Thursday, September 08, 2011

Diversity Thursday

A perfect example about how the Diversity cult demands fealty from everyone. Regardless of how inappropriate, ineffecient, or illogical it may seem - they demand their pound of flesh.

As a result, it warps the process, distorts priorities, impacts readiness - and at its core - results in a drift from core competancy.

The mission for the Office of Naval Research is,
As an executive branch agency within the Department of Defense, the Office of Naval Research (ONR) supports the President's budget. ONR provides technical advice to the Chief of Naval Operations and the Secretary of the Navy.
In some areas, a distraction from the core mission is harmless - but I don't know about you - but since when does anything Naval Research require it to reach down in to elementary schools to try to impact STEM numbers?

That is what we are talking about - I've seen the PPT. The percentage of minorities that have even a possibility of having the academic foundation for technical degrees is a huge challenge - one that DoD cannot fix. DoD has no business even thinking it can impact junior and high school education in a nation of over 310 million souls.

This is just another example of the fuzzy-wuzzy side of Diversity. The first side is the hob-nail booted Commissariat of the Diversity Industry that makes its money off of division and the promotion of sectarianism. The other side is the group that just wants to feel better about themselves, and to be able to show the Diversity Industry that they "get it" - "it" being what the sectarians say it is at that moment in time. They are usually the ones that want to play the paternalistic Great White Father as they try to manage whatever personal racial guilt they feel they need to compensate for with the lives and careers of innocent younger generations. The perfect auto-erotic exercise for those who feed of this FOD. Case in point for the fuzzy-wuzzy follows.


Office of Naval Research

Corporate Strategic Communications

875 N. Randolph St., #1225-D

Arlington, Va., 22203-1771

Office: (703) 696-[redacted]

Fax: (703) 696-[redacted]

E-mail: [redacted]




ONR Officials to Examine Challenges of Creating

a Diverse Workforce at World Leadership Summit

ARLINGTON, Va.— Senior officials from the Office of Naval Research (ONR) will join other industry leaders at the World Diversity Leadership Summit 2011 in New York City, Sept. 6-8.

ONR Director of Research Dr. Michael Kassner, and Dr. Anthony Junior, ONR’s education programs manager, will gather with influential representatives from across defense, public and private industry to discuss the implications of developing and maintaining a diverse workforce.

Junior will moderate a panel focused on the challenges of serving the defense, security and government sectors; the impact of regulatory requirements on diversity; and science, technology, engineering and mathematics’ (STEM) role in the defense and government marketplace.

The summit will conclude with Kassner providing an overview of naval STEM programs aimed at attracting and growing a diverse technical talent pool for the Navy and Marine Corps, during a gala honoring Afghanistan and Iraq war veterans, to be held at the New York Stock Exchange.

“Our message is clear: we are serious about ensuring continued access to a number of technical skills that are unique to the U.S. naval enterprise,” Kassner said. “In particular, the way forward is to attract, inspire and educate young people across the entire cultural, gender and socio-economic spectrum, who are willing to meet this critical demand.”

The Department of the Navy has made long-term commitments to diversity and to investing in K-12 STEM education and outreach. The focus on STEM and recruiting the next-generation workforce is vital to the Navy because more than 50 percent of its scientists and engineers become eligible for retirement by 2020.

The World Diversity Leadership Summit, launched in 2004, gathers senior corporate, government and nongovernmental organization officials from across the globe to focus on the complex challenges and opportunities related to global diversity management. ONR is one of more than 75 organizations, many of them Fortune 500 companies, participating in this year’s event.

· Download the Department of the Navy's 2009 Annual Report on Diversity

· Download the Department of the Navy’s Diversity Policy

· Download a fact sheet about the naval STEM initiative

· Follow the Navy’s Diversity Directorate on Facebook

· Follow the Office of Naval Research on Facebook

# # #

About the Office of Naval Research

The Department of the Navy’s Office of Naval Research (ONR) provides the science and technology necessary to maintain the Navy and Marine Corps' technological advantage. Through its affiliates, ONR is a leader in science and technology with engagement in 50 states, 70 countries, 1,035 institutions of higher learning and 914 industry partners. ONR employs approximately 1,400 people, comprising uniformed, civilian and contract personnel, with additional employees at the Naval Research Lab in Washington, D.C.

