Public Scrutiny and Accountability: An Ethical Dilemma

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.

Brief Overview of Facts and Issues

Art Springer was the head of the Bureau of License Enforcement. Springer worked under Anne Trotter, the agency director of the firm. Trotter on the other hand worked directly under the office of the Governor. Springer was given a free reign in his office. In the process, he made a lot of decisions without consultation of his junior staff.

However, under certain circumstances, Trotter would intervene and give Springer some directives. These instances were considered as high profile situations (Miller, n.d.). However, even under these instances, the directives that Trotter gave were not different from what Springer would have done. In addition, Springer had no ethical issues that affected his work.

William J. Smith held the office of the governor. Governor William was used to getting his way. He also had a habit of getting even with anyone who did not stand on his lines. Smith ensured that all his employees were loyal to him.

The idea of loyalty according to the governor meant that all the employees would have to portray his administration in the best light. Working for the Governor came with strings attached. In fact, to be part of the administration, one had to be willing to sacrifice his reputation for the governor’s sake (Miller, n.d.).

Springer realized that to survive at the state administration, he had to show his support to the governor. Moreover, Springer realized that Trotter would go along with anything that she thought would be beneficial to the governor. Springer thus began working shortly after Governor Smith was elected.

In fact, Trotter, who was head hunting for the best people in the market to head the departments, recruited Springer as the head of bureau of License. At the present moment, Governor Smith is facing a tough re-election campaign and the media is all over the place “digging for dirt”.

Hence, the media presence around Springer’s office has increased by at least 20% (Miller, n.d.). In a meeting, the public information officer cautioned the Bureau Chiefs that they should not let anything to occur within the bureau that the media would deem as scandalous.

The governor liked to be surrounded by his supporters despite the fact that in public, he portrayed the picture of a non-partisan politician. Moreover, the governor liked knowing that his administration was behind him. Most of his administrators understood the importance of supporting the governor. It happened that the governor was hosting a gala fundraiser in the state capital.

Most of the mid level administrators expressed their desire to attend this event (Miller, n.d.). To facilitate the idea of mid level administrators attending the event, three of the four chiefs decided to hold meetings at the state capital. This would ensure that the mid level administrators attended the event. Moreover, their expenses to and from the capital would be reimbursed.

The law is very clear on using the states resources for personal gain. Springer is sure that the idea of the three chiefs is against the law. In fact, his certainty was compounded by the fact that the chiefs have confided in him that there no real reason behind the meetings.

In fact, the meetings are just decoys so that the employees can go to the event organized by the governor and network with other state administrators (Miller, n.d.). Springer initially thought that the chief’s ideas were self-initiated. However after, Trotter, he realized that there was more to the case than he knew.

From Trotter, Springer learned that he was supposed to go along with the idea. In other words, the director wanted Springer to call his own meeting and go to the state. Springer’s loyalty was put to test (Miller, n.d.).

The same afternoon, one of the chiefs, Mike Daniels, asked Springer if he intended to go along with the plan but he dodged the question and tried to point out the dangers of getting involved with such an activity. However, Daniels dismissed his arguments and told him that the media had to be led to a problem before they could actually do anything.

PA at Center of Force Field and the Mission of this PA

This is a case of ethics and decision-making when an individual is faced with ethical problems. Therefore, to identify the public administrator who is at the center of the field, we have to identify the person who is facing issues regarding to ethics and decision-making. From the article, several administrators have violated several ethical rules and guidelines that are supposed to guide their conduct in office.

However, decision-making issues do not hold most of them captives. This is because they have already made their decisions. This therefore leaves Springer as the major candidate who is faced by ethical violations and a decision to make on these issues. Therefore, Springer becomes the best candidate to be placed at the center of a force field.

Springer has a tough mission. He has to make decisions on whether to go along with the plan put forward by the director or to act within the law and do nothing. Both these decisions have consequences. If Springer decides to go along with the plan that the other chiefs have accepted, he risks breaking the law.

Moreover, he risks being put on the spot light by the media that have intensified their activities around the Bureau of Licensing. On the other hand, if Springer decides to be ethical and act within the stipulations of the constitution, he risks losing his job.

