Week 6 - Assignment: Create a PowerPoint Presentation

Handbook_of_Public_Administration_----_Part_7_Professionalizing_Public_Administration_Practice_.pdf

Home >Business & Finance homework help >Management homework help >Week 6 - Assignment: Create a PowerPoint Presentation

PART SEVEN

PROFESSIONALIZING PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE

Part 7 concludes this book by reflecting on what it means to be a memberof the public administration profession. The chapter authors identify key professional expectations with regard to professional ethics and lia- bility. The concluding chapter summarizes lessons from the book about effective enterprises and being an effective public administrator.

While public administration may not be considered a profession in the classic sense that law, divinity, and medicine are—it neither monop- olizes specialized knowledge nor controls entry into the profession—in other respects, public administration has become very professionalized. For example, public administrators require extensive training, apply their knowledge to practical problems, provide an important service to soci- ety, subscribe to ethical codes, and belong to organizations intended to advance the services they provide. Part 7 explores the meaning and impli- cations of professionalism in public administration.

One facet of professionalism that strikes us as particularly relevant in today’s climate is that public administrators have no simple formula for making ethical choices. In chapter 32, Brian Williams provides a thoughtful menu of approaches to guide the choices. The options for public adminis- trators range from avoiding vice to applying virtue and from compliance to external control to internal application of guiding principles. But if these

Perry, James L., and Robert K. Christensen. Handbook of Public Administration, John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ncent-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1895898. Created from ncent-ebooks on 2021-10-26 14:38:02.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

580 Handbook of Public Administration

and other options are to be effective, Williams argues, they must be simul- taneously situated in leadership and followership. Leadership should not be underestimated, and Liza Ireni-Saban’s discussion of codes of ethics in chapter 33 reaches internationally to demonstrate the critical role of insti- tutional and professional leadership in developing “ethical competence” among public administrators

Codes of law play an important role in professionalizing the prac- tice public administration as well. In chapter 34, Stephanie Newbold reminds public administrators that failure to abide by law may be enforce- able by citizens through the courts. Public administrators may be liable for damages for maladministration from violations of due process, to unlawful appropriation of private property, to malicious prosecution. The discussion offers guidance about both potential sources for liability and how to avoid them. Returning to a common theme in this book, success in this and other areas depends on a mixture of internal and external drivers. Law as an externally imposed constraint plays an important role in ensuring some level of administrative professionalism. However, professionalism must also be internally driven through constitutional competence that is self-directed and preventative rather than externally imposed and reactive.

The ultimate goal of public administration practitioners is success at achieving results consistent with the priorities and values of modern gov- ernance. In chapter 35, we set our sights on the ultimate goal of this book: advancing effective governance. What are the attributes, characteristics, or qualities of effective governance? How can we recognize and train effective public administrators? What qualities, attributes, skills, and behaviors are characteristic of effective public administrators? In answering these ques- tions, we synthesize insights shared throughout the book.

As the contributors to the book have emphasized both explicitly and implicitly, effective public administration is a function of both institutions and people. In chapter 35, we seek to highlight answers to the two “big idea” questions based on the contributions to this book: What distinguishes effective governance? and What makes an effective public administrator?

From the evidence presented by the contributors, we conclude that effective governance evolves from clear missions, shared goals, and well-coordinated collective action. It is designed with accountability in mind, measures and monitors processes and results, and is based on good stewardship of resources. These four factors together are critical for public enterprise effectiveness.

Effective enterprises also depend on effective administrators. The adage that people matter has particular potency in public service. Effec- tive public administrators must possess a range of skills, among them

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Part Seven 581

technical, human, conceptual, and intrapersonal, but these skills alone are not sufficient. They must also be responsive to democratic control and concerned with results, including the moral consequences of action.

Although professionalism in public service is valued, professionalism in a traditional sense is not compatible with democratic governance. If pub- lic administration sets itself apart, it risks alienating itself from the public and its representatives. Public administrators must use their discretion and judgment to facilitate the workings of the complex machinery of govern- ment on behalf of the rights and interests of all citizens.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

CHAPTER THIRTY-TWO

EMBRACING ETHICAL PRINCIPLES FOR PUBLIC ACTION

Brian N. Williams

What does it mean to be a member of the public administrationprofession? To whom should these members be accountable? How do public administrators best facilitate consistent ethical action? These questions are salient, especially when considering the politics of the administrative process, the resulting difficulties of embracing ethical principles, and the problem of consistent ethical action as evidenced by the ethical lapses and failures of governmental entities like the US Federal Emergency Management Agency during the aftermath of Hurri- cane Katrina and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Columbia shuttle disaster. Consistent ethical action continues to plague public organizations (as well as other organizations) and perplex public managers.

Many scholars have described public service as a calling or vocation that embodies selfless service and prosocial behavior (Perry & Hon- deghem, 2008b; Brief & Motowidlo, 1986). These characteristics highlight a general intent to do good for others and for society. Accompanying this calling comes with expectations that are internal and external to the public servant. Internal expectations are the inner mechanisms associated with an individual’s own sense of morality and responsibility—his or her understanding and resulting actions or inactions toward what is right (Friedrich, 1940). Ethical leaders encourage ethical actions that are ingrained, buttressed, and reflected by professional codes of ethics, like

583

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

584 Handbook of Public Administration

that of the American Society for Public Administration, which “affirms its responsibility to develop the spirit of responsible professionalism within its membership and to increase awareness and commitment to ethical principles and standards among all those who work in public service in all sectors.”

Similar to the desired effects of internal expectations, external expec- tations also seek to control or regulate the actions of public servants (Finer, 1941). However, external expectations embody the bureaucratic ethos, or the principle that makes public administrators subordinate to elected officials (Pugh, 1991). These expectations are reflected by those external controlling mechanisms like legislative oversight and judicial review that are established by political officials. These controlling expectations have been offered in response to the environment that encapsulates public servants today.

Today’s public servants operate in a fishbowl, with heightened visibil- ity and enhanced scrutiny from the ever-watching attentive public and the always latent, until aroused, mass public. This reality now plays out on a global scale as evidenced by the public uproar from the global com- munity regarding the Abu Ghraib torture scandal associated with the US Department of Defense and the intense scrutiny that the Chinese govern- ment has faced relative to allegations of bribery and corruption of public officials by various global pharmaceutical companies. The public sector environment is pressure packed and ripe with conflicting, competing, and countervailing values, expectations, and responsibilities (Harmon, 1990), coupled with the ever-present, politically inspired cry “to do more with less.” These realities create a setting that is ripe with temptations that can obfuscate and darken pathways for consistent ethical action. Such incon- sistency has a corrosive effect on public trust and public confidence.

This chapter uses a framework that reflects on the past to examine the present and plan for the future to identify the challenges or obstacles that prevent, as well as the principles that facilitate, consistent ethical behaviors. This chapter advocates for the coupling or fusing of two routes to encourage consistent ethical action: combining the more orthodox and leader-centric approach of the past with the more nascent, uncon- ventional, and follower-centric approach that is emerging. Central to this approach is the concept of followership (Kelley, 1992; Kellerman, 2008), especially courageous followership (Chaleef, 2003, 2008). The tandem of followership and leadership is offered as a guiding light to expedite the embracing of ethical principles, which leads to consistent ethical action (Kelley, 1992; Chaleef, 2003, 2008; Kellerman, 2008). This approach, which is akin to mission-focused, shared leadership (the topic of shared

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Embracing Ethical Principles for Public Action 585

leadership is discussed in greater detail in chapter 27), can enhance the ethical climates of public organizations and facilitate the adoption by both leaders and followers of ethical principles for public action. The chapter concludes with future implications related to fostering mission-focused approaches directed toward consistent ethical action for practitioners, pedagogues, and researchers.

Reexamining the Historical Meaning of Public Service

Government is commonly associated with fostering and facilitating “the good” for a society. Framers of governments across the globe sought to con- struct a suitable social order that reflects or mirrors their country’s cultural leanings. Such a society is supported and reinforced by its government, which in turn is charged with governing, managing, and protecting the val- uesofitssociety.Towardtheseends,governmentshaveinstitutionalizedand operate based on a myriad values ranging from collectivism and commu- nitarianism to individualism and liberalism. Public servants—the human resources that catalyze, represent, and reflect these governments—have been central to this effort.

Public servants function metaphorically as the inner wheel in the middle of a larger governmental wheel: they serve as the driving force to provide and deliver services for the betterment of their people. Theoreti- cally, these agents are expected to operate and abide by a sense of duty, responsibility, answerability, and accountability. However, administrative life in the public sector is inherently political, and these agents are actors intertwined in the Lasswellian (Lasswell, 1958) notion of politics (who gets what, where, when, and how) and serve as vital conduits for the distribution of power within a society. This scenario has ethical implications and raises some practical questions: How best to ensure administrative responsibility? And to whom should public servants be responsive and accountable? These questions bring into focus the concept of bureaucratic accountability.

Accountability has emerged as an ever-expanding concept (Mulgan, 2000).Bureaucraticaccountabilityreflectsthefaithfulobedienceofgovern- mental institutions and their agents to the law, the direction and oversight of higher officials, and certain performance standards like efficiency and economy (Kettl, 2012). In essence, public service accountability reflects “the methods by which a public agency or a public official fulfills its duties and obligations, and the process by which that agency or the public official is required to account for such actions” (Jabbra & Dwivedi, 1988, p. 5). These methods are multiple and consist of various facets of bureaucratic account- ability: administrative, managerial, legal, political, professional, moral,

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

586 Handbook of Public Administration

process, fiscal, program, and outcome accountability (Smith & Hague, 1971; Romzek & Dubnick, 1987; Jabbra & Dwivedi, 1988; Deleon, 1998; Sinclair, 1995).

The concept of bureaucratic accountability is supported by the twin pillars of the ethic of neutrality and the ethic of structure (Thompson, 1985). The ethic of neutrality holds that public servants should not exercise independent moral judgment but serve their government by acting in accordance with the orders of their superiors and the policies developed by their political leaders (Thompson, 1985). This ethic portrays the ideal administrator as a completely reliable instrument who refuses to inject personal values in the process of carrying out policies. Conversely, the ethic of structure highlights the structural arrangements of public organizations—the hierarchy, chain of command, formal rules and regu- lations, and others—as the object of judgment. This ethic asserts that the organization, and not its public servants, should be held responsible for its decisions and policies. In theory, the various facets and the twin pillars of bureaucratic accountability work in concert toward the betterment of society through faithful obedience to the law, direction of overseers, and compliance with performance expectations. However, numerous examples (e.g., the 1942 Wannsee Conference to discuss and coordinate the implementation of the “Final Solution”) highlight the shortcomings that accompany that assumption.

Consistent ethical action is a constant challenge that faces public servants of all types and who represent governments with different populations, socioeconomic beliefs, and ideologies. This inconsistency often happens in spite of the assumed societal benefits that would derive from the theoretical construct of bureaucratic accountability (O’Leary, 2006). From the more visible, public, and notable standoffs, including those at Tiananmen Square and the Edmund Pettis Bridge in Selma, Alabama, to the less recognized, and some may consider negligible, encounters and more private or hidden interactions that occur in public offices and spaces in a variety of places, public servants often act in accor- dance with the directives of bureaucratic accountability. Subsequently, they obey the law and the orders of their political superiors—even at the expense of the public they serve. These actions support the argument advanced by Thompson (1985) that the ethic of neutrality and the ethic of structure suppress the independent moral judgment and the individual moral agency of public servants. The actions of Adolph Eichmann and the US soldiers who participated in the My Lai or My Son Massacre during the Vietnam War serve as visible and poignant examples of this phenomenon. Consequently, faithfully following orders that have been sanctioned can

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Embracing Ethical Principles for Public Action 587

impede consistent ethical action and even facilitate the manifestation of what has been named administrative evil.

Administrative evil, a concept that Adams and Balfour (2009) advanced, “falls within that part of the continuum in which people engage in or contribute to acts of evil without recognizing that they are doing anything wrong” (p. 13).

Administrative evil reveals how contemporary organizations and the human resources embedded within them inflict pain and suffering on oth- ers but do so unknowingly and often under the guise of following orders that have been socially constructed, politically endorsed, and legally sanc- tioned. Consequently, this type of evil is masked, hidden, and, prior to Adams and Balfour’s articulation, unnamed.

Administrative evil is a “social phenomenon,” but its appearance across sectors and settings “is likely to vary according to the political and eco- nomic arrangements” of its host country (Adams & Balfour, 2009, p. 7). Our emphasis on technical rationality that can result in a scientific mind-set enables administrative evil. This type of rationality is especially conducive to public sector environments that emphasize narrowly analyzing the pro- cesses by which public policy is developed and formulated. The structure of public sector organizations, like those organizations from other sectors, also diffuses individual responsibility for actions that foster many func- tional, but not necessarily intentional, acts that facilitate administrative evil (Adams & Balfour, 2009).

The preceding discussion highlights attempts that have been made and designs that have been offered to facilitate consistent ethical action. Yet the examples reveal obvious deficiencies. The emphasis placed on bureau- cratic accountability, inclusive of its multiple facets, the ethic of structure, the ethic of neutrality, and ultimately its reliance on compliance to external mechanisms of control, seems ineffective as a strategy or tactic to ensure consistent ethical action. The limitations of the external approach have signaled an opportunity to consider an internal approach to promote and embrace ethical principles for public action.

Scholars have advanced arguments acknowledging and in support of an internal approach toward consistent ethical action (Friedrich, 1940; Harmon & Mayer, 1986; Romzek & Dubnick, 1987). This approach has been expressed using a variety of terms, including professional, inward, personal, and subjective accountability (Romzek & Dubnick, 1987; Sinclair, 1995; Gagne, 1996). The internal approach fits with Thompson’s (1985) notion of administrative ethics, or the application of moral principles to the conduct of individuals within organizations. Administrative ethics in public sector organizations is based on an individual applying his or

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

588 Handbook of Public Administration

her moral principles to his or her administrative or professional life. This method assumes that consistent ethical action can be generated from within through inner convictions and professional values facilitated by strong leaders and managers to foster an ethical climate. However, administrative life in the public sector is inherently political, and as a result, the public servants who are the key actors within this process are intimately linked to this political process.

This linkage is a challenge that can yield either inconsistent but benign ethical action or administrative evil regardless of an emphasis on internal or external mechanisms presumed to develop consistent ethical action. Yet both approaches seem to affect and highlight the role and importance of the public manager, leader, or administrator in creating an ethical climate.

How Best to Guard the Guardians?

Ethical climate is defined as “the shared perceptions of what is correct behavior, and how ethical situations should be handled within an organi- zation” (Victor and Cullen, 1987, p. 51). As a theory, ethical climate draws from Kohlberg’s (1981) research on moral development that argues that individuals develop morally in a sequential, multistage fashion. During this process, reasoning progresses from reasoning governed by fear of punishment ultimately to a reasoning based on a concern for universal rights and humanity as a whole. This progression allowed Kohlberg to construct a framework that defines three major types of ethical standards (self-interest, caring, and principle) and three levels of ethical concern (individual, social system, and humanity as a whole; Kohlberg, 1981). Sub- sequently, Victor and Cullen (1988) used Kohlberg’s conceptualization to construct a framework to hypothesize nine ethical climates types. This framework (table 32.1) is based on two dimensions: ethical criteria and locus of analysis.

The two-dimension table offered by Victor and Cullen (1988) mir- rors Kohlberg’s (1981) two-dimensional conceptualization. The first dimension captures the ethical criteria or the reasoning process by which ethical decisions are made. Victor and Cullen (1988) identify three major classes of ethical reasoning, which they term egoism, benevolence, and principle, and each corresponds respectively with Kohlberg’s three levels of moral reasoning: preconventional, conventional, and postconventional. The second dimension of ethical climates, which used social role the- ory (Gouldner, 1957), involves the focus of the ethical reasoning and distinguishes the scope of ethical issues under consideration, resulting in

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Embracing Ethical Principles for Public Action 589

individual-level, local or group-level, and cosmopolitan or societal-level concerns. Victor and Cullen’s (1988) ethical criteria and the locus of anal- ysis dimensions yield nine theoretical climate types: self-interest, company profit, efficiency, friendship, team interest, social responsibility, personal morality, company rules and procedures, and laws and professional code. However, only five emerged in their empirical study: instrumental, caring, independence, company rules and procedure, and law and professional codes (Martin & Cullen, 2006). Table 32.2 highlights the emergence of these five climates within the original theorized framework.

