TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page:
This report is based on 12 one-on-one executive interviews conducted with major leaders within and outside the City of Tempe workforce. The purpose of this study is to explore the perceptions, attitudes and concerns of leaders intimately familiar with the City’s workforce regarding diversity issues and the development of a progressive workforce system.
The reader should note the individuals interviewed for this project were selected through a purposive (a.k.a. judgmental) sampling methodology, as opposed to a representative one. A purposive sample is one where individual respondents are selected for inclusion through the judgment of the researcher (s) whereas a representative sample is one where scientific selection procedures are used to identify potential respondents. A purposive sample, by definition, is not generalizable to an entire population and, therefore, the findings from this type of study are also not generalizable. One of the key values inherent to a purposive sample is as an exploratory means of research, that is, to explore the parameters and research areas in a general sense, the findings from which can then be applied to studying a selected population using scientific probability sampling methods.
And that is the approach we have taken for the diversity audit. We are using non-generalizable methods of research in the first phase (executive interviews, employee focus groups) followed by a generalizable probability sampling method (employee census) in the second phase. The third phase of the assessment also utilizes non-generalizable executive interviews and focus groups for conducting research on implementation issues. The first phase is to provide us a structured understanding of the City of Tempe workforce system and potential issues and measurements to be included in the second phase census. And the third phase implementation research is to provide us insights and ideas regarding action planning and implementation of a diversity system within the City.
Thus, this document represents our findings from the first phase of the research. Noted above, a total of 12 individuals were personally interviewed by the research team for this phase. We selected executives in top management positions in the City, in addition to key spokespersons from City of Tempe employees and the City’s Human Resources Commission (HRC).
This report represents all the findings germane to the basic research objectives of this project. If, however, additional data or inputs are needed, we stand ready to provide them.
Jamieson and Gutierrez
Diversity Audit Team
The following presents the major findings of this study. Each of the findings below is discussed in greater detail in the body of this report.
DETAILED FINDINGS
Respondents all emphasize that the City’s Mission is to serve the citizens of Tempe. Further, most describe this mission as having two levels. The primary level deals with handling infrastructure needs such as protecting public safety and providing for basic needs such as water, roads and other basic city requirements. The second level of service includes higher level public needs such as contributing to the community’s quality of life through public events like the Tempe Art Festival, cultural activities and development projects such as the Tempe Town Lake.
Two thirds of the respondents cite diversity related issues as among the top 2 or 3 citywide challenges for the future. The most frequently mentioned issues pertain to recruiting, retaining and promoting qualified minority job candidates. Respondents emphasize the need to create a diverse employee base as a critical competitive strategy. One respondent explains his point of view, “Some see diversity as a fairness issue. I see it in more practical terms. We need to develop a more diverse workforce to serve our increasingly diverse community. The City of Tempe must be a minority friendly environment to attract the best candidates. It’s about creating a competitive edge; this is the 21st Century and diversity is not just about window dressing or past injustices.” Others agree that the demographic realities of the changing workforce necessitate a new focus upon attracting, recruiting and retaining qualified minority candidates.
Others see the diversity challenge as a fairness issue. These respondents stress the need to open up opportunities for all to participate fully in City job and career opportunities. In their view, the City needs to operate as a meritocracy and an inherent fairness needs to be built into its operating systems, policies and procedures. One respondent contends, “Our biggest challenge is to implement and live our mission and values. A part of this challenge entails agreeing upon a set of processes for hiring, promotion and discipline that is fully implemented across the board.” Several say that good policy and practices are in place, but that the City has not fully implemented them. In one respondent’s opinion, the biggest barrier to implementation is management. In his view, “A critical challenge is training and accountability for management, especially front line supervisors.” Finally, others say that improving employee relations, especially with employee unions, is a challenge.
One-third of the executive staff emphasizes development issues and economic stability as the overarching challenge for the future. Reinvestment into a fixed boundary community, affordable housing, urban renewal, managing in-growth and congestion are examples of specific challenges that are mentioned. Some of these respondents acknowledge that diversity issues are not on their priority list. One respondent explains this point of view, “Diversity issues are clearly a part of our mandate, but are not top on the list of citywide challenges.” Others say that issues on the foregoing list indirectly affect diversity. For example, one manager explains that if the City does not solve the affordable housing issue, this will negatively impact Tempe’s ethnic diversity. In his view, socioeconomic diversity is important for the City and broader community.
Respondents, executive staff and others alike, overwhelmingly describe the Tempe culture as proactive, cutting edge, very skilled, highly competent top to bottom and achievement oriented. In their view Tempe is very team oriented and the cooperation within and between departments is extremely high, particularly as compared to most city organizations. Respondents clearly appreciate and are extremely proud of their organization and the employees therein. Employees are seen as taking tremendous pride in their job and community, as being task-oriented, hard working and demonstrating a high service ideal. Respondents believe that while there may be some minor complaints, the majority of employees genuinely like their jobs and enjoy working for the City.
