journal of Public Administration, 77(2), 253–271. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-
8500.12306
Berry, F. S., & Wechsler, B. (1995). State agencies’ experience with strategic planning: Findings
from a national survey. Public Administration Review, 55(2), 159–168.
https://doi.org/10.2307/977181
Birk, S. (2020). Leading for equity: Taking your diversity and inclusion work to the next level.
Healthcare Executive, 35(6), 8–16.
Bleijenbergh, I., Peters, P., & Postuma, E. (2010). Diversity management beyond the business
case. Equality, diversity and inclusion: An International Journal, 29(5), 413–421.
Boon, J., Wynen, J., & Kleizen, B. (2021). What happens when the going gets tough? Linking
change skepticism, organizational identification, and turnover intentions. Public
Management Review, 23(7), 1056–1080. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2020.1722208
Borgogni, L., Dello Russo, S., & Latham, G. P. (2011). The relationship of employee perceptions
of the immediate supervisor and top management with collective efficacy. Journal of
Leadership & Organizational Studies, 18, 5–13.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051810379799
Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a research method. Qualitative Research Journal
9(2), 27-40.
Bowman, A. O. (2017). The state-local government(s) conundrum: Power and design. The
Journal of Politics, 79(4), 1119–1129. https://doi.org/10.1086/693475
153

Bradbury, M., & Kellough, J. (2011). Representative bureaucracy: Assessing the evidence on
active representation. American Review of Public Administration, 41(2), 157–167.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074010367823
Bryson, J., & Roering, W. (1988). Initiation of strategic planning by governments. [Wiley on
behalf of the American Society for Public Administration.]. Public Administration
Review, 48(6), 995–1004. https://doi.org/10.2307/976996
Bryson, J. M. (2010). The future of public and nonprofit strategic planning in the United States.
Public Administration Review, 70(s1), s255–s267. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-
6210.2010.02285.x
Bryson, J. M., Edwards, L. H., & Van Slyke, D. M. (2018). Getting strategic about strategic
planning research. Public Management Review, 20(3), 317–339.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2017.1285111
Buick, F., Blackman, D., & Johnson, S. (2017). Enabling middle managers as change agents:
Why organizational support needs to change. Australian Journal of Public
Administration, 77(2), 222–235. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12293
Chandler, L. (2020, July 2). What is intersectionality, and what does it have to do with me? YW
Boston. https://www.ywboston.org/2017/03/what-is-intersectionality-and-what-does-it-
have-to-do-with-me/#:%7E:text=Intersectionality%20is%20a%20framework%20for,
complexity%20of%20prejudices%20they%20face.
Clark, R. E. (2005). Research‐tested team motivation strategies. Performance Improvement,
44(1), 13–16. https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi.4140440107
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Information Age Publishing, Inc.
154

Cooper, C. A., & Gerlach, J. D. (2019). Diversity management in action: Chief diversity officer
adoption in America’s cities. State & Local Government Review, 51(2), 113–121.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0160323X19879735
Costanza, D. P., Blacksmith, N., Coats, M. R., Severt, J. B., & DeCostanza, A. H. (2016). The
effect of adaptive organizational culture on long-term survival. Journal of Business and
Psychology, 31, 361–381. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-015-9420-y
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed-methods
approaches. SAGE.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches (5th ed). SAGE.
Creswell, J. W., & Miller D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory in
Practice, 39 (3), 124–130.
Denler, H., Wolters, C., & Benzon, M. (2009). Social cognitive theory.
http://www.education.com/reference/article/social-cognitive-theory/
Dixon-Fyle, S., Dolan, K., Hunt, V., & Prince, S. (2020). Diversity wins: How inclusion matters.
McKinsey & Company. Retrieved April 26, 2022, from
https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/diversity-and-inclusion/diversity-wins-how-
inclusion-matters
Dobbin, F., Kim, S., & Kalev, A. (2011). You can’t always get what you need: Organizational
determinants of diversity programs. American Sociological Review, 76(3), 386–411.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122411409704
Donald, C. G., Lyons, T. S., & Tribbey, R. C. (2001). A partnership for strategic planning and
management in a public organization. Public Performance & Management Review, 25(2),
176–193. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2001.11643653
155

Eccles, J. (2006). Expectancy value motivational theory.
http://www.education.com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivation
Edmonds, B., Hales, D., & Lessard-Phillips, L. (2020). Simulation models of ethnocentrism and
diversity: An introduction to the special issue. Social Science Computer Review, 38(4),
359–364. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439318824316
Elbanna, S., Andrews, R., & Pollanen, R. (2016). Strategic planning and implementation success
in public service organizations: Evidence from Canada. Public Management Review,
18(7), 1017–1042. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2015.1051576
Elliot, A. J., Dweck, C. S., & Yeager, D. S. (Eds.). (2018). Handbook of competence and
motivation. Guilford Press.
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. (2021). Diversity equity and inclusion 2021–23 strategic
plan. Retrieved April 26, 2022, from
https://www.fdic.gov/about/diversity/pdf/dei2021.pdf
Feeney, M. K., & Camarena, L. (2021). Gender, race, and diversity values among local
government leaders. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 41(1), 105–131.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X19865009
Flores, H. (2019). Racism, Latinos, and the public policy process. Lexington Books.
Fujimoto, Y., & Härtel, C. E. J. (2017). Organizational diversity learning framework: Going
beyond diversity training programs. Personnel Review, 46(6), 1120–1141.
https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-09-2015-0254
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
36(1), 45–56. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3601_5
156

