Each year, I recruit PROPEL team members from our pool of what is now over 300 employees. Participation is open to all employees including full-time and part-time staff as well as full-time and part-time/adjunct faculty. Teams are formed intentionally with the goal of building the most diverse teams possible to ensure inclusion of broad perspectives. Based on college-wide faculty to staff ratios and employee demographics, I aim to create representative teams with three staff and two faculty with at least one team member being an employee of Color and one team member being male. Each team consists of five people, and while I would love to bring more diversity to each team, I also recognize that the diversity of PROPEL teams is contingent upon the diversity of our employee base overall. Our employee population is made up of 24% employees of Color and 76% employees who are White with overall 32% male and 68% female. (Note that at my organization employees are currently asked to self-identify as male or female).
Let me pause for a moment to explain why I categorize employees in these two buckets regarding race/ethnicity. I recognize that by lumping all non-White employees into an employees of Color category, we lose the detail regarding which races and ethnicities truly exist within our team. However, when convening PROPEL teams, we simply do not have a representative number of employees volunteering from each demographic category, and therefore, it is practical to try to mimic the general proportions of employees who are White and employees of Color. I do, however, have the raw data to inform team composition if (and hopefully when) more employees of Color begin volunteering for PROPEL.
What has become clear is that we do not currently have a representative number of employees of Color volunteering to participate in PROPEL. We see a similar and even greater disparity when we examine the number of interested employees by gender. The current volunteer pool consists of 18% employees of Color and 82% employees who are White with overall 16% being male and 84% female.
| Demographic Categories | College-Wide | PROPEL Volunteers |
| Employees of Color | 24% | 18% |
| Employees who are White | 76% | 82% |
| Female | 68% | 84% |
| Male | 32% | 16% |
These disparities have real implications not only for the types of innovations developed by each PROPEL team, but also for the individuals who are and who are not participating. Innovation is stimulated by diverse perspectives, and homogeneous teams may struggle to produce truly innovative ideas to stay on the cutting edge of education. While the main goal of PROPEL is to foster ongoing innovation, several sub-goals exist related to employee satisfaction as well as personal and professional growth. PROPEL team members have reported that some of the biggest benefits of participating is the connections they make with colleagues they would not typically engage with during routine work. Team members have shared mentoring relationships they have built within teams and supportive relationships they cultivated. Additionally, PROPEL team members gain exposure for their innovations across the College and with the executive leadership team.
The lack of representation of employees of Color and males in the PROPEL team pool means that individuals in these groups are missing opportunities to build relationships, enhance experience, and gain visibility. Existing PROPEL team members are missing the chance to learn from a wide range of colleagues. It also means our innovations may lack diverse perspectives and may miss opportunities to be relevant to a broad range of stakeholders.
Why might these disparities exist?
I examined my recruitment strategies in hopes that I was simply missing some group and could easily reach out to any overlooked population. Over the last 14 months, I have recruited participants through virtual coffee chats, announcements at department meetings (including every dept across the College), a College-wide newsletter, and emails. I have also shared status updates of PROPEL team formation and innovation development to maintain relevance and awareness. These methods were chosen because they reach every employee. I do not see any gaps in opportunity created by the recruitment method.
Is there something about the nature of PROPEL teams that makes participation less appealing to males and employees of Color? Is there something about the nature of innovation, collaboration, or team work that appeals more to some groups than others? Could the fact that PROPEL is led by a White female (me) contribute to White females being over represented in the volunteer pool?
A dozen research projects could grow out of these questions, and I feel a sense of urgency to understand what is missing. I may never be able to pinpoint the cause of the disparity, but I can develop outreach strategies to appeal to a wider audience. For now, that is where I will focus my attention. I would love to hear from you all…what strategies should I employ to reach a wider audience within my organization? What factors may be contributing to the lack of representation in PROPEL? I look forward to your comments below.
