The U.S. engineering community has arguably been the most successful in the world, as evidenced by our high standard of living. Although no one can predict the future, we must ask ourselves what we can expect. What, for example, is the opportunity cost of having engineers from only one group in the U.S. population represented in the engineering workforce? Will the profession continue to benefit from the good-will of the public, let alone improve their understanding, if large segments of the population are not only poorly represented in the profession, but also, according to anecdotal evidence, feel excluded.
Experience in industry and the classroom shows that creativity is increased and the range of potential solutions to problems is expanded when teams of individuals with a variety of personal, cultural, and disciplinary perspectives work together to solve them. The NAE, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and engineering professional societies and stakeholder groups have all advocated increasing diversity in the U.S. engineering workforce, arguing that the paucity of women and underrepresented minorities in U.S. engineering classrooms, research laboratories, design studios, and corporate boardrooms diminishes the range of perspectives and the diversity of ideas/solutions available to the engineering profession (AAES, 2005; ASCE, 2005; ASEE, 2005; Malcolm et al., 2004; NAE, 2002).
Research has shown that creativity increases and the range of potential solutions is expanded when teams of individuals from different personal, cultural, and disciplinary perspectives work together (Bassett-Jones, 2005; Cowan, 1995; Cox, 1993; Jackson, 1992; McLeod et al., 1996; Watson et al., 1993). In 2001, only 255 of 59,142 (less than 1 percent) of B.S. degrees in engineering were awarded to American Indian students (NSF, 2004). The engineering profession needs the perspectives of American Indians, a diverse group that encompasses 562 federally recognized tribes in the United States, and reservations need the culturally relevant contributions of American Indian engineers.
The scarcity of women and underrepresented minorities in U.S. engineering classrooms, research laboratories, design studios, and corporate boardrooms limits the range of ideas/solutions in immeasurable, but significant ways. While the influx of foreign-born students has brought a variety of international, cultural, and linguistic perspectives to U.S. engineering schools and the engineering workforce, the creativity and ideas of American women and minorities have yet to be fully exploited. It seems clear that, as a nation, we must offer opportunities for all Americans to compete for an engineering education. As a profession, we must welcome and encourage people who have felt excluded and support and mentor their efforts.
References
AAES (American Association of Engineering Societies). 2005. Diversity. Available online at: http://www.aaes.org/diversity/index.asp.
ASCE (American Society of Chemical Engineers). 2005. Diversity Action Grant: A Program of the Center for Leadership and Diversity.
ASEE (American Society for Engineering Education). 2005. ASEE Statement: Diversity. Available online at: http://www.asee.org/about/statementDiversity.cfm.
Bassett-Jones, N. 2005. The paradox of diversity management, creativity and innovation. Diversity Management: Creativity and Innovation. 14(2): 169-175.
Cowan, F. 1995. Exclusion of diversity and creativity impedes scientific innovation. Scientist 9(23): 11-17.
Cox, T. 1993. Cultural Diversity in Organizations: Theory, Research and Practice. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
Jackson, S.E. 1992. Consequences of group composition for the interpersonal dynamics of strategic issue processing. Pp. 345-382 in Advances in Strategic Management 8, P. Shrivastava, A. Huff, and J. Dutton, eds. Greenwich, CT: JAI.
Malcolm, S., D. Chubin, and J. Jesse. 2004. Standing Our Ground: A Guidebook for STEM Educators in the Post-Michigan Era. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
McLeod, P L., S.A. Lobel, and T H. Cox, Jr. 1996. Ethnic diversity and creativity in small groups. Small Group Research 27: 246-264.
NAE. 2002. Diversity in Engineering: Managing the Workforce of the Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
NSF (National Science Foundation). 2004. Science and Engineering Degrees, by Gender
Watson, W., E. Kumar, and L. Michaelsen. 1993. Cultural diversity’s impact on interaction process and performance: comparing homogeneous and diversity task groups. Academy of Management Journal 36: 590-602.