| Course | E200 MSHRM Capstone |
|---|---|
| Task | Task 1 |
| Paper type | Inclusion-focused HR approach |
| Length | About 1,000 words, 3 pages |
| Format | APA 7 |
| School | Western Governors University (WGU) |
| Program | MS Human Resource Management |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for E200 Task 1
Well Represented at the Teller Line, Missing From the Branch Manager's Office: An Inclusion-Focused HR Approach for a Composite Regional Bank, Built on What the Evidence Says Works
Student Name
School of Business, Western Governors University
E200: MSHRM Capstone, Task 1
Course Instructor
Month Day, Year
Well Represented at the Teller Line, Missing From the Branch Manager's Office: An Inclusion-Focused HR Approach for a Composite Regional Bank, Built on What the Evidence Says Works
Foundations of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion
Diversity describes differences among people in a workplace, such as gender, race, ethnicity, age, disability and background. Equity concerns fairness in access to opportunity, pay and advancement, recognizing that equal treatment does not always produce fair outcomes when people start from different positions. Inclusion describes whether people experience the workplace as one where they belong and where their distinct perspectives are valued. A widely cited model defines inclusion as the degree to which employees feel they are esteemed members of the group through both belongingness and being valued for their uniqueness (Shore et al., 2011). The distinction matters: an organization can be diverse without being inclusive, and diversity without inclusion tends to produce conflict and turnover rather than its potential benefits.
Inclusion affects organizations in measurable ways. In a study of gender-diverse work units, a climate for inclusion, meaning fair employment practices, integration of differences and inclusion in decision making, weakened the link between gender diversity and relationship conflict, and lower conflict was in turn associated with lower turnover (Nishii, 2013). Inclusion, in other words, determines whether diversity becomes an asset or a source of friction.
The Organization's Data
Heritage Valley Bank, a composite regional bank with 1,400 employees and 62 branches, examined its workforce data. Women make up 71% of tellers and personal bankers and 64% of assistant branch managers, but 38% of branch managers and 22% of regional and senior leaders. Employees of color make up 44% of branch staff, 31% of assistant managers and 12% of senior leaders. Promotion rates from assistant manager to branch manager over three years were 18% for white men, 11% for white women, 9% for men of color and 6% for women of color. In the engagement survey, employees of color were 15 points less likely than white employees to agree that promotion decisions are fair, and turnover among assistant managers of color was 23%, compared with 14% overall. The pattern is not a pipeline problem at entry; it is a problem of advancement and belonging in the middle of the organization.
Evaluating Methods of Creating an Inclusive Culture
Many organizations respond to data like these with mandatory diversity training. Evidence suggests caution. A study of 708 private-sector establishments over three decades found that programs establishing responsibility for diversity, such as diversity task forces, affirmative action plans and dedicated staff, were followed by the largest increases in the share of women and Black employees in management; mentoring and networking programs had more modest effects; and diversity training and diversity evaluations for managers had the weakest effects, and in some cases none (Kalev et al., 2006). Programs worked best when someone was accountable for results.
The evaluation of Heritage Valley's current efforts leads to the same conclusion. The bank's annual unconscious bias training, required for all managers, has run for four years with no change in promotion rates. Its employee resource groups are valued by members but have no connection to talent decisions. Promotions are decided by regional managers informally, with no posted criteria, which leaves room for bias and fuels perceptions of unfairness.
An Inclusion-Focused HR Approach
Accountability: create an inclusion council chaired by the chief executive, with regional leaders as members, that reviews hiring, promotion, pay and turnover data by gender and race every quarter and sets targets. Each regional manager's performance review will include progress on development and promotion of their team.
Recruitment and hiring: use structured interviews with standard questions and scoring for branch manager roles, with diverse interview panels, and post every branch manager opening internally with clear criteria.
Development: launch a sponsorship program pairing high-performing assistant managers, prioritizing groups underrepresented in leadership, with senior leaders who are accountable for creating stretch assignments and advocating for them. Sponsorship goes beyond mentoring by using the sponsor's influence to open opportunities.
Promotion: replace informal decisions with a promotion process using posted criteria, a readiness assessment and a calibration meeting in which regional leaders review candidates together, with HR tracking outcomes by group.
Rewards: conduct an annual pay equity analysis controlling for role, tenure, location and performance, and correct unexplained gaps; publish pay ranges for all branch roles.
Everyday management: replace the annual unconscious bias training with skills-based manager training on inclusive meetings, fair assignment of development opportunities and giving specific, balanced feedback, reinforced through the quarterly data review.
Belonging: connect employee resource groups to the business by giving each an executive sponsor and a role in reviewing the promotion process and recruiting.
Measures and Timeline
Heritage Valley will measure promotion rates from assistant manager to branch manager by gender and race, representation at each level, turnover of assistant managers by group, pay equity results and inclusion survey items on fairness and belonging. Targets for year three are to reduce the gap in promotion rates between the highest and lowest groups by half, lower turnover among assistant managers of color to the overall rate and raise agreement that promotions are fair by ten points for all groups. The council will launch in the first quarter, the promotion process and sponsorship program in the second, and the first pay equity analysis will be completed by the end of the first year. Because culture changes slowly, the council will report progress to the board annually and publish a short summary for employees, so that the people the approach is meant to serve can see whether it is working.