Numerous studies have revealed three major consequences of an ethical climate: the impact that an ethical climate has on job attitudes and affect, ethical behavior, and ethical or job and organization-related outcomes. In terms of job attitudes and affect, various studies have demonstrated that certain dimensions of ethical climate yield a more satisfied employee (Ambrose, Arnaud, & Schminke, 2007; Babin, Boles, & Robin 2000; Mulki, Jaramillo, & Locander, 2009). Other findings suggest a relationship between ethical climate and organizational commitment (Ambrose et al., 2007; Martin & Cullen, 2006; Schwepker, 2001); ethical

TABLE 32.1. VICTOR AND CULLEN’S ETHICAL CLIMATE TYPES

Ethical Criterion

Locus of Analysis

Individual Local Cosmopolitan

Principle Self-interest Company profit Efficiency Benevolence Friendship Team interest Social responsibility Egoism Personal morality Company rules and

procedures Laws and professional codes

Source: Adapted from Victor and Cullen (1988).

TABLE 32.2. VICTOR AND CULLEN’S ETHICAL CLIMATE TYPES

Ethical Criterion

Locus of Analysis

Individual Local Cosmopolitan

Principle Self-interest (instrumental)

Company profit (instrumental)

Efficiency (caring)

Benevolence Friendship (caring)

Team interest (caring)

Social responsibility (caring)

Egoism Personal morality (independence)

Company rules and procedures

(rules)

Laws and professional codes

(law and codes)

Source: Adapted from Victor and Cullen (1988).

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

590 Handbook of Public Administration

climate and turnover intentions (Ambrose et al., 2007; Ulrich et al., 2007); ethical climate and psychological well-being (Martin & Cullen, 2006); and how ethical climate affects employee trust and affective reactions (Mulki et al., 2009).

Researchers have found ethical climate to be a predictor of a num- ber of ethical and unethical outcomes. These outcomes range from the more deviant, like lying, stealing, deception, and other forms of organiza- tional misbehavior (Martin & Cullen, 2006; Aquino, 1998; Vardi, 2001), to outcomes that are more prosocial in nature (Rothwell & Baldwin, 2007).

Findings that support a relationship between ethical climate and job attitudes and affect and ethical climate and ethical or unethical behav- ior have been supplemented by research findings that highlight ethical climate as a predictor of ethical judgments (Barnett & Vaicys, 2000), eth- ical decision making (Fritzche, 2000), ethical intentions (Buchan, 2005), and organizational outcomes like social responsibility, efficiency, law and professional codes, and commitment to performance and product qual- ity (Weeks, Low, Chonko, Martinez, & Wakefield, 2006; Erondu, Sharland, & Okpara, 2004). Other studies indicate the power of positive ethical cli- mates in promoting an increase in ethical behavior (Verbeke, Ouwerkerk, & Peelen, 1996; Ross & Robertson, 2000). The research findings related to the outcomes or consequences of ethical climate are commonly associated with certain precursors; one of the most visible is leadership or the role of the leader.

Leadership is frequently cited as the most significant organizational factor in discussions about the safeguarding of ethics and integrity within organizations.Theleadershipliteraturehistoricallyacknowledgestheinflu- enceofleadersontheethicsoforganizations(Barnard,1938;Schein,1992). However, researchers have recently begun to consider this relationship explicitly. Theoretical arguments and empirical studies have linked lead- ers to the development of ethical climates (Sims, 2000; Dickson, Smith, Gorjean, & Ehrhard, 2001; Sims & Brinkman, 2002). In particular, Treviño, Hartman, and Brown (2000) discuss the importance of leaders in convey- ing, from the top down, values that facilitate and reinforce consistent ethical actions. Similarly, others suggest that the critical determinant of ethical cli- mate is the leader’s ethical behavior and the role that leaders play in shaping and strengthening the ethical climate of an organization (Sims, 2000; Dick- son et al., 2001; Sims & Brinkman, 2002). The roles that leaders can play may vary, from role modeling and rewards to stating and implementing ethical policies and practices, but scholars conceptually agree that leaders have a significant impact on an organization’s ethical climate.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Embracing Ethical Principles for Public Action 591

Empirical studies have found a positive and significant relationship between leadership and ethical climate in a variety of professional settings. Mulki et al. (2009) emphasize the critical role of leadership on ethical climate and the behavior of persons employed in pharmaceutical sales. Huberts, Kaptein, and Lasthuizen (2007), writing on the impact of leader- ship styles on integrity violations by Dutch police officers, noted the positive effects of the leader’s role modeling and strictness in limiting unethical conduct of officers. Like Huberts et al.’s (2007) findings, Rothwell and Baldwin’s (2007) study of whistle-blowing and the code of silence found supervisory status as the most consistent predictor of willingness and fre- quency of whistle-blowing intentions and behaviors by police and civilian public employees in Georgia. The findings from these studies lend empir- ical support to the role that leadership plays in creating an ethical climate that results in right actions by those within an organizational setting.

The conceptual agreements and the supporting empirical studies high- light not only the importance of ethical work climate but also the crucial role that leaders play in facilitating, shaping, and maintaining ethical orga- nizations, plus the powerful and crucial role they play in creating the right ethical atmosphere in organizations (Schminke, Arnaud, & Juenzi, 2007). Hence, the inference is that the actions or inactions of leaders and man- agers can affect the presence or absence of an ethical climate. This lends itself to exploring additional questions. Are there other emerging opportu- nities to better safeguard and further embrace ethical principles in public action? Could these emerging opportunities be more effective?

Emerging Opportunities to Embrace Ethical Principles in Public Action: A View from Below

Leadership is the most frequently cited organizational factor in discussions about the safeguarding of ethics and integrity, but history is replete with examples of organizational leaders who have shaped and reinforced an unethical climate within organizations (Adams & Balfour, 2009; Sims & Brinkman, 2002, 2003). This unfortunate reality requires exploring other ways to embrace ethical principles in public action. Instead of the dominant leader-centric, top-down perspective to facilitate ethical action, a more follower-centric, bottom-up perspective is offered.

Followership—when an individual helps or supports a leader in accomplishing organizational goals—is an emerging but often overlooked concept (Kelley, 1992; Kellerman, 2008). Historically, and theoretically for that matter, followership has been relegated to second-class status and

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

592 Handbook of Public Administration

relatively concealed from academic view and investigation. Subordinates are commonly assumed to have less power, authority, and influence. The attention, or lack thereof, paid to subordinates pales in comparison to the consideration given to leadership, even though the majority of people in organizations are followers and, one can argue quite persuasively, are in a better position to recognize the daily happenings and appreciate the daily functions within the organization (Kelley, 1988).

Followers are at the heart of followership. They have been defined as “subordinates who have less power, authority, and influence than do their superiors, and who therefore usually, but not invariably, fall in to line” (Kellerman, 2008, p. 213). Notwithstanding this “subordinate” status, fol- lowers can and do play a constructive role in the health of organizations (Chaleef, 2003), and so we can view them “as the primary defenders against toxic leaders of dysfunctional organizations” (Kelley, 1988).

Chaleef (2003) and Kellerman (2008) also appreciate how followers can add value to an organization’s effectiveness, performance, and ethics. Chaleef introduces the concept of the courageous follower: one who exhibits the courage to support the leader, assume responsibility for the organization’s mission, challenge the leader’s behavior in a constructive way, participate as needed in organizational transformation, and ultimately take a stand when warranted to prevent ethical abuses by the organization or its officials.

Accompanying the conceptual frameworks of Kelley, Chaleef, and Kellerman, are models they have designed to classify the types of fol- lowers that have emerged. Kelley (1988) identifies five types or styles of followers (sheep, yes-people, alienated, pragmatics, and star followers). Chaleef (2003) offers four styles (resource, individualist, implementer, and partner). Kellerman (2008) offers five (isolates, bystanders, participants, activists, and diehards). Kelley’s classification is based on the follower’s degree of independent thinking and level of organizational engagement. Chaleef’s (2003) classification considers the levels of independent think- ing and organizational engagement of the follower but is also based on the courage each follower has to support or challenge the organization’s leader. Kellerman’s (2008) types of followers are conceptualized in a hierarchical way and place followers on a continuum of engagement from being detached to being fully committed.

These nuanced classifications or styles help to reveal the various roles that followers can play in organizational efforts. These roles have been disclosed in the work of Howell and Mendez (2008), who have advanced three perspectives on followership that conceptualize the duties and responsibilities that followers have within their organizational positions

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Embracing Ethical Principles for Public Action 593

and reflect the range of relationships existing between leaders and follow- ers. The three role orientations are the interactive, the independent, and the shifting. In the interactive, role, the follower complements and sup- ports the leader. This role is vital for the achievement or accomplishment of group and organizational goals. In the independent role, the follower acts more independently of the leader due to his or her increase in educa- tion and training of followers and resulting desire to exhibit more control over his or her work. The shifting role notes that the duties and respon- sibilities of the follower are contingent on the situation that the follower and the organization face. This orientation projects and reflects the need for leadership and followership to alternate as needed. In some instances, the formal leader may be an ineffective leader requiring subordinating his or her status to one of being an “informal follower,” while at the same time the “formal follower” could be more effective as an “informal leader” due to his or her intimate knowledge of the situation, process and procedures, or population served. This shifting role reflects the more fluid leadership roles and realities of dynamic organizations, environments, and situations that require flexibility (Burke, Fiore, & Salas, 2003).

With the emergence of followership, a clearer vision of mission- focused, shared leadership has appeared. This vision has been advanced by Chaleef (2003) and is captured by figure 32.1.

Figure 32.1 highlights the shared responsibilities for both leaders and followers. It also captures the desired state of both the leader and

FIGURE 32.1. MISSION-FOCUSED SHARED LEADERSHIP

Follower

Leader

ORGANIZATIONAL MISSION

Leader

Source: Adapted from Chaleef (2003, p. 3).

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

594 Handbook of Public Administration

the follower orbiting around, acting according to, and reinforcing the mission of the organization. This conception highlights that both leaders and followers should be mission focused and equally responsible for not only individually pursuing consistent ethical action but also for attempting to influence and facilitate consistent ethical action on the parts of others within their sphere of influence (Chaleef, 2003).

Out of Darkness and into the Light: Implications for Consistent Ethical Actions

Thus far, I have addressed the topics of what it means to be a member of the public administration profession and to whom these members should be accountable. One question remains: How best to facilitate consistent ethical action? To get to heart of this question requires an appreciation for coupling the more traditional approach that is leader-centric with the more follower-centric concept of courageous followership—all with a sin- gular focus toward embracing ethical principles and facilitating consistent ethical action across the organization. This approach might be effective in bringing public sector organizations out of the proverbial darkness and shadows into the marvelous light.

Somewhat like the two opposing routes toward the pursuit of ethical practice in public organizations offered by Friedrich (1940) and Finer’s (1941) internal and external controls and Rohr’s (1989) low-road and high-road approaches, this chapter makes the argument for the coupling of two routes to encourage consistent ethical action: combining the more orthodox and leader-centric with the more unconventional and follower-centric orientations. This fusion approach, much like the fusion road described by Lewis and Gilman (2005), has direct implications for practitioners, pedagogues, and researchers.

Practitioners can aid in bringing the theory of this mission-focused, shared leadership approach to consistent ethical action into practice by creating an in-service atmosphere where leaders and followers role-model the desired state. Likewise, those managing practitioners can take advantage of exposing and employing multiple ethical decision-making strategies that have been developed, and in many instances underused, to leaders and followers. These strategies require decision makers to consider stakeholders, alternatives, consequences, and implications for making a decision that will see the light of day (Lewis & Gilman, 2005; Blanchard & Peale, 1988; Josephson, 2010). Each strategy seeks to leverage internal and external controls to serve the public more consistently and better.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Embracing Ethical Principles for Public Action 595

These strategies could accentuate the importance of embracing ethical principles and strengthen the resolve of public sector actors to consistently engage in ethical action. Moreover, they could serve as excellent tools for managers to activate the ethics of dissent and create an atmosphere that better accommodates guerrilla government when public servants work toward the public interest and against the wishes of their superiors (O’Leary, 2006).

Like practitioners, pedagogues or university instructors can also advance the cause toward the adoption of ethical principles for public action. Instructors of preservice or aspiring public servants are in a unique position to present and expose to students a greater understanding of and appreciation for the public interest. Multiple approaches are available, ranging from incorporating case studies into the learning process to highlighting those often unsung operatives in guerrilla government who embraced ethical principles and were steadfast in doing what was right and for the right reasons. Pedagogues can also begin the process of sharing with students the various applied decision-making tools and strategies noted, as well as presenting additional conceptions of the public interest, much like Svara’s (2007) ethics triangle, which “conveys the idea that administrators should act on their duty to promote the public interest by seeking a balance of virtue, principle, and good consequences” (p. 67).

To complement these pedagogical approaches, instructors need to expose students, through courses or course readings, to the concepts and theories associated with followership and the supporting rationale of servant leadership. Servant leadership is a servant-first approach to leadership to ensure that other people’s needs are being met (Greenleaf, 1970, 1977). A balanced approach that highlights the dual responsibility of leaders and followers in creating, maintaining, and sustaining an ethical climate can be presented to preservice public servants in the hope that this initial impression of mission-focused, shared leadership can be a lasting one.

Finally, future research must play a central role as we seek better ways to embrace ethical principles for public action. More research is needed that uncovers and explores the dimensions, tensions, and challenges asso- ciated with followership. Are there some public settings more amenable to cultivating followership and embracing the mission-focused shared leadership model that has been presented? Are some leaders better adept at developing followers who are coleaders? Are some followers better adept at developing leaders who are coleaders? Are some of the applied decision-making tools, strategies, and approaches more effective than others? Are some of these tools, strategies, and approaches more effective

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

596 Handbook of Public Administration

with certain professions, types of professionals, or settings within the public sector than others?

Much like the diversity of instruments, tools, and strategies used to operate on the human body, a diversity of quantitative and qualitative meth- ods is required to uncover and better understand the personal, profes- sional, and political challenges and opportunities that can impede or facil- itate consistent ethical actions of both leaders and followers. A diverse yet vigorous research agenda can serve as a beacon of light and a source of inspiration toward the desired end of embracing ethical principles and achieving consistent ethical actions.

The concerted efforts by practitioners, pedagogues, and researchers will help to minimize the ethical lapses connected with public officials, while maximizing the adoption of ethical principles and potential for consistent ethical action. Consequently, these efforts might bring the often-decried ethical lapses of public organizations and their officials out from the darkness of negative media attention and into the light of public support and praise.

Conclusion

Embracing ethical principles for public action requires concerted effort by leaders and followers. Both are vitally important for creating, maintaining, and sustaining an ethical climate and culture within public sector organiza- tions. This mission-driven environment, coconstructed by leaders and fol- lowers, will serve to promote, embrace, and fortify ethical conduct and discourage unethical conduct.

Like weather patterns, ethical climates and cultures in organizational settings are affected by environmental dynamics. Hence, the actions or inactions of both leaders and followers can affect the presence or absence of an ethical climate and culture, bear on the consequences (positive or negative) of public sector decisions, and influence the quick or sluggish emergence of consistent ethical action. Bringing the conception of the mission-driven, shared leadership into practice requires a concerted effort not only on the parts of followers and leaders, but also from practitioners, pedagogues, and researchers. The prospects of this collaborative approach to enhance the adoption of ethical principles and improve consistent eth- ical action by public servants are good and worth the investment.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Embracing Ethical Principles for Public Action 597

Summary

Public service accountability has been a public management problem. Accountability can be promoted by adhering to legal and ethical princi- ples, but to achieve consistent ethical action requires a new approach. This chapter advocates combining the more dominant, orthodox, and leader-centric approach with a more nascent, unconventional, and fol- lower-centric method. This fusion approach to facilitate consistent ethical action requires the support of practitioners, both leaders and followers, as well as guidance and direction from pedagogues and researchers. These efforts working in concert can have an important impact on public trust and public confidence.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

CHAPTER THIRTY-THREE

UNDERSTANDING THE OBLIGATIONS OF CODES OF ETHICS

Liza Ireni-Saban

This chapter addresses the province of codes of ethics in promotingethical behavior and professionalism in public administration. Codes of ethics set forth values and standards to meet the expectations of those engaged in professional community and that shape their professional identity (Long & Driscoll, 2007). Codes of ethics are viewed as an impor- tant management tool for building the ethical culture of a profession or organization by improving the profession’s reputation and developing a deep sense of commitment to ethical conduct and pride among pro- fessional community members. According to Richard Stillman (1974), the importance of a code is defined in this way: “A profession requires an ethical code in order that there might be a standard for the very best relations with employer, citizen, public at large, such as other professional fraternities have to foster” (p. 37). Within public administration, codes of ethics are to be understood as an attempt to promote public trust and confidence in the public sector. The evolving nature of governance incorporates greater weight in standards of openness, fairness, and accountability in public administration functioning. Such ethics awareness denies ideas of administration as ethically neutral professionals apart from the electorate, thereby allowing more room for public administrators to exercise substantial discretion (decision-making power) on their own, discretion that affects people’s lives (Svara, 2007).

