University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Navy social and organizational culture and their influence on female officer retention

(USC Thesis Other)

Navy social and organizational culture and their influence on female officer retention

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Navy Social and Organizational Culture and Their Influence on Female Officer Retention

by

Carla A. Carrillo

Rossier School of Education

University of Sourthern California

A dissertation submitted to the faculty

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Education

August 2022

© Copywright by Carla A. Carrillo 2022

The Committee for Carla A. Carrillo certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Jessica Phillips

Kurt Rothenhaus

Paula M. Carbone, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education

University of Southern California

2022

iv
Abstract
The retention of female officers in the U.S. Navy remains a problem despite a significant focus
on diversity programs over the past 10 years. This study aims to identify critical support systems
that enable successful female officers to continue their pursuit of a naval career as well as
identify negative influences that may have persuaded them to choose an alternative path. In
2013, the Navy opened up all of its career paths to women but its retention numbers of female
officers have dropped over the last decade. This is an important problem to address because
researchers and scholars agree that a more diverse force is a better and more proficient force
(Boyce & Herd, 2003; GAO Report to Congressional Committees, 20202; Karmack, 2016; Task
Force One Report, 2019). In order to achieve greater diversity in the Navy the service must find
ways to increase the desire of women to serve and choose the Navy as a viable career path.
Keywords: Female Navy Officers, gendered organizations, organizational diversity,
gender bias, mentorship, sponsorship

v
Dedication

To my biggest supporter and my strongest cheerleader, my husband. Without his unwavering
support and continued belief in my abilities I would not have completed this research. This effort
is also dedicated to my children as I hope to instill in them a love of learning and the belief that
nothing worth achieving is attained easily.

To my brain trust, who provided continuous peer support and encouragement regardless the time
of day or topic. I am extremely grateful for your friendship and encouragement and would redo
the entire process if only to meet you all again.

To my professional colleagues and research participants who took the time to read and discuss
the research with me as I was developing this study. Your encouragement, patience, and
recommendations often helped me get through tough concepts and motivated me to continue this
project. I hope I don’t disappoint.

vi
Acknowledgements
This study would not have been completed without the support and guidance of my
dissertation chair and members. I am grateful for all of the sage advice and passionate
conversations surrounding the development of this study. I would also like to thank the study
participants who shared their personal stories and professional challenges while still serving an
organization of great importance. They are truly supporting the cause day in and day out. Finally,
I would like to thanks everyone who took the time to read my drafts and provide comment. Your
suggestions, criticisms and advice, only made this work stronger and for that I am extremely
grateful.

vii
Table of Contents
Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ........................................................................................................................................ v
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ vi
List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. ix
List of Figures .................................................................................................................................. x
List of Abbreviations ...................................................................................................................... xi
Chapter One: Overview of the Study .............................................................................................. 1
Context and Background of the Problem ............................................................................ 1
Purpose of the Study ............................................................................................................ 3
Importance of the Study ...................................................................................................... 3
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology ..................................................... 4
Definitions ........................................................................................................................... 6
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ......................................................................................... 10
Historical and Social Context of Women in the Military .................................................. 10
Existing Retention Strategies ............................................................................................. 18
Women as Leaders ............................................................................................................. 21
Conceptual Framework ...................................................................................................... 24
Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 30
Chapter Three: Methodology ......................................................................................................... 31
Research Questions ............................................................................................................ 31
Overview of Methodology ................................................................................................. 31
Data Collection, Instrumentation and Analysis Plan ......................................................... 33
Validity, Credibility and Trustworthiness ......................................................................... 38
Ethics and Role of the Researcher ..................................................................................... 40

viii
Limitations and Delimitations ........................................................................................... 41
Chapter Four: Findings .................................................................................................................. 43
Overview of the Source Data and Organizational Structure ............................................. 43
Research Question 1: How Do Social Expectations of Traditional Female Roles
Affect Perceived Performance of Female Officers? .......................................................... 48
Research Question 2: How Does the Organizational Structure of the Navy
Influence the Perceived Achievable Success of Female Officers? .................................... 60
Summary ............................................................................................................................ 68
Chapter Five: Discussion and Implications for Practice ............................................................... 70
Discussion of Findings ...................................................................................................... 70
Implications for Practice .................................................................................................... 82
Recommendations ............................................................................................................. 83
Future Research ................................................................................................................. 88
Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 89
References ..................................................................................................................................... 91
Appendix A: Interview Protocol .................................................................................................. 102
Appendix B: 2019 O5-O6 Female Officer Milestone Survey Summary Results ........................ 105
Appendix C: Historical Female Officers ..................................................................................... 106

ix
List of Tables
Table 1: U.S. Navy Officer Rank Structure ..................................................................................... 8
Table 2: Percentage of Female Officers by Occupation: 2004 and 2018 Comparison ................. 19
Table 3: Data Sources .................................................................................................................... 32
Table 4: Summary of the Eight Participants’ Relevant Personal Information .............................. 45
Table 5: O5–O6 Female Milestone Survey Participants by .......................................................... 47

x

List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework Based on Bronfenbrenner's Model .......................................... 25

xi
List of Abbreviations

ADM: admiral
CAPT: captain
CDR: commander
CNO: Chief of Naval Personnel
CO: commanding officer
DIVO: division officer
DMDC: Defense Manpower Data Center
DOD: Department of Defense
DoN: Department of Navy
ENS: ensign
FITREP: fitness report
GAO: US Government Accountability Office
HRO: human resources officer
HSC-P: Health Services Collegiate Program
IRB: institutional review board
LCDR: lieutenant commander
LTJG: lieutenant junior grade
LT: lieutenant
MSR: minimum service requirement
NDAA: National Defense Authorization Act
NSIPS: Navy Standard Integrated Personnel System
OPNAV N1: Officer of the Chief of Naval Operations, Naval Personnel Office

xii
PC: patrol craft
PRD: projected rotation date
RADM: rear admiral (lower half)
RDML: rear admiral (upper half)
RHIB: rigid hull inflatable boat
ROTC: Reserve Officer Training Corps
SPAR: semper paratus always ready
SSLA: Sea Service Leadership Association
SWO: surface warfare officer
URL: unrestricted line officer
USNA: US Naval Academy
VADM: vice admiral
WAAC: Women’s Army Auxiliary Corps
WAVES: Women Accepted for Volunteer Emergency Services
XO: executive officer

1

Chapter One: Overview of the Study
The retention of female officers in the U.S. Navy remains a problem despite a significant
focus on diversity programs over the past 10 years. Since 2006, the number of women
commissioned increased by 40%, but the number of female officers who decided to remain on
active duty beyond their first period of obligation stagnated across the same timeframe (DoN
Personnel and Readiness Statistics, 2019). Statistics show in 2006, 4,936 females served as O1–
O3 (ensign, lieutenant junior grade, and lieutenant) officers. In 2016, the number of female
officers in these junior ranks grew to 6,925. However, in 2006, only 2,617 females occupied the
mid-level ranks of O4–O6; Lieutenant Commander, Commander and Captain (DoN Personnel
and Readiness Statistics, 2019). Similarly, in 2016, those numbers failed to proportionately
increase; only 2,747 females continued past the minimum service time required producing a 13%
drop in female retention (DoN Personnel and Readiness Statistics, 2019). This problem is
important to address because supporters of greater diversity within the armed forces argue a
more diverse force is a better and more proficient force (Boyce & Herd, 2003; GAO Report to
Congressional Committees, 2020; Kamarck, 2016; Task Force One Report, 2019). Although the
U.S. Navy continues to promote diversity and inclusion within its ranks, female numbers beyond
the rank of Lieutenant remain stagnant reinforcing a predominately male led force (Boyce &
Herd, 2003; Task Force One Report, 2019). In order to continue to promote and achieve gender
diversity in the Navy, the service must find ways to increase the desire of women to remain in
the Service.
Context and Background of the Problem
Women have been supporting military efforts directly or indirectly since the
Revolutionary War. However, it was not until the last 5 decades that women were granted the
2

same privileges and status as men within the Armed Forces. Laws preventing women from
participating in all areas of the military were not fully repealed until as recently as 2013 with an
implementation deadline of January 1, 2016 (Kamarck, 2016). Much of the delay was due to
public opinion and concern over the role and safety of women serving in these dangerous front-
line combat roles (GAO, 2015; Kamarck, 2016; Smith & Rosenstein, 2017). Secretary of
Defense Ashton Carter ordered the military to open all combat jobs to women with no exceptions
only after extensive studies were conducted regarding the impact of full gender integration on
unit cohesion, women’s health, equipment, facility modifications, propensity to serve, and
international experiences with women in combat (Kamarck, 2016).
Female retention has been correlated to the number of occupations open to women,
female propensity to serve and the desire to serve in available occupations (Kamarck, 2016;
MacMahon & Bernard, 2019; Patten & Parker, 2011; Smith & Rosenstein, 2017). Female
propensity and desire to serve are difficult to quantify and have been the focus of recent retention
programs for female officers. The military moved away from diversity acquisition and towards
diversity management in order to preserve the meritocratic structure of the Service (Kamarck,
2016). The DoD’s diversity and inclusion strategic plan does not include quotas for recruitment,
retention or promotion but rather it focuses on generating a more inclusive organizational
alignment based on social and cultural norms (DoN Diversity and Inclusion Roadmap, 2017;
Kamarck, 2016; Task Force One Navy Final Report, 2021). The DoD established Diversity
Goals in its DoD Diversity and Inclusion Strategic Plan, 2012–2017 (page 5), that include,
“Develop structures and strategies to equip leadership with the ability to manage diversity, be
accountable and engender an inclusive work environment that cultivates innovation and
optimization within the Department.” This access and legitimacy paradigm aligned with the
3

military’s goal of ensuring that its workforce reflects its customer base; American society (Kulik,
2014; Task Force One Navy, 2021).
Purpose of the Study
The number of women choosing to remain in the Navy beyond their initial tour of
obligation has remained stagnant over the last 10 years (DON Personnel and Readiness Statistics,
2016). The Navy developed and implemented innovative programs to support female officer
retention indirectly in an effort to support greater work life balance and anti-discrimination
training but these efforts have had minimal impact on female retention numbers. This study
sought to gain a better understanding of the social and organizational factors that impacted a
female officer’s decision to pursue a career as a naval officer. The research questions that guided
this study were:
1. How do social expectations of traditional female roles affect perceived performance
of female naval officers?
2. How does the organizational structure of the Navy influence the perceived achievable
success of female officers?
Importance of the Study
A diverse and inclusive workforce is seen as a strategic advantage for the military (Boyce
& Herd, 2003; GAO Report to Congressional Committees, 2020; Kamarck, 2016; Task Force
One Report, 2019). Studies show that diverse organizations are 35% more likely to outperform
their competitors (Diversity Best Practices, 2017). One of the DoN’s diversity goals, as stated in
the Department of the Navy Diversity and Inclusion Roadmap (2017), is to support and develop
a workforce that “reflects all segments of our society”. In the private sector, females make up
about 38% of managerial positions (McKinsey & Co., 2019) with data to support continued
4

upward trends. The Navy, however, struggles to maintain 18% female respresentation among its
officer corps (DoN Personnel and Readiness Statistics, 2019). It is also important to address this
issue because female leaders demonstrate unique transformational leadership qualitites more
often than men (Aspen, 1984; Patten & Parker, 2011; Walker, 2012). Studies have found that
female leaders often use persuasion and influence rather than direct orders to achieve desired
goals more than males (Morgan, 2004). Finally, ensuring that female officers continue to pursue
a career in the military is an important strategic objective to increase the number of senior female
officers (Harkins, 2019). Harkins (2019) argued that without more women in leadership roles to
mentor and encourage other women, retaining female representation across all leadership
positions will continue to be a challenge.
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model of human development provided a unique model to
better understand some of the challenges women faced as they decided whether or not to pursue
a military career (Gardiner & Kosmitzki, 2007). Bronfenbrenner’s model was originally
developed to describe the shifts in behavior and beliefs within humans throughout their lifecycle
(Bronfenbrenner, 1979). According to Bronfenbrenner (1979), children are directly more
impacted by their immediate family when they are infants. However, as they grow, exposure to
other children, social groups and cultural ideologies help shape and craft unique attitudes and
behavior (Gardiner & Kosmitzki, 2007). These rings of influence are identified as the
microsystem, exosystem and macrosystem and work across time to influence an individual’s
behavior and personal beliefs (Gardiner & Kosmitzki, 2007). The relationship between these
conceptual systems is bi-directional where as much as the individual is being influenced by its
5

environment the individual also influences its environment; oftentimes simultaneously impacting
change within the one or multiple systems (Gardner & Kosmitzki, 2007).
Bronfenbrenner’s theory offers a unique perspective into the Navy’s retention problem by
highlighting the personal conflict between social and organizational factors women are
attempting to reconcile throughout their career. Social gender roles are established at a very
young age and influence perceived opportunities and challenges throughout life (Shapiro et al.,
2015). When women enter the workforce they often adapt to masculine expectations of success
causing a perceived disconnect with their own beliefs of success and creating a sense of
disconnectedness or a lack of belonging (Acker, 2006; Morgan, 2004). As opportunities to
choose between career options and social expectations emerge, the roles of coaches, mentors,
family and friends become increasingly more important and influential (Shapiro et al., 2015).
Finally, the influence of social and organizational factors on a female’s decision to pursue a
Naval career is dependent on where she is during her career, her sense of connectedness with the
organization, and her perception of ability to succeed in that organization when those decisions
need to be made (Acker, 2006; Badura et al., 2018; Jackson et al., 1991).
Through a qualitative research methodology, this study explored how social and
environmental factors influenced female career decisions of female naval officers throughout
their careers. The study leveraged interviews with active women leaders who were currently
serving as Commanders (O5) and Captains (O6) in the Navy. The objective was to get personal
stories from eight senior female officers and gather data across Navy communities to determine
if there were lessons learned or best practices that could be better applied universally in support
of increased female officer retention. This purposeful sampling was meant to gain a better
6

understanding of the environment and characteristics that supported a long term career as a
female naval officer.
Definitions
The following section provides an overview of common terms explored throughout the
dissertation. These terms and their corresponding definitions support the establishment of a
common lexicon within the desired context for the rest of the document.
Diversity is all the different characteristics and attributes of the DoD’s total force, which
are consistent with our core values, integral to overall readiness and mission accomplishment,
and reflective of the nation we serve (DOD Diversity and Inclusion Strategic Plan, 2012).
Demographic diversity refers to inherent or socially defined personal characteristics,
including age, race/ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, family
status, disability and geographic origin (DoN Diversity and Inclusion Roadmap, 2017).
Cognitive diversity refers to differences in styles of work, thinking, learning and
personality (DoN Diversity and Inclusion Roadmap, 2017).
Organizational diversity addresses organizational background characteristics affecting
interaction, including service, component and occuptation/career field (DoN Diversity and
Inclusion Roadmap, 2017).
Diversity management includes plans made and programs undertaken to identify and
promote diversity within the DON to enhance capabilities and achieve mission readiness (DoN
Diversity and Inclusion Roadmap, 2017).
A gendered organization is an organization that supports or implements processes that
advantage and disadvantage the worforce dependent on gender. These advantages and
disadvantages can be overt or subconscious but support gender stereotypes that are embedded
7

within the organizational culture (Acker, 1990). This will be explained in greater detail in
Chapter Two.
A restricted line officer is a commissioned officer in the Navy that is not eligible for
command at sea due to the professional community s/he is affiliated with (engineering duty
officers, naval intelligence officers, foreign area officers, public affairs officers, etc).
Social cohesion is the extent to which group members like each other, prefer to spend
their social time together, enjoy eachother’s company and feel emontionally close to one another
(Congressional Research Service, 2016).
Task cohesion is the shared commitment among members to achieveing a goal that
requires the collective efforts of a group (Congressional Research Service, 2016).
An unrestricted line officer is a commissioned officer in the Navy eligible for command
at sea of the Navy’s warfighting combatant units such as warships, submarines, aviation
squadrons and SEAL teams and higher echelon commands of those units.
The officer rank structure utilized by the U.S. Navy appears in Table 1.

8

Table 1
U.S. Navy Officer Rank Structure
Grade Rank Abbreviation Years of commissioned service*
O1 Ensign ENS 0–2
O2 Lieutenant junior grade LTJG 2–4
O3 Lieutenant LT 4–8
O4 Lieutenant commander LCDR 8–14
O5 Commander CDR 14–20
O6 Captain CAPT 20–30
O7 Rear admiral (lower half) RDML 26–40
O8 Rear admiral (upper half) RADM 28–40
O9 Vice admiral VADM 28–40
O10 Admiral ADM 28–40

*On average, time in rank must be met for promotion up to the rank of captain. After that,
promotions are more influenced by performance than time in rank which accounts for the overlap
in years of commissioned service after the rank of captain.

Organization of the Dissertation
The dissertation follows the traditional five-chapter model. Chapter One outlines the
research, methodology and processes followed to derive the conclusions presented in Chapters
Four and Five. Chapter Two provides a literature review of recent literature that outlines the key
themes that underlie this study. The research will highlight the perceived influence of
9

organizational and social relationships on females during critical decision points throughout their
career. Chapter Three outlines the methodology design and data collection methods used to
gather specific and relevant data on the current topic. Chapter Three also highlights the validity,
reliability and limitations identified throughout the course of the study. Chapter Four provides a
thorough overview of the findings to include the unique discussions and prevalent themes that
surfaced throughout the course of the interviews and data sources. Finally, Chapter Five
highlights critical recommendations to be considered by senior leaders to address the issues that
were identified during the interviews as well as identifies areas or gaps in the research that could
be researched further for greater understanding of the issues surrounding the retention of female
officers in the military.