Moreover, in an industry where most of the employers do like whistle blowers, Springer risks his reputation among other potential employers. Therefore, Springer’s main mission is to find a solution that would satisfy both his employers and his personal needs.

Insights from the Case Questions

The case questions present a deep insight into the case under study. To begin with, the main questions with regards to this case requires one to identify the ethical challenges that Springer faces. In the first place, Springer has a choice between showing loyalty to his boss to maintain his reputation as well as his job or upholding the law and losing his job. The ethics demand that Springer should uphold the law.

However, ethics is a question of morals and morals may be forced to change with circumstances. Springer is under a lot of pressure to make a decision that may leave him at a position where he is not compromised. There is always the tempting factor that since all the others members are involved it may be okay to do the same. Therefore, in order not to lose his job Springer may be tempted to go along with plan.

However, if he goes along with the plan and they get caught in the fiasco, it is a known fact the governor would always look for a fall guy and defend himself. With this in mind, Springer is in a tight spot where he will require a lot soul searching to make his final decision.

The second question demands a course of action that Springer can take. There are two courses of action that Springer could take. To begin with, Springer can collude with the chiefs and go along with the plan. This course would enable him to keep his job in the short run. However, in the event that they are exposed, he will eventually lose his job. On the other hand, Springer can take a different course of action.

He may decide to expose the scandal altogether. This might probably make him lose the current position that he holds. However, from a legal and professional view, this is an ethical decision. This, may however lead to his dismissal from office.

However, he may use all legal means, including requesting for a body of inquiry to investigate on the issue in order for him to be reinstated to the position that he held. This means that he can sue the governor. Therefore, the most probable and safest course of action would be to make a decision based on ethics.

Another question that can be looked upon in this case is the demand to know whether the alternative course of action should be discussed with anyone else. Actually, discussing the problem with someone else would be the best decision. Therefore, if I were Springer then I would discuss the question with someone else.

In such a situation, the best person to discuss with would be a lawyer. This is because a lawyer presents the best cover in case of job termination. Moreover, a lawyer will offer legal advice on the matters regarding to ethics. Furthermore, lawyers always provide alternative solutions to the problem and methods that one can use to ‘cover his back’.

The considerations that will affect Springer’s decision-making include what Springer has to lose or gain (looking at the pros and cons of each decision). Each decision has its advantages and disadvantages. Therefore, choosing the right decision will depend on the consequences that the decision will yield. To begin with, if the decision is likely to lead to dire consequences, then it should be avoided.

On the other hand, if the decision will lead to minor consequences then it represents the course of action. As discussed above, choosing to go along with the director’s plan may lead to only short-term benefits. If the plans go wrong, the resulting consequences may include removal from office, serving a jail sentence and loss of personal reputation.

On the other hand, choosing to be ethical is likely to lead to loss of job and loss of reputation among the corrupt. Looking at these two options, the best option to take is being ethical.

This is because the likelihood of losing the job will be high but due to the laws and legal restrictions, the probability of being directly fired will be reduced. Moreover, since Springer was ‘head hunted’ from the best the probability of finding another job will be high.

If I was in the shoes of Springer and asked to schedule a formal meeting, I probably would have taken the offer. The reason for this decision is that in the case of a formal request, I would have a means of defending my actions. A formal request from my superiors means that they are actually admitting liability hence they will be liable for the consequences that may arise from the meeting.

Therefore, despite the fact that I would have ignored ethics, I will have shown my loyalty and kept my job. Moreover, with this decision, I would manage to keep both my job and reputation intact. However, when the question comes down to morality, I will probably have the feeling of guilt.

Nevertheless, law and morality are two different things. Since in this question I will not have broken the law, then it may live with the social guilt. After all, when the society is analyzed as a whole, almost no one upholds morality.

In case, if the media calls to ask about the appropriateness of the meeting, I can clearly defend my actions by stating that I was requested to attend the meeting therefore, I had no choice but to abide to the directions of my superiors. Therefore, all the answers can be obtained from the director.

