I am in need for M8A1 portofoio to be adjusted (The paper is on Diversity in the workplace) with the corrections that are mentioned in the prvious attachments. (M2A1, M4A1, M6A1). Also I need for M8A1

Statistical Significance of Hiring Statistics of the Federal Government of the United States of America

MPA625 M8A1

Statistical Significance of Hiring Statistics of the Federal Government of the United States of America

Executive Summary:

Utilizing statistics to determine the effectiveness of organizational practices increasingly drives decision making in contemporary organizations. Through advanced technology that makes data collection more and more feasible, organizations look to data and statistical analysis of that data to maximize organizational effectiveness. For those organizations like the Federal Government of the United States of America, the consequences of decisions and practices can have significant consequences for the population of citizens in the nation. A diverse population of citizens in America coupled with legislation seeking to provide equality to all Americans in alignment with the promise of the Constitution of the United States has compelled the Federal Government to ensure that it is extended equitable hiring practices in its own agencies. Through longitudinal statistical analysis of the United States Census as well as Federal Government hiring statistics, evaluation of the realization of America’s promise of equality can be evaluated. This evaluation demonstrates whether the Federal Government practices equity in hiring decisions, or if it has violated the legislation designed to promote equality among all people in the nation. The statistical analysis reveals that while efforts to ensure more equitable distribution of hiring practices have been reflected in the statistics over the course of a decade, the Federal Government has fallen short in realizing its mandate.

Analysis of the statistics does complicate the ability for conclusions to be drawn, given many variables that are beyond the scope of the analysis. For example, in order for a fidelity of findings to be obtained, it would be necessary to presume that similar demographics of candidates pursue jobs with the Federal Government. It is possible that this has taken place, but it is impossible to determine through the data provided that this form of equity in job pools can be asserted. Despite this shortcoming, the larger finding from the present study is that policies in place to ensure more equitable hiring patterns do have an influence on employment statistics over the course of the past decade. Increasing populations of Hispanic workers in the Federal Government align with increasing populations of Hispanic citizens could be a random alignment; however, it is more likely that the Federal Government has made a concerted effort to ensure proportionate diversity in its staff that meets that of the general population.

In the analysis that follows, two data sets (the United States Census of 2000 and 2010 as well as Federal Government Hiring in 2005 and 2015) are used to draw conclusions. These data sets are valid, with rigorous sampling for the Census, and exacting principles of accountability ensuring accuracy in Federal Government hiring practices. These data sets facilitate comparison that may not be perfect, yet which invite tendencies that would support more detailed study. The initial hypothesis of equity in hiring is not supported; however, it is clear from a comparative analysis of the data that the Federal Government is striving to achieve equity in hiring. Recommendations for future study are provided at the conclusion of the present study.

Introduction

At one time, discrimination against people in the United States of America was not prohibited by the laws of the nation. Mostly people who were White worked at the higher paying jobs, and minorities like Black people and Latino people were left to work lower paying jobs. This took place even though many of the minority people may have had greater skills than White people. Yet as the diversity of the nation and the discrimination that existed prevented a more harmonious society, the Federal Government established laws that would promote social equity, including the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Pub.L. 88–352, 78 Stat. 241) and the Equal Pay Act of 1963 (Pub. L. No. 88-38, 77 Stat. 56). These laws were established to ensure that all workers are provided with equal opportunity and pay, regardless of their racial, religious, or gender; however, one half of a century later, equitable allocation of races in federal employment has not been achieved, and pay for women does not match that of men. America promises in the Declaration of Independence that: “all men are created equal.” If this is the case, and if the United States government follows the laws that it created to established social equity by requiring that no businesses practice discrimination in hiring, it would follow that there should be an alignment in hiring with the diversity of the general population. In small businesses, it remains possible that the small sample size may not reflect larger demographics of diversity. Yet in large organizations such as the Federal Government, within which millions of American citizens are employed, the demographic statistics of racial characteristics of Federal employees should match that of the general population.

In order to understand how the issue of social equity in employment within the Federal Government reflects or does not reflect the goals of social equity, a quantitative evaluation of a longitudinal data set must be evaluated. Quantitative statistics indicate the quantity of a measure, which in this case would be the amount of people in each racial group that are hired by the Federal Government, as well as the amount of people in each racial group that live in the United States. Discovering these quantities would make it possible to understand if the United States is practicing equitable employment practices.

