ethics today - united nationsunpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/... · a month ago i...

Newsletter of the ASPA Section on EthicsVolume 8 Number 3 Spring 2006

Ethics Today

11

A month ago I was asked by the Ethics Today editor if I would care to write an essay about the state of ASPA ethics or something like that as my watch as President winds down. Every ASPA president likes to think that he or she has an agenda. My agenda consisted of integrity, internationalism, and image. The integrity component consisted of the following: advocacy, code review, visibility, and interpretation.Advocacy The primary vehicles I relied upon to advocate ethics and integrity were the PATimes President’s column and presentations I made to local chapters and while traveling abroad. Among the columns published that spoke to integrity in some fashion were “The Making of an Ethical Administrator” (July 2005), “Managerialism Run Amok” (November 2005), “Citizen, Client, Customer: Who’s on First” (December 2005), “The Mantle of Idealism” (May 2005), and “ASPA Tomorrows” (March 2006).

Internationally, I made presentations on “Ethics and Integrity in Governance and Management” in Belgium, Germany, Thailand, and China. I believe that these presentations were respected and appreciated, especially in China where the subject of ethics is rarely discussed in public and generally excluded from Chinese MPA university programs.

Code Review

The integrity agenda included the revitalization of the Code Review and Implementation Committee which was established by National Council several years ago. I charged the committee with the following:The Committee should conduct a thorough review and assessment of the ASPA Code of Ethics and all mechanisms and procedures either in place or should be in place to insure that a) the membership is knowledgeable of the Code, b) the contents of the Code are up to date as a means to foster ethical behavior within and among ASPA members, and c) the implementation of the Code contributes to the advancement of ethics and integrity in governance.

IN THIS ISSUE

From Don Menzel 1Section News 4Religion on Ethtalk 5

“Why fuss?” 15“Ethics of Censorship” 15“Heteronomous and Heterogenous Views” 19Conference Schedule 21PA Times Calendar 34ET International 35Contact Information 41Last Words 42

ASPA Ethics 2006By Don Menzel


Ethics Today

22

Among the specific measures I would ask the Committee to examine are:

1. Implementation guidelines;

2. An ethics advisory body that would receive and act on requests for ethics guidance by the membership and make recommendations to National Council regarding how to promote ethical behavior and discourage behavior contrary to the ASPA Code of Ethics.

The Committee should complete its work on or before April 4, 2006, with recommendations sent to National Council with the advice and guidance of the President who serves as a member of council. Appointed by the President, members of the Committee should be drawn from a broad cross section of the ASPA membership to reflect the memberships’ diversity of opinion.

The Code of Ethics is the touchstone of the Society. Full care and diligence should be exercised in carrying out this review and assessment. The Committee must make every effort possible to maximize membership input and participation in undertaking this important task.

I regret to report that the Committee made no signifi cant progress in addressing the charge. Now, where do we go from here? I will have to make a recommendation to National Council to (a) continue with the committee, (b) change the approach in some manner, or (c) terminate the entire enterprise. I must make a recommendation to National Council in Denver and would welcome the advice of the Section members.

Code Visibility

My integrity agenda also included an effort to raise the profi le of the ASPA Code. This has taken several paths. First, I have advocated for a prominently displayed link to the ASPA Code on the ASPA web site. Presently, the viewer must search for a link starting with the “ASPA General Information” button and then scrolling to the bottom of the page that comes up. This situation is especially disturbing given the display of advertisements appearing on the primary ASPA web page. Executive Director Toni Samuel notes that “front page real estate” on an organization’s web site is a challenge to manage, especially with competing priorities. Therefore, I will continue to work with staff and our volunteer leadership as we assess the input from members about our priorities for the content, design and format of ASPA’s web site. I’m certain we will see the changes we desire, as staff completes a comprehensive plan to improve the ASPA web site.”

Second, I charged the Publications Committee with exploring the possibility of having every ASPA related journal incorporate a reference to the Code of Ethics. The ASPA staff reviewed all ASPA related journals and reports that only PAR displays the Code in its entirety, and no other journal even mentions the Code. It seems to me that every ASPA affi liated journal could, at a minimum, reference the Code in some manner. There is clearly more work to be done here.

From Don Menzel continued

Newsletter of the ASPA Section on EthicsVolume 8, Number 3 Spring 2006

Ethics Today

33

Interpretation--Know Your Code

A fourth component of my integrity agenda included a charge to the PATimes editorial board to review and act on the recommendation of the Ethics Visibility Action Team to Place an “Ethics Feature” in the PATimes that would highlight ASPA’s Code of Ethics--in other words, use the feature to explicate various aspects of the Code. This approach would address the commonly asked question: “what does the Code mean in my day-to-day life?” Or, how do I interpret the Code in a meaningful, concrete fashion? A “Know Your Code” approach to the ethics feature could appear monthly or on an occasional basis. The Editorial Board referred this matter to the Ethics Section and is awaiting a recommendation.

It is conventional wisdom that successful Codes of Ethics are living documents. Is ASPA’s Code a living document? Or has it become simply a piece of paper that we view with rose colored glasses? You be the judge. Isn’t it time for action?

ASPA Ethics 2006 – A Voice for Ethical Governance While there is more to do in ASPA to ensure that ethics remains the vital touchstone of the Society and indeed the profession, I am proud to say that the Ethics Section and ASPA members are one in advocating ethical governance worldwide.

ETHICS SECTION

Ethics Today is the newsletter of the ASPA Section on Ethics. Following is a list of Offi cers and Executive Committee (Ex-Comm) members for the Section.

OFFICERS

Chair Terrel RhodesHistorian Mylon WinnMembership Chair Terry CooperNewsletter Editor James HeichelbechSecretary Rick GreenTreasurer Steven BobesWebmaster Dadi Einarsson

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

Jennifer AlexanderEvan BermanRaymond CoxDadi EinarssonJean-Claude Garcia-ZamorEmile Kolthoff Cynthia LynchManfred MeineMeredith NewmanJeremy PlantJames SlackRuss Williams

From Don Menzel continued


Ethics Today

44

Ethics Section News

By the end of 2005, ASPA Sections had lost 633 members from the year be-fore, a 12% decrease. Only one section gained members, the Section on Emer-gency and Crisis Management (SECM), which added 10 members to increase its membership by 5%. The general decline in section membership refl ects the overall decline in ASPA membership, with 8452 members at the end of 2005, compared to 9137 at the end of 2004 (down 7% from 2004).

The Section on Ethics lost members, with the total count down 9 members to 336 at the end of 2005, but this is only a 3% decrease and leaves the Section on Ethics just below SECM in retaining members.

Although the Section on Ethics did rela-tively well in retaining members, the per-centage decreases in membership for sev-eral other sections were also in the single digits (SPAE -4%, SPPM -6%, SICA -6%, SHARE -6%, and SPAR -9%).

2004 2005 Change % Change

International and Comparative Administration SICA 193 181 -12 -6% Health and Human Services Administration SHHSA 226 201 -25 -11% Science and Technology in Government SSTIG 138 108 -30 -22% Professional and Organizational Development SPOD 290 254 -36 -12% Environmental & Natural Resources Administration SENRA 159 131 -28 -18% Criminal Justice Administration SCJA 158 129 -29 -18% Intergovernmental Administration & Management SIAM 431 380 -51 -12% Association on Budgeting & Financial Management ABFM 670 588 -82 -12% Public Administration Education SPAE 241 231 -10 -4% Public Performance and Management SPPM 518 486 -32 -6% Conference on Minority Public Administrators COMPA 345 279 -66 -19% Personnel Administration and Labor Relations SPALR 351 312 -39 -11% Ethics ETHICS 347 336 -11 -3% Women in Public Administration SWPA 282 266 -16 -6% Emergency and Crisis Management SECM 200 210 10 5% Public Administration Research SPAR 342 311 -31 -9% Public Law and Administration SPLA 140 128 -12 -9% Humanistic, Artistic and Reflective Expression SHARE 88 83 -5 -6% Transportation Policy and Administration STPA 113 94 -19 -17%

TOTALS 5341 4708 -633 -12%

336

266

254

231

210

201

181

131

128

588

486

380

839410812

9

27931

1312

-6%-12%

5%-6%

-17%

-22%

-9%

-18%-18%

-6%-11%

-4%

-19%-11%

-9%-3%

-6%-12%-12%

0

250

500

750

1000

AB

FM

SPP

M

SIA

M

ET

HIC

S

SPA

LR

SPA

R

CO

MP

A

SWP

A

SPO

D

SPA

E

SEC

M

SHH

SA

SIC

A

SEN

RA

SCJA

SPLA

SST

IG

STP

A

SHA

RE

Ethics Section Near the Top in Retaining Members

The greatest percentage drop in membership was in the Section on Science and Technology in Govern-ment (STTIG), losing 22% of its members (30), now at a total of 108. The greatest loss of members was in the Association on Budgeting and Financial Management (ABFM), which had 82 fewer members by the end of 2005 (-12%).

55


Ethics TodayReligion on Ethtalk

Ethtalk on Religion

Th e ASPA Section on Ethics is perhaps one of the most diverse group of people to be found anywhere. With over 300, it can be diffi cult to gain a sense of what we’re all about, especially given the wide range of interests that fall under the category of “ethics.”

Th e Section listserv, Ethtalk, occasionally provides a glimpse into the hearts and minds of our members. In addi-tion to serving as a communication channel for everything from conference announcements to requests for read-ing material, Ethtalk, often becomes a vehicle for a vocal minority in the section. Over the years we have seen lively discussions about hot topics such as whether Mark Felt should be considered a hero or a traitor. Th e year 2006 started out strong in this regard with a fl urry of messages in response to a request for prayer. Th e exchange concluded with a fi rm order to “cease and desist” from our leadership within the Section.

Because this is both a topic of interest for the public sector at large and a matter of Section business to be discussed during the 2006 National ASPA conference in Denver, we wanted to provide a summary and analysis of the dis-cussion, along with a few statements from some of the more motivated participants.

Discussion Profi le

Before sharing some of the details, it is helpful to get a sense of what this discussion was like. Th ere were 24 par-ticipants contributing over 70 messages over a period of fi ve days (Friday, February 17th 11:08 am to Tuesday, February 21st 11:08 pm). Although it can be diffi cult at times to gauge attitudes expressed through Ethtalk, this discussion made it relatively easy. Of the 24 people who participated, 11 were supportive of the original post, 11 were opposed, and two people remained neutral. Of the 74 messages this author counted, 44 were in support, 27 objected, and three were from neutral participants (about fi ve messages were missed in the initial count). Th is “score” is of some interest to the participants, as it became somewhat diffi cult to tell at any given point which side was prevailing.

Despite the score keeping, this was still just a small percentage of Section members. With approximately 336 members in the ASPA Section on Ethics, the level of participation for this exchange was hardly representative, with less than 10% of all members participating. However, we can defi nitely say that this vocal minority is divided on this issue. It remains to be seen whether the membership as a whole tends to be for, against, or indiff erent. In any case, there are concerns that need to be addressed.


Ethics Today

66

THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE

Breaking the silence that usually follows the holi-days, the original posting for this thread began with a cautionary note – “Th is probably will seem as the strangest request and topic that you have ever received from a member of our professional organization.”

Th e message explained that the author was “in-volved in a Christian prison ministry,” called Kairos, located within “the highest and worst max security prison in Alabama with a recidivism rate of 96 per-cent.” Accordingly, the value of the ministry was explained in terms of recidivism, which is reduced to “about 23 percent.”