Identification of the Stakeholders

The stakeholders, in this case, are the people who have an interest in the developing situation. From a plain analysis, there are several stakeholders on the case at hand. To begin with, the State can be considered as the major stakeholder. This is because the case involves ethical issues and the state has interest in matters that pertain to ethics.

Therefore, the state has interest in his case since it involves a case where several individuals are willing to utilize resources under false pretence. Another interested party is the governor. The governor has an interest in the case since it may affect his image and public reputation. In addition to the governor, the director, Trotter, also has an interest in the case.

This is because the case will affect her work directly or indirectly depending on the decision that Springer will make. Furthermore, there are the chiefs in other departments. Springer’s decision will affect the chiefs in that they may lose their jobs if Springer makes an ethical decision. Lastly, at the core of the case is Springer. Springer is the man left with the decision making capability.

All the outcomes of the case shall depend on how Springer makes his decision. The media remains a stakeholder in this case but only to a small extent. This is because the media is portrayed as the only source that may uncover the activities of the agency. Therefore, to a given extend they have some interest in the agency and this translates to interest in the case as well.

Kurt Lewin came up with Force Field Analysis in 1951. This analysis is widely used by many people to make informed decision-making (Lewin, 1951). Moreover, managers and administrators use the force field to make plans and implement changes in the administrative programmes. Force Field Analysis is a powerful tool used in gaining comprehensive point of view on different forces that act for and against a decision.

Therefore, managers may use the Force Field Analysis to simplify the process of decision making in an organizational set up. Force Field Analysis may also be useful to individuals facing tough decisions. A simple form of a force field analysis is a pro-and-con list that most individuals use when making personal decisions.

The formation of a force field analysis will depend on the merits and demerits of each decision. Each decision has its advantages and disadvantages. Therefore, choosing the right decision will depend on the consequences that the decision will yield. To begin with, if the decision is likely to lead to dire consequences, then Springer should avoid it.

On the other hand, if the decision will lead to minor consequences then it represents the course of action. As discussed above, choosing to go along with the director’s plan may lead to only short-term benefits. If the plans go wrong then, the consequences include loss of job, probability of going to jail, and loss of personal reputation.

On the other hand, choosing to be ethical is likely to lead to loss of job and loss of reputation among the corrupt. Looking at these two options, the best option to take is being ethical. This is because the likelihood of losing the job will be high but due to the laws and legal restrictions.

The probability of the governor firing him will reduce considerably. Moreover, since the director chose Springer from the best, he is likely to take a short time before he gets another job.

Force field analysis works best when a small group is discussing the case, especially a group of about four to eight people. The first step in creating a force field analysis framework is to decide on the area that requires a decision to be made. This decision might be written as a suggestion or proposal. All the forces that support the proposed decision should be listed on the left column.

These forces drive change and encourage a person to make a certain decision. These forces are also known as the pros of making a certain decision. All the forces that are against the decision are listed on the right column. These forces restrain a person from making certain decisions. After doing this, all the two columns are compared to each other and the one with the most compelling arguments is chosen.

Springer decision is highly dependent on ethics. Therefore, at the core of the force field we will have Springer’s ethical decision. On the left of the force field, we will have all the forces that support the idea of a decision based on ethics. On the left, we will have all the negative forces that may try to prevent Springer from making a rational ethical decision.

Springer needs to consult a legal team that will assist him in formulating a comprehensive force field. A well-formulated force field will assist Springer in coming making a rational decision. Moreover, it simplifies the problem by breaking it down to smaller units that can be solved individually. The figure below shows a sample force field that Springer may use to make a decision on the dilemma that he faces.

Force Field Analysis Diagram

The Problem

According to the law, no one is allowed to use the taxpayer’s money for personal gains. Springer’s colleagues have no qualms about using the taxpayer’s resources to attend a gala event organized by the governor. On the other hand, Springer is an employee who has adhered to ethics all through his career.

Therefore, he is faced with a dilemma, which requires him to choose between two the options. Therefore, in this article the question is should Springer uphold the law or should he show loyalty to his employer.

The problem in this case is with the higher authority (Director and the governor). These two are ‘backing Springer into a corner’ due to matters that relate to ethics. Therefore, the problem in this case is lack of adherence to ethics and the law. Most of the employees at the agency do not abide to the ethics and code of conduct that has been set by the law.

