Printer Friendly

Reviewing the Workforce Diversity in Public Administration: A South Asian Perspective (1975-2019).

Byline: Zahra Ishtiaq Paul, Dr. Kashif Rathore and Muhammad Adnan Sial

Keywords: Work Force Diversity, Public Administration, South Asia, Representative Bureaucracy, Pakistan

Introduction

Society nowadays is getting multifaceted and diverse where individuals have identities based on gender, age, religion, sexual orientation, physical ability, ethnicity, race, educational background, political affiliation, socioeconomic status, skills, functions, culture, nationality and generational cohorts ( Kossek, Lobel, and Brown, 2005; O'Reilly, Williams and Barsade,1998; Sabharwal, Levine, and D'Agostino, 2018; Van Knippenberg, De Dreu, and Homan, 2004). All these dimensions/ attributes come under the umbrella of workforce diversity. Workforce diversity over the years has sought attention of researchers and has been developed as a significant aspect of public administration.

Over three decades, concerns related to equality, fairness and justice have resulted in three pillars of public administration that are economy, efficiency and social equity (Frederickson, 1990, 2005, 2015; Svara, and Brunet, 2004, 2005; Rosenbloom, 2005) and social equity as fourth pillar along with economy, efficiency and effectiveness (Gooden, and Portillo, 2011; Wooldridge, and Gooden, 2009). Moreover it has been empirically tested that diverse and socially inclusive agencies and organizations are effective and efficient and have higher performance rates (Barak, 2013; Brewer, 2005; Jin, Lee, and Lee, 2017; Hur, 2013; Lee, 2019; Lindsay, Leck, Shen, Cagliostro, and Stinson, 2019; Pitts, 2005).

The eminence of diversity research in public administration can be traced back to the Executive order 9981 by President Truman in 1948 declaring discrimination illegal for armed forces (Rivers, 2014). These efforts led to Civil Rights Act of 1964 in United States outlawing discrimination on the basis of race, gender, color, religion, national origin etc. (Barak, 2000). Consequently, researchers started focusing on issues related to workforce diversity. 1970's was the era highlighting researches on color, challenges of black and white, Africans etc. In 1980's gender debate came into limelight more prominently due to lack of women representation in higher managerial positions and further resolving challenges of sexual harassment, affirmative action and pregnancy discrimination (Aiken, Salmon, and Hanges, 2013).

Globalization, internationalization and rapid technological advancement change the workforce and population, it require greater efforts toward hiring and retaining diverse employees. Thomas (1990) highlights importance of diversity to make organizations competitive. Globalization has been termed as a phenomenon of change and transformation (Giddens, 2003; Guillen, 2001; Held and McGrew, 2002). It is an expression of complexity (Lechner and Boli, 2014) which requires the individuals to embrace and learn novel ways of management and rational thinking (Albrow, 2007; Lane, Maznevski, Deetz, and DiStefano, 2009). At the center of belief of globalization is the concept of being a force that is driving and brings about rapid social economic changes. These changes are the cause of remodeling of societies and emergence of new business principles around the world. According to this belief organization do not only have unprecedented opportunities nowadays (Piderit, 2000; Zhou, David, and Li, 2006).

But they also face greater challenges especially when they have to deal with increasing interconnectedness, competition, and uncertainty (Maznevski and Lane, 2004). The change brought due to globalization demands learning, in order to be competitive. The developed countries can learn successful practices in of managing diversity among their workforce in order to be competitive from the developed countries.

Similarly, as a result of the successful 18th century industrialization the developed countries Western Europe and North America (West) has been highlighted as an archetypal of success and implementing best industrial practices. Mostly multinational corporation's headquarters are in the West and are considered essential for transference of all the successful industrial practices to the developing countries (Meyer, 2004; Tung, 2012).

This idea is at the root of "West leads East' paradigm. It is a proponent of developing economies learning new ways from the West. On the other hand the rise of Japan, the Asian tigers (Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan) and China has lead researchers inquire the supremacy of West. With greater awareness of different Asian practices contextualizing to their culture and local settings resulted in the success of these Asian organizations. According to Chen and Miller (2010) combination of the best practices of East and West have enabled the organizations to overcome the window dressing approach and adopt the changes by looking at local/ cultural context and came with a concept "ambicultural'.

South Asian region consists of Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Bhutan, Maldives, Nepal and Sri Lanka. The transfer and role of western knowledge and managerial practices are clearly visible in the South Asian region and its complexity due to rich culture and influence of global economy. It also shows the various challenges which are hindrance to socioeconomic development of this region (Khilji, 2013). That is further highlighted by the World Bank (2019a) as South Asia is the fastest growing region in the world and is a home to one fourth of the world's population. During the year 2019, increase in diversity and inclusion was on the top of the agenda of World Bank. It focused on various diversity programs and a new gender indicator for the inclusion of gender at all levels of organizations in South Asian region. Additionally it embarked learning and awareness programs on disability gender imbalance and gender identity (World Bank, 2019b).

The Evolution of Research on Workforce Diversity

Workforce diversity in the discipline of public administration has its origins in representative bureaucracy. Basically representative bureaucracy deals with the demographic profile of government employees and how it is representative of characteristics of population and service beneficiaries. The initial researches on representative bureaucracy were related to social class (Kingsley, 1944), then most of the research in this area were conducted on underrepresentation of women and color groups in public organizations (Dolan and Rosenbloom, 2003; Naff and Kellough, 2003; Riccucci and Saidel, 2001; Wise, 1990). Others highlighted the cultural dimension of diversity, age, disability and minorities (Bradbury, 2007; Keiser, Wilkins, Meier, and Holland, 2002; Selden, 1997; Wilkins and Keiser, 2006)

After the trend of research on affirmative action and equal employment opportunity (Carcieri, 2004; Naff, 2004; Naylor and Rosenbloom, 2004; Sisneros, 2004), researchers focused on association between workforce diversity and work related outcomes like turnover (Moon, 2018), job satisfaction (Verheij, Groeneveld and Kuyper, 2017) and performance (Rosenauer, Homan, Horstmeier and Voelpel, 2016) etc.

Public organizations that value and manage diversity implement and practice workforce diversity in their HRM policies and functions like recruitment and selection in order to retain diverse workforces. Such workforces are in turn more effective and performance oriented (Rangarajan and Black, 2007). The reason behind empirically testing relationships is worldwide government reforms during the 1990s and 2000s (Kettl, 2000).

The purpose of the current research is to examine the research on workforce diversity in public-sector organizations. Workforce diversity has become one of the significant management issues in organizations from all sectors. In addition to more emphasis on racial, ethnic and gender diversity, globalization has led to increase in cultural and linguistic diversity as well.

The current research focuses on the following research question: How research on workforce diversity has developed over time in the discipline of public administration? Precisely the researchers have tried to study the dimensions, trends, policies, practices of workforce diversity being used in public administration in developed countries. By examining their tactics of embracing and encouraging equality and accepting differences in the workforce of public sector, how can developing countries like countries in South Asia notably Pakistan can further learn and benefit from their experiences?

According to Broadnax (2010), it is known so far that there is workforce diversity in one form or the other prevalent in public sector and is also being practiced and has affected service delivery. Additionally Pitts and Wise (2010) debated that research articles found on diversity in the field of public administration are mostly descriptive in nature and there is need for more empirical work to be done in this area. Pitts and Wise also discussed the need for validation of their systematic literature review findings from year 2000 to 2008.

The current systematic literature review examines all research articles published on workforce diversity in public administration from the year 1975 to 2019. We have distinguished the type of research articles into descriptive and empirical in order to validate Pitts and Wise findings.

Significance

The dynamics of government organizations are changing due to change in culture and society accompanied by increased globalization, immigration, multinationals, social justice, national diversity and growing attention on valuing and managing diverse workforces notably in public sector (Buengeler, and Den Hartog, 2015; Choi, and Rainey, 2014; Ewoh, 2013; Greenberg, 2001).

Though there are number of research studies found on workforce diversity in public administration and its relationship with other variables like performance and satisfaction. The research findings of Raadschelders and Lee (2011) and Wise and Tschirhart (2000) imply the need of more review studies highlighting the concerns of workforce diversity in the field of public administration. Moreover as emphasized by Sabharwal, Levine, and D'Agostino (2018) diversity of workforces and workplaces is a significant and crucial concern for contemporary public management.

Workforce diversity in the discipline of public administration has been focus of attention in many developed countries all over the globe. The current systematic literature review will provide an inventory of variables that can be explored by developing countries in South Asian region. Also it will guide and help the Pakistani researchers to study the trends of workforce diversity in the public sector of Pakistan. Hence by understanding, managing and valuing the similarities and differences among the workforce of public organizations will result in competitive diverse employees at all levels of organizations.

