Join us for a lecture presented by Domonic Bearfield, Professor, Tratchenberg School, George Washington University.
Representative bureaucracy scholarship has evolved from theoretical discussions on representative workforces in democratic societies to empirical studies examining how specific identities shape outcomes for particular groups of clients. Throughout the history of this work, scholars have focused on the representation of people traditionally seen as other in the modern professional workforce – people of color and women. Thus, scholars have failed to acknowledge how whiteness and masculinity have been represented in our research. We argue that discussions of whiteness and masculinity have historically been absent from representative bureaucracy scholarship with significant implications for the field. We begin discussing the history of representative bureaucracy scholarship, focusing on the absent discussion of whiteness and masculinity and the implications this has on the field’s understanding of representation. We then focus on more inclusive approaches to representation in public administration scholarship and practice. Whiteness has traditionally been seen as neutral, and white bureaucrats have largely not been linked to outcomes for white citizens. However, in linking bureaucrats of color to outcomes for clients and citizens of color, we have inadvertently reinforced the idea that white bureaucrats cannot serve all clients effectively.Bureaucrats of color, in much of the representative bureaucracy scholarship, are presented as serving all constituents but especially improving outcomes for clients of color. In essence, the focus on increasing the number of bureaucrats of color to improve outcomes for clients of color allows white bureaucrats to avoid serving diverse communities. This is the myth of representation – that only bureaucrats of the same background can provide efficient, effective and equitable services in diverse democratic communities. The myth of representation masks the structural inequalities built into our bureaucratic organizations and places the burden of fixing these inequalities on bureaucrats who have historically been discriminated against. By identifying and clearly defining the myth of representation, scholarship, practice, and policy solutions aimed at alleviating inequalities can focus on the root of the issue– that bureaucrats of all identities must understand how to serve the historically marginalized as well as the powerful in our democratic communities.
Zoom link available upon request from jboire@umd.edu.