The Effectiveness of Workforce Diversity Management Program in Municipal Government; A Case Study of the City of Mississauga Program
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Public administration currently functions in an era where the traditional methods, teachings as well as processes no longer comport with the existing realities. Factors such as rapid globalization, immigration and integration have contributed to this change. This has resulted in an exponential increase in the number of individuals from foreign countries with diverse backgrounds and cultures working alongside local people within the same organization. This has led to increasing calls for governments and in particular, municipal governments to create a more diverse workforce that is reflective of the population they serve. A popular tool municipal governments including the City of Mississauga have utilized to achieve this is diversity management programs which is the focus of this report. This report employed a mixed methodology in its exploration of “How Effective are Municipalities’ Workforce Diversity Management Programs?” with a particular focus on the City of Mississauga's Workforce Diversity Management Strategy. This was assessed through the lens of the Values Principles Model (VPM) which articulated that for these programs to be effective, they must factor into consideration four key components; representation, participation, application and appreciation. The research revealed that while the City has made progress in its quest to create a more diverse and inclusive work environment. The City has also experienced challenges as it works towards this goal. According to the data regarding representation, there is an overrepresentation of white employees and a significant underrepresentation of visible minorities at the City. Regarding participation, particularly at the leadership and High Potential (HiPo) employees’ levels, the data revealed that visible minorities and women are underrepresented, while white employees and in particular, male employees are significantly represented at both levels of leadership. At the rank-and-file level, employees express a desire to participate in the process. Regarding application, the data revealed there are inconsistencies across divisions, departments, teams and leaders in the application of its diversity strategies. Lastly, regarding appreciation, data were limited in terms of incentives and benefits the City has in place to respond to the diverse needs of its employees.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».