Method

In view of Tranfield, Denyer and Smart (2003), conducting a systematic literature review increases a quality of review process and outcomes. The database ISI web of knowledge was selected to collect the data. The database ISI web of knowledge is selected being the most comprehensive database for peer-reviewed journals in social sciences and is the hub of multidisciplinary information from approximately 8,500 of the most prestigious, high impact research journals in the world. The term "workforce diversity" is used as a key term, which is searched in All fields, All years and All indexes SCI-Expanded (science index), SSCI (social science index), CPCI-SSH (conference proceedings citation index-social science and humanities) and ESCI (emerging source citation index).

Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

The following inclusion and exclusion criteria were used. The studies related to workforce diversity in the area of public administration are retained in the current review. The workforce diversity concept gained attention of researchers, when human resource was considered as an important resource in human relations era and in 1960s and 1970s when concepts of equality and discrimination were more visibly exhibited (Ogbonna and Harris, 2006). So keeping it in mind the search started from year 1975 and the articles were searched for around last five decades starting from the year 1975 to 2019. Only research articles are included in the review. The research studies in English and published in peer reviewed journals are included only.

Since research papers published in peer-reviewed journals are impact factor researches and have validity of data and findings and there is also a scope for generalizability (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Bachrach, and Podsakoff, 2005). The working papers or papers just presented in conferences are excluded.

Data Extraction Procedure

Figure 1 represents a prisma flow chart depicting the selection process through which research papers were selected. Data is analyzed in five steps. In step 1, there were 2221 records identified through ISI web of Knowledge by using "Workforce Diversity' as a search identifier. Then records are refined by including "only articles'. The researchers noted 1920 articles. In step 2, the records/articles are further screened by web of science category "Public Administration". The researchers were left with 90 research articles. In step 3, sample was screened by considering inclusion criteria, articles of impact factor to be included. The four articles are excluded that are noted in Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Social Science and Humanities and three are excluded being found in Emerging Source Citation Index.

In step 4, 83 articles are noted that came under Social Sciences Citation Index. In step 5, various sections of the articles including introduction, methodology and results were analyzed. All the articles were in English language. So the researchers were left with 83 articles for systematic literature review.

In order to define the process/ validate the study, a conceptual content analysis has been conducted by the researchers. According to Christie (2007) it is used to find the times certain words or concepts being used in the text. In this study the text was 83 articles. The researchers examined the words, workforce diversity and its various dimensions.

Both researchers coded various dimensions in all articles. Their results are tallied and inter-rater reliability is measured. The dimensions being coded in the study are: gender, race, ethnicity, color, religion, disability, age, culture, national origin, sexual orientation, representative bureaucracy, diversity management, function, tenure status, education, HRM, linguistics, management styles, ideas, opportunities, sects, tool and model developments and valuing diversity. Most of the articles fell under more than one dimension as an article has three diversity dimensions, gender, culture and disability. So the overall dimensions coded in Table 1 are greater than the total number of articles. Other coded dimensions in the study are research design (cross-sectional, longitudinal, case study, experimental, comparative), research methodology (quantitative, qualitative, mixed), countries, type of research (descriptive, empirical) and year of publication.

Kappa coefficient was used to calculate inter-rater reliability on various dimensions of research. It is used to statistically measure the inter-rater reliability or agreement of coding among two raters. The Kappa statistic was interpreted according to the ranges of 0.01-0.20 slight; 0.21-0.40 fair; 0.41-0.60 moderate; 0.61-0.80 substantial; 0.81-1.00 almost perfect (Landis and Koch, 1997). The inter-rater reliability for the current research indicated substantial agreement or almost perfect (range 0.7 to 0.95, p <0.001).

Findings

The descriptive statistics of the various dimensions coded in this study are presented in Table 1.

Table 1 Descriptive Statistics

Dimensions of study###Frequency (%)###N

Gender###24.1###20

Race###21.7###18

Ethnicity###14.4###12

Color###2.4###2

Religion###2.4###2

Disability###4.82###4

Age###7.2###6

Culture###3.61###3

National origin###6.02###5

Sexual orientation###2.4###2

Representative bureaucracy###7.2###6

Diversity management###10.8###9

Functional###2.4###2

Tenure status###2.4###2

Education###1.20###1

Others###24.1###20

Research Design

Cross-sectional###48.2###40

Longitudinal###14.4###12

Case study###30.1###25

Experimental###1.20###1

Comparative###6.02###5

Research Strategy

Quantitative###60.2###50

Qualitative###35###29

Mixed###4.82###4

Countries

America###65.1###54

England###6.02###5

Canada###4.82###4

Netherlands###3.61###3

Australia###6.02###5

Pakistan###1.20###1

India###1.20###1

Others###12.0###10

Type of Research

Descriptive###56.6###47

Empirical###43.4###36

Year of publication

1975-1984###0###0

1985-1994###0###0

1995-2004###12.0###10

2005-2014###47###39

2015-2019###40.9###34

During last three decades many dimensions of diversity have been studied. Out of 83 studies being reviewed gender (24.1%) has been studied the most, followed by race (21.7%), ethnicity (14.4%), diversity management (10.8%), age and representative bureaucracy (7.2%), national origin (6.02%) and so on. Others category in dimensions consist of diversity in HRM, linguistics, management styles, ideas, opportunities, sects, tool and model developments and valuing diversity. It is evident from the results that mostly research studies focuses on gender, race and ethnicity. The following results are consistent with the findings of Pitts and Wise (2010) and Wise and Tschirhart (2000).

Articles are analyzed against five research designs: cross-sectional, longitudinal, case study, experimental and comparative (Bryman, 2016). Most of the researches (40) have used cross-sectional research design; rest 25 had used case study approach, followed by 12 longitudinal studies and 5 comparative studies. Three research strategies have been used in studying workforce diversity. There were 60.2% quantitative studies that are more than half, 35% qualitative and 4.8 % have used mixed method approach. In quantitative studies ordinary least square (OLS) and maximum likelihood techniques have been used to study workforce diversity dimensions and their relationship with other variables. In qualitative studies literature reviews, interviews and case studies have been analyzed. 65.1% of the researches have been conducted in America, 6.1 % in England and Australia, and rest in other countries. In the South Asian context two studies from Pakistan and India each are noted.

The Indian study is most notable in the South Asian context as it represents the south Asian region due to India being responsible for more than three quarters of South Asian GDP. India has risen from economic bankruptcy to flourishing and promising economy during the last two decades (Ahmed and Ghani, 2007; Bloom and Rosenberg, 2011). More than half of the studies (56.6%) in sample are descriptive in nature and remaining (43.4%) are empirical in nature, which is correlational and explanatory.

The researchers have used 1975 to 2019 as a search identifier. Then search results are tabulated decade wise. From 1975 to 1994, no studies have been found regarding workforce diversity in public administration as per inclusion/exclusion criteria. The reason being there were concepts like affirmative action, discrimination, equal employment opportunity and representative bureaucracy prevalent regarding differences and similarities among employees (Grabosky and Rosenbloom, 1975; Kellough, 1991; Meier, 1975; Pitts, 2009). The current review has been based on the search of a term "Workforce Diversity'. If different search identifiers were used, it would have different results. The literature is available on raising awareness about workforce diversity and possible employer initiatives to manage this diversity in early 1990s (Soni, 2000). The 10 researches have been found in decade 1995 to 2004.

After 2005 researches on workforce diversity have been increased, that are 39 articles in 2005 to 2014 and that trend further increased by 34 articles in next 5 years. There is increase in publications after 2005, the reason being workforce diversity is valued and organizations started understanding the importance of managing a diverse workforce.

In the early 1990s research studies on diversity especially workforce diversity in public administration were non extant. Most of the researches have focused on the gender, race, and ethnicity dimensions of diversity and majority of them are descriptive and quantitative in nature. These findings are consistent with the findings of previous studies being conducted (e.g. Broadnax, 2010; Corley and Sabharwal, 2010; Kellough and Pitts, 2005; Pitts and Wise, 2010; Raadschelders and Lee, 2011; Sabharwal, Levine and D'Agostino, 2016).

Table 2 gives the description of the included research articles in the study. It further consists of six columns listing the important descriptions of included articles. The first one narrates the author and year followed by the country in which those studies are conducted. The third column consist of information related to use of workforce diversity as different variables (independent, dependent, antecedent etc.) followed by basis of workforce diversity being examined in the study. Then other variables used in that study like independent, dependent, moderating and mediating variable are extracted. The last column consists of research design and strategy.