Moreover, they are breaking the law and are demanding the same from Springer. Springer finds himself in situation where he has to choose between losing his job and breaking the law. Springer has to make a decision on whether he will adhere to the code of conduct in his profession or he will join the bandwagon and keep his job.

Analysis of the problem

Art Springer is in a dilemma because he is faced by a tough ethical decision. As head of the bureau of License, Springer has never been faced with ethical problems. Therefore, when the case of ethics arose, Springer found himself in a tough position.

The dilemma arises because his superiors are willing to misinform the public and the state on matters of public finances. The chiefs are willing to call meetings for no good reason. The public will finance these meetings but this is unethical since the meetings will only benefit the governor.

The problem in this case is arises due to difference in moral standards and interests of public administrators. To begin with, the Governor likes to be surrounded with his supporters. Therefore, he tends to consent to any ideas that would have him around his supporters. The fact that his employees are breaking the law to be around him does not raise much concern.

In fact, Springer learned that the governor might be the one who sanctioned the meetings at the states capital. Under the governor is the director who is very loyal to him. Trotter always goes along with what the governor wants. Therefore, she wants Springer to do the same. Moreover, the chiefs of other departments are already going along with the plan. Therefore, this raises a lot of question on ethics of the staff in the agency.

How ethical are the people who work for the governor? Most of them are unethical. These employees do not adhere to the code of conduct required in their profession.

Therefore, when Springer shows that he is not willing to throw his morals out of the window, it raises a lot questions about his loyalty to the governor. However, Springer’s dilemma shows that, as a public administrator, he is doing the right thing to doubt his colleagues’ commitment to their public duty.

Ethic derives its origin from the ancient Greek language, which expressed the idea of morality and conformity in behavior to a certain code.

Ethics therefore defines a code of conduct that should be adopted and implemented by management to govern the behavior within a working environment. To evaluate ethics, we have to look at the personal values that a person portrays. This article is concerned with ethical issues that affect public administrators.

Most of the countries and businesses in the world have incorporated ethics into their constitutions. Taking the example of Brazil, their federal constitution has incorporated the concept of morality, impersonality, publicity, efficiency, and legality in public administration. The concept of ethics is based on morality.

Morality is a principle that leads to the understanding that the service to the people requires more than compliance to the law. Therefore, a public administrator needs to obey rules of the social morality, show good behavior, and have integrity by showing common sense of honesty (Figueiredo & Marcos, 2002). Conduct among public administrators should conform to the public demands and social morality.

Ethics is a vital element in most legislation. This is because it sets the principles for public administration will follow. Acts enacted in parliaments require that all public administrators should manage public financial resources efficiently, effectively and in an ethical manner. Public administration in most countries requires the highest possible standards of ethical behavior.

Ethical management of any organization demands impartiality from the public servants. A public administrator must incorporate procedural fairness, and support equality in employment. Having high ethical standards entails having more than just compliance with the state law and administrative laws.

In fact, it needs a culture of decision-makers who base their decisions on justice, transparency, accountability, fairness, and consideration of public interest. Moreover, the public administrator needs to be careful when exercising of the legal duties delegated to him or her by the public.

Using these aforementioned concepts on ethics, we can identify who the culprits in this case are. For instance, Governor Smith has several ethical issues. To begin with, the governor is partial. He liked to be surrounded by his supporters despite the fact that, in public, he portrayed the picture of a non-partisan politician.

Moreover, the governor liked knowing that his administration was behind him. Most of his administrators understood the importance of supporting the governor. Moreover, the governor usually acted in his own interest. Springer realized that to survive at the state administration he had to show his support to the governor.

Moreover, Springer realized that Trotter would go along with anything that she thought would be beneficial to the governor. Moreover, the governor had a habit of getting even with anyone who did not do his bidding or went against him. Smith made sure clear that all his employees were loyal to him.

The idea of loyal, according to the governor, meant that all the employees would have to portray his administration in the best light. Working for the Governor came with strings attached. In fact, to be part of the administration one had to be willing to sacrifice his reputation for the governor’s sake. This character shows that he governor has ethical issues and he is not fit to hold the position.

