Why Diversity Matters in the U.S. Army: A Personnel Analysis
This paper examines the importance of diversity within the United States Army and broader armed forces, tracing its historical roots to the 1948 Presidential Executive Order on equal opportunity. Drawing on HR management literature and military policy analysis, the paper discusses how diversity affects cohesion and unit effectiveness, outlines the civil-military relationship dimensions of a representative force, and catalogs the key outcomes a robust diversity program can produce—including improved accessions, retention, performance, personnel development, national engagement, education and training, and global mission readiness. The paper argues that diversity and high military standards are not mutually exclusive and that embracing both yields a stronger, more adaptive force.
- Introduction to Diversity in the Armed Forces: Defines diversity and its HR management implications
- The Importance of Diversity in the Military: Historical context and strategic value of military diversity
- Civil-Military Relations and Tactical Necessity: Diversity's role in civil-military bonds and operations
- Potential Army Diversity Outcomes: Seven enumerated outcomes of effective diversity programs
- Conclusion: Diversity and standards as complementary, not competing
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- It grounds the discussion in concrete HR management frameworks—cohesion and effectiveness—giving abstract diversity arguments measurable dimensions relevant to military leadership.
- It moves logically from theory to practice, progressing from definitions and historical context through civil-military relations and into specific, enumerated program outcomes.
- The bulleted breakdown of diversity outcomes (accessions, retention, performance, training, global engagement) provides a structured, policy-ready argument that is easy to follow and cite.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates effective use of multi-source synthesis, weaving together HR management theory (Pinch, 2006), legislative analysis (Kamarck, 2017), and workforce demographics (Judy & D'Amico, 1999) to build a layered argument rather than relying on a single perspective. This approach strengthens credibility and mirrors the evidence-based reasoning expected in policy-oriented military studies writing.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a conceptual definition of diversity and its HR implications, then establishes the military case through historical and demographic context. A dedicated section addresses civil-military relations and operational examples such as the Marine Lioness program. The longest section enumerates seven distinct diversity outcome categories using parallel bullet-point formatting. A concise conclusion reframes the core argument as a win-win proposition, tying together standards and inclusion.
Introduction to Diversity in the Armed Forces
The term diversity has commonly been used to describe the variations in characteristics among two or more individuals. It can cover visible characteristics (such as age, gender, and race) as well as invisible ones (such as knowledge, values, and culture). Considering the attention paid to diversity by contemporary organizations, understanding the reason for this focus on workforce diversity and what it implies within the armed forces personnel management context is valuable (Kamarck, 2017).
Within the armed forces, the subject of diversity is complex in nature—conceptually as well as with respect to its administrative and practical implications. Diversity constitutes one of the biggest and most challenging HR management issues faced by military HR leaders over the last twenty to thirty years. Increased diversity in the areas of recruitment, employment, and development has challenged conventional armed forces organizational principles, standards, outlooks, and beliefs. It has led to the modification and revision of HR models, practices, policies, and initiatives (Pinch, 2006).
Pinch (2006) notes that several entities consider diversity a core value of multicultural, egalitarian societies, and that organizations ought therefore to seek diversity irrespective of its link to performance measures. From an HR management standpoint, diversity has largely been examined in terms of how it affects factors such as group dynamics, which in turn influence organizational performance. The following two main factors have been analyzed in both military and civilian contexts:
- Cohesion: Dedication to the common goals of a group and to fellow group members.
- Effectiveness: A group's capability of fulfilling its goals efficiently.
References
Forsling, C. (2015). Why the military needs diversity. Retrieved from https://taskandpurpose.com/why-the-military-needs-diversity/
Kamarck, K. N. (2017). Diversity, inclusion, and equal opportunity in the armed services: Background and issues for Congress. CRS Report, Congressional Research Service. Retrieved from https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R44321.pdf
Judy, R. W., & D'Amico, C. D. (1999). Workforce 2020. Hudson Institute.
Pinch, F. C. (2006). Challenge and change in the military: Gender and diversity issues. Canadian Defence Army Press.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.