After further description of the activities of the ministry, such as noting that it is “nondenomina-tional,” the author explained that he has “been se-lected as the leader of the next ‘big weekend… in the planning stage for over 6 months’,” with “a series of 11 20-minute talks spread over on Friday, Saturday and Sunday, each followed by small group discussions; a lot of praise music, a lot of prayer, and an awful lot of home made food.”

Th e descriptions of the ministry and the author’s role in the ministry culminated in some details about one activity in particular – a prayer vigil.

Th e discussion itself was more complex than the typical Ethtalk exchange, with multiple, simulta-neous contributions from many participants in response to both public and private communica-tions. Th e fl ow of the exchanges can be broken into several distinct phases, varying from light commentary to heated confl ict. Th e following la-bels are a rough indication of what we were focused on at successive points in the discussion.

Original MessageEarly ResponsesTaking SidesCommentary and ConcernDiscussion and DebateIrreconcilable Confl ictAnalysis and Next Steps

Teasing the valuable content out of the transcript was not an easy task, as much of the thread was laced throughout with sarcastic, mean-spirited at-tacks. One of the participants asked toward the end of these exchanges, “wouldn’t it be nice to have a reasonable exchange on all this rather than fi ll our e-mail boxes with prayer vigil requests, ad hom-onym attacks (and counter attacks), accusations of censorship, etc., etc.”

In the spirit of that request, the summary of the exchange will focus primarily on providing a sum-mary of substantive issues, rather than capturing the exchange in its entirety.

Religion on Ethtalk Ethtalk on Religion


Ethics Today

77

EARLY RESPONSES

Th e initial responses on Ethtalk included questions about Kairos as a public sector initiative:

“Does it receive any ‘charitable choice’ fund-ing through federal or state agencies?”

“I wonder if there are recidivism rates from other programs for the purpose of compari-son?”

Although these questions were motivated by “a professional interest in church-state issues in public administration,” this fi rst responder added that he anticipated that,

“Some members will be hostile to the idea of posting such requests to the listserv, either to (1) keep it ‘pure’ from any sort of advertising, or (2) out of a strict church-state separation-ist sense that faith-based programs have no proper role in public administration.”

As it turns out, the other immediate response was indeed hostile to the request for prayer, with a sim-ple statement:

“Although I do not object to your decision to engage in religious practices, I believe it is in-appropriate to post religious messages on this list.”

While the message was somewhat lengthy, the ac-tual request was fairly succinct:

“We ask people from around the world to take one or more of the 30 minute time slots and use that time to pray that the Holy Spirit will use the team members, the home-made food, the activities, use us all to help show the love of Christ to these men. We ask that you pray that we (the Free World team) may not get in His way and that our hearts will be changed also by this awesome experience.”

Wrapping up with a reminder that “Th e Founders of the American Republic…believed strongly that prayer was the basis of moral and ethical life,” the author wondered if,

“Perhaps there are members in this organiza-tion who feel the same way about ethics and morality as I do: that building communities with a sound moral compass is better than building communities engaged in random acts of ethics; that building community on the ethics of love and compassion is better than wasting one on the ethics hate, bigotry, and quid pro quo. Th at doing so is the basis of ethical and moral public policy and ulti-mately the basis of ethical and moral bureau-cracy.“



Ethics Today

88

TAKING SIDES – SUPPORT

While we often see members “agree to disagree,” this was not one of those issues that either side was willing to let go. Despite the unwavering rejection of “prayer on Ethtalk,” others off ered a few reasons for thinking that the original message could be considered appropriate:

“[It] is about an important area of public administration: penal and correctional insti-tutions...Th ere is ample precedent in public administration theory for scholars being par-ticipants in the areas they study - e.g. action theory, praxis, etc.”

“If the bottom-line issue is a request for prayer, however, is that substantially diff erent than the various emails from list members telling us about their latest books and articles?”

“I would argue that the question of ‘faith based substitution for public services’ IS ab-solutely an appropriate subject for an ethics listserv. What could be more relevant than the proper scope and roles for public and private agencies in pursuing the public good? Is that not the essence of our fi eld?”

Others simply added their support

“Th anks for being inclusive (and courageous) and walking the talk.”

TAKING SIDES – OBJECTIONS

It is certainly fair to say that Ethtalk exploded with activity, with comments back and forth between those who agreed with the objection and those who either supported the original posting or the early positive response.

Th ose who objected focused on two points throughout: 1) that the request for prayer was inappropriate, and 2) that the connection with a public administration did not provide adequate justifi cation.

“[Th e request was] a straightforward posting for a particular faith, accompanied by a re-quest to participate in a prayer vigil in support of that faith’s activities. And though Kairos may, or may not, be as coercive or doctrinaire as other prison ministries, [he] acknowledges that this is a specifi cally sectarian evangelical Christian ministry.”

“[He] was not proposing any social science, he was soliciting participation in a religious activity ... He is evangelizing on our website. It is inappropriate.”

“I personally do not believe this is an appro-priate forum for such a posting.”

“I side with those who ask that partisan and sectarian requests be identifi ed as outside the legitimate scope of our Listserv.”



Ethics Today

99

However, many of us were not satisfi ed with clari-fying a point here and there – we wanted to get a handle on the confl ict emerging within the Sec-tion.

“When I read the fi rst posting ...I had several thoughts:

1) It’s really a lovely thing that some people have dedicated themselves to help in an important cause -- I truly hope it works;

2) It’s inappropriate to turn this list server into a medium for proselytizing;

3) Th e conjunction of religion and public administration is certainly worthy of academic interest and research, but this request was representative of neither; and

4) Th e subject of religion vis a vis govern-ment is every bit as polarizing a force as it ever has been, and like other mys-ticism-based topics is better left out of politics and administration; and

5) Th e subject was hot enough that I would stay out of it.

No matter what my faith is, I totally agree. Ethnet is a professional net and not a reli-gious one.”

COMMENTARY AND CONCERN

With the disagreement clearly laid out, the thread took a refl ective turn. Some tried to ground the discussion by making sure that we understood the nature of this tension from an historical perspec-tive.

“I am not quite keeping up with all the exchanges, I think, but I cannot help but correct something about history implied in [the initial] request. It was the com-ment about Jeff erson, Madison, and the other ‘founders’ who seem to get a lot of attribution in controversies like this.”

“Th ey might have thought ‘strongly that prayer was the basis of moral and ethical life,’ but they certainly had their doubts about its value (or wisdom) in public/po-litical life.”


“Now it appears we have begun keeping score, and I feel

compelled to weigh in, lest anyone think the rest of us don’t care. Please count me among those who do not wish to see this list become part of

anyone’s ‘ministry.’”


Ethics Today

1010

For others, the concern was that professionalism requires some level of dedication and commitment and the negative reaction to the discussion about the prayer request, if not the request itself, seemed restrictive in a way that limits us as professionals.

“It seems to me a balance is called for. A total prohibition of religious talk and refer-ences to spirituality on Ethtalk strikes me as being unnecessarily exclusive since these are common to humanity. To exclude such talk is to exclude beliefs common to our society from public discussion. I should be able to say, “As a Christian, I think….” without off ending people.”

“At the other extreme, messages that include doctrine specifi c language and intent are not appropriate for the purpose of the forum. Ethtalk is not a specifi cally Christian, Jew-ish, Muslim, etc. forum. People of all faiths, and of no particular faith, should feel safe to post to the forum.”

Th is summary of reactions is brief compared to many of the eff orts to fi gure out what the issues were and fi gure out where each of us stood. As both became more diffi cult, it was clear that we were experiencing an “ethics moment.”

At the end of the day, and the end of the discus-sion, the confl ict seemed to stem from a lack of consensus about what Ethtalk is for, and indeed what the Section on Ethics is all about.

For some, the nature of the Section on Ethics is clear – it is a professional venue not to be domi-nated by any particular individual or group. For these members, the request for prayer was clearly unprofessional.

“Discussion of religion and its relationship to ethics is perfectly appropriate on this listserve, but it is not an appropriate place for religious advocacy, evangelization, or promotion of sectarian religious views. Th is listserve and the section were established for exchange with respect to professional public administration ethics oriented to both scholarly and adminis-trative practice.”


“How can I do justice to my professional community if I choose not to mention spirituality for fear of off ending others?”


Ethics Today

1111

IRRECONCILABLE CONFLICT

At the same time, the discussion continued to show that for many there is no common ground, no compromise, and no interest in “working it out.”

“When people are advised that they appear to be proselytizing in a forum where others are not expecting to be proselytized to. And they continue and ratchet it up, they may be closer to extremists than they think.”

“Now you suggest that others (myself includ-ed) are edging toward being extremists be-cause we choose to disagree in a professional manner with comments and views made by other respected colleagues, and simply wish to pursue a responsible conversation on this very relevant topic. [You] try to shut down such conversations by suggesting violations of codes of ethics and by suggesting extremism.”

“You are not persecuted. You are not a moral martyr. You are just imposing in space that we have all paid to join a discourse that is not part of what others of us have anticipated.” “I don’t object to discussion of religion and the public sector as it relates to ethics and the pub-lic sector, even though I probably fi nd much of what you say disagreeable. What I did, do, and will object to is proselytizing here.”

DISCUSSION AND DEBATE

While it did appear that the matter had escalated beyond what could be considered either profes-sional or useful from any perspective, there was value in recognizing that this is a sore spot for many members. A number of comments late in the thread refl ect the seriousness of the challenge for our leadership within the Section.

“An honest conversation about the relation-ship between ethics, faith, and our profes-sional lives is long overdue.”

“Many of us fi nd our daily work informed and supported by our faith and spiritual-ity, but do not talk about it in those terms, whether in academe or in government. We do not do so because in a highly diverse soci-ety such as ours the common currency of our ethical discourse in the public realm cannot eff ectively carried on using the language of particular religious traditions. We have to fi nd other language and foundations for our ethical discourse.”

“I fully agree that understanding the role of religion in governance is very important, so I would never want to discourage that kind of research, refl ection, and deliberation. How-ever, I do object when colleagues begin to use a forum such as this one for recruitment for particular religious activities such as prayer vigils.”



Ethics Today

1212

ANALYSIS AND NEXT STEPS

Needless to say, the discussion, and the confl ict, continued. A number of valuable insights and helpful suggestions were off ered, along with well articulated positions on all sides. However, there was also an increase in the level of animosity and an increase volume. Despite the clear sense that this issue needs to be addressed, the unhealthy tone of the exchanges required an immediate response from Section leadership. Th e following message posted on be-half of the Section Chair was the fi nal post in the thread and the beginning of active moderation of the listserv.

Ethics Section Colleagues,

I have not participated in the exchange prompted by [the author of the prayer request] of last week. As chair of the Ethics Section I now feel that I must address the listserv membership. I will endeavor to be brief.

In the age of electronic immediacy and convenience, email, listservs, myspace and blogs, etc. have become popular forms of public discourse that serve quite useful purposes, but also have perhaps inadvertently lead us to places we may not wish to be. In particular, these forms of “speaking” have created a false sense of anonymity and informality that has eroded our privacy and our professionalism and perhaps our sense of responsibility to others. Boundaries between what should be personal and private and what is appropriately public have been unfortunately blurred. I wish to make only three points and end with a request.

1). When the listserv was created by the Section, our Web master was Don Menzel. A statement was formulated that briefl y enunciated a rationale for the listserv. I have pasted it below as supplied by Dadi Einarsson and confi rmed by Don.

“Dear Members: Th e Section has established a listserv named ‘Ethtalk.’ We hope you will take advantage of this forum to exchange ideas, viewpoints, and information about ethics issues, concerns, and happenings. Section members use listserv to: Post announcements of positions available, Seek help with research, Exchange views of importance such as the recent Presidential election, Keep members up-to-date with the Section and ASPA hap-pening...Th ere is much happening in the world of ethics today and this is one way to keep up.”