598

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Understanding the Obligations of Codes of Ethics 599

Admittedly, administrators have discretionary powers that go beyond the manuals, orders, job descriptions, and legal frameworks of their position and duties, and professional ethics has to come as guidelines in addition to the formal regulations. Administrators should therefore seek a broad and solid understanding of ethical theories and traditions and look for methods for thinking about the ethical dimensions of their decision making.

One way of regulating professional conduct within organizations or professions is through codes of ethics. In contrast to codes of conduct, usually set out for specific actions in which individuals should not engage, codes of ethics are set to encourage the practitioner’s own deliberation and judgment in applying professional standards. They should help profes- sional community members solve ethical dilemmas they might encounter in their day-to-day activities and performance and include clearly stated guidelines for dealing with them that are relevant to the particular function of the profession or organization. Viewed in this way, codes of ethics help develop ethical competence in applying their standards and use personal judgment as part of professional growth (Plant, 2013).

Thus, to be an effective and active guide to ethical decision making, codes of ethics should be effectively communicated to professional com- munity members. The codes need to contain desired practical standards and principles of behavior among members of professional community. In public administration, codes of ethics specify the core values that gov- ern public service consistent with society’s norms in order to retain public trust in its moral values and professionalism.

Despite the prevalence of codes of ethics in public administrations across national settings to guide their members and develop professional identity among administrators, there is little evidence and agreement on the effectiveness of codes of ethics at producing ethical perceptions or behavior among public administrators. However, it seems logical to suggest that codes without effective implementation mechanisms are weaker in their effect than those supported with them. Thus, the purpose of this chapter is to develop a comprehensive framework for effective implementation of codes of ethics in public administration in a way that adjusts to evolving challenges in governance (Svara, 2014; Van Wart, 2003) This framework incorporates appropriate methods to improve the imple- mentation of codes of ethics in public administration (communication, training, education, monitoring, enforcement, leadership by example, and ethical climate) across different stages of the ethical decision-making process (awareness, understanding, implementation, and follow-up).1

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

600 Handbook of Public Administration

The applicability of this framework will be illustrated with examples from three organizations: the American Society for Public Administration (ASPA), the International City/County Management Association (ICMA), and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Each of the these provides code implementation mechanisms for shaping ethical behavior for their members. The comparative anal- ysis outlines the strengths and weaknesses of these organizations’ code implementation efforts for potentially improving the ethics focus of such organizations.

This chapter begins by introducing the role of codes of ethics in elevat- ing professional ethics in public administration and then drawing on the applicability of these codes for public administrators developed in differ- ent national settings. Next, it discusses the effectiveness of codes of ethics in public administration, addresses a framework to evaluate the effective- ness of implementation mechanisms of these codes, and follows with a comparative assessment of implementation mechanisms of codes of ethics for public administrators employed by three organizations at national and international levels. The chapter concludes with some insights into the implementation and communication of codes of ethics that are likely to contribute to developing the professional identity of public administration that can maintain a positive reputation in the eyes of the public.

Codes of Ethics as Markers of Public Administration Professional Identity

Codes of ethics set out the aspirational standards of behavior expected of members in an organization or profession and serve the general public to meet their expectations towards the profession. In the 1940s, in his study on the public administration in the United States, Wayne A. R. Leys (1944) identified the need to introduce codes of ethics in public administration decision making and professional conduct. Codes of ethics provide prac- tical guidance for public servants on ethical behavior to enhance mutual understanding within the interaction between public administration and the community at large. For that, codes of ethics are assumed to yield cognitive and emotive impact on individuals. Cognitively, these codes give a person joining a profession a clear set of standards that he or she is expected to meet in daily work. They are thus considered a communica- tion mechanism to increase the level of confidence when making decisions. Effective communication of codes of ethics in public administration must stress the distinctive nature of public administration as a profession whose

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Understanding the Obligations of Codes of Ethics 601

higher commitment and priority are to serve public interests. By identify- ing the core values and purposes of public administration as a profession, codes of ethics provide guidance to help public servants when faced with competing values, loyalties, and interests. Codes are also used as a mecha- nism to enhance professional socialization. They can contribute to devel- oping a sense of pride of belonging to a group or a profession in motivating individuals to regard themselves as professionals.

Codes of ethics established in public administration function as a professional statement that expresses the public service’s commitments to a specific set of moral standards that are important to its functioning. In order to function in any professional area, each profession requires the knowledge and skills necessary for working toward the relevant value. For example, physicians must learn anatomy and physiology and to prescribe medication because these skills are necessary to the pursuit of health, and lawyers must learn to set up legal documents and muster evidence and arguments to present in court because these are necessary actions to achieve legal justice for clients. The possession of proper knowledge and special skills brings the ability to solve ordinary and extraordinary problems under certain circumstances of professional action.

Understanding the essence of professional practice is one of the major aspects in shaping professional identity. For example, the medical and nursing professions are different, yet they share the same value of healing. They must be differentiated on the grounds of specific rules and principles in the pursuit of patient health. These principles and rules should spell out the nature of the professional practice of a given profession. Generally we need to put the notion of professional practice under philosophical scrutiny.

Professionalism in the study and practice of public administration has long been dominated by the impartiality approach of moral delib- eration aimed at removing the biasing influences of a public servant’s objectives, interests, and favoritism based on the that person’s personal characteristics, background, values, and beliefs in a democratic society (Spicer & Terry, 1993). This approach underlies the belief that bureaucrats should carry out policy directives but not influence policy creation despite their crucial role in the policy process.2

Advocacy on behalf of impartiality in public administration ethics, which builds on claimed synergies between public officials’ goals and practices within the public sector, has made greater inroads into main- stream public administration ethics than advocacy, which argues for these goals and practices on partiality grounds. In the modern state, there has been an enormous increase in the scope of governmental activity, and the

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

602 Handbook of Public Administration

range of its objectives has led to placing immense power and authority in the hands of public officials, thereby increasing opportunities for abuse of power and authority, as well as incidents of unethical activities. Adopting an impartial stance in public administration ethical decision making employs a calculus that is based on viewing all agents as equal and “faceless,” while the particular identities, circumstances, and partialities of agents are secondary or irrelevant.

Partiality is grounded in relations arising in the context of an agent’s personal point of view. As an ethical reason, partiality pertains by virtue of a relation between an agent and a particular object of value. The applica- tion of partiality to public administration offers normative justification to ethical judgment based on the civil servant’s personal point of view. The demands of partiality thus stress the moral value of the varied sorts of per- sonal relationships in which it is featured.

During the past decade, scholars have explored how contested ethi- cal issues arise in situations where public administrators are acting in an impartial way in order to implement policy for those in need within society, especially when faced with circumstances they may not have anticipated, such as emergencies, disasters, and social unrest (Adams & Balfour, 2009; Stivers, 2007). Public administrators are often uniquely situated to answer someone’s need, which derives from an ongoing relationship by virtue of which one has been held responsible for their well-being. In this sense, partiality is morally instrumental in a relationship to the extent that it con- tributes to the protection of those who are in need and on social conven- tions that assign responsibilities for the care of needy persons to others who stand in certain relationships to them.

Despite the lack of consensus on the extent of ethical exercise of public administrators’ discretion, there is a growing awareness of the importance of professional ethics in public administration (Cooper, 2004; Hejka-Ekins, 1988; Maesschalck, 2004a; Svara, 2007; West & Berman, 2004). While codes of ethics in public administration share the stated goal that governs the public service, that is, to serve the public interests, they diverge in their national and governmental purposes and priorities, which provide criteria against which their success can be evaluated.

Thus, for codes to communicate professional identity, the specific purposes and principles embedded in them are intended to guide public officials in carrying out their duties consistent with society’s core values and norms, which evolve across cultural, national, and institutional settings.

For example, codes of ethics may be used as a management tool. The presence of codes of ethics can indicate that management places some

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Understanding the Obligations of Codes of Ethics 603

value on ethical behavior as part of its professional functioning. One of the earliest attempts to formulate public administration as a profession can be found in the Athenian oath written by Pericles in the fifth century B.C.: “We will unceasingly seek to quicken the public sense of public duty; That thus . . . we will transmit this city not only not less, but greater, better and more beautiful than it was transmitted to us.”

In the United Kingdom, the Civil Service Code was introduced to support civil service management reforms. The code, published in 1996, addressed a set of core civil service values and the standards of behavior expected of all civil servants, including “Integrity—putting the obligations of public service above personal interests; Honesty—being truthful and open; Objectivity—basing advice and decisions on rigorous analysis of the evidence and Impartiality—acting solely according to the merits of the case and serving governments of different political parties equally well.”

Estonia was the first of the Baltic countries to adopt a Public Service Code of Ethics, which was integrated into the Public Service Act in 1999. The first article of the Estonian Code addresses the idea that public administrators have an obligation to support the transition to democratic public management. The code defines the new image of the public servant who has responsibilities to both political supervisors and to citizens and is required to balance the two: “An official is a citizen in the service of people.” The democratic values entrenched in the code include “serving the public, respect for the law and people, loyalty to government, public participation, political neutrality, impartiality, objectivity, predictability, openness, honesty, reliability, responsibility, consciousness, competence” (Estonia, 1999).

In China, the 1993 civil service managerial reform placed some value on ethical considerations in performing official duties. As part of a growing tendency to impart a new orientation to public management compatible with professionalism and political accountability, the Chinese government codified civil service processes and structures and launched the Norms of Behavior and Professional Ethics of State Civil Servants (Guojiagongwuyuan xingwei guifan) in 2002. The managerial reform brought a new focus to ethical consideration of the performance of Chinese civil servants that gave more weight to values of accountability than execution of orders (Tsao & Worthley, 2009). In 2011, the Chinese government developed an ethics training program for the country’s civil servants, focusing on the key values and behaviors the government wants to promote—a broad spectrum of responsibility, including accountability to citizens (Huazhong, 2011).

Codes can also be used as a mechanism for socialization of new, inex- perienced civil servants or simply those who are not familiar with the civil

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

604 Handbook of Public Administration

service ethics. Ethical values can provide guidance about expected ethi- cal behavior in the public service. Viewed in this way, codes allow public servants to test their actions or solve ethical dilemmas against expected standards. By communicating the content of the codes to public servants on a regular basis, ethical behavior can become a habit ingrained in public administration. This purpose is articulated in Macedonia’s Code of Ethics for Civil Service. The Macedonian document seeks to “regulate the man- ner of conduct and the operations of the civil servants in order to ensure recognition of the principles of legality, professional integrity, efficiency and loyalty in performing their official duties” (Agency for Administration of the Republic of Macedonia, 2002). The code of ethics was part of vari- ous reforms introduced in the public administration of Macedonia during the first decade of the twenty-first century. These reforms aimed at educat- ing the civil servants with low performance and unethical behavior in their daily contact with the citizens (Selami, 2012).

In both the Chinese and Macedonian cases, the underlying assumption behind the contribution of codes to public servants’ socialization process is that the institutional context of public service has an overriding influence on the moral decisions of professionals rather than individuals’ ability to make ethical judgments.

Finally, codes of ethics impose a binding set of ethical obligations between public administration and the public that can increase public trust in government. The importance of trust between the citizens and the public service enables public servants to carry out their official duties successfully and reduce disagreement or disputes over policy implemen- tation. In Canada, the Values and Ethics Code for the Public Sector came into force on April 2, 2012. The code embedded the need to enhance the reputation of public service by complying with principles of equal treatment, effectiveness, integrity, and accountability when performing their duties.

In Poland, the purpose of the Civil Service Code of Ethics (2001) is specified as follows: “To increase the citizen’s confidence in the State and its authorities.” This is also entrenched in the code of the Czech Repub- lic (2004), which aims ’to gain and maintain the public trust, to promote the desired standards of behavior among public servants and to inform the public about the standards “that citizens have a right to demand from public administration employees” (Code of Ethics of Public Servants). The code was introduced by Czech Republic authorities as part of their effort to monitor citizens’ attitudes toward government and the public adminis- tration due to increasing levels of citizens’ distrust of the involvement of the public sector in the public service.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Understanding the Obligations of Codes of Ethics 605

The need to raise public trust in public administration is entrenched in the Finnish code:

In our own work, we safeguard the trustworthiness of public service, so that citizens’ trust in the impartiality and independence of public service activities is preserved. We discharge our duties in compliance with legislation and –principles of good administrative practice. Our operation must also be seen to fulfil the requirements of good administrative practice in the eyes of an external evaluator. (Finland Ministry of Finance, 2005)

The importance of raising public trust through the initiation of codes of ethics is also assigned in the Asian context. Japan and South Korea acknowledge the need to enhance public trust in government and increase effective communication with citizens (Kim, 2010). Indeed, ethical con- duct by public administration became an important goal as part of the government’s efforts to challenge the dominance of Confucian tradition and values and strengthen the legitimacy of public service in the eyes of the citizens (Mishler & Rose, 2001). Institutional context, political culture, and citizen–state relationships may also be important factors that deter- mine the level of trust in government (Christensen & Laegreid, 2005).

Measuring the Effectiveness of Codes of Ethics in Public Administration

Despite the increasing use of codes of ethics across national and institu- tional settings, there is relatively little empirical evidence regarding the effectiveness of these codes on ethical decision making and behavior in public administrations. The majority of studies treat the theoretical utility of codes of ethics in the public service, and most studies tend to agree that the theoretical utility lies in sending significant messages about the organi- zation’s expectations of ethical conduct. However, in the literature, there appears to be no agreement as to whether codes of ethics are useful and effective in enhancing ethical decision making or conduct in the public service (Frederickson & Ghere, 2005; Gueras & Garofalo, 2005; Lawton & Doig, 2005–2006; Maesschalck, 2004b; Menzel, 2005, 2010).

Kaptein and Schwartz (2008) identified a relatively small number of studies (seventy-nine) examining the behavioral effects of codes of ethics in private organizations, studies that yielded mixed results. In addition, studies that offered to measure the effectiveness of codes of

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

606 Handbook of Public Administration

ethics were often criticized for showing bias toward the use of surveys and snapshot research. Several studies have been conducted by Bowman and his colleagues since 1989 on ethics in public agencies with an emphasis on the effects of the ASPA code of ethics (Bowman, 1990; Bowman & Knox, 2008). The findings of these studies showed that the effectiveness of ASPA’s code correlated with enforceability and acceptability, which appear to be key variables in the codes of the ethics implementation process. In 1995, Elizabeth Kellar reported a significant and positive effect of the ICMA code among 90 percent of ICMA members. In addition, in 1990, Rowe and Hug reported that 84 percent of the respondents perceived the value of the ICMA code in defining their roles as municipal managers. A more recent study on measuring the effectiveness of codes of ethics across 154 national administrations concluded that having a code of ethics has no effect on corruption problems in the public context in both devel- oped and developing countries (Garcia-Sanchez, Rodriguez-Dominguez, & Gallego-Alvarez, 2011).

As this review indicates, codes of ethics are widely adopted in public administrations around the world, yet these public agencies often rely on anecdotal evidence and respective recommendations for assessing the effectiveness of the codes they have in guiding ethical behavior and attitudes of public servants. Moreover, greater understanding is needed on additional measures of the effects of codes of ethics rather than self-reported data on employees’ perceptions of ethical behavior.

This chapter suggests that a critical step before evaluating the effec- tiveness of codes of ethics in public administration requires a better understanding of the code of ethics implementation process. With- out understanding this, it is difficult to know whether they make any continuing contribution to the ethical climate of the organization and the decisions that civil servants make. In their research on the use of ethics training in US cities, West and Berman (2004) found that audit committees’ activities and the use of adequate ethics training, rather than the mere presence of a code, contribute to the promotion of deep levels of commitment and openness among staff members. The research then provides some evidence to suggest that implementation and communication of codes may increase their effectiveness in holding civil servants accountable for compliance and creating the ethical climate of public organizations. Thus, as a fundamental step toward promoting the effectiveness of codes, public administrators are likely to benefit from communicating clear expectations through effective employment of codes of ethics.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Understanding the Obligations of Codes of Ethics 607

Assessing the Effective Implementation of Codes of Ethics in Public Administration

The creation of an effective implementation framework for codes of ethics in public administration serves the dual purpose of deterring unethical conduct in public administration and promoting the building of professional identity. The suggested framework for effective imple- mentation of codes of ethics in public administration draws heavily on the amended Chapter 8 of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, which was integrated into an effective organizational compliance program. In 1991, the US Sentencing Commission established the most widely recognized standards for an effective program within its Sentencing Guidelines Manual. These guidelines are closely aligned with the principles set forth in compliance guidance that various agencies have developed over time. The guidelines provide a structural framework from which a professional organization may self-discipline its own members and conduct. The utility of this framework lies in its emphasis on the manner in which ethical and professional standards and procedures are communicated to all levels of the organization. Furthermore, the effectiveness of the compliance framework rests on the increased level of ethical competence that monitoring and enforcement mechanisms bring.

