Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2025
Representation of Invisible Identities in the Workplace: Faith,Spirituality,or Religious Beliefs Among Female Civil Servants in Federal Law Enforcement
Decades of scholarship exist on passive representation and visible identities such as gender, race, and ethnicity. However, literature on passive representation and invisible identities such as religion is practically non-existent in the public administration domain. Drawing on survey data from 427 female civil servants representing 47 federal law enforcement agencies in the United States, this study introduces a religious profile of the federal workforce, while investigating faith, spirituality, and religious diversity. Findings suggest that the federal workforce is broadly representative of the U.S. population that identify as religious or spiritual (82.5%). However, when examining for specific religions or faiths, the percentage that identify as Catholic and spiritual but not religious are notably higher than the national average. Likewise, the percentage that identify as Protestant and non-religious are notably lower than the national average. Furthermore, this profile of the federal workforce that reports faith, spirituality, or religion as “very important” in their life (47%), with another 24.3% reporting that it is “somewhat important,” is also notably higher than the national average. These findings are important because they extend the discourse for capturing invisible identities such as faith, spirituality, or religion in the federal workforce and have implications regarding passive representation for other organizations in public service.
AlteriA. M.RubinE. V.ParkY. J. (2023). Two wrongs do not make a right: Understanding retaliation for filing discrimination complaints in the U.S. Federal government. Public Personnel Management, 52(1), 3–24.
2.
BishuS. G.KennedyA. R. (2020). Trends and gaps: A meta-review of representative bureaucracy. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 40(4), 559–588.
3.
BozemanB.MurdockA. (2007). Public managers’ religiosity: Impacts on work attitudes and perceptions of co-workers. International Public Management Journal, 10(3), 287–306.
4.
BradburyM.KelloughJ. E. (2011). Representative bureaucracy: Assessing the evidence on active representation. American Review of Public Administration, 41(2), 157–167.
CingolaniL. (2023). Representative bureaucracy and perceptions of social exclusion in Europe: Evidence from 27 countries. Administration & Society, 55(3), 515–540.
7.
DavidovitzM.Shwartz-ZivT. (2024). The role of organizational and client reactions in understanding representative bureaucracy. American Review of Public Administration, 54(2), 151–162.
8.
DiabH.CohenN. (2022). Active representative bureaucracy, homogeneous organizational context, and deviation from official policy among street-level bureaucrats. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 81(2), 303–319.
9.
DikB. J.DanielsD.AlayanA. J. (2024). Religion, spirituality, and the workplace: A review and critique. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 11(1), 279–305.
10.
DinhofK.WillemsJ.de BoerN. (2024). A hijab-effect too? Clients’ reflections on professionalism and empathy toward hijab-wearing public servants. Review of Public Personnel Administration. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371x241234264
11.
EmidyM. B.LewisG. B.Pizarro-BoreX. (2024). U.S. Federal employees with disabilities: How perceptions of diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility affect differences in job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and job involvement. Public Personnel Management, 53(4), 649–679.
FreemanP. K.HoustonD. J. (2010). Belonging, believing, behaving: The religious character of public servants. Administration & Society, 42(6), 694–719.
15.
GadeD. M.WilkinsV. M. (2012). Where did you serve? Veteran identity, representative bureaucracy, and vocational rehabilitation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 23(2), 267–288.
Golan-NadirN. (2024). Religion and public administration at the micro level: The lens of street-level bureaucracy theory in democracies. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 83, 736–748.
18.
GoodwinD.ChenhallE.BilbreyJ. (2015). Statistical analysis of religious discrimination complaints through the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Journal of Legal Issues and Cases in Business, 3(1), 1–13.
19.
HéliotY.GleibsI. H.CoyleA.RousseauD. M.RojonC. (2020). Religious identity in the workplace: A systematic review, research agenda, and practical implications. Human Resource Management, 59(2), 153–173.
KennedyB. (2014). Unraveling representative bureaucracy: A systematic analysis of the literature. Administration & Society, 46(4), 395–421.
22.
KimJ. (2025). Representation of invisible identities in federal agencies: The impact of organizational factors on disability disclosure. Public Personnel Management. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/00910260251334046
23.
