Since affirmative action identifies underutilization based on the percentages of minorities and women who already have the requisite skills in specific job areas, underutilization figures present a limited analysis of work force demographics. It would be reasonable to do a statewide recruitment for this level job group, so it is useful to compare the Hispanic availability percentages with actual state labor force figures. The difference between the availability and actual labor force percentages illustrates the difference between underutilization and underrepresentation. There are broad social and historical tendencies, such as educational and class inequalities, economic instability over generations, and historical legacies of discrimination and exclusion, which have resulted in underrepresentation of certain groups in certain occupations. There are also individual barriers to equality that help to maintain institutional patterns, such as conscious and unconscious biases.
Diversity addresses underrepresentation while affirmative action addresses underutilization.
When we look at the dimension of age, we can also see representation issues. While some of the barriers to diversity are outside our sphere of control, it is important to identify what each of us can do enhance diversity at the University. One way of eventually increasing diversity at the higher levels of the University structure would be to put more effort into developing staff skills and knowledge at the lower tiers of the campus work force, where diversity is greater. Efforts that can help accomplish this goal include mentoring programs, identifying broad career paths, management fellowships, and expanding the staff internship program. The University could also provide training and coaching for managers.