Several respondents describe the City of Tempe as a culture in transition. Specifically, executive staff describes an ongoing, dramatic shift in management philosophy from a militaristic ‘command and control’ model to a more facilitative, participative management style. About half of all respondents say that everyday behaviors and practices generally do match up to the City’s stated ideals, values and goals. About half of the respondents, including all of those outside the immediate executive circle, acknowledge that there are organizational issues and barriers that get in the way of living up to cultural ideals.
One of the he biggest cultural disconnects involves execution of top management directives and policies. As one respondent explains it, “Management expectations should filter down but they haven’t much.” Another posits, “The City culture is in flux, we have the systems in place to promote diversity, but implementation seems to be our problem. Processes are not consistently used and there is a definite lack of translation from top to bottom.” Another respondent agrees, “The message from the top gets convoluted and the front line says they can’t do it as suggested and the end result is that it may never get done.”
Several executive staff members agree that communication has been problematic, especially in the past. As one executive sees it, “We were more family-oriented years ago when we were smaller and more informal. Ten years ago our culture changed. Levels were added and a more formal, structured communication resulted in major gaps between the top and bottom levels. In his view communication issues have contributed to the “blame culture” that has evolved. He further suggests that employees don’t believe mistakes will be tolerated. In his view, and several others agree, communication problems have resulted in mistrust and fear among some employees.”
Others agree things have changed dramatically over the past 25 years and that the culture is in flux. One respondent describes it, “We have a major transition with 20+ year employees retiring and lots of new people coming in. The organization dynamic has shifted from a small organization where everyone knows everybody to a large, complex, diverse organization. It’s a changing work environment and the City needs to respond to the needs of the employee of today.”
Respondents may see the organization somewhat differently, but most agree that it is an organization in transition and that the changes are needed. Several discuss how the previous administration attempted to reify some of the organizational disconnects by refocusing on Tempe’s mission and values. Others mention a recognition program consisting of “smiley faces” as being poorly received by employees and being discontinued under the new administration. Both of these improvement efforts are cited as examples of failed change attempts. Events of the past year have sensitized all respondents, particularly executives, to the need for making change in a methodical, thoughtful manner that reinforces Tempe culture.
About half of all respondents, executive staff and others, say that although there have been some serious problems in the past, things have been improving especially in the past year. For example, communication is improving dramatically. The most frequently cited example of this improvement is the City Manager’s well-publicized Friday field trips. One manager explains the impact, “Morale is much better especially with the new City Manager’s hands-on style. He’s walking the talk and he expects his staff to be visible and accessible role models.” Others acknowledge that promoting and utilizing regular employee work groups to discuss issues and policies have helped improve communication and problem solving.
Respondents resoundingly agree that the candidate’s qualification is the most important thing that they look for in a potential job candidate. That said, respondents are highly focused upon minority recruitment as a major goal and a challenge for the City. This represents a shift in focus for many within the City. As one manager sees it, “Diversity is more consciously built into the recruitment process due to the events of the past two years. Fairness is at issue at this point; however our focus over the years has been to increase workforce diversity to better serve our increasingly diverse community.”
Two managers say that diversity is a minor factor in their recruitment process. One manager explains his point of view, “Qualifications are number one, followed by attitude. Diversity may be a factor to consider if all things are equal, but I generally do not use diversity criteria as a major factor. It’s an ‘in the back of my mind’ plus.”
One manager articulates the top management perspective of what it takes to attract highly qualified minority candidates. He states, “We need an organization with a high workplace quality of life to attract good recruits. We need to be sensitive to attracting women and minorities which means being sensitive to what these groups look for in a quality work environment, i.e. flexible schedules, child care, opportunity for advancement and so forth. We need to build an inclusive environment where color, ethnicity or other group characteristics are not held against them but seen as benefits.”
Most agree that a broad comprehensive recruitment process is a critical component of the City’s success now and into the future. Many departments are expanding their advertising to broaden the recruiting net and looking for additional ways to get more minority candidates into the system. For example, today non-profit minority organizations are notified of City job postings and internal opportunities are actively publicized to attract qualified minority candidates.
According to respondents the City does an excellent job of outreach and is seriously dedicated to bringing in and promoting minority candidates. Most say that they do not see any widespread, institutionalized instances of overt discrimination based on minority status. They say that the challenge is finding and attracting minority candidates.
Respondents say they are focused upon improving their minority recruitment process because they see their organizations ‘behind the power curve’ on increasing the diversity. One respondent explains, “Minority recruitment is a huge problem for the city and for our organization. It’s a major concern. We’ve done better, but not well enough.” In their view, the City has made good progress focusing on outreach; however, most are very interested in learning about new or more effective recruitment strategies. Managers, in particular, say that more can be done, but that they need support in this area.
One respondent admits that stereotypes about who is best suited for a given job and who is most likely to be selected, probably does play a role in hiring and promotion. According to this respondent, “There are stereotypes and assumptions on the part of the employer and the employee that consciously or unconsciously impact the recruitment process. Therefore, the City needs to purposefully reach out to cultural groups that have not historically applied for certain types of positions to expand the candidate pool and to communicate that opportunities are expanding in the City.”
