Ensuring Employment Equity: Are Federal Diversity Programs Making a Difference?
Abstract
In the last two decades, many public sector agencies have instituted a wide array of “managing diversity” programs designed to remove barriers to the full participation of women and people of color. Meanwhile, agencies are also increasingly responding to pressure to develop measures to monitor performance of all of their programs. Yet there have been few efforts in place to measure the effectiveness of diversity management programs. This article argues that such an evaluation is essential, and offers a preliminary governmentwide estimation of the success federal agencies have had in breaking down these barriers. We found, for the most part, that there is little evidence that broad‐based diversity programs, nor any of their programmatic components, have created a more equitable work environment for women or people of color. We then examine the programs at two federal agencies with significant diversity efforts, in depth, and find again that the results have been mixed. While not meant to be the final word, we suggest that these findings can serve as the basis for generating greater discussion and analysis of these important, but under‐evaluated, programs.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Anti-bias training can activate rather than suppress bias.
“They suggest that anti-bias training can activate rather than suppress bias (Kidder et al., 2004;Naff and Kellough, 2003;Rynes and Rosen, 1995;Sidanius et al., 2001).”
From Are Diversity Programs Merely Ceremonial? Evidence-Free Institutionalization (2017) · cites this paper as Naff and Kellough, 2003
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Kalev, A., Dobbin, F., & Kelly, E. (2006) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.1177/000312240607100404 · Cited by 2,052 · see citing works
Are Diversity Programs Merely Ceremonial? Evidence-Free Institutionalization
Dobbin, F., & Kalev, A. (2017) · The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism · doi:10.4135/9781446280669.n32 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
- Authors
- Naff, K. C., & Kellough, J. E.
- Affiliations
- San Francisco State University (US)
- University of Georgia (US)
- Corresponding author
- Naff, Katherine C.
- ORCID
- Kellough, J. Edward
- Venue
- International Journal of Public Administration
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2003-10
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1307-1336
- ISSN
- 0190-0692 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-4265
- OpenAlex
- W2095346700
- Cited by
- 148
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 8.55
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Journal of Public Administration (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Diversity and Inequality
- Social Sciences › Public Administration › Public Policy and Administration Research
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Career Development and Diversity
- Keywords
- employment equity, federal agencies, program evaluation, women in the workplace, people of color, workplace barriers, public sector employees
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review