Garg, S., & Sangwan, S. (2021). Literature review on diversity and inclusion at workplace,
2010–2017. Journal of Business Perspective., 25(1), 12–22. https://doi.org/info:doi/
https://doi.org/10.1177/0972262920959523
George, B. (2020). Successful strategic plan implementation in public organizations: Connecting
people, process, and plan (3Ps). Public Administration Review, 81(4), 793–798.
https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13187
George, B., Walker, R. M., & Monster, J. (2019). Does strategic planning improve
organizational performance? A meta-analysis. Public Administration Review, 79(6), 810–
819. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13104
Gillborn, D. (2020). The white bones of policy: Structure, agency and a vulture’s-eye view with
critical race theory. Knowledge, Policy and Practice in Education and the Struggle for
Social Justice: Essays Inspired by the Work of Geoff Whitty. UCL Press.,
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv13xpshq.15
Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.). Pearson.
Government Accountability Office. (2020). State department: Additional steps are needed to
identify potential barriers to diversity. https://www.gao.gov/reports/GAO-20-237/
Gravley-Stack, K., Ray, C. M., & Peterson, C. M. (2016). Understanding the subjective
experiences of the chief diversity officer: A q method study. Journal of Diversity in
Higher Education, 9(2), 95–112. https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000012
Grissom, A. R. (2018). Workplace diversity and inclusion. Reference and User Services
Quarterly, 57(4), 242–247.
Groeneveld, S., & Verbeek, S. (2012). Diversity policies in public and private sector
organizations: An empirical comparison of incidence and effectiveness. Review of Public
Personnel Administration, 32(4), 353–381. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X11421497
157

Hancock, M. (2018). Equity, inclusion, and beyond: Today’s urban chief diversity officer.
Metropolitan Universities, 29(1). https://doi.org/10.18060/22173
Hero, R. (2017). Some thoughts on racial-ethnic groups’ representation in America: Comments
on the dimensions, issues, and dilemmas. Politics, Groups & Identities, 5(3), 512–531.
https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2017.1330217
Hinga, B. (2019). PowerPoint on paradigms of inquiry unit 1. USC Rossier School of
Education, Los Angeles, CA.
Holmes, A. (2020). Researcher positionality - A consideration of its influence and place in
qualitative research - A new researcher guide. Shanlax International Journal of
Education, 8(4), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.34293/
Hur, Y., & Strickland, R. A. (2015). Diversity management practices, do they make a difference?
Examining consequences of their adoption in local governments. Public Administration
Quarterly, 39(2).
Hur, Y., Strickland, R. A., & Stefanovic, D. (2010). Managing diversity: Does it matter to
municipal governments? International Journal of Public Sector Management, 23(5),
500–515. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513551011058501
Jackson, C., & LePine, J. (2003). Peer responses to a team’s weakest link: A test of LePine and
VanDyne’s model. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(3), 459–475.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.3.459
Jin, M., Lee, J., & Lee, M. Y. (2017). Does leadership matter in diversity management?
Assessing the relative impact of diversity policy and inclusive leadership in the public
sector. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 38(2), 303–319.
https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-07-2015-0151
158

Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. B. (2015). Chapter 9: Methods of data collection. In
Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches (5th ed.) (pp.
223-246). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Kim, S., & Park, S. (2017). Diversity management and fairness in public organizations. Public
Organization Review, 17(2), 179–193. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-015-0334-y
Kirchher, J., & Charles, K. (2018). Enhancing the sample diversity of snowball samples:
Recommendations from a research project on anti-dam movements in Southeast Asia.
PLoS One, 13(8), Article e0201710. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0201710
Kirkpatrick, J. (2015). An introduction to the new world Kirkpatrick model.
http://www.kirkpatrickpartners.com/Portals/0/Resources/White%20Papers/Introduction%
20to%20the%20Kirkpatrick%20New%20World%20Model.pdf
Kirkpatrick, J., & Kirkpatrick, W. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation.
Association for Talent Development.
Koch, J. W. (2018). Racial minorities’ trust in government and government decisionmakers.
Social Science Quarterly, 100(1), 19–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12548
Konrad, A. M., Yang, Y., & Maurer, C. C. (2016). Antecedents and outcomes of diversity and
equality management systems: An integrated institutional agency and strategic human
resource management approach. Human Resource Management, 55(1), 83–107.
https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21713
Kools, M., & George, B. (2020). Debate: The learning organization-a key construct linking
strategic planning and strategic management. Public Money & Management, 40(4), 262–
264. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2020.1727112
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice,
41(4), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
159