... and who did they task with this? Geoff Fein, ONR's Senior Science Writer. Your tax dollars at work.

If you want to do Dept of Edu'ma'cation's work - go there. If you want to do Health & Human Services work - go there. If you want to do Housing & Urban Development work - go there.

We have a nation and a Fleet in a technology fight to stay on top so when war at sea comes - and it will - we lose fewer ships, aircraft, and Sailors to the enemy. That is your work - leave the social work and Cultural Marxism to others.


Byron said...

Sigh...let the games begin...

Scott said...

How STEM is used as an outreach is in question.  From my knowledge it is another minority recruitment tool.  The problem is that where I live it should be aimed at Anglos because they are the minority but they are neglected in the project.  The Navy/USMC sponsorship of the Diversity summit is insane.  I'll write Amos again and remind him that he must go.  Semper Fi!

cdrsalamander said...

<p><span>LT B,</span>
</p><p><span>Let me flesh out the post a bit.  The Office of Naval Research has to fill 10 engineering positions.  It can spread a wide open net to all potential candidates to get the 10 most qualified.  To do that it takes six months and $100,000 dollars.</span>
</p><p><span> </span>
</p><p><span>It decides instead that it wants to target half of those positions to certain approved racial and ethnic groups that it prefers over others.  Those groups have not just a smaller population in general, but as a percentage of the overall group, has a significantly smaller group of people who meet the minimum requirements.  As a result, to fill those 10 positions it takes 9 months and costs $150,000.</span>
</p><p><span> </span>
</p><p><span>The search takes 50% longer and costs 50% more - in order that ONR can discriminate on the basis of race, creed, color, or national origin.  When you intentionally apply more effort and money towards one group in preference to another, that is what you do - discriminate. When you ad in the well documented racial self-identification fraud and the difficult nature of our increasingly mixed race population; is this something that ONR should be involved in?  Is it a moral thing to do? Does it offer equal opportunity to all taxpayers? No, no, and no.</span>


cdrsalamander said...

(cont) <span>That is the problem.  Regardless of their intentions - ONR is operating in a discriminatory manner based on race, creed, color, and national origin.  To do that is morally, economically, and in some ways border-line legally wrong.  </span>
<p><span> </span>
</p><p><span>As for the patronizing nature of it all; again - the problem is in the education system and family dynamics; something ONR could put 100% of its budget towards and probably shift the needle .00001%.  That is not ONR's mission .... unless they are trying to score points politically, in which case they have defined their core nature and we are only arguing about the price.  </span> </p>

cdrsalamander said...

STEM is to race what "Work/Live Balance" is to gender.  You only have to go 4 slides in to the PPT to see what it is really all about.

Salty Gator said...

<span>"The summit will conclude with Kassner providing an overview of naval STEM programs aimed at attracting and growing a diverse technical talent pool for the Navy and Marine Corps, during a gala honoring Afghanistan and Iraq war veterans, to be held at the New York Stock Exchange."</span>

Because Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans really give a flying f--- about ONR diversity programs.

Salty Gator said...

I have a problem with ONR being nothing more than the sum of its scientists wet dreams.  The whole process is jacked.  Instead of asking the fleet what they want and then designing prototype solutions, they throw out their own wild ass ideas and let you pick from their chinese menu which YOU the fleet want to put money towards.

Salty Gator said...

That's not a thread jack...I'm just saying that I find the social engineering aspect amusing when the primary work is not being accomplished.  Social engineering is much easier than systems engineering.  TRUST ME.

John said...

The worst part is that it is almost certain that in the inevitable slashing of defense spending (either by the action of the super 12 committee, or lack of their action) the diversity billets will be protected and preserved for posterity. 

The cuts will all fall on actual war fighters and maintainers and trainers, not the parasites who prey on them.

WCOG said...

I'm working on an ONR project now to develop a series of models to determine surface ship Total Ownership Cost (TOC). Apparently the Navy has been operating warships for 200 years without a functioning method of accurately predicting how much they will cost over their lifetime. I guess I'm surprised they didn't get to that sooner.