Chapter 8’s Guidelines for effective organizational compliance pro- grams have set various methods and strategies aiming at evaluating the quality and effectiveness of organizational compliance efforts in a wide vari- ety of legal contexts. Indeed, these guidelines are used by a wide range of government agencies, including the Justice Department, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Department of Labor, and the Equal Employ- ment Opportunity Commission. The guidelines are thought to establish an effective compliance and ethics program by detecting and preventing improper conduct and promoting adherence to the organization’s legal and ethical obligations.

Among the guidelines specified in the Compliance and Ethics are the need to develop organizational leadership and foster a culture that pur- sues compliance with the law; public administration education and training on the codes of ethics; establishing monitoring, auditing, and evaluation mechanisms to assess the level of compliance with legal requirements; com- municating with staff members regarding compliance concerns that may arise; and using a reporting system to provide an open channel to report or to seek guidance about potential or actual misconduct and develop appro- priate enforcement measures.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

608 Handbook of Public Administration

Based on the main tenets of the effective organizational compliance programs, a practice matrix is developed that incorporates various meth- ods pursued at different stages of ethical decision making (table 33.1). Each practice implies an underlying ethical decision phase.

Comparative Analysis of Codes of Ethics Implementation Efforts

This section illustrates the applicability of the assessment framework just presented with examples from the ICMA, the ASPA, and the OECD. Each provides code implementation mechanisms for shaping ethical behavior for their members. The short overview of the main tenets of each organi- zation’s codes of ethics is followed by an assessment of the codes’ imple- mentation and compliance strategies.

International City/County Management Association

The ICMA aims to develop and foster professional local government world- wide. Its mission is “to create excellence in local governance by developing and fostering professional management to build better communities.” The ICMA’s Code of Ethics was introduced in 1924, the ICMA executive board adopted it in 1972, and revisions were made in July 2004.

Among the code’s basic tenets are pursuing effective and democratic local government, social responsibility, integrity, improving the quality and image of public service, fairness and impartiality, stewardship of public resources, and political neutrality. The ICMA’s training programs for local governments are to a great extent related to the code of ethics. Training that is firmly related to the code itself and to its proper implementation are included in the annual plan for training. In addition, ICMA members adhere to the principles of the ICMA Code of Ethics as a condition of mem- bership and agree to submit to a peer-to-peer review of their conduct under established enforcement procedures.

The ICMA code communication is pursued at all levels. ICMA uses its Knowledge Network, which serves as an online platform for local government professionals. More than twenty thousand local government professionals have already joined this community and can engage with peers or with colleagues in local government around the world on ethics issues (http://icma.org/en/icma/knowledge_network/topics/kn/topic_ articles/95/ethics). The ICMA’s Knowledge Network provides information to its members on how to react to questionable activities in their locality

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

TA B LE

3 3 .1 . M E T H O D S FO

R E FF

E C T IV E IM

P LE

M E N TA

T IO

N O F C O D E S O F E T H IC S IN

P U B LI C

A D M IN

IS T R A T IO

A w ar e n e ss

U n d e rs ta n d in g

Im p le m e n ta ti o n

M o n it o ri n g

C o m m u n ic at io n

A co

d e o f et h ic s sh o u ld

b e

p u b lis h ed

an d d is se m in at ed

to em

p lo ye

es , p o te n ti al

em p lo ye

es , an

d th e g en

er al

p u b lic .

P ro vi d in g th e co

d e o f et h ic s

o n th e o rg an

iz at io n in tr an

et al lo w s al ls ta ff to

ac ce ss

it as

n ee

d ed

C o d es

o f et h ic s ca n b e

d el iv er ed

o n lin

e in

a fo rm

at th at

al lo w s st af f to

w o rk

th ro u g h is su es

in a g iv en

ti m e fr am

P re p ar e p o st er s ab

o u t th e co

d e

an d d is p la y th em

in a

co m m u n al

ar ea

su ch

as a st af f

ro o m

an d n o ti ce

b o ar d s

th ro u g h o u t th e o rg an

iz at io n .

P o st

o n th e o rg an

iz at io n ’s

w eb

si te

a se ri es

o f sc en

ar io s

o f p o ss ib le

et h ic al

d ile m m as

to ex

er ci se

em p lo ye

es ’ et h ic al

ju d g m en

Tr ai n in g

C o m m u n ic at e th e tr ai n in g

p ro g ra m

to al ls ta ff

m em

b er s so

th ey

ar e aw

ar e

o f w h at

is h ap

p en

in g in

th e

o rg an

iz at io n .

O ri en

ta ti o n an

d tr ai n in g

p ro g ra m s m ay

in cl u d e ro le

p la yi n g , si m u la ti o n s, an

d o th er

in te ra ct iv e ac ti vi ti es

to re in fo rc e u n d er st an

d in g o f

th e se ri o u s im

p ac t o f

u n et h ic al

b eh

av io r an

d th e

im p o rt an

ce o f re p o rt in g

u n et h ic al

si tu at io n s.

A ft er

co m p le ti n g th e tr ai n in g

p ro g ra m , st af f m em

b er s

w o u ld

b e g iv en

a co

m p et en

cy ce rt ifi ca te

as p ro o f th at

th ey

u n d er st an

d th e co

d es .

A ll em

p lo ye

es ar e re q u ir ed

to co

m p le te

a tr ai n in g co

u rs e in

et h ic al

d ec is io n m ak in g an

d o n th e co

d es

o f et h ic s, w h ic h

w ill

fu n ct io n as

a cr u ci al

fa ct o r in

d et er m in in g th e

em p lo ye

e’ s en

ti tl em

en t to

p er fo rm

an ce -b as ed

re m u n er at io n .

Ea ch

ye ar

af te r th e tr ai n in g

co u rs e,

th e em

p lo ye

e is

re q u ir ed

to co

n fir m

w h et h er

h e o r sh e fo llo

w ed

th e co

d e’ s

p ri n ci p le s o ve r th e p as t ye

ar .

Et h ic s ed

u ca ti o n

Et h ic s sh o u ld

b e in te g ra te d

in to

p ro fe ss io n al

cu rr ic u la

at al ll ev el s.

St af f m em

b er s w ill

n ee

d to

su b m it w ri tt en

as si g n m en

ts ,

a p ro je ct , o r p ra ct ic u m

to d ev el o p sk ill s an

d co

m p et en

ce in

p ro fe ss io n al

et h ic s an

d et h ic al

d ec is io n

m ak in g .

U se

in te ra ct iv e e- le ar n in g to o ls

to g u id e st af f m em

b er s o n

h o w

to co

n si d er

th ei r et h ic al

co m m it m en

t as

p ro fe ss io n al

q u al ifi ed

em p lo ye

es ac co

rd in g to

th e

o rg an

iz at io n ’s co

d es

o f et h ic s.

D ev el o p a co

n su lt at iv e p ro ce ss

th at

w ill

en ab

le al ls ta ff

m em

b er s to

co m m en

t o n th e

ef fe ct iv en

es s o f th e co

d es

o f

et h ic s as

a to o lf o r re so lv in g

et h ic al

d ile m m as

th ey

m ig h t

en co

u n te r.

(C on ti n u ed

)

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

TA B LE

3 3 .1 . (C o n ti n u ed

)

A w ar e n e ss

U n d e rs ta n d in g

Im p le m e n ta ti o n

M o n it o ri n g

En fo rc ea

b ili ty

R eq

u ir e st af f to

si g n a

d o cu

m en

t st at in g th at

th ey

ag re e to

ab id e b y th e co

d es

o f et h ic s. In

ca se

an em

p lo ye

e vi o la te s th e

co d e’ s p ri n ci p le s, th e

o rg an

iz at io n w ill

ta ke

d is ci p lin

ar y ac ti o n .

Et h ic s co

m m it te es

sh o u ld

b e

ed u ca ti o n al

an d ad

vi so ry

in p u rp o se . T h e fu n ct io n o f

th e et h ic s co

m m it te e

sh o u ld

b e to

as si st

in re so lv in g u n u su al ,

co m p lic at ed

et h ic al

d ile m m as

an d to

re n d er

th ei r re co

m m en

d at io n s in

a ti m el y an

d p ro m p t fa sh io n

in ac co

rd an

ce w it h th e

d em

an d s o f th e si tu at io n

an d th e is su es .

C o m p lia n ce

w it h th e co

d es

o f

et h ic s is m o n it o re d b y

in te rn al

au d it to

en su re

th e

co d e im

p le m en

ta ti o n p ro ce ss

is ap

p ro p ri at e to

in ve st ig at e

al le g ed

b re ac h es

o f th e co

d es .

Et h ic s co

m m it te es

sh o u ld

co n d u ct

an an

n u al

re p o rt o f

th e co

n tr o ls th at

su p p o rt th e

en fo rc em

en t o f th e co

d es

o f

et h ic s.

Le ad

er sh ip

b y

ex am

p le

P o st

o n th e o rg an

iz at io n ’s

w eb

si te

em p lo ye

es w h o

ex h ib it et h ic al

b eh

av io r.

M an

ag er s sh o u ld

g en

er at e

o p en

d is cu

ss io n ab

o u t

et h ic s b y sh ar in g et h ic al

p ro b le m s th at

m ay

h av e

co m e u p in

th e m an

ag er ’s

o w n w o rk

o r d eb

at ed

w h o m

to te ll ab

o u t a

co n fid

en ti al

is su e.

Ea ch

m an

ag er

sh o u ld

re vi ew

th e co

d e o f et h ic s w it h al l

em p lo ye

es . Im

p le m en

ti n g it s

g u id el in es

in th e w o rk p la ce

is a m an

ag er ’s re sp o n si b ili ty .

Le ad

er s m ay

ad d re ss

th e

p ri n ci p le s an

d th e

ef fe ct iv en

es s o f th e co

d es

o f

et h ic s re g u la rl y in

th ei r

m ee

ti n g s, sp ee

ch es , an

d p re se n ta ti o n s.

Et h ic al

cl im

at e

In fo rm

th e o rg an

iz at io n ’s

st ak eh

o ld er s an

d ta rg et

p u b lic

o f th e p re se n ce

o f

th e co

d e o f et h ic s an

d th e

o rg an

iz at io n ’s em

p lo ye

es ’

co m m it m en

t to

et h ic al

co n d u ct

as p ar t o f th ei r

p ro fe ss io n al

p er fo rm

an ce .

Fo st er , m an

ag e,

an d re w ar d a

cu lt u re

o f ac co

u n ta b ili ty

an d in te g ri ty

w it h in

th e

o rg an

iz at io n th at

b en

efi ts

th e p u b lic

an d st re n g th en

s st af f m em

b er s’ in te ra ct io n s

w it h o n e an

o th er .

Es ta b lis h an

ea sy

an d sa fe

ch an

n el

fo r re p o rt in g

vi o la ti o n s o f th e co

d es

o f

et h ic s w it h o u t fe ar

o f

n eg

at iv e ca re er

re p er cu

ss io n s.

In ad

d it io n , m ak e su re

em p lo ye

es kn

o w

th at

th ei r

su p er vi so rs

w ill

ta ke

im m ed

ia te

ac ti o n an

d in ve st ig at e cl ai m s.

D ev el o p an

an n u al

su rv ey

o f th e

ex te n t to

w h ic h th e co

d es

h av e in flu

en ce d th e et h ic al

cu lt u re

o f th e o rg an

iz at io n .

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Understanding the Obligations of Codes of Ethics 611

(http://icma.org/en/icma/knowledge_network/documents/kn/ Document/301968/What_To_Do_When_the_Ethical_Dilemma_Involves_ Your_Elected_Official).

The enforceability of the code is enhanced by ICMA through a formal review process administered by a peer review body, the ICMA Committee on Professional Conduct. The rules of procedure for enforcement of the code ensure a confidential review process when investigating a member suspected of violating the code, to afford each member who is the subject of an investigation a full and fair opportunity to be heard throughout the process. The committee is authorized to close a case where no violation has occurred; issue a private censure for an ethics violation; or recommend that the ICMA executive board suspend, publicly censure, or expel, bar, or revoke the credentials of a member who has violated the code. Members have the opportunity to appeal any decision or recommendation of the committee (Menzel, 2010). The ICMA’s director of ethics is responsible for publishing the committee’s recommendation and decision-making process in cases of ethical violations, and full explanations and guidance for the need of ethical standards in the management profession by the ICMA (http://icma.org/en/icma/knowledge_network/documents/kn/ Document/301966/For_Whom_the_Bell_Tolls__Questionable_Practices_ Harm_Everyone; http://icma.org/en/icma/knowledge_network/blogs/ contactblog/176541/Martha_Perego; http://icma.org/en/icma/ knowledge_network/documents/kn/Document/100266/ICMA_Rules_ of_Procedure_for_Enforcement_of_the_Code_of_Ethics).

American Society for Public Administration

The ASPA established the Professional Standards and Ethics Committee in 1974, which was formally approved in 1984 and revised in 1994 (American Society for Public Administration Ethics Code, 2010; Public Administration Review, 2010) During March 2013, the ASPA adopted a revised version of the code at its annual conference in New Orleans.3

ASPA’s Code of Ethics has been the centerpiece of the association’s commitment to promoting ethical competence among its members. The code’s main tenets are:

Serve the public interest.

Respect, support, and study government constitutions and laws that define responsibilities of public agencies, employees, and all citizens.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

612 Handbook of Public Administration

Demonstrate the highest standards in all activities to inspire public confidence and trust in public service.

Strengthen organizational capabilities to apply ethics, efficiency, and effectiveness in serving the public.

Strengthen individual capabilities and encourage professional excellence.

The 2013 revision extends the responsibilities of public servants to include enhancement of social equity and social responsibility to their political supervisors as part of their professional identity. The fact that the 2013 revision makes distinctions between social equity and public interest seems to support the proactive role of public servants and a degree of discretion that interferes with accountability (Svara, 2014). In this context, the 2013 code underpins various elements of ethical leadership as an essential strategy aimed at improving the ethical performance and competence of public administrators (Cooper & Menzel, 2013).

ASPA’s Code of Ethics is supported by communication and ethics edu- cation mechanisms managed by ASPA’s Ethics Section. Communication efforts include publications on ethics issues in ASPA’s newsletter, academic and professional journals, and the inclusion of an “Ethics Moment” in every edition of PA Times. In addition, ASPA’s Ethics Section initiated the ETHTALK listserv, which serves as a forum for the exchange of ideas, viewpoints, and contemporary ethics issues among the ASPA membership (http://www.aspanet.org/public/ASPA/Resources/Code_of_Ethics/ ASPA/Resources/Code_of_Ethics/Code_of_Ethics1.aspx?hkey= acd40318-a945–4ffc-ba7b-18e037b1a858).

A working group initiated by ASPA’s president has proposed reestab- lishing the Professional Standards and Ethics Committee in ASPA. An interim implementation committee appointed by ASPA officers began to work on ASPA ethics and standards approved by the ASPA National Coun- cil at the midyear meeting in March 2014 and provide other initiatives to promote effective implementation activities (http://www.aspanet.org/ public/ASPADocs/Ethics%20Committee-Council%20Approval.pdf).

The ASPA ethical climate process at both awareness and monitoring levels is promoted through the distribution of annual awards for honor- ing ethics-related achievements (Best Ethics Paper by a Student, Ethics in Practice, and Best Paper in Public Integrity). In addition, the association’s Professional Ethics Committee uses a membership survey, based on the scholarly survey of 1989 conducted by Bowman, to obtain an initial assess- ment of the effectiveness of the code (Bowman, 1990; Bowman & Knox, 2008; Bowman & Williams, 1997).

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Understanding the Obligations of Codes of Ethics 613

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development

In April 1998, the Public Management Committee of the OECD issued Principles for Managing Ethics in the Public Service to assist countries in evaluating their institutions, systems, and mechanisms for elevating public service ethics (PUMA, 1998).

These principles, drawn on the experience of OECD countries in developing and managing codes of ethics for the public service, included communication processes at levels of awareness and understanding. The committee identified a strong need for establishing clear ethical standards, which are based on understanding and common values. According to the committee’s guidelines: “Public servants need to know the basic principles and standards they are expected to apply to their work and where the boundaries of acceptable behaviour lie. A concise, well-publicised statement of core ethical standards and principles that guide public service, for example in the form of a code of conduct, can accomplish this by creating a shared understanding across government and within the broader community.”