10

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
In 2012, Williams et al.’s article, Gendered Organizations in the New Economy,
addressed the unfounded belief that women choose to leave the workforce for personal reasons
rather than due to their dissatisfaction with the organization (Williams et al., 2012). This chapter
provides an overview of literature that identifies other possible social and organizational
influences on a woman’s decision to pursue a career as a naval officer. Specifically, this chapter
looks at how social and professional settings, immediate and contextual, affect a female officer’s
perception of success throughout her career. Chapter Two also provides insight into how these
perceptions shift as these settings change in both priority and relevance within the context of
personal and professional success. These relationships and influences on a woman’s decision to
pursue a military career are important to understand to prevent the continued decline of retention
numbers among this particular group.
Historical and Social Context of Women in the Military
Women have played a critical role in the U.S. military since the Revolutionary War era.
However, until recently, policies governing how many women could serve, in what capacity, and
with what benefits, have remained separate from policies governing male participation
(Kamarck, 2016). It was not until 1967 that the restriction placed on the number of women
serving in the military was lifted (Kamarck, 2016). However, even with that restriction lifted, it
was not until 2013 that the Department of Defense (DOD) lifted the Direct Ground Combat and
Assignment Rule, enabling women to serve in all areas of the military including combat arms
occupations—the last occupational area that had prohibited female recruits (Kamarck, 2016).
Reasons for this slow acceptance of women in the military can be attributed to social attitudes,
systemic challenges, and structural limitations. This chapter will look at how social attitudes
11

regarding gender, influence and impact the Navy’s decision to increase opportunities for women.
It also highlights systemic challenges due to cultural settings within the Navy that are slow to
realize the need for diversity and inclusion throughout all aspects of the organization. Finally,
this chapter discusses structural limitations that must be addressed both through policy and law
to ensure true gender equality among service members.
Social Attitudes
Before World War II, women’s roles in society were widely viewed as traditional and
conservative and incongruent with masculine organizations (Fletcher et al., 1994; GAO, 2020;
Kamarck, 2016; Smith & Rosenstein, 2017). There was very little public interest in integrating
females into occupations outside of the nurse corps, a very female dominated profession
(Fletcher et al., 1994; Kamarck, 2016). It was not until the attack on Pearl Harbor that Congress
reversed course and approved the establishment of a Women’s Army Auxiliary Corps (WAAC)
as a temporary solution to get the needed additional support for the war effort. Although the
WAAC was affiliated with the army, there was enough interest and support in the program that
the Navy and coast guard implemented their own female only groups called the Navy WAVES
(Women Accepted for Volunteer Emergency Service) and Coast Guard SPARs (Semper Paratus
Always Ready). With men serving oversees as members of military units, women’s roles
expanded from socially acceptable traditional occupations, like nursing and clerical work, to the
now gapped technical roles of airplane mechanics, air traffic controllers, instructors and even
pilots (Fletcher et al., 1994; Kamarck, 2016). During WWII over 350,000 women served in the
armed forces (Kamarck, 2016).
Research shows that social gender roles are formed in children as early as the age of two
(Shapiro et al., 2015). These attitudes influence social gender expectations that are then
12

manifested in the sports they choose to play, activities they engage in and even the area of study
they pursue throughout their adolescent years with the culmination of their career choice as they
enter adulthood (Shapiro et al., 2015). The notion of gendered occupations persists today with
media perpetuating these beliefs; in film and television less than 20% of working characters are
women, nearly 25% of women are shown doing housework compared to 1% of male characters,
and male characters dominate the legal, business, military and medical roles while females are
cast primarily as mothers, nurses, teachers and housekeepers (Liu et al., 2015; Shapiro et al.,
2015). These roles perpetuate the cultural belief that women are better suited as care givers rather
than businessmen. This cultural belief is also supported in how the culture defines and
characterizes successful leaders (Eagly et al., 1992; Schein et al., 1996; Shen & Joseph, 2020).
The definition of a good leader is often different for males and females based upon
gender specific expectations and stereotype assumptions (Alimo-Metcalfe, 2010; Boyce & Herd,
2003; Eagly et al., 1992; Fuegen, 2015; Morgan, 2004). This disparity between defining
expected roles and managing leaders to that expectation often results in mixed messages and
unreconcilable performance evaluations (Eagly & Karau, 2002; Fuegen, 2015; Sczesny &
Kuhnen, 2004). Studies have shown that females tend to excel in roles that are deemed more
feminine and struggle to achieve the same success as their male counterparts in more male
dominated roles (Eagly & Karau, 2002; Kawakami et al., 2003). Research has also found that the
lack of female representation in leadership roles helps to perpetuate these stereotypes and beliefs
by reinforcing the promotion of men into leadership positions (Seo et al., 2017). This exacerbates
the perception that females are unable to achieve success in those organizations often causing
females to leave and look for growth and leadership opportunities elsewhere (McKinsey, 2018).
13

These social attitudes define social expectations and provide additional context to better
understand how men and women are impacted differently by career challenges (Shapiro, et al.,
2015). For example, the traditional approach to supporting female success in the workplace is to
offer women additional training or support programs designed to teach women how to be as
successful as their male counterparts by focusing on perceived deficient individual
characteristics instead of critical job skills (Ely & Meyerson, 2000). The message sent is that in
order for females to be successful, they would have to become more like their male counterparts,
in personality and character, minimizing the impact of actual performance as a measure of
success (Ely & Meyerson, 2000). This misalignment of self, causes females to question their
competency and sense of belonging often causing the desire to realign to a more congruent role
(Stets & Burke, 2000). In addition to challenging stereotypes women in the military must also
contend with systemic challenges within the Navy’s organizational culture.
Systemic Challenges
Amidst debate over whether to allow women to continue to serve after World War II,
Congress passed the Women’s Armed Services Integration Act of 1948 making women a
permanent part of the military service. This act formally acknowledged the service’s need to
retain female members, but severely limited how many women would be allowed to join. The
enlisted representation was capped at 2% of the overall enlisted force and the number of female
officers was limited to 10% of the enlisted female population (Kamarck, 2016; Women Armed
Services Integration Act, 1974). The legislation also prevented women from serving on combat
ships and aircraft and imposed additional limitations and constraints that did not apply to their
male counterparts. For example, while men could enlist independently at the age of 18, women
required parental consent until the age of 21. Women were also prevented from holding a
14

permanent rank above lieutenant colonel/commander (O5) and were held to twenty percent and
ten percent promotion rates at the senior ranks of lieutenant commander and commander
(Women Armed Services Integration Act, 1974). These promotion rates were based on female
numbers only, not the entire eligible promotion population (Women Armed Services Integration
Act, 1974). Finally, in order for women to get dependency benefits, their male spouses had to
demonstrate dependency and they had to prove that they were the primary source of support for
their children (Kamarck, 2016).
It wasn’t until the late 1960s and 1970s, during the Equal Rights Movement, that many of
these systemic challenges began to be removed enabling women to serve more equally alongside
their military male counterparts. In 1967, Congress amended Title 10, 32, and 37 of United
States Code to remove restrictions on female officers including the percentage of women that
could serve (Kamarck, 2016). This change in legislation also ensured that promotion eligibility
and opportunity were provided equally to men and women and recognized the role of women in
the nurse corps as commissioned service members (Kamarck, 2016). Laws passed in the mid-
1970s, amidst the growing feminist movement and declining number of male youth cohorts
interested in serving, abolished the restrictions placed on women allowing them to voluntarily
join at the age of 18 independently and no longer requiring proof of dependency for benefits
(Fletcher et al., 1994). By 1975 women made up 5% of the overall active duty force (Fletcher et
al., 1994) despite lingering restrictions on access to specific military occupations. A study
conducted as early as 1978, found that the recruitment of women improved the overall quality of
the services and saved taxpayer dollars (Kamarck, 2016). Despite these advances women’s
participation remained limited through policy and access to certain communities for almost
another 20 years. In 1993, the Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Frank Kelso, lobbied
15

Congress to support lifting the ban on women in combat providing detailed plans on how the
Navy would fully integrate women into all communities (Fletcher et al., 1994). In 1994, the
National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) eliminated restrictions on the assignment of
women and tasked the services to develop initiatives to fully integrate women over the next
several years. Although these systemic challenges were addressed and remedied over the years
with the passing of new legislation, the ideas and values that supported those beliefs were
difficult to eradicate with just the signing of a new bill.
These historical limits on female participation in the Navy have long lasting effects for
the organization. Acker (2006) defines inequality regimes as “loosely interrelated practices,
processes, actions, and meanings that result in and maintain class, gender and racial
inequalitieis” (p. 443). These inequalities are primarily manifested in perceived credibility, and
access to professional networks and mentors (Acker, 2006; Cabrera & Thomas-Hunt, 2015).
Credibility
A Georgetown Center on Education and the Workforce study conducted in 2018 found
that women required one additional degree to their male counterparts to reach pay parity
suggesting that women are not perceived as competent as their male counterparts without it
(Mulhere, 2018). This is one example of how double standards are applied in determining
competence, putting females at a disadvantage as they compete for leadership positions.
Credibility can also be also aligned to status and actual performance (Foschi, 2000). Foschi’s
(2000) research shows that given a female’s inferior status in the workplace women need to
demonstrate higher degrees of competence than their male counterparts to be equally considered
for leadership positions. Studies have found that female contributions are typically ignored or
received negatively when working in small gender mixed groups while male contributions are
16

readily accepted and adopted (Eagly & Carli, 2003). This access to networks provides
individuals to increased opportunities.
Opportunity Structures
Cabrera and Thomas-Hunt (2015) define opportunity structures as the opportunities
provided to individual’s throughout their career. As an individual progresses in their career their
opportunity structure evolves based on prior opportunities and work experiences. Opportunity
structures also provide access to high-status sponsors who help guide and nurture an individual’s
career providing an additional source of support to accelerate success (Cabrera and Thomas-
Hunt, 2015). McKinsey and Company’s study, Women in the Workplace (2019), highlighted that
nearly half of HR leaders believe a woman’s biggest challenge in getting promoted to positions
of management and leadership is attributable to lack of sponsorship from the organization’s
current leadership members (Women in the Workplace, 2019). Eagly and Carli (2003) believe
that this is exacerbated by the fact that men hold the majority of positions of power and authority
and continue to view female leadership as incongruent with female stereotypes. Kets and
Sandroni (2016) argue that it is the preference to interact with similar people and the reduction of
risk that prevents leaders from supporting female candidates for positions of leadership.
In other words, without proven performance appraisals and verified competence male leaders
tend to support male associates for leadership positions because they are socially aligned and are
more willing to give them the benefit of the doubt for competence (Kets & Sandroni, 2016).
Structural Limitations
The Navy’s up or out approach makes it a unique organization when dealing with gender
equality. Many organizations have focused on recruiting female leaders to executive roles to
increase their organizational diversity at all levels (Women in the Workplace, 2018). The Navy’s
17

retention and promotion policy makes this approach challenging. The unrestricted officer
pipeline is very strict in that everyone begins at the bottom as a junior officer (O1) and promotes
based on time in grade and performance. Once you make the decision to leave the service, there
is a very small window of opportunity to re-enter at the same rank with no opportunity to receive
credit for work done outside of the military. The implications of this structure limit the Navy’s
senior female officers to only the number of females that start and decide to make the Navy a
career. In other words, in order to increase the number of senior female officers 20 years from
now, you must significantly increase the number of females coming into the Navy today and
support programs that encourage females to continue beyond their minimum service agreement.
Retention matters.
This long lead time to grow female leaders from within also has significant impact on the
organization’s ability to plan and prepare for increased gender growth. For example, a ship
begins its design phase 20 years before it is commissioned. This means consideration for gender
specific berthing and lavatories must be planned well before the Navy truly realizes what its
requirement will be for a crew. Ships’ crews are often limited by the space allocated in berthing
(or where service members sleep) to each gender. Today’s fleet is somewhat limited in gender
quotas on ships due to a ship’s unique configurations and berthing capacities. This aspect also
caused the Navy to be the last service with a waiver request after the 2015 mandate to open all
roles to females. Submarines were the last community to allow for women due to the strict
configuration of the boat and its inability to quickly tailor the necessary accommodations for
female crew members (Kamarck, 2016). It was newsworthy when ADM Michelle Howard
became the first female to be promoted to the rank of four-star admiral and had to have her
uniforms custom made because the necessary pieces were not available for females
18

(Bahrampour, 2014). The Navy’s delay in structurally supporting female officers impacts the
sense of belonging that females develop and potentially influences their decision to choose an
alternate career path (Acker, 2006; Latham & Pinder, 2005).
Existing Retention Strategies
In 1983, Schneider argued that the process of recruiting, selecting and retaining within an
organization leads to homogeneity within that organization (p. 43). Similarly, people are
attracted to organizations where they feel they will be accepted and do well establishing a de
facto organization demography that defines the organization. Historically, the military has been a
very male dominated profession. The government even endorsed the publication of The Navy
Wife after WWII which detailed naval etiquette for Navy wives and imposed upon them the
responsibility of maintaining a happy home so that their husbands could have successful careers.
The book has since transitioned to a less gender specific guide for spouses but the traditional
stereotypical roles for men and women linger. Officer spouse clubs now take the place of former
officer wives clubs but participation is almost entirely female providing yet another disconnect
for female officers to share their career with their spouse in the same way their male counterparts
do.
There is continued underlying support that suggests a subconscious connection between
military roles and gender (Morgan, 2004). Retention statistics, as depicted in Table 2, show that
occupations continue to reflect traditional gender roles with female representation highest among
healthcare and administration occupations and lowest among special forces and elite fighting
specialties (GAO 20-61, 2020). Although all fields are now open to women, the retention
numbers have steadily decreased from 2004 to 2018 (GAO 20-61, 2020).

19

Table 2
Percentage of Female Officers by Occupation: 2004 and 2018 Comparison
Pay grade Admin Analysis Combat Equipment Health
care
Leadership Logistics
O1 (2004) 27.3 29.3 5.8 18.4 55.5 0.0 28.0
O1 (2018) 37.2 26.4 12.6 19.9 54.5 0.0 24.7
O2 (2004) 0.0 26.5 8.5 17.8 48.8 0.0 23.7
O2 (2018) 38.3 25.6 12.1 17.8 55.2 0.0 24.7
O3 (2004) 0.0 18.3 5.7 13.7 36.1 0.0 18.8
O3 (2018) 33.2 20.7 8.1 12.6 41.7 0.0 21.8
O4 (2004) 0.0 12.7 2.3 10.9 34.7 0.0 12.6
O4 (2018) 29.2 15.6 5.1 10.8 39.8 16.7 16.6
O5 (2004) 0.0 11.2 1.9 11.8 30.2 3.6 11.1
O5 (2018) 22.5 14.1 4 9.4 31.9 5.1 14.2
O6 (2004) 19.1 10.2 2.3 11.1 19.9 4.2 11.3
O6 (2018) 21 11.5 3.0 7.5 27 3.1 8.3
O7 (2004) 18.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.2 0.0
O7 (2018) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.5 0.0
O8 (2004) 18.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.4 0.0
O8 (2018) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6 0.0
O9 (2004) 13.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .8 0.0
O9 (2018) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.8 0.0
O10 (2004) 10.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
O10 (2018) 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.4 0.0

The U.S. Navy has made significant strides in considering the needs and desires of
female sailors in the development of recruiting and retention strategies, however, many would
argue that the strategies themselves are not effective. Many of the programs are aimed at
recruiting and retaining a robust force without specifically supporting the retention of any one
group or demographic. This is consistent with the U.S. Navy’s current diversity goals which
state, “Recruit and access from a diverse group of applicants to secure a high-performing and
innovative workforce that reflects all segments of society” (DON Diversity and Inclusion
Roadmap, 2017, p.5). This lack of attention to the specific demographics of its workforce has led
20

to a disparate and generalized approach for recruitment and retention implementing programs
which only appear to address the concerns of its minority populations without fully
understanding the underlying needs and support required by these populations to remain in the
Service.
The U.S. Navy has developed several retention programs aimed at incentivizing officer
retention. Programs such as the Career Intermission Program, Low-Residency Graduate
Education Program and the Fleet Scholars Program are designed to support the continued
professional and personal development of officers who choose to remain in the service. Although
these programs have had some success, critics argue that they are not targeted enough and do not
adequately address the underlying issues driving good officers, male and female, out of the U.S.
Navy (Calaway & Bice, 2020). This lack of a targeted strategy has resulted in the development
of programs that solve some concerns highlighted by people who have previously left the Navy
to pursue alternative careers but it fails to recognize female specific concerns that continue to
plague the organization.
The Navy has made significant strides in equalizing opportunities for both men and
women. Headlines made by women such as Captain Dianna Wolfson, who became the first
female leader of Norfolk Naval Shipyard in 2021, and Captain Amy Bauernschmidt, who
became the female carrier commanding officer in the same year, remind us that there are still
very few women who have reached pinnacle positions within the Navy (Navy Times, 2020). In
fact, Table 2 highlights the decline of females in senior positions within the U.S. Navy. There are
far fewer females in the O7-10 ranks in 2018 than there were in 2004 (GAO 20-61, 2020). This
highlights the vacuum of leadership and mentorship for young female officers who are debating
whether or not they can navigate a naval career while still achieving the personal goals of family
21

and friendships. Female officers make up less than 14% of mid-level ranks (O4-O6) and only
10% of senior level ranks (Office of Diversity Management and Equal Opportunity, 2017). It
also highlights the struggle that women continue to face when looking for career success in the
Navy.
In 2019, the Center for a New American Society reported that military members are
compensated better than their civilian counterparts (McMahon & Bernard, 2019). This is
noteworthy for females since the civilian population still reports females are earning less than
their male counterparts for the same job (McKinsey, 2018). Although a factor in the decision
process, pay does not appear to be a significant motivator for retention, as it may have been in
the past, forcing the military to compete in other areas with their civilian counterparts. Recent
reports suggest that generations Y and Z seek greater work life balance and put greater value on
enjoying life experiences including marriage and parenthood (McMahon & Bernard, 2019). In a
2010 Pew Research study 52% of millennials placed being a good parent as their number one
priority (Pew Research Center, 2010). Having a successful marriage and helping others were
listed as the number two and three priorities respectively (Pew Research Center, 2010). A more
recent study found work schedules, deployments, organizational culture, family planning, sexual
assault and dependent care as the top six influential factors when deciding whether or not to
separate from the military (GAO 20–61, 2020).
Women as Leaders
In the early 1970s Schein and Schein published controversial articles supporting the
“Think Manager Think Male” concept that supported the idea that men were more likely to
emulate leadership characteristics than females (Schein, 1973; Schein 1975). Over the last
several decades, studies have shown that both men and women are capable of leadership
22

qualities and studies have shifted from whether or not women are capable of leading to whether
or not women are better than men of leading (Anderson, et al., 2006). More recent studies have
concluded that gender differences in leadership may be less apparent than previously believed
and demonstrate differences in effective leadership styles regardless of gender (Anderson, et al.,
2006; Eagly & Karau, 2002). As the trend moves away from traditional hierarchical
organizations to more collaborative and innovative environments, there has been an increasing
call for transformational and adaptive leadership that works to enhance team performance rather
than just direct and supervise output (Northouse, 2016).
Transitional Versus Transactional Leadership
When measuring financial performance, companies with more women in senior
management positions have demonstrated higher earnings than companies with less gender
diverse management (Loughlin et al., 2012). Much of this success is contributed to a shift from
transactional leadership models to transformational leadership models and the successful
application of collaborative/supportive leadership models that empower and support the
organization’s workforce. This type of leadership has also been directly linked to common
female stereotypes such as communal, supporting, nurturing, and relationship oriented (Eagly &
Karau, 2002; Eagly, 2007; Loughlin et al., 2012). In a study conducted by Alimo-Metcalfe
(2010) female leaders were more likely than men to use transformational and interactive
leadership styles, focusing on empowering subordinates and enhancing their self-worth, while
male leaders adopted transactional leadership styles that relied on formal authority and
traditional power constructs.
More importantly, the 2018 National Defense Authorization Act (FY18 NDAA)
authorized increasing the size of the military by slightly more than 56 thousand people by 2023
23