Krumholz, N., & Hexter, K. W. (Eds.). (2020). Advancing equity planning now. Cornell
University Press. https://doi.org/10.7591/9781501730399
Lorbiecki, A. (2001). Changing views on diversity management. Management Learning., 32(3),
345–361.
Lunenburg, F. C. (2010). Managing change: The role of the change agent. International Journal
of Management, Business, and Administration, 13(1), 1–6.
Matton, J. N., & Hernandez, C. M. (2004). A new study identifies the “makes and breaks” of
diversity initiatives. Journal of Organizational Excellence, 23(4), 47–58.
https://doi.org/10.1002/npr.20025
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Mertens, D. M. (2012). Transformative mixed methods. American Behavioral Scientist, 56(6),
802–813. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764211433797
Michener, J. (2019). Policy feedback in a racialized polity. Policy Studies Journal: the Journal of
the Policy Studies Organization, 47(2), 423–450. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12328
Miller, J. (1995). The business case for diversity. Journal of Education for Business, 71(1), 7–10.
Moon, K., & Christensen, R. (2019). Realizing the performance benefits of workforce diversity
in the U.S. federal government: The moderating role of diversity climate. Public
Personnel Management, 49(1), 141–165. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091026019848458
Mosher, F. (1968). Democracy and the public service. Oxford University Press.
National Governors Association. (2021). Overview of survey results on diversity, equity and
inclusion efforts. Retrieved April 26, 2022, from https://www.nga.org/wp-
content/uploads/2021/02/DEI-Survey-Memo_021121.pdf
160

Ng, E. S., Sears, G. J., & Arnold, K. A. (2021). Exploring the influence of CEO and chief
diversity officers’ relational demography on organizational diversity management.
Management Decision, 59(11), 2583–2605. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-01-2019-0135
Nishishiba, M. (2012). Local government diversity initiatives in Oregon: An exploratory study.
State & Local Government Review, 44(1), 55–66.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0160323X12439475
Nixon, M. L. (2017). Experiences of women of color university chief diversity officers. Journal
of Diversity in Higher Education, 10(4), 301–317. https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000043
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy theory. http://www.education.com/reference/article/self-efficacy-
theory/
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed). Sage Publications.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 667–686.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.667
Pitts, D. W. (2005). Diversity, representation, and performance: Evidence about race and
ethnicity in public organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory,
15(4), 615–631.
Pitts, D. W., Hicklin, A. K., Hawes, D. P., & Melton, E. (2010). What drives the implementation
of diversity management programs? Evidence from public organizations. Journal of
Public Administration: Research and Theory, 20(4), 867–886.
https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mup044
Poister, T. H., Pitts, D. W., & Hamilton Edwards, L. (2010). Strategic management research in
the public sector: A review, synthesis, and future directions. American Review of Public
Administration, 40(5), 522–545. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074010370617
161

Poister, T. H., & Streib, G. D. (1999). Strategic management in the public sector: Concepts,
models, and processes. Public Productivity & Management Review, 22(3), 308–325.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3380706
Pour, M. J., Kouchak Zadeh, Z., & Ahmad Zadeh, N. (2018). Designing an integrated
methodology for knowledge management strategic planning: The roadmap toward
strategic alignment. VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems,
48(3), 373–387. https://doi.org/10.1108/VJIKMS-10-2017-0071
Rabl, T., del Carmen Triana, M., Byun, S.-Y., & Bosch, L. (2020). Diversity management efforts
as an ethical responsibility: How employees’ perceptions of an organizational integration
and learning approach to diversity affect employee behavior. Journal of Business Ethics,
161(3), 531–550. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3849-7
Ramirez, E. G. (2021). Diversity, equity, and inclusion is it just another catchphrase? Advanced
Emergency Nursing Journal, 43(2), 87–88.
https://doi.org/10.1097/TME.0000000000000353
Riccucci, N., & Van Ryzin, G. (2017). Representative bureaucracy: A lever to enhance social
equity, coproduction, and democracy. Public Administration Review, 77(1), 21–30.
https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12649
Risvik, E., & Hakon, F. (2018). The role of change agents in public sector innovation. ISPIM
Innovation Symposium, 1–14.
Rubaii-Barrett, N., & Wise, L. R. (2007). From want ads to web sites: What diversity messages
are state governments projecting? Review of Public Personnel Administration, 27(1), 21–
38. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X06289040
Saldaña, J. & Omasta, M. (2018). Qualitative research: Analyzing life. SAGE Publications.
162

Salkind, N. J. (2014). Statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics. Using Microsoft
Excel. (5th ed.). Los Angeles: SAGE.
Sanyal, C., Wilson, D., Sweeney, C., Smith Rachele, J., Kaur, S., & Yates, C. (2015). Diversity
and inclusion depend on effective engagement. Human Resource Management
International Digest, 23(5), 21–24. https://doi.org/10.1108/HRMID-05-2015-0087
Schein, E. H. (2017). Organizational culture and leadership (5th ed.). Jossey Bass.
Schraw, G., & Lehman, S. (2009). Interest. http://www.education.com/reference/article/interest/
Schraw, G., & McCrudden, M. (2006). Information processing theory.
http://www.education.com/reference/article/information-processing-theory/
Schunk, U., & Usher, E. L. (2019). Social cognitive theory and motivation. In the Oxford
handbook of human motivation (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190666453.013.2
Scott, S. N., & Palincsar, A. S. (2006). Sociocultural theory. http://www.education.
com/reference/article/sociocultural-theory/
Shahi, A., Karachiwalla, F., & Grewal, N. (2019). Walking the walk: The case for internal
equity, diversity, and inclusion work within the Canadian public health sector. Health
Equity, 3(1), 183–185. https://doi.org/10.1089/heq.2019.0008
Shanton, K. (2014). The problem of African American underrepresentation on local councils.
Demos. www.demos.org/sites/default/files/publications/Underrepresentation.pdf
Solórzano, D. & Yosso, T. (2002). Critical race methodology: Counter-storytelling as an
analytical framework for education research. Qualitative Inquiry, 8(1), pp.23-44.
Available at: http://qix.sagepub.com/content/8/1/23.
163