Conclusion
Heritage Valley Bank is diverse at the front line but not in leadership, and its data show that the problem lies in advancement and belonging. Research indicates that accountability and changes to how decisions are made do more to change such outcomes than training alone, and that a climate of inclusion turns diversity into performance rather than conflict. The approach builds inclusion into hiring, development, promotion, pay and daily management, holds leaders accountable for results and measures progress with the bank's own data.
References
Kalev, A., Dobbin, F., & Kelly, E. (2006). Best practices or best guesses? Assessing the efficacy of corporate affirmative action and diversity policies. American Sociological Review, 71(4), 589-617. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240607100404
Nishii, L. H. (2013). The benefits of climate for inclusion for gender-diverse groups. Academy of Management Journal, 56(6), 1754-1774. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.0823
Shore, L. M., Randel, A. E., Chung, B. G., Dean, M. A., Holcombe Ehrhart, K., & Singh, G. (2011). Inclusion and diversity in work groups: A review and model for future research. Journal of Management, 37(4), 1262-1289. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310385943
What the E200 Task 1 instructions ask
The E200 capstone begins with an inclusion-focused HR approach built on evidence. You usually explain the foundations of diversity, equity and inclusion, analyze an organization's data, evaluate methods for creating an inclusive culture, propose an approach and set measures with a timeline. Evaluators look for accurate definitions that distinguish the three concepts, and a data analysis that locates where the organization falls short, such as promotion from one level to the next. The evaluation of methods carries weight, because research shows that some popular approaches do little. Your approach should rely on methods with evidence and fit the problem the data show. Measures should track outcomes, such as promotion rates and inclusion survey scores, not only activities. A realistic timeline with owners makes the approach credible.
How this E200 Task 1 example is built
The paper opens with definitions of diversity, equity and inclusion and why each matters to HR. The data section presents representation by level and gender, showing the drop from assistant branch manager to branch manager. A methods section weighs mandatory training against accountability, mentoring and changes to how decisions are made, drawing on a long-term study of private employers. The approach follows in four parts: an inclusion council chaired by the chief executive, structured criteria for promotion, sponsorship for high-potential assistant managers and manager practices that build belonging. The measures and timeline section lists promotion rates, turnover and survey items with quarterly reviews. The conclusion restates where the problem lies and how the approach addresses it. Notes point out the rubric aspect each section covers.
Where the E200 Task 1 rubric puts the marks
E200 Task 1 aspects are scored competent, approaching competence or not evident. A foundations aspect asks for accurate definitions of diversity, equity and inclusion. The data aspect rewards analysis that identifies where representation or experience breaks down. A methods aspect looks for inclusion approaches evaluated against research, including their limits. The approach aspect wants HR actions that answer the data and rest on evidence. Measures and timeline aspects check for outcome metrics, owners and dates. At the capstone level, evaluators expect research to drive choices, and they notice when an approach relies on methods that studies show have weak effects. Clear writing and APA citation are part of the score, and the analysis should treat employees with respect while being candid about disparities.
E200 Task 1 help: what sends it back
Inclusion papers lose marks when definitions blur diversity and inclusion. Explain each concept and how they differ. Data analysis sometimes reports totals that look balanced while hiding gaps at higher levels; break results down by level. Methods sections can repeat popular programs without evidence, so evaluate each approach against research, including studies that found training alone has limited effect. Approaches may list many initiatives with no link to the problem the data show. Measures often count activities, such as trainings held, when evaluators want outcomes like promotion rates. Timelines may lack owners. Use the organization's own data throughout, avoid claims of legal compliance you cannot support, and write about groups with care and precision.
Get a E200 Task 1 example written to your instructions
Send the task instructions and rubric aspects from your E200 course of study. We write a custom inclusion-focused HR approach to those exact aspects, returned in 24-48h. The first custom sample is free.
Other MBA sample papers
- D375 Task 1 Creative Brief and Brand Alignment
- D433 Task 2 Development and Performance Evaluation
- C200 Task 1 Personal Leadership Evaluation
- D381 Task 1 E-commerce Analytics Evaluation
E200 Task 1 questions, answered
What does research say works in E200?
Studies of large employers found that establishing responsibility for diversity, such as councils and accountable leaders, did more to change who reaches management than mandatory training alone. The sample builds its approach on accountability.
Is the E200 bank real?
No. Heritage Valley Bank exists only in this capstone example, and its workforce numbers were invented. The research on diversity programs and inclusion climate cited is real.
What is a climate for inclusion in E200?
Shared perceptions that employees are treated fairly, valued for who they are and included in decisions. The sample measures it with survey items on fairness and belonging, reviewed each quarter.
How should E200 Task 1 use data?
To find where the organization falls short. The sample shows women are well represented at the front line but not in branch management, so its approach targets advancement rather than hiring.
Where can I find a free E200 Task 1 sample paper?
The bank's inclusion-focused HR approach is laid out above with margin notes. Tell us the organization and its data, and your first custom E200 capstone paper is free.