LT B said...

That's ok, we have a Navy Ethos now, so thank Christ above we have that now.  We evidently sucked eggs the other 200 some years before that ethos was written.

LT B said...

Roger, copy all.  :)

UltimaRatioRegis said...

Let me know how that turns out.  With their mania for "right-sizing" and "optimal manning", I have yet to see the USN have the slightest idea about TCO.  Which is largely a function of design of the system and subsystems of particular platforms, and not a "one size fits all" modeling template.

Perry said...

I don't agree with this.  To some extent, every R&D organization does its own projects, but at ONR they must have a definite payoff in the Fleet.  The projects I've worked on for ONR have been very focused on delivering what the Fleet wants.  I've also seen many that have gotten quickly cut off even though the science was working but it was becoming obvious that the project would not deliver something useful to Sailors and Marines.

In the current project I'm working on, ONR is little more a conduit for the funding - my team and I are working directly with SWOS to build exactly what they want.  In the last ONR project I worked on, the Marines were incredibly excited about how the technology could make the Coyotes' job at 29 Palms much easier and improve the Marines' training.

I think ONR does a good job of being responsive to the Fleet's needs.

Actus Rhesus said...

you know, looking back at my time in Iraq, I know we had minorities at the task force...but I couldn't tell you how many, apart from the ones I directly supervised, because quite frankly we had other supporting the war.

All I know is we had good morale, people worked hard, and we tried to get shit done.

UltimaRatioRegis said...

That chump change could be funding necessary, even required training for junior sailors.  Which commands don't have.  So they go without.  And the operating fleet suffers.

"We never pay anyone Dane-Geld,
No matter how trifling the cost.
For the end of that game is oppression and shame,
And the nation that pays it is lost."

Consider it Dane-Geld.  And USN/ONR lost.

Bubba said...


Don't look at powerpoint slides!  They cause brain damage.  I have an absolute adversion to powerpoint; I'll get up and walk out of the room.  The quality of my life is so much better.  Don't look at powerpoint!



Bubba said...

Anybody who cares about hurricanes should have this website

If the guys who share this work with us want to have a hotel weekend to promote diversity, I say, let 'em. 

B. Walthrop said...

<span>"We never pay anyone Dane-Geld,  
No matter how trifling the cost.  
For the end of that game is oppression and shame,  
And the nation that pays it is lost."  </span>

This got me wondering just who "We" are in this allusion to the current discussion, so I did some digging and this is what I came up with.....



That last link is actually a grant announcement to support STEM programs from ONR for both USN and USMC STEM Programs.  I suppose this is not surprising that the USMC is included.  Just look at ONR's logo.

I suppose all of those USMC initiatives represent thousands or tens of thousands of dollars that could be better spent on training and equipping Lance Corporals, Privates, and Sergeants.

Consider it Dane-Geld.  It looks like the USMC, CMC, and Quantico are lost as well.

Now, I don't really believe the above rhetoric.  The current fad in the USG (including the USN and USMC) as a whole is more comedic than dangerous.  Like many fads that have come before (parachute pants, the resurgence of penny loafers, big hair, and leg warmers) it will loose its cache' because the Gen X, Gen Y, and Millenials simply don't place much stock in the metrics being used to measure diversity as defined by the DoN.  

Food for thought.

UltimaRatioRegis said...

Here's some more food for thought, BW. 

USMC is likely mandated to go along, and will genuflect when told.  But the difference is this:

The CNO's stated Number One Priority is Diversity.

The Commandant's stated Number One Priority is supporting the Marines in contact with the enemy.

Food for thought.

B. Walthrop said...

That is true...CMC's #1 Priority is to "continue to provide the best trained and equipped Marine units to Afghanistan."

This is from the General Amos Planning Guidance for 2011.  

Priority #4 from this document is to "keep faith with our Marines, our Sailors and our families."