Another person with ethical issues is the director. She does what her boss tells her without questions. Moreover, she intimidates all the other employees who do not work as per her requirements. Both the governor and the director are willing to anything against common ethics. In fact, after Springer confronted the director on the case at hand he realized that there was more to the case than he knew.

The director had collaborated with chiefs to ensure that the meetings took place in the capital. Moreover, she expected Springer to do the same as the other director. These factors show that there is an ethical problem in the agency. Most of the employees are affected because top management is affected.

Other persons who are affected by the ethical problems are the chiefs of other departments and their junior administrators. These chiefs have no qualms when subscribing to the notion of breaking the law.

They accept all the diabolical plans without considering the implications or consequences. Ethical issues are not sources of concern in the agency. This shows that, the agency as a whole is affected with the issues on ethics except for Springer.

Alternative Solutions to Ethical Problems in the Agency

To begin with, Springer can decide to resign. If Springer resigns, he may be the only casualty in the whole scandal. This is because he will lose his job while the company will go ahead and carry out its plan. Moreover, Springer’s resignation will not be beneficial to the agency, which is affected by ethical issues.

Therefore, Springer’s resignation from his position will only be an act of saving personal image while letting the society rot. In fact, it only solves his problems and not the problem of ethics that must be solved.

Another way to solve this problem is for Springer to adhere to ethics and refuse to yield to the pressure from his superiors. However, in such a case the likelihood of losing his job is high. This is because he will have shown disloyalty to his boss who will not be pleased with the idea. It is well known that Governor Smith likes only the loyal followers. Therefore, a disloyal employee is likely to lose is position in the agency.

Moreover, if Springer decides to maintain his decision based on a moral ground, he will lose the trust of his colleagues like Daniel. The reason being that he will be the black ‘sheep of the flock’. This means that his refusal to accept a plan that everyone else had accepted will be seen as betrayal thus loss of trust from his colleagues.

However, by sticking to a moral decision, Springer will have given himself a fighting chance in case he loses his job. This is because if he is fired on the fact that he was nit loyal, he can expose the governor’s lack of adherence to the law and ethics. Moreover, being fired on such grounds can warrant a lawsuit against the agency.

Springer can solve the problem facing him by provide an anonymous tip to the media. The media might then conduct their investigations, which might lead them to the core of the case and maybe uncover the truth. This way, the case will be uncovered without Springer losing his job. However, for every alternative there is a victim. In this alternative, the victim is likely to be the governor or the director.

The chiefs of other departments may also be included in the list of victims. However, the likelihood of catching the governor as the main victim is low. This is because he has taken the caution to ensure that his employees can take the heat. Therefore, in case of intensive media investigations one of the employees will be taken as the fall guy.

Alternatively, Springer can come out in the open report the occurrence to the authorities. By reporting this action, Springer will have acted on ethical grounds. Moreover, he will not compromise himself in the process. Therefore, he may avoid any criminal prosecution that the perpetrators of the fraudulent plot will face. In case where Springer decides to report the case, he must have sufficient evidence to support his claims.

Otherwise, he may find himself as the only victim in the case. Cases concerning ethics are usually complicated and can easily be concealed if the whistle blower does not have sufficient evidence. However, if the whistle blower provides accurate information the law is bound to protect him. A good example of such a case was in the newspapers where an employee received benefits because he maintained ethics

Public administrators face various ethical issues. Most of the issues faced by managers involve decision-making. Appropriate use of public finance and conflict of interest are the major issues that have been observed in the field of public administration. Usually managers decisions on public finances tend to serve personal interests rather than the interests of shareholders, owners, or the public (Schneider, 2004).

The issue on appropriate use of public resources is usually associated with conflict of interest. Public administrators will prefer to serve self-interest rather than to serve the public’s interest. For example, a manager whose performance is measured on return on investment will usually pick the investment option that serves his or her interests first.

If the manager is faced with the option of an investment that benefits the company but reduces his personal return on investment he or she can reject the option.