Th is brief framing seemed to be suffi cient to suggest to a group of professionals useful ways in which the list could be used. It was not considered exhaustive or inclusive, but as a guide. Given these general parameters - posting information about new books related to ethics is appropriate, posting information about engaging in professional activities, etc., issues confronting public administrators in their work place, or faculty in their classrooms, discussion of policy issues as they relate to our roles as public administrators and educators, and theoretical, conceptual, philosophical discussions about foundations of our ethical thought and behavior - all seem to follow from the guidelines. Although, again other like issues could be listed.



Ethics Today

1313


To this point, the listserv has only minimally been fi ltered by our Web master. I will ask the Executive Committee in Denver to discuss whether we have reached a point where we may need more extensive guidelines for the list and to make recommendations to the Section.

2). Th e issues posted to the list should be of professional interest to the membership. It would seem that the list would be a useful means to present issues, ideas, etc. as a way of determining interest levels among members who might wish to pursue more extensive discussions, debates, etc. that would be pursued through off list e-mail lists, or to direct interested individuals to potentially useful information located elsewhere. We have had 2 or 3 “hot” topics that have elicited en-gaged exchanges through the listserv in the past year. A danger arises, though, when one, two or a few folks use the listserv to conduct a dialog through multiple postings in the course of a day or two. Although it may not have been conveyed very well, the original intent, I believe for the listserv was for communication of information, assistance in fi nding answers to questions, or sources of information, shared interests, etc. - short exchanges, not really for conducting protracted debates. If the membership desires a venue for the latter, then we could explore creating such a space.

3. Th is is a listserv for professionals. It is imperative that we behave toward each other as professionals. Professionals can be passionate about their work, but being a professional also involves self censorship just as being part of a civil society involves censoring our behaviors and voices. I am not suggesting that only politically correct speech or topics are to appear on the listserv, but rather, that we each consider what there is about our information or topic that is indeed pertinent to a professional audience of public administrators. Th e listserv is not an avenue for personal causes.

During the most recent set of exchanges, I have received off list messages from members who have felt fearful about en-gaging in the list, individuals who have asked to be removed from the list, and who have been deeply off ended that the listserv has been monopolized by individual agendas. Th is is bad. It is contrary to our Section mission and our eff orts to promote education and open exchange. Th e fact that our members are withdrawing should give each of us pause to seri-ously examine what we have done to bring strangers (and perhaps friends) to the point of wanting to withdraw from a community arena and to no longer be involved in professional exchange?

To conclude, I end with only one conclusion - [the] original e-mail was inappropriate for this listserv. Even though there have been attempts by some to fi nd aspects of the resulting exchanges that are appropriate for the listserv, it is disturbing that there is still a lack of acknowledgment that the original message was indeed, as presented, inappropriate.

My request - please end this set of exchanges on the listserv. If individuals wish to pursue this or related topics, please do so off list with the individuals who may also be interested.

I encourage Section members to attend our general membership meeting at the Denver ASPA meeting on Monday morn-ing (7:30 - 8: 30 a.m.) - room to be determined - to discuss listserv policies or related topics. If you have agenda items please send them to me or to other Executive Committee members.


Ethics Today

1414

ACCOUNTABILITY CASES – CALL FOR CASES Robert Schwartz and Dan Williams

We are pleased to announce the launching of Accountability Cases. This innovative series uses real-world cases to illuminate concepts in accountability. Accountability Cases meets a long-felt need for high quality tools to be used in learning about ac-countability. Cases will raise issues and dilemmas by linking theoretical perspectives with tangible experiences.

We invite proposals for cases from academic and practitioners who are able to provide detailed accounts of events that illuminate accountability concepts. Please send 1-2 page proposals to Robert Schwartz (email: [email protected]) or to Dan Williams (email: [email protected]).

Accountability concepts lend themselves to cases that surface diffi culties and dilemmas. As such, their audience is likely to be students in academic programs and practitioners in formal training settings. Cases will be used to illuminate theories and will be explicitly linked to the literature.

All cases will be subject to a double-blind peer review process. The American Society for Public Administration’s Center for Ac-countability and Performance will act as publisher for individual cases. Cases will be published individually on the web as they are fi nalized. Eventually, we would like to compile completed cases in book form.

We have identifi ed ten concepts (broadly defi ned) around which cases might be developed. Potential authors are welcome to suggest additional concepts. 1.Thick and thin accountability: Personal responsibility to internal moral guidelines compared with accountability to directions; 2. Politics of accountability: how apparently robust new accountability measures lead to little true accountability due to lacunae in legislation and in implementation; 3. Problem of many hands: issues in holding individu-als to account when responsibility is scattered; 4. Rituals of Verifi cation: issues of decoupling and colonization; 5. Ethics and Accountability: issues in the design and operation of ethics accountability institutions (i.e the case of special prosecutors); 6. Audit and Accountability: uses and abuses of audit fi ndings; 7. Evaluation Dilemmas and Accountability: publishing program evaluation fi ndings; 8. Accountability and Third Party Governance: advantages and disadvantages of downward accountability; 9. Elusive Accountability: promises and pitfalls of commissions of inquiry and other investigations in satisfying demands for accountability; 10. Accountability for Accountability: Examining the ways in which ethical matters interact with accountability for performance.

Case Characteristics and Format

Cases must portray actual events and evolve from careful research. Information for cases might be garnered from media reports, investigations, audits, hearings and secondary sources. Often, there will be a need for authors to conduct interviews with key actors in order to fi nd out what exactly transpired.

Concept Introduction: A brief review of the relevant theory or concept, including references to important pieces in the literature (400 – 800 words)Case Introduction and Historical Context: Introduce the story, characters, issues at hand and provide a brief history of programs and institutions that play important roles in the case (500 – 1000 words)The Story: Detailed telling of what happened with dates, quotes and dialogues in order to convey a sense of what actually occurred (4000 – 8000 words)Setting the Stage for Analysis: This should not be a full analysis of the concept through the story, but rather a pointing to possible questions and lines of analysis (200 – 400 words)

1.

2.

3.

4.


Ethics Today

1515

Just lately the Ethics listserv has had a fuss over the appropriateness of a solicitation for prayer in sup-port of a prison project. I was one of the parties to the fuss. Specifi cally, I questioned the appropriate-ness of the posting. A lively debate ensued. I quote from some of the postings, without citation. First a few postings agreeing that religious solicitations do not belong on the list.

“I am also a practicing Christian and I fully agree. Th is is not the appropriate place....eth-ics is not morality.”

“I heartily agree. Religion is not ethics, in fact there is no guarantee that religion is not un-ethical. As to the founding fathers, they were in a very broad sense deists. In fact, Jeff erson had all references to the supernatural struck out of his own personally edited copy of the bible.”

“What we have, instead, is a straightforward posting for a particular faith, accompanied by a request to participate in a prayer vigil in sup-port of that faith’s activities. …No, this listserv is not the place for such postings. And to the attempt to wrap such postings in the cloak of participant observer academic research I say ‘Th is Emperor has no clothes...’”

My 2/17/06 e-mail, “Perhaps a very strange request: A Request for Agape,” was sent to you through the Eth-ics Section list-serve and started a debate about the ap-propriate place for religious expression in our profes-sional organization. I believe the debate brought to light three fundamental questions. (1) Should lead-ership in an Ethics association censor discussion and curtail debate on moral values simply because some members feel uncomfortable? (2) Can a member of an Ethics association exercise the constitutional right to freely express his or her faith within that profes-sional society and, hence, within that very profession? (3) Does our Ethics Section implicitly sanction subtle tolerance toward ridicule and intimidation of members who hold certain (in this case, Christian) moral val-ues which may run contrary to the moral values held by others? Certainly answers to these questions shape and clarify the moral fabric of our Ethics association, our professional Society, and the profession of public administration. In fact, the answers determine the very connotation of the words “ethics” and “morality” and render judgement to our right to include them in our professional lexicon.

After about a week of almost 100 list-serve exchanges on this topic, Section leadership ended the “debate” with a pronouncement that the content of my original e-mail was “inappropriate” for list-serve distribution and, hence, inappropriate for a general and open dis-cussion among all Section members.

Why fuss over religious solicitation?

Dan Williams

The Ethics of Censorshipand the Morality of Intolerance

in Post-Modern ASPA

Jim Slack


Ethics Today

1616

Editor Jim Heichelbech invited me to further express my views on this issue in Ethics Today. However, prior to further writing on this topic, I received (as all of us did through the Section’s list-serve) an e-mail with which I took issue. My response, however, was cen-sored and blocked. Section leadership determined my response to be contrary to “the notion that we conduct ourselves in this public forum with respect for others as professionals.” Section leadership deemed my response as focusing on “accusation rather than on reasoned discourse” and reminded me that I “do not speak for Christians any more than [two specifi c others] did.”

While Section leadership noted that the issue of list-serve censorship will be addressed by the executive council at the forthcoming ASPA meeting, I believe the values incumbent in this issue is of concern to all of us and, therefore, should be addressed in a much larger forum than simply a meeting room in Denver.

As my contribution to Ethics Today, I opt to draw attention to my censored response. In the interest of fairness and full disclosure, two ethical values I assume remain in good standing in this Ethics association, I reprint everything in its entirety.

Th e original message:

“If you were putting together a course or a train-ing program on administrative ethics for nonprofi t managers, what textbook(s) might you use? Do any of you presently teach such a course or conduct such training programs? If so, would you have syllabi or other materials you would be willing to share?”

“No matter what my faith is, I totally agree. Ethnet is a professional net and not a religious one.”

Now a few from the other side:

“At least on one level, [his] (original) email is about an important area of public admin-istration: penal and correctional institutions. Programs by private and semi-private agencies in prisons are important subjects for us to con-sider - especially when they off er the possibility of rehabilitation and reduced recidivism. Th at some of them might be faith-based organiza-tions is already (properly) an area of ethical deliberation.”

“Th anks for being inclusive (and courageous) and walking the talk.”

“I think it is very appropriate to connect ethics and religion. It goes back to Abraham, 4,000 years ago in a verifi ed, historical written re-cord.”

“It seems to me that [he] did the EthTalk pro-fessional community a great service by putting out for discussion the potential impact that a program like [this one] might off er in the reha-bilitation of incarcerated individuals.”

In point of fact, I have made no eff ort to weigh these examples by their weight in the listserv itself, but two things I think I noticed were: (1) there were more postings from those who objected to the so-licitation and (2) the postings from those who ap-proved of the original posting were much longer than those who disapproved.

Why fuss? Ethics of Censorship


Ethics Today

1717

Why do I object? Here I post a link to a sum-mary of the ASPA mission, http://www.aspanet.org/scriptcontent/ASPAgeneral.cfm. No where in this mission is there any hint that ASPA is a reli-gious organization or that it involves soliciting participation in religious activity. We are, presum-ably, a 501(c)(3) scientifi c organization as discussed on page 26 of IRS publication 557. We are not a 501(c)(3) religious organization as discussed on page 25 of the same publication. Converting us into a religious organization would involve rewrit-ing of our mission statement and refi lling with the IRS. So, before moving to higher levels of reason-ing, on a bureaucratic/legalistic level, the original poster is not participating in ASPA when he posts a religious solicitation. Th is may sound trivial, but other members of ASPA, such as myself, have a pri-ma facia right to be a member of what they think they are a member of.

