Ethics: General Definition and Review

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Administrative Ethical Behaviour
Philosophical approaches to ethics in public administration
Public Sector Decision Making
Federal Regulation Administrative Law
Legislative-Centered Public Administration
Abortion Conscience Clause Laws
Work Cited

Ethics is generally concerned about how people act according to some measured standard while determining that people are doing the right thing. John Rohr defines ethics as doing deeds that avoid evil (Rohr, 1978). Public administration scholars define ethics as general prescriptive rules that guide behavior. Swain & Duke (2001) rank ethics in between those values and morals that lie on one hand and philosophy, political philosophy, and regime principles on the other hand (Swain & Duke, 2001). Therefore, ethics, unlike individualistic values that are peculiar, are morally, socially and generally oriented. Ethics are also not considered as philosophical, political and regime principles because they are not that fundamental, abstract, or specific. Ethics concern about individuals having behavioral choices, choices having social consequences in which they may be characterized in general prescriptive rules. Ethics may include dictums like honesty and politeness and may lead to dilemmas that involve subtleties, but they themselves are seldom subtle (Swain & Duke, 2001).

Ethics are those measurement tools that determine the position of any individual on the basis of his or her morality and professionalism towards his professional duties, professional relations with other employees, relation with his organization and, towards society as a whole. When we talk about administrative ethics, we are actually concerned about providers’ behavior towards influencing the ethics of their members, how the members influence each other and the organization, and how the members and organization deal with the community and government.

The importance of ethics can be analyzed from the economic, socio-political, and human developmental paradigm in which individual and organizational ethical behaviour is concerned even more than any functioning of an organization.

Administrative Ethical Behaviour

Similarly, administrative ethical behaviour is evaluated with respect to the consequences of organizational actions. In a psychological context, organizational studies is legitimate and important facets of employees’ job performance and their organizational citizenship behaviours (OCBs) because such pro-social behaviours contribute to organizational effectiveness, even though they may not be part of the prescribed work role (Podsakoff & MacKenzie, 2000). Administrative Ethical Behaviour (AEB) cannot ethically ignore the moral qualities and actions of the organizations to which we devote our efforts in effect, the organization’s citizenship behaviour with respect to the society that legitimizes and supports it and in which it functions.

In the public administration literature, the meaning of ethics ranges widely from personal character including values, morality, citizenship responsibilities, and rules, guidelines, to laws of professional groups, group ideals, constitutional systems, political philosophic positions, and fundamental philosophic positions. Ethics in public administration is not new; many ethical concepts have been borrowed from philosophic traditions which overlap significantly with the ancient and modern differentiation. These traditions have been researched by many public administration authors, and they have more commonly expressed various views to assess ethics or ethical actions involve caring for individuals in the positive sense and since individuals and their needs or concerns vary, the ends of ethics vary as well (Davidson, 1994).

Why Ethics are important to Public Administration?

Ethics in context with the public administration is the study of philosophy that is concerned with the morality of human conduct, emphasizing how to best determine right and wrong values in specific circumstances for a particular group, organization, region, or nation. The need for public administration to foster ethical conduct despite the defined moral standards for action is the reason that numerous situations do not fit neatly within defined guidelines (McKinney & Howard, 1998, p. 4).

The main reason for public administration to foster ethics is to induce internalized individual qualities in its management so as to make its management capable of managing external controls, which include methods of oversight and correction. Ethics are important to public administration because public policies are based upon the ‘rights and wrongs’ of ethics that clearly identifies managerial individual choices. By ‘rights’ of the ethics, administration is concerned with professional honesty in a working environment, loyalty to the organization and abiding justice and fair rules whereas the ‘wrongs’ are concerned with possible actions that induce harmful consequences, unfair or unjust decision that goes against the organization or any employee, and any course of action involving any illegal activity.