which puts a significant strain on recruiting sources (McMahon & Bernard, 2019). As the U.S.
Navy looks to develop leaders for its future force, it must adapt to a more socially aware and
gender neutral generation who are more informed and interconnected than any previous
generation (McMahon & Bernard, 2019). This younger generation has seemingly shifted its
priorities due to increased opportunities afforded by a more technologically advanced market and
is no longer primarily driven by financial compensation. Generations Y and Z (defined as people
born between 1981 and 1996 and 1997 and 2012, respectively) are more focused on making a
positive contribution, working across multiple fields and professions throughout their
professional life, and enjoying a healthy “work-life” balance that enables greater flexibility to
focus on both personal and professional goals (McMahon & Bernard, 2019). In order for the U.S.
Navy to meet its aggressive recruiting numbers for 2023, it must also align its leadership to
retain this new workforce in order to sustain its end strength with the right type of leadership.
Crisis Management
Women have also been recognized at leading organizations through crisis more
effectively than men. In a 2011 study conducted by Ryan and Hersby, researchers found that
female leadership was more desirable when interpersonal leadership was required (2007).
Nothing has amplified this idea more than the recent COVID-19 pandemic. Countries such as
New Zealand and Germany seemed to experience greater success in achieving social acceptance
for their pandemic response plans than male led countries like the United States and the United
Kingdom (Taub, 2020). Finland, led by Sanna Marin, was supported by four female led parties
and managed to keep the death toll 10% below its neighboring country, Sweden (Taub, 2020).
The ability of these female leaders to allow for greater diversity of thought within their
24

administrations allowed them to gather more data and make better informed decisions for their
citizens (Taub, 2020).
The literature on this topic is clear, women are disadvantaged by the “think manager –
think male” mentality that currently persists in our society (Shein et al., 1996). However, in
recent decades, literature surrounding management and leadership has shifted away from
hierarchical organizations towards more collaborative and empowering leadership techniques
that are aligned with female traits (Eagly & Carli, 2003). This trend towards transformational
and adaptive leadership styles supports the erosion of organizational barriers currently
preventing women from attaining leadership positions (Eagly & Carli, 2003). Schein (2001) also
highlights emerging cultural shifts to include women viewing leadership traits as androgynous
vice masculine. With these two major shifts in the leadership landscape, and a deliberate focus
on addressing lingering biases and stereotypes, organizations can accelerate the benefits of
retaining women in the workforce.
Conceptual Framework
Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model of human development provides an understanding of
the challenges facing female officers as they decide their career aspirations. Bronfenbrenner’s
model was originally developed to describe the shifts in behavior and beliefs within humans
throughout their lifecycle. According to Bronfenbrenner, children are directly more impacted by
their immediate family when they are infants but as they grow, exposure to other children, social
groups and cultural ideologies help shape and craft unique attitudes and behavior (Gardiner &
Kosmitzki, 2007). These rings of influence are identified as the microsystem, mesosystem,
exosystem and macrosystem and work across time to influence an individual’s behavior and
personal beliefs (Gardiner & Kosmitzki, 2007). The relationship between these conceptual
25

systems is bi-directional offering individuals an opportunity to influence their environment while
being influenced by it (Gardner & Kosmitzki, 2007). When applied to the problem of practice,
the microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem and macrosystem all play a role in influencing a
female officer’s decision to stay in the US Navy. Figure 1 highlights the connection and
influences throughout a female officer’s career to her background and current environment.

Figure 1

Conceptual Framework Based on Bronfenbrenner's Model

Note. Adapted from Lives Across Culture, 4
th
ed. (p. 24) by H. Gardiner, H and C. Kosmitzki,
2007.
26

Microsystem
At the center of the model in Figure 1 is the microsystem which has the greatest impact
on personal identity and development (Gardner & Kosmitzki, 2007). On the “self” side of the
graphic it is what has defined the identity of the female officer as she enters into the service.
Each member of the service has a unique and compelling reason for joining the military
influenced primarily by the members of their microsystem (family, friends, school, church). In
fact, 82% of U.S. Navy recruits have had a parent or other family member serve in one of the
four branches of the military (Thompson, 2016). These influencers play an important role as the
individual transitions into adulthood and begins to determine their career path. As the recruit
becomes more ingrained into the military lifestyle her chain of command also becomes an
important part of her microsystem. The need to feel accepted and valued by her peers, mentors
and subordinates influences her motivation and sense of belonging (Seo et al., 2017).
On the “U.S. Navy” side of the graphic the microsystem is defined by the traditions and
beliefs that provide the foundation of the Navy’s organizational culture. From a young officer’s
perspective, it is exemplified by the first organization or command that they are a part of. The
commanding officer establishes the norms and expectations for his/her organization that the
young officer must adhere to including ideas of leadership (Johnson et el., 2008). Studies have
shown that traditional military leadership models focus on primarily male oriented traits
oftentimes ignoring female contributions (Boyce & Herd, 2003).
Mesosytem
The mesosystem does not necessarily include settings from which a female officer draws
ideas or decisions, but rather the mesosystem represents the complex layer where settings collide
and begin to impact decisions and behavior across multiple influential factors. For many this is
27

amplified by traditional milestones and “rites of passage” experiences. For example, going away
to college provides a unique opportunity where early microsystems (family) are met with new
microsystems (college friends) shaping future behavior and ideas (Gardner & Kosmitzki, 2007).
The mesosystem is critical for the exchange of ideas and the strengthening of beliefs and
motivational influences that support ideologies (Gardner & Kosmitzki, 2007).
In the U.S. Navy’s construct this can be seen as the transition from one command to
another or from one community to another. It is through this change that an individual would be
afforded the opportunity to see additional environments and viewpoints that may be different
than those established by the original microsystem. This opportunity to explore new
organizations would then strengthen or debunk beliefs and motivational influences previously
held (Gardner & Kosmitzki, 2007).
Exosystem
Bronfenbrenner’s theory offers a unique perspective into the U.S. Navy’s retention
problem by highlighting the personal conflict between social and organizational factors women
are attempting to reconcile throughout their career. Social gender roles are established at a very
young age and influence perceived opportunities and challenges throughout life (Shapiro et al.,
2015). When women enter the workforce they often adapt to masculine expectations of success
causing a perceived disconnect with their own beliefs of success and creating a sense of
disconnectedness or a lack of belonging (Acker, 2006). As opportunities to choose between
career options and social expectations emerge, the roles of coaches, mentors, family and friends
become increasingly more important and influential (Shapiro et al., 2015). Finally, the influence
of social and organizational factors on a female’s decision to pursue a Naval career is dependent
on where she is during her career when those decisions need to be made.
28

From the Navy’s perspective the exosystem offers a unique opportunity to align and
highlight greater organizational goals apart from individual experiences. For example, the Navy
leverages mentoring programs and community networking events to support advancing U.S.
Navy objectives with individual experiences. When there is a mismatch between the espoused
values and beliefs of the organization and what the perceived values and beliefs are through
personal accounts individuals will find themselves at odds with the group and choose to leave
(Latham & Pinder, 2005).
Macrosystems
Bronfenbrenner defined the macrosystem as the complex relationships and cultural
settings that support the establishment of norms and beliefs within individuals (Gardner &
Kosmitzki, 2007). This setting includes the establishment of political and social norms that
support cultural beliefs and impact legislative decisions. For example, it was through legislative
mandates that services reviewed the restrictions on females in combat roles. Social norms and
beliefs that combat was no place for females supported previous restrictions placed on females
but with the push to ensure greater diversity in the services and treat males and females equally,
congressional intervention was necessary to push the services to increase the number of females
throughout all available occupations.
In 2019, Congresswoman Elaine Luria asked the following question of VADM Burke,
the Navy’s Director of Manpower at the time, “
If [in 2005] we are 10 years past lifting the Combat Exclusion Act and then those women
have had the same opportunities across the course of their careers, how are we [today] at
the point that only 3.8 percent of those selected for Aviation Commander Command and
1.8 percent for Major Command were women (States News Service, 2019)?
29

Representative Luria, a 20 year U.S. Navy veteran herself, was noting that even after restrictions
placed on female military service was lifted the retention numbers remain unsatisfactorily low
and the number of females in leadership position remain unsatisfactory (States News Service,
2019). Representative Luria agreed with the Military Leadership Diversity Commission’s
conclusion that current military leadership struggles to represent the public it serves (States
News Service, 2019). This exemplifies the commitment of our elected officials to support greater
gender diversity at the macrosystem level within the Services and the continued attempt to hold
service leaders accountable for their diversity performance. Without the support of federal laws
and mandates, gender issues would get lost amidst the mission and operational tempo of a truly
unique organization.
Much of the literature surrounding female leadership is focused on character traits and
leadership styles. Although significant, these traits require an environment that fosters, matures
and supports their growth and development. Homophily, or the tendency for people to interact
with people who have similar characteristics and interests, result in men and women being
offered different opportunities to network, socialize and lead (Cabrera & Thomas-Hunt, 2015).
As a result, men and women receive varying access to information, resources and opportunities
based on these interactions. Fiske (2016) argues this lack of access to social structural networks
within an organization also prevents leaders from choosing females for greater leadership roles.
It is this same lack of opportunity to assume more risk that perpetuates the gender stereotype that
women are more risk-averse than men without actually providing female leaders the opportunity
to take risks (Fiske, 2016). Finally, the LeanIn.org annual study of 2018, Women in the
Workplace, agrees that employees who socialize with their supervisors out of work tend to be
happier with their jobs and are more likely to stay with the organization. The dissatisfied feeling
30

resulting from a lack of access and resources often prompts females to look elsewhere for a
greater sense of support and belonging (Women in the Workplace, 2018). When females no
longer feel valued or aligned with an organization’s values they often leave in search of
something more fulfilling (Fiske, 2016). Bronfenbrenner’s model reminds us that individuals are
constantly growing and learning from their environments. When approaching the issue of female
officer retention, greater consideration should be given to the environment the U.S. Navy is
fostering to ensure that it is supporting and cultivating the environment where diverse thought
and ideas are encouraged and rewarded.
Conclusion
Women have been recognized as leaders in the past. From rulers of famed civilizations
such as Cleopatra and Catherine the Great to more recent examples such as New Zealand’s
Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and the first U.S. female Vice President, Kamala Harris. Yet,
despite these examples, women continue to struggle to achieve and maintain senior management
levels in today’s organizations. Women represent more than 52% of the population and currently
attain 63% of masters degrees (National Center for Educational Statistics, 2019) but continue to
only represent about 38% of all management positions (McKinsey & Company, 2020). This
incongruency has led to a plethora of studies examining the underlying causes for the female
leadership gap. Most of these studies focus on studying leadership behaviors of those females
and how they are perceived and rewarded for exhibiting those behaviors. However, very few
studies have looked at the environment in which successful women were able to achieve success.

31

Chapter Three: Methodology
This study explored the impact of organizational culture on the retention of female
officers in the Navy. The results of this effort werre to identify critical biases and micro
aggressions that may result in women opting not to pursue the Navy as a career. This study
achieved its purpose by exploring the experiences of female leaders who have opted to remain in
the service and determining the effect of the U.S. Navy’s organizational culture in making that
decision. This chapter provides a summary of the data, variables, and methodology used to analyze
the effects of organizational culture on the retention of female officers in the Navy. Much of the data
was obtained from the Defense Manpower Data Center (DoN Personnel and Readiness Statistics,
2019). Data was also gathered through formal interviews of current and former female officers in an
effort to identify critical aspects of the Navy that supported their desire to remain in the Service.
Research Questions
This study seeked to gain a better understanding of the social and organizational factors that
impact a female officer’s decision to pursue a career as a naval officer. The research questions
that guided this study were:
1. How do social expectations of traditional female roles affect perceived performance
of female naval officers?
2. How does the organizational structure of the Navy influence the perceived achievable
success of female officers?
Overview of Methodology
I chose to use a multi method approach using qualitative interviews and DoN Personnel
and Readiness Statistics, 2019 research data to study the research questions. Qualitative
interviews were developed as a method to gain a personal account of individual experiences and
views from female Navy officers (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). These personal interviews were
32

augmented with the data gathered by the DMDC’s Officer Retention Survey to provide a holistic
picture of how the Navy’s organizational environment effects female retention among officers.
Table 3 describes the data sources used in this research.

Table 3

Data Sources

Research questions Interviews DMDC surveys
How do social expectations of traditional female roles
affect perceived performance of female naval
officers?
X
How does the organizational structure of the Navy
influence the perceived achievable success of
female officers?
X X

33

Data Collection, Instrumentation and Analysis Plan
This qualitative study focused on current senior female leaders (O5 and above) to
determine what organizational and environmental factors challenged, motivated and supported
their career decisions. These interviews offered critical insight into the impact organizational
culture had on a female’s decision to remain in the Navy. The following sections outline the
methodology and approach used to capture data across the various sources; interviews, DMDC
Surveys and other sources. These sections describe the data analysis process relevant to each
source and include how credibility and trustworthiness of the sources were determined.
Data Source 1: Interviews
This study incorporated eight qualitative interviews. These interviews focused on
gathering the perspective of current female officers. A purposeful nonprobability sampling
approach was used to determine interview participants to best generalize the responses of female
officers across the entire population as a whole (Merriam & Tisdale, 2016). The interviews were
semi-structured and supported a consistent question and theme similarity with flexibility for
deviation depending on the participant answers and specific experiences (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016).
Participating Stakeholders
This study focused on current female Navy officers. Invitations to participate in the study
were sent via Facebook utilizing the Female Navy Officers page to garner a sampling with the
opportunity for participants to nominate someone else at the end of the interview process.
Although not scientific, this method allowed for a sampling and pulled from a group that
continues to identify as female Navy officers and may have had greater motivation to support the
study. The goal was to ensure that there was enough representation to truly gather a
34

comprehensive picture of Navy culture independent of community or specific organizational
affiliation. This point of saturation, as described by Merriam and Tisdell (2016), was expected to
be reached with the 8 surveys.
Instrumentation
Qualitative questions were developed to generate reflections on common themes and
experiences shared by female Navy officers highlighting challenges and potential sources of
support that supported or obstructed their perceived efficacy in their Naval career. The preferred
semi structured approach enabled flexibility during the interview process to further explore
personal experiences and better supported a qualitative study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). A total
of eight questions, along with potential follow up questions (see Appendix A), were developed to
guide the conversation, cull the participants’ experiences and better understand their perception
of challenges and support provided by the Navy as an organization as it related to their own
measure of self-efficacy as a naval officer.
The interview questions were designed to target organizational factors that influenced
individual decisions to pursue or leave a Navy career. The first question was focused on
gathering demographic data to provide organizational context data. The majority of the
questions, were rooted in determining environmental and motivational factors aligning to
Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model (Bronfenbrenner, 1979) to determine microstysem,
mesosystsm, exosystem, and macrosystem influences on career choices. The questions were
divided into two areas of focus: three questions related to perceptions of self-efficacy and four
questions related to perceived impact of organizational structures on career choices. Holistically,
the questions provided a foundation for discussing their own personal accounts of underlying
motivational factors that impacted their career decisions.
35

Data Collection Procedures
Participation for the study was determined by the response to the request for participation
through a Facebook post. Interested individuals received a personal email from the researcher
outlining the purpose of the overall study and goal of the interviews within the study’s purpose.
The email provided details concerning the ethical and practical use of the study’s results and the
process in place to ensure confidentiality and privacy of the participants. These efforts included
using only rank and psuedonyms when referenced and offered participants an opportunity to read
the final results prior to submission. Documentation was kept confidential and private through
the use of password protected encryption and interviews were recorded with the written consent
of the participants. After a review of the protocol, if the participant still desired to participate,
they replied to the email with their name, rank, community and status of service (active duty,
reserve or veteran). All participants who were not actively serving were excluded from
participating. Candidates were chosen to ensure a broad range of represented communities in the
study.
Once the participants were selected and agreed to be interviewed, I scheduled a day and
time that was mutually agreeable to both the participant and myself. A Zoom link was sent to the
participants in agreement with current University of Southern California’s research guidelines
under the COVID-19 pandemic environment. Zoom afforded the the ability to record each
interview in support of data collection and review post interview. The website Wreally.com was
used to transcribe the interview and translate the video file into a PDF. Every effort was made to
ensure video was enabled for greater opportunity to use observation as an additional tool
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The interviews were scheduled for 60 minutes each and I guided the
discussion to ensure the interview was completed on time. I sent a reminder email to the
36

participant 24 hours prior to the interview with the questions to help the participant collect her
thoughts and reflect on relevant past experiences. Finally, I tested the virtual platform the day
before the interview to ensure that it was working correctly as well as prepared pens and
notebooks to take notes on related observations throughout the interview process.
Each interview began with a review of the study’s objectives and purpose along with
verbal consent from the participant to participate and be recorded. The participant was reminded
of the code of ethics under which the interview would be conducted along with the processes that
were place to ensure confidentiality and anonymity of the participants. The participant was given
the opportunity to conclude the interview at any time if she no longer felt comfortable and was
afforded the opportunity to ask any initial questions she may have prior to the commencement of
the interview. Once the ground rules and expectations were established I asked the participant if
they were ready to begin the interview. Once the participant answered affirmatively, I began
recording and asked the first question.
Upon completion of the interview, and if time permitted, I asked additional probing
questions or reviewed observations that had the potential to trigger an additional question. If no
time was afforded, I provided an opportunity for the participant to ask any additional questions
regarding the interview process. Once the interview was complete and the participant was
satisfied with the process I thanked the participant for their time and participation. I stopped
recording and ensured that the interview was properly saved and stored along with any notes that
were taken during the session.
Data Analysis
Qualitative techniques were used to conduct data analysis of the information gathered
through the interview process. I used a cumulative data approach when analyzing the data to
37

support the identification of connections and similarities between interviews and connection
back to the research questions. The process supported a continual revisit of the research
questions to ensure that the data being collected remained relevant and supported the ultimate
purpose of the study (Maxwell, 2013). This process also helped me isolate personal beliefs and
biases so that she remained open to the observations and experiences of the participants without
judgment or preconceptions (Van Manen, 2014).
On a more tactical level, the data analysis process for the interviews included a structured
method of coding, observation and personal insight recording. Data was collected, reviewed,
coded and analyzed within a set timeline to ensure reflections were not lost or distorted over
time. All data analysis was conducted in a quiet environment at approximately the same time of
day to ensure additional cognitive biases did not manipulate the reflective process (Pink, 2018).
Data Source 2: DMDC Surveys
The Navy utilizes exit and milestone surveys to support manpower planning and predict
potential future manpower gaps. At the time of the study, milestone surveys were provided to
members with service time remaining on active duty within a decision window to stay or leave
the Navy (DMDC Survey, 2020). Exit Surveys were provided to service members who reported
their intention to leave the service to support a better understanding of factors influencing these
decisions (DMDC Survey, 2020). These surveys supported the personal accounts of the study’s
participants and served to augment and provide context to the personal accounts captured
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
Data Collection Procedures
These surveys were not available for public review. A request was made to the Navy’s
N1, Office of the Chief of Naval Operations/Chief of Naval Personnel to get access to the last 10
38

