The first group of factors that might account for the disparate career achievements of the race/ethnic groups concerns human capital differences. Included here are education, experience and motivation to achieve high level positions.

Undergraduate education. Table 12 compares the undergraduate experiences of the various groups. Nearly all of the respondents had completed college. While about a third of the blacks, in 1992, attended a historically black college, this dropped to about 25 percent in 1997. Corresponding to their similar ages, the groups showed only small differences in their year of graduation.

Women more than men, differed in their undergraduate major. Black women were more often social science majors when compared to the other race/ethnic groups. In 1992 black women were less often nursing graduates when compared to whites but this difference narrowed in 1997. Hispanics and Asians of both gender groups were more likely than blacks or whites to have majored in the biological sciences.

In both 1992 and 1997, blacks were more likely than whites to have received 50 percent or more of their tuition from grants, scholarships etc. About half of the blacks compared to a fifth of the whites received such assistance. About 40 percent of Hispanics and a third of the Asians received such aid. In 1992, such aid was stated to be a determinant in 7 out of 10 recipients' decisions to complete college. In 1997, females maintained their views of the impact of such aid but males ascribed lower value to its importance in deciding to complete college.

Graduate education. In 1992, 9 out of 10 black and white women had graduate degrees. In contrast, 8 out of 10 black men compared to 9 out of 10 white men took graduate degrees then (Table 13). These differences persist today; black men are less likely to have a graduate degree than white, Asian or Hispanic men.

With the exception of Hispanic women, the majority of all respondent groups took their graduate degree in healthcare management. Compared to 1992 where two thirds of the blacks took such specialized degrees, today, the percentage has declined about 10 percent. Whites have not changed very much in the types of majors they took since 1992; about half of the women and two thirds of the men have healthcare management degrees. Hispanics tend to mirror the whites except more of the females have degrees in public health. The Asian women tend to have healthcare management degrees; Asian men are often trained in general business.

As was true in 1992, about half of the blacks and less than a third of the whites received 50 percent or more of their tuition from grants, scholarships or fellowships. About half of the Hispanic men reported scholarship support but only about a quarter of Hispanic women and Asians of either gender benefited in this regard. The importance of such support in pursuing a healthcare management degree varied between 1992 and 1997 by gender. Today, fewer women indicate this was a major decision factor; but such support has grown in influencing men to enter the field.

Internships, Residencies and Fellowships. The early socialization experiences of young professionals can exert a profound influence on their careers. Five years ago, blacks took internships more than whites. Today, there are no major difference between the race/ethnic groups and participating in either internships, residencies, fellowships or in having a mentor to coach and support them. However, white women tend not to take fellowships. (Refer to Table 14)

Of these early socialization experiences, having a mentor is most common--between two-thirds and three fourths of all respondents identified a mentor. Next most common place was the internship--about 30 to 45 percent had one. Residency was more prevalent among the males--indeed 44 percent of the white males took a residency in healthcare management. Fellowship continues to be the least common early socialization experience; they are most often seen in the careers of black and Asian women.

Jobs were actually obtained by sizable proportions of those who took residencies and fellowships. For example, hiring of residents ranged from 42 percent that recruited black women residents to two thirds of organizations that recruited white men. Those taking fellowships were in most instance even more successful--half or more of the fellows said they obtained jobs in the organization's where they took their fellowship.

Mentors. As was noted earlier for the respondents' current selection of protégés, their own mentors were most often of their own race/ethnicity. Blacks tended to have more black mentors; whites, white mentors and Hispanics had more Hispanic mentors etc. Asian women however, identified more Hispanic mentors but their numbers were small in this sample.

Table 14 shows the gender and race/ethnicity of the respondents' most influential mentor. Today, 51 percent of blacks--both males and females--claim their most influential mentor was white; 47 percent claim the most influential mentor was black.

In both 1992 and today, about one third of the black women and two thirds of the white women cited white males; about a fifth of black women cite black females as their main mentor in both years. Black women were less inclined to cite black males as their main mentor in 1997 who nevertheless continue to mentor about 28 percent of them. The largest increase in mentor type was white women--rising to a fifth of the most influential mentor of black women and 30 percent of white women.