Philosophical approaches to ethics in public administration

All of the philosophical approaches are based on the grounds in which administrators in accordance with the ethical concerns, determine the course of action which are right and which are wrong. On ethical ground for bureaucrats based on the U.S Constitution, Rohr writes that Supreme Court opinions best reflect the decision making process that encourages public servants to consider their decisions utilising the laws (Sheeran, 1993, p. 6).

The most common approaches to ethics in public administration are epistemology and logic, which are concerned with knowledge, truth, and meaning. In some sense, every branch of knowledge, every science, presupposes that knowledge can be acquired, that propositions can be true or false, and sentences understood. But there is no special relation of ethics directly with economics or politics that these philosophies are concerned with.

Other approaches include the usage of positive economics, which is concerned to measure economic facts and relationships and to produce causal explanations of economic events and trends. Normative economics is concerned with whether one economic state of affairs is better or worse than another, and hence with the question whether one action or measure, one policy or institutional framework, is better than another in the light of its probable consequences. Normative economic problems range from whether or not to widen some road, through whether to fix the foreign exchange rate, to the design of economic decision-making institutions and procedures.

If we take inflation, as an example, we will see that, like most boundaries that between positive and normative is not precise. Economists may agree the precise measure the rate of increase of some index of prices and try to measure the effect of various causes on this measure. Equally positively they may recognize some other measure, and use that in their calculations. When a politician thunders that some policy would be inflationary, he is clearly condemning it. Economics shares with other social sciences the fact that its findings are often relevant to policy. Great care has to be taken by a social scientist who wants to preserve his or her scientific status that findings are not taken as recommendations if this is not intended. The findings should not use persuasive language. Of course, the economist or other social scientist may passionately want to be influential. In that case, he or she may be happy to abandon scientific integrity.

The most significant approach that links philosophy to ethics is utilitarianism. The distinction that has been drawn between Act and Rule Utilitarianism defines the reason why it is used as an approach to administration. Rule Utilitarianism was invented as an answer to the objection that utilitarianism, a variety of consequentialism, ignored important moral rules and was held that some rules are essential for the general welfare. On the other hand, an act whose consequences might seem to maximize utility, but which broke such a rule, could undermine the general adherence to rules which are essential for a peaceful and thriving society (I.M.D, 2004, p. 40). An obvious example of such a paradox is breaking a promise to someone in order to give pleasure to a third party. Most defenders of utilitarianism seem to be rule utilitarians, and most would probably agree that rules may be broken only in very exceptional circumstances. A utilitarian chooses rules adherence to which will, he believes, maximize utility.

As far as breaking the rules is concerned, according to the exceptional circumstances the utilitarian can take everything into account, the apparent net gain in utility from disappointing a promisee and pleasing a third party, the feeling of guilt from breaking a promise, the disutility caused by weakening the convention of keeping promises and even the intrinsic badness, if any, of breaking promises. Finally, there are a great many decisions that have to be taken where no rule, custom, or convention applies: while utilitarianism provides a universal principle. The upshot is that a utilitarian must be a universal utilitarian: of course he takes the value of rules into account.

Public Sector Decision Making

Decision-making falls within the province of all levels of management, though it is generally assumed to be reserved to individuals fairly high in the administrative hierarchy. This assumption fits our cultural belief that each organization has someone in charge who makes the real decisions and exercises the responsibility. For example, a client went into a local welfare agency to avail himself of the service to which he believed he was entitled. On being told that he no longer qualified, he demanded an explanation, which he got and promptly rejected. He insisted on seeing the person in charge, therefore the assistant director responded, giving the same unacceptable explanation. The assistant director called the director, who came and gave the same explanation. Though the client was still not entirely placated, he thanked the director for his time, shook his hand, and left.

In attempting to meet and resolve different types of problems, two schools of thought have developed. One holds that decisions are mainly the product of intuitive and creative elements, while other believes that decision-making is a rational process representing the opposing school (McKinney & Howard, 1998, p. 246). These theorists believe that decisions can be reduced not only to a rational process but to computer programs, capable of making decisions with the range and depth similar to that supplied by human thought.