Table 2 Description of the included research articles

Author (Year)###Country###WD used as###Basis of Diversity###Other variables###Research Design/Strategy

Thomas and Mohai (1995)###USA###IV###Gender###N/A###Longitudinal/Quantitative

Dobbs (1996)###USA###Antecedent###Managing diversity###N/A###Cross-sectional/Qualitative

Naff (1998)###USA###Antecedent###RB###Attitude towards RB (IV)###Cross-sectional/Quantitative

Mor-Barak and Cherin###Tool

(1998)###USA###Others###Development###measure of inclusion-exclusion (IV)###Case study/Quantitative

Guajardo (1999)###USA###IV###Race/Gender/Religion###N/A###Longitudinal/Quantitative

###Workforce diversity, work life

Perry and Cayer (1999)###USA###Antecedent###balance###Cafeteria Style Health Plans (IV)###Cross-sectional/Quantitative

###work performance (DV) Role of inclusion and

Barak (2000)###USA###IV###developing model###exclusion (Mod V)###Cross-sectional/Qualitative

Von Bergen, Soper and

Foster (2002)###USA###Antecedent###Diversity in HRM###Diversity training (IV)###Cross-sectional/Qualitative

###Minority

Charles (2003)###USA###IV###(Ethnic, Racial, Age)###Diversity Recruitment (IV)###Case study/Mixed

Ball and Haque (2003)###USA###IV###Religion###N/A###Case study/Qualitative

###Supervisor's role (IV), Org. performance and

Brewer (2005)###USA###Antecedent###Workforce diversity###effectiveness (DV)###Case study/Qualitative

Andrews, Boyne, Meier,

O'Toole and Walker (2005)###USA###IV###RB###Org. performance (DV), Org. strategy (Mod V)###Case study/Quantitative

###Race/Ethnicity

Pitts (2005)###USA###IV###/RB###Performance (DV)###Longitudinal/Quantitative

Dickson and Hargie (2006)###Ireland###IV###Sects###N/A###Comparative/Qualitative

Andrews, Boyne and

Walker (2006)###UK###IV###RB###Performance (DV)###Case study/Mixed

Crumpacker and

Crumpacker (2008)###USA###IV###Gender###N/A###Cross-sectional/Qualitative

Wong (2008)###USA###IV###Ideas/Opportunities###N/A###Case study/Qualitative

Tung (2008)###Canada###IV###National origin###N/A###Comparative/Qualitative

Fairchild (2009)###USA###IV###Racial###N/A###Case study/Quantitative

Pitts (2009)###USA###Antecedent###DM###Work group performance, Job satisfaction (DVs)###Cross-sectional/Quantitative

###Organizational performance (DV), Time (Mod

Pitts And Jarry (2009)###USA###IV###Ethnicity###V)###Longitudinal/Quantitative

Brown, Harris, and

Squirrell (2010)###USA###IV###Gender###N/A###Case study/Quantitative

Choi (2010)###USA###DV###Race/Ethnicity/Gender###Policy type (IV)###Case study/Quantitative

Choy, Ramburuth, Eng

Adeline and Lee (2010)###China###Antecedent###Management styles###Differentiated Management (IV)###Comparative/Qualitative

West (2010)###USA###Antecedent###RB###Workforce diversity###Longitudinal/Qualitative

Lowe (2010)###USA###Antecedent###Workforce diversity###Workforce intermediation (IV)###Case study/Qualitative

McMurray, Karim and

Fisher (2010)###Australia###IV###Culture/Linguistics###N/A###Case study/Qualitative

Pitts and Wise (2010)###USA###IV###WD/ Employment###N/A###Longitudinal/Qualitative

Bryant and Jaworski

(2011)###Australia###IV###Gender###Skills shortages (DV)###Cross-sectional/Qualitative

Bradbury and Kellough

(2011)###USA###Antecedent###RB###RB (IV)###Cross-sectional/Quantitative

Greene and Kirton (2011)###UK###IV###DM###Diversity management policies (IV)###Case study/Qualitative

Watkins-Hayes (2011)###USA###IV###Racial###N/A###Cross-sectional/Qualitative

Lewis and Cho (2011)###USA###IV###Age###N/A###Cross-sectional/Quantitative

Forstenlechner, Lettice and

Ozbilgin (2012)###UAE###IV###Demographics###N/A###Longitudinal/Qualitative

Groeneveld and Verbeek###Netherlands###DV###Ethnicity###Diversity policies (IV)###Comparative/Quantitative

(2012)

Pieters (2012)###Netherlands###IV###Gender###N/A###Cross-sectional/Qualitative

Ortega, Plagens, Stephens###Perceptions of Affirmative Action Policies and

and Berry-James (2012)###USA###IV###Race/Ethnicity###Workplace Discrimination (DVs)###Cross-sectional/Quantitative

Aiken, Salmon and Hanges

(2013)###USA###Others###Racial/Gender/Ethnicity###Others###Case study/Qualitative

Andrews and Ashworth

(2013)###UK###Ant/ Conse###Gender/Color/Ethnic/Disability###Org determinants (IV)###Case study/Qualitative

Ewoh (2013)###USA###Antecedent###Culture, Valuing diversity###Diversity Management (IV)###Cross-sectional/Mixed

Clark, Ochs and Frazier

(2013)###USA###IV###Demographics###N/A###Cross-sectional/Quantitative

Guajardo (2013)###USA###IV###Workforce diversity###N/A###Comparative/Quantitative

Hur (2013)###USA###IV###Ethnicity/Racial###Org performance, Conflict, Turnover (DVs)###Cross-sectional/Quantitative

Kirkman, Cordery,

Mathieu, Rosen and###Community performance (DV), Psychological

Kukenberger (2013)###USA###IV###National origin###safety, Rich communication media use (Mod Vs)###Cross-sectional/Quantitative

###Family friendly work pratices (IV), Job

###satisfaction and Org. performance (DVs),

Ko, Hur and Smith-Walter###Managerial Support and Performance-Oriented

(2013)###USA###Antecedent###Workforce diversity###Management (Mod Vs)###Cross-sectional/Quantitative

###Diversity Management (IV), job satisfaction

###(DV), Perception of organizational fairness (Mod

Choi and Rainey (2014)###USA###IV###DM###V)###Cross-sectional/Quantitative

Whyman and Petrescu

(2014)###UK###IV###National origin###Workplace flexibility practices (DV)###Cross-sectional/Quantitative

F. Mahon and CJM Millar

(2014)###UK###IV###Age###N/A###Cross-sectional/Qualitative

Soldan and Nankervis###Australia###IV###DM###Effectiveness of Diversity Management (IV)###Cross-sectional/Qualitative

(2014)

Opstrup and Villadsen###Financial Performance (DV), Management

(2015)###Denmark###IV###Gender###structure (Mod V)###Longitudinal/Quantitative

Buengeler and Den Hartog###Team performance (DV), Interactional justice

(2015)###Germany###IV###National origin###climate (Mod V)###Cross-sectional/Quantitative

###Training and Development, HR IT uses, Union

Goodman, French, and###presence (IVs), Local Government workforce

Battaglio (2015)###USA###IV###HRM and DM###planning (DV)###Cross-sectional/Quantitative

Guajardo (2015)###USA###DV###Workforce diversity###Org. Efficiency (IV),###Cross-sectional/Quantitative

###Kinder, Lydenberg, Domini

###Research and Analytics

Kang (2015)###Singapore###IV###(KLD)ratings###Social Performance (DV)###Cross-sectional/Quantitative

###Job security, Commitment to social

###responsibility, Benefits, and Commitment to

###diversity (IVs), Public service attraction and

Ng and Sears (2015)###Canada###IV###Diversity###Employee equity groups (DV)###Case study/Quantitative

Augustine, Baraldi, Wheat,

Malgwi, and Jones (2016)###Africa###IV###Gender###Sustainability of economic performance (DV)###Case study/Quantitative

Kim and Park (2016)###USA###IV###DM###Diversity management (IV), Org. Justice (DV)###Cross-sectional/Quantitative

Madichie and Nyakang'o

(2016)###Kenya###DV###Age###Strategic workforce plan (IV)###Cross-sectional/Quantitative

###Gender/Race/

###Functional background/###Org. citizenship behavior (DV),

Moon (2016)###USA###IV###Tenure status###Transformational leadership climate (Mod V)###Longitudinal/Quantitative

Oberfield (2016)###USA###IV###Personal###Perceptions of diversity climate (DV)###Case study/Qualitative

Rosenauer, Homan,###Diversity climate and Team performance (DVs),

Horstmeier and Voelpel###Leaders Cultural Intelligence and Task

(2016)###Germany###IV###National origin###Interdependence (Mod Vs)###Cross-sectional/Quantitative

Brimhall, Mor Barak,

Hurlburt, McArdle,

Palinkas and Henwood###Org. Leader's influence (IV), Perceptions of

(2017)###USA###Antecedent###Workforce diversity###workplace inclusion (DV)###Longitudinal/Quantitative

