Module 3 Lecture
What is Ethics?
Ethics in daily life: understanding of what is right and wrong; what guides us to behave ethically.
In academic terms, ethics is grounded in two Greek traditions:
Teleological perspective: focuses on maximizing what is good in the end; consequences matter.
Deontological theory: motives and intentions are important factors in decision making.
In public management, there are two main implications:
Ethics as normative guidelines for resolving conflicts of interest to enhance societal well-being.
Ethics as a body of principles and standards of conduct that govern individual or group behaviors.
Overall view: ethics are behavioral guidelines for public administrators toward better societal well-being.
Teleological vs Deontological Perspectives
Teleological (consequentialist) view: outcomes and consequences matter; aim to maximize good at the end.
Deontological view: duties, motives, and intentions matter; actions are right if they align with moral duties regardless of outcomes.
In public administration, both matter, but there is emphasis on not just achieving results but how results are achieved (means matter too).
Ethics in Public Administration: Norms and Goals
Public administration ethics are normative guidelines for resolving conflicts of interest to enhance societal well-being.
It is a body of principles and standards of conduct that govern the behavior of individuals or groups within public institutions.
Purpose: guide behavior in professional public roles toward the public good.
Ethical Dilemmas and the Trolley Problem
Ethical dilemma: a situation with options that have conflicting moral standards or where all options may be morally problematic; no option clearly overrides the others.
Trolley problem (illustrative ethical dilemma):
A train with brakes broken; a lever/divergent lane with two possible destinations.
On one side, 5 people; on the other side, 1 person. The person cannot escape, and you cannot warn them.
Question: which way should you divert the train?
Common intuition: divert to the lane with the single person to save five.
Variations raise questions: what if the one is a family member or a vicious criminal? Do these cases change your decision?
Takeaway: there is no absolute right or wrong answer; the scenario illustrates the essence of ethical dilemma.
Ethics in Bureaucracy: Weberian Perspective and Its Limits
Weberian bureaucracy: hierarchical structure, written rules/regulations, clear divisions of labor, defined authorities and responsibilities.
Claimed benefits: efficiency and predictability.
Critiques: can enable unethical behavior due to centralization of power and unquestioning obedience at lower levels.
Problem: formal rules cannot predict every scenario; bureaucrats must often rely on discretion when facing novel or conflicting situations.
Implication: administrative ethics are needed to guide discretionary decisions and prevent unethical conduct.
Bureaucratic Discretion and Administrative Ethics
Discretion: decisions made on the spot using common sense, knowledge, and experience when formal rules fall short.
Means-ends problem: getting the job done is not enough; how the job is done matters.
Public employees face competing demands from diverse interests (citizens, organizations, government, etc.).
Street’s three laws for public employees (framework to balance competing demands):
Loyalty to the organization
Responsiveness to public needs
Employees’ own objectives and desires
When these goals conflict, prioritizing public needs and interests is considered the most ethical action.
Practical takeaway: ethics in public administration requires balancing loyalty, responsiveness, and personal objectives in light of public welfare.
Corruption, Bribery, and Whistleblowing in Public Organizations
Corruption definition: betrayal of public trust for private interests.
Distinction: corruption vs legitimate political exchanges.
Example of legitimate exchange: Vote for a policy (e.g., tax cuts) because it affects broad public interests.
Example of corruption: paying voters (e.g., $200) to obtain votes, which violates election law and public trust.
Bribery: giving, offering, or receiving something of value to influence public officials’ duties.
Why bribery happens: greed and excessive desire for more than deserved; it disrupts daily administration and harms public interests.
Responding to corruption: whistleblowing.
Whistleblowing: exposing organizational wrongdoings to the public or appropriate authorities; public interest overrides personal/organizational interests.
Positive effects: promotes ethical culture, transparency, and protection of the public.
Potential drawbacks: retaliation fears, conflicts of interest, harm to chain of command, morale and trust issues.
How legal systems protect whistleblowers: examples include landmark cases such as:
The Pentagon Papers case (Ellsberg) – Supreme Court allowed publication of leaked documents related to Vietnam policy.
Fitzgerald case – an employee who reported cost overruns faced retaliation but was eventually reinstated and compensated.
Ethics commissions and oversight boards:
Bipartisan commissions appointed by governors/legislators.
Jurisdiction varies by state but typically covers: legislative/executive branches, candidates, officials, lobbyists, and vendors.
Roles: support internal ethics codes, monitor conflicts of interest, adjudicate cases, impose penalties, and provide training.
Cooper: Big Questions in Administrative Ethics
Cooper defines ethics as a system of moral principles and the rules of conduct recognized for a class of actions or a group/culture.