But, religious solicitation is not without baggage in this country. Th e Evangelical community is closely associated with the Republican Party. While this association is not pure by any means, it is certainly well enough established to be considered a basis for political strategy for both of the major parties. Th us, Evangelical solicitation among public admin-istrators could be viewed as an inappropriate “camel nose under the tent” for later date party litmus test, indirectly through religious litmus test, for public employment. Of course, the poster soliciting par-ticipation can easily say that this was not his intent. However, this is a legitimate slippery slope issue. Exactly where do we draw the line? I would argue, at the front door. Keep those religious solicitations separate.

Th ere is also a matter of diversity. Th e Christian community enjoys dominance this country. It is

Th e e-mail exchange with which I took issue:

“Oh, I only use the King James version of the Bi-ble...It has everything a good ethics educator needs to demonstrate the application of morality.”

My Blocked Response:

“Good Colleagues: “Th is will be my one and only e-mail on this particular subject.”

“I have tried for several days to let a section member’s recent ‘remarks’ go by the wayside. I fully understand that there are reasons to do so: Many colleagues in the section have probably ignored the remark because of its pretentiousness; others have probably ignored the remark because of its infl ammatory intent. Still oth-ers most likely feel sorry for the author, because deep down inside it refl ects a balance between a certain kind of hatred and a certain kind of pain – both of which are truly regrettable.”

“Perhaps members who are practicing Christians ignored it because we expect persecution in a wide variety of forms (sometimes, small subtle ‘jabs,’ if you will, such as this) as a result of our Faith. Per-haps other practicing Christians felt somewhat in-timidated – if you listen to the concerns and fears of practicing Christian college students, including those in MPA programs, the remark is refl ective of the kind of intimidation many face by the ‘pow-er’ of faculty at classroom lecterns each day across America.”

Th e specifi c remark to which I refer seems simple enough: “Oh, I only use the King James version of the Bible...It has everything a good ethics educator needs to demonstrate the application of morality.”



Ethics Today

1818

not so much that everyone is a practicing Christian, as that they have more likelihood of identifying with Christianity than with other religions or with no religion. Th is fact has the eff ect of rendering the country hostile to dissenters to Christianity. Th ese dissenters may be Hindus, Jews, Muslims, members of American Native religions, practitioners of re-gional religions, secular humanists, deists, atheists, agnostics, Unitarians, or people who consider the whole religion game to be disturbingly confused.

Soliciting for specifi cally Christian behavior may be perceived as hostile by members of these other groups. By posting a hostile message, the poster has violated item 2 of our code of ethics “Oppose all forms of discrimination and harassment, and pro-mote affi rmative action” http://www.aspanet.org/scriptcontent/index_codeofethics.cfm.

Now a note on the supporting postings. Look back at the postings supporting the original poster. In general, the posters support the idea of discussing faith-based delivery of prison services. Some also support the prayer in addition. Only one seems only to support the prayer topic. Th e original ob-jection had nothing to do with the discussion of faith-based delivery of prison services. What was called into question was the solicitation for prayer. Th at solicitation remains suspect.

Ostensibly one might accept this remark as being hon-est and sincere – like some others in the Section, the author chooses to use scriptural-based literature in his ethics course. But previous e-mails on this list-serve suggest the contrary.

Or, one could conclude that these remarks were be-nign, sent just for “fun,” and should be interpreted as “tongue-in-cheek” – all the more reason to just let it go by the wayside. But this, too, seems to confl ict with past e-mails.

Or, we could acknowledge that this sarcastic remark was mean-spirited, and then simply attribute it to “Free Speech”. Hence, the argument could (and prob-ably will) be made that I am making much out of noth-ing. Th is may be true.

But at a much deeper, more meaningful level, the re-mark is indicative of a subtle yet apparently very real lack of tolerance for diversity in our Section and in our profession. Th is I fi nd disturbing.

Hence, my concern is not about its author, nor even about the author’s intentions. I am concerned about the Section itself. Our Section seems to be one which, as announced by leadership, deems as “inappropriate” a request for individual prayer for inmates engaged in an activity which has both positive ethical and policy consequences – that such a request somehow off ends individual members, violates the established collective values of the Section, and therefore must be screened and blocked from list-serve distribution. (My point is not to revisit this. I am simply mindful of leadership policy.)



Ethics Today

1919

Yet our Section also seems to be one that is not troubled by the offi cial distribution of remarks (through the list-serve) which belittle and demean the faith values of others – nor is it troubled by a lack of offi cial response about those remarks and the distribution.

Further, our Section seems to be unconcerned about the offi cial distribution of (and lack of response to) this kind of demeaning innuendo which might be per-ceived (by member and potential member alike) as an implicit notice and reminder of organizational toler-ance toward, and perhaps acceptance of, subtle intimi-dation and persecution pressed upon those who simply seek protection and comfort under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment in their professional lives and within their professional associations.

If the author’s remarks belittled the values of other so-cietal groups (say, African-Americans, Muslims, homo-sexuals, feminists, etc.), and if those remarks could be perceived as signaling a level of acceptability of toler-ance by the organization toward intimidation and per-secution of Section members belonging to these groups – then I am sure the response by Section members and Section leaders (elected and nominated) would be a bit more than the listserv silence which we currently seem to share.

In similar fashion to our collective and individual sup-port for civil rights and the 14th Amendment, the assurance of protection and comfort under the Free Exercise Clause should be a concern and goal of all members of any organization that focuses on public sector ethics. Certainly it should be an offi cial policy of the ASPA Section on Ethics.

Ethics of Censorship

Does freedom of religion include public expres-sions of faith?… or are such expressions off ensive in nature to those not of the religion? An impor-tant characteristic of civil societies is religious tol-erance. However, I have found that contemporary scholars and professionals often disagree about what religious toleration means in practice, especially in professional organizations such as ASPA. For ex-ample, some people believe that religious expression can be appropriate in professional organizations, as long as it is mindful and respectful of other people’s beliefs, and is also pertinent to the purpose of the organization. Others fi nd religious expressions not only to be inappropriate for such a forum, but to be innately off ensive. Th us, individuals in civil so-cieties frequently diff er on what religious toleration means in practice in professional organizations such as ASPA.

For example, a member of the Section on Ethics recently posted a message to the section’s listserv that pertained to a prison ministry. Th e subject and content concerned an aspect of both public admin-istration (prisoners) and religion (the non-profi t or-ganization referenced is faith-based). Many people replied to this message indicating they thought this message was not appropriate for the listserv, while others argued otherwise. However, another aspect of this issue was whether the e-mail message was of-fensive in nature, even if it was inappropriate for other reasons. Reading these discussions reminded me of something I have observed in the United States: some people view religious freedom in a ho-mogenous way, others view it in a heterogeneous way.

Heterogenous and Homogenous Views of Religious Tolerance in ASPAF

Rob Bittick


Ethics Today

2020

What I call “Heterogeneous Toleration” is the view that religious diversity is something good. Rational discussions of diff erent opinions allow more ideas into society and spur people to examine their own beliefs. People holding this view argue that diff er-ent religious beliefs can coexist peacefully if people respect each other’s conscience, that is, the right to make up their own mind including refusing to engage in such a discussion. Th is means not only must no one be forced to believe in a religious doc-trine, it also means people must not be prohibited from expressing their beliefs as long as they respect other’s rights at the same time. Th erefore, religious expressions by people of diverse faiths should not necessarily be off ensive in nature to those not of that faith, even in a professional context.

On the other hand, “Homogenous Tolerance” is the view that religious diversity is innately confl ictual and can lead people to disrespect each other. As such, religious expression inevitably leads to intoler-ant behavior and even violence. Such religious ex-pressions are, therefore, innately off ensive to those not of that faith. From this point of view, religious announcements are not only inappropriate on a professional listserv for the ASPA Section on Ethics, but they are off ensive in nature. Tolerance occurs when people agree not to express their beliefs, but rather, agree to promote a common agreed upon set of ethical standards. Th us, religious expression is avoided altogether so not to off end people of dif-ferent beliefs.

In practice, those who advocate heterogeneous tol-eration view diverse religious expression as a natural part of the human community. When individuals respect each other’s conscience, expressing one’s re-ligious beliefs, and even debates between adherents

should not be off ensive. Rather religious expressions are innately off ensive when they do not respect the conscience of others, and they are inappropriate when they do not pertain to the subject of the fo-rum.

In contrast, homogenous toleration holds that most expressions of religion in professional organizations are innately off ensive in nature. Religion is not pro-hibited. Rather, acceptable religions in such societ-ies and organizations are those who both tend to mirror each other concerning ethics, and also agree to refrain from expressing their beliefs publicly so not to off end people.

Certainly, people can argue that an email message with religious content is not innately off ensive, but is still inappropriate for a professional listserv for other reasons. Th e question I raise is, “Should ASPA advocate heterogeneous or homogenous tolerance among our members?”

Such beliefs lead to diff erent rules being applied to discussions in public forums such as the listserv for the Section on Ethics. Prohibitions on most religious expressions will likely result in homogenous tolera-tion being practiced. Th is is a more narrow view of religious toleration. In contrast, rules that welcome religious expressions while prohibiting those that do not respect the conscience of others will likely lead to heterogeneous toleration being practiced. Th is is a more broad view of religious toleration.

What do you think?

Heterogenous and Homogenous Views

2121


Ethics TodayInformation about the National ASPA Conference 2006

The Sky’s the LimitIdealism and Innovation In Public Service

Information about ethics-related sessions at the conference, particularly those within the “Advocating Eth-ics, Integrity & the End of Corruption” track, are included in this conference issue of Ethics Today. While the information listed here was current the week before the conference, changes to the schedule are ongoing. For the most current information, please check the conference program and daily updates.

Workshops & Special Sessions

SATURDAYIntegrity in Public Service: An Interactive Ethics Workshop with Charles Garofalo 8:00 am to Noon

SUNDAYGlobal Ethics/Global Unity:The New Universal Responsibility of the Public Administrator 1:30 pm to 3:00 pm

Advocating Ethics, Integrity & the End of Corruption

SUNDAYInterpretations of Ethical Symbols in Government 9:30 am to 11:00 amPopular or Constitutional Government 11:00 am to 12:30 pmEthical Innovations for A Critical Public Service 12:30 pm to 2:00 pmNormalizing Hate: The Socio-Cultural Dimensions of Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo 3:30 pm to 4:00 pm

MONDAYWhy Government Should Be Held to a Higher Standard 1:15 pm to 2:45 pmInternational Ethics in Public Organizations 1:15 pm to 4:30 pmCombating Global Corruption 3:00 pm to 4:30 pm

TUESDAYProtecting the Public Trust 8:00 am to 9:30 amIs it for Real? Uncovering Government Ethics 8:00 am to 9:30 amMeasuring Public Integrity: A Dutch/US Comparative Project 9:45 am to 11:15 am

2222


Ethics TodaySaturday April 1st

Integrity in Public Service: An Interactive Ethics Workshop with Charles Garofalo Saturday, April 1, 2006 from 8:00 am to Noon

Conducted by: Charles Garofalo

What is Public Service For? (8:00 am - 8:45 am)Perceptions, Understandings, and Experiences of Ethics in Public Agencies

What Counts as Ethical Behavior in Your Organization? What Counts as Unethical Behavior?

Are the Rules Always Enough? 9:00 am - 9:45 am)Interpretation and Implementation of Values, Principles, and the Public Interest in Your Agency

How Do You Make Decisions? What Happens After You Decide? (10:00 am - 10:45 am)Policy and Management Dilemmas in Your Agency

Who Is Responsible for What? (11:00 am - noon)Strategies, Leadership, and Training for Trust, Commitment, and Service

On site registration for the 2006 ASPA National Conference begins on Thursday, March 30.