Among males, only small differences are apparent when comparing 1992 and 1997 responses. White males continue to mentor nearly 90 percent of white men and about 40 percent of black men respondents said their mentors were white males; another 40 percent said they most influential mentor was a black male. Hispanics rely mostly on white mentors -- 56 percent stated that a white male was their most influential mentor. Asians relied almost exclusively on whites as their most influential mentors.

Career Origins. Table 15 shows that first position obtained fails to differentiate the race/ethnic groups. About equal proportions obtained positions in various locations of the organizational hierarchy when they began their careers as healthcare managers. Differences in the focus of their first area of responsibility are diminishing as well. For example, in 1992, white women were more likely to begin as clinical/ancillary service managers compared to blacks; this is still the case today but the difference is less pronounced.

Differences between blacks and whites in the type of first organization they worked for are more evident among women than men though the pattern is similar for both gender groups. Thus, whites were more likely than blacks to begin their careers in a freestanding hospital. In contrast, all the minority groups, blacks, Hispanics and Asians more than whites were more likely to start their careers in a public health agency or in the military.

Career experience. Table 16 provides an overview of the years of experience attained--another potential explanation for differences in career outcomes. Considering the total number of years worked in healthcare, white women worked about two years longer than black women in 1992--18 years for whites versus 16 years for the blacks. But in 1997, both blacks and whites worked about 18 years in healthcare 13 of these in healthcare management--about 4 years longer than Asians in this sample. Indeed, white females had more experience than Hispanic and Asian females as healthcare managers. Males on average, had worked 19 years in healthcare and 15 years as healthcare managers.

White women worked on average for three organizations and held 4 management positions in their careers while black and Hispanic women typically worked for 2 organizations and held 3 management positions. There were no important differences among the men. On average, they too, worked for three organizations but most held 5 management positions. This is consistent with their longer tenure in healthcare management.

If acquiring experience is important to attain higher level positions, than withdrawing from the workforce would be expected to exert a negative influence on career attainments. Table 17 examines this issue and shows blacks to be disadvantaged in that compared to the other groups--notably whites and Asians--they took less desirable jobs because of financial need and lack of opportunity. Moreover, they more than others took part time employment for the same reasons. These patterns were evident in the 1992 study as well. At that time (1992) white women, to a greater extent than blacks, told us they had taken less desirable jobs because of family needs. Today, while still a factor in one out five respondents, there are no important differences among the race/ethnic groups.

Attitudes affecting careers. A volitional component can affect the career trajectory as well as education and years of experience accrued. In Table 18, respondents indicated their willingness to relocate and the impact of their family obligations on their careers. In 1992, we discerned that fewer white women had relocated to obtain a better position than blacks. Today, there are no significant differences between the race/ethnic groups. Likewise, in 1992, fewer whites (women and men) than blacks said they would move to a different city for career advancement; today, these differences are less apparent.

But some key attitudinal differences have persisted. For example, black men continue to be less willing to relocate to a rural or semi-rural location for an attractive career opportunity. And, disappointingly, blacks especially, but also Asians and Hispanics more than whites continue to assert they have been negatively affected by racial/ethnic discrimination in their careers. Indeed, in a sequel to this question, blacks expressed least satisfaction with the progress they have made toward meeting their overall career goals.

Overall, considering human capital explanations for the differential career outcomes, we observed that fewer black men have graduate degrees and along with Asian males, fewer have specialized training in healthcare management. Fewer black males were subsequently hired for a full time position in the organizations where they had their residency or fellowship. About half of the blacks identified whites as their main mentor; 97 percent of whites identified whites as their main mentor.

We continue to observe that blacks and other minorities launch their careers in the governmental sphere; whereas whites often begin in the not for profit hospital sector. White women (but not men) have worked for about one more organization and have had one more managerial position than minority women. While blacks today are as willing to relocate to another city as whites; they continue to reject rural and semi-rural settings. And all minorities claim that their careers were negatively affected by racial/ethnic discrimination and are less satisfied with their career progression than whites.