Federal Regulation Administrative Law

Since administrative ethics take into account moral aspects of administration employees and senior managers’ activities, it encompasses three basic components, values, standards and norms and behaviour. The U.S. federal system was created by people who wanted the fruits of a centrally coordinated government but feared the power that such a system might exercise. The Constitution authorized governmental power that is fragmented, conditioned, and prohibited while on the federal level, fragmentation results from the separation of powers while taking into account the system of checks and balances.

The federal system provides for two divisions of functions, those having primarily national importance and those of mainly local concern. In the case of the former, functions that have importance for the country as a whole are assigned to the national government, which include defence, foreign relations, foreign commerce, and the monetary system. The primary local functions include such matters as public education, police protection, roads and highways, and health. Since these latter powers, unlike those of the central government, were not outlined therefore, the powers of the national government are known as the delegated powers and those of the states as reserved powers.

Legislative-Centered Public Administration

When we talk about public administration with respect to Congress, we mean to consider about the theoretical constructs that are derived from the actions taken by Congress with regard to federal administration. Public administration in context with administrative law began its evolution when Congress felt to be displaced while searching for an authoritative role in the burgeoning administrative state (Rosenbloom, 2000, p. 131). However, soon after realizing that the administrative decisions and actions are political because they allocate benefits and burdens, Congress self-evidently engaged in legislative functions such as rulemaking, but it is also true in the context of enforcement, personnel and budget systems, organizational design, the location of administrative facilities, and other matters.

With the active involvement of politics, the orthodox vision of administration based on the application of neutral, scientifically informed expertise in pursuit of the public interest remained insufficient to legitimize agency actions or yield politically responsive decisions. Therefore it was evident on Congress that such administration is insulated from political controls or unresponsive, it may be considered illegitimate, as several members of Congress contended while debating the Walter-Logan Act and the APA. Insofar as politics is involved in administration, agencies’ operations should comport with the values of American democratic-constitutionalism. Congress realized that obeying these values, it will help legitimize their actions and improve administrative performance in the political system. For instance, as a general rule, democratic-constitutionalism demands that administrative operations and decisions be open to public scrutiny; that interested parties have a right to representation and participation in agencies’ decision making; and that administrators respect the public, protect their rights, and avoid intruding on their privacy and autonomy (Rosenbloom, 2000, p. 135).

Perhaps negotiated rulemaking comes closest to legislative-centered public administration’s ideal decision-making model. The agency notifies the public of its intent to engage in rulemaking and then joins with other concerned parties in a cooperative problem-solving exercise. Congress’s supervisory role justifies placing inspectors general and chief financial officers in the agencies, imposing a vast number of reporting requirements on administrators, using committee and personal staff to monitor agency behavior, and establishing direct congressional participation in the core managerial activities of strategic planning and performance measurement. Because Congress creates, empowers, and sustains administration, it has an obligation to make sure that it functions appropriately in individual cases as well as in general. Casework is not particularistic favor-seeking or rule-bending; it is a legitimate and major legislative function. The members have an obligation to see how the administrative machinery Congress created is working, to intervene when it seems to falter in specific instances, and to redesign it when failure is endemic.

In sum, legislative-centered public administration is a theoretical construct that highlights being a prominent congressional role in federal administration under the constitutional separation of powers and even that in addition to being the ‘source’ of federal administration. Congress, while performing the role of administration delegates and therefore treats the agencies as extensions for performance of its legislative functions. Because administration involves political decision making, Congress is responsible for ensuring that the agencies embrace democratic constitutional values and has broad supervisory responsibility for administration and should be organized and staffed accordingly. Its representational role includes district service and casework, for which personal staff are necessary. The primary function of the presidency and political executive with respect to federal administration, especially in the domestic sphere, is to coordinate the agencies, activities and manage their day-to-day operations. The courts thus serve as a check on unconstitutional, illegal, irrational, or abusive administration, largely as specified by Congress through administrative law.

