Category: Public administration

As a consultant, you need to develop an in-depth analysis and evaluation of the selected agency’s human resources management system and processes, and then provide recommendations for improvement, as well as research-related academic sources and websites. The analysis will be read by the VP of Public Services and client support, as well as by the leaders of the agency for which you are working. Write a 5–7 page paper (including title and reference page) titled Part 3: Evaluation of [Selected Agency]’s Human Resources Management, in which you separate the content into the following sections:
Human Resources Processes.
Implications of Human Resource Workforce.
Succession Planning for Human Resource Management.
Instructions
Analyze the major components of the agency’s human resources system, including processes, and a performance evaluation plan for attracting and retaining the best and brightest public workforce. Analysis should be focused and detailed.
Describe three factors impacting the agency’s current employment trend and delivery of its products and services.
Recommend two strategies required to improve the agency’s workforce. Explain each recommendation providing specific reasons why it would bring about improvement.
Discuss two ways the agency could implement programs as a method of promotion and advancement for current employees.
Discuss two ways the agency could implement recruitment of talent from the outside.
Use at least three quality sources to support your writing. Choose sources that are credible, relevant, and appropriate. Cite each source listed on your source page at least one time within your assignment. Include no more than one nongovernment website.
For help with research, writing, and citation, access the library or review library guides.
Produce writing that is clear and well organized and applies appropriate SWS style. Writing contains accurate grammar, mechanics, and spelling.

