Organizational Rhetoric or Reality? The Disparities Between Avowed Commitment to Diversity and Formal Programs and Initiatives in Higher Education Institutions

1
Organizational Rhetoric or Reality? The
Disparities Between Avowed Commitment to
Diversity and Formal Programs and Initiatives in
Higher Education Institutions

• Larry L. Rowley, Sylvia Hurtado,
• Luis Ponjuan and Zachary Anderson
• University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI

2
Research Goals

• To examine selective aspects of the approaches
  that colleges and universities utilize to
  emphasize or achieve diversity
• To identify organizational characteristics that
  predict diversity initiatives and outcomes in
  colleges and universities
• To contribute to discussions of how closely
  institutional diversity at colleges and
  universities mirrors the institutional mission
  statements, administrative rhetoric, and formal
  policies

3
Theoretical Framework

• Diversity as an Organizational Concept
• Diversity is a multi-level organizational concept
  that is impacted by various institutional
  contexts (e.g., historical, structural,
  psychological) (Hurtado, Milem,
  Clayton-Pederson, Allen, 1999)
• Diversity has an impact or implications within
  and across various organizational dimensions
  (Cox, 1993 Smith, 1995)
• Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis
• Prevailing institutionalized concepts can impact
  organizational forms and behaviors (DiMaggio
  Powell, 1991)
• Formal structures constructed within
  organizations can function as myth and ceremony
  (Meyer Rowan, 1991)
• Institutionalized concepts are manifested in
  organizations partially based upon social actions
  and interactions (Jepperson, 1991)

4
Methods

• Sample
• 1440 Four year Institutions surveyed
• 55 return rate (744 institutions)
• Analyses
• Factor Analysis
• Bivariate Analysis
• Multiple Regression

5
2000 Carnegie Classifications
6
Percentage of Institutions with Mission
Statements that Address Diversity
7
Percentage of Minority Faculty (Presence)
8
Percentage of Tenured Minority Faculty
(Commitment)
9
Dependent Variables

• Evaluation and Rewards for Diversity
• Peer Comparisons to Create a Diverse Environment
• Percentage of Minority Students Enrolled
• Percentage of Tenured and Tenure Track Minority
  Faculty
• Percentage of Tenured Minority faculty

10
Independent Variables

• Institutional Background Characteristics
• Student Enrollment figures represent the
  demographics of the local area
• Institutions admission selectivity
• Association Affiliations (e.g. ACE, AACU, AAHE)
• Institutional Categorization Variables
• Carnegie Classification (Doctoral, Masters,
  Bachelors)
• Institutional Control (e.g. Private or Public)
• Institutional Rhetoric Variables
• Core Leadership supports diversity
• Institutional Priority on Diversity
• Institutional Priority on Prestige
• Does your Institutions mission statement
  address Diversity

11
Regression Results
Predictors of Evaluation and Rewards for Diversity Predictors of Evaluation and Rewards for Diversity
Doctoral Institution
Private
Core Leadership Support for Diversity
Institutional Priority for Diversity
Predictors of Progress Relative to Peers Creating a Diverse Environment Predictors of Progress Relative to Peers Creating a Diverse Environment
Core Leadership Support for Diversity
Institutional Priority on Prestige (-)
Institutional Priority on Diversity
Predictors of Institutions Percentage of Minority Students Predictors of Institutions Percentage of Minority Students
Institutions admission selectivity (-)
Public Institution
p lt .05, p lt .01, p lt .001
12
Regression Results
Predictors of Institutions Percentage of Minority Faculty (Presence) Predictors of Institutions Percentage of Minority Faculty (Presence)
Mission statement addresses diversity
Institutional Priority on Prestige
Percentage of Minority Students
Predictors of Percentage of Tenured Minority Faculty (Commitment) Predictors of Percentage of Tenured Minority Faculty (Commitment)
Student enrollment reflect demographics of local area
Institutional Priority on Prestige
Percentage of Minority Students
p lt .05, p lt .01, p lt .001
13
Discussion and Conclusion

• There are indeed some disparities between avowed
  institutional commitment to diversity activity
  and diversity outcomes
• Institutional characteristics and rhetoric were
  strong predictors of self-reported outcome
  measures. (Institutions walk the walk and talk
  the talk)
• Institutional characteristics and rhetoric were
  weak predictors of more objective outcome
  measures (Institutions talk the talk but dont
  walk the walk)
• To maximize diversity outcomes (tenured minority
  faculty) there must be an interlocking set of
  commitments including both structural and
  behavioral factors
• There is a need to move beyond mission rhetoric
  to articulation of priorities, evaluation and
  rewards for diversity progress, and core
  leadership support, and development of a diverse
  student body

14

• To access Presentation slides and paper Please
  visit our Website
• www.umich.edu/divdemo