Other guidelines advocated professional socialization through the initiation of training programs on ethics to raise awareness and develop essential skills for ethical analysis and moral reasoning. In addition, it is suggested that “internal consultation mechanisms should be made available to help public servants apply basic ethical standards in the workplace.”

The OECD committee suggests that political leaders hold the respon- sibility for maintaining a high standard of ethical behavior by establishing legislative and institutional arrangements that “reinforce ethical behaviour and create sanctions against wrongdoing, by providing adequate support and resources for ethics-related activities throughout government and by avoiding the exploitation of ethics rules and laws for political purposes.” The committee has also identified the need for viable enforcement mech- anisms that function to formally serve for the detection and independent investigation of corrupted acts or ethical violations as part of an ethics infrastructure.

In 1992, the OECD and the European Union collaborated to initiate the SIGMA Programme. SIGMA, funded by the EU’s Phare Programme, aimed at providing standards of reliable and efficient administration through the establishment of an implementation of administrative reform program; providing training and information exchange events; and collecting comparative data on public administration through published reports, checklists, an Internet site, and a bimonthly newslet- ter on ethics and integrity in the public administrations among EU

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

614 Handbook of Public Administration

member states such as Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia (http://www.oecd.org/puma/sigmaweb). SIGMA’s Supreme Audit Insti- tutions serve to enhance accountability through regular reports on public spending and revenue collection and on appropriation rules and other relevant laws (SIGMA, 1998, 1999).

Summary

Codes of ethics may serve as a way of signaling that public administra- tion is committed to norms of ethical behavior as part of its professional functioning. The professional and ethical standards set up by codes for public administrators, when effectively communicated to its professional community, are likely to contribute to developing professional identity and growth that can lead to a more supportive and regulatory environment and increased public trust.

Public administration associations across national boundaries have gone through the process of developing codes of ethics over the past decade. This trend is a critical process in holding public administrators accountable for compliance. This chapter suggests that the professional standards and priorities must be clearly communicated to engender public servants’ commitment to meeting the standards contained in the codes. For that purpose, it provides an implementation framework for codes of ethics in public administration to increase the level of ethical competence that communication, monitoring, and ethical training and education, and enforcement mechanisms bring. The rationale behind the code’s implementation framework is that improved communication of profes- sional identity may result in public officials having increased confidence and comfort making ethical decisions based on clear understanding of their moral obligations and responsibilities to the public as part of their professional integrity.

The code’s implementation framework offers criteria against which its effectiveness can be assessed. The comparative analysis of codes of ethics implementation programs for public administration professionals in both national and international organizations shows that most of them have not yet chosen to pursue the development of enforcement and training mech- anisms for their codes of ethics. It seems that the ICMA has become more proactive in employing an enforcement mechanism among those engag- ing in the area of public administration practice, and ASPA, despite lack of

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Understanding the Obligations of Codes of Ethics 615

an enforcement mechanism, recently considered the implementation of such a mechanism.

Not all organizations have set the standards and the content of training programs; their implementation has faced some difficulty in committing the resources to train public administrators. Since public administration has attained the status of a profession in many countries around the globe, ethics training should be considered a salient factor affecting promotion. Furthermore, an online platform for codes of ethics and ethical education as introduced by ICMA and the ASPA offers entirely new possibilities for code communication and enables current responses to changes in standards, policies, legislation, or code revisions resulting from governance reforms. Online forums and professional networks may also serve as valuable consultant and training mechanisms for public officials faced with ethical dilemmas that need to be addressed in a timely manner. This initiative requires collaborative efforts of various public administration professional organizations in the difficult and ongoing task of defining and building mechanisms for developing ethical competence when faced with competing interests, loyalties, and values among their members.

Notes 1. The efficiency criteria are based on the guidelines and strategies incorporated in

the “Effective Program to Prevent and Detect Violations of Law” entrenched in the 2011 Federal Sentencing Guidelines, http://www.ussc.gov/guidelines-manual/2011- federal-sentencing-guidelines-manual.

2. Within the public administration community, there has been debate over the whether public administrators should be politically neutral or active citizens. Waldo (1980) acknowledged the need for a more active role in public debate.

3. The 2013 Code of Ethics can be viewed at http://www.aspanet.org/public/ASPA/ Resources/Code_of_Ethics/ASPA/Resources/Code_of_Ethics/Code_of_Ethics1. aspx?hkey=acd40318-a945–4ffc-ba7b-18e037b1a858.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

CHAPTER THIRTY-FOUR

UNDERSTANDING YOUR LIABILITY AS A PUBLIC ADMINISTRATOR

Stephanie P. Newbold

Public administrators in the United States and around the worldmust understand how their professional decision making affects the citizens for whom they serve. More so than at any other time, reviewing courts are increasing public administrators’ liability when they violate or undermine the individual or constitutional rights of citizens or when the government fails to provide essential public services for which they are charged to perform. One of the most important ways the field of public administration can professionalize the practice of public administration is by drawing attention to issues of professional liability. Avoiding lawsuits is a critical element of this conversation.

The significance of governmental accountability in democratic regimes has been a central topic of interest for centuries, dating back to the ancient Greeks. Scholars of Western political thought have consistently viewed the concept of governmental accountability as a fundamental tenet associated with the theory and practice of democratic governance (Cooke, 1961; de Tocqueville, 1983; Canavan, 1986; Berns, 1986; Pollock & Maitland, 2010). When democratic governments fail to meet their own standards of accountability, individual citizens and groups of individuals who claim they were harmed by governmental action or inaction must have a way to seek a remedy for their alleged injuries. In this regard, public accountability serves a variety of important purposes. It can work to complement core elements of public administrative management that

616

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Understanding Your Liability as a Public Administrator 617

help to decrease liability for public administrators, including placing more emphasis on promoting ethical behavior in public organizations and encouraging governmental transparency. In some cases, governmental accountability allows citizens to exercise democratic control through the electoral process and vote public officials in and out of office (Bovens, 2005). Increasing public accountability can also work to preserve the integrity of public institutions by creating performance standards, ethical guidelines, and accountability measures associated with the maintenance and preservation of a public organization’s mission, goals, and responsi- bilities to the people it serves (Bovens, 2005; Rosenbloom, 2007; Terry, 2003). Finally, public accountability can serve to improve the individual performance of public managers because public agencies are now plac- ing more emphasis on training their employees on how to meet their individual and collective responsibilities in ways that balance economic efficiency and effectiveness with ensuring that their agency’s actions promote responsibility, responsiveness, and representativeness (Bovens, 2005; Riccucci, 2012; Rosenbloom, 2003; Rosenbloom, O’Leary, & Chanin 2010; Wamsley, 1990).

Governmental liability, by means of comparison to public accountabil- ity, is a more specific type of instrument individual citizens can use to hold their government accountable. The practical evolution of governmental liability in the modern era emerged largely as a result of the human atrocities committed by the Nazi regime in World War II. After the conclusion of the war, representatives from the Allied nations conducted the Nuremburg trials, a series of military tribunals designed to prosecute and punish prominent military and political leaders of Nazi Germany for war crimes against humanity. These public trials, and the convictions that followed, highlighted in the most extraordinary ways the importance of holding government officials liable when they purposively and knowingly violate the legal, constitutional, and human rights of the citizens they have promised to protect. From this point in history moving forward, considerably more emphasis has been placed on governmental liability for citizens (Cooper, 2007; Lee & Rosenbloom, 2005; Riccucci, 2012; Rohr, 1998, 2002; Rosenbloom et al., 2010).

The US War on Terror has provided a more contemporary, and extremely important, example for how the Supreme Court can check the executive’s power in defense of a citizen’s constitutional rights. This effort not only illustrates the importance of governmental liability but also serves as a reminder for how the Court can force the executive branch to change its decision-making process, even when the president strongly disagrees, in order to protect the rights of citizens. In Hamdi v. Rumsfeld (2004), a

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

618 Handbook of Public Administration

case that focused much of the international legal community’s attention on American constitutional law, the Court examined the constitutional rights of Yaser Esam Hamdi, a US citizen with Taliban connections. The US military captured Hamdi in Afghanistan and subsequently transported him to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. President George W. Bush and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld classified Hamdi as an enemy combatant and decided to hold him in military custody for an indefinite period of time. They did not bring formal charges against Hamdi and did not provide him with a hearing so that he could contest the government’s charges.

The administration’s refusal to apply the Geneva Conventions to Hamdi was not only problematic for many international groups and legal scholars; it was also troublesome for the American High Court. In its majority opinion, the Court maintained that the Constitution requires the government to provide all US citizens their constitutional rights to due process, regardless of circumstance or classification as an enemy combatant. According to the justices, the Constitution required that the government provide Hamdi with a meaningful opportunity to contest his detention before a federal court. Just as important, the Court maintained that the government has to work harder to protect constitutional rights in times of war than in times of peace.

As Justice Sandra Day O’Conner correctly reminded the Bush admin- istration, “We reaffirm today the fundamental nature of a citizen’s right to be free from involuntary confinement by his own government without due process of law, and we weigh the opposing governmental interests against the curtailment of liberty that such confinement entails” (Hamdi, 2004, sec. C, para. 2).

The Court therefore overturned the executive’s decision and held that both the Constitution and the Geneva Conventions entitled Hamdi to due process of law. This case sent a clear message to Congress, the president, and the international community: if needed, the US Supreme Court would safeguard the rights of American citizens in times of war and require mem- bers of the executive branch to uphold the Constitution and international agreements, like the Geneva Conventions, the nation had committed to support.

Both the Nuremburg trials and Hamdi provide an important frame- work for how and why public administrators must concern themselves with liability. Governmental liability occurs when public administrators, acting in their official capacity as conservators of state action, violate an individual’s legally or constitutionally protected rights. Public administra- tion scholars who specialize in human resources management emphasize the need for public managers to understand governmental liability as one

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Understanding Your Liability as a Public Administrator 619

of the most important ways they can decrease the likelihood of lawsuits against themselves and the agencies they represent (Naff, Riccucci, & Freyss, 2013; Nigro et al., 2013; Riccucci, 2002, 2012; Rosenbloom, Carroll, & Carroll, 2004; Rosenbloom et al., 2010). Governmental liability therefore is necessary to ensure that the state upholds the very rights it deems essential for the maintenance and preservation of democratic governance. In most democratic nations, reviewing courts have become the most prominent and effective way for citizens to challenge the type of governmental decision making that potentially violated legal and constitutional rights (Cooper, 2007; Naff et al., 2013; Newbold, 2010; Riccucci, 2012; Rohr, 1998, 2002; Rosenbloom et al., 2004, 2010).

Over the past three decades, the Supreme Court has taken an active role in determining the liability of US public administrators when they are making decisions and establishing determinations concerning citizens’ individual and constitutional rights. If public administrators violate, ignore, undermine, or even fail to understand these rights—rights for which a reasonable person would have known—the federal courts can hold these public officials professionally and personally liable (Cooper, 2007; Lee & Rosenbloom, 2005; Naff et al., 2013; Rosenbloom et al., 2004, 2010). This type of liability makes it all the more important for public administrators not only to be constitutionally competent regarding the laws that govern their administrative agencies but also to understand how their professional judgment directly and indirectly affects the citizens they serve daily (Rosenbloom et al., 2004).

Scholars of comparative public administration have also addressed the importance of liability for public managers in a variety of contexts, although the literature here is not nearly as in depth as what is available from the US perspective. Harry Street (1953) has compared governmental liability in England, the British Commonwealth, the United States, and Continental Europe. Dari-Mattiacci, Garoupa, and Gomez-Pomar (2010) have explored state liability from a comparative perspective as a means to draw attention to the ways a state can produce incentives to discourage misconduct, remove incentives for opportunistic behavior by third parties, and monitor or oversee public organizations and the different branches of government. Doernberg (2011) has provided a comparative analysis of official immunity in the United States and Great Britain, with emphasis on how the Supreme Court has underscored the relevance of liability for executive branch officials and municipalities. And Raadschelders, Toonen, and Van der Meer (2007) edited an important work in which public administration scholars from around the world evaluated the twenty-first-century civil service from a global perspective.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

620 Handbook of Public Administration

Knowledge about Effective Practice

This section focuses on effective practices that public administrators need to employ in an effort to decrease their liability. First, a comprehensive understanding for when and how civil servants have immunity from law- suits will be explored. Next, we examine the need for public administrators to protect the substantive and procedural rights of the citizens for whom they serve. Third, we analyze the importance of free speech liability for public administrators. Fourth, how civil servants can preserve equal protec- tion under the law, particularly with regard to how admissions counselors use race as a factor in creating a diverse student body at public colleges and universities, is critical for understanding the complexities associated with decreasing liability. Finally, we underscore the impact of privatization and contracting out public goods and services on public administrators’ liability.

Immunity for Public Administrators

In order for public administrators to understand their personal and professional liability when performing the functions of their job, they must also understand when they have immunity from lawsuits. Liability in this context means the courts will not allow groups or individuals to bring lawsuits against public administrators who were performing the responsibilities associated with their position. The following analysis examines three important Supreme Court cases: Nixon v. Fitzgerald, Clinton v. Jones, and Harlow v. Fitzgerald. Each illustrates how the Court works to shapes institutional dynamics of the administrative state. In Nixon v. Fitzgerald, the Court maintained that the president of the United States has absolute immunity from lawsuits for all official actions that occurred during his administration. In Clinton v. Jones, however, the Court held that the US president does not have immunity for unofficial conduct or for conduct that occurred in an unofficial capacity. Finally, the Court ruled in Harlow v. Fitzgerald that constitutional competence was an essential job requirement for public administrators.

In the 1982 term, the Supreme Court provided important guidance for the field of public administration regarding when public managers have immunity from lawsuits. In Nixon v. Fitzgerald, it held that the president, when acting in his official capacity as leader of the executive branch, has absolute immunity from liability damages. Absolute immunity also extends to legislators when they are acting in their official capacity as elected officials, judges when they are acting in their official judicial capacity,

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Understanding Your Liability as a Public Administrator 621

prosecutors when they are acting in their official prosecutorial capacity, and executive branch officers engaged in adjudicative functions.

In the 1997 case, Clinton v. Jones, the Court addressed the limitations of absolute immunity for the president. Justice Stevens, writing for the unan- imous Court, held that the president does not have absolute immunity, or any other type of immunity, for unofficial conduct or for conduct that extends beyond the scope of any action taken in an unofficial capacity. The Court also held that the Constitution does not automatically grant the pres- ident immunity from civil lawsuits based on his private conduct or afford him temporary immunity from those lawsuits until after he has left office. The Supreme Court in this case was making a powerful statement: no one, not even the president, is immune from following the rule of law.

Harlow v. Fitzgerald is one of the most important cases that US public managers need to understand in order to protect themselves from lawsuits. Here, the Court established that constitutional competence for public managers was a job requirement for public managers at all levels of government (Rosenbloom et al., 2004). In this case, the Court held that when public administrators are performing discretionary functions associated with their job, they are generally shielded from liability for civil damages. However, the Court was explicitly clear that a civil servant will lose qualified immunity if he or she knows that his or her official action violates an individual’s constitutional rights for which a reasonable person would have known, or if he or she acted with malicious intent to cause a deprivation of constitutional rights or other injuries. If a reviewing court finds that a public administrator knowingly violated a citizen’s legally pro- tected rights, then the administrator in question becomes personally and professionally liable for the damages he or she has inflicted. In a word, this means that every personal asset a public manager has—savings, property, retirement accounts—can serve as compensation for the individual whose rights the public manager violated.

The US Congress has also addressed the importance of immunity for public administrators working at the state and local levels of government. Title 42 of the US Code, section 1983, maintains that if a civil servant at the state or local level violates a citizen’s constitutional or individual rights, he or she can be held personally and professional liable for damages (Newbold, 2011; Rosenbloom et al., 2010).

In this regard, both the Supreme Court and Congress have spoken clearly and unambiguously regarding their constitutional expectations for US public administrators. In doing so, the Court is working to shape the American administrative state in its own image by placing the Constitu- tion front and center in public sector organizations. The Court is willing to

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

622 Handbook of Public Administration

provide public administrators with qualified immunity for decisions made in an official capacity as long as they respect how the rule of law protects the rights of citizens.

Maintaining Substantive and Procedural Due Process Rights in Public Administration

Due process is a central tenet of US constitutional law, and conserving this important protection is critical for understanding public administrators’ liability. The Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution states that the fed- eral government cannot deprive an individual of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment, ratified after the Civil War, maintains that the individual states cannot deprive an individ- ual of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. Based on these two key principles of constitutional law, the more nuanced concepts of pro- cedural due process and substantive due process have become important legal standards in helping public administrators understand their liability.1

Procedural due process “permits the government to take action that may have grave consequences for a person or group as long as it follows fair procedures” (Cooper, 2007, p. 195). This is the due process associ- ated with administrative adjudications and emphasizes the importance of fundamental fairness in cases affecting life, liberty, and property as well as ensuring that public administrators follow the law correctly. By means of contrast, substantive due process “prevents the government from taking some actions against an individual regardless of the procedural protections provided” (Cooper, 2007, p. 195). Scholars and practitioners often regard this type of due process as “the rights implicit in ordered liberty” (Cooper, 2007). Modern examples of substantive due process include the right to privacy, the right to contraception and other choices about reproductive health, the right to an abortion, and the right of homosexuals to participate in private sexual activity.