Instructions
In at least 300 words, reply to the original poster. You must use at least two scholarly journals to support your response.  You must also use at least one reference from the New International Version Bible.  All citations must be in APA 7th Edition format with both in-text citations and a References page.  If citations are from a book, the page number must be included.  Journals must be from within the past 5 years.  You must also use the attached text as a reference.
FYI…In the replies, many students do not analyze other students’ comments. Remember, you should write about the other student’s comments; that is, the good and bad points. Don’t just say you agree and tell the other student your opinion or just ask questions; that’s not sufficient. Look at several of their comments; list them in your reply, for context, and then critique them. I.e.:  I agree that on this point…; however, I disagree that it should be… On the other hand, you said that…, and, while I agree on part of that, I believe a better way… That’s analysis. Again, don’t simply tell them your opinions, as that is the biggest problem I see. Listing their comments is also important so that it gives a better understanding of what you are saying, according to the context of the comments.
Prompt
Public administrators conduct research to plan, solve problems, and support their decisions. They must collect data to support these tasks and other courses of action. Unfortunately, the literature indicates that these public administrators mostly use quantitative methods. What can qualitative research offer than quantitative methods cannot offer to support these public administration tasks?
Original Poster (Christopher Arnold)
Scholars concur that qualitative research methods in public administration fulfill a valuable role yet are underrepresented as an approach within the overall body of academic literature (Ospina et al., 2018). Despite the wide range of perspectives, theories, ontologies, and methods, purely qualitative methods have been perceived as a niche and, more so, have served as a buttress for quantitative data in mixed methods inquiries (Ospina et al., 2018). Yet qualitative research methods informed by a biblical-covenantal worldview offer several advantages to public administration researchers over quantitative methods, particularly in support of practical, real-world applications (Lune & Berg, 2017).
1 Thessalonians 5:21 instructs us to test all things and hold fast to that which is good. This suggests that as public administration researchers, we should seek to understand the cultural, economic, political, and social context of public administration tasks to support data-driven decision-making and problem-solving (Lune & Berg, 2017).
For example, in the study of federalism and intergovernmental relations, where power is shared between various agencies across executive, legislative, and judicial branches at one or more layers of government, a purely quantitative approach is overly reductive, since quantifying outputs into zeros and ones does not help qualify the outcomes and the impacts of policymaking (O’Toole, 1990). Qualitative methods, on the other hand, provide a nuanced understanding of the dynamics between stakeholders, including elected officials, public administrators, and special interest groups, elucidate the inputs that influence the outcomes, and enable program evaluation of the implementation of policies to identify the factors which facilitate or hinder effective governance and stewardship (Lune & Berg, 2017).
These methods also become useful in defining unintended consequences, which aids in designing more effective and responsive policies (Stout, 2013). Romans 13:1 means that every person should be subject to the governing authorities. Paul’s was underpinned by the message that while we are obligated to obey, we should not do so unquestioningly, particularly when the actions of the government of, by, and for the people conflict with a higher moral duty (Ingram et al., 2003).
Qualitative research methods provide the ways and means to explore these phenomena and explore the human experience with public administration, something numerical data cannot provide (Lune & Berg, 2017). “For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him?” (1 Corinthians 2:11). Public administration researchers pursue knowledge not merely for the sake of knowledge but to gain wisdom and positively affect the policies, programs and services their system of government seeks to provide (Stout, 2013).
The tasks that comprise intergovernmental affairs, intergovernmental relations, and intergovernmental management, existing within a larger ethical framework, may impact different communities differently (Bolleyer, 2011). While the numbers may indicate a policy is adhering to program requirements or meeting a certain bottom-line policy goal, qualitative review can make policymaking more flexible and responsive by understanding how these tasks are experienced and perceived (Lune & Berg, 2017).
As the saying goes, perception is reality; various epistemologies argue that reality is reality (Rocheleau, 1986). How that reality is shaped varies from school to school (Ospina et al., 2018). “Then said Pilate unto him, ‘What is truth?’” (John 18:38). Romans 10:12 illustrated how earthly distinctions are meaningless to the heavenly father, and all who call upon him shall abound in riches. Transformative leaders seek to bridge this divide and address structural inequalities to promote equitable governance (Fischer, 2010). This is evocative of the covenantal duty or obligation between public administrators and those they govern, with their consent (Fischer, 2017).
Thus, seeing beyond the numbers can be said to help researchers understand the often subjective realities of the individuals and communities impacted by public administration (Stout, 2013). When insights from a Christian worldview and a biblical-covenantal perspective are incorporated, policymaking not only becomes more effective, but more just (Fischer, 2017). Transformation is enabled through servant leadership and the performance of stewardship, which reflects the experiences and needs of all individuals and organizations in the communities with a single set of values (Fischer, 2010). Recognizing these advantages, universities providing instruction in public administration research have made great strides in incorporating instruction in qualitative methods into their mandatory curricula (Stout, 2013). “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’” (Matthew 25:40).
Word Count: 897
References
Bolleyer, N. (2011). The influence of political parties on policy coordination. Governance, 24(3),
469-494.
Fischer, K. (2010). A biblical-covenantal perspective on organizational behavior & leadership,
Faculty Publications and Presentations, 523.
Fischer, K. J. (2017). The power of the covenant idea for leadership, reform, and ethical
behavior. The Journal of Values-Based Leadership, 10(2), 13.
Ingram, T. N., LaForge, R. W., Avila, R. A., Schwepker Jr, C. H., & Williams, M. R. (2003).
Government: A Public Administration Perspective. ME Sharpe.
Lune, H., & Berg, B.L. (2017). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences, 9th.
Pearson.
Ospina, S. M., Esteve, M., & Lee, S. (2018). Assessing qualitative studies in public
administration research. Public Administration Review, 78(4), 593-605.
O’Toole Jr., L.J. (1990). Theoretical developments in public administration: Implications for
the study of federalism. Governance 3(4), 394-415.
Rocheleau, B. (1986). Public perception of program effectiveness and worth: A
review. Evaluation and Program Planning, 9(1), 31-37.
Stout, M. (2013). Preparing public administration scholars for qualitative inquiry: A status
report. Public Administration Research, 2(1), 11.