Doede (2017)###USA###IV###Race/Ethnicity###Job satisfaction and Turnover (DVs)###Cross-sectional/Quantitative

###Efficiency of HR Practices and effectiveness

Das and Chaurasia (2017)###India###IV###Gender/Age###(IVs), Social cohesion and Turnover (Med Vs)###Case study/Quantitative

###Org. support and Faireness (Ivs), Job satisfaction

Choi (2017)###South Korea###IV###Racial/Ethnicity###(DV)###Cross-sectional/Quantitative

Jin, Lee and Lee (2017)###USA###Antecedent###Workforce diversity###Diversity policy and Inclusive leadership (IVs) Cross-sectional/Quantitative

Williams (2017)###Australia###IV###Disability###N/A###Case study/Qualitative

McGrandle (2017)###Canada###IV###DM###Diversity management practices (IV)###Case study/Qualitative

Vardeman-Wintera and

Placeba (2017)###USA###IV###Gender/Minorities###N/A###Cross-sectional/Qualitative

Pink-Harper, Burnside and

Davis (2017)###USA###IV###Culture/LGBT###Job satisfaction (DV), Skill utilization (Med V) Case study/Quantitative

Verheij, Groeneveld and###Diversity approaches (IV), Negative treatment

Kuyper (2017)###Netherlands###Antecedent###Workforce diversity###(DV)###Cross-sectional/Quantitative

###tool analysis,

Buttner and Tullar (2018)###USA###DV###metric analysis###Diversity metric (workforce analytics) (IV)###Case study/Quantitative

Ashley, Peters, Brown and###Work satisfaction and Future career intentions

Halcomb (2018)###Australia###DV###Role, Valuing diversity###(IVs)###Cross-sectional/Mixed

Joshi, Inouye, and

Robinson (2018)###USA###IV###Gender/Minorities###Award (DV)###Longitudinal/Quantitative

Linos (2018)###USA###Antecedent###Workforce diversity###Public service motivation (IV)###Experimental/Quantitative

###Innovative and Turnover (DV), Inclusive

Moon (2018)###USA###IV###Gender/Race###management (Mod V)###Case study/Quantitative

###Org. social capital (DV), Diversity climate

Moon (2018)###USA###IV###Gender/Race/Age###(ModV)###Cross-sectional/Quantitative

###Employee status (IV), Job satisfaction (DV),

Vanderschuere and###Organizational fairness, Diversity management

Birdsall (2018)###USA###Antecedent###Gender/Race/Education/Tenure###(Mod Vs)###Case study/Quantitative

Sabharwal, Levine and###Gender/Race/Color/LGBT/

DAgostino (2018)###USA###IV###ethnicity/function/Disability###N/A###Longitudinal/Qualitative

Arshad, Khan and

Khan (2019)###Pakistan###IV###Workforce diversity###Organizations performance (DV)###Cross-sectional/Quantitative

Anestaki, Sabharwal,

Connelly and Cayer (2019)###USA###IV###Race/Gender###N/A###Cross-sectional/Quantitative

###Goal Achievement rate (DV), Org. mission and

Lee (2019)###USA###IV###Racial###diversity climate (Mod Vs)###Cross-sectional/Quantitative

Lindsay, Leck, Shen,

Cagliostro and Stinson

(2019)###Canada###Antecedent###Disability###N/A###Cross-sectional/Qualitative

It is visible from table 2 that the workforce diversity is used as an antecedent in included studies (Andrews and Ashworth, 2013; Brewer, 2005; Brimhall, Mor Barak, Hurlburt, McArdle, Palinkas, and Henwood, 2017; Choy, Ramburuth, Eng Adeline, and Lee, 2010; Dobbs, 1996; Ewoh, 2013; Ko, Hur, and Smith-Walter, 2013; Lindsay et. al., 2019; Linos, 2018; Lowe, 2010; Naff, 1998; Perry and Cayer, 1999; Pitts, 2009; Vanderschuere and Birdsall, 2018; Verheij, Groeneveld, and Kuyper, 2017; Von Bergen, Soper, and Foster, 2002). Various dimensions of workforce diversity have been studied during all these years in the field of public administration. Notable dimensions identified are diversity in gender, race, ethnicity, color, religion, disability, age, culture, national origin, sexual orientation, representative bureaucracy, diversity management, function, tenure status, education, HRM, linguistics, management styles, ideas, opportunities, sects, tool and model developments and valuing diversity.

The empirical studies assessing the impact of workforce diversity on other variables indicate certain organizational impact. There were 35 articles in a sample which studied diversity as empirically related to outcomes. Workforce diversity in form of various dimensions are associated with other variables like work performance (Barak, 2000; Buengeler, and Den Hartog, 2015; Pitts, 2009), organizational performance (Andrews, Boyne, Meier, O'Toole, and Walker, 2005; Brewer, 2005; Hur, 2013; Kirkman, Cordery, Mathieu, Rosen, and Kukenberger, 2013;

Ko, Hur, and Smith-Walter, 2013; Pitts and Jarry, 2009), financial performance (Opstrup and Villadsen, 2015), social performance (Kang, 2015), economic performance (Augustine, Baraldi, Wheat, Malgwi, and Jones, 2016), job satisfaction (Choi and Rainey, 2014; Ko, Hur, and Smith-Walter, 2013; Pink-Harper, Burnside, and Davis, 2017; Pitts, 2009; Vanderschuere and Birdsall, 2018), conflict, turnover (Hur, 2013; Moon, 2018), organizational justice (Kim and Park, 2016), organizational citizenship behavior (Moon, 2016), perceptions of diversity climate (Oberfield, 2016; Rosenauer, Homan, Horstmeier, and Voelpel, 2016) and perceptions of workplace inclusion (Brimhall, Mor Barak, Hurlburt, McArdle, Palinkas, and Henwood, 2017). These findings were in contradiction with the findings of researchers according to whom very little empirical researches are found on diversity and performance (Sabharwal, Levine, and D'Agostino, 2018) and no researches available on workforce diversity and work related outcomes (Pitts, 2006).

Generally the studies in the current systematic literature review have used moderating and mediating variables in their researches as well. Markedly are role of inclusion and exclusion (Barak, 2000; Moon, 2018), organizational strategy (Andrews et al., 2005), psychological safety, rich communication media use (Kirkman et al,, 2013), managerial support and performance-oriented management (Ko, Hur, and Smith-Walter, 2013), Perception of organizational fairness and diversity management (Choi and Rainey, 2014; Vanderschuere and Birdsall, 2018), management structure (Opstrup and Villadsen, 2015), interactional justice climate (Buengeler and Den Hartog, 2015), transformational leadership climate (Moon, 2016), leaders' cultural intelligence and task interdependence (Rosenauer, Homan, Horstmeier and Voelpel, 2016) and diversity climate (Lee, 2019; Moon, 2018). The mediating variables used are social cohesion and turnover (Das and Chaurasia, 2017), skill utilization (Pink-Harper, Burnside and Davis, 2017).

Discussion

The current review has been conducted to analyze the development of workforce diversity in the field of public administration. It is evident from table 1 the theoretical literature on workforce diversity in context of public administration is available from year 1995. Very few studies are available, but there full texts are not accessible. The publications in the current field proliferated in 2000 the reason being various worldwide government reforms introduced in government organizations (Kettl, 2000).

The dimensions of workforce diversity examined in the sample are quite diverse being practiced in various countries globally. However there is dearth of literature on workforce diversity from South Asian region. Out of selected 83 articles, two studies have been reported from India and Pakistan (i.e. Das and Chaurasia, 2017; Arshad, Khan and Khan, 2019).

India is the largest country of South Asia and the seventh largest country in the world by area. Whereas Pakistan is the second most populous country in South Asia (Sawe, 2018). A wide range of economic reforms have been undertaken since 1990 by the South Asian governments consistently and as a result noticeable changes have been observed in the business scenario of the south Asian region (Khilji, 2012). The Kearney FDI Confidence Index has reported India as a second most favored country (after China) in terms of Foreign Direct Investment (Kearney, 2012). According to world development report 2019 of World Bank, more emphasis is given on reducing gender imbalance in Pakistan (World Bank, 2019b). As a result of economic reforms Pakistan has also included amongst the top 20 global offshoring destinations. It is pretty much apparent that the research studies of India and Pakistan are comprehensive and can represent South Asian region.

The analysis has highlighted an inventory of 98 variables in total. It has identified 21 antecedents, 31 independent/predictor variables, three mediating variables, 14 moderating variables and 29 dependent/criterion variables. The inventory of extracted variables from various articles is listed in table 2 and is quite diverse.