Others acknowledge that stereotypes often play a role when any new group joins a previously homogeneous group. For example, when women first joined the fire or police department there may have been some concerns about whether they could do the job or whether standards would be changed or lowered. These issues fade fast in the face of evidence to the contrary. When it is clear the new recruit can and does perform the job well, questions and doubts dissipate. In fact, several respondents observe that employees typically welcome diverse employees into their work group because they bring new skills and abilities into the team, e.g. women working with domestic violence victims, Spanish speaking employees, etc. Then too, the success of these early recruits opens the door for members from other diverse groups to join the team without issues or concerns.
Another respondent tells a story about working to change public perceptions about women being hired in the City of Tempe. Years ago the prevailing belief was that women were invited to apply for traditionally male public safety positions, but were less likely to be hired. Efforts to get the word out that all qualified candidates, including women, would be hired helped change the community perception thereby increasing the female candidate pool. Another adds, “The more diverse we become at all levels, the more credibility the City will have with minority candidates.” Clearly many respondents are aware that the City’s image in the broader community greatly impacts their ability to attract the best and brightest minority candidates.
In sum, minority recruitment is clearly a major shared goal among executive staff and others. The management team appears to have a good understanding of the need and the benefits of diversifying the employee workforce. In fact, several indicate that they are very interested in assistance in this area, i.e. learning about best-known recruitment strategies, additional outreach avenues, etc.
According to respondents, there is a fairly structured communication policy in place, i.e. regular bimonthly staff meetings, employee work groups, one-on-one meetings with employees and so forth. Policy changes are typically posted on the website and the employee groups such as the Tempe Employee Council are often used to disseminate information or to gather feedback for management. Respondents say that they see most managers and organizations following the communication guidelines and norms that are in place.
That said, most respondents acknowledge that there have been communication problems in Tempe especially in the past. However, they emphasize that communication has vastly improved in the last year. They say that the biggest change has been a new focus on employee inclusion. One manager describes the shift, “The City is becoming more inclusive at the strategic and operational levels. It’s beginning to make a positive difference although we are still learning how to make it work, particularly in larger groups.” Managers say that they are focused on better utilizing existing communication mechanisms such as employee work groups. Others are encouraging more participation at staff meetings and other regularly scheduled communication forums.
Many executive staff members acknowledge that learning how to run their organizations as an interactive group can be a challenge. One manager explains, “Generally I think communication is very good, but sometimes we may provide too much information. It’s similar to the outreach issues with citizens. Employees may want to run things that should be handled by managers. The line is difficult to manage.” Another adds, “There is a learning curve with making the type of changes we need to make. For example, we’re learning how to run staff meetings as interactive work groups. Our new management training covers this.”
Several respondents suggest that employee involvement in decision-making varies widely by group and is dependent upon the style and attitude of the individual manager. Some managers are uncomfortable with the new participatory style and do not encourage employee feedback, others are doing a good job. In some cases it appears that management is simply going through the motions of soliciting employee input. As one respondent sees it, “The biggest problem on this (management decision making) is that they make decision on their own. They do a façade of employee input and then do what they want anyway. We all know it. They send out an email to inform us. That’s it.”
Several respondents acknowledge that there have been thorny communication issues between top management and labor unions particularly prior to the Greco Administration. Several examples of disconnects are cited where decisions that have been made in the past have not taken employee feedback and concerns seriously. Other examples suggest that the decision making process itself is structured to favor the interests of the City, e.g. cost savings, rather than the best interests of the employees, e.g. medical insurance or retirement benefits.
Managers and union representatives agree that things have dramatically improved especially during the last year. As one respondent sees it, “I think there is a very good rapport between employees and management in our department. In the last year we have instituted a more inclusive process where employees have more say so and can give feedback on departmental and City policy. A direct bargaining relationship was put into place last year and line employees appear very satisfied.” Another adds, “I wish that there was a way for the rest of the City departments to look at us and see how we work. I would like for us to be the role model, and I think we are.”
A few contend that communication disconnects and lack of management follow through have created an environment where many employees are skeptical of management motives. For example, employees were working in action committees formed to respond to concerns raised in the employee attitude survey. Circumstances surrounding other organizational issues and priorities resulted in putting these issues and committees on the back burner. From the employee perspective, management dropped the ball. The decision to prioritize other issues may in fact be correct, but the communication and follow through to explain changing priorities was lacking. The end result is a certain amount of mistrust on the part of some employees.
Shifts in management direction may occur without providing employees a context for understanding the change. This contributes to an environment of mistrust and misunderstanding. One manager describes his experience in attempting to improve communication and trust in his organization, “There has been a vast improvement in our communication in the last year. Work groups meet at least twice monthly to get 360-degree feedback on operational issues and policies. Not everyone is buying into it as yet, but I see more participation as time goes on.”
Respondents see significant improvements being made under the new administration. As one respondent sees it, “Manley’s great. He’s a people person who likes to get out, meet and talk to employees. That’s great. He set up monthly meetings with employees and seems warm, not standoffish. When you talk to him, you feel this guy is honest. He truly cares…he’s had a lot to clean up to improve relationships. He’s on the right track.” Managers assert that the City Manager’s communication style is very effective. Several cite the Monday newsletter as an example of regular, direct communication that is making a difference. Other managers point out that they too are implementing communication changes, including spending at least 10% of their time in the field to improve employee relations.
