Professional Ethics - Term Paper Example

Professional Ethics Avoiding Unethical Behaviour Name: Lecturer: Course: Date: Introduction Professionalism in development industry has attracted huge publicity, since urban developers, councillors, architects and planning practitioners have engaged severally in unethical behaviours practices during the course of planning and implementing development projects (Thompson 2007). Such tendencies have called for formulation of agencies to address the issues, such as the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) in New South Wales (ICAC 2012). This paper examines three examples of unethical professional behaviour' or 'corrupt behaviour' in planning activities and mechanisms – namely the Proposed changes to Planning rules, use of SEPP1 and use of Voluntary Planning Agreements. Possible organisational and individual actions that could be taken to prevent and handle the three situations are discussed. Last, the effectiveness of the PIA Code of Conduct that addresses ethical conduct is examined. Part 1 Examples of 'unethical professional behaviour' and 'corrupt behaviour' in planning activities and mechanisms a) Proposed changes to Planning rules (increasing standards) The 2004 Strathfield Case  The Strathfield Case refers to a blackmailing incidence to avert the proposed changes to planning rules, in particular the Draft Local Environmental Plan (LEP). The case involved Alfred Tsang, Mayor of Strathfield Municipal Council, John Abi-Saab, a Councillor, and a developer called Michael Saklaoui (ICAC 2005 b). ICAC (2005a) investigation report indicated that Saklaoui gave Tsang $2,500, and further offered him a bribe of $200,000 on grounds that his application for a car park be considered. Tsang was later informed by Abi-Saab that he was aware of the bribery incident and that Tsang should resign from his mayoral position. Tsang was threatened to resign and if not, then a video evidence of the bribery incident would be made public through the media. However, ICAC (2005b) investigations established that Abi-Saab and Saklaoui had colluded and conspired against the mayor since his resignation would stop him from changing the Draft Local Environmental Plan (LEP). The plan was likely to cause the market value of Saklaoui’s property to drop. b) Use of SEPP No.1 The 2008 Wollongong City Council case The State Environmental Planning Policy No 1 (SEPP 1) allows applicants to oppose development standards, including the height of a building. Although there are several benefits of using SEPP1, they have been criticised for causing the potential for corruption and 'unethical professional behaviour'. Such an incidence was demonstrated in the case of Wollongong City Council in 2008, where elements of corruption were evident at the Department of Planning (ICAC 2012). Those involved were public officials who were reviewing SEPP1. In the case, potential for corruption could have been detected at Wollongong City Council, if the Department of Planning had asked the councils to document development approvals that had been made using a controversial planning policy. Frank Vellar, a Wollongong developer, had submitted a multimillion-dollar development application (worth $100 million) to the council that hugely surpassed the height limits and the ratio for the local floor space. However, through the use of a controversial law in the form of SEPP1 and significant support from the corrupt senior council staff, Vellar’s application was accepted. This is since the policy provided flexibility in applying for planning control. This allowed the council to get around the SEPP1 (Gibson & Creagh 2008). c) Use of Voluntary Planning Agreements Gwandalan and Catherine Hill Bay Incident In 2009, the proposed development of Gwandalan and Catherine Hill Bay entailed rezoning land to allow for future development. The mechanism applied in rezoning the land and approval of concept was through a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU). The relevance of the case to planning agreements is that MOU that had been entered between Rosecorp (the developer) and Minister of Planning was used in replacement to a Voluntary Planning Agreement. The objective was to attain an offset for the implications of development. Claims of bribery and bias featured in the planning. Gwandalan Summerland Point Action later brought proceedings before the court that the approved project be cancelled because of evidences of land-bribe and bias -- on the part of the Minister of Planning -- in exchange for rezoning. The court ruled in favour of the applicants and cancelled the approval. Analysis from this case shows that Voluntary Planning Agreements consist of the only formal agreements that can be entered into, as well as, considered to be a part of planning and evaluation procedures (Ruston 2010). Part II Organisational and individual actions that could be taken to prevent and handle the three