Assessing the Organizational Culture of Higher Education Institutions in an Era of #MeToo

• Published date: 01 November 2020
• Author: Stephanie Dolamore,Tara N. Richards
• Date: 01 November 2020
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13179

Assessing the Organizational Culture of Higher Education Institutions 1133

Public Administration Review,

Vol. 80, Iss. 6, pp. 1133–1137. © 2020 by

The American Society for Public Administration.

DOI:10.1111/puar.13179.

Stephanie Dolamore

Tara N. Richards

University of Nebraska Omaha

Assessing the Organizational Culture of Higher Education

Institutions in an Era of #MeToo

Abstract: Sexual harassment was established as a form of sex discrimination in institutions of higher education

(IHEs) under Title IX of the Education Amendments to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Since then, decades of

victimization surveys beginning in the 1980s show that sexual misconduct continues to be a significant problem for

IHEs. Estimates suggest that as many as 25 percent of college women experience a sexual assault while in college, while

as many as 34 percent experience attempted or completed unwanted kissing, sexual touching using physical force,

threat of physical force, and/or verbal coercion during their college career. In this Viewpoint essay, the authors propose

the Preventing and Addressing Sexual Misconduct Framework as a tool to assess and cultivate an organizational

culture that is responsive to these concerning trends. Pulling from an interdisciplinary body of scholarship and the

philosophy of the #MeToo movement, this tool is a starting place for the continued dialogue that is needed to more fully

address sexual misconduct on college campuses.

Evidence for Practice

• Sexual misconduct is a significant problem in institutions of higher education. Estimates suggest that as many

as 25% of college women experience a sexual assault while in college (Fisher, Cullen, and Turner 2000).

• Current responses by institutions of higher education focus on ‘checking the box’ compliance and reducing

potential legal liability, and do not necessarily focus on preventing sexual violence or serving survivors post-

assault.

• Mature organizational responses to concerning trends in sexual misconduct require a significant refocusing

of the organizational culture of each institution. One such tool to accomplish this work is the proposed

Preventing and Addressing Sexual Misconduct (PASM) Framework.

In 1972, the Education Amendments to the Civil

Rights Act of 1964 were signed into law. Title IX

of these amendments states, “No person in the

United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded

from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or

be subjected to discrimination under, any education

program or activity receiving Federal financial

assistance.”1 Sexual harassment has been established as

a form of sex discrimination in institutions of higher

education (IHEs) under Title IX through civil case

precedent,2 which is the role of this legislation in more

recent in public memory. At the same time, decades

of victimization surveys beginning in the 1980s (Koss,

Gidycz, and Wisniewski 1987) have uncovered that

gender-based violence, often referred to as “sexual

misconduct” in higher education, continues to be a

significant problem for IHEs (for a review, see Fedina,

Holmes, and Backes 2018). Estimates suggest that

as many as 25 percent of college women experience

a sexual assault while in college (Fisher, Cullen, and

Turner 2000), while as many as 34 percent experience

attempted or completed unwanted kissing, sexual

touching using physical force, threat of physical

force, and/or verbal coercion during their college

career (Minow and Einolf 2009). Furthermore, while

this piece emphasizes the U.S. context of sexual

misconduct at IHEs, international research indicates

that gender-based violence on campuses is not unique

to the United States (see, e.g., Barnes 2016; Bull et al.

2018).

In the contemporary narrative of sexual misconduct

on college campuses, there is no doubt that

individual accountability is an important dimension

of preventing and addressing sexual misconduct.

However, organizational responses are also needed.

These organizational-level responses must address

the culture that perpetuates sexual violence across the

globe, including responses from anchor institutions

of democracy, such as colleges and universities

(Dexter and Blankenberg 2016; Holden and

Tryhorn 2013). In this Viewpoint essay, we propose

the Preventing and Addressing Sexual Misconduct

(PASM) Framework as a tool to assess and cultivate

Gallaudet University

Tara N. Richards is an assistant

professor in the School of Criminology

and Criminal Justice at the University

of Nebraska Omaha. Her research and

teaching focuses on intimate partner

violence, sexual assault, and the role of

gender in criminal justice system processes.

Her recent articles have appeared in

Justice

Quarterly

,

Law and Human Behavior

,

and

Crime & Delinquency

. She serves on

Douglas County, Nebraska’s Domestic

Violence Community Response Team, Sexual

Assault Response Team, and Sexual Assault

Kit Initiative Working group.

Email: tararichards@unomaha.edu

Stephanie Dolamore is an assistant

professor in the Department of Government

and Public Affairs at Gallaudet University.

She teaches in the bilingual master of public

administration program for D/deaf, hard of

hearing, and hearing students. Her research

focuses on the intersection of social justice

and public organizations, with a specific

focus on the promotion of public values in

organizational culture.

E-mail: stephanie.dolamore@gallaudet.edu

Viewpoint

Symposium:

Implications

of the #MeToo

Movement for

Academia