The second step toward this goal is<span> to "improve diversity representation throughout our Corps."</span>

Strangely, the CNO's guidance for 2011 is very similar to the CMC's guidance for 2011.  The first priority (focus in the navy vernacular) is to "c<span><span>ontinue to be the most dominant, ready and influential naval force, globally and across all naval missions."</span></span>

Diversity is mentioned (but only once like the CMC's guidance),and it is well down the page and not in the headline focus area.  Here's the link if you don't believe me:

Now I know that the speech the CNO gave at USNA got quite a bit of attention here on the front porch, but I think it has been overplayed.  I'll offer you a similar speech (to a more limited audience) by General Amos that suggests "The Marine Corps has established minority officer recruiting as a top priority in our recruiting efforts."  Here's that link:

This quote was featured prominently in a slide show presented to the National Naval Officer's Association.  I believe this is one of those affinity groups that get some play around this place on Thursdays.

I suppose you're suggesting that General Amos is genuflecting as directed, but perhaps we should give the CNO the same benefit of the doubt in a speech given to a similarly limited audience.  How do you square that circle?</p>

UltimaRatioRegis said...

CNO's speech is overplayed?  Huh.  In front of future officers, he makes that speech.  Overplayed?  Not hardly. 

How do I square the circle? 

General Amos is indeed "providing the best trained and equipped Marine units to Afghanistan." 

Admiral Roughead hasn't exactly <span>ensured that the Navy will "c<span><span>ontinue to be the most dominant, ready and influential naval force, globally and across all naval missions."  In fact, with his endless diversity push, "optimal manning", and shipbuilding and maintenance as a shambles, he has done anything but.</span></span></span>

CDR Salamander said...

Overplayed?  No.  When I was in AFG the CNO came by and had a "CNO Call."  Right off the bat - the beginning of his pep talk, he came out discussing how Diversity was his #1 priority and he was working very hard at it.  Overplayed?  No.  Even in AFG, that is what he felt he needed to talk about to a group of Sailor that simply did not care about the subject.

It was at that time that I noticed that the group he was speaking to - the USN/USNR Narmy I was part of was just about if not majority "minority" depending on how you defined people.  The CNO's gaggle that came in was on visual inspection 100% of European extraction. 

Also to add to the feeling, in our all Navy group, there were Sailors in DCU, ACU, MARPAT, BDU, flight suits and mixtures of the above.  The CNO's gaggle was all perfect DCU. said...

No it isn't. As you well know.
small, disadvanted, HUB, women, veteran owned, minority owned businesses only need apply. That's the law.

Salty Gator said...

Why is ONR developing a Total Ownership Cost model?  Isn't that a NAVSEA05C task?  Shouldn't ONR be focusing on, say, guns, missiles, ammunition, propulsion systems, HM&E, hull forms, CORROSION, directed energy weapons, enhanced secure communications, fuel substitutes / economy?

I hate when I am told by ONR and industry types that "fleet is really excited about this technology" that ONR is developing on their own without a fleet requirement.  What is a fleet requirement?  Here's an example:  It is a Joint Operational Urgent Need (JUON), a Urgent Need Statement / Urgent Operational Need (UNS / UON), it is a solution to a validated capability gap by the J-ROC or the Navy component dependent upon the ACAT.  To be honest, if fleet was really excited about something, it would come back to us in the five sided puzzle palace in more than a one liner email hand carried by ONR or industry.

A lot of good ideas floating around.  Precious few requirements.  Money goes to requirements.  And not enough, in my opinion.  So to that end, HOW ABOUT ONR SETS ABOUT SOLVING OUR REQUIREMENTS ISSUES / MAKING MATERIEL SOLUTIONS CHEAPER BEFORE THEY EMBARK ON THEIR OWN SCIENCE FAIR PROJECTS?

Same goes for you, NPS...

Salty Gator said...

And you did.  Period.  The honor is all of yours.  And no more or less based on the color of your skin, which is lost on these clowns.

Salty Gator said...

Dear Bubba,

Your presence must not be missed in most DoN meetings then.  Because everything is in powerpoint.

Salty Gator

Salty Gator said...

somebody got a spell-check......

Salty Gator said...


I think the good LT and CDR were discussing individual positions, not contracts.  But I'm with you on contract awards.  Some companies which shall remain nameless have minority-stake ownership by female-minority-"disabled" veterans so that they can scoot boots to the front of the line and claim their piece of the pie.  The minority-stake owner has an office, a phone, a computer, and an 8 hour lunch break every day.