Sunday April 2nd

Public Administration SuperSession: Global Ethics/Global Unity - The New Universal Responsibility of the Public Administrator

Sunday, April 2, 2006 from 1:30 pm to 3:00 pm

Conducted by: Charles Garofalo

This SuperSession focuses on moral agency in public administration amid global change. We consider administrative interde-pendence primarily by reversing the cliché, “Government should be run like a business,” and proposing that, in 21st-century governance, “Business should be run like government” - meaning that public administration is a fundamentally moral enterprise that makes it a prototype for other professions, including business, to emulate as they position themselves in a globalizing world. Practitioners and professors interested in exploring the moral and strategic challenges and opportunities of 21st-century gover-nance should attend this SuperSession. Attendees will engage in a conversation on global ethics, global governance, and global interdependence, and to develop practical perspectives on the evolving role of the state at all levels and the moral responsibilities and obligations of its agents.

On site registration for the 2006 ASPA National Conference begins on Thursday, March 30.

2323


Ethics TodaySunday April 2nd

Ethical Innovations for A Critical Public Service Date: Sunday, 12:30 PM - 2:00 PM, Ballroom C

Idealism and Innovation? Politics, Ethics, Religion & Public Service

Cheryl Simrell King, [email protected], Evergreen State College Amy Eleanor Gould, Ph.D., [email protected], Evergreen State College

Popular or Constitutional Government Date: Sunday, 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM, Ballroom C

Krishna K. Tummala, [email protected], Kansas State University

Habib Zafarullah, [email protected], University of New England Jon S.T. Quah, [email protected], Stanford University

John Derek Taylor, [email protected], Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Univ. Saheed Bayat, [email protected], Cape Peninsula University of Technology Naas Ferreira, [email protected], Cape Peninsula University of Technology

Interpretations of Ethical Symbols in Government Date: Sunday, 9:30 AM - 11:00 AM, Ballroom C

Robert W. Smith, Ph.D, [email protected], Clemson University Mary Ann Feldheim, [email protected], University of Central Florida

XiaoHu Wang, [email protected], University of Central Florida Elizabeth S. Overman, Ph.D., [email protected], Jackson State University

Normalizing Hate: The Socio-Cultural Dimensions of Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Date: Sunday, 3:30 PM - 4:00 PM, Expo Hall

Mohamad Alkadry, PH.D., [email protected], West Virginia University

Executive Committee Sunday

9:00 am to 10:00 am

24


Ethics TodayMonday April 3rd

Combating Global Corruption Date: Monday, 3:00 PM - 4:30 PM, Conifer 3

Moderator: Lyn Brownfi eld, [email protected], Kit Carson County

Advocating Ethics and Integrity in Urban Development in the City of Leipzig

Jean-Claude Garcia-Zamor, garciaz@fi u.edu, Florida International University

Roman Corruption in Modernity: The Ramsay MacMullen Hypothesis Douglas John Register, [email protected], North Carolina Central Univ

Recovering Public Integrity in Ghana: A Trans-Cultural Study in Public Service Ethics Peter Haruna, [email protected], Texas A&M International University

Discussant: Manfred F. Meine, [email protected], Troy University

International Ethics in Public Organizations Date: Monday, 1:15 PM - 4:30 PM, Larkspur

Frances Burke, Ph.D., [email protected], Integrity International

Cynthia E. Lynch, [email protected], Southern University and A&M College

Why Government Should Be Held to a Higher Standard Date: Monday, 1:15 PM - 2:45 PM, Humbolt

Public Sector Impact on Private Sector Operations

Frances Burke, Ph.D., [email protected], Integrity International

New Challenges to Administrative Ethics: Illustrations From Modern China Richard K Ghere, [email protected], University of Dayton

Encouraging Ethics at the Public/Private/Nonprofi t Interfaces William L. Richter, [email protected], Kansas State University

The Cost of Being Good: Does It Pay to Be Ethical? Carole L. Jurkiewicz, [email protected], Louisiana State University

Section on Ethics General Meeting (Breakfast)

Monday7:30 am to 8:30 am

2525


Ethics TodayTuesday April 4th

Measuring Public Integrity: A Dutch/US Comparative Project Date: Tuesday, 9:45 AM - 11:15 AM, Humbolt

Measuring Organizational Integrity: An On-line Survey into the Perception of Employees

Leo W.J.C. Huberts, [email protected], Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam Raymond W. Cox, III, [email protected], University of Akron

Terrance A. Johnson, [email protected], Lincoln University (PA)

Measuring Organizational Integrity: An On-line Survey into the Perception of Employees Emile Kolthoff, [email protected], Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam

Discussant: Leo W.J.C. Huberts, [email protected], Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam

Protecting the Public Trust Date: Tuesday, 8:00 AM - 9:30 AM, Blanca

Moderator: Sara Richey, [email protected], City of Tucson Transportation

Ethics and Social Responsibility in Transportation Systems Jason J. Bittner, [email protected], Wisconsin Transportation Center

Clean Government: The Quest for New Tools Reginald L. Audibert, [email protected], Portland State University

Trust in Government Dean Geuras, [email protected], Southwest Texasa State University

Charles Garofalo, [email protected], Texas State University Minzi Su, [email protected], Portland State University

Is it for Real? Uncovering Government Ethics Date: Tuesday, 8:00 AM - 9:30 AM, Longs

Managing for Performance and Integrity: Administrative Reform in New York City Government

Frank Anechiarico, [email protected], John Jay College of Criminal Justice CUNY

The Missing Link in Ethics Research: A Study of Values in Organizations Jo Arney, [email protected], University of Colorado-Denver

State Ethics Regulation: Window Dressing or Meaningful Enforcement? Shannon Vaughan, [email protected], Appalachian State University

Mark D. Bradbury, [email protected], Appalachian State University Dennis C. Smith, [email protected], NYU Wagner School

Adam Newmark, [email protected], Appalachian State University


Ethics Today

2626

CALL FOR BOOK REVIEWS

PUBLIC INTEGRITY

Public Integrity is looking for book reviews. Read a good book lately? Something of interest to our readership? For example, a book about health care, politics, education, defense, corruption, environment, leadership, budgeting, or accountability? We are looking for anything that has a connection with values, ethics, or morals. Please submit your reviews! We are especially interested in books having a 2005 copyright date. We publish both single book reviews, as well as essays of three or more books (some of which might have earlier copyright dates). Please share your reviews or proposals to do reviews! You can reach me at [email protected]. Please, share your insights with others by writing a book review for Public Integrity! Submission guidelines are below. We look forward to hearing from you!

PUBLIC INTEGRITY GUIDELINES

Single book reviews should be about 1,300 - 1,700 words. Book reviews should begin with one or two paragraphs summarizing the main points of the book. Th en, the main body of the review should focus on matters of the book that deal with ethics, values, or morals. Reference to ethics, values, morals should be made explicit. Th e review should close with implications for public administration practice and, optionally, implications for scholarship. Please try to write the review with a practitioner audience in mind.

Public Integrity also publishes book review essays of 3-4 books with a common theme. Review essays typically are 2,500 - 3,500 words. After a brief introduction to the importance or new developments of the common subject matter, the review essay should be divided into sections with headings that discuss diff erent issues relevant to ethics, values, or morals. For example, a book review essay on the theme of community-building might have these two sections: the meaning of community; and government and the public interest. Th us, book review essays do NOT sequentially discuss the diff erent books. As with single reviews, the essay should close with implications for public administration practice and, optionally, implications for scholarship. Th e review should be accessible to a practitioner audience.

Please contact the book review editor if you have any questions:

Dr. Robert Smith, Director Master of Public Administration Program Department of Political Science Clemson University 230 E. Brackett Hall Clemson, SC 29634 E-Mail: [email protected] Phone: 864/656-3550 Fax: 864/656-0691


Ethics Today

2727

2006 International Conference on Public Administration (2nd ICPA)Government Innovation and Reform

Call for Papers

.

October 5-6 2006 Warwick University Coventry UK

• Science & Technology in Government• Intergovernmental Administration &

Management• Administrative ethics• Emergency and Crisis Management• Public Law & Administration

• Environmental and Natural Resources Administration

• Budgeting & Financial Management• Public Performance and Management• E-governance• Citizen Empowerment

Send papers outside China (in Word) by email to [email protected] C. Menzel, Ph.D., President:American Society for Public Administration 2005-06.

3930 Americana DriveTampa, Florida 33634Tel. 813-886-6332Cell 813-951-6079

Send papers in China (in Word) by email to [email protected], School of Humanities and Social Science, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China

Chengdu, Sichuan, P.R.CPost Code: 610054Tel: 86-28-83205246Fax�86-28-83205258

Papers should be written in English with Microsoft Word 2000 or higher edition. Th e fi rst page should include the following information: title, name(s) and affi liation(s) of the author(s), abstract, postal address, phone and fax numbers, and email address of the corresponding author.

All accepted papers will be published by Press of University of Electronic Science and Technology of China and will be sent to be indexed by ISSHP and ISTP. All the papers from Proceeding of 2005 International Conference on Public Administration have been indexed by ISSHP (Index to Social Sciences & Humanities Proceedings) and ISTP (Index to Scientifi c & Technical Proceedings) by ISI Web of Knowledge in USA.Submission Deadline: July15 2006

Sponsored by Chinese Public Administration Society, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, International Institute of Administrative Sciences, European Group of Public Administration, American Society for Public Administration, and School of Public Administration, Moscow State University, Russia and Chinese Public Administration Journal

Hosted by School of Humanities and Social Science of University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, P.R. China and Sino- British Culture &Language Exchange, UK.

Organized by Warwick University Conference Center

Mr. Gao Xiaoping: Execut ive Deputy President, Chinese Public Administration Society

Dr. Baojing: Deputy Secretary in Genera l of Chinese Publ ic Administration Society, Editor in Chief of Chinese Public Administration Journal

Professor Zhu Xiaoning: Dean of School of Humanities and Social Science of University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, P.R. China

Dr. Michael Duggett: Director General of International Institute of Administrative Sciences, Belgium

Dr. Dr.Fabienne MARON: Executive General Secretary of European Group of Public Administration

Dr. Donald C. Menzel: President of American Society for Public Administration 2005-06 USA

Dr. Wendy Haynes: President of American Society for Public Administration 2006-07 USA

Dr. Surin Alexey Viktorovich: Dean of School of Public Administration of Moscow State University, Russia

Dr. Colin Talbot: Professor of Public Policy and Management, Co-Director CPPM, University of Manchester, UK; Professor Lubov Ivanovna Semennikova , Vice dean of School of Public Administration of Moscow State University, Russia

Public administration is an ever-changing professional and research fi eld. 2006 international conference on Public Administration (2nd ICPA), aiming at government innovation in an era of e-communications, e-learning and e-government, seeks to provide a forum for distinguished speakers from academia, government and industry to discuss problems and new ideas, share experiences of success and failure in public administration, explore the changes that public administration poses for all aspects of governance, and promote international co-operation in the fi eld of public administration.

Paper topics include but are not limited to:

Co-Chairs:

Paper acceptance notifi cation: August 15 2006

2828


Ethics Today

To become a member of the ASPA Section on Ethics, go to https://www.aspaonline.org/ScriptContentIndex.cfm or fi ll out the membership form on the next page. Be sure to join the Section on Ethics! It is only $35 a year.

In addition to ASPA national and chapter membership, which includes 12 issues of PA Times, 6 issues of Public Administration Review, reduced conference rates, discounts on publication, and access to web site resources, Ethics Section members also receive a subscription to Public Integrity and to the Section newsletter, Ethics Today. And Ethics Section members have access to the Section listserv, ethtalk, where members engage in meaningful discussions and share critical information about ethical issues in the public sector.

AM I A MEMBER OF ASPA?

HAVE I RENEWED

MY ASPA MEMBERSHIP?

