Organizational Staffing Model

Part 1
Are some of the 13 (see exhibit 1.7, pg. 26) strategic staffing decisions more important than others? If so, which ones? Why?
In general, it is difficult to make the argument that a number of staffing decisions are comprehensively more important as compared to the others. All the strategic staffing decisions are significant contemplations with regard to the devising and execution of an exhaustive staffing strategy. Nonetheless, particular circumstance might be linked to particular strategic staffing decisions being especially significant. For instance, in a company requires to make the most of its flexibility, it implies that the strategic staffing decision encompassing the core versus the flexible labor force would be particularly pivotal. In contrast, if a company endeavors to improve its level of employee retention and reduce employee turnover, it implies that the internal versus external hiring staffing decision will be deemed more important. In the same manner, when delving into business across other nations, the company places the national versus global decisions to be more important than others in determining whether to employ global personnel or the national employees.
1. How can an organization collect and report these statistics in the form shown in Exhibit 2.5?
i. Flow statistics
This necessitates the HR department to trace different pieces of information including the total number of candidates, the number of candidates that are employed, gender, age, ethnic background. Furthermore, this information can be delineated in terms of percentages for every category.
ii. Stock statistics
This encompasses gathering data concerning the demographics of the entity’s prevailing labor force and contrasting them with the demographics of the geographic expanse in which the entity conducts its business operations. This data can be attained from the latest census data and conduct a comparison of the two.
iii. Concentration statistics
This would take account investigating the proportion of individuals in dissimilar job categorizations in the entity such managerial classifications which are further broken down or grouped into other categories such as gender, age, and ethnic background (Heneman et al., 1997).
2. What standards or guidelines would you recommend for deciding whether statistical differences between men and women, or non-minorities and minorities, reflect discrimination occurring throughout an organization's staffing system?
There are key guiding principles for evading discrimination and measuring negative impact of staffing systems. For instance, the guiding principle employed in the flow statistics is the 4/5th rule. This asserts that a selection rate for any category, which has different classifications such as race, ethnicity or gender that is less than 4/5th of that for the category with the highest rate, comprises evidence of adverse impact.
In order compute this particular guideline, it is imperative to ascertain the selection rate for every protected category that constitute more than 2 percent of the whole applicant category. Secondly, pinpoint the group with the highest selection rate. Third, divide the selection arte for every group by the selection rate of the category with the greatest rate and then determine whether these rates are significantly dissimilar (Heneman et al., 1997).
3. What types of staffing activities (recruitment, selection, and employment) might be causing the statistical differences? For example, in Exhibit 2.5 the selection rate is 50% for men and 11 % for women. How would the organization collect the data necessary to compute these selection rates, how would you decide whether the difference in selection rates (50% vs. 11 %) is big enough to indicate possible discrimination, and what sorts of practices might be causing the difference in selection rates?
1. Recruitment
A significant manner in which recruiting can make a contribution to dissimilarities in group selection rates encompasses the sources and approaches of recruiting employed to attract candidates.
2. Selection
The selection approaches employed may also be contributory in a substantial manner to the differences in group selection rates. A fitting example is that if a written test is provided to all of the applicants for the job prospect, in which a number of groups of individuals incessantly have better performances, then it implies that this might be discriminatory.
3. Employment
A key issue in this case could be the constitution of job offers made to different persons. It is probable that the terms and conditions linked to the job offers being made are less likely that individuals of particular protected groups will have the acceptance of the job offers (Heneman et al., 1997).
Part 2
1. How might the contemplated hiring policy result in a disparate impact against a protected group? Explain your answer in details
The contemplated hiring policy would result in a disparate impact against a protected group owing to the reason that the policy involves decisions undertaken linked to a protected characteristic. The policy that Goldies wants to carry out in its hiring practices is centered in part on one or more protected individualities and at the same time is indicative of an inclination or predisposition for a certain ethnicity and characteristic that is protected under the law. In this particular case, the company is contemplating instituting the need for individuals applying for the job opportunity and also being employed to be blonde as a bona fide occupational qualification for employment. Therefore, in this regard, the company would be unfair to individuals in general for the reason that not all individuals are blonde in nature and this would be limiting them in their quest for job application (Venable, 2014).
2. Could the policy also be viewed as involving disparate treatment discrimination? Answer “yes” or “no,” and explain your reasoning using support from the uploaded material (Ch1: Staffing Models and Strategy and Ch2: Legal Compliance).
Yes, the policy could be viewed as involving disparate treatment discrimination. This is for the reason that it implies that even the candidates and applicants that are qualified for the position that is open would experience discrimination and prejudice solely for the reason that their hair color is not blonde. Furthermore, this is to some extent discrimination because other ethnicities such as blacks or African Americans who are unable to grow blonde hair would definitely be discriminated against in obtaining the job at hand. Therefore, this implies that the policy being considered for implementation by Goldies would result in disparate treatment discrimination. Disparate impact discrimination takes into account the employment practices that on face value seem to be neutral or do not have any prejudice but which have a certain negative effect on a certain group of applicants. In this case, the policy will be absolutely unfair to individuals that do not have blonde hair (Heneman et al., 1997).





References
Heneman, H. G., Heneman, R. L., & Judge, T. (1997). Staffing organizations. McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Venable LLP. (2014). Prohibited Discrimination in Hiring: Disparate Treatment and Disparate Impact. Retrieved from: https://trust.guidestar.org/blog/2014/04/14/prohibited-discrimination-in-hiring-disparate-treatment-and-disparate-impact/