This is because the managers have the power to reject profitable investment options whose return on investment is below the average return on investment of his division. Acceptance of such an investment option may lower the overall return on investment of the division and not serve the manager’s interest. This example shows that accountability in the public sector has become outdated.

Identification of a Solution

The problem of ethics demands an amicable solution. One of the best possible solutions is implementing reforms. It is generally easier to implement reforms in public administration. However, the reforms present dilemmas to the policy makers.

Therefore, there is great danger that these policy makers may lose sight on what is important and what is required to bring balances in the institutional frameworks. In the case presented above, various alternatives may be taken into account to arrive at a solution. However, each of the alternatives has its casualty. In our case study, reforms are not the only form of solution that are useful.

The best solution in this case lies with the analysis of the force field and Springer’s moral. However, best solution in this case is to be whistle blower. Springer should come out in the open and report the case of ethics breach to the authorities.

By reporting this action, Springer will have acted on ethical grounds. Moreover, he will not compromise himself in the process. Therefore, he will exclude his involvement in any criminal proceedings that the perpetrators of the fraudulent plot will face.

This solution has several advantages and disadvantages. Some of the merits include maintain one’s integrity. All the future, potential employers of Springer will view him as honest, straightforward, and sincere in his approach to professional work.

Public administrators must be aware of their role in the society. Therefore, they must maintain extremely high standards of professional conduct. Moreover, they should not tolerate any mode of conduct that may compromise their status. Therefore, being a whistle blower will increase the chances of Springer getting a job with employer who demand honesty. As a whistle blower, Springer will keep his conscience clear.

The disadvantage of this solution is that, the political environment and the public sector demands loyalty. Therefore, a public administrator who is deemed as a whistle blower may find it difficult to find a job. If the truth is told, then the world today comprises of more evil than good.

Most employers bend the rules to a given extend. With this in mind, employers might find it difficult to tolerate Springer since he cannot “bend” the law. Therefore, the overall chances of Springer getting another job will be lower. Another disadvantage, though obvious, is that Springer will lose his job if he opts to use this solution. Losing a job may be disadvantageous to anyone. This is because one loses his source of income.

To address this aforementioned disadvantage, Springer has to take legal counsel. The reason for legal counsel is to ensure that he keeps his job. In case he is fired, he has an option of suing his employer. Cases to do with ethics continue to increase in public administration. According to the New York Times, Morgensen (2011) reported a case of an employee who exposed the Bank of America.

The court awarded this employee a total of 3.8 million dollars in damages. The employee, Mr. Winston exposed how Countrywide Company failed in observing professional ethics and the law while conducting its businesses. Countrywide wanted Mr. Winston, their former employee, to misrepresent the corporate governance practices in a report.

In fact, the company’s president had asked Mr. Winston to write a report countering another report that had expressed concerns about executive pay and succession plan. The problem was that Winston had never come across an extensive succession plan and he refused to write the report. The president of countrywide wanted to terminate Winston’s employment but instead chose to reduce the number of employees working beneath him.

When the bank of America took over Countrywide, they fired Winston on the account of being a whistle blower. This case shows the extent to which management accountants neglect ethics while performing professional duties.

Wyatt (2011a) also presents an interesting article on how corporate whistle-blowers gains from reporting cases on unethical practices. The fact that the congress and financial market regulators offer rewards to whistle-blowers serves to show just how the management accounting field has abandoned ethics.

The study of professional ethics has become increasingly important in the public sector, especially in public administration. Public administrators require ethics due to the nature of their work and the sensitivity of public (Svennson and Wood, 2003). Users of public information, businesses, investors, and the internal revenue department rely on the information provided by a public administrator to perform their duties effectively.

Public administrators such as accountants prepared statements, which must be audited to show a true and fair view on the position of the company in the market. Therefore, to ensure that the information given does not mislead the public, managers and public administrators ought to provide information that is valid.

Availability of ethics in the field of public administration will enhance the credibility of opinion provided by the accountants. Equally, Governor Smith must embrace ethics. Moreover, any breach in code of conduct must be punished severely.

