Racial and Gender Diversity in State DOTs and Transit Agencies (2007)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

33 Conducting a Utilization and Availability Analysis One of the primary means for measuring whether or not an organization is achieving its goal of attaining a diverse workforce is to conduct a regular utilization and availability analysis. State DOTs and federally funded transit agencies are under a legislative mandate to complete these types of analy- ses as a means of monitoring their progress towards achiev- ing this goal. Conducting an availability and utilization analysis allows an organization to determine if there is an underutilization of a particular group and/or if a particular race or gender is being concentrated in a particular occupation. For example, according to Special Report 275, The Workforce Challenge: Recruiting, Training, and Retaining Qualified Workers for Transportation and Transit Agencies, “Minorities are overrep- resented in bus operations as compared with information technology and engineering positions, in which Caucasian males dominate. The gender mix for bus operations is about 77 percent male and 24 percent female” (3). The numbers reported in The Workforce Challenge are aggregated because they provide the total count for minorities. It would be more useful, however, if the racial/ethnic mix for men and women were provided along with the gender concentration in bus operations. It is important for agencies to disaggregate their employ- ment counts by job category, each race/ethnicity, and gender when conducting an availability and utilization analysis, and not just consider the overall workforce simply by minority status or gender alone. In The Determinants of Minority Em- ployment in Police and Fire Departments, O’Brien (2003) looked at the factors that affect employment of Blacks, His- panics, Asians, and Native Americans in police and fire de- partments. He examined aggregated data, as well as data dis- aggregated by race and gender, and found that different variables, such as whether a department had an affirmative action plan or numeric goals, affected the employment rate of the different racial/ethnic groups. This study demonstrated the importance of studying both aggregated (all minorities as a group) and disaggregated (broken out by each race/ ethnicity) data. The police and fire department article also used variables that were relevant to this project. In his article, the author created several key sets of variables including: geographic (whether a department was in a city or suburb); regional; population (urban and minority demographics); wage differentials; and legal (number of EEO complaints). The analysis revealed: There was a difference for minority groups. For police, while having just an AA policy did not increase minority employment, having both an AA policy and numeric goals did increase Black and Hispanic employment. However, having both an AA policy and numeric goals did not affect the other minority groups. For firefighters, having just an AA policy was sufficient by itself to increase Hispanic and Asian employment. However, just having an AA policy had no effect on Black and Native American employment (O’Brien 2003). This analysis illustrates the importance of disaggregating data, because it creates more meaningful results for re- searchers and policy makers. Identifying Factors that Influence Utilization Rates There are several factors that might influence the utiliza- tion of women and minorities, but only some of which are in the control of an agency. External factors that might influence the utilization of women and minorities include local eco- nomic factors, such as a state’s unemployment rate, total population, minority population, poverty rate, and the percentage of women and minorities with a high school or college degree. If there is a high unemployment rate in a par- ticular area, then it is reasonable for a state DOT or transit A P P E N D I X B Literature Review

34 agency to have low utilization rates for women and minori- ties. It would not be surprising for a state with a large minor- ity population to have a larger utilization rate than a state with a small minority population. In Jihong Zhao’s (2005) article, “Predicting the Employ- ment of Minority Officers in U.S. Cities,” he states that “a substantial minority population was among the most im- portant predictors of minority officer employment in city po- lice departments.” The percentage of women and minorities with a high school or college degree is also important because the educational level of these groups will determine what po- sitions they are qualified to fill. The type of position available in the transit industry has changed over the past few years because the mission has shifted from one primarily focused on building roads to one that must be prepared to respond both to potential terrorist threats and to develop new transit systems. As a result, there is a growing need for additional professional positions such as planners, engineers, and IT programmers. In addition to external factors, there are internal factors that an agency can influence. For example, agencies can cre- ate work environments hospitable to women and minorities so that they will be encouraged to apply for positions and, if hired, will stay in the industry. Gary Graham and Julie Hotchkiss (2003, 4–7) conducted research that examined which industries are most hospitable to women. Using the Current Population Survey, they developed an EEO index with five components to evaluate an agency’s climate: 1. The “Equal Pay Component” measures the extent to which the employer pays women and men in the same jobs the same pay. 2. The “Occupational Segregation Component” measures the extent to which an employer’s workforce is integrated, by gender, and across jobs and occupations. 