Soldan, Z., & Nankervis, A. (2014). Employee perceptions of the effectiveness of diversity
management in the Australian public service: Rhetoric and reality. Public Personnel
Management, 43(4), 543–564. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091026014533093
Thomas, D. A. (2004). Diversity as strategy. Harvard Business Review, 82(9), 100–108.
https://hbr.org/2004/09/diversity-as-strategy
van der Voet, J. (2014). The effectiveness and specificity of change management in a public
organization: Transformational leadership and a bureaucratic organizational structure.
European Management Journal, 32(3), 373–382.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2013.10.001
van der Voet, J., Kuipers, B. S., & Groeneveld, S. (2016). Implementing change in public
organizations: The relationship between leadership and affective commitment to change
in a public sector context. Public Management Review, 18(6), 842–865.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2015.1045020
Westover, J. H. (2021). The importance of diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging in the
workplace. Leadership Excellence, 38(2), 24–27.
The White House, Office of the Press Secretary. (2021). Executive order on diversity, equity,
inclusion, and accessibility in the federal workforce. Retrieved January 28, 2022, from
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/06/25/executive-
order-on-diversity-equity-inclusion-and-accessibility-in-the-federal-workforce/
Wyatt-Nichol, H., & Antwi-Boasiako, K. B. (2012). Diversity management: Development,
practices, and perceptions among state and local government agencies. Public Personnel
Management, 41(4), 749–772. https://doi.org/10.1177/009102601204100409
Yough, M., & Anderman, E. (2006). Goal orientation theory.
http://www.education.com/reference/article/goal-orientation-theory/
164

Appendix A: Pre-Interview Recruiting Communications
The following email will be sent to DEI change agents in state/municipal agencies.
Pre-interview Initial Email to Request Study Participation
Dear Dr., Ms., or Mr. ___________
My name is Jessica Kallin and I am a doctoral student at the University of Southern
California. I am conducting research on the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences on change agents implementing DEI strategic plans in state and municipal
governments. My goal as a student practitioner is to provide insight to our field as to how we
might be able to collaborate to overcome some of the challenges we are facing. Ultimately it is
my hope that this information will benefit individuals tasked with DEI in government agencies. I
assure you that information acquired will remain confidential as will the organization.
I have received IRB approval and am in the stage of my dissertation where I am gathering
data. I am conducting interviews with individuals in positions directly responsible for the DEI
initiatives in their government agency. All participant and organizational information will be
completely confidential. While I know how busy you are, it would mean the world to me if you
would consider giving me an hour of your time. I will share the findings of the study with you. It
would be my hope that some of these findings could be of professional value to you.
I would like to schedule an hour with you in the next week at a time and date that is most
convenient to you. Please feel free to reply to this email with some dates and times that work
best. I have also included a link to Calendly in case it is easier for you to use this method to
schedule an hour block of time to be interviewed: https://calendly.com/jessica_kallin. Thank you
very much for your time and consideration.
Best regards,

165

Jessica Kallin
Doctoral Candidate
Rossier School of Education
The University of Southern California

Pre-interview Email to Confirm Participation for Study
Following the scheduling of a participant the following email will be sent to confirm
interview appointments.
Dear Dr., Ms., or Mr. ___________
Thank you very much for agreeing to participate in my research study concerning the
topic of knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences on change agents implementing
DEI strategic plans in state and municipal governments. You should have received a Zoom link
when you registered for an interview. In case you do not have it, your Zoom link is: [insert link].
As a reminder,your identity will be known only to me, and I am conducting this study for my
doctoral dissertation at the University of Southern California. I am attaching a pdf file to this
email regarding the formal notice of participant rights and the protocol surrounding how the
information you provide will be used and protected. Please reach out to me if you have any
questions about this.
Thank you so very much for taking time out of your schedule to assist me with this
research and I look forward to our conversation on [insert date and time].
Best regards,

Student
Doctoral Candidate
Rossier School of Education
The University of Southern California

166

Appendix B: Information Sheet for Exempt Research

University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
3470 Trousdale Pkwy Ste 1100, Los Angeles, CA 90089

INFORMATION SHEET FOR EXEMPT RESEARCH

STUDY TITLE: KMO Influences on DEI Strategic Plans in Government
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Jessica Kallin, Doctoral Candidate
FACULTY ADVISOR: Dr. Adrian J. Donato