Abortion Conscience Clause Laws

The Consolidated Appropriations Act 2005, akin to ANDA (Abortion non-discrimination Act) has been passed during the 108th Congress and has been expanded the ‘health care identity’ to all kinds of health practitioners and health maintenance organizations (Feder, Jan 2005). A fair step towards providing justice, the Act has been an addition to the previous law which protected only individual doctors or medical training programs and did not provide abortions or abortion training, primarily in the medical education setting or to doctors in their individual practices. The new legislation passed by Congress fulfils what it requires to be ‘ethical in administrative law’ and allows large health insurance companies and HMOs to refuse to provide coverage or pay for abortions.

Although this recent new appropriation legislation is similar to the proposed ANDA, but it differs in dual ways. First, Congress being aware of the fact that ANDA would have denied all federal funds to entities that engaged in abortion-related discrimination, therefore it has proposed that the new legislation denies only those funds that are available under the Labor/HHS appropriations bill. Second, it differs from ANDA in the sense that it is not permanent legislation, therefore the new appropriations legislation will remain in effect for one year only, unless Congress enacts a similar provision in future appropriations bills. Thus, this law serves as an expansion of previous law, by providing for smaller penalties which are temporary in nature.

Morality in politics also affects the implementation of ‘administrative ethics’ in fertility control politics. In this atmosphere of fundamental values and extreme positions, politicians find it hard to compromise, much less to design coherent fertility control policies. This lack of coherence has consequences that both policy implementation theory and empirical findings tell that the structure of a policy affects the likelihood of successful implementation.

Although abortion and family planning often share the same political winds, American family planning policy is separate from abortion policy. For the most part, abortion policy emanates from U.S. Supreme Court decisions, although in recent years, the Court has devolved more power to the states (McFarlane & Meier, 2001, p. 152). Abortion policy is multifaceted and mostly regulatory, but one important redistributive element is whether states decide to fund abortions for low-income women. Federal family planning policy in the United States is redistributive and consists largely of subsidizing services for the poor. This is so far the best example of implementing ‘administrative ethical behaviour’.

Work Cited

Davidson, A.M. (1994) “Gender Differences in Administrative Ethics” In: Handbook of Administrative Ethics; Cooper, T.L., Ed: New York; 415-433.

Feder Jody, (2005) CRS Report for Congress: The history and effect of Abortion Conscience Clause Laws. Web.

I. M. D. Little, (2004) Ethics, Economics, and Politics: Principles of Public Policy: Oxford University Press: Oxford.

Lefkowitz Joel, (2003) Ethics and Values in Industrial-Organizational Psychology: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, NJ.

McFarlane R. Deborah & Meier J. Kenneth, (2001) The Politics of Fertility Control: Family Planning and Abortion Policies in the American States: Chatham House Publishers: New York.

McKinney B. Jerome & Howard C. Lawrence, (1998) Public Administration: Balancing Power and Accountability: Praeger Publishers: Westport, CT.

Podsakoff, R M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (2000, April). The impact of organizational citizenship behavior on organizational performance: A review of the empirical literature. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, New Orleans.

Rohr, J.A. (1978) Ethics for Bureaucrats; Marcel Dekker, Inc.: New York, 7, 51.

Rosenbloom H. David, (2000) Building a Legislative-Centered Public Administration: Congress and the Administrative State, 1946-1999: University of Alabama: Tuscaloosa, AL.

Sheeran J. Patrick, (1993) Ethics in Public Administration: A Philosophical Approach. United States.

Swain W. John & Duke L. Matthew, (2001) “Recommendations for Research on Ethics in Public Policy from a Public Administration Perspective: Barking Dogs and More” In: International Journal of Public Administration. Volume: 24. Issue: 1.

Click Here To Order Now!