years of survey data. Although the request for full access was denied, the office agreed to
provide specific data as it pertains to the study upon request. All data collected from the N1 were
kept confidential and shared only as needed for the purposes of this study in coordination and
compliance with US Navy policies. Data was kept password protected and maintained any
confidentiality and ethical guidelines already established by the N1 and its survey process.
Data Analysis
Upon collection of the information, I analyzed potential trends and motivational factors
using data visualization tools that provided ease of understanding for the reader. The objective
was to identify and highlight trends from the surveys that aligned or contradicted the interview
data collected (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This triangulation approach (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016) supported a better understanding and comprehensive capture of the environment for the
study. Because this was a subjective study, it was important to truly understand the context and
environment of the personal experiences (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Validity, Credibility and Trustworthiness
This study assumed that the data collected was a reflection of each contributing
member’s perception of reality based on their values and ideas (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Therefore, the goal was not to prove the validity of their ideas and recollections but rather to
assess and draw conclusions and find commonality across experiences to highlight contextual
themes and ideas (Maxwell, 2013). With that in mind, Merriam & Tisdell’s (2016) approach to
credibility was applied across all sources and data analytics processes through the use of member
checks, triangulation and peer reviews to ensure the interpretation and representation of the data
remained consistent and aligned with its original source (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Upon
39

completion of the first draft, the document was provided to all participants for comment. Only
three participants replied with recommended changes for clarity.
Member Checks
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) state, “The process involved in member checks is to take
your preliminary analysis back to some of the participants and ask whether your interpretation
‘rings true’” (p. 246). Member checks were used specifically by allowing available interview
participants an opportunity to read the final analysis and ensure that it aligned with the
participant’s intent and had not been misinterpreted incorrectly. Participants were asked to
review and adjust the research as necessary to ensure that their input was not misused and
continued to support the context or theme in which it was intended (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Triangulation
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) write, “Thus, triangulation… is a powerful strategy for
increasing the credibility or internal validity of your research (p. 245). The triangulation method
was used to ensure that the study was not based solely on the reflections and experiences of only
a select group of people (Patton, 2015). By cross referencing the data across multiple input
sources I supported corroborating themes and ideas that emerged from the interviews and
surveys. This helped ensure that I was not making assumptions or inserting personal bias during
the analysis phase of the research.
Peer Reviews
Finally, peer reviews were used to ensure that the methodology, research and final
analysis are “plausible, based on the data” (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 250). These peer
reviews were important in that they provided an unbiased perspective on the data provided and
the analysis presented. Members of USC’s Organizational Change and Leadership doctoral
40

program were asked to provide input on the tools and methods used as well as the data and final
analysis to support the credibility and trustworthiness of the research.
Ethics and Role of the Researcher
Creswell and Creswell (2018) stress that ethical issues should be anticipated and prepared
for throughout the entire research process to include planning, gathering data and developing
results. Prior to the start of the research careful consideration of ethical access to data and use of
study results was given to ensure that the process was aligned with the institutional review board
(IRB) guidelines as outlined by USC. I also worked to involve key personnel from the
organization to support and validate the data once the research was completed (Creswell &
Creswell, 2018).
The process for gathering data also came under acute ethical scrutiny to ensure that the
rights and privacy of the individuals who agreed to participate were not violated by the study’s
process or intent. Every consideration to maintain anonymity of participants who did not
specifically agree to be identified within the study was examined and leveraged as applicable to
ensure that the participant’s experiences would be included without risking the identity of the
contributor. I spent time to ensure that the purpose of the study was clear and that all participants
were aware of that purpose prior to participating (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). If at any time
during the process participants were uncomfortable or decided not to participate, participants
were afforded the opportunity to change their minds and rescind their agreement to participate.
Throughout the data collection process effort was deliberately made to ensure that data
collected was attributable to the original source for validation purposes and the data was kept
confidential and private through the use of password protected files (Creswell & Creswell,
2018). This report includes fictitious names in order to protect the privacy and anonymity of
41

participants (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Members of the study were also asked to review the
results to ensure that nothing presented was interpreted incorrectly or misaligned from the
original intent or meaning.
Upon release of the final draft of this study, all efforts were made to ensure that everyone
who participated were acknowledged for their contributions. The data will be shared with peers
and key stakeholders to ensure that the data presented is valid and true prior to releasing the data
officially for course conclusion. Although I contributed to the overall research process, I made
every effort to remove personal thoughts, feelings and experiences out of the data to ensure that
only the participants data is reflected in the final product. Raw data collected will be kept for 5
years to answer any questions or concerns regarding the data or the study overall (Creswell &
Creswell, 2018).
Limitations and Delimitations
Throughout this research study I was aware of the limitations and delimitations of the
study. Limitations as defined by Creswell and Creswell (2018) include items that the researcher
does not have control over throughout the study. Delimitations include conscious decisions made
by the researcher to establish parameters or limitations for the study (Creswell & Creswell,
2018). Some of the limitations identified include the inability to ensure participant agreement for
the duration of the study. People who participated in the study were expected to be available
throughout the process in order to ensure the validity of the study. Other limitations included the
trustworthiness and credibility of participants in sharing true and accurate events. Additional
limitations included not being granted access to all of the DMDC data requested. I was provided
the most recent survey results from the O5/O6 Female Officer Milestone Survey but was not
provided historical survey data to conduct trend analysis or provide comparisons to amplify this
42

study’s analysis. Finally, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the ability to interview face to face
was limited and therefore, the ability to use body language, environment and other visual cues to
add additional analysis of the experiences to the stories shared during the interview process was
limited.
Delimitations of this study included the decision to only interview eight participants. This
decision was made to ensure that the data remained effective enough to draw conclusions but not
too overburdensome that the analysis became overwhelmed with individual stories that provided
too many factors. This delimitation also limited this study’s ability to discuss the environmental
impact of specific communities in comparison to others. In other words, the analysis provided is
generalized across the U.S. Navy holistically and was not tailored to a specific community or
group within the organization. This study focused on available female naval officers regardless
of community. Another delimitation of the study included the method of soliciting participants. I
chose to garner participation through the Facebook Navy Female Officers page due to the
group’s focus on female officer issues. The sample source was therefore limited by only female
officers who were aware and had subscribed to the group.

43

Chapter Four: Findings
This study explored the impact of social and organizational culture on the retention of
female officers in the U.S. Navy. The study leveraged Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model of
human development as a framework to explore the influence of social and organizational
influences on a female officer’s career decisions throughout her career. This chapter begins with
a description of the female officers interviewed and any related information to advance the
purpose of this study. The chapter also provides an overview and summary of the DMDC data
obtained from the O5 and O6 Female Officer Milestone Survey results from 2019 to augment
findings and themes from the interviews. The chapter concludes with an overview of key themes
that emerged during the interviews and within the survey responses relative to the study’s initial
research questions. One of the significant findings included the impact of time in service when
determining competence, performance and a sense of belonging. Early in their career, study
participants expressed an uncertainty about whether they would serve until retirement; however,
as they became more senior, and more confident in their abilities, they gained a greater sense of
belonging and satisfaction.
Overview of the Source Data and Organizational Structure
This study explored the experiences of female officers who have made the decision to
remain on active duty for a majority of their Naval career. The study leveraged interviews as the
primary source of information and augmented those findings with results from a 2019 O5/O6
Female Navy Officer Milestone Survey. The following sections offer an overview of the
interviewed participants as well as a brief overview of the Female Navy Officer Milestone
Survey demographcis. The section concludes with relevant organizational information before
reporting the findings.
44

Interviewed Participants
This study explored the experiences of eight female officers who have successfully
navigated a naval career and achieved the rank of Commander (O5) or Captain (O6). The
participants were volunteers who met the criteria of active duty, female senior Navy officer.
Although the question was not asked directly of the participants, given their shared rank, time in
service would have varied between 14 and 30 years (see Table 1). Table 4 provides a brief
summary of the eight participants.

45

Table 4

Summary of the Eight Participants’ Relevant Personal Information
Participant name
(pseudonym)
Rank Current
community
Commissioned
community
Commissioning
source
Dix Captain Engineering
Duty Officer
(EDO)
Surface Warfare
Officer (SWO)
USNA
Duerk Captain SWO SWO USNA
Higbee Captain Medical Service
Corps (MSC)
MSC HCSP*
Toms Captain SWO SWO USNA
McKee Captain Aviation Aviation USNA
Hazard Commander SWO SWO USNA
Hartington Commander SWO SWO USNA
Hopper Commander Intelligence SWO ROTC

* HCSP = Health Collegiate Scholarship Program provides scholarships to medical professionals
in return for commissioned service upon graduation.

As shown in Table 4, participants represented across several Navy communities with the
Surface Warfare Officer community being most represented. Of the eight participants, seven
were commissioned as Unrestricted Line Officers and only one was commissioned into a
Restricted Line Officer field (Medical Supply Corps). Only two participants requested a lateral
46

transfer to another community during their career. Six of the eight participants chose to remain in
their commissioned communities for the duration of their career. Although the study did not
focus on the impact of the commissioning source, it is notable that six of the eight participants
are U.S. Naval Academy (USNA) graduates. To ensure anonymity, the rank of the participants
isreflected accurately but each participant was given the last name of an historically relevant
female U.S. Navy officer. A summative biography on each historical female officer can be found
in Appendix C.
In addition to the interviews conducted, this study also relied on results from the Navy’s
2019 Female Officer Milestone Survey. This survey worked to validate and support key themes
that were identified through the interview process. A brief overview of the survey is provided in
the following section.
Female Navy Officer Milestone Survey Demographics
At the time of this study the Navy’s Female Officer Retention Survey was an ongoing
personnel survey given at key points in an active duty member’s career to poll satisfaction levels
and determine retention tendencies among specific groups. The consistent use of the survey
began in 2014. At the time of the study it was automatically promulgated via email 15 months
prior to a service member’s minimum service requirement (MSR) or projected rotation date
(PRD; OPNAV N1, 2020). The survey was comprised of a maximum 155 questions and was
tailored to the individual taking the survey according to how the individual answered 15 core
questions and their demographics in the Navy Standard Integrated Personnel System (NSIPS)
(OPNAV N1, 2020). The survey utilized a 7-point Likert scale representing a member’s stay or
leave tendency toward each question.
47

I requested, and was provided, the raw data from a recent O5-O6 Female Officer
Milestone Survey conducted in 2019. The survey included responses from 1,228 female officers
across all communities who were either within 15 months of separation eligibility or their PRD.
Communities with over 50 participants are provided in Table 5 while a full community list of
participants can be found in Appendix B.

Table 5

O5–O6 Female Milestone Survey Participants by Community

Designator Community name Number of participants
1110 Surface Warfare Officer 57
1200 Human Resources Officer 57
2100 Medical Corps Officer 191
2200 Dental Corps Officer 65
2300 Medical Service Corps Officer 144
2900 Nurse Corps Officer 298

48

Survey participants were asked to provide the impact of organizational, professional and
personal topics on their decision to stay or leave the Service. The survey also provided an
opportunity to submit free responses to several questions to gain a better appreciation of factors
and issues impacting the force at the time of the survey. Survey data that could not be obtained
included the survey’s participation rate both overall and by community.
Utilizing the data from the interviews as the primary source of information, the study
leveraged the survey results to reinforce the findings and support the validation of the study
results. Themes were identified when at least half of the participants expressed a similar concept
or idea. The following sections focus on the data collected and findings developed in response to
the study’s primary research questions.
Research Question 1: How Do Social Expectations of Traditional Female Roles Affect
Perceived Performance of Female Officers?
The study revealed that social expectations of traditional female roles effected how
female officers were perceived by supervisors, primarily during the early years of participants’
careers despite the Navy’s commitment to equality as published in the Navy’s recent Task Force
One document (LaGrone, 2021) and GAO studies (Kamarck, 2016). These perceptions impacted
interactions and expectations placed on these female officers. This was revealed through the
shared motivations for joining the Navy and the experiences all of the participants described
surrounding their first tours. As the participants advanced in their careers, the effect of gender
stereotypes on perceived performance became less relevant since they had established a
professional reputation and had proven their competence as a leader. This was directly expressed
by five of the eight participants. All of the participants shared that around the time they were
selected to the rank of Lieutenant Commander (which equates to 8 years of service or more) they
49

no longer felt the need to prove their abilities, but rather, they felt more comfortable expressing
their own leadership style.
The following sections highlight key themes that emerged throughout the interviews
surrounding social factors that influenced participants’ decisions to remain in the Service.
Following Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model for human behavior, the first section describes
factors from the participants microsystem that includes the initial motivation to join the Navy.
This motivation stems largely from the support of family and friends and introducsed an
expectation developed by the participants on what type of environment they were joining. This
expectation was based primarily on some knowledge of macrosystem ideas and policies
associated with the organization. The next section discusses the impact of gender stereotypes
during the participants’ early career years. This section explores how participant perceptions and
expectations were influenced by reality and the challenges they faced in adapting to their new
microsystem. The next section outlines how gender factors shifted over time as the participants
progressed into the macrosystem of the organization. Finally, I discuss the mesosystem influence
of leadership in trasitioning and supporting the professional growth of a female officer as she
progresses throughout the organization.
Perceptions of Gender Stereotypes Prior to Joining the Service
According to Gardner and Kosmitzki (2007), the microsystem has the greatest impact on
personal identity and development. In order to better understand the participants’ personal
identity prior to joining the Service the interview commenced with a question to related to
motivations for joining the Navy and how their decision was perceived by family and friends.
Four of the women interviewed acknowledged that the opportunity to be equally treated and paid
50

was key to their decision to join. The Navy offered an environment where women would not be
constrained by their gender. CDR Hazard amplified on her initial response by adding:
I thought of the Navy as an equalizer. Like the military would be a way that nobody
would care who my dad was or how much money we had, they would just care about
what I did on a given day and I was kind of really enticed by that.
CAPT Toms stated that her mother helped her decide to join the military stating
My mother encouraged me to go to the Naval Academy. I wanted to go to a normal
college … but she said one of the things to consider about the military is that they have to
pay you the same. They can’t pay you differently. And I just remember that resonate.
CAPT Duerk remembers seeing a female officer portrayed in a recruiting brochure and was
surprised by her own reaction of not believing that the military was a good fit for females. The
belief that she could participate in an organization that allowed females to do exciting and
impactful missions appealed to her:
I got a scholarship to the University of Florida and realized that it would be too close to
home. All of the people from my high school were going there and I also got a
scholarship to American University in Washington D.C. and one day I got a brochure
from the Coast Guard Academy and the brochure had a lady on the front. And the lady
was in her uniform and she was underway like on a RHIB (rigid hull inflatable boat) on a
small boat. And she was, saving someone, reaching down in the water, something like
that. At the time I was like that would never happen. I had never seen a picture of a
woman doing anything in the military and so I read the brochure and I was kind of
embarrassed about it because I though it wasn’t for girls. I didn’t know anyone in the
military and I certainly didn’t know any women in the military. But my dad realized I had
51

saved that pamphlet and placed it in a special place in my room and he was like, hey are
you interested in the Coast Guard? He suggested I look into it and that was the first
encouragement to consider the military as a career choice.
CAPT McKee also expressed interest in the military in order to achieve a non-traditional
profession. She shared:
I didn’t want to be stuck behind a desk, but I wanted my life to mean something. Only
two groups in the Navy who were actually having fun, the SEALS and the aviators and
since well, the SEAL community was closed to women at the time and I’m not that
physically fit, to be honest, aviation was for me.
Four of the eight participants expressly tied their motivation to join the U.S. Navy to the
idea that women were afforded an equal opportunity to do what men do. This reinforces an
understanding of the expectations these women had upon joining the Service. The following
section highlights participants’ experience during their first division officer tours and the
influence those interactions had on their desire to pursue a military career.
Impact of Gender Stereotypes During Early Years of Career
After commissioning (the ceremony post graduation or completion of Officer Candidate
School (OCS) where candidates are officially sworn into the U.S. Navy as an officer) all eight of
the participants shared that they expected some challenges due to their gender but all of the
participants also believed that the organization would reward good performance regardless of
gender. Many of the participants graduated around 2000. This was only seven years after
Congress approved women to serve on combat ships (Kamarck, 2016). As many of these women
graduated from college and were commissioned into the service, there was still a very low
percentage of female officers integrated into commands, with some commands only assigned?
52

one or two female officers. This section describes specific occasions where four study
participants experienced additional challenges due to their gender.
Two of the study participants spoke directly to the different expectations placed upon
them upon entering the service due to their gender. CAPT Dix stated:
Being a minority in any organization is challenging. All of the things everybody says is
true. You have to work harder, you have to prove yourself, you have to be smarter, faster
and better than the person next to you.
CDR Hartington shared, “I think guys take for granted that all they have to do is wear the
uniform and be an average performer and no one questions that they belong in the organization.”
Two of the participants, who were members of organizations with very few females, expressed
additional challenges in trying to establish a sense of belonging. CDR Hazard shared the
following:
On my first Cruiser I was only one of seven women on board the ship (Cruisers have on
average about 300 enlisted and 30 officers on board). I found that to be very hard. I found
that to be living under a microscope where everything I did was anlayzed. And I think
that is hard for a 22 year old. … But on my second ship, it really made me fall in love
with the Navy. I had a great command and I loved the fact that there were enlisted
women on the ship. So then I wasn’t an oddity. It wasn’t like weird that there were more
women. I have found in every command that I have been at, the more women there are
the less being a woman mattered because it was just normally where there’s a bunch of
people of course there would be women. Why wouldn’t there be women?
CAPT Toms explained that it was not uncommon to feel unwelcome at certain commands
especially if there were not many females within the command. She recalled a time when she
53

arrived at her command as the division officer for the engineering department and received less
than a warm welcome:
My immediate supervisor was trying to pay me a complement by saying he was happy to
be “stuck” with the female officer after I had been there for a while. I know he was
saying that as a complement, but it was just not the right thing to say.
She further shared that she became aware of discussions among the department heads prior to her
arrival regarding who would take the new female division officer. The inference was that the
new female officer would be an additional management burden vice competent addition to the
team. Awareness of the command’s attitude prior to her arrival, however, demonstrated to her
that the command supported gender stereotypes and believed that women were less competent
than men.
As discussed above, four of the participants expressed challenges with developing a sense
of belonging and meeting expectations upon entering the organization and having to deal with
stereotypical beliefs concerning their ability to perform prior to them being afforded an
opportunity to prove their abilities. The following section discusses how the personal impact of
gender stereotypes diminished over time with access to opportunities and competency growth.
As women progressed in their career, they established individual reputations that surpassed
stereotypes and potential preconceptions about their performance based solely on their gender.
Impact of Gender Stereotypes During Mid to Late Career Years
As individuals progress through an organization, their suitability and competency is
formalized through evaluations and the credibility of those that have evaluated them (Fuegen,
2015). Studies have shown that women tend to perform better and over compensate by being
over-prepared when dealing with imposter syndrome or the feeling of inferiority (Badaway et al.,
54