You are invited to participate in a research study. Your participation is voluntary. This document
explains information about this study. You should ask questions about anything that is unclear to
you.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this study is to identify the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences
on change agents implementing DEI strategic plans in state and municipal governments. I hope
to learn these influences from your experience and perspective. You are invited as a participant
because of your specific role in your organization, which fits the defined research population of
the study.
PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
You are asked to participate in a Zoom meeting to be interviewed about the research topic. The
interview is expected to last no more than 30 minutes. All interaction for you and your
organization is confidential and anonymous. Neither you nor your organization will be named or
alluded to in a manner that would provide identification.
While it is the desire of the researcher to record the conversation for subsequent confidential and
anonymous transcription so that your responses can be accurately analyzed, such recording is
167

purely voluntary on your part and is not a condition for participation. The researcher will take
notes as an alternative during the interview as needed.
There is no ‘prework’ necessary for the interview, and it will be held at a time that is convenient
for you with respect to your schedule and responsibilities.
CONFIDENTIALITY
The members of the research team and the University of Southern California Institutional
Review Board (IRB) may access the data. The IRB reviews and monitors research studies to
protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.
When the findings of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information will be used.
Audio recordings, if made, will not have any direct reference to the full name or organization of
the participant and will be used solely for the purpose of analyzing the transcript for relevant
content. The recordings will remain in the sole possession of the research team and will be
destroyed not later than one year from completion and final approval of the study. The study is
expected to be fully completed by May 15, 2023. For this study, the research team is the
researcher and the chair of the researcher’s dissertation committee.
Audio recordings, if made, will not be started until the preliminary and identifying remarks of
the participant, and their organization, are concluded. The researcher will refer to the participant
by an arbitrary identification to maintain confidentiality and anonymity. As a part of the research
study the recordings will be transcribed by a bonded academic paper transcription company. If a
participant desires a copy of the transcript, it will be provided for review, editing, or declination
of participation.

168

INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about this study, please contact Jessica Kallin: (801)694-9737,
jkallin@usc.edu, or Dr. Adrian J. Donato: adonato@usc.edu
IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about your rights as a research participant, please contact the
University of Southern California Institutional Review Board at (323) 442-0114 or email
irb@usc.edu.

USC IRB Information Sheet Template Version Date: 01/30/2021

169

Appendix C: KMO Survey Crosswalk
Assumed influence Survey item
Knowledge
Stakeholder knows the concepts and
vocabulary of diversity, equity, and
inclusion work (K-F)
Please match the word or concept with the
appropriate description or definition. (K-F)
(Match word to definition)
Stakeholder needs to know how to follow the
steps of strategic planning process (K-P)
Walk me through the strategic planning
process at your agency. (K-P)
(Open-ended item)
Stakeholder needs to plan their use of DEI
data to meet organizational needs (K-M)
After reviewing your agency’s DEI data, you
note the strategic plan you created for your
organization needs fine tuning. Write down
a few of your reflections related to the
adjustments you plan to make. (K-M)
(Open-ended item)

Motivation
Stakeholder needs to consider conducting
DEI work useful for themselves (Value)
I consider the DEI work I do valuable for
myself. (Value)
(4-point Likert)
Stakeholder needs confidence in leading
teams through change initiatives (Self-
efficacy)
To what degree are you confident that you
can lead your organization through its
strategic planning activities? (Self-efficacy)
(Provide degree marker for them to check)
Stakeholder needs to have confidence that all
involved staff in their
(team/department/group) possess the skills
to implement diversity management
initiatives (Collective efficacy)
To what degree are you confident that all
involved staff in your
(team/department/group) possess the skills
to implement diversity management
initiatives? (Collective efficacy)
(Provide degree marker for them to check)
Stakeholder needs clear goals related to the
production of the DEI strategic plan (Goals)
I have clear goals related to the production of
my DEI strategic plan. (Goals)
(4-point Likert)
Organization
Stakeholder needs leadership support to
implement DEI strategic plan (Cultural
settings: resources)
Senior leadership in my organization
supports the implementation of a DEI
strategic plan (Cultural settings: resources)
(4-point Likert)
170

Assumed influence Survey item
Stakeholder needs to have agency policies
that align with DEI strategic plans and
initiatives (Cultural settings: policies,
processes, and procedures)
My organization has agency-wide policies
that align with the DEI strategic plan and
related initiatives. (Cultural settings:
Policies, processes, and procedures)
(4-point Likert)
Stakeholder needs organizational
commitment to DEI strategic planning
(Cultural models)
My organization as a whole is committed to
strategically planning and implementing
diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts.
(Cultural models)
(4-point Likert)

171

Appendix D: KMO Survey Protocol
The researcher will pose the following questions to designated DEI change agents in state
or municipal government agencies through a Qualtrics online survey. The conceptual framework
and research questions are noted in the parenthesis for researcher and reader knowledge only and
will not appear in the study from the view of the participants. The introduction and questions
begin in the following sections.
Survey Introduction
Welcome to this survey on DEI strategic planning in government. Please take a few
minutes to answer questions about Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion strategic planning from your
perspective as DEI Leadership for your state or municipal agency.
Please note that your responses are entirely anonymous and will help create
recommended solutions for implementing DEI-focused plans in government agencies, so answer
as candidly as possible.
Thank you for your willingness to participate in this research survey, and let’s get started!
Transition
These first three questions are to better understand your role and agency.
1. (Background/demographic) Please select the option that best reflects your position.
(Select one option)
• Employee responsible for DEI
• Employee with multiple responsibilities, including DEI
• Other: please specify
2. (Background/demographic) Select the type of agency of which you are employed.
(Select one option)
• State government
172