HAVE I JOINED THE SECTION ON

ETHICS?

DemographicInformation

BIRTHDATE

GENDER❐ Male❐ Female

ETHNICITY❐ African-American❐ Asian-American❐ Caucasian❐ Native-American❐ Other____________

AGE❐ Under 30❐ 30-39❐ 40-49❐ 50-59❐ 60-65❐ Over 65

EMPLOYMENT SECTOR❐ Business Organization❐ COG/Sub-state District❐ College/University❐ County Government❐ Federal Government❐ Municipal Government❐ State Government❐ Non-profit Organization❐ Retired❐ Self-employed/consultant❐ Student❐ Other____________

PROFESSIONALROLE❐ Appointed Official❐ Elected Official❐ Top Management❐ First-line Management❐ Middle Management❐ Staff❐ Technical Specialist❐ University Administration❐ University Faculty❐ Other____________

Please complete this brief demographic form sothat ASPA will have an accurate record of themake-up of its membership.

Section FeesSection membersip is in addition to ASPAmembership fees. Sections and fees are listed on the back of this form.

Section(s) Code(s)

Total Section Fees $

Additional Chapter FeesChapter membership in addition to the onefree provided by ASPA incur a $6 fee.Additional Chapters are listed on the backof this form.

Additional Chapter(s)

Total Chapter Fees $

Postage Options❐ Postage for Canada and Mexico ($25)

❐ 1st Class PA TIMES delivery ($15)

❐ International Air delivery ($70)

Total Optional Fees

Grand Total Fee $

Gross Annual Income

Up to $24,999 $65.00

$25,000 to $39,000 $80.00

$40,000 or more $95.00

Student $40.00Those enrolled at a college or university in theU.S. and limited to a maximum of three years.Please list university/college when using this category.

International $95.00Those living outside of the U.S., Canada, Mexicoand not receiving mail at an APO or FPOaddress.

Family Membership $35.00For persons receiving mail at the same residence.One copy of Public Administration Review andPATIMES will be provided to the family. Feeapplies to each additional family member. Pleaseindicate name(s) of additional family member(s)on the form above.

First name Middle initial Last name

Agency

Address

City State Zip+4 Country

Home Mailing Address ❐ Please send my ASPA Membership benefits to my home address

City State Zip+4 Country

Work Phone Home Phone Fax

e-mail address (❐ home e-mail ❐ office e-mail)

Name of additional family member (if using ASPA’s family membership)

If applying as a student, indicate academic institution and who referred you:

I have read and support the principles embodied in the ASPACode of Ethics. (optional) See www.aspanet.org for Code.

Membership Fee

WhatASPAOffersYou

American Society for Public Administration

Advancing excellence in public service . . .

Optional Fees

Please add the total membership fee and optional fees to arrive at a grand total fee.

Payment InformationDues must be prepaid. Send completed application form and payment to: ASPA, c/o SunTrust Bank, Department 41, Washington, DC 20042-0041.

❐ Check made payable to ASPA ❐ Mastercard ❐ VISA ❐ American Express

Card Number Expiration Date

Signature

1120 G Street, NW, Suite 700, Washington, DC 20005 • 202-393-7878 p • 202-638-4952 f • [email protected] • www. a s p a n e t . o r g

Code of Ethics

Chapter Number

ASPA members receive free membership in one local chapter. Chaptersare listed on the back of this form.

❐ Check here if you prefer to be an at-large member.

❐ Exclude my name from any listing of members sold commercially.

Select A ChapterMore Detail onwww.aspanet.org

Get information on:

University-based Affiliates

Membership Application Online

Agency/Organization Membership

Membership Acceptance Form

05-04

✩ Public AdministrationReview (PAR)–Rated #1in journal citations, PARis the premier journal in public administration. Crucialfor keeping you current onimportant research.

✩ PA TIMES–A monthlynewspaper focusing on theconcerns of public adminis-trators and highlighting bestpractices in the field.Features The Recruiter, anemployment section.

✩ ASPA’s Web site–Withmore than 40,000 visitors permonth, ASPA’s web sitekeeps you up to date on thefield of public service, aswell as ASPA’s own projects,products and services.

Apply for Membership Online!

www.aspaonline.org

MM/DD/YYYY

AlabamaAuburn Area (59)Greater Birmingham (95)Montgomery Area (76)Troy State University,Montgomery (076UB)

Alask aAlaska (68)

ArizonaArizona (66)Southern Arizona (103)

Ark ansasArkansas (85)

Calif orniaBakersfield (18)Central California (2) Inland Empire (14)Los Angeles Metro (4)Monterey Bay (73)Orange County (46)Sacramento (5)San Diego (6)San Francisco Bay Area (7)San Joaquin Valley (83)Santa Clara Valley (87)Univ. of Southern California(004UB)

Color adoColorado (8)Southern Colorado (99)

ConnecticutConnecticut (9)

Dela wareDelaware (47)

District of ColumbiaNational Capital Area (10)

FloridaCentral Florida (80)Gold Coast (86)Gulf Coast (92)Island Coast (133)North Florida (63)Northeast Florida (57)South Florida (12)Suncoast (52)Treasure Coast (102)Univ. of Central Florida

(080UB)Georgia

Georgia (13)East Georgia (119)Southwest Georgia (130)

HawaiiHawaii (15)

IllinoisCentral Illinois (19)Greater Chicago (17)Heart of Illinois (79)Southern Illinois (117)

IndianaIndiana (22)Northwest Indiana (113)Three Rivers (128)

IowaIowa Capital (78)Siouxland(20)

KansasG reater Kansas City (34)Kansas (21)

Kentuck yKentucky (26)Metropolitan Louisville (105)

LouisianaLouisiana (114)

MaineMaine (23)

MarylandMaryland (24)

MassachusettsMassachusetts (25)

MichiganDetroit Metropolitan (27)Lake Superior (67)Michigan Capital (28)West Michigan (120)

MinnesotaMinnesota (31)

MississippiMississippi (91)

MissouriCentral Missouri (93)Greater Kansas City (34)St. Louis

Metropolitan (35)Nebr ask a

Nebraska (69)Nevada

Las Vegas (64)New Jersey

New Jersey (37)Northern

New Jersey (104)New Mexico

New Mexico (38)El Paso/Southeast

New Mexico (112)

New YorkE m p i re State Capital A rea (39) Central New York (42)Greater Rochester (77)Hudson Valley (107)Long Island (62)Lower Hudson Valley (82)New York Metropolitan (41)New York Univ. Robert F.

Wagner School (041UB)Niagara Frontier (29)

North CarolinaCentral Piedmont (54)Eastern North Carolina (1)Piedmont Triad (101)Research Triangle (74)Southeastern North Carilina

(135)Ohio

Akron (131)Central Ohio (43)Miami Valley (84)Northeast Ohio

Regional (45)Northwest Ohio (44)Greater Cincinnati (106)

Cleveland State University(045UB)

OklahomaOklahoma (75)

OregonOregon/Southwest Washington(48)

Pennsylv aniaCentral Pennsylvania (49)Northeast Pennsylvania (70)Philadelphia Area (50)Pittsburgh Area (51)Univ. of Pittsburgh (051UB)

Rhode IslandRhode Island (53)

South CarolinaLowcountry (97)South Carolina (16)Upstate South Carolina (132)

South Dak otaSiouxland (20)

TennesseeEast Tennessee (72)Memphis/Mid-South (88)Tennessee (11)

TexasCentex (32)High Plains (118)Houston Area (55)Laredo (134)North Texas (56)South Texas (40)El Paso/Southeast

New Mexico (112)

UtahUtah (58)

VermontVermont (33)

VirginiaHampton Roads (71)Northern Virginia (94)Southwest Virginia (96)Virginia (81)

WashingtonEvergreen (61)Inland Northwest (111)Oregon/Southwest

Washington (48)West Virginia

West Virginia (60)Wisconsin

Milwaukee (98)Wisconsin Capital (65)

Section on Ethics(ETHICS] 13 $35.00*Public Integrity

Association on Budgetingand Financial Management(ABFM) 8 $ 2 5 . 0 0*Public Budgeting & Finance

Conference of Minority PublicAdministrators (COMPA) 11 $ 1 9 . 0 0*Journal of Public Management and Social Policy

Section on Criminal Justice Administration (SCJA) 6 $ 3 9 . 0 0*Criminal Justice Policy Review

Section on Emergency and Crisis Management(SECM) 17 $ 1 0 . 0 0

Section on Environmentaland Natural ResourcesAdministration(SENRA) $ 1 1 . 5 0

Section on Health and HumanServices Administration(SHHSA) 2 $ 2 1 . 0 0*Journal of Health and Human Services Administration

Section on Historical,Artistic, and ReflectiveExpression (SHARE) 20 $ 2 0 . 0 0*Public Voices

Section on IntergovernmentalAdministration andManagement(SIAM) 7 $ 2 2 . 0 0*State and Local Government Review

Section on International and Comparative Administration SICA (1) $ 4 0 . 0 0International Public Management Journal

Section on PublicPerformance andManagement(SPPM) 10 $ 2 6 . 5 0*Public Performance and Management Review

National Young Professionals Forum(NYPF) 15 $ 1 1 . 0 0

Section on PersonnelAdministration and LaborRelations(SPALR) 12 Student $25.00

Regular $30.00*Review of Public Personnel Administration

Section for Professional andOrganizational Development(SPOD) 4 $ 2 2 . 0 0*Public Administration Quarterly

Section on PublicAdministration Education ( S PAE) 9 $ 1 9 . 0 0*Journal of Public Affairs Education

Section on PublicAdministration Research(SPAR) 18 $ 3 6 . 0 0*American Review of Public Administration

Section on Public Law and Administration (SPLA) 19 $ 9 . 0 0

Section on Science andTechnology in Government(SSTIG) 3 $ 1 2 . 0 0

Section on TransportationPolicy and Administration(STPA) 21 $ 2 6 . 0 0*Public Works Management and Policy

Section for Women in Public Administration(SWPA) 16 $ 1 7 . 0 0

1120 G Street, NW, Suite 700, Washington, DC 20005 • 202-393-7878 p • 202-638-4952 f • [email protected] • www. a s p a n e t . o r g

American Society for Public Administration

Advancing excellence in public service . . .

Membership in alocal chapter isincluded in yourmembership fee.

ASPA Chapters Please visit the ASPA website www.aspanet.org for a detailed list of chapters.

ASPA Sections

ASPA Sections are a great way tostay current in your field.

Section journals appear in italics. Please visit the ASPA website www.aspanet.org for a detailed list of sections.

Publications Discount Program

New from ASPA!

Cutting edge books and journals

discounted for ASPA members

only! Here are two of the lastest,

find more online atwww.aspanet.org.

PUBLIC INTEGRITYThe journal of ASPA’s Ethics Sectionis now available to all ASPA members!

Member Price: $40 U.S., $50 International

Non-member Price: $70 U.S., $88 International Order from: [email protected], or Sorina Pop, M.E. Sharpe, Inc., 80 Business Park Drive, Armonk, NY10504

THE PUBLIC MANAGERThe quarterly for practitioners interested in effective performance in the public sector.

MemberPrice: $19Non-member Price: $35 O r d e rf rom: The Bureaucrat, Inc. 12007 Titian Wa y, Potomac, MD 20854

3131


Ethics TodayThe International Journal of Public Administration

Symposium on “Spiritual Faith and Government Decisions” Call for Abstracts and Papers

The International Journal of Public Administration invites manuscripts on the theme of utilizing “spiritual faith” as an explicit ingredient and force in making and implementing government decisions that have either ethical or moral consequences to governments, government clients, or the citizenry. “Spiritual faith” is defi ned broadly to include any religious perspective as long as it can point to specifi c moral principles as its foundation for understanding and regulating civic behavior. (In other words, we are not concerned with issues of how individuals “get to heaven,” but rather relationships between spiritual faith and government decisions which regulate human interaction.)