2018). Imposter Syndrome is a phenomenon commonly referred to when individuals believe that
they are acting as intellectual fakes or are working in a role that they do not feel truly fit to be
performing (Badaway et al., 2018). Individuals suffering with imposter syndrome often doubt
their ability to be successful, feel inauthentic and doubt their sense of belonging within an
organization (Badaway et al., 2018). A contributing factor to this sense of inauthenticity can be
attributed to evidence that favorable female performance is often attributed to luck or other
external forces vice actual competence (Fuegen, 2015). Five out of the eight participants of this
research expressed similar feelings of “fake it ‘til you make it” early in their career in an attempt
to disprove stereotyes and establish their own reputations.
Four out of the eight participants remarked that early in their career they were plagued by
self-doubt and questioned their organizational fit. However, by the time that they achieved the
rank of Lieutenant Commander (LCDR) they felt more legitimate and competent in their roles.
CAPT Dix recounted the day she accepted her value to the Navy and the impact the realization
had on her:
We were going through sea plant testing and you know I had a whole lot of folks that
were older than me and had been in the Navy longer than me and we’re all sitting around
this table and one of the individuals asked some questions and I was like, wait a second, I
know way more about this than you do. That was like, you know, like a light switch flips
and you no longer worry about whether or not you will be seen as a fraud. You know you
deserve to be there. It affects how you interact with the world around you when you go
into a situation knowing that you belong, knowing that your perspective matters and
knowing that you’re a contributor with what you say and think.
55

Prior to this revelation, CAPT Dix shared that there was a constant fear that someone was
going to notice that she was undeserving of her role or position. She related, “you feel
like you are always three questions away from somebody finding out how dumb you
are.”
CAPT Duerk also reflected on her career and discussed how she no longer
worries about how she is perceived by those around her:
I’ve essentially reached the top of my career and so if I decide to wear Hello Kitties to
work people are going to think that I am weird but I’m not going to feel like, oh my gosh,
they aren’t going to like me. They are not going to question whether or not I am a good
leader. When I was younger, I thought that. It was like, okay, how do I make sure that I
know everything more than everyone else? How do I work harder than everybody else?
How do I prove that I belong? There was a definite proof that I needed to strive to be a
member of the club. But now, my job is to inspire people and to make sure that people
have what they need to succeed. At the end of the day, I feel different. I feel kind of like,
hey, I made it to where I wanted to make it and I can be a little bit more of myself.
This experience underscores how CAPT Duerk felt like an outsider early in her career.
Once she achieved the pinnacle of her career (getting command at sea is often seen as
the highlight of a Navy officer’s career and is usually achieved around the 20 year mark
where they would then be eligible to retire), she was finally able to accept that she
belonged.
CDR Hazard spoke to how her experience over time has helped her gain
confidence and credibility:
56

I think it was really difficult for me at first to figure out my authentic self because I was
trying to emulate everybody else that was successful. And of course, up to that point, I
had only worked for men. So, you’re like, I am going to do this. This guy did it and it
works great. I love working for him. And then you realize, oh, when I try to do it, it
comes off really terribly. So, I have learned that the real me is perky and silly and happy.
And that’s odd in my community. You have to embrace who you are and I think it took
me a long time; probably until I was at least in my second Department Head tour. I had to
figure out the balance between showing people me while still getting them to take me
seriously. Being 39 is awesome. Nobody pats me on the head and calls me “pumpkin” …
ever. People believe me when I say things because I am a Commander. Whereas when I
was 22, people would say, that’s nice sweetheart and ignore me and then I would have to
go and tell the Warrant Officer and he’d say it and everyone would tell him what a great
idea it was. Now I say things and people respond with a yes Ma’am. It’s wonderful.
CDR Hazard highlights experiences early in her career where she felt that her opinion
was ignored leading her to question her competence and belonging. The lack of a female
leadership example to demonstrate what success could look like for her, established an
additional challenge in that she had to define her own criteria for success within the male
dominated organization.
CDR Hopper also spoke to finding her leadership voice throughout her career:
As a junior officer I had more self-doubt. I think a lot of the negative energy was, I don’t
want to say self-inflicted but just sort of created by me and I don’t know if that’s a female
thing where we second-guess ourselves more or if we like to share the credit more
somehow. But at a certain point, I think it was by the time I was a commander, I felt like
57

I had made it and that I demonstrated for myself that I belonged and that I was competent
and that I was sharp. And so I started sharing my opinion more and became a more
assertive, decisive leader.
Literature surrounding imposter syndrome supports this experience. Badaway et al.
(2018) discusses how skills training and successful challenging assignments assist in
demonstrating competence and agency to an individual. Once these women realized and
accepted that they deserved to be where they were in their career their confidence, sense
of belonging and ability to lead more authentically increased.
This section discussed how four of the study participants were able to overcome feelings
of self-doubt over time with continued successful promotions that strengthened their perceived
sense of belonging and their ability to authentically contribute to the organization. Acker (2006)
and Morgan (2004) expand on this in their studies revealing that when women enter the
workforce they often adapt to masculine expectations of success causing a perceived disconnect
with their own beliefs of success and thereby creating a sense of disconnectedness or a lack of
belonging. The following section relates how interactions with leadership that supported the
perpetuation of gender stereotypes impacted study participants and their sense of competency
and agency.
Leadership and Gender Bias

Although recent studies have shown that gender is not a reliable indicator of leadership
skills (Badura et al., 2018; Devicient et al., 2019), there is still evidence than females are not
treated as equally competitive in male dominated organizations (Acker, 2000; Foschi, 2000; Seo
et al., 2017). This bias is often reflected in the manner in which feedback is provided to an
individual that demonstrates an increases the importance of male performance and diminishes or
58

devalues female performance (Foschi, 2000). Two participants shared recent examples of being
treated and evaluated differently due to gender.
The U.S. Navy’s fitness report system provides an annual review of performance where
everyone is ranked among their peer group or rank within the Command (BUPERS
INSTRUCTION 1610.10.E, 2019). For example, regardless of experience or time in the
Command (with few execeptions—see referenced instruction for nuances), all Lietenants will be
ranked together. Upon completion of the formal ranking and performance evaluation write up,
each officer receives a debrief by their senior reporting official. This debrief is an opportunity to
discuss strengths and weaknesses and future career opportunities based on performance and
aptitude. Although CAPT Duerk was ranked among all of her peers, she expressed frustration at
only being compared to the other female in her organization when it was time for performance
evaluation debrief:
I remember getting upset about my FITREP (Fitness Report or military equivalent to a
civilian annual appraisal). I was pretty shocked and upset by it. I became upset (during
the debrief) and told him (reporting senior) how I felt about only being compared to the
other female Captain in the squadron. Like that was all he had to say was in comparison
to her I was okay. She’s nice but I wanted to know what I needed to do to be number one,
not just better than this other person. I wanted tips on how to make my ship better. And I
kind of saw the way he talked to the males and it was different than the way he talked to
me.
This exchange reinforced how females are held to different standards and are often not
even considered to be competitive with their male counterparts (Fuegan, 2015; Heilman
& Parks-Stamm, 2015).
59

The second example referenced an inbrief between the study participant and her new
Commanding Officer. It is often expected for new officers to conduct an introductory meeting
with leadership upon arrival at a new command. This meeting facilitates introductions and
provides a forum to discuss expectations and establish professional objectives for their tour.
CDR Hopper described a time she checked in to her new command and was disappointed by the
discussion with her male Commanding Officer:
I remember instead of talking to me about my record, his check in with me was if you fall
in love, it’ll be okay. He said, I will get you transferred off the ship and I don’t want you
to worry on that front. And that was his check in. His priority was to make sure I
understood that I would be fully supported if I fell in love. I was ready to talk to him
about my accomplishments and the value I was prepared to bring to his team, and we
never got to that.
This exchange demonstrated that leadership prioritized personal goals over professional
goals for this female officer and assumed that her personal goals were to meet someone
special and fall in love. Literature explains that this type of interaction reinforces the
stereotype that all women prioritize family over careers and prevents organizations from
enforcing policies that support equality driving women out of the organization (Williams
et al., 2012).
This finding was also reinforced with the results of the Navy’s Milestone Survey
(2019). Of the 1,228 survey participants 47% agreed that command climate and the
quality of leadership from their Commanding Officer were significant factors in their
decision to stay in the Navy. Respondents also acknowledged that career opportunities
and career advancements were largely favored as influencers for retention. These are both
60

jeopardized when females are seen as less valuable and potentially successful than their
male counterparts. Individuals who perceive themselves to be undervalued with limiting
promotional opportunities are more likely to leave organizations in search of better
prospects (Ellinas et al., 2019; Nyberg, 2010).
Research Question 2: How Does the Organizational Structure of the Navy Influence the
Perceived Achievable Success of Female Officers?
The following section discusses challenges highlighted by participants that identified
systemic gaps in the U.S. Navy’s organizational construct and desired vision to build a more
inclusive force. Overall, it was recognized that organizational constructs such as mentorship
programs, promotion boards and career pipelines are built on historical precepts and male
influenced leadership favoring male participants. Participants of this study highlighted the
importance of mentorship and sponsorship as key enablers to their success but also stressed the
challenge of finding good mentors. They discussed the importance of access to opportunities
through networking and sponsorship that enabled them to compete for critical billets which
accelerated their success.
The following sections highlight key themes that emerged throughout the interviews
surrounding organizational factors that influenced participants’ decisions to remain in the
Service. Following Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model for human behavior, the following
sections highlight the influence of the organizational structure in establishing a positive
mesosystem to support an officer’s transition and career progression from early organizational
contructs to more senior levels of leadership. The mesosystem, per Gardner and Kosmitzki’s
(2007) interpretation of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model of human behavior, is critical for the
exchange of ideas and the strengthening of beliefs and motivational influences that support
61

ideologies and behavior. The mesosystem supports the officer’s professional growth and
alignment of career goals with personal beliefs and desires. The following sections outline the
influence and challenges of mentorship and sponsorship and the importance of networks in
supporting the study participants’ careers.
Influence and Challenges of Mentorship and Sponsorship
Six of the study participants commented on the importance of early mentors in their
career while two specifically spoke to the support received through sponsorship in achieving
career milestones. In her 2021 article, Mentorship and Sponsorship in a Diverse Population,
Cabrera Muffly states, “Although mentorship is important, sponsorship is frequently necessary
for career advancement” (p. 450). The difference between the two may be subtle but the outcome
is significant. A mentor relationship is typically developed over time where mentors serve as
coaches or advisors, often giving advice and suggestions on how to navigate personal or
professional situations. Sponsorship, on the other hand, is when a senior colleague actively
advocates on behalf of a junior colleague for career advancement opportunities (Cabrera-Muffly,
2021). The following paragraphs describe specific experiences shared by five of the study
participants.
CAPT Dix, CDR Hopper and CAPT Deurk attributed much of their success to the
mentors that guided and supported much them. CAPT Dix related:
I would say I have had some pretty strong mentors in my community that without them
and their positional perspective I would not be a chief engineer on an aircraft carrier. You
have mentors that push you into positions that are outside of your comfort zone that you
wouldn’t otherwise take.
62

Harkening back to an earlier discussion regarding imposter syndrome, Badaway et al. (2018)
reinforced the importance of additional skills training and opportunities for challenging
assignments as two effective methods of increasing competency and agency.
CDR Hopper attributes mentorship to keeping her from leaving the Navy early in her
career. It was the validation from her Commanding Officer that changed her mind:
As a LTJG, I was strongly thinking about getting out and I was doing really well. My
Captain at the time saw a spark in me and helped kind of light it. By empowering me and
trusting me with a lot of things that were more at the Department Head level. He gave me
some real insight into what senior officers are watching for and what the expectations are.
This valuable insight into the next phase of a Navy career helped CDR Hopper make a
more informed decision about whether or not to stay in the Navy. Without that critical
insight, and access to only her immediate environment, she may have chosen to look
elsewhere for career satisfaction.
Finally, CAPT Duerk told the story of how she was not enjoying her tour until her CAPT
expressed confidence in her leadership abilities by telling her that he could see her as the CO of a
ship someday:
This was the first time someone I thought was really important, the captain of the ship,
said hey, you know maybe this is like a thought for you to stay in the Navy. He probably
doesn’t remember saying that but I remember. I remember thinking somebody thinks I
had talent and talent for this particular thing that I am doing and that was pretty
meaningful for me.
Validation from senior leadership of recognized potential helps to mitigate the negative
impacts of a gendered organization.
63

In reference to the influence of sponsorship, CDR Hazard shared that early in her career
she was planning to laterally transfer to another community until her Commanding Officer at the
time told her that he believed she had the potential to command a ship and that he would
personally endorse her package for an early command tour if she opted to remain in the
community. She shared:
My Captain, I was a JG (Junior Grade) on the amphib (amphibious assault ship), said,
‘you’re my number one DIVO (Division Officer) and I will support your package whole
heartedly if this is what you want to do, but I think you could command a ship one day.’
That was the first time that anybody had ever said that to me. Like, my first ship was kind
of rocky. To be someone’s “go to” person, someone that they saw leadership potential
was really great. So, I pulled the package (to laterally transfer) and my Captain actually
worked to get me early command of a PC (patrol craft).
With those words of encouragement and his sponsorship she gained an opportunity that few
officers achieve so early in their career, accelerating her path to command success.
CAPT Toms shared a similar story where she was selected for early command through
the support and sponsorship of her Commodore (senior leader of a group of ships or aircraft):
When my Commodore asked me what I wanted to do for my second department head
tour I was like, oh, I just want to go be the N4 (lead maintenance officer on a destroyer
squadron staff). He said, great! But then on his own, he shot a note to the lead person at
Naval Personnel Command for our community and said, hey, she sounds like a great
candidate for early command. That’s when I was asked if I would be interested in early
command. I am like, well, that doesn’t sound like something I can say no to. And that’s
the first thing I really remember. Someone reaching out and being overly supportive.
64

This exemplifies leadership that is willing to identify potential leadership and works to
nurture and develop personnel. Research has shown that mentorship and sponsorship
relationships help build agency and work to increase job satisfaction (Ayyala et al.,
2019).
These early career expressions of support and interest in the potential career of these
officers helped support their decision to remain in the Navy. These critical senior leaders aligned
themselves to the Navy belief that senior leadership has a responsibility to mentor and encourage
their junior sailors. The organizational connection between policy and practice supported
organizationl integrity at all levels. However, participants shared that it was not always easy for
females to get the desired mentorship or sponsorship due to gender stereotypes.
When discussing mentorship and sponsorship opportunities, CDR Hartington agreed that
sponsorship from male leadership was necessary but it was often challenging due to social
constraints:
There are a lot of things that are barriers to that (establishing mentorship relationships).
Guys don’t want to mention women because they are worried about the perception.
Dudes will go play golf or they’ll do all this stuff together. They’ll get these invites for
meals, but if they take a woman out, it’s like they’re on a date and you are constantly
fighting that perception. And the problem is if the power structure at the top is all male
and you don’t have Admirals and other senior people sponsoring you, then they’re never
going to be able to help you. You have to work twice as hard to achieve that same thing.
Literature provides some additional discussion on the frustration expressed by CDR Hartington
in finding and establishing a mentorship relationship. Villwock (2021) writes that people tend to
mentor those that are more like them which often leaves women at a disadvantage in gendered
65

organizations. In addition, studies have also shown that there are significant benefits by having
mentors who have similar personal and professional challenges again placing females who are in
male dominated organizations at a disadvantage (Cabrera-Muffly, 2020). This theme also
resonated with the survey respondents in the O5-O6 Female Navy Officer Milestone Survey.
Write in responses from the O5-O6 Female Navy Officer Milestone Survey conveyed
similar appreciation for mentor programs or leaders who took time to invest in their career. One
respondent wrote, “I am fortunate to have had excellent mentors and people who cared about my
career” when responding to the request to “Please list any other factors or comments about Navy
leadership that influenced your Navy career intentions” (DMDC O5-O6 Female Officer
Milestone Survey, 2019). Another respondent replied, “My former commanding officers care
about my career and I appreciate their support” (DMDC O5-O6 Female Officer Milestone
Survey, 2019). Finally, another respondent shared, “The positive mentoring that leaders provide
and how they take the out of their busy schedules to encouarge, motivate and provide insight into
your Naval career” (DMDC O5-O6 Female Officer Milestone Survey, 2019). This finding is
important because women are more likely to perceive that the lack of mentorship and
sponsorship prevents them access to critical assignments that would otherwise accelerate their
career (Cabrera-Muffly, 2020). In addition to mentorship and sponsorship, participants in this
study also highlighted the importance of networking and the challenges females face with
traditional U.S. Navy networking opportunities.
Influence and Challenges of Networking Structures
Social networks are often the source of access to critical information, advocacy, advice
and access to power and influence (Campbell et al., 1986). The Navy’s organizational structure,
and access to networks, is built on long standing traditions and sometimes antiquated
66

expectations based on a traditionally male dominated professional environment. As Cabrera and
Thomas-Hunt (2007) explain, females are often at a disadvantage due to the social and structural
aspects of building social networks and fostering inter-personal relationships in a male
dominated organization. Three participants shared experiences where they had to overcome
obstacles in order to access critical stakeholders early in their career.
CAPT McKee spoke about a time she realized that she was being excluded from
significant decision-making opportunities because she did not participate in certain social events:
My peer group would meet to go smoke cigars on the smoking area of the ship. I am not a
cigar smoker. And finally, I realized since I was missing out on half the decisions being
made, I had to go and just stand next to the cigars so I could be part of it, but I still didn’t
feel welcomed there.
She continued with more examples of how sometimes U.S. Navy policy restricted networking
putting females at a disadvantage:
And when they (male peers) went into their staterooms on a ship I couldn’t go in because
of the restrictions about men and women in the same stateroom on a ship… When we
would go into port somewhere and the guys would get a hotel room together and I would
not be invited into that group. So, you know, if you’re in Hong Kong and you can split
the cost of a hotel room four ways it is a lot less expensive than having to do that all on
your own… It was the exclusion from some of the social things, which is where you
build that level of trust with your team, that’s hard to get back.
This organizational constraint puts females at a disadvantage by removing opportunities for team
building and bonding highlighting once again, how females are seen as outsiders and do not fit
into the organizational construct of the U.S. Navy.
67

CDR Hartington credits the Navy’s establishment of the Sea Service Leadership
Association (SSLA) for providing additional networking opportunity for women. She shared:
This support group changed my view of why we need, how important, these structures
are in general. This group alone, through the Joint Women’s Leadership Symposium,
probably changed the trajectory of my career. This definitely cemented the fact that I was
doing okay alone, but I was stronger together and it was better to bring other women
alongside because it’s lonely at the top and it’s better if you go together.
This is one example of the Navy’s attempt to establish networking environments for women to
support retention.
In addition to the traditional networking opportunities and sponsored events, three of the
participants mentioned the importance of social media in supporting networking opportunities.
CDR Hazard specifically mentioned how social networks had improved communication among
female officers and were working to close the networking gap advantage that males experienced:
The Navy started changing about that time, when I was a LT and we started getting
things like Facebook and groups. They became more prevalent and popular and then it
became easier and easier to connect, not just in person, but virtually anywhere you are in
the world. And any time zone with other mentors, with other women who are doing this,
they became accessible.
She went on to explain that through social media networks she stayed in touch with five female
friends who were doing the exact same job as her and had young children:
It’s been awesome. I mean, I had women that we would be up at 2 o’clock in the morning
because we were all pumping at the same time. It is easier to stay because somebody else
68

has done it and they have some solutions, someone will say, oh this helped. And you
don’t feel alone.
Finally, CAPT McKee, as a senior officer herself, noted that she made it an objective to
develop a network for female leaders during each of her tours. In her role at the time of the
study, she described how she supported a monthly meeting of female Program Managers where
discussions about career and personal challenges were shared for advice and lessons learned. In
the absence of female supported networking opportunities, CAPT McKee opted to develop her
own to meet the needs of her organization. Throughout each interview, participants shared their
journey of how they overcame perceptions and biases, and received support, in order to achieve
their career goals. Adjusting traditional U.S. Navy mentorship, sponsorship and networking
structures were all critical to their success.
Summary
The findings from this study demonstrated how perceived gender stereotypes, both by the
participants and the organization’s leadership, can negatively impact how female officers
perceive personal success and develop a sense of belonging within an organization. The impact
of these stereotypes are more impactful early on in a female officer’s career before they have an
opportunity to demonstrate and build competency. For this reason, participants shared that
finding a senior level leader who was willing to mentor and advocate on their behalf was
beneficial to establishing their credibility and increasing their own sense of agency during that
more vulnerable time. However, organizational constraints continue to pose a challenge to
female officer’s sense of belonging by highlighting their inability or limitations in accessing or
participating in traditional activities. These limitations can be perceived as insurmountable
especially when supported by leadership. Participants of this study, all reported gender bias at
69

some point in their career. Their determination to look past these aggressions, with the support of
mentors or given time and proven success coupled with a passion for what they do ultimately
suppored their decision to remain on active duty.