By evaluating the employment statistics of the Executive Branch of the United States Government over the course of the last decade, considerable insight can be gained that can inform organizational decisions for this public service agency. Moreover, the trends that these data sets reflect and the informed decisions that emerge can be then applied to other public service sectors to ensure more effective administration of the goals of the United States Government to ensure an equitable society in which all races, religions, and genders do not experience discrimination in the workplace.

Scale of Measurement

Federal employment reports by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) range in their descriptive data. The Employment by Gender and Race/National Origin data set between 2006-2017 demonstrate recent patterns of employment that can be used in comparison to the United States Census data sets to determine whether or not the United States has attained alignment of hiring with the diverse characteristics of the American population. These data sets are reliable, and errors are minimized. Using a longitudinal data set makes it possible to see if any progress is taking place in the diversity of the employment by the Federal Government, or if a regression is taking place.

Views of Researchers

Many different researchers have considered the impact of the alignment of the diversity of employment with that of the general population in the United States. These researchers show the value of diversity in hiring, and also indicates that the United States has tried to establish equitable practices without always realizing its goals for diversity. Brooks, Doughtery, and Price, J. (2015) detailed in their analysis of historical hiring patterns that the Federal work force of the United States sets the bar for equitable hiring practices that other public agencies strive to follow. Although the researcher demonstrated higher degrees of social equity in their employment statistics than other social service agencies, the Federal work force still did not meet the goal of aligning larger employment statistics with that of the people of the United States. Rice (2015) explained that diversity in hiring actually serves an organizational function as well as a larger social function, stating that a lack of diversity in governmental organizations results in poorer “employee relations, employee attitudes, employee retention and turnover, and employee hiring” (p. 97). Beyond just the productivity of the organization, effective application of diversity in hiring promotes a greater value to the society that the clearest arms of that society practice what they have professed in their laws. Yet it is also vital to understand that diversity serves a more organization function. This can result in improved operations for the organization. As Choi and Rainey (2010) remarked, “racial diversity significantly improved performance in the agencies that encourage teamwork and cooperation among employees” (p. 116). In an increasingly multicultural global marketplace that relies more on teamwork than individual achievement, diversity offers considerable operational advantages to organizations that can effectively implement employment practices that celebrate the diversity of the American people.

Justification of Method of Measurement

Quantitative measurement offers a degree of objectivity that makes it possible to equitably evaluate the influence of forces that shape results. In the case of the ability of the United States to realize its promise of equality for all citizens, its employment practices must be equitable. While it remains possible in small samples that highly skilled employees that may be required in an organization could skew statistics in favor of one or more ethnic groups; however, given the fact that the Federal Government employs well over two million people, its statistics of employment should mirror the diversity of the larger society.

able allocation of races in federal employment has not been achieved, and pay for women does not match that of men.

The United States of America, in an effort to provide a demonstration of equality in its own employment, has achieved a measure of demographic equality. Yet despite its mandate to fulfill equality in hiring practices, it is still difficult to determine if the United States has demonstrated true equality in its hiring practices. By examining the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) Employment by Gender and Race/National Origin data set from 2006-2017 as well as a comparison with demographic from the United States Census, the hypothesis that the United States Government has improved in its efforts to employ equitably is supported; however, in striving to demonstrate an demographic alignment in hiring practices with the demographics of the nation, the United States Government has not achieved equitable hiring patterns, due to several extraneous variables that may or may not be influencing the hiring patterns inequitably. The issue is very complex, because to assert that the United States Government is actually practicing equitable hiring patterns, the hiring pool would have to be reflective of the demographics of the United States, and this is not possible from the two data sets that have been used for this report. In other words, it is possible that a larger population of one racial group may be seeking employment with the Federal Government than other racial groups. It is also possible that there is equitable pursuit of jobs with the Federal Government for its jobs; however, it is not possible to evaluate this variable with precision, complicating any results that may emerge from an examination of the two data sets used in this study.

The 2000 United States Census shows that over 70% of the people in the nation are classified as White. Black people comprise near 12%, as did Hispanic people. If the United States Government was practicing equitable hiring patterns, it stands to reason that the hiring statistics should be similar to the general population. In 2006, almost 20% of the workers in the Federal Government were Black, well above the general population. White people were at almost 70%, less than the general population. Hispanics were not hired by the Federal Government with the same percentage, at about half of the general population (See Figure 1).