situations chosen As noted in the three cases -- Strathfield Case, Wollongong City Council case, and Gwandalan and Catherine Hill Bay Incident -- the government should ensure that it makes it compulsory that key strategic policy documents are complied with during the process of making planning instruments, such as SEPP1 or enforcing Voluntary Planning Agreements. Additionally, the government should ensure that sufficient oversight precautions are put in place for the evaluation and creation of policy applications that suggest prohibited uses (Rangot 2009). In regards to public officials such as involvement of Minister of Planning in unethical professional practice, in the case of Gwandalan and Catherine Hill Bay Incident, the government should initiate a system of continuous professional development for planning professionals (ICAC 2012). The planning legislations such as the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 in New South Wales should clearly convey their objectives as well as provide sufficient guidance on the priorities that should be given in completion of planning objectives (UN 2004). This avoids such incidences of using biased MoU rather than fairly objective VPA in planning and evaluation procedures, as noted in Gwandalan and Catherine Hill Bay Incident. The government should further ensure that its system for assessment and approval developments of state offer adequate opportunities that can be used to consider competing public interests. The government should seek to lessen the complexity of the planning system, such as rationalising the amount of control documents that should apply to a single parcel of land area, as evidence in the Wollongong City Council case. Further, the planning authority should also be forced to provide regular information and updates to the government and the public on development applications (ICAC 2012). Overall, there is a need for better reporting and monitoring by planning authorities, such as the Department of Planning. The planning authorities or agencies need to be subjected to substantial and meaningful reporting and monitoring system to promote the efficiency and the effectiveness of the system performance (UN 2004). The reporting and monitoring systems should also be a legislative requirement. It also needs to be integrated with additional requirements for reporting, when possible (Commonwealth of Australia 2011). The monitoring system should also make use of performance benchmarking model. This applies to the three cases. The planning authority should have internal investigation mechanism. By establishing a policy and approach that can be used in the management of external allegations and complaints, such organisations are presented with detailed procedures and mechanisms for pursuing internal investigations and informing ICAC or any other related external agency (NSW Government 2014). This also applies to the three cases. Basing on the Strathfield Case, and Gwandalan and Catherine Hill Bay Incident, seminars on ethical practice should be conducted frequently for public officials or within the organisations to help them understand the significance of ethical work practice. In this regards, public officials, such as the mayor or the minister, should be made to understand that they have an integral role to play in crime detection, prevention and investigation (Criminal Justice Commission 1993; SMH 2013). They should know that the accountability and responsibility of corruption should not be delegated; rather, they should apply expert advice and assistance from other external professionals, such as legal advisors and auditors on the best course of action, when faced with situations where they can make decisions that damage their reputation (SMH 2013). They should also understand that they are the roles models for ethical behaviour, as well as, to take stern action for cases of unethical behaviour among their behaviour (Dietz & Gillespe 2010). The management of planning authorities should also create and promote an ethical culture within their departments or workplaces, evaluate the risk of corruption at workplace, as well as, be at the forefront of setting up workplace policies, practices, mechanisms and strategies for preventing potential cases of unethical professional conducts or corruption. They should also place emphasis on putting the basic controls to promote compliance with the policies, practices, mechanisms and strategies (Chandler 2009). Internal codes of conduct should be formulated within an organisation to inform employees of the organisation’s commitment to ethical practices and expectation on ethical conducts and norms (UN 2004). Further, organisations such as the Department of Planning should create an appeal process to allow any unethical practice to be brought to the awareness of the organisation. Additionally, organisations should appoint compliance officers to monitor cases of corruption and abuse of