70

Chapter Five: Discussion and Implications for Practice
Female officers are underrepresented among senior officers in the U.S. Navy. This is a
problem because as the U.S. Navy continues to promote diversity and inclusion within its ranks,
female numbers beyond the rank of Lieutenant remain stagnant reinforcing a predominately male
led force (Task Force One Report, 2019). This problem is important to address because
supporters of greater diversity within the armed forces argue a more diverse force is a better and
more proficient force (Kamarck, 2016). The purpose of this study was to understand how social
and organizational culture impacts female officer retention in order to identify key influencers
and potentially develop programs or policies to increase female officer retention.
Semi-structured, qualitative interviews were conducted to explore the study’s two
research questions:
1. How do social expectations of traditional female roles affect the perceived
performance of female naval officers?
2. How does the organizational structure of the U.S. Navy influence the perceived
achievable success for female officers?
Eight senior level officers, defined as officers who achieved the rank of Commander (O5) or
Captain (O6), were interviewed for this study to gain a greater understanding of how cultural and
organizational culture influenced their career choices and supported their decision to make the
Navy a career. Responses from the Navy’s 2019 O5-O6 Female Milestone Retention Survey
were used to augment findings and themes related to female officer retention.
Discussion of Findings
Although the U.S. Navy as a large organization prioritizes equality through the
establishment of policies and programs (Kamarck, 2016; Patten & Parker, 2011), it continues to
71

struggle with gender bias at the microsystem and exosystem negatively influencing the
participants’ decisions to remain in the Service. Study participants expressed challenges early in
their career when expectations of an equal environment were met with examples of differential
treatment by direct leadership based on gender within their immediate commands. The
participants were able to reconcile these noncongruent systems (macrosystem vs microsystem)
with exposure to different commands and the support of mentorship and advocacy over time.
The following sections provide a deeper connection of the findings to the study’s conceptual
framework introduced in Chapter Two. It also provides a more robust discussion of the key
findings before providing recommendations, implications for practice and potential future
research to support further discussions on the topice.
Connections to Conceptual Framework
This study was based on Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model in an effort to explore the
the influences of organizational and social structures on a female officer’s decision to remain in
the U.S. Navy over time. Using the ecological model to demonstrate how participants may have
been influenced by their environment provided an understanding of the impact social and
environmental factors had on them and the changes that occured over time that might have
influenced decisions. Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model was originally developed to describe
the shifts in behavior and beliefs throughout a human lifecycle. This study leveraged the model
to determine how access and exposure to the five systems impacts a female’s desire to remain in
the Navy. The microsystem represented an officer’s first official command after commissioning
which provided the critical introduction to the organization and established the foundation for
behavioral expectation. The exosystem relates to the environment post first tour Division Officer
where officers are expected to have a more general knowledge of the U.S. Navy and are exposed
72

to greater leadership opporutnities. Finally, the macrosystem relates to the U.S. Navy’s policies
and general programs that guide individual command leaderships and support the development
of micro-cultures throughout the organization. The mesosystem relates to the relationships and
structural programs that support transitioning between systems. The chronosystem provides a
way to discuss the influence of time and experience as individuals navigate through the
microsystem, exosystem and macrosystem. This section will discuss each system and its
application to the findings beginning with the macrosystem.
Macrosystem
The U.S. Navy, at the time of the study, publicly supported gender equality through
policies and statements (LaGrone, 2021). In fact, four of the study participants shared that these
policies directly influenced their decision to join the Navy at the onset of their careers: CDR
Hazard shared that she perceived the Navy as an equalizer and was persuaded to join and CAPT
Toms shared that her mom convninced her to join because the Navy provided equal pay to both
men and women. CAPT Deurk was influenced by the knowledge that women were afforded the
opportunity to do things traditionally aligned with male roles like rescue missions and CAPT
McKee was interested in the Navy’s more exciting career paths made available to women. These
macrosystem policies worked to establish an expectation for these female officers who, at the
point of their accession, believed that the Navy believed in and promoted an equitable workforce
with unique career opportunities.
The participants shared experiences of gender bias both perceived, as was the case with
the two officers who shared that by being the only female or one of a few females in the
organization, they were treated differently than their male colleagues, and more deliberate as was
the case with CDR Deurk and CDR Hopper who were treated differently than their male
73

colleagues by their senior officers during an introductory meeting and a FITREP debrief even
though policies advocating equality were established across the organization. These examples
highlighted that the organization did not value these officers as equally contributing members of
the wardroom. This contradictory application of Navy equity policies provided a challenge for
female officers to overcome. They had to either accept and adapt to the new environment or find
an alternative organization that offered greater alignment to what they are seeking.
The macrosystem established the foundational policies and structure for the Navy, but it
was up to each individual command to execute them and operate effectively. The next section
discusses the importance of the microsystem as the first environment female officers are exposed
to after commissioning.
Microsystem
Gardner and Kosmitzki (2007) explain the microsystem as the system which has the
greatest impact on personal identity and development. For a newly commissioned officer this
was the first real introduction to the operational Navy and it supported the establishment of
behavioral expectations for the organization. The female officer had an opportunity here to
decide whether or not to accept the organizational construct as potentially viable for professional
development. Female officers who reported a sense of belonging and value among their peers
during their exposure to the microsystem, reported greater success and were more motivated to
accept the organization as a viable career path (Seo et al., 2017). Female officers who
experienced negative environments within the microsystem could be influenced to leave the
organization in search of a more supportive professional environment (Seo et al., 2017).
CDR Hazard’s experience as one of only seven females out of a 300 person crew
exemplified the negative environments females have experienced in the U.S. Navy. Her
74

perception of being constantly watched and monitored as an oddity added additional stress and
perpetuated the myth that females do not belong in the organization. CAPT Toms shared a
similar experience when she felt unwelcome and undervalued solely due to her gender when she
arrived at her command. Both of these examples failed to support the establishment of a sense of
belonging and value between the women and the organization. In fact, it directly contradicted the
intention of macrosystem policies meant to support a more equitable environment.
At this point in a female officer’s career, they had their first opportunity to resign their
commission and leave the service. The study found that transition to the exosystem was
facilitated by relationships with mentors and sponsors who supported and encouraged study
participants. The next section discusses the importance of the exosystem and mesosystem.
Exosystem and Mesosystem
This study aligned the exosystem with an officer’s post Division Officer tour and equated
the timing to the O4-O6 ranks. The exosystem afforded officers a greater opportunity to
influence the overall organization with greater leadership responsibilities and influence over
younger officers. Success at this level was extremely competitive and required access to the right
opportunities for continued career progression. CDR Hazard and CAPT Toms shared how
support from their leadership enabled their success between their Division Officer tours and their
Department Head tours. CDR Hazard’s leadership intervened in her decision to laterally transfer
after her Division Officer tour by sharing his belief in her ability to be a successful ship captain
one day. With this support and validation of potential success, CDR Hazard opted to remain in
the community and accepted orders as the Captain of a Patrol Craft. CAPT Toms shared a
similar story where leadership made personal efforts to secure her next set of orders by calling
the detailer himself and supporting her selection to early command.
75

This intervention of support from leadership exemplifies the role of the mesosystem as
described by Bronfenbrenner. The mesosystem is critical for the exchange of ideas and the
strengthening of beliefs and motivational influences that support ideologies (Gardner &
Kosmitzki, 2007). The mesosystem reinforced beliefs and affirms ideologies to strengthen the
connection to the organization as the individual grew and was exposed to greater organizational
issues. These mentor relationships and network opportunities offered female officers exposure to
greater command concepts and strengthened the belief that they were a valuable member of the
organization. With the support and advocacy of senior leadership four out of eight participants
shared personal stories where their leadership demonstrated support in their capability by either
providing them with extra responsibility or recommending them for a career enhancing positions.
These relationships provided additional encouragement to continue to pursue a naval career.
Study participants identified the support of mentor relationships as a key enabler to their
career success. These relationships, along with hard work established their reputations as
competent and valuable officers. However, the development and cultivation of these
relationships and reputations developed over time and requiring the necessary investment and
dedication to be fully realized. This takes us to the final system of the ecological model as it
relates to the study; the chronosystem.
Chronosystem
The chronosystem, as defined by Bronfenbrenner is defined as the time where individuals
develop mutual accomodations between self development and environment over the course of
their life in order to satisfy personal growth and professional growth (Gardiner & Kosmitzki,
2007). It is through this reflection over time and experience that congruence across personally
held beliefs and environmental realities are formed. As participants reflected over their
76

experiences they shared stories on how they adapted to their environment or modified their
behavior in order to achieve greater success. CAPT McKee, although not a smoker, adjusted her
behavior and attended the social outing in order to gain the necessary professional knowledge.
However, at the time of this study, she shared that she prioritizes the development of network
opportunities for female officers that are not uncomfortable or gender based. Another example
was provided by CDR Hazard who attempted to emulate male leadership early in her career.
Over time and various attempts at finding her own leadership style, she finally accepted her
authentic self and has learned to use that to drive her career success.
The study revealed that females who were exposed to positive microsystem and
exosystem environments achieved greater satisfaction and fulfillment in their roles while
exposure to microsystems which perpetuated gender stereotypes created dissatisfaction and
frustration. The study also found that these challenges can be overcome over time with exposure
to different, more congruent environments placing greater influence on early career
environments than later ones. Finally, the study also highlighted the importance of mentors and
sponsors in providing support and advocacy to enable greater career success. The following
sections discuss these findings in greater detail.
Impact of Environments Over Time
The study highlighted how perceptions of gender bias were extremely impactful early in
each officer’s career as they worked to develop confidence and agency in their new roles.
Research supports the importance of developing a sense of belonging, compentence and value
early in one’s career in order to sustain a motivated and engaged workforce (Johnson et al.,
2008). Study participants shared examples of gender bias in social and organizational constructs
that frustrated and challenged them. These examples could have caused these women to choose
77

alternative career paths had they not been exposed to different environments or been given
encouragement by senior leadership.
Negative environments added an additional challenge for these female officers and
influenced how they perceived themselves as members of the organization reinforcing social
stereotypes that women do not belong in the Navy (Johnson et al., 2008). For example, CDR
Hazard expressed additional scrutiny as one of only seven women in a crew of about 300 people
demonstrating the stress this gender skewed environment had on her. In CAPT Toms’
experience, she was expressly told that as a new junior female officer, her command was not
looking forward to gaining her. It wasn’t until after she proved her ability to lead that her
leadership accepted her as a legitimate member of the team. Fortunately for both officers their
next command provided a more positive experience restoring their belief that they could be
successful in the US Navy potentially influencing their decisions to stay in the Navy.
Other examples of gender bias provided by CDR Hopper and CAPT Deurk demonstrated
how they were treated differently than their male counterparts when being introduced to the
command and receiving feedback. CDR Hopper tolerated the exchange with her Commanding
Officer during their introductory meeting that prioritized her assumed personal ambitions of
falling in love, while CAPT Deurk’s performance evaluation was limited to her performance in
comparison only to the other female in the group. CDR Hopper was prepared to demonstrate her
value to her new leadership by discussing her past accomplishments and professional skills, but
instead her leadership took that critical introductory meeting to assure her that they would
support her request to separate from the Navy should she fall in love. This focus on personal
goals instead of professional goals demonstrates how women were treated differently and
perpetuates the belief that females are an organizational risk and will always leave the workforce
78

to start a family (Fletcher et al., 1994; Williams et al., 2012). This stereotype has been debunked
by researchers but continues to permeate and influence organizational workforce decisions
especially when men are leading the organization (Williams et al., 2012).
When discussing organizational influences that negatively impacted retention decisions,
CAPT Deurk’s shared how being treated differently by her leadership during the evaluation
process frustrated and confused her. After receiving feedback where she was compared only to
the other female in her squadron she reported feeling undervalued and different than her male
counterparts. She reported being acutely aware of the difference in how he interacted with his
male subordinates vice his female subordinates. Again, these examples demonstrated the
perception of a double standard for female officers which often works to deligitamize women’s
roles within the organization reinforcing them as outsiders with little chance of ever being
accepted (Cabrera & Thomas-Hunt, 2019; Liu et al., 2015).
Finally, the study exemplified how organizational traditions and social stereotypes also
effected perceived social opportunities often limiting a female officer’s ability to network in the
traditional U.S. Navy model. Participants shared that traditionally, officers bonded over smoking
cigars on the bridge wing, participating in golf outings and attending social gatherings at the bar.
Most of these activities were male dominated activities and put the participants at a
disadvantage. Although there was nothing precluding females from participating, as CAPT
McKee shared, she perceived that female officers were often not welcomed in these groups.
However, if females did not participate, they risked forfeiting an opportunity to gain insight,
provide input, and potentially reinforce their role within the wardroom. CAPT McKee shared
that although she did not enjoy cigars, she would join the male officers on the bridge wing only
to remain aware of the discussions and ensure that her voice was included when decisions were
79

made. These environments perpetuated a sense of non-belonging. In an article discussing the
effects of gendered organizations on leadership, Liu et al. (2015) discusses the impact of being
seen as an outsider among recognized organizational social groups. Those that are perceived as
outsiders face an increased challenge in establishing trust and credibility among their followers
as an authentic leader (Liu et al., 2015). It is likely that this type of traditional, male-dominated
social-networking in the U.S. Navy impacted many females’ decision to stay or leave. Those,
like CAPT McKee that were willing to conform just to ensure they were included in decisions
accepted conformity as a means to continued career success. Those that viewed this as an
unnecessary sacrifice for the sake of career progression opted to leave the organization in search
of something different.
All of the examples shared above illustrate individual examples of gender bias that
negatively impacted study participants and negatively influenced their decision to remain in the
Navy. However, all of the participants did decide to stay in the Navy. This was due to the ability
of these women to adapt to the environment, develop their own self confidence, and find support
through mentors, sponsors and networks. With time and support, these women were able to
develop greater confidence in their own abilities minimizing the influence of negative social and
organizational influences on their perception of success.
Critical Success Enablers
All of the women interviewed experienced some type of negative social or organizational
impact related to gender that made them feel unsupported by their leadership, environment or
overall organization. However, these women all shared stories of personal growth through the
development of their own leadership styles and acceptance of their own competence and self-
value. This self-identification journey was supported through the positive relationships with
80

mentors, sponsors and colleagues. The section below illustrates how these constructs provided
support needed for continued success as a female officer.
CAPT McKee’s tolerance of the negative social situation caused her to participate in the
traditional social gatherings but it also made her realize that as a leader she needed to provide
better networks and environments for her female officers. In Ely and Myerson’s (2000) article,
Advanding Gender Equity in Organizations: The Challenge and the Importance of Maintaining a
Gender Narrative, they write that the answer to building equity is not to teach women how to
behave more like men, but to appreciate and understand the value in diverse leadership models.
CAPT McKee tolerated the environment but was committed to changing it once she was capable
of influencing the environment on her own which may have effected her decision to remain in
the U.S. Navy. Understanding that she could only do that if she remained in the service
supported her decision to stay in.
The point in their careers when they finally accepted that they were competent and
valuable members of the team remains a distinct memory for CAPT Dix, CAPT Deurk, CDR
Hazard and CDR Hopper. All four of these females shared stories of the day that they accepted
their agency and competency as a female leaders. For CAPT Dix, there was a day when she
realized and accepted that she deserved her role and was a bonafide expert. CAPT Deurk and
CDR Hopper acknowledged a time in their career where they stopped being concerned with
everyone else’s perceptions of them and fully embraced their unique leadership styles. CDR
Hazard shared how she was finally able to feel like an authentic leader when she became a CDR.
Again, the value of access to experiences and tasks that established these successful careers and
provided the foundation for these beliefs happened over time and with reflection. However, the
revelation and acceptance happened during their Department Head or even Command tour which
81

is often too late for someone contemplating their perceived value early on in their career. This is
why the role of mentors, sponsors and networks early in a female officer’s career is so critical.
All of the participants acknowledged that mentors and sponsors played a critical role in
access to opportunities and information. Without her Captain’s acknowledgement of her skills,
CDR Hazard might have requested the lateral transfer to another community or even requested to
leave the Navy. CAPT Toms’ leadership sponsored and advocated for her to be selected for early
command accelerating her career success. Finally, CAPT Dix directly attributes her career
successs to mentors who constantly challenged her and pushed her to take on roles that she
thought she may not be ready for. With the support of these leaders, these women continued to
succeed despite lingering self-doubt. Research shows that women are often less likely to have
mentors but are more likely to attribute career stagnation to lack of mentorship (Cabrera-Muffly,
2020). The U.S. Navy should make a more concerted effort to establish and support mentorship
programs that work to establish these relationship with junior female officers and senior leaders.
Finally, with the inception of social media, female officers have taken a proactive
approach and developed a Facebook page dedicated to supporting female officers. As CDR
Hazard pointed out, female Navy officers have united on social media like Facebook to share
ideas, best practices, advice and experiences in the hopes of helping each other regardless of
geographic location. She expressed a sense of gratitude for the ability to discuss issues and get
support from other women who were in similar professional roles with minimal effort. By
establishing a unique network of individuals who were sharing similar experiences and can
provide guidance and advice, CDR Hazard discovered a way to gain access to information that
was once seen as inaccessible due to social networking contstraints. Again, exposure to
82

environments outside of the formal organizational construct allowed her to relate to other success
stories and offered added support in achieving greater career success.
In summary, literature helps demonstrate how performance bias in the workplace
contributes to early gaps in hiring and promotions by overestimating male competence and
underestimating female performance (Cabrera & Thomas-Hunt, 2015; Heilman & Parks-Stamm,
2015; McKinsey & Co., 2018). For these female officers, this bias could have prevented them
from choosing the Navy as a career option. Given the scope of this study it is difficult to
determine how many females chose not to stay in the Navy because of these biases. This
reinforces the research that claims performance bias has lasting effects on an individual’s career
by limiting opportunities or slowing professional growth (Eagly et al., 1992; Fuegen, 2015).
Unfortunately, the Navy’s organizational construct does not afford slow professional growth.
Opporutnities for female officers to choose their career paths are pre-selected. Therefore, if
female officers feel limited or restrained in their ability to succeed in the Navy, they will choose
an alternate career leaving the Navy at a significant disadvantage. Unfortunately, the U.S. Navy
is not the only organization or career path that is also challenged with these issues. The following
section discusses how this study can also inform other organizations and career fields.
Implications for Practice
This study has practical implications for all gendered organizations especially those that
have a hierarchical chain of command or determined experience to advance. Professions like law
enforcement, fire departments, medical professionals and even education would benefit from this
study’s findings. Law enforcement organizations currently face similar challenges in increasing
the number of female officers in their ranks citing the overall gendered culture of law
enforcement as reinforcing gender stereotypes and limiting female success (Garcia, 2003).
83

