The Pros and Cons of the Different Methods of Improving Public Sector Ethics - Coursework Example

9. Is it possible to improve public sector ethics? Evaluate the pros and cons of the different methods of improving public sector ethics. Public Sector Ethics Name Institution Course Date Public Sector Ethics Ethics is a term commonly used in everyday life. Discussion of ethics in the public sector has increased over the years. Ethics is termed as the study of morality. It is also considered an important value worth pursuing in life. It is relative, it is honourable. However, what is honourable in one society or community may not be typically honourable in another. Ethics being honourable depends on a number of factors such as moral values and world views to name a few. Ethics in the public administration is a lengthy topic (Lewis and Gilman, 2012). In the public sector, the term ethics addresses key principles of every public administrator’s duties and responsibilities as a steward to the public (Lewis and Gilman, 2012). Ethics in the public sector are accountability standards where the public can scrutinize any work being done by a public administrator. Decisions are made in regards to ethical principles which the public would consider as correct. Public sector ethics tend to create an atmosphere around governmental operations. There is widespread concern about nepotism, theft, bribery and corruption in the public sector (Mafunisa, 2000). Therefore, there is concern whether it is possible to improve public sector ethics. This paper will highlight philosophical concept of ethics that would provide an understanding of human values and what constitute right conduct. The paper will also mention some unethical issues faced by the public sector and ways of improving pubic sector ethics. We live in a society where uncertainty has crept about basic norm and values and a good number of decisions today are complex morally and ethically (Bazerman and Mahzarin, 2004). Public sector requires acceptable and clear moral and ethical foundation in order to succeed. Therefore, it is desirable to create a recipe for ethical behaviour among the public officials based on commitment to moral norms and values. Today, it is difficult to establish the meaning of ethics since different people have different views about what is good and what is bad (Bazerman and Mahzarin, 2004). Ethics can be defined as the study of what is right for human beings. In the above definition, it is clear that an individual is able to make a decision to accept or reject a given ethical rule as being the right way of behaving. Ethics is directed to employees as a guide to choosing what is right and what is wrong in a particular situation. For instance, we can talk of an ethical individual or about an act which is ethically accountable (Bazerman and Mahzarin, 2004). Therefore, on what basis do individuals judge whether a particular human behaviour is right or wrong, acceptable or unacceptable? The moral consciousness of a given public servant will provide the moral values and norms ought to be followed and integrated in everyday situation, taking personal life into consideration and considering the interests of another person as being ethical (Lewis and Gilman, 2012). Ethical issues involve feelings; it is not just an intellectual discipline but a conflict that takes place when an individual try to meet human values and needs. However, being ethical is far from pursuing one’s feelings because an individual pursuing his feelings and interests may hesitate from pursuing what is right and one’s feeling may deviate from what is ethical. Acting ethically in a public sector means ensuring that what results from the public service is not demeaning to others; public service practices should focus on ensuring the wellbeing of the society at large (Lewis and Gilman, 2012). Nevertheless, this highly depends on the continuing development of the public and political climate approving factors such as impartiality, accountability, trustworthiness and the enhancing high level of ethical standards in the public administration (Lawrence, 2007). For instance, it is considered essential to look honest in the public sector than to get anything done. In this world of high degree of uncertainty in relation to the norms and the values, a good number of decisions that public administrators are confronted with are very ethically complex (Lewis and Gilman, 2012). There are actions that necessitate the need for ethical conduct in the public sector. Such issues may be disadvantageous to the society (Fisher, 2013). For instance, they may lead to inefficiency, wastage of public resources, national instability, and government mistrust to name a few. Public sector activities may include offering social security, planning the national defence, provision of education, roads and health etc. In principle, no limitations have been put to what state can do. However, it has always been a debate to what extent should the state intervene. Ethics is a concern regarding the actual role of the state administration. Whatever role the state is playing, public servants have discretionary authority and they made critical decisions that affect a lot of people (Lewis and Gilman, 2012). It is important therefore that this decision be ethically correct. Unethical behaviours take place when an ethical principle is compromised. Transparency is the principle that demands the public to know the facts, processes and figures leading to a decision that affects them. Transparency is a principle that allows the public to access information in reliable way (Kinchin, 2007). As a principle of public sector, transparency can be termed as an ethical imperative. It is a principle that every public servant should strive for. Increasing transparency will make decision making process a public undertaking