Recommendations

To solve ethical problems that affect the public administration there is need for amendments in the prevailing ethical rules. Various reasons have been advanced as to why there is need for amending ethics in the public sector. Being a public administrator comes with great power and responsibility. Most public administrators have access to a lot of information and funds that may be lethal for one person to hold.

Therefore, organizations have incorporated ethics to prevent misuse of information acquired during professional work. Ethics is a form of security to the public. For instance, the field of information technology requires ethics. This is because computers have led to a significant increase in the abuse of information and fraud.

In the banking industry for example, with little information about an individual, the prospect to commit fraud by unethical employees increases. The enactment of professional ethics coupled with policies in public administration reduces the chances of fraud.

However, the initiative of the public administrator is needed to enhance amendments in the code of conduct. In public administration, ethics is useful in molding behavior and to protect the public’s interests from being sabotaged.

Adherence to strict code of contact should be mandatory in the public sector field to provide credibility to the industry. For example, development of ethics in the field of information technology has led to an increase in trading via the internet. Ethics is compulsory to ensure that the public feel safe about their personal information and resources.

The most commonly accepted reason for ethics in public sector is to enhance professionalism. The idea of professionalism usually involves having knowledge of what is right to do and the right conduct of an individual.

Public administrators with the knowledge of right and wrong will usually ensure that he or she maintains professionalism at all costs. Moreover, ethics is useful in maintaining an administrator’s discipline (Brown, 2004). Discipline ensures that the public sector maintains a level of excellence that is required by the government and the public.

Conclusion

This is a case on rational decision-making when faced with ethical problems. The study of professional ethics has become increasingly important in the public sector, especially in public administration. Public administrators require ethics due to the nature of their work and the sensitivity of public. To solve ethical problems, one needs to identify the methods available.

Managers use models to simplify the process of decision-making. Kurt Lewin introduced the force field model, which he used in simplifying the problem. However, using this model requires identification of the administrator at the core of the problem. To identify the public administrator who is at the center of the force field we have to identify the person who is facing issues regarding to ethics and decision-making.

From the article, several administrators are facing ethical issues. However, decision-making issues do not hold most of them captives since they have already made their decisions. This therefore leaves Springer as the major candidate who is faced by ethical issues and a decision to make on these issues.

Morality is a principle that leads to the understanding that the service to the people requires more than compliance to the law. Ethics is a system of moral principles that governs the accounting profession while conducting their daily activities. With the recent track record in accounting there is need to enhance the controls in the field. In the last decade alone, the cases pertaining to ethics have to light.

For instance, the field of information technology requires ethics. This is because computers have led to a significant increase in the abuse of information and fraud. In the banking industry for example, with little information about an individual, the prospect to commit fraud by unethical employees increases.

To solve ethical problems that affect the public administration there is need for amendments in the current ethical rules. Analysts in the field of ethics have given various reasons as to why there is need for amending ethics in the public sector. One of the reasons is that a public administrator has great power and responsibility.

Moreover, public administrators have access to a lot of information and funds that may be lethal for one person to control. Therefore, organizations have incorporated ethics to prevent misuse of information acquired during professional work. Ethics is a form of security to the public. A moral stand is important to the public since it will increase their confidence in the administrators.

References

Brown, T. K. (2004). The costly myth of growth through acquisition. Bank Director, 1 (2), 14-19

Figueiredo, C. M. & Marcos, N. (2002). Ethics in Public Administration and In The Exercise of Citzenship: The Role of The Brazilian Audit Courts As Accountability Agencies. The Pernambuco Audit Court Case, 1(4), 12-30

Lewin, K. (1951). Field Theory in Social Science. Journal of Social Sciences, 2(1), 9-15.

Miller, M.G. (n.d). Public Scrutiny and Accountability: Dilemma in State Administration. The Messenger, 3 (2), 87-99

Morgensen, G. (2011). How The Whistle Blower Conquered Country Wide. Bank Director, 1 (2), 122-128

Schneider, A. (2004). Ethical Decision Making on Various Managerial Accounting Issues. JAMAR , (2) 2, 29-35

Wyatt, E. (2010). For Whistle Blowers, Expanded Incentives. Bank Director, 1 (2), 31-40

Click Here To Order Now!