In sum, respondents agree that communication and decision making have been a problem in the past and is an area that managers are working to improve. Further, most believe that the shift toward a more participatory management style is making a difference. One respondent summarizes the group sentiment, “One of our biggest problems has been creating a two-way communication system that works top to bottom. This has been a citywide problem. There is a new willingness and readiness to do something about it and this management structure has the best chance of succeeding.” Most respondents agree that increasingly more employees have input and opportunity to give feedback on key decisions that affect them, but that more progress is needed.
Respondents explain that employees are expected to use the “chain of command” to deal with and elevate problems that encounter on the job. Most believe that problems are generally handled well. One respondent expresses the group sentiment, “Problems for an organization our size are generally handled very well. But clearly we’ve had problems that have not been handled well and that needs to be addressed.” Respondents agree that Tempe needs systems, policies and procedures in place to support workforce issues, even if they are rare in occurrence.
Most agree that it is a major problem when an employee takes an issue to a supervisor and nothing happens. They agree that there needs to be an opportunity and a process, which is not arduous, for employees to communicate their concerns beyond their immediate supervisor. Respondents agree that supervisors need training and support to be able to handle the myriad issues that emerge in an increasingly diverse work group.
Some respondents see a difference in the way problems are handled in different parts of the City. One respondent posits, “There are probably more problems in parts of the organization that operate in a command and control mode. That’s the way PD is, and it’s the same in Public Works, but PD probably has to be that way because of their jobs.” Another adds, “In other departments, like Public Works, employees are worried about saying anything. I’ve heard problems with them even being able to use sick leave.” Several respondents acknowledge that there could be pockets within the City where issues have not surfaced and been dealt with effectively, but most believe this to be on an exception basis, not a widespread problem in the City.
Several respondents say that there are departments in the City where there is a good rapport and respect between management and employees. One respondent explains, “If something (an issue) like that happens to us, we’d get it cleared up quickly. Other departments know the hammer could fall on them. I think most of the problems arise in departments that still use command and control methods.”
Respondents that see discrepancies in how problems are handled describe several systems problems. Several argue that historically the Human Resources department has represented top management and has not operated as an employee advocate or as a neutral facilitator. In the past and even today, the City Manager and his viewpoint has greatly influenced the outcome of workforce conflicts. One respondent explains, “There have been major problems in Tempe particularly under Gary Brown’s leadership. He was bad for employees. The City Manager and the HR Director did not support employees. The good part is that the HR Director and City Manager aren’t here anymore. But there are still a lot of people afraid to say anything. I think employees can go to Will and he’ll probably come through for employees, but, and this is important, the biggest problem is having to go to Will. You know?”
The concerns expressed by these respondents center on the fact that there doesn’t seem to be a citywide system in place that protects and safeguards employees that raise issues. In their view, the existing system is not always implemented as designed. Worse yet, the actual outcome has been far too dependent on the individual managers and directors in place at a given time. One respondent explains the employee perspective, “Although there is a new Human Resources Director in place, employees are watching his operation very closely. Will issues be swept under the table, or will they be addressed fairly and openly? It’s too early to say. Most employees are reserving judgment.” Most importantly, even having an open, inclusive and fair City Manager is seen as problematic if the fairness of the system is still dependent upon the individuals occupying key management positions.
In sum, executive staff members have a relatively positive view of the current problem resolution system. They realize issues may exist, but they do not report any major problems. Respondents outside the executive circle see many issues and areas for improvement. They recommend taking a closer look at how the system and policies are administered and making changes to safeguard employees and rebuild employee trust. Respondents may differ in the degree to which they see problems with the existing system, yet most would agree that an independent system that supports employees in resolving their issues is mandatory. Many would also agree that the front line supervisor has a tremendous impact and as such need to be adequately trained and held accountable for effectively dealing with employee issues.
Respondents strongly agree that the City has excellent benefits, good pay and that employees are generally satisfied. Even so, management has been focusing upon improving employee recognition over the past year. For example, each department has discretionary funds of ½ percent of the salary budget for their department to use for bonuses and recognition activities. Each department director has latitude in how these funds are used; however, the City is moving toward more team-based recognition.
Respondents say that the City works very hard to operate as a meritocracy, but that it is the City’s biggest struggle. One manager explains the difficulty, “Meritocracy is our ideal, but it is difficult to measure the worth of a service. It’s more difficult than in the private sector. In government you find pay scales with automatic increases. Some love the security, other may find it unfair.” Another adds, “Tempe is mostly a meritocracy, but I can give you instances of where it’s not. It’s human nature and there may be some favoritism. Meritocracy is very hard to implement across the board.”
Ensuring a system of fair promotion is probably the biggest issue for employees. One respondent explains, “Fairness is the hot button issue for employees. The TEC is currently working on an interview process that will work across all departments. Many departments are already using interview panels, but it’s not fully implemented. The process can be circumvented by managers who wish to do so.” In fact, a couple of managers report much success using employee panel to screen job candidates. Another adds he likes the idea of the panel, but argues that the recruitment process needs to be streamlined. He explains, “I’m now interviewing 20 candidates for a job due to fear of exclusion. We need to develop a fair and equitable process that narrows the field without narrowing the recruitment pool.”