Selection of Agency and Program 
Choose a government agency from New York City, which you can find listed at NYC.gov. Alternatively, you can select a government agency and program beyond New York City.
I must approve your choice of agency and program, Professor Morote, no later than November 6, 2023.
Step Two: Agency and Program Description
• In your paper, describe the selected agency and program comprehensively.
Step Three: Mission Statement
• If a misions lemen Misiony exam ant, es ate ofe aty shag is eysationa an. EXplin in the lecture otes for the ninth discussion board, ema gunding framework.
Step Four: Logic Model
• Develop a Logic Model tailored to the selected program. This model should illustrate the program’s inputs, actilities, outputs, outcomes, and goals.
Step Five: Performance Measurement Indicators
• Create a set of performance measurement indicators that align with the Logic Model you’ve constructed. These indicators should effectively measure and evaluate the program’s performance.
Examples of NYC Government Agency Programs:
NYPD: Law Enforcement Explorers
HRA: Special One-Time Assistance (SOTA)
DFTA: Senior Citizen Rent Increase (SCRIE)

Selection of Agency and Program
Choose a government agency from New York City, which you can find listed at NYC.gov. Alternatively, you can select a government agency and program beyond New York City.
I must approve your choice of agency and program, Professor Morote, no later than November 6, 2023.
Step Two: Agency and Program Description
• In your paper, describe the selected agency and program comprehensively.
Step Three: Mission Statement
• If a misions lemen Misiony exam ant, es ate ofe aty shag is eysationa an. EXplin in the lecture otes for the ninth discussion board, ema gunding framework.
Step Four: Logic Model
• Develop a Logic Model tailored to the selected program. This model should illustrate the program’s inputs, actilities, outputs, outcomes, and goals.
Step Five: Performance Measurement Indicators
• Create a set of performance measurement indicators that align with the Logic Model you’ve constructed. These indicators should effectively measure and evaluate the program’s performance.
Examples of NYC Government Agency Programs:
NYPD: Law Enforcement Explorers
HRA: Special One-Time Assistance (SOTA)
DFTA: Senior Citizen Rent Increase (SCRIE)

Instructions
In order to learn more about approaches to managing public organizations, I’d like you to examine some of the current academic literature.
This week, you will create a synthesis matrix similar to one you might use for a literature review to help you examine the literature and the approaches to managing public organizations.
Using the public administration topic of your choice (with a management focus however), find at least four peer-reviewed sources from the APUS library (not texts or books or websites) you might use for a paper. As you review each one, find the main ideas that you might use in a literature review.  You should be able to find a minimum of three or four topics or ideas that you might use in a literature review.
Create a matrix (please see the attached sample). Put the last names of the authors of the sources in the top row.  List your main ideas in the left column.
Write some brief notes about what each author says about the various ideas. Authors won’t usually include every idea, but more than one author often covers some of the same ideas. In order to practice synthesizing and summarizing, do not use quotations. Everything in this assignment should be your own words. Use simple, meaningful notes for most of the information. These do not need to be complete sentences as long as the reader can understand what you mean. The idea is to help you explore various concepts related to managing public organizations and how different authors use them.
When you are done, be sure to include a reference list in APA format.
synthesismatrixforliteraturereview.pdf
(111.96 KB)

Make up assignment
Make up assignment
Dear Students,
I would like to offer an additional
assignment for those who wish to further enhance their learning. This
assignment carries a weight of 6 points, equivalent to that of a team
assignment, and is designed to be completed individually.
Your task is to thoroughly study Chapter 15, titled “Gender and Leadership.”
Afterward, please analyze the case study
presented in Section 15.2, which explores the issues of lack of
inclusion and credibility.
For your response, provide answers to
the four questions, each containing 120 words, supported by at least two
citations from credible sources.
I encourage you to employ critical thinking skills in your responses.