and making it prudent and allow effective management of public resources. Fairness is another ethical obligation that public sector should pursue. According to Kinchin (2007), fairness is the most central but vague principle of public sector ethics and is very difficult to establish what is fair and what is not fair. Another principle guiding the public sector code of ethics is accountability. In the public sector realm, accountability is the obligations of the public servants to inform the public about their actions and decisions. Integrity on the other hand is the consistency of action, values and principles of a public agency. It is the principle of having a sense of honesty in relation to motivations for an action. Corruptions is the most reprehensible ethical issue facing the public sector (Shah, 2007). Corruption can be described as violation of official laws and rules for personal gain or support of private agenda. Corruption often takes place when a public administrator, in defiance of set norms and values, breaks rules and laws to advance his personal interests. Public sector member groups have grounded rules that regulate behaviour. If a public sector is to continue as a united entity, agreements and constraints should be put forward regarding how the members should act and what really constitute unethical and unaccepted behaviour. Corruption ranges from paying of bribe to theft of public capital (Shah, 2007). It also involves questioning economic and political activities where the public servants enrich themselves. The causes and effects of corruptions are diverse. Corruption can be described as state-society relation. For instance, it may take place when a public official offer rights over public resource using the name of the government. In addition, corruption can be in the ‘supply side’. Individuals who offer bribe in order to gain something in return are considered ‘corruptors’. The corruptors may include the non-governmental, private organisations and non-public individuals who exert influence on the public official to gain advantages (Shah, 2007). In order to conclude whether corruption is ethically right or wrong, it is important to evaluate practices based on unethical theories. Another area that has ethical concerns on the public sector is receiving gifts and gratitude (Lewis and Gilman, 2012). There should be clear rules that establish what public servants are entitled to receive gifts and gratitude and how they are recorded. Gifts are often offered in relation to business relationship. Gifts and gratitude can create a feeling of obligation to a particular public servant. Thus, receiving a gift or gratitude corruptly is a criminal offence and is unethical behaviour (Shah, 2007). It is very hard to distinguish between a gift and a bribe. A gift or gratitude can be given innocently or can be given with an aim of influencing actions or decisions. Feeling of obligation arises with acceptance of a gratitude or gift. Once such a gift or gratitude is accepted, a public service can be compromised. An individual attempting to bribe a public servant often start with small incentives that may seem innocent. A good number of code of conduct states that public servant should not receive gifts or gratitude that is likely to jeopardize any actions and decision in the course of offering service. The decision of whether to receive a gift or not should not rely on the public servants but public administration should set limits and guidance of the gifts and gratitude an employee can receive (Lewis and Gilman, 2012). Another unethical issue in the public services is conflict of interest (Lewis and Gilman, 2012). A conflict of interest can be defined as a situation where a public servant in position of responsibility has competing professional and personal interests (Lewis and Gilman, 2012). This concept arises when public servant is influenced by personal interest when doing his or her job. Conflict of interest makes it difficult for an individual to carry out duties impartially. Some examples of conflict of interest include self dealing where public and private interest tend to collide; revolving door politics where public officials work for organisations they should regulate; family interest where an individual hires a relative or where goods and services are bought from company controlled by a relative; and outside employment where the private job interest collide with the job of a public administrator. Conflict of interest has the potential of causing appearance of impropriety thus undermining confidence in a person or profession. Conflict of interest situation is unavoidable and collide with work decisions in the public sector (Lewis and Gilman, 2012). There are some broad principles suggested to improve ethical conduct within the public sector (Rabin, 2003). These principles can be incorporated to national conditions and to find ways of developing effective framework that can suit particular situation. One of the principles is concerned with ethical standards being clear. Public servants are expected to know the basic principles they should apply in their work and how they can distinguish between acceptable and unacceptable behaviour (Rabin, 2003). A well-publicized ethical standards put followed to guide public servants can create an understanding across the public sector and can establish the boundaries of accepted actions. Also ethical standards in the public sector should be based on a legal framework. This is to say that laws and regulations should be the basis for fundamental values for every public servant and should act as a framework for prosecution, guidance and disciplinary actions. In addition the ethical standards should also be easily available to the public administrators to apply in concrete circumstances. Application of the ethical standards by the