• Municipal government
• Other: please specify
3. (Background/demographic) How long have you been in your current position? (Select
one option)
• Less than 1 year
• 1 to 3 years
• 3 to 5 years
• More than 5 years
Transition
The following three questions are focused on your knowledge.
4. (Knowledge: factual) Please match the word or concept with the appropriate
description or definition. (Match word to definition)
• Equity: The consistent and systematic fair, just, and impartial treatment of all
individuals, including individuals who belong to underserved communities
that have been denied such treatment
• Accessibility: the design, development and maintenance of facilities,
information and communication technology, programs, and services, so all
individuals including people with disabilities can fully and independently use
them
• Diversity: the differences between individuals based on race, ethnicity,
gender, age, disability, national origin, sexual orientation, socio-economic
status, religion, disability, and includes other unique characteristics and
experiences
173

• Inclusion: the appreciation and acknowledgement of the expertise and skills of
individuals from all backgrounds
• Diversity management: increase inclusiveness of differences and be
responsive to the needs of diverse groups of employees, while creating
initiatives that emphasize organizational performance, recruitment, retention,
and development strategies to address underrepresentation
• DEI strategic plan: creates and defines standards of success and
implementation of diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts within an agency
5. (Knowledge: procedural) Walk me through the strategic planning process at your
agency. (Open-ended item)
6. (Knowledge: metacognitive) After reviewing your agency’s DEI data, you note the
strategic plan you created for your organization needs fine tuning. Write down a few
of your reflections and the potential adjustments you may make. (Open-ended item)
Transition
The following four questions aim to understand your perception of DEI and strategic
planning.
7. (Motivation: value) I consider the DEI work I do valuable for myself. (4-point Likert-
type)
8. (Motivation: self-efficacy) To what degree are you confident that you can lead your
organization through its strategic planning activities? (Provide degree marker for
them to check)
9. (Motivation: collective efficacy) To what degree are you confident that all involved
staff in your (team/department/group) possess the skills to implement diversity
management initiatives? (Provide degree marker for them to check)
174

10. (Motivation: Goals) I have clear goals related to the production of my DEI strategic
plan. (4-point Likert)
Transition
The last three questions seek to gain insight into your organization.
11. (Organization: cultural settings [resources]) Senior Leadership in my organization
supports the implementation of a DEI strategic plan. (4-point Likert)
12. (Organization: cultural settings [policies, process, and procedures]) My organization
has agency-wide policies that align with the DEI strategic plan and related initiatives.
(4-point Likert)
13. (Organization: cultural models) My organization as a whole is committed to
strategically planning and implementing diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts. (4-
point Likert)
Transition
Thank you for your participation! This concludes the survey. If you have any questions or
would like more information, you can contact Jessica Kallin at jkallin@usc.edu.

175

Appendix E: KMO Interview Crosswalk
Assumed influence Interview question
Knowledge
Stakeholder knows the concepts and
vocabulary of diversity, equity, and
inclusion work (K-F)
How do you define diversity, equity, and
inclusion? (K-F)
Stakeholder needs to know how to follow the
steps of strategic planning process (K-P)
If you had to explain your agency’s strategic
planning processes to someone, what
would you say? Prompt: what are the key
takeaways or initiatives? (K-P)
Stakeholder needs to plan their use of DEI
data to meet organizational needs (K-M)
When you have access to DEI data about
your agency, how do you use this to reflect
on your organizational needs? Additional
prompt: Can you share a time when you
used DEI data to implement a plan or
initiative within your organization? (K-M)
Motivation
Stakeholder needs to consider conducting
DEI work useful for themselves (value)
Can you discuss some of your reasons for
doing DEI work? (Value)
Stakeholder needs confidence in leading
teams through change initiatives (self-
efficacy)
Please provide an example of a time when
you felt you implemented a DEI change
initiative successfully. Prompt: How did
this success influence your confidence in
doing this work? What factors made it
successful? (Self-efficacy)
Stakeholder needs to have confidence that all
involved staff in their
(team/department/group) possess the skills
to implement diversity management
initiatives (collective efficacy)
How confident are you in all involved staff
having the skills to implement diversity
management initiatives? Prompt: If you
were to leave the room, how confident
would others be in continuing the
conversation about DEI without you?
(Collective efficacy)
Stakeholder needs clear goals related to the
production of the DEI strategic plan (goals)
How do you develop clear goals when
producing a DEI strategic plan? Prompt:
How would you rank the clarity of the
goals you currently have? (Goals)
Organization
176

Assumed influence Interview question
Stakeholder needs leadership support to
implement DEI strategic plan (cultural
settings: resources)
Can you talk to me about how leadership is
involved in implementing the DEI strategic
plan? Prompt: How do your agency leaders
support the work being done to aid in the
plan’s success? (Cultural settings:
resources)
Stakeholder needs to have agency policies
that align with DEI strategic plans and
initiatives (cultural settings: policies,
processes, and procedures)
How does DEI work exist in relation with
your agency’s overall strategic plan?
Prompt: Is it completely separate, or is it
braided into other agency plans and
policies? (Cultural settings: policies,
processes, and procedures)
Stakeholder needs organizational
commitment to DEI strategic planning
(cultural models)
Describe for me how the DEI strategic plan
is incorporated across the entire
organization. Prompt: Is there commitment
across departments? (Cultural models)