The symposium welcomes a diversity of opinion, from a diversity of disciplines, on the use (and/or misuse) of “spiritual faith” in making government decisions. It encourages manuscripts which focus on a diversity of settings (international, comparative, nation-specifi c, sub-national processes and institutions, grass-roots movements to af-fect government decisions). It seeks diversity of concerns (e.g., “Free Exercise” decisions at a state university in, say, Mississippi; faith-based initiatives of all kinds; examinations of the role of faith in, say the urban planning processes; death row conditions in, say, Oklahoma; trials on “crimes against humanity” in Iraq; a social welfare program in Israel and/or Palestine; etc.) It also seeks diversity in conceptual framework and methodology. Philosophical, his-torical and contemporary “think pieces,” as well as more scientifi c studies, are welcome.

Manuscripts will undergo the traditional double-blind review process. While journal space may limit the number of peer-reviewed manuscripts published in the symposium, all manuscripts that are conceptually sound, intellectually rigorous and can withstand the test of the double-blind review process will be considered for inclusion as chapters in a much larger book project on the same topic. Manuscript reviewers will be tapped from membership in the (1) Religion and Politics Section of the American Political Science Association, (2) Council on Faith & International Affairs; and (3) Ethics Section of the American Society for Public Administration, as well as other specialized scholars and refl ective practitioners.

Deadlines for submission of proposals:

1 June 2006: a one-page abstract (via e-mail) detailing the proposed manuscript1 February 2007: fi nal manuscript (4 hard copies and 1 disc) due for double-blind reviews.

Send all inquiries and correspondence to:James D. Slack, Ph.D.ProfessorDepartment of GovernmentThe University of Alabama at BirminghamBirmingham, Alabama 35294-3350 USA

[email protected]

3232


Ethics TodayEthics in Public Management

Edited by: H. George Frederickson; Richard K. Ghere Cloth ISBN: 0-7656-1460-XUSD $85.95 Paper ISBN: 0-7656-1461-8USD: $36.95M.E. Sharpe, Inc. http://www.mesharpe.com/mall/resultsa.asp?Title=Ethics+in+Public+Management

Information: 400pp. Tables, fi gures, references, index. Publication Date: April 2005

Publisher’s Description: The groundbreaking Ethics in Public Administration set the agenda for a decade’s worth of research in the theory and practice of ethics in the public sector. This long-awaited follow-up volume represents the state of the art in research on administrative ethics. It features all new contributions by many of the leading fi gures in the fi eld, and addresses both the managerial and individual/moral dimensions of ethical behavior as well as new challenges to administrative ethics posed by globalization.

A detailed introduction, opening passage, and conclusion lend context to each of the book’s four main sections. Ethics in Public Management is must reading for any graduate level course in public sector ethics.

Selected Contents:Part 1. Ethics and Public Administration in the Twenty-First Century

1. Introduction, Richard K. Ghere 2. State of the Art of Empirical Research on Ethics and Integrity in Governance, Donald C. Menzel

Part. 2. Organization Designs that Support Ethical Behavior 3. Developing a Behavioral Model for Ethical Decision Making in Organizations: Conceptual and Empirical Re-

search, Dennis P. Wittmer 4. Update on Moral Reasoning Research and Theory in Public Administration: A Neo-Kohlbergian Perspective,

Laura Lee Swisher, Ann-Marie Rizzo, and Marsha A. Marley 5. Power and Ethics: The Communal Language of Effective Leadership, Carole L. Jurkiewicz 6. Public-Service Ethics and Administrative Evil: Prospects and Problems, Guy B. Adams and Danny L. Balfour 7. Accountability Through Thick and Thin: Moral Agency in Public Service, Melvin Dubnick and Ciarßn

O’Kelly Part 3. Market Forces That Compromise Administrative Ethics

8. Public Ethics and the New Managerialism: An Axiomatic Theory, H. George Frederickson 9. Ensuring Accountability in Human Services: The Dilemma of Measuring Moral and Ethical Performance, Lisa

A. Dicke and Petina Boonyarak 10. Cowboys and the New Public Management: Political Corruption as a Harbinger, Peter deLeon 11. Public Ethics, Legal Accountability, and the New Governance, Laura S. Jensen and Sheila Suess Kennedy

Part 4. Unintended Outcomes of Anticorruption Reforms 12. The Cure for a Public Disease: The Foibles and Future of Corruption Control, Frank Anechiarico 13. In Search of Virtue: Why Ethics Policies Spawn Unintended Consequences, Kathryn G. Denhardt and Stuart C.

Gilman Part 5. Administrative Ethics in Global Perspective

14. An Anatomy of Offi cial Corruption, Gerald E. Caiden 15. Public-Service Ethics in a Transnational World, Diane E. Yoder and Terry L. Cooper 16. Globalization and Public-Service Ethics: Some Directions for Inquiry, Richard K .Ghere 17. Conclusion: Ethics and Public Management--Answers and Questions, Richard K. Ghere

3333


Ethics TodaySecond Edition of The Ethics Challenge in Public Service

The second edition of The Ethics Challenge in Public Service by ethics section members Carol W. Lewis and Stuart C. Gilman (2005) has been published by John Wiley & Sons. For more information see http://www3.interscience.wiley.com:8100/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-0787978809.html

Since it was fi rst published in 1991, The Ethics Challenge in Public Service has become a classic text used by public managers and in public management programs across the country. This second edition is fi lled with practical tools and techniques for making ethical choices in the ambiguous, pressured world of public service. It explores the day-to-day ethical dilemmas managers face in their work, including what to do when rules recommend one action and compassion another, and whether it is ethical to dissent from agency policy. This essential text explores managers’ accountability to different stakeholders and how to balance the often competing responsibilities.

Introduction: Ethics in Public Service

PART ONE: ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF PUBLIC MANAGERS 1. What Is Important inPublic Service? 2. Obeying and Implementing the Law 3. Serving the Public Interest 4. Taking Individual Responsibility

PART TWO: TOOLS FOR PERSONAL DECISION MAKING 5. Finding Solid Ground: Ethical Standards and Reasoning 6. Resolving Ethical Dilemmas: Strategies and Tactics for Managers 7. Understanding Who and What Matters: Stakeholder Analysis

PART THREE: ETHICS AND THE ORGANIZATION 8. Designing and Implementing Codes 9. Broadening the Horizon 10. Building an Ethical Agency

Afterword:The Job AheadResource A: Chronology of Theoretical and Applied Ethics in Public ServiceResource B: Selected Internet ResourcesResource C: Tools for Making Ethical Decisions

3434


Ethics Today

Th e PA Times provides an excellent opportunity for Ethics Section members to publish ethics-related articles. Consider a topic and let us know that you would like to provide an article for PA Times. It is another way to illustrate the active membership of the Ethics Section, its dedication to ethics in public service and the expression of our Section and individual commitments. If you have an article that would like to submit, pleaser let us know ([email protected]).

THE PA TIMES EDITORIAL CALENDAR

MayDealing with Succession Planning

Deadline: April 22, 2006

JuneAchieving Ethical Administration

Deadline: May 22, 2006

JulyProtecting People and Property in the 21st Century

Deadline: June 22, 2006

AugustEmergency Management One Year After Katrina

Deadline: July 22, 2006

SeptemberAdministering Help America Vote Act: Tales from the Field

Deadline: August 22, 2006

OctoberPublic Administration Skills Across Professions

Educational Supplement: MPA: Not Just for Public Employees AnymoreDeadline: September 22, 2006

35

Ethics Today / International2006 ASPA Conference Edition

Frances Burke ET/International Editor



Decision Forcing

International Vignettes

WE’RE STILL

LOOKING FOR INPUT!

ETHICS TODAY INTERNATIONAL

READER FEEDBACK

Q1 – Of Ethics International, I read:

1___All 2___Most 3___Some 4___None

Q2 – Of the Conferences Sec-

tion of Ethics Today In-ternational, I read:

1___All 2___Most 3___Scan Some 4___None

Q3 – I have attended confer-ences announced in Eth-ics Today International

1___Yes 2___No

Q4 – Which one (s)? ____________________ ____________________

Q5 – Currently I teach an International Ethics Course

1___Yes 2___No

Please send responses and sylla-bus, if possible, toFran Burke at:[email protected]

WHISTLE-BLOWING/GENTLE ALTERNATIVES

Have you ever observed a colleague or student committing a breach of research ethics? Per-haps it was as serious as a professor claiming a student’s work or a grant reviewer ‘lifting’ ideas from a proposal? Or perhaps it was as simple as a naïve student using the wrong sta-tistic or trolling for significance, or making a hypothesis to fit the data? Get the idea? Did you do something about it? Mindful of the delicacy of the situation and the usual fate of whistle-blowers, what did you do? Something subtle or collegial?

Your editor, Fran Burke ([email protected]) and Joan Sieber ([email protected]) are seeking whistle-blowing experiences, particularly international cases. The purpose of Joan Sieber’s research is to produce an online manual describing effec-tive and ineffective strategies, totally anony-mous. If you are willing to be interviewed, please email Joan or call 510 538-5424. The story is yours to tell; nothing will be tape re-corded. We seek useful details for the analysis of factors leading to success or failure and that will help to construct fictitious cases.

DECISION FORCING INTERNATIONAL

ETHICSVIGNETTES

International cases on Ethics Global-ly are requested. These are NOT eth-ics cases which are 12-20 pages long, but are short, one or two paragraphs about cases in which managers are forced to make ethical decisions on a real issues, events or work experi-ences swiftly.

The ASPA Ethics Workbook as well as Combating Corruption/Encour-aging Ethics, Edition 1, has examples of short, powerful cases which force an immediate decision. There are many United States decision-forcing cases, but we seek international de-cision-forcing cases which touch on difficult ethics decisions.

Please forward to Fran Burke at [email protected].

Whistle-Blowing

Experiences

Ethics Today Reader

Comments

3636



UNITED NATIONS Oil-for-Food PROGRAMBy James Stowe, Kansas State University

A perusal of international headlines reveals a series of continued arrests and indictments associated with the United Nations Oil-for-Food (OFF) Program. The accusations and suspicions imply continued ethical conse-quences of the OFF program. It is important to remember, however, that the facts of the program often differ from the media’s portrayal.

The largest humanitarian program in history, with an estimated $65 billion budget, OFF had been considered a success because of the relief it provided to Iraqi citizens; largely in the form of food, medicine and other aid products. Unfortunately, the full potential of the program was not realized due to lapses in accountability and oversight that lacked in effectiveness, if not scope.

Condemnation of the United Nations in this humanitarian and programmatic should be done cautiously. The media’s description of the programs weaknesses has been incomplete, and has largely ignored information that would enhance the public’s trust in the U.N. As noted by Dr. Joy Gordon, the academic authority on the program, much of the illicit funds raised by the previous Iraqi government were outside the program, such as the vast smuggling efforts of Saddam Hussein’s regime. In addition, the faults of the program were pres-ent from its inception with oversight being provided by the U.N. Security Council itself – which according to Gordon “does not oversee any programs.” The Security Council, which often acted for political benefit rather than the benefit of the Iraqi citizenry, did not provide the management mechanisms necessary to prevent illegal surcharges and kickbacks.

Already, the U.N. is implementing reforms that, although not specifically aimed at ameliorating problems that occurred in the OFF program, will inevitably address some of the ethical issues that were present. The new U.S. Ethics office will help curb ethical lapses by providing a formal avenue for receiving ethical information before such issues escalate.