Instructions
In at least 300 words, reply to the original poster. You must use at least two scholarly journals to support your response.  You must also use at least one reference from the New International Version Bible.  All citations must be in APA 7th Edition format with both in-text citations and a References page.  If citations are from a book, the page number must be included.  Journals must be from within the past 5 years.  You must also use the attached text as a reference.
FYI…In the replies, many students do not analyze other students’ comments. Remember, you should write about the other student’s comments; that is, the good and bad points. Don’t just say you agree and tell the other student your opinion or just ask questions; that’s not sufficient. Look at several of their comments; list them in your reply, for context, and then critique them. I.e.:  I agree that on this point…; however, I disagree that it should be… On the other hand, you said that…, and, while I agree on part of that, I believe a better way… That’s analysis. Again, don’t simply tell them your opinions, as that is the biggest problem I see. Listing their comments is also important so that it gives a better understanding of what you are saying, according to the context of the comments.
Prompt
Public administrators conduct research to plan, solve problems, and support their decisions. They must collect data to support these tasks and other courses of action. Unfortunately, the literature indicates that these public administrators mostly use quantitative methods. What can qualitative research offer than quantitative methods cannot offer to support these public administration tasks?
Original Poster (Wendell Hindman)
Introduction to Qualitative Research for Public Administration
Within the public administration field, using quantitative data is the methodology of choice for most researchers (Ospina et al., 2017). While they collect data and evaluate numbers and trends, the lack of qualitative data leaves the research incomplete. The limited use of qualitative data and the often narrow scope of the methodology when it is employed have led to an underutilized and undervalued resource (Ospina et al., 2017). Qualitative data provides a glimpse of the makeup and composition of things, whereas quantitative provides a picture through numerical or statistical information (Lune & Berg, 2016). Public administrators who seek to find information to address problems, develop plans for the future or validate decisions should use a research methodology that allows them to measure the quality of information over quantity (Ospina et al., 2017). Quantitative researchers use deductive methods or approaches, while qualitative researchers use inductive approaches (Barczak, 2015).
Unlike quantitative research which evaluates statistical information, qualitative research focuses on determining the quality and value of information and its relationships to the subject being evaluated through systematic approaches (Barczak, 2015; Lune & Berg, 2016). The use of data to test hypotheses and determine the validity of an idea is replaced in qualitative research with specific observations and identification of patterns. This research type evaluates social interactions, behaviors, and other influences to measure their effects on people. While quantitative data looks for statistical significance, qualitative looks for patterns and relationships between the various factors (Lune & Berg, 2016). For researchers in public administration, these relationships and influences can provide information on not only the specific issue being evaluated but also provide a clearer picture of why the issue exists and what factors could potentially impact it. Quantitative methodology drives theoretical innovation and creates opportunities for the researcher to identify relationships outside a narrow or specific dataset (Hendren et al., 2022).
Qualitative data provides the researcher with understanding and information that could not be quantified numerically or through some other means (Queirós et al., 2017). These understandings provide explanations of the various social relationships and how they are intertwined and affect each other. Another advantage of qualitative methodologies is the immersion of the researchers themselves (Ospina et al., 2017; Queirós et al., 2017). In quantitative, the researcher is outside the problem or area of study looking inward to evaluate data gathered through some measurement instrument. Within qualitative studies, the researcher is more often immersed in the study in order to evaluate and closely examine the relationships and interactions of the area of study. While it may start with focus groups and external examinations, the nature of evaluation pulls the researcher into the study to fully grasp the problem and evaluate what influences the other behaviors have upon it (Queirós et al., 2017).
Within scripture, Jesus used parables to provide lessons on human behaviors and attitudes. These parables used qualitative evaluations to focus on those behaviors, emotions, and experiences. Quantitative methods do not provide an avenue to evaluate those basic human factors but leave the researcher only the opportunity to identify trends. Qualitative evaluations provided glimpses of how, what, and why people acted like they did, providing lessons in human behavior and the effects of sin on the heart. In Matthew chapter 13, Jesus is telling the story of the sower and scattering of seeds. When questioned why He uses parables to talk to the people, He explains in verse 14 that people hear without understanding and see without perceiving (Bible, 2021). He goes on to explain that people must understand within their hearts to gain understanding and knowledge, not simply rely on what they have heard and seen. The correlation exists within qualitative and quantitative studies, where the quantitative allows researchers to see and hear, but not fully understand. The qualitative methods allow the researcher to fully understand the heart.  
Traditional use of qualitative research has focused primarily on case studies, leaving many to believe that this methodology is inferior to the quantitative methods (Barczak, 2015). Ospina, Esteve, and Lee (2017) evaluated qualitative studies and found that researchers often failed to be transparent about how the data was collected and analyzed, and failed to tie both epistemological and theoretical assumptions back to the correct methodologies. These failures, coupled with errors in the proper selection of methodology often limited the scope and outcomes of qualitative studies, which created some negative attitudes toward the method. The use of qualitative research provides opportunities to understand relationships and behavioral influences on factors being studied. This replaces the more traditional mindset of numerical significance and creates opportunities to determine what effect the variables have on one another, and more importantly, provides a glimpse into why those relationships exist.
References
Barczak, G. (2015). Publishing qualitative versus quantitative research. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(5), 658–658. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12277Links to an external site.
Bible, T. (2021). King James Bible. Trinitarian Bible Society.
Hendren, K., Newcomer, K., Pandey, S. K., Smith, M., & Sumner, N. (2022). How qualitative research methods can be leveraged to strengthen mixed methods research in public policy and public administration? Public Administration Review, 83(3), 468–485. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13528Links to an external site.
Lune, H., & Berg, B. (2016). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences, books a la carte (9th ed.). Pearson.
Ospina, S. M., Esteve, M., & Lee, S. (2017). Assessing qualitative studies in public administration research. Public Administration Review, 78(4), 593–605. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12837Links to an external site.
Queirós, A., Faria, D., & Almeida, F. (2017). Strengths and limitations of qualitative and quantitative research methods. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.887089