177

Appendix F: KMO Interview Protocol
The researcher will pose the following questions to designated DEI change agents within
state or municipal government agencies through a Zoom interview. The conceptual framework
and research questions are noted in the parenthesis for researcher and reader knowledge only and
will not appear in the study from the view of the participants. The introduction and questions
begin in the following sections.
Introduction
Thank you for agreeing to participate in my study. I appreciate your time and candid
feedback. As I mentioned, the interview should take about an hour, is that ok? Participation is
completely voluntary, and you can end this at any time, along with skipping any questions you
do not want to address.
Before we start, I want to remind you about this study. I am a doctoral student in the EdD
Organizational Change and Leadership program at USC and am conducting a study on the ability
of hired change agents to implement DEI strategic plans within State and Municipal government
agencies. My goal is to understand your knowledge, perspective, and experience within your
agency.
I will speak to individuals in positions like DEI Director, Chief Equity Officer, and others
designated specifically toward diversity, equity, and inclusion work at the leadership level. All
participants will be given pseudonyms and agency names will be omitted to maintain anonymity.
The data for this study will be compiled into a report, and while some of what you say might be
used as direct quotes, none of this data will be directly attributed to you. All data will be kept in a
password-protected computer that only I have access to, and all raw data will be destroyed after
the study is complete.
178

I will be recording audio in zoom to accurately capture what you share with me. The
recording is strictly to help best capture your perspectives and will not be shared with anyone
outside the research team. After the interview, I will have the recording transcribed into a
transcript, and the recording will be deleted. Do I have your permission to record our
conversation?
Do you have any questions regarding the study before we begin?
Opening Questions
“I’m going to begin by asking you to tell me a little about yourself.”
1. (Demographic/background) If you’re comfortable doing so, can you share with me your
preferred pronouns?
2. (Demographic/background) What is your current role at your agency, and how long have
you been there?
Transition
“Thank you, that’s helpful to know a bit about your background with [organization].
Next, we’ll begin talking about what you do within your role focusing on diversity, equity, and
inclusion.”
1. (Knowledge: factual) How do you define diversity, equity, and inclusion?
2. (Knowledge: procedural) If you had to explain your agency’s strategic planning
processes to someone, what would you say?
Prompt: What are the key takeaways or initiatives?
3. (Knowledge: metacognitive) When you have access to DEI data about your agency,
how do you use this to reflect on your organizational needs?
Prompt: Can you share a time when you used DEI data to implement a plan or
initiative within your organization?
179

4. (Motivation: value) Can you discuss some of your reasons for doing DEI work?
5. (Motivation: self-efficacy) Please provide an example of a time when you felt you
implemented a DEI change initiative successfully.
Prompt: How did this success influence your confidence in doing this work? What
factors made it successful?
6. (Motivation—collective efficacy) How confident are you in all involved staff having
the skills to implement diversity management initiatives?
Prompt: If you were to leave the room, how confident would others be in continuing
the conversation about DEI without you?
7. (Motivation: goals) How do you develop clear goals when producing a DEI strategic
plan?
Prompt: how would you rank the clarity of the goals you currently have?
8. (Organization: cultural settings [resources]) Can you talk to me about how leadership
is involved in implementing the DEI strategic plan?
Prompt: How do your agency leaders support the work being done to aid in the plan’s
success?
9. (Organization: cultural settings [policies, processes, and procedures]) How does DEI
work exist in relation with your agency’s overall strategic plan?
Prompt: Is it completely separate, or is it braided into other agency plans and
policies?
10. (Organization: cultural models) Describe for me how the DEI strategic plan is
incorporated across the entire organization.
Prompt: Is there commitment across departments?

180

Interview Conclusion
Thank you so much for participating in this interview. I want to ensure I fully understand
your perspective, do you mind if I share with you some takeaways I heard?
[Share out]
Do you feel this accurately reflects what you’ve shared with me?
I appreciate your time and your willingness to talk about this. Your experiences and
feedback are extremely valuable for my research. Do you have any questions for me before I go?
Please reach out to me if you think of anything, or have questions come to mind. Thank you
again for your time.

181

Appendix G: KMO Document Analysis Protocol
Document analysis will consist of electronic data provided by research participants for
the researcher (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The organization’s identity will be removed to provide
anonymity and any identifiers throughout the plan will be blacked out. The documents to be
analyzed include state or municipal government agency strategic plans related specifically to the
implementation of initiatives around diversity, equity, and inclusion. The use of these documents
will provide a more in-depth comprehension of the interview results and the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences on the existing DEI strategic plan. See G1.

Table G1
Document Analysis
Assumed influences Selected documents Purpose of analysis
Knowledge
Stakeholder knows the
concepts and vocabulary of
diversity, equity, and
inclusion work (K-F)
DEI strategic plan,
newsletters, interviews,
newspaper articles, reports,
internal policies, meeting
minutes
Evidence of stakeholder
ability to identify concepts
and vocabulary of DEI.
Stakeholder needs to know
how to follow the steps of
strategic planning process
(K-P)
DEI strategic plan and agency
strategic plan, internal
policies
Evidence of stakeholder
knowing how to follow the
steps of strategic planning
process
Stakeholder needs to plan
their use of DEI data to
meet organizational needs
(K-M)
DEI strategic plan,
organizational reports and
data, newsletters, interviews,
newspaper articles
Evidence of stakeholder
planning their use of DEI
data to meet organizational
needs
Motivation
Stakeholder needs to
consider conducting DEI
work useful for themselves
(Value)
Agency DEI strategic plan,
newspaper articles,
interviews, newsletters
Evidence of stakeholder
considering DEI work
useful for themselves
182