LeeD.JohansenM.BaeK.B. (2021). Organizational justice and the inclusion of LGBT federal employees: A quasi experimental analysis using coarsened exact matching. Review of Public Personnel Management, 41(4), 700–722.
24.
LewisG. B.EmidyM. B. (2022). Sexual orientation and organizational justice in the federal service: Exploring differences through an intersectional lens. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 32(3), 489–508.
25.
LiggansG.AttohP. A.GongT.ChaseT.RussellM. B.ClarkP. W. (2019). Military veterans in federal agencies: Organizational inlusion, human resource practices, and trust in ledership as predictors of organizational commitment.Public Personnel Management, 48(3), 413–437.
26.
MillikenF. J.MorrisonE. W.HewlinP. F. (2003). An exploratory study of employee silence: Issues that employees don’t communicate upward and why. Journal of Management Studies, 40(6), 1453–1476.
27.
MoloneyK.Sanabria-PulidoP.DemirciogluM. A. (2023). Interrogating hegemonic embraces: Representative bureaucracy, methodological whiteness, and non-west exclusions. Public Administration Review, 83(1), 195–202.
28.
MosherF. C. (1968). Democracy and the public service. Oxford University Press.
OngaroE.TantardiniM. (2024a). Contours of a research programme for the study of the relationship of religion and public administration. Public Policy and Administration, 39(4), 521–530.
31.
OngaroE.TantardiniM. (2024b). Religion, spirituality, faith and public administration: A literature review and outlook. Public Policy and Administration, 39(4), 531–555.
32.
O’ConnorK.ShahwanU. (2024). Religion and representative bureaucracy: Does religion guide administrative discretion?Public Policy and Administration, 39, 588–607. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/09520767241254869
33.
ParkS. (. (2020). Representative bureaucracy through staff with lived experience: Peer co-production in the field of substance use disorder treatment. American Review of Public Administration, 50(8), 880–897.
34.
PerryJ. L.BrudneyJ. L.CourseyD.LittlepageL. (2008). What drives morally committed citizens? A study of the antecedents of public service motivation. Public Administration Review, 68(3), 445–458.
PfaffS.CrabtreeC.KernH. L.HolbeinJ. B. (2021). Do street-level bureaucrats discriminate based on religion? A large-scale correspondence experiment among American Public School Principals. Public Administration Review, 81(2), 244–259.
39.
PierskallaJ. H.LauretigA.RosenbergA. S.SacksA. (2021). Democratization and representative bureaucracy: An analysis of promotion patterns in Indonesia’s civil service, 1980–2015. American Journal of Political Science, 65(2), 261–277.
40.
RiccucciN. M.Van RyzinG. G. (2017). Representative bureaucracy: A lever to enhance social equity, coproduction, and democracy. Public Administration Review, 77(1), 21–30.
41.
RobertsR. (2023). Religion in the public workplace: A primer for public employers. Public Personnel Management, 52(1), 117–139.
42.
RobertsR. (2025). Title VII and religious accommodations in the workplace after Groff v. Dejoy (2023). Review of Public Personnel Administration, 45, 201–221. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371x241289949
43.
TaoA. K.CampbellJ. W. (2020). Veterans and job satisfaction in the U.S. federal government: The importance of role clarity in the first years of civilian employment. Public Personnel Management, 49(4), 508–531.
44.
ThielemannG.StewartJ. (1996). A demand-side perspective on the importance of representative bureaucracy: AIDS, ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation. Public Administration Review, 56(2), 168–173.
45.
WixwatM.SaucierG. (2021). Being spiritual but not religious. Current Opinion in Psychology, 40, 121–125.
46.
YuH. H. (2022). Intersectionality and non-reporting behavior: Perceptions from women of color in federal law enforcement. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 42(3), 574–592.
47.
YuH. H. (2023). Structural racism in the federal workplace: An intersectional approach to examining race-based discrimination in law enforcement. Journal of Social Equity and Public Administration, 1(1), 39–57.
48.
YuH. H.McCandlessS. A.RauhausB. M. (2023). Social equity in public administration: Past, present, and the future. Journal of Public and Nonprofit Affairs, 9(3), 437–452.
