Diversity Training Programs for the U.S. Armed Forces
This paper examines diversity training programs for the United States Armed Forces, an organization whose members represent virtually every demographic background in American society. Beginning with a needs assessment that identifies four categories of workplace discrimination, the paper outlines how training materials should be designed and developed under Department of Defense directives, with further customization at the service-branch and unit levels. It addresses implementation challenges unique to military settings — particularly the balance between combat readiness and training access — and proposes evaluation methods tied to disciplinary records and retention data. The paper concludes that diversity training must be treated as an ongoing organizational requirement rather than a one-time event in order to sustain high performance and unit cohesion.
- Introduction: Military diversity context and paper scope
- Needs Assessment: Identifying Training Requirements: Four discrimination types and unit-specific needs
- Design and Development of Training Materials: Training resources, responsibilities, and curriculum topics
- Implementation: Delivering Diversity Training: Delivery methods for stateside and combat units
- Evaluation and Sustainment of Training Effectiveness: Metrics, ongoing reinforcement, and performance impact
- Conclusion: DoD policy and sustained training as organizational necessity
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Follows a clear instructional-design framework (needs assessment → design → development → implementation → evaluation), giving the argument a logical, professional structure.
- Uses well-organized tables to present complex categorical information — discrimination types and training resources — making it easy for readers to compare and reference key details.
- Grounds each section in specific evidence, including a named DoD directive, a documented 1996 Army sexual harassment incident, and a direct scholarly quotation cautioning against over-reliance on short training sessions.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates applied needs-assessment methodology drawn from organizational training literature (Kraiger, 2002). Rather than discussing diversity abstractly, it operationalizes the concept by mapping discrimination categories to specific training responses, tying design choices to real DoD policy directives, and proposing concrete, measurable evaluation criteria such as Article 15 disciplinary rates and retention statistics.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a context-setting introduction that frames the military's diversity challenge and previews the paper's scope. The body follows the classic ADDIE-style sequence: needs assessment, design, development, implementation, and evaluation. Each subsection is headed by a guiding question, keeping the analysis focused. The conclusion synthesizes the argument by reaffirming the need for sustained, policy-backed diversity training. Total length is concise, making it a clear model of a focused applied-research paper at the undergraduate level.
Introduction
One of the most diverse organizations in the United States is its armed forces, whose members are drawn from all walks of life and disparate geographic locations across the country. This diverse collection of individuals must function as a seamless and well-integrated team — particularly during combat operations — in order to ensure mission success as well as the safety of its soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines, along with the officers who lead them.
In order to develop and maintain this level of cohesiveness, it is important that the military recognize that diversity in the ranks can present a number of challenges, including cross-cultural differences and, increasingly, sexual orientation issues. To help identify how the U.S. military can benefit from the strengths that a highly diverse organization provides while minimizing the associated challenges, this paper reviews the relevant literature through a needs assessment, the design of a training program, and how such a program will be developed, implemented, and measured for effectiveness. A discussion of how diversity training programs can contribute to combat readiness and esprit de corps is followed by a summary of the research and key findings in the conclusion.
Needs Assessment: Identifying Training Requirements
Although each military service and its constituent elements will present different training needs based on their respective memberships and organizational missions, there are some commonalities that can help illuminate what types of diversity training requirements are needed in a given military unit. For example, despite an increasing amount of effort on the part of top commanders, sex discrimination remains an important issue in the U.S. military. Perhaps the most high-profile instance took place in November 1996, when the U.S. Army was confronted with potential sexual harassment claims from more than 5,000 female soldiers who claimed the military was treating them unfairly compared to their male counterparts (Hemphill & Haines, 1999). The subsequent elimination of the "don't ask, don't tell" rule and the allowance of active duty service by openly gay individuals likewise introduced potential new training needs, depending on the composition of a given military unit (Obama signs repeal of 'don't ask, don't tell,' 2010).
In this regard, Kraiger emphasizes the need for unit-specific needs assessment to develop effective training programs: "The first step in preparing for diversity training is to conduct an organizational needs assessment to determine the nature and severity of diversity problems or issues in the organization. Only then can a comprehensive, long-term diversity strategy be created" (2002, p. 122).
To help determine what type of diversity training is needed in any given situation, an identification of what types of discriminatory practices might be taking place is required. Discrimination can be grouped into four basic categories, as described below.
Isolated discrimination refers to intentionally harmful actions undertaken by a dominant group member against members of a subordinate group, without that action being socially embedded in the larger organization or community context.
Small-group discrimination refers to intentionally harmful actions undertaken by a few dominant group members acting in concert against members of subordinate groups, without the sanction of the larger organization.
Direct institutional discrimination refers to organizationally prescribed actions that, by intention, have a negative impact upon members of subordinate groups — routine actions carried out by large numbers of employees guided by organizational norms and culture.
Indirect institutional discrimination refers to practices that have a negative impact upon members of a subordinate group even though the prescribed norms and regulations guiding these actions were established with no intent to harm subordinate group members.
(Source: Hemphill & Haines, 1999, p. 2)
Design and Development of Training Materials
The training materials needed for a diversity training program in the U.S. Armed Forces would be developed and assigned by responsibility at multiple organizational levels. Written handouts would be the responsibility of the Department of Defense (DoD) pursuant to DoD Directive No. 1020.02 (February 5, 2009), Diversity Management and Equal Opportunity (EO) in the Department of Defense. Case studies of workplace discrimination and videos (motion picture or DVD format) would be developed at the service-specific level — that is, by the U.S. Army, Air Force, Marines, Navy, or Coast Guard as appropriate. Self-awareness exercises, discussion of actual incidents from the workplace, group exercises, role playing, and interaction with trainees of different backgrounds would all be developed and administered at the unit level (e.g., division, wing, battalion, or company level).
The training medium for diversity training in the U.S. military would be developed and administered internally. At a minimum, the curriculum should cover the following topics, with additional areas introduced as the need is identified:
1. Problems of discrimination in the military workplace
2. The role of stereotypes in discrimination
3. How to make different groups welcome in the military workplace
4. How diversity contributes to performance and productivity
5. The DoD's policies concerning discrimination and the provisions of federal equal employment opportunity laws
6. The content of stereotypes about different groups
7. Promoting retention and development of different groups
8. The cultures of different demographic groups serving in the military
9. Nondiscriminatory recruitment
10. Problems of discrimination outside the military workplace
Conclusion
Because the U.S. Armed Forces are not a homogeneous collection of individuals, but rather represent an enormously diverse collection of people from all of the states and territories, there is a vital need for informed and meaningful diversity training programs. Such programs can help group members better understand one another and overcome powerful cross-cultural differences that may adversely affect unit readiness and mission performance. To this end, the U.S. Department of Defense has established policies that prohibit any type of discriminatory practice in the military, and there are numerous examples from both the public and private sectors of how such programs can help eliminate these harmful practices.
References
Bendick, M., Egan, M. L., & Lofhjelm, S. M. (2001). Workforce diversity training: From anti-discrimination compliance to organizational development. Human Resource Planning, 24(2), 10.
Diversity management and equal opportunity (EO) in the Department of Defense. (2009, February 5). U.S. Department of Defense. Retrieved from
Hemphill, H., & Haines, R. (1999). Discrimination, harassment, and the failure of diversity training: What to do now. Westport, CT: Quorum Books.
Kraiger, K. (2002). Creating, implementing, and managing effective training and development: State-of-the-art lessons for practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Obama signs repeal of 'don't ask, don't tell.' (2010, December 22). Associated Press: MSNBC. Retrieved from
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.