3. The “Glass Ceiling Component” measures the extent to which women are represented in the upper levels of the organization. 4. The “Hiring Component” measures the extent to which women and men are proportionally represented in occu- pations and firms relative to their levels of availability in the relevant labor market. 5. The “Related Discrimination Component” considers the scores on the separate components from the perspective of race/ethnicity. The authors applied this EEO index to six broad industry groups: • Manufacturing (MAN) • Mining and Construction (MC) • Transportation, communication, and utilities (TCU) • Retail and wholesale trade (TRD) • Service (SRV) • Finance, insurance, and real estate (FIN). The two industries relevant to state DOTs and transit agen- cies are mining and construction (MC) and transportation, communication, and utilities (TCU). According to the authors’ analysis, “both MC and TCU have indexes below the market norm. MC’s poor index was driven by its significantly below average performance on three out of five compo- nents.” It scored below the norm on: Occupational Segrega- tion, Glass Ceiling, and Related Discrimination. Graham and Hotchkiss argue that organizations “operat- ing in poorly-performing industries might be slated for greater enforcement efforts by agencies such as Equal Em- ployment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP).” They further note that the EEOC does not systematically evaluate the staffing data it collects through the EEO reports and rec- ommend that the EEOC and other agencies that monitor EEO performance have a more routine assessment of indus- try performance on EEO efforts. Effective leadership is another key internal factor that can influence an agency’s success in fully utilizing women and minorities. Leadership needs to communicate the impor- tance of diversity in the organization. This communication can be in the form of formal written statements, as well as through regular company-wide correspondence meetings, and other communication tools. In its report, Best Practices of Private Sector Employers, the EEOC states: Management must have a positive and unequivocal commit- ment to equal employment opportunity. Without commitment from top-level management to front-line supervisors, nothing can reasonably be expected to be done. Management commit- ment must be a driving force. . . . Management should partici- pate and interact with employees and employee groups. It should encourage ongoing discussions about diversity issues. Communication should be encouraged from “top-down” and “bottom-up”, including CEO speeches to employees and letters from employee to management. (EEOC 1997) Jeffrey Gandz (2001), in A Business Case for Diversity, also discusses the importance of leadership. He says, “One critical requirement in achieving diversity is a clear, unequivocal state- ment by organizational leaders of the importance of doing so.” In addition to having a clear statement, Gandz emphasizes the importance of “walking the talk,” which means making sure these statements are followed up with concrete actions. Finally, Layne (2002) also discusses leadership in Best Practices in Managing Diversity, Leadership and Management in Engineering. It is not enough to have mid and lower level employees com- mitted to diversity; management must also be involved. “The chief executive officer, senior management, and the board of

35 directors of the organization must demonstrate their commit- ment to workforce diversity. This must be done not only by is- suing statements and developing policies, but also by making decisions and taking actions that reflect that commitment” (Layne 2002). Benchmarking Best Practices One of this project’s main goals is the development of benchmarks to measure racial and gender diversity in state DOTs and transit agencies. The first step then is to define the term “benchmark.” A benchmark has been defined as: 1. A systematic and continuous process to identify, deter- mine, measure, compare, learn, adopt and implement the best practices obtained through internal and external eval- uation of an organization so that performance of a higher standard can be achieved and improved. [emphasis added] (Endut et al., 2000) 2. A standard of performance ... [which] allows organiza- tions to discover where they stand in relation to others [emphasis added] (U. S. Department of Defense date unknown). Before establishing a benchmark, one should identify what type of benchmark they want to establish. In Best Practices & Benchmarking: Making Worthwhile Comparisons (U. S. Depart- ment of Defense date unknown), four forms of benchmarking are discussed: 1. Internal benchmarking studies the practices and per- formance within the organization itself. 2. External benchmarking determines the performance of others, preferably world-class companies. 3. Quantitative benchmarking allows organizations to meas- ure progress toward goals and to set improvement objec- tives in terms of specific performance measures or metrics. 4. Process benchmarking examines how top performing companies accomplish a specific process. These studies are undertaken through research, surveys, interviews, and site visits. Also discussed in Best Practices & Benchmarking: Making Worthwhile Comparisons is how an organization can conduct a “gap analysis,” which is a “method that helps identify the performance or operational differences between your process and that of your benchmarking partners, and why the differ- ences are there.” A gap analysis involves taking a look at how things are and comparing them to how you want them to be. In our review of the Transportation Research Board’s current research projects, we found other benchmarking studies that are currently in progress. One of the objectives of Benchmarking for North Carolina Public Transportation Systems (TRB 2004) is to develop a set of “efficiency and effectiveness benchmarks that are commonly used by other transit systems.” The researcher of the North Carolina proj- ect defines benchmarking as “a process to establish stan- dards, targets and/or best practices in regard to performance measurement.” In another TRB sponsored benchmarking project, Analy- sis and Benchmarking of State DOT Recruitment and Hiring Practices (TRB 2005), the researchers plan to “analyze and benchmark HR best practices for recruiting and hiring trans- portation agency employees at entry and mid-career levels.” According to the project overview, “There currently exists lit- tle information and no mechanism for comparison of human resource (HR) best practice benchmarks of state departments of transportation (DOTs) and other transportation agen- cies.” This recruitment and hiring study will survey practices of state DOTs, other governmental agencies, and private and nonprofit organizations to develop a list of best practices. After the initial list of best practices has been developed, the researchers plan to refine the list based on the outcome of site visits and telephone interviews. The best practices will be organized within defined peer categories, which will be based on demographics and organizational structure. In Managing Transit’s Workforce in the New Millennium, the authors developed benchmarks for key positions in the transit industry. A telephone benchmarking survey was administered to 50 HR managers or transit managers in small, medium, and large transit agencies. The purpose of the survey was to “deter- mine the positions most difficult to recruit for and to retain em- ployees in.” The researchers received data from 33 of the 50 agencies, a 66% response rate. From these responses, the team developed a tentative list of benchmark positions. According to the report, “bus operators and mechanics were mentioned most often as difficult to recruit and retain followed by information technology professionals, engineers, and customer relations rep- resentatives.” The researchers then developed a survey, which they mailed to 200 small, medium, and large transit agencies. “The purpose of the survey was to understand how transit agen- cies recruit, train and retain employees in the benchmark posi- tions.” Of the 200 surveys, 53 were completed, resulting in a 27% response rate. The researchers used the results of the survey to develop a list of 15 agencies to visit in order to prepare case stud- ies. The agencies were grouped by size and were representative of different geographic regions. One of the goals of the study was to develop a core skill set for the benchmark positions. The researchers were able to identify a set of skills for transit mechanics, but were not able to identify a detailed skill set for the other benchmark positions. Developing Benchmarks Developing a benchmark requires extensive research and data collection. The Government Accounting Office (GAO)

36 outlines a series of steps to develop a benchmark. It instructs organizations to 1. Understand the government process [they] want to improve, 2. Research to plan the review, 3. Select appropriate organizations, 4. Collect data from selected organizations, 5. Identify barriers to change, and 6. Make recommendations for change constructive and con- vincing. (U. S. Department of Defense, Date Unknown) In order to understand the government process, GAO sug- gests that organizations discuss the process with agency offi- cials and then illustrate it in a flowchart. Implementing this suggestion would help understand how state DOTs and tran- sit agencies develop and measure their diversity and affirma- tive action goals. From our review of the data, it appears that there is no uniform way to collect and report the utilization and avail- ability rates for women and minority employees. There were, however, some agencies that seemed to have a good process in place. The GAO recommends that when selecting appropriate organizations for the comparison group, the organization looking for comparisons should find compa- nies that experts consider among the best at the process being reviewed. In the benchmarking process, there are numerous options for selecting a comparison group. In Benchmarking for North Carolina Public Transportation Systems (TRB 2004) the authors state that comparisons can be made with (1) some kind of industry standards, (2) appropriate organizational goals or targets, (3) the performance of a peer group, or (4) the “best practices” of other similar organizations. In Best Practices in Managing Diversity, Leadership and Management in Engineering (Layne 2002), the author discusses best practices to manage di- versity in the engineering industry. According to the author, “benchmarking against results in other organizations” is a key component of a successful diversity program, and “successful companies keep track of what their competition is doing in the area of diversity, just as they do with other business goals.” In A Business Case for Diversity, Jeffrey Gandz (2001) argues that it is a mistake to search only within one’s own industry. He believes that “Just looking at one’s direct com- petitors is a myopic view of the benchmarking process. Learning from the best, about the best practices, and about the things that work and the things that should be avoided is critically important if many of the pitfalls of diversity man- agement are to be avoided.” The best practices of a select group of private and public sector organizations are discussed in the Best Practices sec- tion of this report (Appendix E). The complete list of references consulted for this literature review is provided in the Bibliography (Appendix C).