Understanding the differences between procedural and substantive due process is important. These practical distinctions help public adminis- trators recognize the different types of due process procedures they might need to provide citizens in specific types of situations. This is especially true, for example, when public managers working at the street level are determining a citizen’s welfare eligibility or what type of disability services an individual might be eligible to receive. Public administrators who are in charge of determining the allocation of public benefits relating to social services need to be particularly cognizant of ensuring due process protections. Over the past five decades, the Supreme Court has explained the liability public managers face if they violate citizens’ due process rights

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Understanding Your Liability as a Public Administrator 623

when making determinations regarding the approval or denial of state and federal benefits. The cases outlined next provide a framework to guide public administrators in understanding how to maintain constitutional competence, protect the rights of citizens, and decrease their personal and professional liability.

Balancing Due Process with the Free Exercise Clause. In the landmark 1963 case Sherbert v. Verner, the Court held that a state could not disqualify an individual for unemployment compensation benefits solely because of her refusal to work on Saturdays, the Sabbath Day of her faith, because doing so imposes an unconstitutional burden on the free exercise of religion. The Court also held that the state must provide a compelling state interest prior to the termination of state benefits. This case provides an important constitutional lesson: no state, or public administrator working on behalf of the state, can exclude any individual who follows a particular religion from receiving the benefits of public welfare legislation if he or she is otherwise eligible.

Termination of Public Benefits: A Due Process Conundrum. Between 1970 and 1976, the Supreme Court also drew important distinctions between when and how public administrators could deny welfare and Social Security dis- ability benefits. Understanding liability as a public administrator requires an understanding of these cases. In Goldberg v. Kelly (1970), Justice William Brennan, writing for the majority, held that welfare was a form of prop- erty protected by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Therefore, before a caseworker can deny welfare benefits to an individ- ual or a family, he or she must allow a pretermination hearing. According to Frank Michelman (1999), who wrote one of the definitive biographies on Justice Brennan’s jurisprudence, the Goldberg decision conceptualized one of the justice’s quintessential viewpoints regarding constitutional inter- pretation: “The Constitution, without specifically saying so, must mean to guarantee rights to individualized hearings to those asserting eligibility for government benefits” (p. 41). In Goldberg, the Court argued that for qual- ified welfare recipients, these benefits represented the only way the poor could maintain the basic elements associated with life, liberty, and property. Failing to provide pretermination hearings prior to the elimination of wel- fare benefits therefore constituted a violation of the due process clause and would subject the reviewing caseworker and his or her agency to a lawsuit.

Much to Justice Brennan’s chagrin, in Mathews v. Eldridge (1976), the Court narrowed the Goldberg precedent and held that the Fifth Amendment’s due process clause did not require caseworkers to provide

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

624 Handbook of Public Administration

a pretermination hearing prior to termination of Social Security disability benefits. Here, the Court found a fundamental difference between welfare recipients and disability recipients, because welfare is need based, whereas disability insurance is based on the inability to work, regardless of financial status or income. This case added to the field’s understanding for what constitutes constitutional competence for public administrators. When eligibility in welfare cases is being determined, a pretermination hearing is constitutionally necessary; in cases involving Social Security disability insurance, a pretermination hearing is not necessary prior to the dissolution of benefits.

Free Speech Liability for Public Administrators

One of the most revered provisions commonly associated with democratic governance is the freedom of speech. The First Amendment maintains that Congress shall make no law abridging this freedom. As the admin- istrative state has expanded, however, one of the challenges facing public administrators at all levels of government is what type of speech the Con- stitution protects when civil servants choose to speak out on public issues. The Supreme Court has offered important instructions to public managers regarding how to balance the free constitutional speech of public employ- ees with the need to protect the efficient and responsible management of public agencies. The case law in this area provides important lessons for public administrators regarding their liability when attempting to regulate the public and private speech of civil servants.

In 1987, the Court examined the constitutionality of the termination of a public employee, Ardith McPherson, who was working on probation- ary status for the Office of the Constable in Harris County, Texas. After the attempted assassination of President Ronald Reagan, McPherson, who was eating lunch with her boyfriend in the office’s courtyard area, commented, “If they go for him again, I hope they get him.” A deputy constable overheard McPherson’s comments, and the agency fired her immediately. Writing for the Court’s majority in Rankin v. McPherson (1987), Justice Thurgood Marshall held that McPherson’s speech was constitutionally protected under the First Amendment because it was a matter of public interest.

According to Justice Marshall, public agencies have an important balancing act when deciding how to regulate the speech of their employ- ees. In this case, the Court balanced McPherson’s interests as a citizen when commenting on a public issue and the employer’s interest in maintaining an efficient work environment. Justice Marshall used this

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Understanding Your Liability as a Public Administrator 625

opportunity to instruct public managers on the importance of protecting the public speech of civil servants: “Vigilance is necessary to ensure that public employees do not use authority over employees to silence discourse, not because it hampers public functions but simply because superiors disagree with the content of employees’ speech” (sec. II, p. 3). McPherson prevailed in this case for three key reasons: the constable’s office could not provide a compelling state interest for why it fired her, McPherson’s comments did not disrupt the functioning of the office, and the Court held that McPherson’s punishment was too severe as her professional duties were primarily clerical.

One of the most notable cases that addressed the liability public agen- cies have when they choose to terminate a public employee for speech managers determine harms the institutional credibility of the organiza- tion was Pickering v. Board of Education (1968). Marvin Pickering, a public high school teacher, wrote a letter to a local Illinois newspaper critiquing the school board’s decision to use taxpayer dollars to fund and expand the athletic programs at the expense of funding improvements to the academic curriculum. When the letter was published, the school board fired Picker- ing immediately, claiming his these public assertions were detrimental to the mission, goals, and operations of the school system.

Justice Marshall, writing for the majority, held that the school board’s decision to terminate Pickering’s job for his public speech violated the First Amendment. Marshall also created what became known as the Pickering balancing test, which requires public agencies to balance the individual speech of their employees with the potential harm such speech instills on the organization (Lee & Rosenbloom, 2005; Rohr, 2002). Here, the Court chose to balance Pickering’s right to free speech against the school board’s official interests to advance its decision-making authority. In a word, Marshall was instructing leaders and managers of public organizations to balance the free speech interests of the employee with the public speech interests of the citizen (Lee & Rosenbloom, 2005; Rohr, 2002; Rosenbloom et al., 2010). Pickering created a powerful prece- dent for understanding a public administrator’s liability in the modern administrative state: if a public employee’s speech is of public interest, the Constitution protects that speech under the First Amendment.

Garcetti v. Ceballus (2006), however, added constitutional constraints to the thirty-eight-year-old Pickering precedent and provided further parameters for understanding governmental liability in public sector orga- nizations. Here, the Court once again examined how the First Amendment protects the free speech rights of public employees (Roberts, 2006; Rosen- bloom et al., 2010). Richard Ceballos, a deputy district attorney for the

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

626 Handbook of Public Administration

Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office, argued that his supervisor, Gil Garcetti, retaliated against him for writing an internal memorandum citing disagreements and misrepresentations between what a sheriff found during a formal search and the information the sheriff provided during his affidavit. Based on these inaccuracies, Ceballos argued that the district attorney’s office should dismiss the case before it went to trial.

Ceballus claimed that his professional opinion in this case not only caused Garcetti to retaliate against him on a regular basis, but also provided Garcetti an opportunity to deny his pending promotion in the district attorney’s office. Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the Court’s majority, held that “when public employees make statements pursuant to their offi- cial duties, the employees are not speaking as citizens for First Amendment purposes, and the Constitution does not insulate their written commu- nications from employer discipline” (sec. III, p. 9). As Roberts (1997) correctly points out, the Garcetti decision empowers public administration supervisors and employers with much greater latitude in terms of how they regulate the internal affairs of their agencies without being overwhelm- ingly concerned that their decisions will generate a First Amendment lawsuit.

Preserving Equal Protection under the Law without Increasing Liability

The Constitution’s equal protection clause, which is part of the Fourteenth Amendment, provides that no state shall deny to any person within its juris- diction the equal protection of the laws. From the civil rights movement to the present, one of the most scrutinized and difficult areas to manage is how public organizations use race and affirmative action programs to create a more racially balanced and equitable society at large.

When the government employs race as a factor in determining eligi- bility criterion for public goods and services or as a means to implement a specific public policy agenda, the federal courts apply strict scrutiny, the most exacting level of judicial review. Grounded in the equal protection clause, the federal courts use strict scrutiny when the government seeks to restrict rights based on race and ethnicity, which are suspect classifica- tions, or when the government seeks to limit an individual’s fundamental rights, which include the freedoms of speech and press. Policies created to differentiate individuals according to their race or ethnicity or those designed to restrict fundamental rights are constitutional only when the government can demonstrate that they are narrowly tailored to promote a compelling state interest by the least restrictive means possible. In these types of cases, the reviewing courts require a heavy burden of proof from

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Understanding Your Liability as a Public Administrator 627

the government. Leaders of public agencies have long been made aware that in cases involving suspect classifications and fundamental rights, it is not enough to demonstrate mere reasonableness. The Supreme Court has been overwhelmingly clear that if public organizations or public managers equate a numerical value to any race, they are in violation of the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Developing a compre- hensive understanding as to how and why the Court applies this judicial reasoning is especially important for helping to shield public servants from liability damages.

Over the past four decades, the Court has been especially active in reviewing cases in which public sector organizations have used race in various public policy initiatives to help advance principles associated with democratic governance, especially equality and representativeness. In Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978), the Court held that quotas based on race were unconstitutional. Justice Lewis Powell, writing for the majority, maintained that public institutions of higher education were not constitutionally prohibited from using the category of race to promote a diverse student body, but arbitrary and capricious values placed on individuals who constitute a specific race was unconstitutional. In a word, the Court ruled that race could be a factor but not the factor for public organizations attempting to establish greater racial diversity within their programs.

Three decades later, the Court once again scrutinized how public institutions of higher education used race to create a more diverse student body. In Grutter v. Bollinger (2003), the Court examined the University of Michigan’s Law School admissions policies. Here, the law school afforded notable weight to prospective candidates African American, Hispanic, or Native American ethnicity. The university argued that these groups advanced its efforts to increase diversity. The Court was heavily influenced by Michigan’s emphasis on building a “critical mass” of minority students within its overall student environment. Justice O’Connor, writing for the Court’s majority, supported Michigan’s efforts to achieve diversity from a holistic, highly individualized admissions process.

Applying the Bakke precedent for how race can be one of many factors in the admissions process, the admissions counselors at Michigan examined and considered all types of diversity, including gender, disability status, whether the applicant was the first generation in his or her family to attend college, experiential and cultural learning opportunities, foreign languages spoken, financial status, undergraduate record, LSAT scores, and letters of recommendation. Then the evaluators compared that can- didate to the entire pool of applicants seeking admission. The university

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

628 Handbook of Public Administration

demonstrated that it applied great flexibility to the admissions selection process to ensure that the law school considered all types of diversity.

Justice O’Connor agreed with Michigan’s argument on three key points. First, the institutionalization of establishing a critical mass was central to the law school’s mission to help future lawyers understand people of different races better. Second, the law school wanted to create more effective ways to help ensure that public institutions were more accessible to every member of society, regardless of race. Finally, the university wanted to create an environment where the paths to society’s leadership positions were more open and available to talented and qualified individuals of all races and ethnicities. The Court’s majority agreed and ruled in favor of its holistic admissions policy and further substantiated the constitutional argument that race is but one factor that constitutes diversity.

Whereas the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the University of Michigan’s Law School’s holistic approach to creating a diverse student body, it ruled that the undergraduate admissions approach adopted by the university’s College of Literature, Arts, and Sciences undermined the equal protection clause. In Gratz v. Bollinger (2003), admissions counselors automatically awarded prospective students twenty points, one-fifth of the total points needed to guarantee admission into the college, to each underrepresented minority solely because of race. The Court maintained that since the college did not apply a holistic or individualized review of each applicant, the university undermined the equal protection clause of the Constitution. While university officials argued that they created their selection criterion for administrative and procedural convenience, the Court rejected this approach.

In response to the Court’s rulings in Grutter and Gratz, the state of Michigan sought greater input from citizens regarding how it should use affirmative action efforts within the public sector. In the November 2006 election, a majority of Michigan voters supported a proposition to amend the state’s constitution to prohibit public colleges and universities, public employers, and public contractors from using sex- and race-based prefer- ences in admissions and employment decisions. The result of this ballot initiative meant that it was unconstitutional in the state for public colleges and universities to consider an applicant’s sex or race in their admissions decisions.

In a highly contested and publicized case, Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action (2014), the Supreme Court held that the voters of a state can choose to prohibit the use of racial preferences within public sector decision making, which, according to Justice Kennedy who wrote

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Understanding Your Liability as a Public Administrator 629

the Court’s plurality opinion, includes university admissions. The Court’s plurality maintained that such efforts do not violate the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. This case will undoubtedly change how states incorporate affirmative action techniques into public sector decision making. Such efforts will require public administrators to rely on their discretionary judgment more in support of racial and gender diversity and to help ensure that public institutions demographically reflect the citizens they serve.

One of the most important lessons for public administrators to under- stand with regard to protecting their personal and professional liability is that when public organizations or public managers equate a numerical value to any race, regardless of the reason or decision-making justification, they are in violation of the equal protection clause. The recent Supreme Court case, Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1, et al. (2007) illustrates this point.

In Parents Involved, the Court overturned decisions made by local school boards in Seattle, Washington, and Louisville, Kentucky, because each placed a numerical, arbitrary value on race in an effort to create a more racially diverse student body within their public schools. In Seattle, the school board classified students as either white or nonwhite. If a public school was not within ten percentage points of the district’s overall white/nonwhite racial balance, administrators instituted a tiebreaker, designed to reselect certain student assignments that would bring the school within the targeted racial balanced needed to achieve the district’s diversity initiative. In Louisville, the school board classified students as black or other and required all nonmagnet public schools to maintain a minimum of 15 percent black enrollment and a maximum of 50 percent black enrollment. Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the Court’s majority, argued that the fundamental purpose of the equal protection clause was to treat every citizen equally, regardless of race, religion, or class. He held that allowing local school districts to classify and group students according to their race purposively undermines the intent of this constitutional provision. Understanding liability as a public administrator means recognizing this essential element of American constitutional law.

Civil Servant Immunity in a Privatized Administrative State

Over the past few decades, the field of public administration in the United States and around the rest of the world has observed increased efforts to contract out and privatize government services to the private sector, nonprofit organizations, and other third parties. This effort has largely

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

630 Handbook of Public Administration

occurred due to the field’s strong emphasis in new public management and producing a government that is more economically efficient and effec- tive (Gore, 1993; Osborne & Gaebler, 1992; Rohr, 2002; Rosenbloom et al., 2010; Terry, 1998; Verkuil, 2009). These efforts have transformed the ser- vice delivery of public goods and services and distorted the traditional distinctions regarding which public sector responsibilities are inherently governmental while simultaneously raising important constitutional ques- tions regarding how to evaluate the performance and responsibilities of contracted-out employees (Rohr, 2002; Verkuil, 2009).

To this point, John Rohr (2002) has often argued that contracted employees in the United States have the worst of two worlds: all of the liability that a traditional civil servant has without any of the qualified immunity generally afforded to public administrators. The reason this dynamic occurs is due precisely to how the Supreme Court has analyzed the decision-making capacity and constitutional obligations of contracted employees.

In West v. Atkins (1988), the Court addressed an essential question regarding the types of constitutional responsibilities contracted employees have when providing services to citizens who are in the custody of the state. Here, the Court maintained that a part-time physician who is under contract with a state to provide medical care to prison inmates at a state prison hospital is required to observe the same constitutional requirements as if he or she were a full-time public employee. The Court was unambiguous in its opinion that if the government chooses to contract out public services, like that of providing adequate medical care to prisoners, it cannot ignore its constitutional obligations to protect those in its custody. As Justice Harry Blackmun noted, “It is the physician’s function within the state system, not the precise terms of his employment, that is determinative” (p. 1).