There does not seem to be any widespread fear among employees of traditional diversity issues such as reverse discrimination, affirmation action or quotas; however, respondents are acutely aware that City policies and practices must be viewed as fair, open and visible to all employees to avoid some of these potential pitfalls.
Finally, several respondents are excited about the City’s new tuition reimbursement program. The dollar amount has been raised to $5,000.00 and the coverage has been expanded to include paying for training outside the employee’s current job field. Respondents agree that this is a great employee benefit.
Respondents have slightly different definitions of diversity, but most emphasize that diversity goes beyond traditional notions of race and ethnicity. Respondents advocate a broad view of diversity that encompasses differences in backgrounds, job classifications, abilities, talents, thoughts, problem solving style, personality styles and similar themes. Most emphasize that it is these differences between people that contribute to a more creative, strong, effective team or organization.
Respondents say that diversity definitions and guidelines have been disseminated to employees through the Civil Treatment training that all employee and managers have taken. However, they agree that there still are misconceptions among employees regarding what diversity is and why it is important. For example, one executive contends that diversity is still a code word for racial diversity and political correctness among some employees. Another respondent explains, “A lot of work has been done but I’m not sure how successful we’ve been. I have seen situations at the line level where diversity issues are occurring and the employees are simply not picking up on it.” Another adds, “Some employees just don’t get it without explicit training on a very basic level. We need to cover things that most of us assume employees know, but they may not.”
There are differences of opinion regarding what diversity encompasses and where Tempe may be lacking in diversity. For example, one respondent stresses that there are gender issues that need to be addressed; yet in his view, most employees and managers act as if gender issues have been resolved. Another believes that Tempe is fairly diverse at the bottom and top management levels and that it is the middle management area that needs to be the diversified. Others argue that lack of diversity at the top management level is the most pressing issue. Respondents may disagree about the diversity specifics, but they generally agree that Tempe is “moderately diverse” and needs to continue to diversify the employee base to ‘mirror’ the increasingly diverse community.
In sum, most of the respondents have a pretty clear idea about what diversity means to them. However, they are not confident that there is a common definition and understanding throughout the City. In their view this needs to be done. Then too, clear diversity goals need to be articulated. They see this as one of the primary outcomes of the diversity audit – identifying issues and articulating diversity goals.
Respondents are very aware of diversity benefits. They emphasize internal organizational benefits such as increased teamwork, higher employee morale, enhanced creativity and problem solving capability. Most see diversity providing the City of Tempe new perspectives and broadening the existing employee knowledge/talent base. Several also mention external community benefits such as improved customer service and enhanced business and economic impacts, i.e. attract more convention business, attract business development, etc. Here again respondents are concerned that the rank and file employee may not understand the big picture when it comes to diversity benefits.
The majority of respondents believe that employees are well aware of the issues that have occurred in the City, but that most are unclear about the purpose and potential impact of the diversity audit. Some employees probably see it as “a pain in the ass” according to one manager. He notes that this situation has been going on for some time now and employees and managers are getting worn out and frustrated. In his view most are ready to move forward and dread rehashing problems.
Others say that many employees are likely to be fearful given recent events including the AG Report and the Ortega Report. Also the way things were handled in Public Works, especially the mass firings, may make some employees reticent to talk openly.
Most employees are fearful simply because they are uncomfortable talking about diversity. This is unfamiliar ground for some and many are scared of saying the wrong thing or offending someone. One manager expounds, “The organization is scared, uncertain and embarrassed. We had our dirty laundry aired and I worry that employees may see this as one more witch hunt.” In contrast, managers say that they see good support for the audit among their top management peers because they understand why it is being done and the benefits. Respondents agree that employees need to be reassured that the process is aimed toward moving forward and that the process is not intended to be punitive or to single out individuals.
In sum, most believe that employees will be more open and honest if they are clear about the purpose and goals of the audit. Respondents stress that employees need to know that the audit is intended to help the City of Tempe continuously improve the workplace environment and its operating systems. In their view employees need to see that the audit is designed to help improve organizational effectiveness and that it is not another “witch hunt” or simply a political response to outside pressures.
The new City Manager has broadly communicated his management vision for the City of Tempe. He espouses a shift from the traditional top down ‘command and control’ model to a more inclusive participatory management style. This new management style and the top manager’s expectation are being broadly disseminated in training that is being delivered to all managers starting in August. Further, the City Manager has asked his staff to focus their management efforts in three key areas: 1. working with their employees directly in the field; 2. developing new and improved methods for communicating and working issues with employees and 3. implementing recognition programs within their organizations. These key criteria will be included in the executive staff performance evaluations.
Executive staff describes the new management philosophy as a positive change. One respondent describes the new approach, “Our management philosophy is to develop facilitative supervisors and leaders rather than ‘bosses’ per se. Tempe is definitely moving from a Theory X to the Theory Y mode of working with employees. We recognize that we need good leaders with good people skills; in fact, good people skills are more important than technical skills which can be trained.”