office within the organisation. Idris (2011) in his paper examined the impacts of monitoring in which he suggested that an internal inspector should monitor an organisation for compliance with the anti-corruption regulations and the general code of conducts. Idris (2011) suggested that the monitoring problems can be applied in public institutions as the term “compliance” is understood to imply compliance with the code of ethics rather than the law. Organisations should also promote ethical culture. In addition, there is a need to modify performance management system to promote ethical behaviour within an organisation as a factor for appraisal and rewards. Studies on ethical behaviour strongly suggest the idea that if ethical reinforcement is desired, the performance measurement, reward and appraisal system must be altered to account for ethical behaviour (Idris 2011). Organisations should promote ethical climate. A basic management principle for managing the public institutions is that if certain behaviour is desired, then it has to be reinforced. Idris (2011) points out that how individuals within an organisation perceive ethical behaviour and how the organisation reinforces it, determines the form of ethical behaviour that employees exhibit. Hence, if the planning authorities want to promote ethical practices, they have to acknowledge that they have the responsibility to establish their organisation’s reinforcement mechanism (Nagia 2011). The organisations should provide ethical training to reinforce the employee’s personal ethical framework (Macfarlane 2000). The point is organisations must show commitment by devoting resources to ethics training and to clarify to the employees of the organisation’s ethical frameworks, practices and self-discipline, whenever they strive to make ethical decisions under difficult circumstances, such as those faced by Mayor Tsang in the Strathfield case. In dealing with the ethical dilemmas, Idris (2011) suggested a seven-step checklist that can be employed by organisations. Organisations should emphasise to their employees to identify and clarify the dilemma. Second, employees should get the right facts. Third, employees should list their options, test out each alternative by asking whether it is right, legal or beneficial, as well as whether it is consistent with the organisation’s goals and values. Next, employees should answer the questions to help them determine whether the action they observed may be classified as “unethical behaviour”. Employees should afterwards make their decisions. Lastly, employees should double-check their decisions by asking how they would feel if their decision was made public and whether they can defend their actions. Preventing the autonomy of one public official through formalisation and bureaucratization can prevent corruption or the potential for unethical behaviour. To this end, Jason (2007) suggested that when the discretion of public officials is restricted, the opportunities for corruptions and gains from it can be reduced. For instance, having policies and procedures that reduce the autonomy of a certain public official reduces the opportunity for bribery or blackmail, as noted in the Strathfield Case and the Gwandalan and Catherine Hill Bay Incident. PART III Effectiveness of PIA Code of Conduct in addressing ethical conduct The planning profession has often been presented as an interdisciplinary profession aimed at improving the manner in which a community can live and work (APA 2014). The profession demands an increased diversity of skills in addition to community engagement. The conduct of these professional planners is guided by the PIA Code of Ethics. The PIA Code of Ethics also binds the members of the Planning Institute of Australia. To a considerable extent, PIA Code of Conduct addresses ethical conduct (PIA 2011). The Code is intended to offer guidance to planners to make sure that their professional conduct is consistent with the highest professional and ethical standards in a manner that earns the respect and the confidence of the public. The Code recognises that planners encounter a range of ethical dilemmas and issues (PIA 2002). The Code provides support and guidance to planners, hence ensuring that they practice their planning profession using the highest professional and ethical standards, as well as, earn respect in the eyes of the community. Section 3.1 (1) of the Code emphasises that members of the PIA must aim to practice the highest standards in their entire professional activities (DA Online 2009). The Code also strives to eliminate autonomy of the planners in their practice, which minimises chances of corruption and blackmailing. As suggested by Jason (2007), preventing the autonomy of a particular employee through formalisation and bureaucratization reduces the potential for unethical behaviour or corruption, since when the discretion of the employee is restricted, the gains and opportunities for corrupt practices are reduced. In the case of the code, section 3.1(3) of the Code specifies that members should ensure that all those involved in panning have the opportunity to take part in a meaningful way to the decision-making process (PIA 2002). The Code also seeks to promote transparency and accountability, which has the potential to prevent corruption on the part of PIA members since they have to make full disclosure of their activities. Section 3.1(4) of the Code specifies that PIA members should ensure that all planning processes are practiced openly and that all pertinent information is fully disclosed to interested parties. Section 3.1(7) further sets out that the PIA members should know the nature of the roles they play in providing planning advice, which should be entered in the public domain (PIA 2002). The Code also seeks to prevent the likelihood of conflict of interest among the planners. As suggested by Gilman (2005), codes can greatly reduce the corrupt practices that result from conflict of interest. The Code condemns conflict of interest as pointed out in section 3.2(8) that PIA members should not act in cases where conflict of interest may arise between their personal interest and that of the public. By stressing that members of PIA should avoid working or contracts with individuals who are potentially corrupt, the Code recognises and notifies the members of their vulnerability to corruption, when they work for clients who may compromise their integrity. For instance, Section 3.2(10) advises that members who undertake planning should not undertake any work for clients they consider as likely to be prejudiced (DA Online 2009). The Code also recognises that members may be offered gifts that could support grounds for blackmail. It therefore informs the members of what is expected of them under such situations. Hence, it requires that the members should disclose to their clients, employee or employers of the gifts offered by a third party in relation to their work as planners, and that they should rejects such gifts when they perceive that it is likely to influence their advice. Such principles are suggested in section 3.2(11) (DA Online 2009). Conversely, despite the effectiveness of the PIA Code of Conduct in addressing ethical conduct, this is not adequate, as the Code has some drawbacks that allow for manipulation or violation. The major drawback is that it cannot be described as an actual value-based code. The PIA Code of conduct has used a compliance-based approach. Such an approach only serves to inform the employees or individuals of the law as means to prevent violation. It also highlights behaviours that are not tolerated rather than explaining them in detail. According to IFAC (2007), compliance-based approach has limited effectiveness as it does not fully embrace organisational or institutional values. For instance, it does not define the scope of corruption or unprofessional practice. The scope of corruption and bribery definition should instead be widened and clarified. Since the definition may vary in their definition and level of perceived commitment, violating them becomes easy. Instead of just prohibiting bribery, they should offer guidance on soliciting, offering and receiving gifts, as well as refer to authoritative guidance such as the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. On the other hand, a value-based code should inform the members of what is ethical and what is not. It should also define the fundamental principles and offers guidance on what should be considered as ethical and what should not (IFAC 2007). It should define values at a comparatively high level since it is not feasible to address all circumstances that employees may face. In addition, it should clearly identify behaviour that are not tolerable and explain their consequences. It is therefore submitted that the same set of rules that apply to those in public office also apply to private practitioners. This is since codes of conduct are a critical tool for state-owned and private enterprises, where the confidence of the public must be regained since unethical behaviour can severely damage reputation (Gilman 2005). Using and implementing the code in public sector and private practice can help address certain ethical issues that can arise in private practice, and which are challenging to tackle. For instance, the private organisations may as well use the codes of conduct for member of the board to prevent conflict of interest specifically by directing the members of the board to avoid putting their personal objectives above the interest of the organisation (IFAC 2007). This is since diligent decision-making in the private sector requires the same level of consideration and application of ethical issues as public sector. Conclusion Frome the analyses of the three planning activities and mechanisms – namely the Proposed changes to Planning rules, use