public servants can be facilitated through training and internal consultations in order to facilitate ethics awareness in the public sector. Also, public servants should be aware of their rights and obligations especially when exposing wrongdoing (Rabin, 2003). There should be clear rules and procedures that a public servant should follow in an event of exposing wrongdoing (Rabin, 2003). There should also be a political commitment to reinforcing ethical conduct through developing legislative arrangements, setting a good example and providing enough resources and support to reinforcing ethical conduct in the public sector. The decision-making process is expected to be open and transparent to the public to know how public resources are used (Rabin, 2003). Clear rules and regulations defining ethical standard should be in place to establish the behaviour of public sector dealing with private sector. In addition to this, the public servant working condition including personal development and adequate salary and remuneration should be put in place to create a surrounding that supports ethical behaviour. Accountability mechanisms should also be established in the public sector based on compliance to the ethical principles that guide actions to the superiors and the public (Maesschalck, (2004). It is important also to establish an appropriate procedure and mechanism in detecting, investigating wrongdoing and misconducts in the public sector. In the public sector, it is very hard to establish what behaviours or actions are ethical or unethical. The ethical theories emphasize aspects of ethical dilemma and how to establish the most ethically correct action or behaviour one should follow. Consequentialism ethical theory is based on the ability to make a prediction related to the consequences of an action. A utilitarian believes that the decision that brings the greatest benefit to greatest number of people is ethically correct (West, 2004). A positive benefit of utilitarianism is that it can carry out comparison identical predicted solutions and utilize an accepted point system that define the choice that is beneficial to the greatest number of people. According to utilitarian, the ethical action to be followed is one that results to beneficial consequences or outcomes (West, 2004). Utilitarianism supports the idea that the ethical worth of any action or decision is determined by its involvement to the greatest utility; pleasure and happiness put together among all persons. This is to mean that, the more pleasure for the greatest number of people, the better. Utilitarianism is considered section of consequentialist ethics since the ethical worth of an action or decision is based on its consequences or outcomes (West, 2004). The deontological theory highlights that individuals should solemnly adhere to their duties and responsibilities when evaluating an ethical dilemma (Fisher, 2013). In other words, an individual will oblige to his or her duties to society or another individual since upholding and following one’s duty is what is termed as correct. Deontologists argues that ethical conducts bind an individual from his or her obligations and duties and look at the goodness or wrongness of the actions rather than the goodness or badness of the results of the actions (Fisher, 2013). Kantianism is a deontology theory revolving around obligations rather than the end goals. Kantianism believes that ethical acts are on founded on self-interest or great utility, but on obligations and duty despite the possible consequences of the actions. Kantianism criticises against utilitarianism and other theories stating that utilitarian would justify murder as okay if it justifies the good for the largest number of individuals (West, 2004). The theory thus establish that moral systems has no ability to persuade moral action since they are in relation to subjective considerations. Another theory of ethics is virtue. Virtue theory focuses on the character rather than the outcome that result from the actions of an individual (Liles, 2014). This theory takes into consideration an individual’s reputations, morals ad motivations when rating irregular behaviour that is termed as unethical. An individual with bad reputation is judged harshly compared to an individual with a good reputation. Virtue ethics attributes to the meaning of life and proponents of this theory argue that the features of this theory are universally accepted (Liles, 2014). Ethical theories contribute to decision-making process (Fisher, 2013). These theories follow the ethical principles for them to be applicable by themselves. Ethical theories can be combined to be ethically correct way forward for each scenario. By utilising the combination other ethical theories, an individual can be able to use a number of ways to analyse and evaluate a scenario in order to achieve the most morally and ethically decision possible. These ethical theories can be used by his public sector as a framework for establishing ethically correct answers (Mafunisa, 2000). When an individual understands the pros and cons of each theory, one can make rational decisions in an attempt to achieve ethically correct answered in an event of a dilemma. It is impossible to eradicate the unethical behaviours in the public sector (Lewis and Gilman, 2012). However, there are some methods that can be united in improving public sector ethics. Over the years, there has been a growing global need for an effective method for improving public sector ethics. Ethics in the public sector can be improved by introduction of integrated approach to leadership. Ethics appropriateness on the basis of leader behaviour is evaluated following an idealistic concept regarding person’s perception of how a leader ought to behave (Wart, 2003). In the public sector where leaders are expected to uphold