Others say that they are primarily focused upon minority recruitment and promotion in their organizations. One manager describes the City’s focus, “We are casting a broad recruitment net and filling management positions with diverse appointments. Better recruitment processes are yielding better, more qualified candidates. I think we (managers) are all far more conscious of the importance of building diverse teams and less liable to pass over minority candidates.”
Another ongoing effort to manage diversity involves making employees aware of job opportunities, job requirements and helping them create formal employee development plans. One manager explains why his organization is focused on this, “In the past some employees have assumed that a job may be pre-selected or that they will not be considered for that job due to their minority status. Therefore, we are actively recruiting and encouraging employees to apply for non-traditional jobs they might have felt uncomfortable applying for in the past.”
Another manager is working on employee development plans to combat perceptions of discrimination or favoritism. He explains, “Promotional opportunities are a two-edge sword. Some employees may not avail themselves of training opportunities or prepare themselves for advancement. When young, aggressive employees with fire in their bellies get promoted, some of these employees may feel this is unfair. Then too, the organization may be too quick to pass over employees that are not “go getters” in favor of those who are actively preparing themselves for advancement. Bottom line, we are working to change this dynamic so employees are clear on what they need to do to be promoted and supervisors are clear on their role in helping develop employees.”
Finally, employees provide regular diversity input and ideas via their union organizations in fire and police and through the Tempe Employee Council (TEC) for non-union employees. For example, the TEC has worked with the Human Relations Commission and HR on various issues such as compensation, promotion and interviewing processes and similar workplace systems. Respondents emphasize that employee work groups are also increasingly used to discuss and resolve potential organizational issues including diversity.
Respondents see hiring and promotion as the most significant diversity problem in the City of Tempe. In their view the issues surrounding promotions are the perhaps the most visible problem. One-third of the respondents say that ensuring that there is a “level playing field” for promotions is the most significant system issue to be addressed. Several note that the inability for minorities to advance in the Public Works department is the most egregious example of this problem. They emphasize that the City’s promotional system must not only be fair but must be perceived by employees to be fair as well.
Another third of the respondents say that hiring minority recruits is their biggest concern for several reasons. First and foremost, they say that their departments are not diverse enough. One manager expresses this point of view, “Most departments, including ours, is behind the power curve when it comes to diversity. For example, in our organization women were in support roles until 1994. We have made a conscious effort to recruit women and other underrepresented groups, but we’re not there yet.” Most say that they are working on bringing up numbers for underrepresented groups in their departments. Others say that the critical issue is employee retention. One respondent explains his department’s situation, “Tempe is a great place to live but people leave the workforce after awhile. We’re a stopover for some of the best, so keeping people is a big focus.” Some stress that the field is very competitive and other cities may have a better pay or compensation package to offer. In any event, the City has experienced much competition for good recruits especially in the police and fire departments.
A few respondents cite lack of female leadership and representation, especially at the executive level, as a major problem. Those that say this is an issue contend that the City tends to be focused on increasing racial and ethnic minority representation. One manager summarizes this view, “Gender is still an issue although the politicians discount it and think we have gone beyond it. Females are underrepresented in the professional and leadership ranks; however gender in not on the radar screen in Tempe.”
Others cite a number of different diversity issues including the lack of a common understanding of diversity and its benefit, the lack of teamwork between supervisors and employees and the persistence of top down management in parts of the City. Finally, at least two managers admit that they are unsure what the biggest or most significant diversity issues are. Diversity issues have not come to their attention in their own departments and they are unaware of diversity issues that may exist in other departments.
Some respondents are cognizant of the complexity of making the cultural transition to a more diverse workforce. One describes the problem in terms of a culture clash. He observes, “The biggest obstacle or challenge to diversity is the coming together of long-term employees with new ethnic minorities who grew up in a different culture. Now it’s a different reality and those two worlds are colliding.” Interestingly some respondents believe making the transition is a matter of putting the right people in key organizational roles, others are more focused on structural changes and believe that if the right policies are identified and implemented, diversity ‘will take care of itself.’
Most are sensitive to the difficulties of making some of the changes needed to create an organization that embraces and promotes diversity. For example, several respondents recognize that making the shift to a participatory management style won’t be easy. One respondent points out, “The larger problem is the managers who are not managing in the spirit of participatory management. They need to be trained and held accountable to the new management standard.” One respondent sees power as the central issue in building a more participatory, diverse organization. He observes, “You know, for management the hardest thing to learn is how to give up power. They don’t realize that they get more power that way.”
Another respondent sees the challenge, in the broadest sense, as creating an appreciation for diversity without creating a white backlash. One of the biggest challenges in this regard is to create an overarching citywide system that is fair and is perceived by all employees as fair. Several respondents acknowledge that this may be the toughest aspect of making diversity work in the City of Tempe. Several also emphasize that the City’s diversity focus must include everyone, particularly Anglo males. In their view diversity initiatives and goals must visibly benefit the total organization, not just the few.