One of the future implications by Wise and Pitts (2010) was the need of studying various dimensions of workforce diversity management like training programs, promoting inclusion through mentoring and networking etc. and their relationship with other variables. The current systematic literature review has found the articles highlighting diversity training (Goodman, French, and Battaglio, 2015; Von Bergen, Soper and Foster, 2002), inclusion through mentoring and networks (Brimhall et al., 2017; Jin, Lee and Lee, 2017; Moon, 2018).

A total of 35 empirical studies are noted out of which few have used secondary data, federal government data, policy documents and from different surveyed data in United States of America (Choi, 2010; Choi and Rainey, 2014; Clark, Ochs, and Frazier, 2013; Crumpacker and Crumpacker, 2008; Ewoh, 2013) and United Kingdom (Andrews, Boyne, and Walker, 2006).

It has been identified that 29 researches have used qualitative methods. By using qualitative methods like interviews and case studies captures the holistic view regarding workforce diversity and its dimensions or its relationship with other variables. The research findings have given a broader view and understanding of diversity encompassing other than race, gender and affirmative action. It is seen during analysis that mostly researches have used representative bureaucracy as theoretical underpinnings.

Increasing globalization, immigration and United States being key player demands the comparative studies on diversity in public administration (Broadnax, 2010). There were five studies that have used comparative framework (Choy et al., 2010; Dickson and Hargie, 2006; Groeneveld and Verbeek, 2012; Guajardo, 2013; Tung, 2008). Such comparative studies are useful in understanding workforce diversity trends between more than one organization, country and nations. It also highlights the differences and similarities of managing diversity, or implementing diversity policy or program among comparisons.

Some of the dimensions of diversity like gender, race, color, religion, LGBT, ethnicity, functional background, disability, tenure status, which are studied using longitudinal research design (Forstenlechner, Lettice, and Ozbilgin, 2012; Guajardo, 1999; Joshi, Inouye, and Robinson, 2018; Moon, 2016; Opstrup and Villadsen, 2015; Pitts, 2005; Pitts and Jarry, 2009; Pitts and Wise, 2010; Sabharwal, Levine, and D'Agostino, 2018; Thomas and Mohai, 1995; West, 2010). Longitudinal research is usually used to study social change and impact. Some of them are studied independently over a period of time and some in relationship with other variables. Hence these studies will be helpful in understanding of these dimensions and their effects over other variables.

Workforce diversity is becoming an important facet in public sector; its various dimensions have also been studied as a standalone and also with relation to other variables. Its development has been slow but continuous. Diversity is usually associated with race and gender. Our research findings highlighted many other facets of diversity like culture, national origin, management styles, ideas and opportunities that have been nourished in the field of public administration.

All the salient features for attaining economic, political and social change are evident in the present day South Asia. The region has been successful in achieving gender diversity by overcoming conventional barriers and starting implementation of better legislation or laws, new policy management, and establishment of government sponsored microeconomic activities and greater emphasis on diversity and gender policies in organizations, hence it can create new pathways/bridges (Khilji and Rowley, 2013; Murray and Syed, 2013).

Findings of current systematic literature review will aid public sector managers especially of South Asian region in addressing various diversity related issues and selecting different programs and policies for implementation. As discussed earlier in the introduction of the study regarding a term "Ambicultural', the current systematic literature review has highlighted various dimensions, antecedents, consequences of workforce diversity in context of public administration in developed countries. The need of the hour is to conduct studies on diversity in the public sectors of South Asian region. By adopting practices of managing diversity in the developed countries/West and contextualizing according to local cultures, a void can be filled in the literature of workforce diversity in public administration from South Asia.

Thomas and Ely (1996) researched that Western organizations inculcate learning and effectiveness paradigm as a part of broader diversity program which leads to internalizing of difference among employee. Thus an organization learns and grows because of differences. This paradigm is focused more on learning and effectiveness instead of assimilation and differentiation. The application of western literature review can help south Asian region in learning and accepting approaches leading to high standards of performance and open culture in an organization.

Conclusion

Eighty three articles that satisfied all inclusion criteria were included in the review. Workforce diversity concept is multidimensional and inclusive of not only differences but similarities as well. It is evident from the analysis of sample articles that public administration as a field has cultivated a comprehensive view of workforce diversity extending beyond the issues of minorities, gender, affirmative action and representative bureaucracy. There is an emerging trend of exploring more dimensions of diversity in culture, national origin, ideas, opportunities, HRM practices and more. Workforce diversity either collectively or in form of dimensions have been used as antecedents, independent/predictor, and dependent/criterion, mediating and moderating variables in various studies that further validates the significance of workforce diversity in public administration.

The interest of researchers in workforce diversity in public administration field has been increased in last 15 years. Most researchers studied the gender, race and ethnicity dimensions of workforce diversity. Articles on other diversity dimensions color, religion, disability, culture and sexual orientation are few in number, which is consistent with findings of Pitts and Wise (2010) and Wise and Tschirhart (2000).

Empirical studies on effect of workforce diversity on organizational performance focusing on US and UK federal agencies and federal governments, can be interpreted as reliability of the results.

In order to enrich the literature of public administration from policies related to workforce diversity and its implementation, more researches should be conducted in South Asian region especially Pakistan.

In a nutshell, researchers in developed countries have done a lot of research, highlighted the gray areas and came up with their solutions. Western world adopted the outcome of such research works and benefitted themselves as well as public at large. We have all what it takes to improve our public sector, we do not need to reinvent rather tweak to suit our needs. Simply we need to identify our shortcomings and religiously start towards their redress.

Limitation and Future Implications

The current research summarizes 83 articles from all over the world and highlighted number of variables associated with workforce diversity. The current research, however, is limited in that only a single database (ISI web of knowledge) was used. It is recommended for future research that variables and dimensions identified through current systematic literature review may further enriched using more databases, and tested using quantitative confirmatory models.

The identified research articles can be analyzed in different ways, by going through their methodologies and data analysis in detail. There are chances of finding new areas of research.

The current research has highlighted a number of dimensions of workforce diversity, that can be studied alone or in association with other variables.

References

Aiken, J. R., Salmon, E. D., and Hanges, P. J. (2013). The origins and legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Journal of Business and Psychology, 28(4), 383-399.

Albrow, M. (2007). A new decade of the global age, 1996-2006. Globality Studies Journal, 8.

Andrews, R., and Ashworth, R. (2013). Determinants of representation: an empirical assessment of the UK civil service. Policy and Politics, 41(3), 429-448. doi: 10.1332/030557312x645829

Andrews, R., and Ashworth, R. (2015). Representation and Inclusion in Public Organizations: Evidence from the UK Civil Service. Public Administration Review, 75(2), 279-288. doi: 10.1111/puar.12308

Andrews, R., Boyne, G. A., Meier, K. J., O'Toole, L. J., and Walker, R. M. (2005). Representative bureaucracy, organizational strategy, and public service performance: An empirical analysis of English local government. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15(4), 489-504. doi: 10.1093/jopart/mui032

Andrews, R., Boyne, G. A., and Walker, R. M. (2006). Workforce diversity in the public sector: an evaluation of the performance of English local authorities. Policy and Politics, 34(2), 287-306. doi: 10.1332/030557306776315868

Anestaki, A., Sabharwal, M., Connelly, K., and Cayer, N. J. (2019). Race and Gender Representation in Presidential Appointments, SES, and GS Levels, During Clinton, Bush, and Obama Administrations. Administration and Society, 51(2), 197-228. doi: 10.1177/0095399716655376

Arshad, M. A., Khan, Q., and Khan, S. (2019). Empirical analysis of HPO framework in public sector organizations of Pakistan. International Journal of Public Leadership, 15(2), 78-93.

Ball, C., and Haque, A. (2003). Diversity in religious practice: Implications of Islamic values in the public workplace. Public Personnel Management, 32(3), 315-330. doi: 10.1177/009102600303200301

Barak, M. E. M. (2000). Beyond affirmative action: Toward a model of diversity and organizational inclusion. Administration in Social Work, 23(3-4), 47-+.

Barak, M. E. M. (2013). Beyond Affirmative Action: Toward a Model of Diversity and Organizational Inclusion. Social Services in the Workplace: Repositioning Occupational Social Work in the New Millennium, 47.

Boerner, S., and Gebert, D. (2012). Fostering artistic ensemble performance: Exploring the role of transformational leadership. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 22(3), 347-365. doi: 10.1002/nml.20058

Bradbury, M., and Kellough, J. E. (2011). Representative Bureaucracy: Assessing the Evidence on Active Representation. American Review of Public Administration, 41(2), 157-167. doi: 10.1177/0275074010367823

Bradbury, M. D. (2007). The legal and managerial challenge of obesity as a disability: Evidence from the federal courts. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 27(1), 79-90.

