Date of Award

Spring 4-28-2024

Document Type

Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Education (EdD)

Department

Organizational Leadership

First Advisor

Carlos V. Guzman, Ph.D.

Second Advisor

Jonathan Greenberg, Ed.D.

Third Advisor

Lizabeth Johnson, Ed.D.

Fourth Advisor

Patrick Ainsworth, Ed.D.

Abstract

Purpose: This nonexperimental, descriptive, and comparative study aimed to identify and describe the differences between Public Sector HR Association (PSHRA) professionals who worked in a state or local government civil service merit or employment at will (EAW) personnel system.

Methodology: This nonexperimental, descriptive, and comparative study identified and described the responses of 214 state and local government PSHRA professionals throughout the United States, focusing on their respective personnel systems. The researcher collected data and tabulated descriptive statistics and z scores to compare and statistically determine the differences between the two public sector personnel systems.

Findings: The 214 PSHRA professionals who participated in this study indicated various findings. Although PSHRA professionals working within an EAW system averaged higher in recruitment, hiring, promotion, retention, and succession planning than those working within a civil service merit system, hiring was the only statistically significant difference between the two personnel systems. In addition, the need for transformational change leadership averaged very high among both personnel systems, but very little transformational change is occurring within recruitment, hiring, promotion, retention, and succession planning.

Conclusions: This study nearly entirely debunks the new public management (NPM) theoretical framework and, consequently, EAW. The z scores indicated that there was only one statistically significant difference between merit and EAW personnel systems, which was in hiring. Therefore, civil service merit system competitive examinations mediate the ability of PSHRA professionals to effectively hire the most qualified candidate for the job. Furthermore, transformational change leadership averaged as a high need, but little transformational change is occurring.

Recommendations: As this study nearly entirely debunked the NPM theoretical framework and EAW as a more effective public sector personnel system, further qualitative and quantitative research would help reveal what the impediments are in supporting the NPM theoretical framework and HRM reform. Moreover, further research should examine why, despite the high need for transformational change leadership, transformational change has stalled or has stopped altogether. Additional research will help scholars and practitioners to understand what has changed with NPM, EAW, and the HRM reform movement that gained momentum in the 1990s.

Download

Share

COinS