Medical professionals are also challenged with providing adequate mentorship and sponsorship
programs to support women who wish to pursue medical careers (Ayyala et al., 2019). Finally,
the education profession sees a differing trend where females occupy teaching roles while males
occupy academic leadership roles (Acker, 2006). Each of these professions support a gendered
organization that artificially imposes status based on gender due to positional authority given to
those in executive leadership roles.
With graduate rates for females surpassing males, gendered organizations will continue to
struggle to acquire and retain quality professionals if they continue to support a male dominated
environment. Research has found that when individuals can not reconcile differential
performance expectations with their own attitudes and beliefs about self they become less
satisfied in their roles and prefer to leave the organization rather than attempt to fit (Ellinas,
2019; Kezar, 2002; Stets & Burke, 2000; Williams et al., 2012). This decision to not participate
in these fields not only perpetuates the issues, but also puts increased stress on finding and
retaining the right people to lead these organizations.
Recommendations
The study revealed organizational and social influences that both negatively and
positively impacted the participants’ decisions to stay in the Navy. Exposure to gender bias in
how women were treated and evaluated, especially during their first tour environments, were
found to be extremely impactful in preventing female attachment and the development of a sense
of competency. However, the study also found that the role of mentors and sponsors is critical to
counterbalance negative environments and provide guidance and support in developing critical
skills and gaining access to career enhancing opportunities. This support enables a greater sense
84

of value and potential success at an earlier, more critical time in a female officer’s career. Given
these findings the following three recommendations are provided:
1. The U.S. Navy should develop a training program to reduce the effects of gender bias
within individual commands by teaching the workforce how to identify and prevent
it.
2. The U.S. Navy should develop a mentorship program targeted specifically to junior
female officers that pairs them with leadership outside of their own chain of
command.
3. The U.S. Navy should develop a program to incentivize women to remain in the U.S.
Navy beyond their Division Officer Tour. The program should be developed
specifically for women to highlight the unique skill sets they bring to the organization
in support of developing a more diverse force.
Develop a Gender Bias Training Program
The most impactful finding from this study included the confirmation that gender bias
continues to exist in the Navy despite the organization’s continued attempts to develop policies
and promote equality. However, the findings also revealed that the examples of gender bias are
not glaring and overt, but rather they manifested in micro-aggressions and seemingly isolated
organizational environments and examples. For example, CAPT Deurk’s realization that her
CAPT did not value her contribution as much as her male colleagues frustrated and angered her,
but she accepted this as a personality flaw of the CAPT since not all of her previous leadership
treated her in the same manner. Regardless of repetition or standardization, the impact to those
effected is the same. Gender bias supports the overvaluing of male performance and diminishes a
85

woman’s value within an organization leaving women at a significant disadvantage (Cabrera &
Thomas-Hunt, 2015; Heilman & Parks-Stamm, 2015; McKinsey & Co., 2018).
The U.S. Navy should develop a program that reaches out to the entire workforce to
demonstrate how gender bias manifests itself in performance evaluations, team building, job
assignments and finally promotion opportunities. This training, although geared toward
organizational leadership, or O5 officers and above and First Class Petty Officers and above,
should be inclusive of everyone at some level in order to demonstrate that gender bias can
happen anywhere and creates a toxic environment for the entire team. Ely and Meyerson (2000)
explain that the goal of developing a more gender equal organization is not to erase gender but
rather gain awareness of how organizational policies, practices and interactions could aggravate
and justify disparities in how different genders are treated within the organization. Allowing
women to describe the real impact of certain policies and behavior would assist in generating
greater dialogue and create a better understanding of how to make significant changes for the
overall improvement of the organization (Ely and Meyerson, 2000).
Nyberg’s (2010) research highlights that workers will perform better when they believe
that their effort will lead to career success and desired outcomes. Female officers who believe
that their efforts, regardless of the contribution, will most likely be undervalued or
underappreciated are more likely to stop trying. Developing a gender bias training that supports
the discussion of female and male contributions in non gendered terms begins to establish an
equal foundation from which to develop new leaders.
Development of a Targeted Female Officer Mentorship Program
The study highlighted the importance of mentors, sponsors and networks in accelerating
career success especially for the participants. In her research, Cabrera-Muffly (2020) explained
86

that the deliberate creation of mentoring programs supports the elimination of gender bias by
facilitating relationships between people that may not otherwise relate. She continued to outline
the positive effects of exposing leaders to a greater demographic outside of their comfort zone
while also encouraging diverse discussions and recommendations (Cabrera-Muffly, 2020). With
this in mind, the U.S. Navy should be deliberate in pairing young female officers with leadership
outside of their immediate command structure. This would offer females an opportunity to speak
freely about the potential challenges they are facing in their current work environment while also
potentially providing a a different set of recommendations for career success.
CAPT Dix attributed some of her success to the mentors she had within her community
who pushed her to accept challenging roles and opportunities even if she did not think she was
ready. These mentors were not always in her immediate command but were people that she was
fortunate to meet throughout her career who took an interest in supporting her success. These
relationships are critical to providing access for female officers to opportunities through
mentorship and sponsorship (Cabrera-Muffly, 2020; McKinsey & Company & LeanIn.org.,
2018, 2019, 2020; Vilwock, 2021).
Incentivized Female Officer Retention Program
Finally, acknowledging that females bring a unique and equally effective style of
leadership and competence is critical for diminishing the gendered organization and reaching the
Navy’s ultimate goal of a more diverse and equitable force (LaGrone, 2021). This provides the
Navy a unique opportunity to counter the effects of gender bias and elevate the status of female
officers within the organization.
The U.S. Navy has developed similar programs like this in the past. Occupational rates
that struggled to retain people were provided a financial incentive for those that opted to re-
87

enlist. Althought service re-enlistment bonuses are not traditionally used for officers, the Navy
has provided financial incentives for certain communities or even certain positions within
communities in order to support officer retention. Incentives such as the Department Head bonus
and the Command bonus were meant to entice officers to accept orders as Department Heads or
Commanding Officers at a time when retention in those areas was low.
The development of a female officer retention program would signal to the organization
that leadership values the unique contribution that female leaders bring to the fleet and are
prioritizing retention of those skills. This program would also serve to counter gender bias
throughout the organization by formally acknowledging the organization’s need to retain and
develop more female officers.
The above recommendations, bias training, increased and deliberate mentorship programs
and financial incentives for women, come with implementation risk. Research has shown that
most diversity programs tend to trigger backlash instead of positive change (Dobbin & Kalev,
2016). The above approach is founded on the notion that these three programs, when
implemented together, will foster greater dialogue across all leadership levels and among
mentors and mentees. Dobbin and Kalev (2016) write that the most effective programs increase
contact across diverse communities to gain a better understanding at both the cultural and
individual level. Chavez and Weisinger (2008) challenge organizations to develop programs and
policies that support a broader discussion and establishes a relationship approach to tackling
diversity issues. Development of a stronger diversity strategy that supports multiple perspectives
and is truly reflective of the workforce contributes to greater positive outcomes when tackling
issues of diversity (Chavez & Weisinger, 2008). The three programs mentioned above are
starting points to more thoughtful discussions and integrated solutions. Managing for diversity
88

by supporting inclusive discussion, thoughtful policies, and supporting programs are just the first
step in developing a diverse and inclusive culture where people feel supported and valued
(Dobbin & Kalev, 2016; Ryan & Haslam, 2007).
Future Research
This study sought to gain a better understanding of the social and organizational factors
that impacted a female officer’s decision to pursue a career as a naval officer. The study
interviewed senior female officers who successfully navigated a Navy career to identify potential
enablers or areas of greater influence that could be exploited for increased female retention.
Admittedly, the success stories of a few female officers were only a very small part of the overall
equation to identify necessary focus areas to improve female officer retention. The below
paragraphs provide additional areas of focus for future research to elaborate on this study’s
findings.
First, a review of current junior grade female officers and their experiences and career
views would add another perspective to better understand today’s organizational culture and
impact on retention. The participants of this study represent and discussed environments that
were 15 to 20 years old. Including the perspective of today’s junior officers would provide a
more relative discussion on organizational culture and impact during the early career years.
Second, a future study on leadership bias and the training afforded to senior leaders to
identify and prevent gender bias would help better understand whether or not the U.S. Navy has
an issue that may just not be identified yet. Acker (1990) writes, “gender is difficult to see when
only the masculine is present” (p. 42). A review of U.S. Navy policies that could be perceived as
promoting gender bias would highlight unintended bias at the expense of gender stereotypes. In
Ely and Meyerson’s (2000) research, they quickly dismiss the traditional approaches of
89

“helping” females by treating them more like males or training them to behave more like males
as successful approaches to advancing gender equity in organizations. Instead, the authors
recommend organizations redefine success in gender neutral terms and support gender agnostic
policies (Ely & Meyerson, 2000).
Another area for further research would extend the conversation about the criticality of
having more female leaders to promote female leadership. Studies have found that increasing the
number of females in organizations minimizes the perception that women are not competent to
hold positions of leadership as well as increases access to mentors who can better guide females
through professional and personal challenges (Badura et al., 2018; Cabrera-Muffly, 2020).
Finally, this study did not look at diversity beyond gender. A further study on ethnic and
racial diversity would support greater discussion in how to manage for diversity in the U.S. Navy
and create an inclusive culture for everyone.
The above recommendations for future studies would help develop a more holistic
approach to understanding the cultural organization that the GAO identified as influencing a
female service member’s decision to remain on active duty (GAO 20-61, 2020). This study
supported a summary overview of organizational and cultural systems that influenced female
officer retention.
Conclusion
It is often assumed that females who opt out of the workforce do so for personal reasons
rather than dissatisfaction with the organization (Williams et al., 2012). This assumption
perpetuates bad behaviors and ignores the underlying issues that drive women out of an
organization. This study aimed to demonstrate the perpetual challenges faced by females and the
additional organizational and social structures that should be studied to address these challenges.
90

Leveraging Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model the study explored the influence of social and
organizational environments throughout a female officer’s career to determine their effect on
career decisions. This study found that organizational equity is extremely important in
establishing a sense of belonging early in an officer’s career. Officers who were recognized for
their hard work and were treated, evaluated and supported equally to their male counterparts,
reported greater satisfaction with the organization and continued to pursue professional goals. It
can be assumed that officers who constantly struggle to overcome bias, prove competence and
gain access to networks and information will find a different environment for success. The U.S.
Navy’s recent focus on building a more diverse and inclusive force should drive to go beyond
numbers and policies to determine the social and organizational culture that is influencing the
fleet. Women must be part of the discussion in order to truly appreciate the challenges that they
face and the impact that they have. Without an extensive review of the organizational culture at
each level of the organization, the U.S. Navy will continue to lose incredible leaders putting our
national defense strategy at risk.

91

References
Acker, J. (1990). Hierarchies, Jobs, Bodies: A Theory of Gendered Organizations. Gender and
Society, 4(2), 139–158.
Acker, J. (2006). Inequality Regimes: Gender, class, and race in organizations. Gender &
Society, 20(4), 441–464.
Alimo-Metcalfe, B. (2010). An investigation of female and male constructs of leadership and
empowerment. Gender in Management: An International Journal, 25(8). 640–648.
Anderson, N., Lievens, F., van Dam, K., & Born, M. (2006). A construct driven investigation of
gender differences in a leadership role assessment center. Journal of Applied Psychology,
91, 555–566.
Aspin, L. (1984). Manning the Military: The Female Factor. Minerva; Pasadena, 2(2), 133.
Ayyala, M. S., Skarupski, K., Bodurtha, J. N., Gonzalez-Fernandez, M., Ishii, L. E., Fivush, B.,
& Levine, R. B. (2019). Mentorship is not enough: Exploring sponsorship and its role in
career advancement in academic medicine. Academic Medicine, 94(1), 94–100.
Badawy, R., Gazdag, B. A., Bentley, J.R., & Brouer, R. L. (2018). Are all imposters created
equal? Exploring gender differences in the imposter phenomenon performance link.
Personality and Individual Differences, 131, 156–163.
Badura, K. L., Grijalva, E., Newman, D. A., Taiyi Yan, T., & Jeon, G. (2018). Gender and
leadership emergence: A meta-analysis and explanatory model. Personnel Psychology, 71,
335–367.
Bahrampour, Tara (2014). Meet the highest ranking woman in US Naval History. Glamour.com

92

Bear, J. B., Cushenberry, L., London, M., & Sherman, G. D. (2017). Performance feedback,
power retention, and the gender gap in leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, (28), 721–740.
Beyer, S. (2002). The effects of gender, dysphoria, and performance feedback on the accuracy of
self-evaluations. Sex Roles, 47 (9/10) 453.
Biernat, M., & Danahar, K. (2012). Interpreting and reacting to feedback in stereotype-relevant
performance domains. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 48 (271-276). DOI:
10.1016/j.jesp.2011.08.010
Braun, L. A., Kennedy, H., Sadler, L.S., & Dixon, J. (2015). Research on U.S. Military Women:
Recruitment and Retention Challenges and Strategies. Military Medicine, 180(12), 1247–
1255.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and
Design. Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data.
Boyce, L., & Herd, A. (2003). The relationship between gender role stereotypes and requisite
military leadership characteristics. Sex Roles, 49(7/8); 365–378.
BUPERS Instruction 1610.10E (2019). Navy Performance Evaluation System.
Cabrera, S. F., & Thomas-Hunt, M. C. (2015). “Street Cred” and the Executive Woman: The
Effects of Gender Differences in Social Networks on Career Advancement. Social
Psychology of Gender, 123–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0882-6145(07)24006-8
Cabrera-Muffly, C. (2020). Mentorship and sponsorship in a diverse population. Otolaryngol
Clin N Am, 54; 449–456.
Calaway, S., & Bice, J. (2020). The Navy Needs a Retention Strategy. Proceedings, 146(12)
1414.
93

Castilla, E. J., & Benard, S. (2010). The Paradox of Meritocracy in Organizations.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 55, 543–576.
Chavez, C., & Weisinger, J. Y. (2008). Beyond Diversity Training: A social infusion for cultural
inclusion. Human Resources Management, 47(2), 331–350.
Cresswell, J. W., & Cresswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and
mixed methods approaches (5
th
ed.). SAGE.
Devicienti, F., Grinza, E., Manello, A., & Vannoni, D. (2019) What are the benefits of having
more female leaders? Evidence from the use of part-time work in Italy. ILR Review, 72(4),
pp 897–926
Dobbin, F., & Kalev, A. (2016). Why diversity programs fail. Harvard Business Review Press.
Eagly, A. H., Makhijani, M. G., & Klonsky, B. G. (1992). Gender and the evaluation of leaders:
A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 3–22.
Eagly, A. H., Karau, S. J. (2002). Role Congruity Theory of Prejudice toward female leaders.
Psychological Review, 109(3), 573–598.
Ellinas, E.H., Kaljo, K., Patitucci, T.N., Novalija, J., Byars-Winston, A., & Fouad, N.A. (2019).
No Room to Lean In: A Qualitative Study on Gendered Barriers to Promotion and
Leadership. Journal of Women’s Health, 28(3). 393-402. DOI: 10.1089/jwh.2018.7252
Ely, R.J. & Meyerson, D.E. (2000). Advancing Gender Equity in Organizations: The Challenge
and Importance of Maintaining a Gender Narrative. SAGE, 7(4), 589–608.
Fapohunda, T. (2013). An exploration of gender based differences in workplace values.
International Journal of Human Resource Studies, 3(3), 50–61.
94

Feugen, K. (2015). The Effects of Gender Stereotypes on Judgements and Decisions in
Organizations. Social Psychology of Gender, 79–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0882-
6145(07)24004-4
Fisk, S. R. (2016). Gender Stereotypes, Risk-Taking, and Gendered Mobility. Advances in
Group Processes, 179–210. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0882-614520160000033007
Fletcher, J. W., McMahon, J.S., & Quester, A. O. (1993). Tradition, technology, and the
changing roles of women in the Navy. Minerva; Pasadena, 11(3).
Fletcher, J. W., McManan, J.S., & Quester, A. O. (1994) Women in the Navy: The past, the
present and the future. Center for Naval Analyses.
Foschi, M. (2000). Double standards for competence: Theory and research. Annual Review
Social, 26, 21–42.
Garcia, V. (2003). “Difference” in the police department. Journal of Contemporary Criminal
Justice, 19(3), 330–344.
Gardiner, H., & Kosmitzki, C. (2007). Lives Across Culture, 4
th
ed. Allyn & Bacon.
GAO Report to Congressional Committees, 20-61. (2020). Female Active Duty Personnel:
Guidance and Plans Needed for Recruitment and Retention Efforts. Government
Accountability Office.
Heilman, M. H., Parks-Stamm, E. J. (2015). Gender Stereotypes in the Workplace: Obstacles to
Women’s Career Progress. Social Psychology of Gender, 47–77.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0882-6145(07)24003-2
Hewlett, S. A., Rashid, R., & Sherbin, L. (2020). How to disrupt bias and drive value. Harvard
Business Review. https://store.hbr.org/product/how-to-disrupt-bias-and-drive-
value/ROT375.
95

Jackson, S.E., Brett, J. F., Sessa, V. I., Cooper, D. M., Julin, J. A., & Peyronnin, K. (1991). Some
differences make a difference: Individual dissimilarity and group heterogeneity as correlates
of recruitment, promotions and turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(5), 675–689.
Jansen, M. & Delahaij, R. (2019). Leadership Acceptance Through the Lens of Social Identity
Theory: A Case Study of Military Leadership in Afghanistan. Armed Forces and Society,
46(4), 657–676.
Johnson, S., Murphy, S., Zewdie, S., & Reichard, R. (2008). The strong, sensitive type: Effects
of gender stereotypes and leadership prototypes on the evaluation of male and female
leaders. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 106, pp 39–60.
Kamarck, K. N. (2016). Diversity, inclusion and equal opportunity in the Armed Services:
background and issues for Congress. Congressional Review Service. https://www.crs.gov
Kamarck, K. N. (2016). Women in Combat: Issues for Congress. Congressional Review Service,
R42075.
Kawakami, K., Dovidio, J. F., & van Kamp, S. (2003). Kicking the habit: Effects of
nonstereotypic association training and correction processs on hiring decisions. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 68–75.
Kets, W., & Sandroni, A. (2016). A belief-based theory of homophily [Unpublished doctoral
dissertation]. Kellogg School of Management.
Kezar, A. (2000). Pluralistic leadership: Incorporating Diverse Voices. The Journal of Higher
Education, 71(6); 722–743.
Kezar, A. (2002). Expanding notions of leadership to capture pluralistic voices: Positionality
theory in practice. Journal of College Student Development, 43(4), 558–578.
96