B. Walthrop said...

<p><span>Perhaps you're both right and the CNO's speech has not been overplayed.  Since the CMC's speech was to a group of serving officers (both junior and senior), I’d say <span> </span>it's been underplayed.  I really don't see much a distinction between the two speeches as they are both just "genuflecting as directed."</span>
</p><p><span> </span>
</p><p><span>As a Navy partisan, I suppose I have just grown a bit weary of the last argument of kings suggesting that the USN is lost when there is plenty of house cleaning to be done on the green side as well.  Now that we've both proven we can set up strawmen for the other to attempt to knock down, let's address the real issues.</span>
</p><p><span> </span>
<span>The USG (including USN and USMC) have chosen lazy metrics to measure "diversity" in an unfulfilled hope of re-connecting the military with the American public at large.  The metrics they're using are clearly wrong-headed, somewhat divisive, and perhaps un-American.  There are a number of reasons that the military and the American public have become disconnected.  For the USN it started after the de-glamorization campaigns following Tail Hook.  The attacks (subtle but real) on the club system had that access point pretty well on life support, and then 9/11 happened.  The bases closed, and for the last 10 years, the military and the American public were separated by walls.  </span>

B. Walthrop said...

<span>(cont'd) In response to the perception that the military and the American public were growing apart, the diversity initiatives were born.<span>  </span>Unfortunately, the metrics used to track these efforts were lazy because they were readily available.<span>  </span>Skin color is easy to see. Ethnicity is easy to estimate given that self-reporting (with all of the associated flaws) was easy as well.<span>  </span>In a misguided effort to foster inclusiveness, the bureaucracy took a well meaning effort (connecting the military with the general public), and turned it into a bit of a laugh.</span>
<span> </span>
<span>Not everyone buys into that rhetoric, and given the situation they try to make whiskey sours out of the lemons they were handed.<span>  </span>I believe ONR’s effort to foster and interest in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics across a broad cross section of secondary school students is one of these efforts.<span>  </span>It gets labeled as a “Diversity” initiative because those are that metrics that OPNAV has chosen to track, but the fact of the matter is that if the US is not able to generate a cadre of folks educated in hard sciences both with a willingness to endure the deprivations of military and government service, then the USMC and the USN will find themselves in a real hurt locker 20 years from now.</span>

B. Walthrop said...

(cont'd ) <span>I understand CDR Salamander’s frustration with the current situation, but I think the time is now right to start changing the course of the bureaucracy toward solving the root problems rather than tearing down many of the efforts of folks to make whiskey sours out of lemons.<span>  </span>Clearly “genuflecting as directed” has not worked, so what are the solutions (understanding that Rome and the current Diversity direction was not built in a day and building something is a lot more complicated than tearing something down).<span>  </span>That’s the tack I would take, and I have some ideas about a new and more productive course.<span>  </span>The first is changing the metrics because metrics don’t really measure things…Metrics drive behaviors.<span>  </span>CDR S rightly points out (in so many words) that the current set of metrics are driving wrong-headed behaviors.<span>  </span>On this we agree.</span>


John Henry said...

Think of this as recruiting money well spent, rather than diversity money wasted.

Grumpy Old Ham said...

<span>"If you want to do Dept of Edu'ma'cation's work - go there."</span>

The fact that other portions of the government feel the need to step in and "fix" education speaks volumes about the effectiveness (more precisely, the lack thereof) of the Department of Education.

You want more money for O&M -- start with zeroing out the Dept of Education budget, and transfer the funds to DoD O&M accounts.  Same goes for the other DoE.  Funny how both are creations of that damned peanut farmer...

Oh, and just to show that I'm an equal opportunity offender -- fixing our education system isn't as simple as issuing edicts regarding mandatory testing.  The problems run much deeper, and have to be addressed at a cultural level.  Having ONR show a couple of Powerpoint slides at a Diversity Diktat lovefest ain't the way to start.

CharleyA said...

The Navy's not the only service focusing it efforts on diversity.   The USCG's civilian recruiters are at it as well: