Is It Possible to Improve Public Sector Ethics - Essay Example

Is it possible to improve public sector ethics? Name Professor Institution Course Date Is it possible to improve public sector ethics? Introduction In the recent past, public sector ethics have drawn a lot of public interest due to its perceptible significance for the corporation’s economic health and that of the general society (Paul & Elder 2006). The news of in the recent years, particularly portrayed a distressing story of business ethics in companies such as Anderson, Enron, WorldCom, Merrill Lynch, Global Crossing, Tyco International, Qwest and Boeing among others (Paul & Elder 2006). Corporate failures, Falling stock markets, abuses of corporate power, dubious accounting practices, scandalous investigations point out that the whole economic system on which investment profits have relied is demonstrating warnings of stress which have weakened public’s confidence (Fukuyama 2000). These issues have portrayed the public service as a failed sector therefore the question, is it possible to improve public sector ethics? Based on the reviewed literatures, this essay will argue that public sector ethics can be improved using methods such as enforcing the rule of law, code of conduct, ethics training, and leadership, and auditing and monitoring and whistle blowing. This essay will also evaluate the pros and cons of such methods. Public Sector Ethics Ethics are defined as a collection of principles and concepts which guide us in establishing what behavior is good and which ones are wrong (Uhr 1988, p.109). Uhr (1988, p.110) claims that the public sector ethics focuses on the fundamental principle of the public administrators’ responsibility as a "stewards" of the public. As such, it can be regarded as the moral consideration and justification for the actions and decisions made at the completion of routines when providing the public services. In this perspective, ethics are the standard of accountability in which the public scrutinizes the roles being carried out by the employees of the organizations. Just like the private sector, the government and public always expect public sectors to operate with a lot of ethics and accountability (Sampford 1994). The public administrators in the above mentioned companies had often made decisions which are self-centered, making sure that they defraud the company and get away with it. OECD (1996) argues that some even collude with the internal audits to make sure they are not caught. Some corrupt officials of these companies have opened bank accounts outside their country which they use to divert public funds. According to OECD (1996), Unethical acts have ensured that most public companies cannot provide effective services to the public. Signs of such actions are poor roads, ineffective education system, poor health cares services and insecurity (Mafunisa 2008). This is because the funds that were set for a certain activity has been misappropriated and cannot be accounted for. In a nutshell, the public cannot get value for their taxes. For instance, in 1998, the WorldCom's stock started declining because its CEO Bernard Ebbers used the funds to finance his personal business endeavors such as timber and yachting (Pulliam & Deborah 2008). Pulliam & Deborah (2008) posits that the firm’s profitability was hit and that the management was compelled to ditch its intended merger with the Sprint in 2000. The company went bankrupt and in 2005, CEO Bernard Ebbers was charged with fraud (Pulliam & Deborah 2008). In the public sector, the citizens expect public officers to make decisions that are based on ethical principles and which they perceive as correct. Having that form of distinction makes sure that public officers are not conducting themselves on the internal set of ethical codes without questioning whether the standards would hold public scrutiny (Potts 1998). It has put an extra burden on public officers concerning the actions of their private lives. Public sector ethics are normally regarded as political ethics, hence judgment is political in nature. According to OECD (1996), Public administration integrity is a significant situation for effective operation of the government, for making sure public trust in public sector, and for building situations for sustainable economic and social development. However, improving public sector entails management and institutionalized reforms. Pros and cons of different methods of improving public sector ethics Ethics training for the public administrators is considered one of the effective methods of creating integrity in public institutions and making sure good quality public management (Sampford 1994). The ethics are even one of the UN requirements. The UN Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) needs that the member states "promote training programs to make public officials meet the prerequisites for the correct, honorable and appropriate performance of public roles and that offer them with appropriate and specialized training to improve their consciousness of the menaces of corruption inbuilt in the role performance” (OECD 1996). Training on ethics, anti-corruption and integrity are offered in several countries across the world, as well as nations with a quite high degree of ethics in public organization including countries in which corruption is common (Sampford 1994). Even with the training, Gini (2000) claims that many employees feel that their work lack meaning and value away from the utilitarian purpose of offering them with the paycheck. That does not mean using the utilitarian approach is bad, but should be used when others are also considered. Ethics training is an important tool for improving ethics and curbing corruption in public organization if used collectively with other instruments as part of a broad pro-integrity and anti-corruption policy (Van Rooyen 2008, p.271). In fact, people need to be trained on the importance of serving. Ethics training alone may not create sustainable results, particularly in nations having high corruption levels. Ethics training creates visible results just in the long-term basis. Fair legal platforms, implemented on a fair basis, including an autonomous judicial system can help in creating societies where people and institutions have confidence (Uhr 1988, p.112). The public sector has the capacity with the help of government to create or interpret laws. Public sector institutions and the employees working within must, then, show a strong obligation to law that encourages integrity and complies with such laws (Uhr 1988, p.117). Within the power granted by the public, they ought to also endeavor to use their authority to hold other members of the institution accountable. One of the advantages of rule of law in ensuring ethics, is that it is set in the both company constitution and the national constitution, and the employee has no choice but to follow it (Potts 1998). The law gives the public officer who has violated the public ethics an opportunity to defend himself, and if they are not able, the law allows the judge to prosecute them. Potts (1998) argues that in countries like the US, accountability is integrated into the corporate culture, but the law is also set to minimize corruption. Effective, moral and value leadership is also one of the methods that can be used to improve public sector ethics (Van Rooyen 2008, p.270). An ethical organization’s culture which is driven by leadership is observed as a successful approach which will uphold the wider society interest with regard to service delivery in the public sector. Kakabadse, Korac-Kakabadse & Kouizmin (2003, p.480) contend that it is the responsibility of all public leaders to promote and protect the public interest. In this manner, they must make sure there are no obstacles, such as unethical behavior, to realizing a culture of high quality public service delivery. Effective leadership creates shared vision. Shared vision thus, leads to ethical behavior steered by imperative for the leaders to do away with personal interests in support of a leadership style which prioritizes the wellbeing of the general society (Gini 2000). In the sphere of ethics, the utilitarian concept of doing good to achieve the best results, reigns. Based on this, Kakabadse, Korac-Kakabadse & Kouizmin (2003, p.483) portray a leader as a servant of the people who get rid of personal authority to benefit the public. A leader who is a servant may be regarded an altruist, because of his duty to improve lives and to create opportunities for institutionalized effectiveness. According to Dorasamy (2010, p.59), altruistic leaders create and use laws to fulfill public demands. Such leaders accept accountability and responsibility in serving the wider public interest. Using leadership is beneficial because it involves influencing the employees and convincing them through stories about how bad corruption and fraud are (Dorasamy 2010, p.55). This can even be better when the leader has agreeableness characteristics. However, using leadership to improve public sector ethics also faces challenges. As stated earlier, public sector ethics are political ethics in nature and many public servants are appointed or elected politically, meaning they may work leaning on the side of people who elected or appointed them (Potts 1998). As such, leadership might not improve ethics. Politicians are laws’ public administrators who are expected to adhere to public ethics acts. However, these politicians have bribed voters to elect them. Bribe itself is an ethical behavior, and for a person who has such means cannot be expected to adhere to the same (Mafunisa 2008). The top management can also formulate codes of ethics to help improve public ethics. Uhr (1988, p.115) argues that Code of ethics is a standard that act as a guideline to assist an individual to carry out their tasks with integrity and honesty. Many people working in public service are not aware of the codes of ethics (Sampford 1994). In some situations, the principles exist but are not accessible to everyone. The top management hangs them in their officers where junior officers are not able to observe on a daily basis. For a company to improve its ethical framework, everyone should be provided with a copy of code of ethics which they can refer quite often so as to hold them accountable. A code of ethics starts by pointing out the values which highlight the code and explains a firm’s obligation to its employees (Paul & Elder 2006). The code should be publicly accessible and addressed to every employee who have the interest in the activities of the firm and the manner in which it conducts its business. It can comprise of aspects of how the organization plans to execute its vision and values, including guiding the employees on ethical principles and how to accomplish them. Paul & Elder (2006) assert that code of ethics can also be communicated to candidates during the hiring process. Similarly, code of ethics reminds the hiring panel to avoid favoritism and corruption, and encourage a lean process that will ensure the company gets the qualified people to deliver quality service. In this way, ethics in public sector can be made a major part of the organizational culture (Sampford 1994). Nevertheless, some public organizations have a code of ethics, meaning sometimes this document may not be effective as people tend to think. Some experts argue that ethics are an intrinsic principle which it is the individual that decides to lie with and cannot be compelled to conform to (Fukuyama 2000). For such reason, enforceability has sometimes become a challenge making it unable to improve ethics in public sectors. Code of ethics to some extent is contradictory. At one spectrum, it forbids disclosure of company’s information by the employees, on the other end, an employee know some corrupt deal carried by the senior officials but cannot disclose because of such clause (Fukuyama 2000). In the current business arena, most public organizations employ internal auditors and also external auditors to conduct company auditing to maintaining accountability in their running (OECD 1996). Audit is one of the significant functions of an organization. Mafunisa (2008) affirms that the role is not just restricted in making sure that a firm’s financial reporting illustrates a true and fair analysis, but it also serves the public good since it is established to strengthen and create accountability, trust and confidence. To ensure the public sector is accountable, the public company act supports the establishment of internal audit department to carry out such functions (Mafunisa 2008). However, in many cases most internal auditors collude with employees or top managers to defraud the company. To improve the work and ethics in the public sector, the audit and monitoring role should not be just left to internal auditors, but other bodies created by the government must take the role of external auditing and monitoring role (Potts 1998). According to Mafunisa (2008), such bodies include the Inspectors General, Ombudsmen, Public Accounts Committees in Parliament, and Auditors General, among others. However, they require the institutional capabilities such as written laws to perform their mandates. There is, however the limitation is using audit to improve ethics in the public sector. One of the limitations is that when there is less cooperation from internal auditors and managers of the company during external auditing, the truth about financial accountability cannot be established (Potts 1998). Similarly, when internal auditors find the company getting larger profits and yet they are paid peanuts, they will not be effective in their work. Hence ethical violation may not be proven. OECD (1996) claims the external auditors too require capacity and better funding to carry out their mandates. If these requirements are not met, external auditors such as Accounts Committees in Parliament, Auditors General etc will conspire with public sector managers not to publish unethical issues report. Whistle blowing is another method public organizations can use to improve conformity to ethics. This vice has helped the companies save much money, which they might as well lose (Harders 1991, p.30). If Whistle blowing is encouraged by the top management, many people may fear getting into unethical behavior. Some of the well recognized whistle blowing acts involves frauds at WorldCom and Enron (Pulliam & Deborah 2008). Cooper (2008) state that in 2002, Time magazine editors feted two whistleblower people of the year, it turned out to be WorldCom employee, Cynthia Cooper and Sherron Watkins an employee of Enron. The act acknowledged the significance of internal whistle in bringing unethical conducts to the attention of the public (Cooper 2008). If it not was for the two, the whole fraud act at these two companies could have been concealed. However, Whistle blowing in public sector frequently faces the distinctive problem which their disclosure could compose a crime (Harders 1991). This can lead to an ethical dilemma more so when the continuing delinquency is relentless and there is no sensible hope that it will end by blowing the whistle. Conclusion Failure in the public sector is a true risk to the future of any public organization. With an effective ethical culture based on the core values of trust and integrity, public companies will be able to improve. By supporting powerful policies on enforcing the rule of law, code of conduct, ethics training, and leadership, auditing and monitoring and whistle blowing, a company sends a strong message to its staff that ethics, social responsibility and morality are critical to the success and effectiveness of the organization and that any immoral behavior is intolerable. It can then be concluded that any public organization with positive reputation of ethical conducts in today’s business is a sign that the public will be able to get value for their taxes through development and quality service delivery. References Cooper, C 2008, Extraordinary Circumstances: The Journey of a Corporate Whistleblower, Hoboken, New Jersey, John Wiley & Sons, Inc Dorasamy, N 2010, Enhancing an ethical culture through purpose –directed leadership for improved public service delivery: A case for South Africa, African Journal of Business Management, Vol.4, No. 1, pp. 56-64 Gini, A 2000, ‘Moral Leadership and Business Ethics’ from My Job, My Self: Work and the Creation of the Modern Individual, Routledge, London Fukuyama, F 2000, ‘Social Capital’ from L. E. Harrison and S. Huntington (eds) Culture Matters: How Values Shape Human Progress, Basic Books, New York. Harders, J 1991, Whistleblowing: Counting the Cost, Canberra Bulletin of Public Administration, vol. 66, pp.29-37 Kakabadse, A, Korac-Kakabadse, N & Kouizmin, A 2003, Ethics, Values and Behaviors: Comparison of three case studies examining the paucity of leadership in government, Public Administration, vol. pp.477-508 Mafunisa, MJ 2008, Public service ethics, Kenwyn, Juta and Co.Ltd. Paul, R & Elder, L 2006, The Miniature Guide to Understanding the Foundations of Ethical Reasoning, US, Foundation for Critical Thinking Free Press Potts, S. D 1998, Ethics in Public Service: An Idea Whose Time Has Come’ from Sampford, C and N. Preston, Public Sector Ethics: Finding and Implementing Values, Federation Press, Annandale, NSW. Pulliam, S & Deborah, S 2008, How Three Unlikely Sleuths Exposed Fraud at WorldCom: Firm's Own Employees Sniffed Out Cryptic Clues and Followed Hunches, The Wall Street Journal. OECD 1996, Ethics in the Public Service, Public Management Occasional Papers, No. 14, Paris. Sampford, C. 1994, Institutionalizing Public Sector Ethics’ from Preston, N. (ed.) Ethics for the Public Sector: education and training, Federation Press, Annandale, NSW. Uhr, J 1988, Ethics and Public Service, Australian Journal of Public Administration, vol. 2, pp. 109-118 Van Rooyen, E 2008, The leadership and ethics interface: Strengthening human resources and organizational capacity for development., Public Admin, vol. 3, pp.269-275. Read More