Glass Ceilings in the Military

• Date: 01 October 1993
• Published date: 01 October 1993
• Author: J. Norman Baldwin,Bruce A. Rothwell
• DOI: 10.1177/0734371X9301300402
• Subject Matter: Articles

5

THE

PROMOTION

RECORD

OF

THE

UNITED

STATES

AIR

FORCE

Glass

Ceilings

in the

Military

J.

NORMAN

BALDWIN

AND

BRUCE

A.

ROTHWELL

xamining

the

composition

of

governmental

labor

forces

is

t*

a

continual

responsibility

as

the

population

of

the

United

I

j-~

States

changes.

The

Hudson

Institute

(1988)

predicts

~

between

1988

and

2000,

two-thirds

of

the

new

entrants

――――――

into

the

workforce

will

be

women,

17

percent

will

be

Afro-

Americans,

and

29

percent

will

be

Hispanic.

As

Caucasian

and

male-

dominated

labor

pools

diminish,

government

agencies

should

be

selecting

increasing

numbers

from

traditionally

disadvantaged

groups.

However,

the

selection

of

women

and

minorities

is

only

the

first

step

in

pursuing

representative

government

and

improving

the

. ,

, , .

,

-

,

This

article

presents

the

outcome

from

every Air Force

officer promotion

board

convening

over

a

13-year

period.

It

includes

the

evaluation

of more

than

160,000

Caucasian,

Afro-

American,Hispanic, femaleand

"other"

officers

eligible

for

promotion

to

captain,

major,

lieutenant colonel

and

colonel.

The

data

indicate

minorities

are

not

promoted

at

the

same

rate

as

majority

officers,

and few females

serve

as

Air

Force

officers.

On

the

brighter

side,

females

have

very

competitive

promotion

rates

to

lieutenant

colonel

and

colonel,

minority

promotion

rates

do

not

indicate

adverse

impacts,

and

majority-minority promotion

rate

differences

decrease

as

rank

increases

in

the

Air

Force.

welfare

of

disadvantaged

groups.

Ensuring

women

and

minorities

are

promoted

and

represented

throughout

the

hierarchies

of

public

agencies

is

the

essential

second

step.

Women

comprise

51.2

percent

of

the

population,

yet

hold

less

than

five

percent

of

the

senior

management

positions

in

the

United

States

(Loden,

1987:

44;

U.

S.

Depart-

ment

of

Commerce,

1990: 12).

While

making

progress

in

the

1980s,

minorities

are

also

underrepresented

in

the

official

and

managerial

ranks

of

large

and

small

American

companies

(U.S.

Department

of

Labor

[DOL],

1992: 17).

Whether

one

is

a

majority

or

minority

group

member,

promotions

is

an

incentive

that

provides

upward

mobility,

higher

pay,

prestige,

and

increased

authority

(Baker,

Markham,

6

Bonjean,

and

Corder

1988).

As

an

incentive,

it

consequently

enhances

motivation

and

productivity.

As

a

means

to

valued

ends,

it

ultimately

enhances

the

satisfaction

level

of

employees.

Glass

ceilings,

in

turn,

can

have

a

detrimental

impact

on

the

morale

and

productivity

of

employees.

Commitment,

satisfaction,

and

motivation

can

wane,

while

turnover,

apathy,

resistance

to

change,

and

cynicism

wax.

The

preceding

problems

are

magnified

when

the

absence

of

promotion

opportunities

is

associated

with

perceptions

of

discrimina-

tion

(Hopkins,

1987).

Disillusioned

and

discouraged,

victimized

group

members

often

fail

to

put

forth

their

best

efforts

(Schotter

and

Weigelt, 1988).

However,

when

special

efforts

are

made

to

hire

and

promote

women

and

minorities,

motivation

is

generally

enhanced

because

group

members

find

the

playing

field

more

fair.

This

in-

creased

effort,

in

turn,

pressures

advantaged

groups

to

work

harder,

thus

increasing

the

overall

productivity

of

an

organization

(Schotter

and

Weigelt,

1988).

Promoting

women

and

minorities

in

public

organizations

has

even

greater

significance.

Efforts

to

promote

the

disadvantaged

into

progressively

more

influential

positions

enhances

the

representation

and

widens

the

range

of

views

in

decision

making

(Krislov, 1974;

Rehfuss,

1986).

Decisions

reflect

the

broader

interests

of

the

popula-

tion,

and

more

sensitive

and

insightful

decisions

are

made

concerning

programs

serving

disadvantaged

groups.

Additional

classic

argu-

ments

favoring

the

selection

and

promotion

of

women

and

minorities

emphasize

(1)

the

importance

of

making

up

for

past

discrimination

when

groups

still

suffer

the

vestiges

of

discrimination,

(2)

establishing

a

more

equitable

distribution

of

wealth,

and

(3)

building

the

dignity

of

historically

oppressed

groups.

The

role

of

government

in

achieving

these

ends

is

particularly

important

when

viewing

members

of

disad-

vantaged

groups

are

taxpayers

with

a

proprietary

right

to

share

in

the

benefits

of

government

employment.

Moreover,

overcoming

glass

ceilings

in

government

is

especially

important

because

the

government

is

&dquo;a

symbol

of

this

nation’s

commitment

to

racial

and

sexual

equality&dquo;

and

a

model

of

desirable

employment

values

(Hellriegel

and

Short,

1972;

Lewis,

1988:

700).

The

research

on

equal

promotion

opportunity

in

the

public

sector,

however,

is

limited.

One

agency

seldom

investigated

is

the

Department

of

Defense

(DOD),

an

employer

of

more

than

one

million

employees

and

more

than

one-third

of

the

federal

work

force

(U.S.

Department

of

Commerce,

1990:

326).

Our

article

consequently

expands

the

equal

promotion

opportunity

research

by

investigating

active

duty

officers

of

one

of

the

major

branches

of

DOD -

the

United

States

Air

Force.

It

specifically

explores

whether

the

Air

Force

pro-

motes

women

and

minorities

at

the

same

rate

as

the

majority,

has

made

progress

in

promoting

women

and

minorities,

and

promotes