Kolb, J. (1999). The effect of gender role, attitude toward leadership, and self0confidence on
leader emergence: implications for leadership development. Human Resource Development
Quarterly, 10(4), 305–320.
Kulik, C. T. (2014). Working below and above the line: the research-practice gap in diversity
management. Human Resource Management Journal, 24(2), 129–144.
LaGrone, S. (2021). Task Force One Navy Issues More than 50 Recommendations to Improve
Diversity in the Service. NavyTimes Online.
Latham, G. P. & Pinder, C. C. (2005). Work motivation theory and research at the dawn of the
twenty-first century. Annual Review Psychology, 56, 485–516.
Latu, I. M., Mast, M. S., Lammers, J., & Bombari, D. (2013). Successful female leaders
empower women’s behavior in leadership tasks. Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology, 49, 444–448.
Lawler, E. E. & Suttle, J. L. (1973). Expectancy theory and job behavior. Organizational
Behavior and Human Performance, 9, 482–503.
Liu, H., Cutcher, L., & Grant, D. (2015) Doing authenticity: The gendered construction of
authentic leadership. Gender, Work, and Organization, 22(3) DOI: 10.1111/gwao.12073.
Loughlin, C., Arnold, K., & Crawford, J. (2012). Lost Opportunity: Is transformational
leadership accurately recognized and rewarded in all managers? Equality, Diversity and
Inclusion: An International Journal, 31(1). 43–64.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4
th
ed.). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Morgan, M. (2004). Women in a Man’s world: Gender differences in leadership at the military
academy. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34(12) 2482–2502.
97

Motro, D., & Ellis, A. P.J. (2016). Boys Don’t Cry: Gender and Reactions to Negative
Performance Feedback. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(2), 227–235.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/apl0000175
Ni, H. W. & Huo, Y. J. (2018). Same‐gender supervisors protect women's leadership aspirations
after negative performance feedback. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 48(8), 437–
447. doi:10.1111/jasp.12523
Nyberg, A. (2010). Retaining your high performers: Moderators of the performance-job
satisfaction-voluntary turnover relationship. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(3), 440–453.
McKinsey & Company & LeanIn.org. (2018). Women in the Workplace.
https://womenintheworkplace.com/
McKinsey & Company & LeanIn.org. (2019). Women in the Workplace.
https://womenintheworkplace.com/
McKinsey & Company & LeanIn.org. (2020). Women in the Workplace.
https://womenintheworkplace.com/
McMahon, C. & Bernard, C. (2019). Storm clouds on the horizon: Challenges and
recommendations for military recruiting and retention. Naval War College Review, 3(72).
Morgan, M. (2004). Women in a man’s world: Gender differences in leadership at the military
academy. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34(12), 2482–2502.
Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice (7
th
ed.). SAGE.
Office of Virginia Representative Elaine Luria. (2019, May 16). Congresswoman Elaine Luria
challenges top Navy leadership over lack of female representation [Press Release].
98

https://luria.house.gov/media/press-releases/congresswoman-elaine-luria-challenges-top-
Navy-leadership-over-lack-female
Parker, K. (2021). What’s behind the growing gap between men and women in college
completion. Pewresearch.org.
Patten, E. & Parker, K. (2011). Women in the U.S. Military: Growing Share, Distinctive Profile.
Pew Research Center. www.pewsocialtrends.org
Payscale. (2019). The State of the Gender Pay Gap: Executive Summary.
https://www.payscale.com/data/gender-pay-gap
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic
motivation, social development and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. DOI:
10.1037//0003-0066X.55.1.68
Ryan, M., & Haslam, S. A. (2005). The glass cliff: Evidence that women are over-represented in
precarious leadership positions. British Journal of Management, (16), 81–90.
Ryan, M., & Haslam, S. A. (2007). The glass cliff: Exploring the dynamics surrounding the
appointment of women to precarious leadership positions. Academy of Management Review,
(32), 549–572.
Ryan, M., Haslam, S. A., Hersbey, M. D., & Bongiorno, R. (2011). This crisis – Think female:
The glass cliff and contextual variation in the think manager – think male stereotype.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(3), 470–484.
Schein, V. E., Mueller, R., Lituchy, T., & Liu, J. (1996). Think manager – Think male: a global
phenomenon? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 17, 33–41.
Schein, E. H., & Schein, P. (2017). Organizational culture and leadership (5
th
ed.). John Wiley
& Sons, Inc.
99

Schyns, B., von Elverfeldt, A., & Felfe, J. (2008) Is there a male advantage in the effects of
feedback and leadership on leaders’ occupational self-efficacy? Equal Opportunities
International, 27(7) pp 596–612.
Sczesny, S., & Kuhnen, U. (2004). Meta-cognition about biological sex and gender-stereotypic
Physical Appearance: Consequences for the Assessment of Leadership Competence. Society
for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc., 30(1), 13–21.
Seo, G., Huang, W., & Han, S. (2017). Conceptual Review of Underrepresentation of Women in
Senior Leadership Positions From a Perspective of Gendered Social Status in the workplace:
Implication for HRD Research and Practice. Human Resources Development Review, 16(1).
35–59.
Shapiro, M., Grossman, D., Carter, S., Martin, K., Deyton, P., & Hammer, D. (2015). Middle
school girls and the “Leaky Pipeline” to leadership. Middle School Journal, 46(5), 3-13.
DOI: 10.1080/00940771.2015.11461919
Shen, W., Joseph, D. (2020). Gender and leadership: A criterion focused review and research
agenda. Human Resource Management Review.
Sisk, R. (2019). Number of Female Generals, Admirals has doubled since 2000 report finds.
Military.com. https://www.military.com/daily-news/2019/04/17/number-female-generals-
admirals-has-doubled-2000-report-
finds.html#:~:text=In%20February%202018%2C%20there%20were,fiscal%202000%2C%2
0the%20report%20states.
Smith, D (CAPT) & Rosenstein, J.E. (2017). Gender and the Military Profession: Early Career
Influences, Attitudes and Intentions. Armed Forces & Society, 43(2), 260–279. DOI:
10.1177/0095327XI5626722
100

Steffens, N. K., Munt, K. A., van Knippenberg, D., & Hasiam, S. A. (2021). Advancing the
social identity theory of leadership: A meta-analytic review of leader group prototypicality.
Organizational Psychology Review, 11(1), 35–72.
Stets, J.E. & Burke, P.J. (200). Identity theory and social identity theory. Social Psychology
Quarterly, 63(3). 224–237.
Stoddard, E.R. (1994). Married female officers in a combat branch: Occupation-family stress and
future career choices. Minerva; Pasadena, 12(2), 1.
Sumra, M. (2019). Masculinity, femininity and leadership: taking a closer look at the alpha
female. PLOS One, 14(4) https://doi.org/10.1371/journal/pone.0215181.
Taub, A. (2020). Why are women-led nations doing better with COVID-19? New York Times
Online. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/15/world/coronavirus-women-leaders.html
Thompson, M. (2016). Here’s why the US Military is a family business. TIME online.
https://time.com/4254696/military-family-business/
Trittin, H. & Schoeneborn, D. (2017). Diversity as Polyphony: Reconceptualizing Diversity
Management from a Communication-Centered Perspective. J Bus Ethics, 144, 305-322.
DOI: 10.1007/s10551-0152825-8
Vanden Brook, T. (2020). Women in combat wear armor designed for men. That’s finally
changing in 2020. USA Today Online.
Villwock, J. A. (2021). Meaningfully moving forward through intentional training, mentorship
and sponsorship. Otolaryngol Clin N Am, 54, xxi–xxii.
Walker, K. (2012). A model for femininity and military leadership. Journal of Psychological
Issues in Organizational Culture, 2(4).
101

Williams, C. L., Muller, C., Kilanski, K. (2012). Gendered Organizations in the New Economy.
Gender and Society, 26(4), 549–573.
Zenger, J., & Folkman, J. (2020). Research: Women are better leaders during a crisis. Harvard
Business Review. Retrieved from HBR.org
102

Appendix A: Interview Protocol

Introduction to the Interview:

Good morning/afternoon. My name is Carla Carrillo and I am a student at the University of
Southern California pursuing a post graduate degree from the school’s Organizational Change
and Leadership program through the Rossier School. My dissertation work focuses on how the
Navy’s culture develops and influences women leaders in support of building a diverse and
sustainable workforce. Through this discussion/interview I hope to gain a better understanding of
what influenced your decision to pursue a career in the U.S. Navy and how the Navy’s
organizational environment impacted your professional development.

With your agreement this interview will be recorded. Thank you for your support and
participation.

Do you have any questions before we begin?

Interview Questions:
1. What is your rank, community and current role?
a. Have you been a member of that community since you were commissioned?
b. If not, what community did you begin your career with?
2. Who or what influenced you the most to join the Navy?
a. What motivated you to choose the community you started in?
b. Did you join the Navy with the intent of making it a career?
103

3. What was the reaction of your family and friends when you told them about your
decision to join the Navy?
a. What impact did people who did not support you have on you?
4. How did support from your social groups change over the course of your career, if at
all?
a. Which group’s support was more important to you?
b. Did its importance and/or influence change over time? If so, what influenced
the change?
5. Who or what provided the greatest support in achieving your career goals within the
Navy organization?
a. How did this support differ for your male counterparts, if at all?
6. Who or what provided the greatest support in achieving your career goals external to
the Navy?
a. How did this support differ for your male counterparts, if at all?
7. How has being a female officer in a primarily male dominated organization
challenged you as an individual?
a. How has your leadership style changed over the course of your career in
response to your environment?
b. How has your environment changed over the course of your career with the
influence of more female leadership?
8. What benefits do you find from being a senior female Navy officer?

Conclusion to the Interview:

104

Thank you for your time today. Your insights will be valuable in helping me complete my
dissertation and hopefully provide some helpful insights for Navy leaders to consider as they
continue to develop programs and policies to increase gender diversity throughout the
organization. I will be in touch throughout the process and happy to share the final assessment
prior to submission to ensure I didn’t misinterpret anything said. However, all direct attributions
will remain anonymous. Thank you again.

105

Appendix B: 2019 O5-O6 Female Officer Milestone Survey Summary Results
The Navy Milestone Survey is given at key points in an officer or Sailor’s career to
identify retention tendencies. The Navy Standard Integrated Personnel System (NSIPS) manages
the survey and alerts potential respondents via email. Officers are requested to complete the
survey within 15 months of their minimum service requirement (MSR) or projected rotation date
(PRD).
Participants of the 2019 O5-O6 Female Officer Milestone Survey reflected 1228
members across 44 different communities. All respondents were female officers who are
currently serving as O5 and O6 officers in the U.S. Navy. The below table outlines the breakout
of participants by community.

106

Appendix C: Historical Female Officers
Dorothea L. Dix never achieved an official Naval Officer commissioning because her
contributions to the service pre-date an era when women were recognized and eligible for
commissionings. However, over the course of her lifetime, she was well-known for her efforts to
secure humane treatment of the mentally ill and advocated for reforms which established State
care. Relative to this research, Ms. Dix was the superintendent of women nurses during the Civil
War thus beginning a long tradition of female leadership in military service.
Rear Admiral Duerk was commissioned into the U.S. Navy in 1943 as a member of the
Nurse Corps in the U.S. Naval Reserve. During World War II, she served onboard the USS
Benevolence, a naval hospital ship, anchored off Eniwetok and later Japan, that received the sick
and wounded brought back from the Pacific area of operations. In December of 1953, Ms. Deurk
transferred from the Naval Reserves to the U.S. Navy and continued to progress in her naval
career. In 1967 she was promoted to Captain and in 1972 Rear Admiral Deurk was the first
woman to be selected and advanced to flag rank.
Rear Admiral Hartington was commissioned in the U.S. Navy after graduating from
Rhode Island College of Education (R.I.C.E.) in 1953. She was the first woman to attend the
National War College in Washington D.C. and the first woman to work as the Secretary to the
Joint Chiefs of Staff. In 1981 she was selected and promoted to the rank of Rear Admiral
becoming only the second female to achieve that rank.
Rear Admiral Hazard was commissioned via Officer Candidate School in 1960 after a
brief career as a high school teacher. She had a robust career working first as a protocol officer in
the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations and returned to the same office later as an action
officer in charge of Middle East, African Section, Politico-Military Affairs Division among other
107

notable career positions. Beginning in 1980, Ms. Hazard successfully completed three successive
command tours at Naval Training Centers in Treaure Island, CA, San Diego, CA, and Great
Lakes, MI. In 1987, Ms. Hazard became the director for manpower and Personnel, Organization
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and was the first woman board selected to rear admiral (upper half)
(RADM) in May 1988 and retired from active service in 1992.
Lenah Higbee, like Ms. Dix, was never commissioned in the U.S. Navy due to the era in
which she served. In 1908 Ms. Higbee joined the Nurse Corps as part of “The Sacred Twenty”.
These women were the first to formally serve as members of the Navy. In 1911, Ms. Higbee
became the second superintendent of the Nurse Corps and served in that role for the next 11
years resigning her position in 1922. Ms. Higbee was also the first female to be awarded the
Navy Cross for her efforts in leading the nurse corps during World War I.
Prior to joining the Navy, Grace Hopper earned a Ph.D. in mathematics from Yale
University. At 34 years old, Grace Hopper attempted to enlist in the U.S. Navy. She was rejected
due to her age but was able to join the U.S. Naval Reserves. She began her computing career in
1944 working on the Harvard Mark I team. She was a pioneer in the computer field and is known
for being the first to devise the theory of machine independent programming languages
ultimately leading to the development of COBAL. She retired from the Naval Reserves in 1966
only to be recalled to active duty a year later in 1967. Rear Admiral Hopper retired in 1986 after
serving the Navy for 43 years.
Fran McKee was the first female line officer promoted to flag officer in 1976. Rear
Admiral McKee served as the Director of Naval Education and Development before being
promoted to Rear Admiral (upper half) in 1978 and serving as the Director Human Resource
Management. She retired in 1981 after 30 years of honorable service.
108

Commander Toms began her Naval career and received her commission as an officer in
the WAVES in 1943. With a degree in Physics Ms. Toms was a perfect candidate to support the
development of the emerging radar technology of the time. In 1945, Ms. Toms was assigned to
the position of assistant project engineer in radio direction finder design. After WWII ended,
there was no longer a need for women in the service and Ms. Toms was released from active
duty in 1946. She continued to serve in the Naval Reserves and worked with the National
Research Laboratory (NRL) on the continued development of Radar technology and early
understanding of nuclear structures often as the only female scientist. She was promoted to the
rank of CDR in 1961 and retired from the NRL 10 years later.

109

Table C1
Breakout of Participants by Community
Officer code Officer description Number of
respondents
110X An unrestricted line officer who is not qualified in any warfare
specialty or in training
1
111X An unrestricted line officer who is qualified in surface warfare 79
120X A restricted line officer of the human resources community 103
1230 A restricted line officer of the permanent military professor
community
4
130X An unrestricted line officer who is a member of the aeronautical
community
16
131X An unrestricted line officer who is qualified for duty involving
flying heavier than air type of aircraft as a pilot
18
132X An unrestricted line officer who is qualified for duty involving
flying heavier than air type of aircraft as a naval flight officer
18
144X Engineering duty officer who is qualified as a ship engineering
specialist.
18
150X A restricted line aerospace engineering duty flag officer or
captain who was formerly either an aerospace engineering
duty officer or aviation maintenance duty officer
3
151X An aerospace engineering duty officer (aerospace engineering) 9
152X An aerospace engineering duty officer (aviation maintenance) 10
165X A special duty officer (public affairs) 18
171X A special duty officer (foreign area officer) 8
180X A special duty officer (oceanography) 29
181X A special duty officer (cryptological warfare) 20
182X A special duty officer (information professional) 23
183X A special duty officer (intelligence) 34
210X A medical corps officer 215
230X A medical service corps officer 164
250X A judge advocate general corps officer 50
290X A nurse corps officer 319
310X A supply corps officer 37
410X A chaplain corps officer 13
611X A limited duty officer (surface, deck) 2
618X A limited duty officer (surface, electronics) 2
633X A limited duty officer (aviation maintenance) 2
639X A limited duty officer (air traffic control) 2
641X A limited duty officer (administration) 5
649X A limited duty officer (security) 2
651X A limited duty officer (supply) 1
653X A limited duty officer (civil engineer) 2
655X A limited duty officer (judge advocate) 1

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Underrepresentation of women in the U.S. banking industry’s top executive roles: why doesn’t the CEO look like me?

PDF

Retaining female field grade officers in the USAF: an evaluative study

PDF

Knowledge, motivation, and organization influences on persisting leadership demographics in a military organization: perspectives on diversity and inclusion from minority female officers

PDF

Understanding how organizational culture and expectations influence retention of managers

PDF

Where are the female executive leaders?

PDF

Racial and gender gaps in executive management: a retrospective examination of the problem cause and strategies to address disparities

PDF

Sustainable fashion leadership: The female phenomenon

PDF

Promoting diversity: reactions to corporate actions that support anti-racism efforts

PDF

Investigating the personal and organizational factors influencing the departure of female physicians from healthcare leadership roles

PDF

Low retention of active duty female Marine Corps officers

PDF

Counselors and teachers’ perceptions of underrepresentation of female secondary students in STEM

PDF

An examination of the impact of diversity initiatives and their supporting roles on organizational culture: an experiential study from the perspective of diversity personnel

PDF

Women in leadership: how female leaders fair in America’s commercial insurance industry

PDF

Double jeopardy: the influence of prevalent race and gender bias on women of color executive leadership promotions

PDF

Fostering leadership resilience: examining the influence of social networks on female administrators’ capacity to lead in times of crisis or organizational change

PDF

Improving the representation of female executives in a large utility provider: a modified KMO framework

PDF

Online graduate program retention: exploring the impact of community on student retention rates from the perspectives of faculty and alumni

PDF

The underrepresentation of Asian American Pacific Islanders serving in the senior and executive leadership ranks in the U.S. Navy SEALs

PDF

Averting the gaze: gender bias in the fashion industry

PDF

Environmental influences on the diversity of professional sports executive leadership

Asset Metadata

Creator Carrillo, Carla Araujo (author)

Core Title Navy social and organizational culture and their influence on female officer retention

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2022-08

Publication Date 07/09/2022

Defense Date 01/26/2022

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

Tag female Navy officers,gender bias,gendered organizations,mentorship,OAI-PMH Harvest,organizational diversity,sponsorship

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Carbone, Paula (committee chair), Phillips, Jennifer (committee member), Rothenhaus, Kurt (committee member)

Creator Email carla.carrillo@mac.com,carlac@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC111371067

Unique identifier UC111371067

Legacy Identifier etd-CarrilloCa-10824

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Carrillo, Carla Araujo

Type texts

Source 20220713-usctheses-batch-952 (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