Leading, Slipping, Gaining, Lagging Analysis:
Assessing Federal Civilian Earnings Growth
Across Michigan Counties
Real* Federal Civilian
Earnings Growth
County vs Statewide Average: 2007-2016 and 2016
Real* Federal Civilian
Earnings Growth
Michigan:
2007-2016 = 2.78%
2016 = 1.46%
Borrowing from an approach that sometimes appears in the finance sections of the popular press, LSGL analysis is a handy and versatile way to compare, portray and classify the patterns of real federal civilian earnings growth across all of Michigan's 83 counties. In finance, this technique is used for comparing and assessing the market performance of individual securities or across industry sectors. For example, the performance of the 30 stocks contained within Dow are compared with one another over the past week in contrast to their performance over the past month using the Dow's respective averages as the points of reference.
Here in this Michigan Regional Economic Analysis Project report, we adopt this approach to gauge and compare the real federal civilian earnings growth of Michigan's 83 counties over the latest available year (2016) against the backdrop of their growth over the long term period (2007-2016). In so doing we classify their growth and performance into 4 broad categories: Leading, Slipping, Gaining and Lagging.
Real* Federal Civilian
Earnings Growth
County vs Statewide Average: 2007-2016 and 2016
Real* Federal Civilian
Earnings Growth
Michigan:
2007-2016 = 2.78%
2016 = 1.46%
This figure displays the 83 counties of Michigan as dots on a scattergram, with the vertical axis representing the average annual real federal civilian earnings growth rate over the long-term period (2007-2016), and the horizontal axis representing the real federal civilian earnings growth rate for the near-term (2016).
This figure sets apart those counties whose long-term real federal civilian earnings growth exceeded the statewide average of 2.78%, by portraying them in the top two quadrants demarcated at 2.78% on the vertical axis. County whose long-term average annual real federal civilian earnings growth rate trailed the statewide average (2.78%) are distributed in the bottom two quadrants. In all, 18 counties surpassed the statewide average over 2007-2016, while 65 counties fell below.
Similarly, the two quadrants on the right of this figure present the positions of the 26 counties whose most recent (2016) real federal civilian earnings growth rate exceeded the statewide average (1.46%). The two quadrants on the left feature those 57 counties whose real federal civilian earnings growth over 2016 trailed the statewide average.
Accordingly, each quadrant portrays the performance of all 83 counties corresponding with their long-term (2007-2016) and near-term (2016) performance relative to their respective statewide averages of 2.78% over 2007-2016 and 1.46% over 2016:
Leading counties () (top-right quadrant)...are counties whose average annual real federal civilian earnings growth rate surpassed the statewide average both long-term (2.78%) and near-term (1.46%).
Slipping counties () (top-left quadrant)...are counties whose long-term average annual real federal civilian earnings growth rate exceeded the statewide average (2.78%), but whose near-term growth has "slipped" by falling below the Michigan average (1.46%).
Gaining counties () (bottom-right quadrant)...are counties whose long-term average annual real federal civilian earnings growth rate fell below the statewide average (2.78%), but whose near-term growth has "gained" by registering above the average (1.46%) statewide.
Lagging counties () (bottom-left quadrant)...are counties whose average annual real federal civilian earnings growth rate fell under the statewide average both long-term (2.78%) and near-term (1.46%).
   
 
Summary of Michigan's 83 County Totals
 
Short Term Average
 
 
Below
(1.46%)
Above
(1.46%)
 
Long
Term
Average
Above
(2.78%)
8
10
18
Below
(2.78%)
49
16
65
 
57
26
83
 
   
Leading Counties
2016 vs. 2007-2016 Averages
Leading Counties
Michigan:
2007-2016 = 2.78%
2016 = 1.46%
Turning attention to the top-right quadrant from the discussion above, this figure features the distribution of the Michigan counties classified as Leading. These counties surpassed Michigan's average annual real federal civilian earnings growth both long-term (2007-2016 = 2.78%) as well as near-term (2016 = 1.46%). Each is identified by its corresponding ranking based on it's average annual real federal civilian earnings growth rate over 2007-2016.
Of Michigan's 83 counties, just 10 (12%) are classified within the Leading () category. Those counties ranked by their long-term average include:
Slipping Counties
2016 vs. 2007-2016 Averages
Slipping Counties
Michigan:
2007-2016 = 2.78%
2016 = 1.46%
This figure depicts the distribution of the 8 Michigan counties classified as Slipping (top-left quadrant), in that their long-term average annual real federal civilian earnings growth rate outpaced the average statewide (2007-2016 = 2.78%), while they trailed the statewide average near-term (2016 = 1.46%). Again, each county is identified by it's corresponding ranking based on its average annual real federal civilian earnings growth rate over 2007-2016.
Only 8 (10%) of Michigan's 83 counties are classified as Slipping (). Those counties ranked by their long-term average include:
Gaining Counties
2016 vs. 2007-2016 Averages
Gaining Counties
Michigan:
2007-2016 = 2.78%
2016 = 1.46%
This figure shows the distribution of the 16 Michigan counties classified as Gaining (bottom-right quadrant), in that their long-term average annual real federal civilian earnings growth rate posted below the average statewide (2007-2016 = 2.78%), while they outpaced Michigan's average near-term (2016 = 1.46%). Again, each county is identified by its corresponding ranking based on its average annual real federal civilian earnings growth rate over 2007-2016.
Of Michigan's 83 counties, 19% (16) are featured as Gaining (). Those counties ranked by their long-term average include:
Lagging Counties
2016 vs. 2007-2016 Averages
Lagging Counties
Michigan:
2007-2016 = 2.78%
2016 = 1.46%
This figure depicts the distributions of the 49 Michigan counties classified as Lagging (bottom-left quadrant). These counties trailed the statewide average annual real federal civilian earnings growth both long-term (2007-2016 = 2.78%) as well as near-term (2016 = 1.46%). Again, each county is identified by its corresponding ranking based on it's average annual real federal civilian earnings growth rate over 2007-2016.
59% of Michigan's counties, 49 of 83, are characterized here as Lagging (). Those counties ranked by their long-term average include:
   