Figure 1: Comparison of Census (2000) and Employment (2006) Percentages.

The differences in hiring can be explained to be associated with the amount of people who pursued the jobs. From this snapshot, it is difficult to tell if the United States was practicing equality in hiring diversity. Yet by looking at a comparison from ten years later, the influence of the quest for diversity becomes clearer.

By 2016, the way that the Federal Government of the United States of America was hiring people indicated that a possible attempt at increasing the hiring of Hispanic people was taking place. Interestingly, fewer of these people reported to the Census; however, this may not be indicative of the actual population of Hispanic people as it is possible that many people who were Hispanic did not report themselves as Hispanic for many reasons, including fear of reprisal (Taylor, Lopez, Martínez, & Velasco, 2012). Despite the slight decrease in both Hispanic and White people in the United States according to the 2010 Census, by 2016 a decided increase in Federal employees who were Hispanic was registered (See Figure 2). This would support the hypothesis to a certain extent, that the Federal Government had made a concerted effort to recognize the diversity in the general population regarding Hispanic people that had not been recognized in hiring patterns of a decade before. Black people stayed about the same, and White people dropped slightly regarding their employment by the Federal Government.

Figure 2: Comparison of Census (2010) and Employment (2016) Percentages.

The hypothesis that the United States should practice equality in hiring as evidenced by an alignment of population with those who are hired by the Federal Government is not supported; however, what is supported is that the Federal Government is making an effort to address inequalities by establishing hiring patterns as evidenced by the data from 2016.

Trends

While the hypothesis that the Federal Government has achieved racial equality as reflected in its own hiring patterns has not been proven, it is very clear that efforts have been made to increase racial equality as evidenced by historical data as well as by looking at the trends in hiring in 2016 and 2017 (Figure 3).

Figure 3: Federal Employment (2016 and 2017) Percentages.

As the White population in the United States continues to dip slightly, the percentage of those people who are employed by the Federal Government has also dipped. There are still more White people than are employed by the Federal Government, but these could be due to many factors, including the reality that the majority of Federal Government jobs are in major metropolitan areas, including Washington, D.C., in which the demographics of White people are decidedly less than the rest of the nation. In the District, the demographics according to the 2010 Census are that 49% Black, 43.6% White, and 8.3% Hispanic population the region. This would show that a large disparity was in place in favor of White people; however, it is worth noting that people from the outlying areas, including Northern Virginia and Southeastern Maryland provide commuter populations for Federal jobs in Washington D.C. The trend is that the Federal Government has recognized that there is a disproportionate total of Hispanics who are hired by the agency, and that the agency has made an effort to remedy this by practicing more racially diverse hiring patterns.

Conclusion

The variables in this analysis are complicated by several forces, with the actual population of people who apply for jobs representing the largest threat. In order to test the hypothesis of the Federal Government actually practicing equitable hiring patterns would require a data base that includes the demographics of the people who applied for positions, as well as the Census and Federal Government hiring patterns. If these could be acquired, then it would be possible to validate or invalidate the hypothesis. Yet the hypothesis of whether the Federal Government of the United States is actually striving for more equitable hiring patterns that align with the racial demographics of the nation is supported.

References

Brooks, D., Doughtery, B., & Price, J. (2015). The Federal Government as a Model Employer and Its Impact on Employment Civil Rights in America. Emp. Rts. & Emp. Pol'y J., 19, 151.

Choi, S., & Rainey, H. G. (2010). Managing diversity in US federal agencies: Effects of diversity and diversity management on employee perceptions of organizational performance. Public Administration Review, 70(1), 109-121.

Rice, M. F. (2015). Workforce diversity in business and governmental organizations. Diversity and public administration: Theory, issues, and perspectives, New York: M.E. Sharpe.

U.S. Office of Personnel Management Office of Policy Planning & Analysis, Data Analysis Group. (2018). Executive Branch Employment by Gender and Race/National Origin September 2006 – September 2017. Retrieved from: https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/data-analysis-documentation/federal-employment-reports/reports-publications/executive-branch-employment-by-gender-and-racenational-origin/