Assumed influences Selected documents Purpose of analysis
Stakeholder needs
confidence in leading
teams through change
initiatives (Self-efficacy)
Agency DEI strategic plan,
meeting minutes, project
planning reports and
evaluations
Evidence of stakeholder
having confidence in
leading teams through
change initiatives
Stakeholder needs to have
confidence that all
involved staff in their
(team/department/group)
possess the skills to
implement diversity
management initiatives
(Collective efficacy)
Agency DEI strategic plan,
meeting minutes, project
planning reports and
evaluations, newsletters
Evidence of stakeholder
having confidence in
involved staff having the
skills to implement
diversity management
initiatives
Stakeholder needs clear
goals related to the
production of the DEI
strategic plan (Goals)
Agency DEI strategic plan,
agency strategic plan,
meeting minutes, project
planning reports and
evaluations
Evidence of stakeholder
having clear goals related to
the production of the DEI
strategic plan
Organization
Stakeholder needs leadership
support to implement DEI
strategic plan (Cultural
settings: resources)
Agency DEI strategic plan,
agency strategic plan,
interviews, newspaper
articles, reports, internal
policies, newsletters
Evidence of stakeholder
having leadership support
to implement DEI strategic
plan
Stakeholder needs to have
agency policies that align
with DEI strategic plans
and initiatives (Cultural
settings: policies,
processes, and procedures)
Agency DEI strategic plan,
agency strategic plan,
newspaper articles, reports,
internal policies, newsletters
Evidence of stakeholder
having policies that align
with DEI strategic plans
and initiatives
Stakeholder needs
organizational commitment
to DEI strategic planning
(Cultural models)
Agency DEI strategic plan,
agency strategic plan,
newspaper articles, reports,
internal policies
Evidence of stakeholder
having organizational
commitment to DEI
strategic planning

183

Appendix H: Immediate Evaluation Instrument
This instrument will be used to measure L1 and L2 outcomes immediately following the
workshop.
1. I enjoyed practicing methods of DEI strategic planning (4-point Likert: strongly disagree
to strongly agree).
2. I will transfer what I learned to my goal setting for the year. (4-point Likert: strongly
disagree to strongly agree).
3. Given a list of words and concepts, describe what each is and how it relates to your
strategic planning process.
● diversity
● equity
● inclusion
● accessibility
4. I feel more confident developing goals for my agency based on DEI data. (4-point
Likert: strongly disagree to strongly agree).
5. Even though I may not get everything right, it is worth it to try to implement diversity
initiatives. (4-point Likert: strongly disagree to strongly agree).
6. I will recommend this course to other teachers. (4-point Likert: strongly disagree to
strongly agree).
7. How do you expect to better embed your DEI strategic plan across the agency?

184

Appendix I: Blended Evaluation Tool
This blended evaluation tool will be implemented 30 days after the workshop. Questions
1–4 used a 4-point Likert scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree).
1. What I learned in the workshop continues to be very valuable to implement DEI
strategic plans.
2. I was able to use DEI data more fully with the skills I gained from this training
course.
3. My peers and I continue to use the course job aids for identifying strategic planning
steps and DEI concepts.
4. I continue to embed my DEI strategic plan across the agency.
5. Can you discuss some of your reasons for working in the DEI field?
6. What is your approach for braiding in DEI to other department goals?

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Diversity management in local government: a gap analysis

PDF

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

PDF

Environmental influences on the diversity of professional sports executive leadership

PDF

Creating the conditions for change readiness in higher education: an innovation study

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

Performance management in government: the importance of goal clarity

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

A faith-based nonprofit organization’s implementation of strategic planning: A qualitative study

PDF

An analysis of influences to faculty retention at a Philippine college

PDF

Implementing comprehensive succession planning: an improvement study

PDF

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

PDF

Understanding international graduate engineering students’ engagement with DEI initiatives

PDF

A study of diversification In the outdoor recreation industry and its connection to the Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) urban health equity gap

PDF

Cultivating workplace belonging through managerial impact

PDF

The path to satisfaction, connection, and persistence: implementing a strategic and structured employee onboarding program: an innovation study

PDF

The interaction of teacher knowledge and motivation with organizational influences on the implementation of a hybrid reading intervention model taught in elementary grades

Asset Metadata

Creator Kallin, Jessica Ann (author)

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

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2023-05

Publication Date 03/31/2023

Defense Date 02/28/2023

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

Tag change agent,change leadership,change management,chief diversity officer,DEI,dei plan,diversity,diversity management,equity,inclusion,KMO,mixed-methods,Motivation,motivation theory,Municipal government,OAI-PMH Harvest,public sector,public sector change,qualitative research,representation,representative bureaucracy,state government,strategic plan,strategic planning

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Donato, Adrian (committee chair), Cates, Patrick (committee member), Krop, Cathy (committee member)

Creator Email jessicakallinma@gmail.com,jkallin@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC112936713

Unique identifier UC112936713

Identifier etd-KallinJess-11546.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-KallinJess-11546

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Kallin, Jessica Ann

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20230331-usctheses-batch-1014 (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. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.

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