Your task is to thoroughly study Chapter 14, titled “Gender and Leadership.”
Afterward, please analyze the case study 14.1 “The Glass Ceiling”, which explores the issues of lack of
inclusion and credibility.
For your response, provide answers to
the four questions, each containing 120 words, supported by at least two
citations from credible sources.
I encourage you to employ critical thinking skills in your responses.

Selection of Agency and Program 
*   Choose a government agency from New York City, which you can find listed at NYC.gov. Alternatively, you can select a government agency and program beyond New York City.
*   I must approve your choice of agency and program, Professor Morote, no later than November 6, 2023.
Step Two: Agency and Program Description
• In your paper, describe the selected agency and program comprehensively.
Step Three: Mission Statement
• If a misions lemen Misiony exam ant, es ate ofe aty shag is eysationa an. EXplin in the lecture otes for the ninth discussion board, ema gunding framework.
Step Four: Logic Model
• Develop a Logic Model tailored to the selected program. This model should illustrate the program’s inputs, actilities, outputs, outcomes, and goals.
Step Five: Performance Measurement Indicators
• Create a set of performance measurement indicators that align with the Logic Model you’ve constructed. These indicators should effectively measure and evaluate the program’s performance.
Examples of NYC Government Agency Programs:
*   NYPD: Law Enforcement Explorers
*   HRA: Special One-Time Assistance (SOTA)
*   DFTA: Senior Citizen Rent Increase (SCRIE)

Make up assignment
Dear Students,
I would like to offer an additional
assignment for those who wish to further enhance their learning. This
assignment carries a weight of 6 points, equivalent to that of a team
assignment, and is designed to be completed individually.
Your task is to thoroughly study Chapter 15, titled “Gender and Leadership.”
Afterward, please analyze the case study
presented in Section 15.2, which explores the issues of lack of
inclusion and credibility.
For your response, provide answers to
the four questions, each containing 120 words, supported by at least two
citations from credible sources.
I encourage you to employ critical thinking skills in your responses.