It is apparent that lack of accountability was the key ethical problem within the program. Oversight provided by the Security Council and the extensive transparency identified by Dr. Gordon were not enough to curb malfeasance within the organization. Future programs will be benefited by higher accountability standards and ethical reforms that are just now being implemented throughout the United Nations.

3737



A bright spot in the wake of the OFF program is the hope of improved programs in the future, perhaps with oversight provided by the Secretariat. Through reforms and continued prosecution of corruption, public trust in the U.N. is salvageable. Optimism is warranted in the new U.N. Ethics Office, which is providing necessary tools for employees to raise issues of concern before they swell into scandal. Improvement in accountability will not only strengthen the U.N.’s humanitarian efforts, but is also what the public is demanding of the or-ganization. Lessons from the OFF programs successes and failures can be applied to many facets of the public sector and will help provide greater ethical standards for tomorrow’s endeavors.

Sources:

Gordon, Joy. “Between a Sword and the Wall,” The InterDependent 3 (2005): 36 United State Congress. House Committee on Government Reform. “Joy Gordon’s Statement On the United Nations Oil for Food Program Before House Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats, and Inter-national Relations.” Available online: http://reform.house.gov/uploadedfiles/gordon%20testimony.pdf

Celebrating 1st Women Elected Head of STATE IN AFRICA

“I wish the attention of the media and the international community would make the shift from one individual to three million people that desire a chance of a new life,” stated Ms. Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf, Liberia’s newly elected President. During her first U.N. visit, Ms. Johnson-Sirleaf was pressed for information about the exiled-in- Nigeria former President Charles Taylor. Noting that she had had talks with Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo and leaders involved with taking Taylor into exile in that country, Johnson-Sirleaf reflected that “Mr. Taylor was not indicted in a Liberian court; he was indicted in the Special Court of Sierra Leone supported by the United Nations.” Further, she expressed concern for the country and Liberian people since Taylor has business and political ties still in Liberia. Her country, she noted, is “seeking to restore its relationships, [and] its international reputation.” To a joint meeting of the U.S. Congress, President Johnson-Sirleaf declared that “The people of Liberia and the people of the United States are bound together by history and by values.”

Ms. Johnson-Sirleaf noted that the country’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) had been launched, as had the development process – both important stages in the transition from war to peace. Seeking both long-term and ‘quick-impact measures,‘ she elaborated on the ongoing rehabilitation of the thousands of demo-bilized youth, and the infrastructure both economic and social.

3838



The Muhammad Cartoons DebateCall for Essays, Argumentatively Focused

Looking for original contributions that primarily address ethical and intercultural aspects of the controversy. Accepted papers will be published in a book, tentative title:

“THE CARTOON DEBATE AND THE FREEDOM OF THE PRESS: Conflicting Norms and Values in the Global Media Culture //

Der Karikaturenstreit und die Pressefreiheit – Wert-und-Normenkonflikte in der globalen Medienkultur.”

Please submit essay of 1500 words by May 10, 2006 in essay style with scholarly informed common language but written in argumentatively focused. Papers may be in English or in German; place references in footnotes at bottom of page. Submit electronically to: Prof. Dr. Bernhard Debatin, [email protected]. Dr. Debatin is Associate Professor for Multimedia Policy, Director of Tutorial Studies in Journalism. E.W. Scripps School of Journalism, Ohio University, Athens, Ohio 45701, USA Telephone: 740 593-9809; Fax: 740 593-2592. Check out: http://oak.cts.ohiou.edu/~debatin

Conferences – Meetings – Seminars – Symposia

13th Annual ED/NEB INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCEJune 14 – 16, 2006, Marriott Hotel Lisbon, Portugal

“Leading Innovation in Global Education & Training”

Take-aways are emphasized from this conference which provides multiple platforms for knowledge exchange. There are different tracks for best practices ideas, for evidence-based reform in Training and Global Business [email protected]; Mrs. Ellen Nelissen; 31 43 3883770P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands

3939



Conferences – Meetings – Seminars – Symposia2006 GLOBAL BUSINESS & TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATION

June 27 – July 1, 2006, Moscow, Russia (GBATA)“Management and Technology in the Global Economy:

Nurturing Innovations and National Heritage”

Special Topics: *Globalization *Global Poverty *Managing NGOs Tracks: *Comparative Ethics *Corporate Culture *Governance *Social, Legal & Regulatory Challengeshttp://www.gbata.com Nejdet Delener [email protected] St. John’s University, Queens, New York 11439 718 990-6764

CONFERENCE on EMPIRICAL RESEARCH on HUMAN RESEARCH ETHICS Journal of … JERHRE (Jerry)

July 28, 2006, San Francisco Bay Area“Creative Ethical Problem Solving in Human Research:

Challenges & Solutions for Researchers and Ethics Committees”

What can be done with research ideas that seem ethically and scientifically sound but are innovative and might not be compliant with regulations? www.csueastbay.edu/jerhre/conference/index/html will provide the answer. Deadline for abstract submission is April 15, 20065; check early bird rates.

EUROPEAN GROUP of PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION EGPASeptember 6 – 9, 2006, Bocconi University, Milano

“Public Managers under Pressure between Politics, Professionalism and Civil Society.”www.egpa2006.com

4040



Conferences – Meetings – Seminars – Symposia

7th World Congress INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR UNIVERSAL DIALOGUE (ISUD)1 – 5 June 2007, Hiroshima, Japan

“After Hiroshima – Collective Memory, Philosophical Reflection, World Peace”

The Society wishes to stimulate philosophical reflection and discussion on Topics related to its common theme and papers which address questions on suffering, trauma, war, nonviolence, justice, international relations, genocide, humanrights, nuclear power, international law, humanitarianism, reparation, and forgiveness. Other topics welcomeAbstract due: April 1, 2006 (300-500 words); November 1, Full text due. Abstracts regular post or email attach-ment in Word to: Dr. Charles Brown, Philosophy department, Campus Box 4032, Emporia State University, Emporia, KS 66801, USA [email protected]; or details www.isud.org

Ethics Today Notes and Noteworthys

ICMA HIGHLIGHTS FREDERICKSON ARTICLE

H. George Frederickson, professor of public administration at the University of Kansas, headlines the Novem-ber issue of ICMA’s PM magazine with his article “Transcending the Community: Local Leadership in a World of Shared Power.”

The article addresses the question “For whom do managers work?” when sovereighty and jurisdiction are in considerable doubt. It can be downloaded from ICMA’s web site: http://icma.org/pm Academic Exchange, ICMA, December 2005.

4141


Ethics TodayCONTACT INFORMATION

Jennifer Alexander [email protected]

Danny L. Balfour [email protected]

Erik Bergrud [email protected]

Evan Berman [email protected]

Steven Bobes [email protected]

Jim Bowman [email protected]

Willa Bruce

Fran Burke [email protected]

Russ Carlsen [email protected]

Raymond Cox [email protected]

Larry Cobb [email protected]

Terry Cooper [email protected]

Mel Dubnick [email protected]

Rod Erakovich [email protected]

Herb Fain [email protected]

Ali Farazmand [email protected]

Jean-Claude Garcia-Zamor [email protected]

Stuart Gilman StuartGilman@[email protected]

Eleanor Glor [email protected]

Rick Green [email protected]

James Heichelbech [email protected]

Carole L. Jurkiewicz [email protected]

Cynthia Lynch [email protected]

Don Menzel [email protected]

Manfred Meine [email protected]

Meredith Newman [email protected]

Kenneth Nichols [email protected]

Rosalind Osgood [email protected]

Jeremy Plant [email protected]

Terrel Rhodes [email protected]

Ann Marie Rizzo [email protected]

William Solomon [email protected]

Robert Smith [email protected]

Richard Stillman [email protected]

Montgomery Van Wart [email protected]

Vera Vogelsang-Coombs [email protected]

Jonathan West [email protected]

Richard White [email protected]

Russ Williams [email protected]

Mylon Winn [email protected]

Dennis Wittmer [email protected]

John Worthley [email protected]

As the Ethics Section has grown, the number of members who become actively involved has also grown. To make it easier to contact people, we will now provide a consolidated list of email addresses for ExComm members, ET Board members and everyone else who would like to be contacted. If you would like to have your email address added, removed or corrected, please contact James Heichel-bech ([email protected]).


Ethics Today

4242

ETHICS TODAYBoard of Editors

James R. Heichelbech, EditorFran Burke, International Editor

Danny BalfourErik BergrudHerbert FainEleanor GlorRosalind OsgoodWilliam SolomonRuss WilliamsJohn Worthley

Have an ethical issue you would like to raise to the general membership? Want to let the ASPA ethics community know about an event? Need ethics-related contributions for a journal or conference? Send your comments and requests to:

Ethics TodayJames Heichelbech, [email protected]

LAST WORDS

When I started working as a market research analyst some years ago, we decided that my background in public sector ethics would come in handy. After all, much of the work we do is for public sector agencies who have particular concerns about how their customers are treated and about how they themselves appear to their customers. We therefore ordered a box of business cards that would read,

Research Analyst / Ethics SpecialistAs it turns out, this was a bad idea. Ironically, the word ‘ethics’ used in most public sector environments tends to create a sense of fear and distrust. As far as I can tell, the fear stems from the belief that “ethics” is about getting people in trouble. On a practical level, “combating corruption” involves identifi cation of improprieties and punishment of the individuals responsible. Th ere is nothing to gain by mentioning a Code of Ethics unless there is a problem, and the only outcome imaginable is that you, the administrator, can’t do this or that (e.g. work here anymore). And unfortunately, investigations into ethical misconduct seem to get interpreted as politically motivated. Th e distrust, therefore, results from the belief that individuals will be punished and that the one “promoting” ethics will be the one to facilitate the punishment.

Recently, I asked some questions about potential ethical issues connected to a public sector research project. Th e response was, “maybe we need to fi nd a diff er-ent vendor.” Needless to say, I will be getting new business cards. Th e larger issue here, though, is whether it makes sense to continue using the word “ethics” in our eff orts to promote ethics in public administration. If individual administrators are threatened by the very idea of “ethics,” then we seem to have much to gain by calling it something other than “ethics.” What do we lose? Perhaps we have more diffi culty attracting others to our community. Perhaps we lose a sense of focus and cohesiveness in our common goal. But I’m not so sure the word “eth-ics” is the source of our focus and cohesion. I believe that we would attract more people and get more work done without the word “ethics” in everything we say and do. For example, would we get resistance to “ethics training” if we called it something else?

In the meantime, my solution is to continue doing what I do, but call myself a “normative analyst” instead of an “ethics specialist.” Th e only person who could possibly get into trouble with a title like that is me, but then it is unlikely that I will lose the contract or my job in the process. In fact, I’m pretty sure nobody will remember the “normative” part and just remember “analyst” in the same way they hear “psychologist” whenever I say “philosopher.” If I get my work done, they can call me whatever they like.

Ethics – A Rose By Any Other Name Is SweeterBy James Heichelbech

CALL FOR PARTICIPATION

For the past year, we have been working to revi-talize the Editorial Board for Ethics Today. Th e somewhat shorter list of people above includes those who have expressed interest in continuing to serve. (If there are some who have been serv-ing and wish to continue, but are not included in the list above, please let us know and we will put you back on.)

We are very much interested in adding a few new names to the list. Any and all who are interested in serving on the Editorial Board for Ethics To-day, please send an e-mail to James Heichelbech at [email protected].

Contributions for the Last Words article are welcome. If you have comments of any length on any topic large or small, please send them to James Heichelbech, Ethics Today editor, at [email protected]

ethics today - united nationsunpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/... · a month ago i...

Documents