The implications of this case for public administration were signifi- cant. It suggests that private individuals who join in a contract with the state to provide public services can become state actors when they perform public services on behalf of the state (Rohr, 2002). If private, contracted employees do not demonstrate constitutional competence or violate the constitutional rights of the citizens they are serving, the federal courts can hold them personally and professionally liable for the damages they inflict (Rohr, 2002; Rosenbloom et al., 2010). Justice Antonin Scalia in Lebron v. National Railroad Passenger Corporation (1995) made this point explic- itly clear: “Neither the federal government nor the state governments are allowed to evade the most solemn obligations in the Constitution by simply resorting to the corporate form” (sec. V, p. 39).

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Understanding Your Liability as a Public Administrator 631

If the Supreme Court maintains that contracted employees must uphold constitutional competence in order to protect themselves from lawsuits, then logic would presume they also receive qualified immunity from suit when they are working on behalf of the state. In Richardson v. McKnight (1997), however, the Court denied qualified immunity to contract employees. According to Justice Stephen Breyer, the economic market achieves the same goals for private, contract employees as qualified immunity achieves for public employees.

The implications of this case are profound for the administrative state. When private or nonprofit organizations enter into a contract with the government, their employees engage in state action. In this professional capacity, contracted employees are responsible for upholding constitutional law and will likely sustain liabilities if they violate the legally and constitutionally protected rights of citizens. Such an environment provides credence to Rohr’s argument that contracted employees have the worst of both worlds: all of the liability but no immunity from lawsuit. As a result, it is more challenging for contracted employees and private sector organizations that are engaging in state action to defend themselves against claims they are undermining constitutional law (Dickinson, 2009; Rohr, 2002; Rosenbloom et al., 2010).

These realities require that government agencies that contract out public services proactively communicate with private contractors regard- ing the legal and constitutional expectations associated with privatization. Rohr (2002) suggests that public administrators involved in contracting out services need to discuss why and how private organizations are more vulnerable to lawsuits when they engage in state action. They need to explain why complying with the rule of law and constitutional tradition is often expensive and inefficient, and they need to require that private con- tractors integrate new evaluative requirements into their organizational culture.

Laura Dickinson (2009) has recommended the incorporation of specific criteria in every state contract. She makes the case that when the state contracts out public values, it must create guidelines for eval- uation that include (1) incorporating public law standards into each contract; (2) requiring private contractors to receive training in activities that promote public law values; (3) enhancing contractual monitoring by internal government actors and third parties; (4) clearly outlining performance benchmarks; (5) requiring contractors to receive accredi- tation from independent organizations; (6) mandating that contractors perform self-evaluations; (7) enhancing governmental termination pro- visions and allow for the partial governmental takeover of contracts for

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

632 Handbook of Public Administration

noncompliance; (8) allowing for beneficiary participation or broader public involvement in the design of contracts; and (9) strengthening enforcement mechanisms.

Implications

The implications for public administrators who do not understand their liability are severe. The Congress and the Supreme Court demand that public administrators recognize how the rule of law and the nation’s consti- tutional heritage affect their interactions with citizens. Failing to do so can result in lawsuits against the public administrator in question and the pub- lic agency that administrator represents. As Justice Brennan noted in Owen v. City of Independence (1980), “A damages remedy against the offending party is a vital component of any scheme for vindicating cherished con- stitutional guarantees, and the importance of assuring its efficacy is only accentuated when the wrongdoer is the institution that has been estab- lished to protect the very rights it has transgressed” (sec. B, p. 4). The Court has continued to support this line of legal reasoning and remains committed to ensuring that those who act on behalf of the state diligently uphold the Constitution and the rule of law.

From an international perspective, privatizing public goods and ser- vices has also notably affected public administration. In their comparative evaluation of public and private management, Rainey and Chun (2005) point to some of the challenges public managers face when governments privatize public responsibilities: “Public management appears for obvious reasons to be more frequently subject to such externally imposed or mandated changes, and public sector respondents tend to express less enthusiasm and support for these types of changes than for changes originating in their organizations” (p. 87). In examining budgeting and accounting reforms in South Africa, Rubin and Kelly (2005) found that this government has been particularly focused on privatization as a means to gain additional financial resources for development. As such, issues of transparency and corruption as well as balancing the budget and providing moderation in terms of how much money the government is borrowing have become increasingly important (p. 582). Rubin and Kelly also emphasized how privatization has affected public administration in China. Here, the government is focusing more on a market orientation for public goods and services as a means to control spending more effectively and create a balanced budget.

Countries are continually learning from each other about the strengths and weaknesses of privatization. A general point of agreement, however,

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Understanding Your Liability as a Public Administrator 633

is that in some countries “privatization is justified in the interests of efficiency; in other countries sales have occurred to produce one-time rev- enues; sometimes privatization occurs in a country because it is required by external authorities such as the international lending agencies or the EU” (Rubin & Kelly, 2005, pp. 584–585). The global emphasis on privatization points to the fact that new public management has made an enormous impact on public administration, and countries are continually trying to find the most effective way to incorporate economic market approaches into the practice of public management.

Ronald Moe and Robert Gilmour (1995), however, offer a sobering concern: public administration has seemingly forgotten how the rule of law provides the intellectual core for the American administrative state. Con- sequently, this has made it significantly easier to apply business models, such as those associated with new public management and the reinvent- ing government movements, to the practice of public sector management. As Paul Appleby (1945) reminds us, however, government is different, and the differences between the sectors are precisely why public administra- tors must be held to a higher standard in terms of accountability for their performance.

The Constitution is at the center of the US administrative state. Unlike at any other period in administrative history, constitutional law perme- ates entire areas of public management (Newbold, 2010; Rosenbloom et al., 2004, 2010). This environment demonstrates the importance and relevance of requiring constitutional competence as a core skill set for public management at all levels of government (Rosenbloom, 2003, 2007; Rosenbloom et al., 2004, 2010). It also speaks to the importance of establishing a constitutional school for American public administration (Newbold, 2010). This school of thought emphasizes that the nation’s constitutional heritage and the rule of law serve as the theoretical and practical foundation of public administration. And nowhere is this truer than in the context of understanding liability for public administrators. If public managers do not understand how the law affects what they can and cannot do in the context of their professional responsibilities, they lack the necessary knowledge, skills, and abilities to perform their jobs effectively and responsibly.

Summary

One of the most valuable and relevant lessons for public administrators is to understand their personal and professional liability, especially when

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

634 Handbook of Public Administration

making determinations regarding individual eligibility for public benefits or government programs. Failing to do so can result in grave consequences for both the civil servant and the administrative state. Larry Terry (2003) argued that the most distinguishing component of public sector leader- ship is the administrator’s responsibility to conserve the democratic values embedded within the nation’s constitutional heritage. When public admin- istrators take their oath of office, they are making a moral commitment to preserve the Constitution above all else (Terry, 2003). The relationship between the individual civil servant and the Constitution is the glue that holds the administrative state together. As such, comprehending adminis- trative liability is critically important for the continued professionalization of the field.

Understanding when public administrators have qualified immunity from suit, the need to protect citizens’ due process rights, recognizing when civil servants have free speech protections and when they do not, and the importance of ensuring individuals’ equal protection rights are critically important. Taken as a whole, these efforts form the core of constitutional competence, and if public managers incorporate these practices within their jobs, they will significantly decrease their liability. In addition, as public administration continues to move toward privatization and contracting out increasingly more public goods and services, it is imperative that leaders within the administrative state continue to demand constitutional integrity and compliance with the rule of law from everyone associated with and involved in publicly oriented service delivery.

Grounding public administration in constitutional tradition and the rule of law greatly enriches our collective awareness of the roles and responsibilities public administrators have within government. If public administrators do not understand the significance of maintaining constitutional competence and the legal ramifications that will likely emerge if they violate a citizen’s rights, they not only increase their personal and professional liability but also jeopardize the constitutional integrity and stability of the administrative state.

In The Federalist Number 68, Publius astutely observed, “The true test of a good government is its aptitude and tendency to produce a good administration” (Cooke, 1961, p. 461). In this pronouncement, Alexander Hamilton legitimated our field within a specific type constitutional order that the framers based on federalism, separation of powers, and the pro- tection of individual rights. Two hundred and twenty-six years later, the preservation of the democratic governance process is still dependent on this very observation.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Understanding Your Liability as a Public Administrator 635

Note 1. As a matter of factual specificity, some legal scholars do not distinguish the con-

cept of due process from a procedural or a substantive perspective because the text of the Constitution itself discusses due process only as due process. Others in the legal profession and many within the field of public administration who focus on the foundations of administration management argue that there are noteworthy distinctions between procedural and substantive due process.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

CHAPTER THIRTY-FIVE

EFFECTIVE GOVERNANCE, EFFECTIVE ADMINISTRATORS

James L. Perry and Robert K. Christensen

This concluding chapter summarizes what we know about effectivepublic governance in order to underscore what it means to be an effective public administrator in today’s environment. In the Preface we noted a shift in the paradigms of public administration. The chapters in this third edition of the Handbook underscore that public administration has transitioned in its focus from government enterprises to enterprising governance. While the definition of government enterprise in the second edition was perhaps broad enough to capture some of this shift, the focus on governance is critical to better understand what it means to be an effective public administrator.

Governance contemplates a tighter integration of nonstate actors and arrangements (e.g., private corporations, nonprofit entities, markets, and networks) into the evolution of our contemporary public service configurations (Wise, 1990). Internationally, these additional actors are playing key roles in the design, oversight, and delivery of public programs and services. However, the additional actors and roles do not dilute the critical role of public administration professionals. The preceding chapters convincingly argue just the opposite. Today’s public administrators must be enterprising to ensure that public service is professionally rendered both because of and, sometimes in spite of, governance arrangements that include nongovernmental actors.

636

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Effective Governance, Effective Administrators 637

What are the attributes, characteristics, or qualities of effective and enterprising governance? How can we recognize and train the effective public administrator? What qualities, attributes, skills, and behaviors are characteristic of effective public administrators? In answering these ques- tions in this chapter, we synthesize insights shared throughout this book.

This new edition sheds much-needed light on key aspects of the public administrative enterprise in the shift from government to gover- nance. Collaboration, negotiation, social entrepreneurship, social media, public-private partnerships, global governance institutions, and deliber- ative democracy are just a few examples of the dynamic enterprise that public administrators must embrace. Despite paradigmatic developments since the second edition, however, this new edition does not slight enduring themes. Intergovernmental relations, communication and interpersonal skills, ethics and legal competence—to name just a few—remain as important today as before. These too are fixtures in the modern public administrative enterprise.

Each of the seven parts of this book is arranged to systematically engage different aspects of effective governance and effective public administra- tion. Rather than resummarize each of the parts here, we offer a different perspective on how the respective themes fit together to distinguish two key questions: What constitutes effective governance? What makes an effective public administrator?

What Distinguishes Effective Governance?

The specific themes just discussed are inseparably linked to effective governance enterprises—a term that we use to encompass the energies, skills, resources, and actions of both state and nonstate actors yoked to accomplish public purposes. But a closer look reveals two big ideas that are particularly useful to advance and further define effective governance in terms of research and practice. The ideas are centered in strategy, collective action, and accountability in terms of law, transparency, and performance.

Effective Governance Requires Clear Missions, Shared Goals, and Collective Action

Governance enterprises cannot be effective unless they know where they are headed. Effectiveness is not random; it begins with a clear mission, vision, and goals. The contributors to this book emphasize clear mis- sions and goals but also recognize that goal ambiguities are sometimes

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

638 Handbook of Public Administration

strategic and sometimes resolved through governance processes. Richard Walker, Chan Su Jung, and Gong Rok Kim identify the menu of options for strategically resolving ambiguity. They focus on strategic leadership in effective governance enterprises and remind that strategic management is not a single tool, but rather a set of considerations—including goals, pro- cesses, content, stances, and actions—designed to maximize governance effectiveness.

The contributors also identify more subtle, less direct means for establishing visions, missions, and goals. One avenue, addressed by Anne Khademian and Fatima Sharif, is by managing relations with legislative and executive actors in ways that produce consensus, reaffirm agreements, and clarify goals. So effective governance in this sense requires some goal sharing among elected and nonelected (administrative) actors. Michael Howlett, Ishani Mukherjee, and Jeremy Rayner continue this theme in governance’s relation to policy design and implementation. The likelihood that a governance arrangement will produce an effective public program requires consensus on design-level input from policy planners, administrators, and legislators. Of course, policy designs affect not only the formal auspices, institutional structures, and rules that govern a public program but also the implementation of a program.

Rules and institutional arrangements more broadly were the focus of Elinor Ostrom’s (2009) astute attention because she cared deeply about developing and sustaining collective action to solve social problems—a goal common to most contemporary governance arrangements. Ostrom was interested in these arrangements at multiple levels, from microlevel operational situations to more meso- and macrolevel collective and consti- tutional choice situations. The contributors to this book offer perspectives across these levels. At the micro- and mesolevels of collective action, for example, several contributors highlight the role of the tools of governance.

Both direct and indirect tools are required in the vast majority of today’s governance arrangements (Salamon, ??). Direct service remains a staple in the curriculum for training new administrators. Sean Nicholson-Crotty discusses grants-in-aid, a critical indirect tool of collec- tive action. Contracting is another key tool of collective action, and Zach Huitink, David Van Slyke, and Trevor Brown remind us that third parties perform much of the work in today’s governance enterprises through contracts. Grants and contracts are indirect tools in which originating governments can strongly influence results through the quality of their management and monitoring. But other collective action tools may offer governments less leverage unless they are managed proactively. Coproduction and social enterprise are two such tools, and Tony Bovaird and Elke Loeffler review keys to effective design and management of

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Effective Governance, Effective Administrators 639

coproduction. Wolfgang Bielefeld tackles social entrepreneurship, not- ing that entrepreneurship for public good occurs in the public sector, nonprofit sector, for-profit sector, and collective and multisector settings. Because this entrepreneurship takes many forms, understanding factors that drive success and failure across these various manifestations directly informs effective governance.

At more macrolevels of collective action, several contributors define the contemporary landscape of effective governance and how it is chang- ing, including a discussion of implications for the tools used at more microlevels of collective action. Donald Kettl begins by arguing that the definition and scope of effective governance will likely continue to evolve as new governance forms increasingly intersect with traditional forms. Environments, but also the strategies public administrators use to cope with them, are driving the transformation of collective action. These changes include even more macrolevel factors as one considers Jonathan Koppell’s contribution. Koppell argues that the increasingly international nature of governance enterprises is spurring the creation of unique institutions, rules, and administrative arrangements that compete with and overlap domestic counterparts.

But even domestic arrangements are not insulated from transforma- tion. Laurence O’Toole describes intergovernmental relations, which many might prematurely consider a relatively insulated tool of direct governance, as “dynamically in flux.” New forms of partnership are one manifestation of the flux. Barbara Crosby, Melissa Stone, and John Bryson highlight the drivers that have made intra- and cross-sectoral partnerships a useful strategic choice to engage some of more challenging contemporary public problems.

Across these levels of collective action, we reiterate that a striking pat- tern of change is that which Kettl describes as the erosion of boundaries. The prominence of sector-based boundary erosion is not unexpected, and we saw evidence of such blurring in contributions to the second edition of this book. However, the pace and scope of that blurring are increas- ing. Newly forming rules, laws, and institutions are overlapping traditional (i.e., largely direct government) forms of collective action. These legal and accountability regimes—even as they evolve—are critical to effective gov- ernance. We take up these and other topics in the next section devoted to designing accountability.

Effective Governance Is Designed for Accountability

A theme emphasized repeatedly is that governance effectiveness is en- hanced by effective design of legal and accountability systems, organiza- tions, programs, and control systems. A common thread implicit in many

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

640 Handbook of Public Administration

of the contributions was the successes and failures of governance at all levels of collective action. Accountability emerges as a unifying theme from these and other chapters that explicitly extend the question of designing governance enterprises to ensure governance effectiveness.

The efficacy of design is not new to the field. Woodrow Wilson’s (1887) seminal essay was devoted largely to the question of how efficient and effective administrative institutions should be designed to serve the purposes of a democratic society. The Progressive movement was devoted to a series of new political and administrative designs, including the council-manager plan. Herbert Simon pioneered thinking about public administration as a design science—devising “courses of action aimed at changing existing situations into preferred ones” (1969, p. 55). The “new” public administration of the 1970s evoked a strong design component (Levine, Backoff, Cahoon, & Siffin, 1975). More recently, the reinvention movement (Osborne & Gaebler, 1992), privatization (Hefetz & Warner, 2012; Wise, 1990), the new economics of organization (Moe, 1984), quality management (Walton, 1986; Schmidt & Finnigan, 1992), systems thinking (Senge, 1990), and governance transformation (Kettl, chapter 1; Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2011) have sensitized us once again to the importance of design for effective governance.