differing levels of ethical responsibility, it is largely expected that leaders meet the predetermined expectations of the people they represent. Public sector leaders are expected to uphold higher standards. Public sector leader should be more adaptive and thus there is a need for comprehensive leadership model to be introduced in the public sector that integrates both transactional and transformational elements (Maesschalck, 2004). For a public leader to be ethically responsible and to improve ethics in the public sector, he or she should adopt transactional and transformational elements of leadership in his administration. However, integration of such leadership style may result to overlap between the relationships. Also, every element of the transactional and transformational leadership may not serve the expectations of public service leaders. Although leader focusing on specific elements of both transformational and transactional leadership may find this approach beneficial to improving ethics in the public sector. Another method of improving public sector ethics is pay reform (Kish, 2014). Pay reforms may reduce the potential for corruption and dishonesty by providing suitable incentives. It is essential for wage structures to be reformed in order to provide suitable remuneration to the public servants (Kish, 2014). These reforms can be in form of making remuneration transparent and eliminating underpay that most of the time causes public servant to seek other unethical ways. The possibility of a public servant to reject bribe and other unethical behaviours in the line of duty is high if the system of pay is founded upon the principle of meritocracy. If public servants do not receive a living wage, possibility of demanding bribes are high. Therefore, pay reforms that develops living wages may curb petty corruptions and other unethical behaviours (Kish, 2014). However, pay reforms at times may not curb unethical behaviours in the public sector. Even with better remuneration, some public servants may carry out unethical behaviours such as receiving bribes in order to acquire more money for personal benefits. Another way of improving public sector ethics is through whistleblowing (Brown, 2008). Whistleblowing is calling for attention in presence of wrong doing. Public sectors should establish inter-departmental hotlines where wrongdoings can be reported. Whistle blowing involves reporting a violation to relevant authorities, testifying in particular legal proceedings, leaking information of a violation and refusing to take part in wrongdoing (Brown, 2008). Whistleblowing is based on ethics since it represents a deep understanding of an action being harmful or unfair. Whistleblowing should be encouraged in the public sector in order to make sure that unethical behaviours are taken care of. However, there are problems that result from whistleblowing. Sometimes, disclosure of whistle blowers may constitute a crime do to the results that occur as a result of the leaked wrongdoing (Brown, 2008). To sum it up, ethics is the principle based on the evaluation of behaviour being right or wrong. Ethics and the public sector values entails the heart and soul of the public administration. Uncertainty has crept in the public sector and basic norm and values and a good number of public decisions today are complex morally and ethically. Public sector requires acceptable and clear moral and ethical foundation in order to succeed. There are some broad principles suggested to improve ethical conduct within the public sector in order to avoid unethical behaviours such as corruption, receiving gifts and gratitude, conflicts of interests to name a few. In the public sector, it is very hard to establish what behaviours or actions are ethical or unethical. The ethical theories emphasize aspects of ethical dilemma and how to establish the most ethically correct action or behaviour one should follow. Examples of ways that will improve public sector ethics include whistle bowing, integrated approach to leadership and pay reforms. References Bazerman, H. & Banaj, R June, 2004, “The Social Psychology of Ordinary Ethical Failures.” Social Justice Research, vol. 17, no. 2, p. 111-115. Brown, A 2008, Whistleblowing in the Australian public sector enhancing the theory and practice of internal witness management in public sector organisations, Acton, A.C.T: ANU E Press. Fisher, C 2013, Business ethics and values, City, Pearson. Kieh, G 2014, Reconstructing the authoritarian state in Africa, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, Routledge. Lewis, C & Gilman, S 2012, The ethics challenge in public service : a problem-solving guide, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, A Wiley Imprint. Liles, D 2014, Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Cyber Warfare and Security ICCWS-2014, Reading, Academic Publishing International Ltd. Maesschalck, J 2004, The impact of new public management reforms on public servants’ ethics: Towards a theory, Public Administration, vol. 82, no. 2, p. 465–489. Mafunisa, M 2000, Public service ethics, Kenwyn, Juta. Niamh, K 2007, “More than writing on a wall: Evaluating the Role that Code of Ethics Play in Securing Accountability of Public Sector Decision-Makers”, The Australian Journal of Public Administration, vol. 66, no. 1, pp.112-120 Rabin, J 2003, Encyclopedia of public administration and public policy, New York, Marcel Dekker. Shah, A 2007, Performance accountability and combating corruption, Washington, D.C: World Bank. Van Wart, M 2003, Public-sector leadership theory: An assessment, Public Administration Review, vol. 63, no. 2, p. 214-228. Wasden, L July, 2007, Office of the Attorney General, Idaho, Ethics in Government Manual. West, H 2004, An introduction to Mill's utilitarian ethics, Cambridge, U.K., Cambridge University Press. Read More