DiversityInc - November/December 2008

years and was seldom shared with agency and component leadership. With the endorsement of the director of National Intelligence (DNI), we arranged individual, in-person interviews with each organizational head to discuss diversity trends, highlights and plans. In some cases, it took months to arrange the sessions—“palace guards” routinely resisted and tried their best to refer us to other senior staff, until they were told that this effort was at the direction of the DNI and that we would be persistent.

We noticed how variations in the posture and behavior of the leaders during these meetings related to corresponding differences in organizational results. We also realized a universal truth: Nearly all leaders generally express their support for EEO and diversity, but few actually get results from their subordinates. The “default setting” is usually a rhetorical comment that they are committed to EEO and diversity, but those are not related to the “real business” of the enterprise. As long as expensive lawsuits or grossly negative publicity are avoided, the subordinates won’t be held personally responsible for achieving significant results, changing trends or holding their own direct reports accountable for the same.

In our sessions with the directors, we pointed out that every major corporation at the top of its game for diversity has learned— some very expensively—that without genuine and credible advocacy for these concerns in an organization’s front office, nothing changes. Our message to senior leaders: For real and measurable improvements in diversity, the individual commitment of the leader is absolutely essential. Beyond a general endorsement, his or her expression must

be visible, specific, personal, persistent and intentional.

the individual commitment of the leader is essential.

Visible: Others
must see and hear
the commitment, and
the visibility must be
evident even when
the “usual suspects”
(diversity professionals) are not in
the room.

Specific: The expression will be most credible when it addresses specific conditions of the work force and challenges for that organization. Where are the gaps? What are the trends in EEO complaints?

Personal: Those who are responsible for delivering results should know it and be reminded and evaluated at intervals, using performance measures. In addition, leaders’ messages will be most effective when they share their values, with references to their own “personal diversity story” (when diversity became meaningful for them).

Persistent: Most leaders give a speech on special diversity occasions (e.g., special emphasis programs, Martin Luther King Day, memorials), but the message should be more constant. “Persistent” means just that—on a regular basis, as routinely as budget reviews and reports on other programs.

Intentional: Results do not come through chance or providence. They occur when the leader says, “This is what I want to happen.”

While progress has been slow, the direct engagement of senior

leadership has result-
ed in some measur-
able improvements in
the IC. Overall repre-
sentation of people
from traditionally
underserved popula-
tions has increased
every year for the
past five years, and
there are improvements in promo-
tions, awards, scholarship and
development programs. About 75
percent of students in our Stokes
Fellowship program, which offers
tuition assistance, internships and
permanent job opportunities, are
from traditionally underserved
populations. We have also seen
increases in the representation of
traditionally underserved popula-
tions and women in higher pay
grades, senior positions and core
mission skills—analysis, collection,
and science and technology.

There is still more to be done, however. Areas for improvement include our diversity compared to external benchmarks, especially for Latinos. At 21 percent people from traditionally underrepresented racial/ethnic groups, 39 percent women and 4 percent people with disabilities, the IC is substantially lower than the representation in the rest of the federal work force, the civilian labor force and the U.S. population. We are also concerned about hiring and attrition for employees with disabilities.

Although we are not where we want to be, the good news is that subordinates will “make it happen” once they perceive that the positive commitment from the top is sincere, meaning it meets the five criteria. That is what is happening in the modern-day IC. And for that, we can all feel a lot safer.