Administrative ethics: the same concepts applied to public administration.
Five normative foundations (Cooper):
Regime values: constitutional theory and founding thoughts (e.g., freedoms, equality, property rights, individualism) as interpreted by the Constitution and Supreme Court; employees must uphold these values.
Citizenship: public administrators as representatives of citizens; should be responsive to needs and encourage citizen participation.
Social equity: rooted in Roth’s theory of justice and the New Public Administration movement (1960s–1970s); PA should address equity issues in policy making and implementation.
Virtue: the character and morals of individuals; decision making may be guided by personal virtue.
Public interest: assess whether actions serve the public at large or special interests.
Global fit: Are these norms universal or nation-specific?
Cooper argues that some values are globally accepted (e.g., self-determination, freedom, honesty, trust) and are promoted through international treaties and agreements; administrative ethics can be global through these channels, especially in an interdependent world.
Organizational support for ethical behavior: how structure and culture shape behavior.
Milgram and Zimbardo experiments illustrate obedience to authority and the potential for unethical actions in hierarchical settings; while methodologically problematic today, their insights remain relevant for understanding organizational influence on ethics.
Implication: organizational design should consider how features influence ethical decision-making.
Equality vs. equity: when to treat people the same vs differently.
Equality means uniform treatment, but individuals have different needs and circumstances.
Equity emphasizes fairness by addressing different needs (e.g., aiding low-income or elderly groups with targeted benefits) to improve overall fairness and outcomes.
Fredriksen: Searching for Virtue in Public Life
Core idea: virtue (character) is foundational to public ethics, but virtue should be understood within public life, not just within individual morality.
Vulgar ethics: ethics of ordinary people; the ethics that govern the common good and public service—requires rules, procedures, ethical culture, and leadership within public organizations.
Public life is not limited to government. It includes non-governmental organizations, public enterprises, government contractors, and other entities with varying degrees of publicness (publicness continuum).
Traditional PA ethics canons (linked to early reforms like civil service reform and scientific management):
Merit-based systems, standardization, ethics rules, and professional codes.
These reforms raised ethical standards for governmental institutions but often addressed narrower issues (e.g., misuse of resources) rather than broader social problems (e.g., poverty, service delays).
Limitations of traditional canons: slower service delivery, increased inflexibility, and less focus on broader social welfare outcomes.
Modern public life: broader concept where virtue is found in the grassroots public sphere and issues of publicness extend beyond formal government structures.
Fredriksen’s proposal: virtue should be sought in the public life—rooted in citizens and public participation, social equity, social capital, and collaborative efforts.
Grain of “vulgar ethics”: embrace practical wisdom and common sense; apply ordinary-case reasoning to ethical questions.
Public life as a plural concept: the public sector comprises multiple entities with varying degrees of publicness; virtue is distributed across these actors, not confined to government alone.
Distinction from Cooper: while Cooper emphasizes the individual moral compass (virtue as a personal attribute), Fredriksen emphasizes virtue as a collective, public sense embedded in the public life and community engagement.
Virtue in Public Life: Publicness, Grassroots, and Collaboration
Public life includes diverse actors beyond the state (e.g., schools, public corporations, nonprofit organizations) operating in a public context.
Virtue is located in grassroots participation, social equity, social capital, and collaborative efforts across public and private actors.
The public sector should be understood as a spectrum of publicness, with varying degrees of public influence and accountability.
Traditional Canons vs. Modern Public Life
Traditional canons centered on governmental institutions, merit, standardization, ethics rules, and professional codes.
Modern public life expands ethics to include non-governmental actors and a broader sense of publicness, requiring inclusive approaches to governance and ethics.
Key Takeaways for Public Administrators
Ethics is about both what is done (outcomes) and how it is done (process, motives, and integrity).
Public administrators must navigate ethical dilemmas with an eye toward the public good and the long-term trust in public institutions.
Corruption and bribery erode public trust; whistleblowing is a critical mechanism to protect the public, despite potential personal and organizational costs.
Ethical governance requires organizational structures and cultures that promote ethical decision-making, accountability, transparency, and equitable treatment.
The normative foundations of administrative ethics include regime values, citizenship, social equity, virtue, and public interest; these must be considered in both national and global contexts.
There is value in both universal ethical principles and context-specific judgments about fairness and equity; organizations should strive for a balance that serves the public.
Virtue in public life is best understood not only as individual character but also as a collective attribute rooted in citizen participation, social capital, and collaboration across public and private actors.
Next Sessions Preview
Upcoming discussion on public administration and public values.
Questions can be directed via email to the instructor.