Brewer, G. A. (2005). In the eye of the storm: Frontline supervisors and federal agency performance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15(4), 505-527. doi: 10.1093/jopart/mui031

Brimhall, K. C., and Barak, M. E. M. (2018). The Critical Role of Workplace Inclusion in Fostering Innovation, Job Satisfaction, and Quality of Care in a Diverse Human Service Organization. Human Service Organizations Management Leadership and Governance, 42(5), 474-492. doi: 10.1080/23303131.2018.1526151

Brimhall, K. C., Barak, M. E. M., Hurlburt, M., McArdle, J. J., Palinkas, L., and Henwood, B. (2017). Increasing Workplace Inclusion: The Promise of Leader-Member Exchange. Human Service Organizations Management Leadership and Governance, 41(3), 222-239. doi: 10.1080/23303131.2016.1251522

Broadnax, W. D. (2010). Diversity in public organizations: A work in progress. Public Administration Review, 70, S177-S179.

Brown, G., Harris, C., and Squirrell, T. (2010). Gender Diversification in the U.S. Forest Service: Does It Still Matter? Review of Public Personnel Administration, 30(3), 268-300. doi: 10.1177/0734371x10368219

Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods: Oxford university press.

Calo, T. J. (2008). Talent Management in the Era of the Aging Workforce: The Critical Role of Knowledge Transfer. Public Personnel Management, 37(4), 403-416. doi: 10.1177/009102600803700403

Carcieri, M. D. (2004). The University of Michigan affirmative action cases and public personnel decisions. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 24(1), 70-76.

Carrell, M. R., and Mann, E. E. (1995). DEFINING WORKFORCE DIVERSITY IN PUBLIC-SECTOR ORGANIZATIONS. Public Personnel Management, 24(1), 99-111. doi: 10.1177/009102609502400108

Charles, J. (2003). Diversity management: An exploratory assessment of minority group representation in state government. Public Personnel Management, 32(4), 561-577. doi: 10.1177/009102600303200407

Christie, C. (2007). Content analysis. In R. Baumeister and K. Vohs (Eds.), Encyclopedia of social psychology (p. 176). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE

Choi, S. (2010). Diversity in the U.S. Federal Government: Antecedents and Correlates of Diversity in Federal Agencies. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 30(3), 301-321. doi: 10.1177/0734371x10368222

Choi, S. (2013). Demographic Diversity of Managers and Employee Job Satisfaction: Empirical Analysis of the Federal Case. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 33(3), 275-298. doi: 10.1177/0734371x12453054

Choi, S. (2017). Workforce Diversity and Job Satisfaction of the Majority and the Minority: Analyzing the Asymmetrical Effects of Relational Demography on Whites and Racial/Ethnic Minorities. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 37(1), 84-107. doi: 10.1177/0734371x15623617

Choi, S., and Rainey, H. G. (2014). Organizational Fairness and Diversity Management in Public Organizations: Does Fairness Matter in Managing Diversity? Review of Public Personnel Administration, 34(4), 307-331. doi: 10.1177/0734371x13486489

Chordiya, R. (2019). Are Federal Child Care Programs Sufficient for Employee Retention? Critical Examination From a Gendered Perspective. American Review of Public Administration, 49(3), 338-352. doi: 10.1177/0275074018804662

Clark, R. C., Ochs, H. L., and Frazier, M. (2013). Representative Bureaucracy: The Politics of Access to Policy-Making Positions in the Federal Executive Service. Public Personnel Management, 42(1), 75-89. doi: 10.1177/0091026013484570

Corley, E. A., and Sabharwal, M. (2010). Scholarly collaboration and productivity patterns in public administration: Analysing recent trends. Public Administration, 88(3), 627-648.

Crumpacker, M., and Crumpacker, J. M. (2008). The US Federal Senior Executive Service (SES) and Gender Diversity: Would Proposed Legislation Enhancing the Representational Diversity of Selection Panels Necessarily Increase the Number of Female Appointments to the SES? Public Personnel Management, 37(4), 417-433. doi: 10.1177/009102600803700404

Dobbs, M. F. (1996). Managing diversity: Lessons from the private sector. Public Personnel Management, 25(3), 351-367. doi: 10.1177/009102609602500308

Dolan, J., and Rosenbloom, D. H. (2003). Representative bureaucracy: Classic Readings and Continuing Controversies, edit. by ME Sharpe.

Ewoh, A. I. E. (2013). Managing and Valuing Diversity: Challenges to Public Managers in the 21st Century. Public Personnel Management, 42(2), 107-122. doi: 10.1177/0091026013487048

Frederickson, G. (2005). The state of social equity in American public administration. National Civic Review, 94(4), 31-38.

Frederickson, H. G. (1990). Public administration and social equity. Public Administration Review, 50(2), 228-237.

Frederickson, H. G. (2015). Social Equity and Public Administration: Origins, Developments, and Applications: Origins, Developments, and Applications: Routledge.

Giddens, A. (2003). The globalizing of modernity. The global transformations reader: An introduction to the globalization debate, 60-66.

Glinos, I. A. (2014). Going beyond numbers: A typology of health professional mobility inside and outside the European Union. Policy and Society, 33(1), 25-37. doi: 10.1016/j.polsoc.2014.04.001

Gooden, S., and Portillo, S. (2011). Advancing social equity in the Minnowbrook tradition. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(suppl_1), i61-i76.

Goodman, D., French, P. E., and Battaglio, R. P. (2015). Determinants of Local Government Workforce Planning. American Review of Public Administration, 45(2), 135-152. doi: 10.1177/0275074013486179

Grabosky, P. N., and Rosenbloom, D. H. (1975). Racial and ethnic integration in the federal service. Social Science Quarterly, 71-84.

Greene, A.-m., and Kirton, G. (2011). Diversity management meets downsizing: the case of a government department. Employee Relations, 33(1), 22-39.

Groeneveld, S., and Verbeek, S. (2012). Diversity Policies in Public and Private Sector Organizations: An Empirical Comparison of Incidence and Effectiveness. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 32(4), 353-381. doi: 10.1177/0734371x11421497

Guajardo, S. A. (1999). Workforce diversity: Monitoring employment trends in public organizations. Public Personnel Management, 28(1), 63-85. doi: 10.1177/009102609902800106

Guajardo, S. A. (2013). Workforce Diversity: An Application of Diversity and Integration Indices to Small Agencies. Public Personnel Management, 42(1), 27-40. doi: 10.1177/0091026013484573

Guajardo, S. A. (2015). Assessing Organizational Efficiency and Workforce Diversity: An Application of Data Envelopment Analysis to New York City Agencies. Public Personnel Management, 44(2), 239-265. doi: 10.1177/0091026015575179

Guillen, M. F. (2001). Is globalization civilizing, destructive or feeble? A critique of five key debates in the social science literature. Annual review of sociology, 27(1), 235-260.

Gummer, B. (1998). Current perspectives on diversity in the workforce: How diverse is diverse? Administration in Social Work, 22(1), 83-100. doi: 10.1300/J147v22n01_06

Haley-Lock, A. (2007). A workforce or workplace crisis? - Applying an organizational perspective to the study of human services employment. Administration in Social Work, 31(3), 41-61. doi: 10.1300/J147v31n03_04

Held, D., and McGrew, A. (2000). The global transformations reader (Vol. 13). Cambridge: Polity Press.

HLarsh, M., Woodson, T. S., Cozzens, S., Wetmore, J. M., Soumonni, O., and Cortes, R. (2018). The role of emerging technologies in inclusive innovation: the case of nanotechnology in South Africa. Science and Public Policy, 45(5), 597-607. doi: 10.1093/scipol/scx079

Hur, Y. (2013). Racial diversity, is it a blessing to an organization? Examining its organizational consequences in municipal police departments. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 79(1), 149-164. doi: 10.1177/0020852312467613

Hyde, C. A. (2018). Leading From Below: Low-Power Actors as Organizational Change Agents. Human Service Organizations Management Leadership and Governance, 42(1), 53-67. doi: 10.1080/23303131.2017.1360229

Ivancevich, J. M., and Gilbert, J. A. (2000). Diversity management - Time for a new approach. Public Personnel Management, 29(1), 75-92. doi: 10.1177/009102600002900106

Jin, M., Lee, J., and Lee, M. (2017). Does leadership matter in diversity management? Assessing the relative impact of diversity policy and inclusive leadership in the public sector. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 38(2), 303-319.

Jin, M. H., and Park, J. (2016). Sexual Minority and Employee Engagement: Implications for Job Satisfaction. Journal of Public and Nonprofit Affairs, 2(1), 3-14. doi: 10.20899/jpna.2.1.3-14

Kalimullah, Arshad, M. A., Khan, Q., and Khan, S. (2019). Empirical analysis of HPO framework in public sector organizations of Pakistan. International Journal of Public Leadership, 15(2), 78-93. doi: 10.1108/ijpl-06-2018-0030

Kearney, A. T. (2012). Cautious investors feed a tentative recovery. Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) Confidence Index. Online: http://www. atkearney. com/documents/10192/fdaa84a5-a30a-4e4e-bc36-453375d6596fb (30.04. 2013).

Keiser, L. R., Wilkins, V. M., Meier, K. J., and Holland, C. A. (2002). Lipstick and logarithms: Gender, institutional context, and representative bureaucracy. American political science review, 96(3), 553-564.

Kellough, J. E. (1991). Integration in the public workplace: Determinants of minority and female employment in federal... Journal of Management Studies, 28(5), 557-566.

Kellough, J. E., and Pitts, D. W. (2005). Who contributes to Public Administration Review? Examining the characteristics of authors who submit manuscripts to the journal. Public Administration Review, 65(1), 3-7.

Kettl, D. F. (2000). The transformation of governance: Globalization, devolution, and the role of government. Public Administration Review, 60(6), 488-497.

Khilji, S. E. (2013). The changing context of South Asian economies. In Globalization, Change and Learning in South Asia (pp. 1-18). Chandos Publishing.

Khilji, S., and Rowley, C. (2013). Globalization, change and learning in South Asia. Elsevier.

Kim, S. (2003). Linking employee assessments to succession planning. Public Personnel Management, 32(4), 533-547. doi: 10.1177/009102600303200405

Kim, S., and Park, S. (2016). ORGANIZATIONAL JUSTICE AS AN OUTCOME OF DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT FOR FEMALE EMPLOYEES: EVIDENCE FROM US FEDERAL AGENCIES. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences(49E), 41-59.

Kim, T., and Mullins, L. B. (2016). How Does Supervisor Support and Diversity Management Affect Employee Participation in Work/Family Policies? Review of Public Personnel Administration, 36(1), 80-105. doi: 10.1177/0734371x14553883

Ko, J., Hur, S., and Smith-Walter, A. (2013). Family-Friendly Work Practices and Job Satisfaction and Organizational Performance: Moderating Effects of Managerial Support and Performance-Oriented Management. Public Personnel Management, 42(4), 545-565. doi: 10.1177/0091026013505503

Kossek, E., Lobel, S., and Brown, A. (2005). Human Resource Strategies to Manage Workforce Diversity, w: A. Konrad, P. Prasad, J. Pringle (red.). Handbook of Workplace Diversity.

Landis, J. R., and Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. biometrics, 159-174.

Lane, H. W., Maznevski, M., Deetz, J., and DiStefano, J. (2009). International management behavior: Leading with a global mindset. John Wiley and Sons.

Lee, H. (2019). Does Increasing Racial Minority Representation Contribute to Overall Organizational Performance? The Role of Organizational Mission and Diversity Climate. American Review of Public Administration, 49(4), 454-468. doi: 10.1177/0275074019831101

Lechner, F. J., and Boli, J. (Eds.). (2014). The globalization reader. John Wiley and Sons.

Lewis, G. B., and Cho, Y. J. (2011). The Aging of the State Government Workforce: Trends and Implications. American Review of Public Administration, 41(1), 48-60. doi: 10.1177/0275074009359308

Lindsay, S., Leck, J., Shen, W., Cagliostro, E., and Stinson, J. (2019). A framework for developing employer's disability confidence. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 38(1), 40-55.

Linos, E. (2018). More Than Public Service: A Field Experiment on Job Advertisements and Diversity in the Police. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 28(1), 67-85. doi: 10.1093/jopart/mux032

Lowe, N. J. (2010). Responding to diversity: workforce intermediation in a transitioning regional economy. Environment and Planning C-Government and Policy, 28(4), 696-713. doi: 10.1068/c0845

Mallow, A. (2010). Diversity Management in Substance Abuse Organizations: Improving the Relationship Between the Organization and its Workforce. Administration in Social Work, 34(3), 275-285. doi: 10.1080/03643107.2010.481181

Mathews, A. (1998). Diversity: A principle of human resource management. Public Personnel Management, 27(2), 175-185. doi: 10.1177/009102609802700205

Maznevski, M. L., and Lane, H. W. (2004). Shaping the global mindset: Designing educational experiences for effective global thinking and action. Crossing cultures: Insights from master teachers, 171-184.

McCabe, B. C., and Stream, C. (2000). Diversity by the numbers - Changes in state and local government workforces 1980-1995. Public Personnel Management, 29(1), 93-106. doi: 10.1177/009102600002900107

McGrandle, J. (2017). Understanding Diversity Management in the Public Sector: A Case for Contingency Theory. International Journal of Public Administration, 40(6), 526-537. doi: 10.1080/01900692.2015.1136942

Meier, K. J. (1975). Representative bureaucracy: An empirical analysis. American political science review, 69(2), 526-542.

Meyer, K. E. (2004). Perspectives on multinational enterprises in emerging economies. Journal of international business studies, 35(4), 259-276.

Moon, K. K. (2016). The Effects of Diversity and Transformational Leadership Climate on Organizational Citizenship Behavior in the US Federal Government: An Organizational-Level Longitudinal Study. Public Performance and Management Review, 40(2), 361-381. doi: 10.1080/15309576.2016.1216002

Moon, K. K. (2018a). Examining the Relationships Between Diversity and Work Behaviors in US Federal Agencies: Does Inclusive Management Make a Difference? Review of Public Personnel Administration, 38(2), 218-247. doi: 10.1177/0734371x16660157

Moon, K. K. (2018b). How does a diversity climate shape the relationship between demographic diversity and organizational social capital in the US federal government? Public Management Review, 20(8), 1246-1264. doi: 10.1080/14719037.2017.1400582

Mor-Barak, M. E., and Cherin, D. A. (1998). A tool to expand organizational understanding of workforce diversity: Exploring a measure of inclusion-exclusion. Administration in Social Work, 22(1), 47-+. doi: 10.1300/J147v22n01_04

Murray, P. A., and Syed, J. (2013). Globalization and gender in south Asia. In Proceedings of the 13th Annual Conference of the European Academy of Management (EURAM 2013) (pp. 1-32). European Academy of Management.

Naff, K. C. (1998). Progress toward achieving a representative federal bureaucracy: The impact of supervisors and their beliefs. Public Personnel Management, 27(2), 135-150. doi: 10.1177/009102609802700202

Naff, K. C. (2004). From Bakke to Grutter and Gratz: The supreme court as a policymaking institution. Review of Policy Research, 21(3), 405-427.

Naff, K. C., and Kellough, J. E. (2003). Ensuring employment equity: Are federal diversity programs making a difference? International Journal of Public Administration, 26(12), 1307-1336.

Naylor, L. A., and Rosenbloom, D. H. (2004). Adarand, Grutter, and Gratz: Does Affirmative Action in Federal Employment Matter? Review of Public Personnel Administration, 24(2), 150-174.

Ng, E. S., and Sears, G. J. (2015). Toward Representative Bureaucracy: Predicting Public Service Attraction Among Underrepresented Groups in Canada. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 35(4), 367-385. doi: 10.1177/0734371x14544546

O'Reilly III, C. A., Williams, K. Y., and Barsade, S. (1998). Group demography and innovation: Does diversity help?

Oberfield, Z. W. (2016). WHY ARE SOME AGENCIES PERCEIVED AS MORE COMMITTED TO DIVERSITY THAN OTHERS? An analysis of public-sector diversity climates. Public Management Review, 18(5), 763-790. doi: 10.1080/14719037.2015.1045017

Ogbonna, E., and Harris, L. C. (2006). The dynamics of employee relationships in an ethnically diverse workforce. Human relations, 59(3), 379-407.

Opstrup, N., and Villadsen, A. R. (2015). The Right Mix? Gender Diversity in Top Management Teams and Financial Performance. Public Administration Review, 75(2), 291-301. doi: 10.1111/puar.12310

Ortega, R., Plagens, G. K., Stephens, P., and Berry-James, R. M. (2012). Mexican American Public Sector Professionals: Perceptions of Affirmative Action Policies and Workplace Discrimination. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 32(1), 24-44. doi: 10.1177/0734371x11408705

Perry, R. W., and Cayer, N. J. (1999). Cafeteria style health plans in municipal government. Public Personnel Management, 28(1), 107-117. doi: 10.1177/009102609902800108

Piderit, S.K. (2000) ""Rethinking resistance and recognizing ambivalence: a multidimensional view of attitudes towards organizational change," Academy of Management Journal, 44, 697-713.