of SEPP No.1 and Use of Voluntary Planning Agreements – it is clear that unethical behaviours practices by the urban developers, councillors and developers in the course of planning and implementing developments are still prevalent, despite the set of established mechanisms to prevent potential 'unethical professional behaviour' or 'corrupt behaviour'. Organisations should ensure that flexible planning decisions are made, which are however subject to authorised sets of criteria that are both objective and robust. The management of planning authorities should also create and promote an ethical culture within their departments or workplaces. Evaluate the risk of corruption at workplace, as well as, be at the forefront of setting up workplace policies, practices, mechanisms and strategies for preventing potential cases of unethical professional conducts or corruption. Reference List APA 2014, What is Planning? viewed 27 April 2014, https://www.planning.org/aboutplanning/whatisplanning.htm Chandler, D 2009, "The Perfect Storm of Leaders’ Unethical Behavior: A Conceptual Framework," International Journal of Leadership Studies, Vol. 5 Iss. 1, pp.59-92 Criminal Justice Commission 1993, Corruption in the Workplace, Criminal Justice Commission, Toowong Commonwealth of Australia 2011, Performance Benchmarking of Australian Business Regulation: Planning, Zoning and Development Assessments, Productivity Commission Research Report, Vol. 1, viewed 27 April 2014, http://www.pc.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/108840/planning-volume1.pdf DA Online 2009, Professional Ethics, viewed 27 April 2014, http://www.daonline.net.au/site/professional_ethics.php Dietz, G & Gillespe, N 2010, The Recovery of Trust: Case studies of organisational failures and trust repair, Institute of Business Ethics, London Gibson, J & Creagh, S 2008, Corruption could have been stopped, Sydney Morning Herald, viewed 27 April 2014, http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/corruption-could-have-been-stopped/2008/10/08/1223145446475.html Gilman, S 2005, Ethics Codes and Codes of Conduct as Tools For Promoting An Ethical And Professional Public Service: Comparative Successes and Lessons, PREM, the World Bank, Washington, DC ICAC 2005a, Corruption risks in NSW development approval processes, Independent Commission Against Corruption, Sydney ICAC 2005b, ICAC Report: Report on investigation into the relationship between certain Strathfield Councillors & developers, Independent Commission Against Corruption, Sydney, ICAC 2012, Anti-Corruption Safeguards And The Nsw Planning System, Independent Commission Against Corruption, Sydney Idris, O 2011, "Unethical Behavior by Professional Accountant in an Organization," Research Journal of Finance and Accounting vol. 2, no. 2, pp.1-10 IFAC 2007, Defining and Developing an Effective Code of Conduct for Organizations, International Federation of Accountants, New York Jason, Z 2007, "The Effects of Bureaucratization on Corruption, Deviant and Unethical Behavior in Organizations," Journal of Managerial Issues, Vol. 13, No. 1, 119-28 Macfarlane, R 2000, Local jobs from local development: The use of Planning Agreements to target training and employment outcomes, Joseph Rowntree Foundation, Layerthorpe Nagia, K 2011, The Conduct of South African Public Service Compared to International Guidelines, viewed 27 April 2014, http://upetd.up.ac.za/thesis/available/etd-09272012-130338/unrestricted/dissertation.pdf NSW Government 2014, Fraud and corruption prevention strategy, viewed 27 April 2014, http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/whoweare/fraud.htm UN 2004, The Global Programme Against Corruption Un Anti-Corruption Toolkit, United Nations, Vienna PIA 2006, Corruption Risks in the NSW Development Approval Processes. PIA Discussion Paper Submission to the Independent Commission Against Corruption PIA 2002, Code of Professional Conduct, Planning Institute Of Australia, Kingston PIA 2011, Cultural Shifts in Planning, Supplementary Submission to the NSW Planning Review, prepared by the NSW Division of the Planning Institute of Australia. November 2011 Rangot, L 2009, On preventing corruption: some comments based on recent ICAC investigations into Wollongong City Council and the NSW Fire Brigades, Address to APSACC, 29 July 2009 Ruston, D 2010, Let’s make a deal: negotiating developer contributions through Voluntary Planning Agreements in New South Wales, viewed 27 April 2014, http://www.be.unsw.edu.au/sites/default/files/upload/pdf/schools_and_engagement/resources/_notes/5A4_14.pdf SMH 2013, Planning proposals favour developers over the public, Sydney Morning Herald, viewed 27 April 2014, http://www.smh.com.au/comment/smh-letters/planning-proposals-favour-developers-over-the-public-20131030-2whid.html Thompson, S 2007, Planning Australia: An Overview of Urban and Regional Planning, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Read More