Others reiterate their concerns regarding hiring, recruiting and retaining diverse employees. Many talk about the need to ‘fill the holes in the fabric’ meaning that the City’s workforce diversity should reflect the diversity within the surrounding community. One manager emphasizes that good recruitment is only half of the battle, the tougher part is keeping good employees. In his experience, “We’ve been hiring people left and right and have used the opportunity to bring in minorities and females to broaden our employee base. Our biggest barrier is the tremendous turnover we are experience at the zero to five-year mark. There are many reasons for our attrition, but some of it is cultural. We have minority employees that are not comfortable and are not feeling like they are a part of the culture. Its clear we need stronger first line supervisors to help our employees be successful. We need to go beyond technical supervision; we need to work on mentoring and leadership within our supervisory ranks. It’s our biggest concern.”
Others agree that the first line supervisor plays a unique and important role especially in a diverse organization. One manager explains his view, “The biggest disconnect is the first line supervisor who has the biggest impact. First line supervisors may be reluctant to address issues or make a change especially if he/she doesn’t have the power and has to go to his/her manager. Traditionally, first line supervisors are not as likely to make system changes or propose them as part of their job. Making system changes should be part of their role as supervisors.” Others agree that diversity “disconnects” and misunderstandings occur daily in the trenches and that supervisors must be trained to recognize and deal with them as they occur.
Executive staff members say that the Public Works situation was largely a supervisory/management failure. In fact, two managers argue that the entire situation was handled very poorly and was misdiagnosed as a diversity problem. In their view it was really a matter of inadequate or poor management practices were not in keeping with the broader City of Tempe culture. Others agree that Public Works was an anomaly. A couple of managers suggest that there may be pockets of problems in Public Works or even in the Police Department, but that most organizations do not have widespread problems or discriminatory practices.
All agree that Public Work has a history of management problems. In fact, there is HR documentation that point to a number of interventions over the years that apparently did not solve existing problems. However, one manager contends that Public Works is not atypical. He sees the situation differently, “The Public Works situation is not an isolated occurrence. It’s perhaps the most blatant example, but it’s not an anomaly. Everyone at the top knew it was going on inside and outside Public Works. In the past the top management team has swept these types of issues under the rug with the help of the HR Department.” He compares the situation at the top with the United States Presidency. In his view, the City Manager operated with ‘presidential deniability.’ The City Manager tacitly condones the situation letting his staff handle the details. According to this respondent, spin control and impression management have been the standard operating procedure at the top.
Respondents outside the executive circle express different views about what happened in Public Works and why. Everyone acknowledges that ongoing management practices were discriminatory, but two respondents contend that top City Management was unaware of the fact. Other respondents disagree. One explains his view of the situation, “How’d it happen? It was allowed. The leaders, city management, let it happen. The City Manager has to be held accountable because the situation was allowed and it wasn’t addressed.” Another respondent agrees, “A Public Works employee went to the HR Director, but there was no help there. I went to witness his hearing, to view the operation to make sure he was treated okay. The HR Director didn’t even show. Some inexperienced gal from HR who’d never done anything like this before was sent to handle it. Clearly they didn’t take it seriously. The problem grew from there, big time.”
Another respondent adds, “The whole situation got lost in the semantics of the AG Report. The whole conversation became focused on how to define the problem. Was it weak or poor management or was it a diversity problem? The unfortunate thing is that we get sidetracked when issues come up, rather than being able to move forward and agree on what needs to happen. We need to implement the rules and regulations that we believe in to ensure fairness and meritocracy and the diversity issues will take care of themselves.”
In sum, respondents generally agree that the management actions and prevailing environment within Public Works was highly problematic. Employees were not treated fairly; there was a pattern of discrimination, intimidation and retaliation against employees. However two thirds of the respondents believe that this situation was an aberration, which is not typical of how things operate in the City of Tempe. They contend that the City Management was not aware of the extent or scope of the problem. One third of the respondents disagree. They think the top management knew it was going on and allowed it to happen by not confronting and solving the problem as it emerged.
Bottom line, everyone agrees that the City needs to create a system and a workplace environment where these types of behaviors are neither tolerated nor condoned. Respondents generally express confidence that these types of issues can be uncovered and eliminated. One respondent articulates this view, “What we did right, is that we didn’t cover it up or brush it aside. We faced the music and acknowledged that we have deep rooted and systematic problems that need to be addressed. That’s what we are doing now.”
Respondents reflect upon the events of the last year and to share their thoughts on what has worked well and identify areas for improvement in making change and solving organizational issues. At least two managers believe that the Public Works situation was misdiagnosed from the inception. One manager articulates this view, “The HR department overreacted to charges of discrimination. Employees saw that they could more readily change management policy and gain leverage by using the ‘D’ word.” This manager suggests that the Public Works situation highlights the fact that there is a lack of shared definition and understanding of the problem. Consequently, he welcomes the diversity audit, particularly if it serves to clearly define the problem and provides a thoughtful, effective action plan.
Most respondents expressed concerns about the situation was handled. Certain decisions and actions were not carefully considered. Some describe changes being made haphazardly due to the perceived crisis. Others believe good people may have been fired in the haste to be responsive to emerging issues and concerns. On balance, everyone seems ready to make necessary changes; however, they expect to do so in a more data-driven, methodical way.