Pitts, D. (2009). Diversity Management, Job Satisfaction, and Performance: Evidence from US Federal Agencies. Public Administration Review, 69(2), 328-338. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2008.01977.x

Pitts, D. W. (2005). Diversity, representation, and performance: Evidence about race and ethnicity in public organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15(4), 615-631. doi: 10.1093/jopart/mui033

Pitts, D. W. (2006). Modeling the impact of diversity management. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 26(3), 245-268.

Pitts, D. W., Hicklin, A. K., Hawes, D. P., and Melton, E. (2010). What Drives the Implementation of Diversity Management Programs? Evidence from Public Organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20(4), 867-886. doi: 10.1093/jopart/mup044

Pitts, D. W., and Jarry, E. M. (2009). GETTING TO KNOW YOU: ETHNIC DIVERSITY, TIME AND PERFORMANCE IN PUBLIC ORGANIZATIONS. Public Administration, 87(3), 503-518. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9299.2009.01776.x

Pitts, D. W., and Wise, L. R. (2010). Workforce Diversity in the New Millennium: Prospects for Research. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 30(1), 44-69. doi: 10.1177/0734371x09351823

Podger, A. (2017). Enduring Challenges and New Developments in Public Human Resource Management: Australia as an Example of International Experience. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 37(1), 108-128. doi: 10.1177/0734371x17693057

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Bachrach, D. G., and Podsakoff, N. P. (2005). The influence of management journals in the 1980s and 1990s. Strategic Management Journal, 26(5), 473-488.

Raadschelders, J. C., and Lee, K. H. (2011). Trends in the study of public administration: Empirical and qualitative observations from Public Administration Review, 2000-2009. Public Administration Review, 71(1), 19-33.

Rangarajan, N., and Black, T. (2007). Exploring organizational barriers to diversity: A case study of the New York state education department. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 27(3), 249-263.

Riccucci, N. M. (2007). Moving away from a strict scrutiny standard for affirmative action - Implications for public management. American Review of Public Administration, 37(2), 123-141. doi: 10.1177/0275074006298877

Riccucci, N. M., and Saidel, J. R. (2001). The demographics of gubernatorial appointees: Toward an explanation of variation. Policy Studies Journal, 29(1), 11-22.

Rivers, K. J. (2014). The stratagem of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: an examination on employment for African Americans 50 years later.

Rosenauer, D., Homan, A. C., Horstmeier, C. A., and Voelpel, S. C. (2016). Managing nationality diversity: The interactive effect of leaders' cultural intelligence and task interdependence. British journal of management, 27(3), 628-645.

Rosenbloom, D. (2005). Taking social equity seriously in MPA education. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 11(3), 247-252.

Rosenbloom, J. L., and Ginther, D. K. (2017). The effectiveness of social science research in addressing societal problems: Broadening participation in computing. Science and Public Policy, 44(2), 259-273. doi: 10.1093/scipol/scw062

Rubaiibarrett, N., and Beck, A. C. (1993). MINORITIES IN THE MAJORITY - IMPLICATIONS FOR MANAGING CULTURAL-DIVERSITY. Public Personnel Management, 22(4), 503-521. doi: 10.1177/009102609302200401

Sabharwal, M., Levine, H., and D'Agostino, M. (2018). A Conceptual Content Analysis of 75 Years of Diversity Research in Public Administration. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 38(2), 248-267. doi: 10.1177/0734371x16671368

Savath, V., and Brainard, S. G. (2013). Managing Nanotechnology Risks in Vulnerable Populations: A Case for Gender Diversity. Review of Policy Research, 30(5), 549-565. doi: 10.1111/ropr.12031

Selden, S. (1997). The Promise of a Representative Bureaucracy: Diversity and Responsiveness in a Government Agency. New York/London: ME Sharpe: Inc.

Selden, S. C., and Selden, F. (2001). Rethinking diversity in public organizations for the 21st century - Moving toward a multicultural model. Administration and Society, 33(3), 303-329. doi: 10.1177/00953990122019785

Sisneros, A. (2004). Marching in the Procession of Precaution? A Rebuttal to Martin D. Carcieri's "The University of Michigan Affirmative Action Cases and Public Personnel Decisions". Review of Public Personnel Administration, 24(2), 175-182.

Soldan, Z., and Nankervis, A. (2014). Employee Perceptions of the Effectiveness of Diversity Management in the Australian Public Service: Rhetoric and Reality. Public Personnel Management, 43(4), 543-564. doi: 10.1177/0091026014533093

Soni, V. (2000). A twenty-first-century reception for diversity in the public sector: A case study. Public Administration Review, 60(5), 395-408. doi: 10.1111/0033-3352.00103

Soni, V. (2000). A twenty-first-century reception for diversity in the public sector: a case study. Public Administration Review, 60(5), 395-408.

Starks, G. L. (2009). Minority Representation in Senior Positions in US Federal Agencies: A Paradox of Underrepresentation. Public Personnel Management, 38(1), 79-90. doi: 10.1177/009102600903800106

Svara, J. H., and Brunet, J. R. (2004). Filling in the skeletal pillar: Addressing social equity in introductory courses in public administration. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 10(2), 99-109.

Svara, J. H., and Brunet, J. R. (2005). Social equity is a pillar of public administration. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 11(3), 253-258.

Thomas, R. R. (1990). From affirmoiive aciion to affirming diversity. Harvard business review, 1, 107A117.

Thomas, J. C., and Mohai, P. (1995). RACIAL, GENDER, AND PROFESSIONAL DIVERSIFICATION IN THE FOREST-SERVICE FROM 1983 TO 1992. Policy Studies Journal, 23(2), 296-309. doi: 10.1111/j.1541-0072.1995.tb01744.x

Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., and Smart, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British journal of management, 14(3), 207-222.

Tung, R. (2012) ""The future of East Asian management", in M. Warner (Ed.), Managing across Diverse Cultures in East Asia: Issues and Challenges in a Changing Globalized World. London: Routledge, pp. 263-76.

Van Knippenberg, D., De Dreu, C. K., and Homan, A. C. (2004). Work group diversity and group performance: an integrative model and research agenda. Journal of applied psychology, 89(6), 1008.

Vanderschuere, M., and Birdsall, C. (2019). Can Diversity Management Improve Job Satisfaction for Military Veterans in the Federal Government? American Review of Public Administration, 49(1), 116-127. doi: 10.1177/0275074018783005

Verheij, J., Groeneveld, S., and Kuyper, L. (2017). Diverse approaches to negative treatment in the workplace: sector differences and their effects. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 36(1), 54-72.

Von Bergen, C. W., Soper, B., and Foster, T. (2002). Unintended negative effects of diversity management. Public Personnel Management, 31(2), 239-251. doi: 10.1177/009102600203100209

Watkins-Hayes, C. (2011). Race, Respect, and Red Tape: Inside the Black Box of Racially Representative Bureaucracies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21, I233-I251. doi: 10.1093/jopart/muq096

West, J. P. (2010). Thirty Years of ROPPA: Past Trends and Future Prospects. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 30(1), 5-19. doi: 10.1177/0734371x09351819

Wilkins, V. M., and Keiser, L. R. (2004). Linking passive and active representation by gender: The case of child support agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16(1), 87-102.

Williamson, S., and Foley, M. (2018). Unconscious Bias Training: The "Silver Bullet' for Gender Equity? Australian Journal of Public Administration, 77(3), 355-359. doi: 10.1111/1467-8500.12313

Wise, L. R. (1990). Social Equity in Civil Service Systems. Public Administration Review, 50(5), 567-575.

Wise, L. R., and Tschirhart, M. (2000). Examining empirical evidence on diversity effects: how useful is diversity research for public-sector managers? Public Administration Review, 60(5), 386-394.

Wooldridge, B., and Gooden, S. (2009). The epic of social equity: Evolution, essence, and emergence. Administrative Theory and Praxis, 31(2), 222-234.

World Bank (2019a). World Bank Annual Report 2019. Washington, DC: World Bank.

World Bank (2019b). World Development Report 2019: The Changing Nature of Work. Washington, DC: World Bank.

Zhou, K. Z., David, K. T., and Li, J. J. (2006). Organizational changes in emerging economies: Drivers and consequences. Journal of International Business Studies, 37(2), 248-263.
COPYRIGHT 2019 Knowledge Bylanes
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2019 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Zahra Ishtiaq Paul, Dr. Kashif Rathore and Muhammad Adnan Sial
Publication:Journal of Political Studies
Geographic Code:4E0WE
Date:Dec 31, 2019
Words:11541
Previous Article:Great Power Perspective towards Afghanistan: India China Creeping Competition in the Heart of Asia.
Next Article:Impact of Political Liberalism on Public Sector Organizations: A Case Study of NADRA, Lahore.
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2022 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters |