Factors Related to Exclusion in the U.S. Army

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/0095327X211068875
• Published date: 01 April 2023
• Date: 01 April 2023
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0095327X211068875

Armed Forces & Society

2023, Vol. 49(2) 231 –251

© The Author(s) 2022

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0095327X211068875

journals.sagepub.com/home/afs

Article

1134644AFSXXX10.1177/0095327X211068875Armed Forces & SocietyKintzle et al.

research-article2022

Factors Related to Exclusion

in the U.S. Army

Sara Kintzle, Eva Alday, Adrianne Clomax,

Mich`

alle Mor Barak, and Carl A. Castro

Abstract

The promotion of inclusion in the U.S. Army requires an understanding of how and why

exclusion occurs. As exclusion can have deleterious impacts at both and individual and

organizational level, reducing exclusive behaviors can have positive effects on Soldiers

and the Army. To explore exclusion in the Army, 19 focus groups were conducted with

120 active-duty enlisted Soldiers. Two rounds of thematic analysis revealed four

themes related to exclusion. Participants indicated exclusion to be often based on low

or bad performance, personality factors that were identif‌ied as different or toxic,

cliques within the Army unwilling to welcome others, and gender, with both men and

women identifying exclusionary behaviors toward women within and outside of the

work environment. Research f‌indings offer insight into how and why exclusion occurs

and how such behaviors can be addressed in the U.S. Army including training and

addressing cultural and systemic barriers to inclusion.

Keywords

inclusion, diversity, U.S. Army, gender issues, military culture, professionalism/

leadership

Since the 1948 Executive Order that sought to abolish discrimination in the U.S. Armed

Forces, the Department of Defense (DOD) has challenged itself in becoming a

University of Southern California Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work, Los Angeles, CA, USA

Corresponding Author:

Sara Kintzle, University of Southern California, 669 West 34th Street, Suite 201D, Los Angeles, CA 90089,

USA.

Email: kintzle@usc.edu

232 Armed Forces & Society 49(2)

“deliberately inclusive organization,”(Military Leadership Diversity Commission,

2011). In recent years, the DOD has pushed for promoting diversity and inclusion

across the entire workforce. The DOD has emphasized that both are integral in rep-

resenting the diverse population of the United States and are signif‌icant contributors to

mission readiness and success (Department of Defense [DOD], 2012). In response, the

U.S. Army has established several goals to promote diversity and inclusion through

recruitment standards, training and education, and establishing and maintaining in-

clusive environments (Department of the Army, 2021). While such initiatives aim to

create a welcoming and inclusive environment, they often challenge the norms of Army

culture often resistant to change, which has historically placed a high value on per-

formance, masculinity, and conformity (Keats, 2010).

As the U.S. Army continues to enact policies that promote diversity and inclusion

across the force, research examining barriers to inclusivity is of increasing importance.

One such research question is how and why exclusion occurs in the Army. Individuals

perceive exclusion when their personal and unique qualities are not recognized and

when their needs for belongingness are not fulf‌illed (Chung et al., 2019). An inclusive

environment is one where everyone feels valued for who they are, where everyone is

fairly treated, and where everyone’s diverse contributions are welcomed and appre-

ciated (Mor Barak et al., 2014;Nishii, 2013;Shore et al., 2011).

Throughout U.S. history, the military has employed exclusionary policies impacting

eligibility for military service and specif‌ic positions for certain groups, such as ex-

clusion based on race and ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation and gender identity

(Aspin, 1994;Borch, 2010;DOD, 2016;MacGregor, 2001). Until recently, women

were excluded from serving in direct combat roles. While this policy changed in 2016,

many women report diff‌iculty feeling included and welcomed in their mostly male units

(Swick & Moore, 2018). Before the repeal of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy in 2011,

individuals who identif‌ied as a sexual minority were ineligible for military service and

subject to separation should they disclose their sexual orientation (Borch, 2010). Even

with the repeal of this policy, research has found that many service members are still

fearful of disclosure (McNamara et al., 2020). Individuals who identify as transgender

have also experienced changing policies regarding their eligibility to serve (Dunlap

et al., 2021). Research has found workplace exclusion based on race or gender can be

detrimental to individuals in these groups from reaching their career advancement

ambitions (O’Reilly & Banki, 2016). It can lead to lower job satisfaction and psy-

chological health (Hitlan et al., 2006). Even when exclusionary policies are changed (or

rescinded), it can still be a considerable amount of time before the culture of the

organization changes with it.

Exclusion is a type of behavior in which an individual is routinely left out and

rejected by others (Mwilambwe-Tshilobo & Spreng, 2021). Exclusion ensues when the

individual is not considered an organizational insider with unique value in the group

(Shore & Chung, 2021; Wang & Li, 2018). Acts of exclusion can comprise bullying and

discrimination in the workplace (Mwilambwe-Tshilobo & Spreng, 2021), leaving

coworkers out of invitations for lunch or after-work outings. Exclusion also occurs

2Armed Forces & Society 0(0)