Several respondents emphasize the need for realistic expectations and an effective transition plan. Another respondent describes what happened in Public Works, “The emergency administration came in and told employees there was a clean state, that there would be no more discrimination and that they should trust them. Those who didn’t immediately jump on the bandwagon and trust new management were labeled ‘lemon suckers.’ So not only were they victimized under the previous management, they were then marked under the new management.” This respondent, and others agree, believe that the Public Works situation wasn’t handled well. They stress that the City needs to have realistic expectations of change and be willing to support employees and managers that are having difficulty in the transition.
Others see communication and inclusion as critical elements of an effective action plan. As one manager sees it, “Lack of trust is the biggest issue to overcome.” Another respondent stresses, “Employees need input on a daily basis. We need to continue to foster open communication and include employees in the diversity discussion. This will be particularly important as we move forward implementing change.”
Managers want to be included in the process of change. Some describe the AG Report as consisting of a number of mandates that failed to give managers the input and latitude that they believe they need to do their jobs well. A few specifically state that they hope the audit process is structured to be more inclusive for managers and employees alike and that it is not simply a list of mandates.
On the plus side, all respondents agree that the City is making good progress toward fostering an environment of open communication. As one respondent sees it, “We need to keep the lines of communication open. All employees need a voice and there needs to be a process in place for them to be heard and for follow up.” Additionally Managers emphasize that making themselves more accessible to employees is crucial. One manager describes the impact, “Accessibility is now becoming the norm in my group. Openness is a value we need to continue to live by and implement citywide. Keeping the change process open and visible to employees will be essential.”
In sum, respondents agree that it is important to continue building on the trust and open communication that is being established in the City. They emphasize the need for an effective, coordinated transition plan for the organization. And they stress the need for an inclusive change process that allows employee and manager input.
One respondent describes the vision for the City, “The most important goal in my view is to create an organizational culture where people are valued, respected and recognized . . . regardless of their personal background.” Most respondents support this overarching goal and they agree that the City needs to communicate a clear vision of what the City wants to accomplish and why. One respondent explains, “We need to communicate today’s notion of diversity.” Another adds, “Some line employees fear reverse discrimination and most don’t understand the payoffs of a diversity focus.” Others acknowledge that employees are not the only ones unclear on diversity; managers have different notions of diversity and why it is important. For example, some are primarily focused on the legal aspects. Respondents are concerned that many managers and employees are not fully aware of the competitive edge diversity brings to an organization; it is this positive aspect of diversity that need to be understood and broadly disseminated.
Two-thirds of the respondents are focused upon recruitment, staffing and employee development as the key strategies or goals. Most agree that widening the recruitment net is critical. A majority of respondents say that the recruitment process itself is a barrier and needs to be improved. Some respondents expect HR to provide better guidelines and support, others anticipate learning more about what the City needs to do to improve recruitment through the diversity audit. All agree this is a critical system that needs improvement and that managers need training and support. And most agree that employee development plans will be essential to help all employees move up and to ensure fairness in hiring and promotions.
Others suggest a focus on improving existing systems and policies. One manager advocates improving the employee screening process to ensure that the best employees are selected and hired. Another recommends improving the City’s disciplinary process so the problem employees can be dealt with more effectively and terminated if warranted. A few emphasize the need to create a better problem resolution process to deal with employee issues including diversity. Others advocate fully implementing and enforcing the existing policies and procedures that are in place. Respondents agree that this is clearly an area that needs to be addressed.
Several assert that training is needed to help the City more effectively manage and support diversity. One respondent explains, “Diversity training too often centers on line employees. We need to do training and education starting at the top and moving down. Managers can’t lead if they don’t understand the diversity issues themselves.” Another agrees, “The biggest obstacle is helping management understand the broad scope of diversity issue. Managers need to embrace it and want to make positive change. I’m not aware of any incentives for them to embrace diversity. It’s looked upon as a ‘feel good’ thing. Managers know the City says it’s important, but they really wonder if it’s a priority.”
Others agree that training is essential, but most focus on the front line supervisor. One manager asserts, “The biggest leverage is with first line supervisors. They have the most impact and have the most fear and inexperience dealing with minorities.” Respondents believe that some of the ongoing management training will help supervisors re-conceptual their role and give them some new skills; however, most believe that additional training and support should be provided to front line supervisors given their critical role in working directly with employees on a daily basis.
Finally, another manager acknowledges that making real change will take much time and effort. He worries about management staying the course, “The managerial challenge will be to balance developmental goals with our diversity focus. Our plate is very full and diversity is a ‘soft goal’ that could be pushed to the background once the crisis abates. Diversity needs to be made a formal priority that is built into our management systems.”
In sum, respondents have many good insights regarding how diversity can help their organization become more effective and specific ideas about what need to happen to make the change. As a group, respondents are ready to move forward. One respondent summarizes the group sentiment, “I think everyone is positive on doing this, but getting something we can all buy into will be the biggest challenge. There are very different ideas among different groups. Attitude is not the big barrier. The good news is that we want to promote diversity. And if it is presented in a fair and equitable way, employees are likely to support it.”