 
Michigan
Real* Federal Civilian Earnings Growth
County vs. Statewide Average
 
2007-2016
 
2016
 
 
Leading Counties
 
8
6.08
 
2
9.97
11,371
 
4
9.21
 
24
1.70
7,199
 
2
10.19
 
7
4.96
22,573
 
5
9.18
 
1
10.44
1,713
 
16
2.88
 
16
3.12
9,423
 
11
4.24
 
8
4.23
1,027,020
 
17
2.85
 
14
3.26
4,018
 
12
4.24
 
12
3.36
145,614
 
7
6.27
 
13
3.32
89,559
 
3
9.31
 
9
4.18
478,775
Slipping Counties
 
10
5.87
 
63
-1.87
52,482
 
6
7.82
 
66
-2.21
80,458
 
13
3.19
 
78
-5.03
8,628
 
9
5.92
 
49
-0.59
15,237
 
18
2.85
 
70
-2.45
7,154
 
14
3.11
 
46
-0.38
489,761
 
1
17.10
 
56
-0.99
13,322
 
15
2.91
 
74
-3.27
2,186
Gaining Counties
 
43
1.11
 
4
6.29
6,391
 
23
2.13
 
22
1.96
13,556
 
52
0.84
 
11
3.66
3,005
 
21
2.25
 
6
5.03
318,288
 
71
0.05
 
15
3.17
12,053
 
54
0.77
 
20
2.20
13,901
 
25
1.96
 
17
2.64
6,849
 
31
1.70
 
25
1.68
287,969
 
49
0.99
 
19
2.27
14,994
 
53
0.83
 
5
5.75
4,507
 
68
0.15
 
10
3.79
6,595
 
22
2.14
 
26
1.50
7,331
 
72
0.04
 
3
7.43
1,331
 
27
1.85
 
18
2.35
4,004
 
48
1.01
 
23
1.80
35,663
 
29
1.73
 
21
1.98
8,513
Lagging Counties
 
83
-4.80
 
79
-5.05
1,298
 
37
1.39
 
59
-1.06
4,954
 
69
0.15
 
67
-2.24
1,742
 
39
1.32
 
64
-2.11
6,128
 
28
1.80
 
72
-2.59
22,607
 
66
0.33
 
52
-0.78
2,413
 
59
0.59
 
44
-0.12
28,111
 
36
1.42
 
35
0.48
6,439
 
58
0.61
 
75
-4.23
5,474
 
50
0.94
 
29
1.21
4,086
 
44
1.09
 
31
1.18
4,276
 
55
0.71
 
57
-0.99
10,178
 
74
-0.02
 
61
-1.59
16,476
 
51
0.86
 
82
-6.99
17,085
 
57
0.63
 
43
0.05
7,454
 
73
-0.01
 
45
-0.31
106,084
 
42
1.11
 
48
-0.55
3,459
 
19
2.74
 
60
-1.38
45,732
 
82
-2.99
 
42
0.06
5,180
 
70
0.12
 
81
-6.33
6,644
 
78
-1.42
 
37
0.26
145,670
 
33
1.67
 
51
-0.71
8,802
 
80
-2.89
 
73
-2.92
2,294
 
62
0.49
 
69
-2.30
28,559
 
81
-2.93
 
80
-5.96
62,755
 
45
1.09
 
58
-1.01
1,765
 
30
1.73
 
34
0.72
4,336
 
60
0.56
 
53
-0.84
10,791
 
34
1.46
 
32
0.94
21,202
 
65
0.39
 
38
0.21
973
 
26
1.93
 
76
-4.83
25,127
 
63
0.48
 
77
-4.89
4,030
 
46
1.02
 
62
-1.73
11,681
 
76
-0.11
 
41
0.12
1,708
 
32
1.70
 
27
1.40
19,474
 
41
1.21
 
68
-2.25
8,854
 
40
1.22
 
36
0.40
30,931
 
20
2.27
 
65
-2.16
5,265
 
64
0.45
 
28
1.30
4,288
 
79
-2.38
 
83
-13.74
2,159
 
35
1.42
 
71
-2.48
4,016
 
75
-0.09
 
50
-0.66
12,529
 
61
0.50
 
54
-0.97
7,218
 
77
-0.92
 
30
1.21
2,771
 
38
1.38
 
47
-0.53
10,645
 
56
0.63
 
33
0.75
9,125
 
47
1.02
 
40
0.16
10,980
 
24
2.00
 
39
0.16
1,636,903
 
67
0.29
 
55
-0.98
11,418
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2.78
 
1.46
5,623,532
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
3.08
 
2.61
324,012,000
November 2017
REAP_PI_CA1600N_620100_LSGL
 
   
Analysis Options Menu
Select Year Interval
Beginning Year:
End Year:
Select Alternative Industry
Highlight a Region (Optional)
Copyright © 2017. Pacific Northwest Regional Economic Analysis Project (PNREAP). All Rights Reserved.

Please stay tuned...
while your request is processing:

Please wait while your request is being processed...
To offer the most comprehensive set of interactive options in support of your research, MI-REAP calculates and crunches most of the data and generates the narrative and graphic analysis on demand in response to your request.
Your request will soon be available.
Just a few more seconds....Your request has been generated and is now loading the results.