Phillip Cooper’s chapter challenges us to begin with foundational, constitutional principles as a blueprint to reinforce and empower admin- istratively responsible action. In one sense, Cooper explains the explicit role of law in advancing responsibility because responsibility is “concerned with ensuring that public service professionals operate within the bounds of the authority provided by law and do not violate the rights of those they are assigned to serve.” In an equally important sense, though, law not only channels and constrains effective governance, but also empowers effective governance in that it serves as an important mechanism of change. Law as a mechanism of change calls forth visions of it as a design principle in the implementation of effective policy (see Schneider & Ingram, 1990b). Another important aspect of empowerment that Cooper notes is the role of law in bolstering the legitimacy of governance enterprises. This legitimacy can only be achieved, of course, by concerted design: adhering to the rule of law.

While formal law may mandate certain aspects of accountable gov- ernance enterprises, Gregory Porumbesu and Tobin Im argue that they should be supplemented by the objective of transparency. Designing accountable governance on the value of transparency may go beyond the requirements of law, but the authors convincingly argue that transparency

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Effective Governance, Effective Administrators 641

is an essential tool to promote an infrastructure of administrative account- ability. The potential of transparency reflects rapid developments in information technology and citizen engagement and empowerment. Tina Nabatchi, Jack Becker, and Matt Leighninger engage the latter topic in their chapter. They argue that citizens should be a conscien- tious factor in the design of governance arrangements. Certainly not all citizen engagement is created equally or for the same purpose, and these authors envision effective governance enterprises that integrate a variety of citizen participation modes to achieve more fulsome levels of accountability. Public administrators are therefore encouraged to be more thoughtful about citizen-related features used to design accountability infrastructure.

Effective Governance Measures and Monitors Results

At the conclusion of his chapter, Harry Hatry poses the rhetorical question: “If one does not know the score, how can one play the game?” Effective public enterprises “know the score” by measuring and monitoring results. As Hatry recounts in his chapter, significant attention to performance mea- surement in public administration has at least a seventy-five-year history, dating to Ridley and Simon’s (1943) path-breaking Measuring Municipal Activities. Hatry’s chapter reflects the substantial progress governance enter- prises in all arenas have made toward effective performance measurement. The demands for a more results-driven public sector will stimulate further development of valid and useful performance measurement.

Kathryn Newcomer identified a variety of techniques used to evaluate the effectiveness of public programs. Effective governance enterprises wisely employ multiple methods to assess the overall results and outcomes of a program and improve its operations. In contemporary governance arrangements, public institutions must often balance competing claims from many stakeholders, including legislatures that appropriate funds and taxpayers who pay the bills. Thus, feedback from many types of stakeholders is an essential part of the process of measuring and monitoring results. Because public performance is often messier, less tangible, and multilateral, governance enterprises must pay attention to cues and nuances in their environments and constituent actors to understand and interpret their performance. Discussed throughout this book, effective governance enterprises measure and monitor results by keeping close to the legislature (chapter 9), courts (chapter 5), citizens (chapter 8), employees (chapter 21), collaborators (chapter 12), and peers (chapter 2).

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

642 Handbook of Public Administration

Effective Governance Systems Steward Resources

An emergent feature of effective governance, while not necessarily directly accessible from individual contributions but discernible from the collectivity, is resource stewardship. Resources come in a variety of forms, including money, people, information, organizations, political power, and social capital. We use stewardship here in a special way, to denote both shared responsibility among governance enterprise participants for resource acquisition and their commitment to the appropriate use of these resources.

As both experience and political rhetoric remind us, money alone solves few public problems. And even if it did, the willingness of people to commit their resources to governance enterprises is declining. Effective governance enterprises must rely on a range of resources contributed by a variety of participants. The constitutional structure of the US government and other governments impose certain demands on resource stewardship.

The evolving complexity of stewardship stems from recent shifts to even more complex governance arrangements that include private cor- porations and private nonprofit agencies, citizens, and other government institutions—each with its own demands for resource stewardship. Regard- less of arrangement, fiscal resource stewardship alone is not sufficient to produce the results the public demands.

Information, typically a less tangible resource, must also be marshaled. The formula for acquiring information resources is complex. It relies on both communication flows within and among governance enterprises and formal information systems. James Garnett; M. Jae Moon and Eric Welch; and Ines Mergel each summarized lessons for effective communication with and among stakeholders and ways for managing information.

Organizational, political, and social resources must be merged with financial, human, and information resources in hopes of meeting the extraordinary demands imposed on public enterprises. How are these other resources created? This question has no easy answer, but the contributors again provide insights. For example, Sergio Fernandez is highly attentive to the processes that align organizations with new and changing objectives. The ability to fully use organizations as resources is a function of overcoming normative resistance to change.

Norms can also be important resources in the political and social realms. Bielefeld’s idea of social entrepreneurship, Nabatchi et al.’s call for citizen engagement, and Mergel’s discussion of social media strategies are all tools that can be employed in governance enterprises to cultivate political and social norms as forms of social capital.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Effective Governance, Effective Administrators 643

What Makes an Effective Public Administrator?

The contributors have emphasized, explicitly and implicitly, that effective public administration is a function of both institutions and people. Our discussion thus far has focused on institutions that comprise governance arrangements—the systems of contemporary public service. The late W. Edwards Deming (Walton, 1986) popularized the idea that variations in quality are largely determined not by people but by systems. Get the sys- tem right, Deming argued, and quality follows. But whose responsibility is it to get the systems right? People! Whether governance enterprises can develop compelling visions, orchestrate collective action, design account- ability, or steward sufficient resources depends on capable and committed public administrators. Thus, it is imperative to inquire: What factors influ- ence a public administrator’s effectiveness? We identify six enduring factors arranged broadly by skill set: technical skill, human skill, conceptual skill, intrapersonal skill, responsiveness to democratic institutions, and focus on results, including the moral consequences of one’s actions.

Technical Skill

An effective public administrator commands the specialized activities that are assigned as part of an organizational role. One of the hallmarks of modern organizations and, by extension, modern public administration is the expansion of specialized activity and knowledge. Administrative effec- tiveness necessitates some capacity to perform expert tasks. Technical skill implies a proficiency in a specific kind of performance, particularly one involving methods, procedures, or techniques (Katz, 1974).

Some contributors to this book have explicitly addressed the importance of technical skills for administrator effectiveness; others have recognized their importance implicitly. We have discussed the importance of resources to governance enterprises. Fiscal resources—if they are to be fully used—require technical skill. Alfred Ho and Yilin Hou both illustrate this need in their respective chapters on performance budgeting and revenue administration. An administrator’s failure to attend to the technical aspects of developing and running revenue systems and budget management can seriously erode the financial viability and public confidence in a governance enterprises.

Because technical skills are the most concrete aspect of administrator effectiveness and have held such a central role in public administration thought over the years (Kaufman, 1969), it is equally important to put them into perspective. Although technical skills are a requisite for effectiveness

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

644 Handbook of Public Administration

in virtually every administrative position, their relative importance usually declines as a public administrator ascends an organization’s hierarchy. By the same token, technical skills are never likely to be the only characteristic that discriminates between effective and ineffective performers at any level in an organization. Indeed technical abilities can infuse and advance other skill sets. Perhaps the best illustration is Jared Llorens’s chapter on public personnel compensation. Llorens simultaneously illustrates the technical and human skills needed to develop effective compensation systems.

Human Skill

Human skills are complex and difficult to summarize. At a minimum, they involve an awareness of self and of how one’s actions affect others; per- ceptiveness regarding the motives and sensitivities of others; recognition of one’s responsibility to the group, genuineness in relations with others; and the ability to bridge competing cultures, resolve conflicts, and negoti- ate (Katz, 1974; Ring & Perry, 1985). Effective public administrators must possess the human skills to integrate people into all types of collective endeavors.

The situations in which a public administrator must employ these human skills are extensive. The situation probably most identi- fied with human skills involves the problem of motivating public personnel to achieve high performance. Using their human skills, public adminis- trators seek to develop member identification with and commitment to organizational goals and to ensure their satisfaction with the rewards and incentives the organization offers. David Pitts and Sarah Towne shed light on the potential performance benefits of managing diversity well. So too, Wouter Vandenabeele and Nina Van Loon underscore that managing differences often requires a deeper understanding of individual moti- vation. While there has been strong scholarly interest in public service motivation, Vandenabeele and Van Loon call for human skills that can properly integrate and leverage context-sensitive motivation into the particular “value chain of public service delivery.”

The importance of human skills for the public administrator reaches into the political environment as well. Relations with legislators (chapter 9) and citizens (chapter 8) are potential sources for confrontation unless the public administrator brings the appropriate orientation and skills to the situation. Perceptiveness and empathy, that is, being able to identify with other parties and understand their position, is a necessary starting point for constructive, productive administrative relationships. But diver- gent interests and confrontations are inevitable. In these situations, public

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Effective Governance, Effective Administrators 645

administrators must have the skills to limit and manage conflict and to negotiate solutions when necessary (see Lisa Blomgren Amsler’s chapter on negotiation).

A public administrator’s capacity to function effectively within the com- plex network, intergovernmental, and coproduction and implementation structures (see, e.g., chapters 1, 2, 3, 10, 12, 13, and 16) relies heavily on the human skills that Rosemary O’Leary discusses. Public administrators must develop cooperative linkages with peers, subordinates, politicians, competitors, and constituents to be able to gather and get information vital for working effectively within the governance enterprises. In a very real sense, the effectiveness of administrators may be a direct reflection of their effectiveness as collaborators.

A human skill whose importance is accentuated by organizational size, social cleavages, and network structures is communication. As James Garnett noted, communication in the public sector is different because government is often situated in the middle of information networks. Within such networks, communications skills become essential tools for operating effectively.

Reflecting on the situations in which human skills are important demonstrates the tenuousness of the public administrator’s position. Although government is the chief coercive institution in our society, it is obvious that much of what happens in government depends on cooperation rather than coercion. As agents, public administrators are therefore relatively helpless unless they can wield informal influence. Thus, they need to develop their human skills to provide the glue to bind people together in cooperative action.

Conceptual Skill

Conceptual skill involves the public administrator’s ability to see the big picture—conceiving how decisions, events, and people are linked together in time and space. Conceptual skills are to the administrator what effec- tive design is to the larger governance enterprise. Each helps to unify and coordinate the administrative process.

Katz (1974) suggests that conceptual skill involves recognizing how the functions of an organization are interdependent and visualizing the rela- tionship of the organization to its broader context. In government, this means being able to envision the relationship between one’s own organiza- tional activities and broader agency and government goals, recognize the implications of action for many attentive groups and the general public, and anticipate the consequences of action or inaction through time.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

646 Handbook of Public Administration

Like human and technical skills, the situations that require well- developed conceptual skills are numerous. Conceptual skills are a necessary resource for effectively understanding and managing the multi- ple accountability relationships inherent in collaborative management. If there are challenges in achieving strategic vision in a single organization, Michael McGuire and Chris Silvia demonstrate the conceptual difficulties of achieving shared vision and purpose in collaborations. They observe that “partners in a collaboration work to achieve their individual orga- nization’s goals as well as a shared, collective goal. The goal itself may be different across organizations involved in the collaboration.” Because of the additional layers of vision, collaborative managers must actively manage collaborative awareness, boundaries, constraints, communication, and external constituents. These facets illustrate key conceptual skills that today’s public administrators must have. The ability to conceptualize a collaborative arrangement in operational terms at an early stage must be complemented by an ability to conceptualize it in technical and human terms as well.

Intrapersonal and Interpersonal Skills

Many of the skills the effective public administrator employs can be acquired by education (e.g., technical skills such as budgeting) or practice (e.g., human skills such as giving effective feedback and listening). As Robert Denhardt and Maria Aristegueta illustrate, others are acquired by introspection, reflection, and self-awareness. Among the intrapersonal skills they identify that are central to effectiveness are establishing a personal vision, becoming more creative and innovative, dealing with ambiguity and change, and improving sense of self.

There are more externally oriented interpersonal skills as well. In the increasing numbers of governance situations requiring collective leader- ship, discussed by Sonia Ospina and Gabrielle Foldy, administrators must sense the need for collective leadership and have the ability to manage the cognitions of multiple audiences. The authors explain that this “broader lens of leadership means [a] shift from considering … individual attributes and behaviors of leaders … to also considering the processes and condi- tions that help members of a group or organization … work together to achieve their common vision.”

Responsiveness to Democratic Control

The effective public administrator not only complies with the letter of the law but strives to facilitate all aspects of democratic accountability by

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Effective Governance, Effective Administrators 647

promoting an informed citizenry, contributing to open debate of issues, and respecting the ultimate choices of citizens and their representatives. Carrying out the law is the first test of democratic responsiveness. As Stephanie Newbold reminds us, failure to carry out the law often brings severe consequences; for public administrators to violate the law is illegitimate and undermines the foundations of constitutional democracy. The public administrator’s exposure to liability is a reflection of how highly we value these constitutional principles. With Cooper (chapter 5), Newbold encourages administrators to be legally proactive—continually reflecting constitutional fluency in their actions. In part this reflects the fact that legal systems are but one mechanism for encouraging democratic responsiveness. External accountability structures, leadership, and orga- nization culture also influence whether democratic values are honored or breached. The effective public administrator recognizes these influences and strives to use these mechanisms to further the goals of a democratic society.

While formal control systems create an environment for account- ability, they do not ensure that public administrators will respond to the needs and interests of citizens and their representatives. The public administrator who perceives and properly interprets environmental cues about popular control has probably also successfully internalized the values and ethical precepts of democratic governance. This is where skills of self-accountability come into play.

Focus on Ethical Decisions and Moral Impact of One’s Actions

Despite the ambiguities often inherent in their positions, effective public administrators have a keen interest in results. As stewards for scarce collec- tive resources, public administrators are obligated to achieve results.

Achieving results has always been a core value in public administra- tion. Among the results that have historically attracted the most attention are efficiency, effectiveness, and equity. But the effective public adminis- trator’s concern about results does not end with these three. He or she must be mindful of the moral and ethical dimensions of action as well. Thus, effective public administrators are cognizant of the ethical use of office. They are also aware of the consequences of institutional decisions and actively engaged in mitigating the undesirable consequences of admin- istrative institutions.

Effective public administrators are interested not only in the obvious moral consequences of their actions, but the more subtle, less percepti- ble consequences as well. In deliberations about tax policy, for example,

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

648 Handbook of Public Administration

the effective public administrator recognizes that decisions about taxes are not neutral but have important distributive, economic, and social conse- quences. It is the public administrator’s role to help focus public debate on these consequences of taxes as well as on their revenue capacity and collectability.

Brian Williams and Liza Ireni-Saban fully engage these issues in their respective chapters. In pursuing self-accountability, modern pub- lic administrators have no simple formula for making ethical choices. Williams supplies an encouraging array of ethical considerations to guide some of these choices that include both leadership and followership. Ireni-Saban supplies an international discussion of codes of ethics that reminds administrators the world over of the varied (but perhaps insuf- ficient) efforts to institutionalize precepts of “ethical competence.” In part, these codes of ethics reflect a push toward the professionalization of public administration.

Public Administration as a Profession

Public administration has long been synonymous with public service. Throughout much of American history, the call to public service has been a powerful motivator, a noble activity worthy of the best of our society. President Kennedy’s call to “ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country” led a generation of American’s best and brightest to seek public service careers. Commitment to public service is part of our civic heritage.

As this book demonstrates, however, effective public enterprises cannot be built on commitment alone. Effective governance evolves from clear missions, shared goals, and well-coordinated collective action. Designed with accountability in mind, it measures and monitors processes and results. It is based on good stewardship of resources. No amount of individual effort can build effective enterprises without these elements.

But effective administrators are also a vital part of effective enterprises. As we noted in the introduction to part 7, few public sector activities are self-administering. Effective public administrators possess a range of skills and attributes, each important to the successful performance of assigned and implicit responsibilities. These skills range from a grasp of the tech- nical components of a job, to ability to work with others, a vision of the big picture, and personal vision. These administrator are also attuned to the letter and spirit of democratic governance, and they work to facilitate processes and substantive outcomes supportive of democratic institutions.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Effective Governance, Effective Administrators 649

At the same time, they are attentive to achieving results, but are aware that they need to be defined more broadly than economical and efficient oper- ation of the government.

Attaining the skills and attributes to be an effective public administra- tor is a formidable challenge. To become effective, public administrators must aspire to two potentially conflicting personal attributes: specialized knowledge and an awareness of and sensitivity to common, shared values. They succeed in integrating these attributes because of their commitment to public service. Public administrators can take great pride from the past and future accomplishments of the public sector. It has been with their competence and commitment that these accomplishments have been achieved.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 5 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .