Attached are my assignments for this week. Please follow instructions all the way through and give the best work you can. If there are any questions or you cannot open links or pdf. please let me know

T he I n str u cto r's G uid e

T itle P age

C opyrig h t

P re fa ce t o t h e S ix th E ditio n

A ck n ow le d gm en ts

T he A uth or

C hapte r O ne: I n tr o du ctio n

What I s E th ic s?

Resp on sib ility a n d R ole

The R esp on sib le A dm in is tr a to r

A D esig n A ppro ach

Overv ie w o f t h e C on te n ts

Con clu sio n

C hapte r T w o: U ndersta n din g E th ic a l D ecis io n

M akin g

Eth ic a l P ro ble m s

Eth ic s a s a n A ctiv e P ro cess

Desc rip tiv e M odels o f E th ic a l D ecis io n M akin g: T he W orld

as I t I s

A P re sc rip tiv e D ecis io n -M akin g M odel: T he W orld a s W e Wou ld L ik e I t t o B e

Con clu sio n

Part O ne: E th ic s f o r I n div id ual

Adm in is tr a to rs

Chapte r T hre e: P ublic A dm in is tr a tio n i n M odern a n d

Postm odern S ocie ty : T he C on te x t o f A dm in is tr a tiv e

Eth ic s

Pro ble m s w ith M odern ity i n a P ostm odern W orld

Im plic a tio n s f o r P ublic A dm in is tr a tio n

Politic a l T heo ry a n d A dm in is tr a tiv e E th ic s

Con clu sio n

Chapte r F ou r: A dm in is tr a tiv e R esp on sib ility : T he

Key t o A dm in is tr a tiv e E th ic s

Obje ctiv e R esp on sib ility

Subje ctiv e R esp on sib ility

“W hat t o D o A bou t M rs. C arm ic h ael”

Con clu sio n

Chapte r F iv e: C on flic ts o f R esp on sib ility : T he E th ic a l

Dile m ma

Con flic ts o f A uth ority

Role C on flic ts

Con flic ts o f I n te re st

Main ta in in g t h e P ublic T ru st

Con clu sio n Part T w o: E th ic s i n t h e O rg an iz a tio n

Chapte r S ix : M ain ta in in g R esp on sib le C on du ct i n

Public O rg an iz a tio n s: T w o A ppro ach es

The S itu atio n al C on te x t

In te rn al a n d E xte rn al C on tr o ls

Con clu sio n

Chapte r S even : I n te g ra tin g E th ic s w ith

Org an iz a tio n al N orm s a n d S tr u ctu re s

Con flic ts A m on g I n te rn al a n d E xte rn al C on tr o ls

The C om pon en ts o f R esp on sib le C on du ct

“M uch A do A bou t S om eth in g” R evis ite d

Con clu sio n

Chapte r E ig h t: S afe g u ard in g E th ic a l A uto n om y i n

Org an iz a tio n s: D ea lin g w ith U neth ic a l S uperio rs a n d

Org an iz a tio n s

Resp on sib ility t o S uperio rs

Sou rc es o f O rg an iz a tio n al P re ssu re : T he T ea m P la yer E th ic

Org an iz a tio n al R em ed ie s

In div id u al R esp on sib ility

In div id u al E th ic a l A uto n om y i n O rg an iz a tio n s

Com pon en ts o f I n div id u al A uto n om y

Con clu sio n

Part T hree: T he D esig n A ppro ach Chapte r N in e: A pply in g t h e D esig n A ppro ach t o

Public A dm in is tr a tio n E th ic s

The D esig n A ppro ach t o P ublic A dm in is tr a tio n E th ic s

Gen era l A pplic a tio n

A S pecif ic A pplic a tio n

Con clu sio n

Chapte r 1 0: C on clu sio n : R esp on sib le A dm in is tr a tio n

The R esp on sib le A dm in is tr a to r

A M odel o f R esp on sib le A dm in is tr a tio n

Refe re n ces

In dex T he I n str u cto r's G uid e f o r t h e s ix th e d it io n o f

The R esp on sib le A dm in is tr a to r

i n clu des a s a m ple s y lla b us,

P ow erP oin t s lid es, a n d o th er r ela te d t e a ch in g t o ols . T he I n str u cto r's G uid e i s a vaila b le f r ee o n lin e. I f y ou

w ou ld l ik e t o d ow nlo ad a n d p rin t o u t a c o p y o f t h e g u id e, p le a se v is it :

www.w ile y .c o m /c o lle g e/c o op er Copyrig ht © 2 012 b y J o hn W ile y & S ons, I n c. A ll r ig hts r e se rv ed .

Publis h ed b y J o sse y -B ass

A W ile y I m prin t

One M ontg om ery S tr e et, S uite 1 200, S an F ra n cis c o , C A 9 4104-4 594

— www.j o sse y bass.c o m

N o p art o f t h is p ublic atio n m ay b e r e p ro duced , s to re d i n a r e tr ie v al s y ste m , o r

tr a n sm itte d i n a n y f o rm o r b y a n y m ean s, e le ctr o nic , m ech an ic al,

photo co pyin g, r e co rd in g, s c an nin g, o r o th erw is e , e x cep t a s p erm itte d u nder

Sectio n 1 07 o r 1 08 o f t h e 1 976 U nite d S ta te s C opyrig ht A ct, w ith out e ith er

th e p rio r w ritte n p erm is sio n o f t h e p ublis h er, o r a u th oriz atio n t h ro ugh

p ay m en t o f t h e a p pro pria te p er-c o py f e e t o t h e C opyrig ht C le ara n ce C en te r,

I n c., 2 22 R ose w ood D riv e, D an vers , M A 0 1923, 9 78-7 50-8 400, f a x 9 78-6 46-

8600, o r o n t h e W eb a t

www.c o pyrig ht.c o m

. R eq uests t o t h e p ublis h er f o r

p erm is sio n s h ould b e a d dre sse d t o t h e P erm is sio ns D ep artm en t, J o hn W ile y

& S ons, I n c., 1 11 R iv er S tr e et, H oboken , N J 0 7030, 2 01-7 48-6 011, f a x 2 01-

748-6 008, o r o nlin e a t

www.w ile y .c o m /g o/p erm is sio ns

.

Lim it o f L ia b ility /D is c la im er o f W arra n ty : W hile t h e p ublis h er a n d a u th or

hav e u se d t h eir b est e ffo rts i n p re p arin g t h is b ook, t h ey m ak e n o

r e p re se n ta tio ns o r w arra n tie s w ith r e sp ect t o t h e a ccu ra cy o r c o m ple te n ess o f

th e c o nte n ts o f t h is b ook a n d s p ecif ic ally d is c la im a n y i m plie d w arra n tie s o f

merc h an ta b ility o r f itn ess f o r a p artic u la r p urp ose . N o w arra n ty m ay b e

cre ate d o r e x te n ded b y s a le s r e p re se n ta tiv es o r w ritte n s a le s m ate ria ls . T he

a d vic e a n d s tr a te g ie s c o nta in ed h ere in m ay n ot b e s u ita b le f o r y our s itu atio n.

You s h ould c o nsu lt w ith a p ro fe ssio nal w here a p pro pria te . N eith er t h e

publis h er n or a u th or s h all b e l ia b le f o r a n y l o ss o f p ro fit o r a n y o th er

co m merc ia l d am ag es, i n clu din g b ut n ot l im ite d t o s p ecia l, i n cid en ta l,

c o nse q uen tia l, o r o th er d am ag es. R ead ers s h ould b e a w are t h at I n te rn et W eb

site s o ffe re d a s c ita tio ns a n d/o r s o urc es f o r f u rth er i n fo rm atio n m ay h av e

c h an ged o r d is a p peare d b etw een t h e t im e t h is w as w ritte n a n d w hen i t i s r e ad .

Jo sse y -B ass b ooks a n d p ro ducts a re a v aila b le t h ro ugh m ost b ooksto re s. T o

co nta ct J o sse y -B ass d ir e ctly c all o ur C usto m er C are D ep artm en t w ith in t h e

U.S . a t 8 00-9 56-7 739, o uts id e t h e U .S . a t 3 17-5 72-3 986, o r f a x 3 17-5 72-

4002. Wile y a ls o p ublis h es i ts b ooks i n a v arie ty o f e le ctr o nic f o rm ats a n d b y p rin t-

on-d em an d. S om e m ate ria l i n clu ded w ith s ta n dard p rin t v ers io ns o f t h is b ook

may n ot b e i n clu ded i n e -b ooks o r i n p rin t- o n-d em an d. I f t h e v ers io n o f t h is

book t h at y ou p urc h ase d r e fe re n ces m ed ia s u ch a s C D o r D VD t h at w as n ot

in clu ded i n y our p urc h ase , y ou m ay d ow nlo ad t h is m ate ria l a t

http ://b ooksu pport.w ile y .c o m . F or m ore i n fo rm atio n a b out W ile y p ro ducts ,

vis it

www.w ile y .c o m

.

Cata lo gin g-in -P ublic a tio n d ata o n f ile w it h t h e L ib ra ry o f C on gress.

IS B N 9 78-0 -4 70-8 7394-6 ( h ard back ); I S B N 9 78-1 -1 18-1 8052-5 ( e b k); I S B N

978-1 -1 18-1 8053-2 ( e b k); I S B N 9 78-1 -1 18-1 8054-9 ( e b k) Pre fa ce t o t h e S ix th E ditio n

B y th e tim e th is six th e d itio n is p ublis h ed ,

The R esp onsib le A dm in is tr a to r

w ill h av e b een in p rin t fo r th ir ty y ears . W hen th e fir s t e d itio n a p peare d I

n ev er d re am ed in m y w ild est fa n ta sie s th at th is b ook w ould h av e s o lo ng a

l if e . In 1 982, th ere w as v ery little in te re st in a d m in is tr a tiv e e th ic s a m ong

e ith er s c h ola rs o r p ra ctitio ners o f p ublic a d m in is tr a tio n. T here w as o nly o ne

o th er b ook b y a s in gle a u th or a v aila b le o n a d m in is tr a tiv e e th ic s, J o hn R ohr's

E th ic s fo r B ure a ucra ts

, w hic h c am e o ut in 1 978 a n d f o cu se d o n th e “ re g im e

v alu es” fo und in th e U .S . co nstitu tio nal tr a d itio n as a fo undatio n fo r

a d m in is tr a tiv e eth ic s. T here w as als o a v olu m e o f essa y s, ed ite d b y Jo el

F le is h m an an d oth ers , title d

Public D utie s: The M ora l O blig atio ns of

G overn m en t O ffic ia ls

, a n d p ublis h ed in 1 981. T here w ere ju st a f e w c o urs e s

o n th is s u bje ct in a cad em ic p ro gra m s a n d o nly a s c atte rin g o f p an els a t th e

a n nual co nfe re n ces of th e A m eric an Socie ty fo r Public A dm in is tr a tio n

( A SPA ) an d th e N atio nal A sso cia tio n of S ch ools of P ublic A ffa ir s an d

A dm in is tr a tio n ( N ASPA A).

By n ow m an y m ore b ooks a n d s c h ola rly jo urn al a rtic le s h av e a p peare d in

p rin t, o ur m ajo r p ro fe ssio nal c o nfe re n ces r e g ula rly h av e a s ig nif ic an t c lu ste r

o f p an el s e ssio ns o n a d m in is tr a tiv e e th ic s, c o nfe re n ces s p ecif ic ally o n e th ic s

a re co nducte d fro m tim e to tim e, an d all th e N ASPA A-a ccre d ite d M PA

d eg re e p ro gra m s i n clu de a t r e atm en t o f t h e s u bje ct. T his s ix th e d itio n s e ek s t o

a ck now le d ge th e ch an ges in th e fie ld an d th e ad van ces in re se arc h w hile

r e m ain in g tr u e to th e b asic fra m ew ork o f th e fir s t e d itio n. T he c h ap te rs a n d

t h e r e fe re n ces h av e b een e x te n siv ely u pdate d to r e fle ct th e r e cen t r e se arc h in

t h e fie ld . A new se ctio n on desc rip tiv e eth ic al decis io n-m ak in g m odels ,

w hic h d ep ic t th e w ay p eo ple te n d to m ak e e th ic al d ecis io ns, h as b een a d ded .

T his is in te n ded to c o ntr a st w ith th e n orm ativ e p re sc rip tiv e m odel a d van ced

i n th is b ook, a m odel d ev elo ped p ro gre ssiv ely s in ce th e f ir s t e d itio n. T here is

a ls o n ew m ate ria l o n s u ch t o pic s a s w his tle -b lo w in g, t h e b ysta n der e ffe ct, a n d

t h e d esig n a p pro ach t o a d m in is tr a tiv e e th ic s.

The R esp onsib le A dm in is tr a to r

w as w ritte n f o r s tu den ts a n d p ra ctitio ners o f

p ublic a d m in is tr a tio n w ho w an t to d ev elo p th eir e th ic al a s w ell a s te ch nic al

c o m pete n ce. It is fo r m en a n d w om en in p ublic s e rv ic e, o r p re p arin g fo r it, who s o m etim es w orry a b out th e rig ht th in g to d o, b ut w ho e ith er h av e n ot

ta k en th e tim e to re ad b ooks o n e th ic al th eo ry o r s u sp ect th at s u ch tr e atis e s

would n ot b e h elp fu l a t th e p ra ctic al le v el. I t is b ein g r e ad b y a d m in is tr a to rs

an d stu den ts o f p ublic ad m in is tr a tio n aro und th e w orld . F or ex am ple , th e

fo urth a n d fif th e d itio ns h av e b een tr a n sla te d in to C hin ese , a n d th e b ook is

now o ne o f th e re q uir e d co re te x ts fo r th e m ore th an o ne h undre d M PA

pro gra m s i n C hin a.

The e d ucatio n, tr a in in g, a n d d ay -to -d ay p ra ctic e o f p ublic a d m in is tr a to rs

te n d to b e d om in ate d b y th e p ra ctic al p ro ble m s o f g ettin g th e jo b d one.

Concern s a b out w hat s h ould b e d one a n d w hy it s h ould b e d one g et s w ep t

asid e by th e pre ssu re s of sc h ed ule an d w ork lo ad . M odern so cie ty is

pre o ccu pie d w ith actio n, to th e ex clu sio n of re fle ctio n ab out valu es an d

prin cip le s. T heo ry is re d uced to th eo rie s th at co ncern m ean s— “h ow to ”

cro w ds o ut “ to w ard w hat e n d?”

Eth ic al th eo ry , in partic u la r, te n ds to su ffe r under th e sw ay of th is

men ta lity . B ecau se e th ic s in volv es su bsta n tiv e re aso nin g a b out o blig atio ns,

co nse q uen ces, a n d u ltim ate e n ds, its im med ia te u tility fo r a p ro ducin g a n d

co nsu m in g s o cie ty is s u sp ect. P rin cip le s a n d v alu es,

goods

a n d

oughts

, s e em

pre tty w is p y stu ff co m pare d to co st- b en efit ra tio s, G NP, te n sile str e n gth ,

org an iz atio nal str u ctu re s, asse m bly lin es, budgets , dow nsiz in g, dead lin es,

outs o urc in g th ro ugh co ntr a cts , in te re st gro up lo bbyin g, an d politic al

pre ssu re s. The pay off fo r dealin g fo rm ally w ith eth ic s is uncle ar fo r

in div id ual a d m in is tr a to rs a n d f o r o rg an iz atio ns a s w ell.

The r e su lt i s a t e n den cy e ith er t o t o ta lly i g nore t h e s tu dy o f e th ic s o r t o d eal

with e th ic s s u perfic ia lly .

Alth ough it s e em s th at th e tim e d ev ote d to th e s tu dy o f e th ic s in g ra d uate

co urs e s in p ublic a d m in is tr a tio n is g ro w in g, th ere is s till n o c le ar c o nse n su s

th at e v ery M PA c u rric u lu m s h ould i n clu de a r e q uir e d , f re esta n din g c o urs e o n

th e su bje ct. N ASPA A h as re q uir e d o nly th at e th ic s b e tr e ate d in th e M PA

cu rric u lu m , a n d in m an y M PA p ro gra m s a ccre d ite d b y N ASPA A, e th ic s is

han dle d a s a s u bto pic w ith in o th er c o re a re as o f th e c u rric u lu m . T his m ean s

th at e th ic s g en era lly r e ceiv es f ra g m en ta ry a tte n tio n, w ith a s e ssio n h ere a n d a

module th ere in v ario us c o urs e s. T hus it o fte n la ck s th e k in d o f c o here n t a n d

in te g ra te d t r e atm en t t h ought n ecessa ry f o r t h e c o re t o pic s o f t h e f ie ld , s u ch a s

public f in an ce, p ublic p olic y , h um an r e so urc e m an ag em en t, a n d q uan tita tiv e meth ods. A dm in is tr a tiv e e th ic s is s till tr e ate d lik e a s te p ch ild o f th e f ie ld . I n

2009, N ASPA A ad opte d new , co m pete n cy -b ase d accre d ita tio n guid elin es

th at re fe r to “ p ublic s e rv ic e v alu es” ra th er th an e th ic s. It re m ain s to b e s e en

what e ffe cts t h is m ay h av e o n t h e c u rric u la r t r e atm en t o f e th ic s, i f a n y. I h av e

partic ip ate d w ith a g ro up fro m th e A SPA S ectio n o n E th ic s to e x plo re th e

mean in g o f e th ic al c o m pete n ce, a n d I a m c o ed itin g a v olu m e w ith D onald

Men zel o n a ch ie v in g e th ic al c o m pete n cy .

Am ong th ose b ey ond th e a cad em y, a t a n e arlie r s ta g e th ere s e em s to h av e

been a n u neasin ess w ith th e fo rm al s tu dy o f e th ic s, ro ote d in a n a ssu m ptio n

th at e th ic s is sim ply a m atte r o f re la tiv ity a n d su bje ctiv ity . In a p lu ra lis tic

so cie ty , w here n o o ne re lig io us o r c u ltu ra l tr a d itio n is d om in an t, e th ic s h as

been v ie w ed a s a p riv ate , in div id ual m atte r, n ot s u sc ep tib le to th e c an ons o f

ra tio nal in quir y . T o a d dre ss th e s tu dy o f e th ic s o pen ly in a n a cad em ic s e ttin g

was th ought to ru n th e ris k o f e ith er c re atin g u nre so lv ab le c o nflic ts a m ong

th ose w ho h old d if fe rin g e th ic al p ers p ectiv es o r u nfa ir ly p ro pag an diz in g fo r

one p artic u la r p oin t o f v ie w . H ow ev er, A m eric an s a p pear to h av e b eco m e

more c o m fo rta b le w ith t h e t o pic o f e th ic s i n p ublic l if e a n d w ith t h e e x is te n ce

of a cad em ic c o urs e s o n e th ic s a n d th e tr e atm en t o f e th ic s in c o urs e s o n o th er

to pic s.

So e v en th ough a d m in is tr a tiv e e th ic s a s a fie ld o f stu dy h as n ot b een a s

fu lly a ccep te d a n d s u pporte d a s I w ould h av e l ik ed , i t i s c le ar t h at t h e n um ber

of s c h ola rs a n d p ra ctitio ners w ho a re w ork in g o n re la te d to pic s, b oth in th e

acad em y a n d in g overn m en ts a t e v ery le v el, in b oth th e U nite d S ta te s a n d

aro und th e world , has in cre ase d en orm ously sin ce th e mid 1970s.

Furth erm ore , w e hav e m ad e sig nif ic an t pro gre ss to w ard esta b lis h in g th e

im porta n ce of ad m in is tr a tiv e eth ic s as a cen tr a l co ncern of public

ad m in is tr a tio n. Ack n ow le d gm en ts

T hir ty y ears afte r th e fir s t ed itio n o f

The R esp onsib le A dm in is tr a to r

w as

p ublis h ed , m y in te lle ctu al h onesty a n d h um ility still re q uir e a d m ittin g th at

w ritin g a b ook i s n ot a t a sk f o r w hic h a n a u th or o ught t o t a k e s o le c re d it. T he

m ore I w rite a n d re fle ct, th e m ore I in te ra ct w ith s tu den ts in th e c la ssro om ,

a n d th e m ore I co nvers e w ith co lle ag ues aro und th e w orld , th e cle are r it

b eco m es th at sc h ola rs h ip is tr u ly a co lle ctiv e en te rp ris e . E ven b ooks th at

c arry th e n am e o f a s in gle a u th or a re s h ap ed in cre asin gly o ver tim e b y th ose

w ho r e ad t h em .

I am in deb te d to th e m an y u nderg ra d uate stu den ts w ho, fo r m ore th an

t w en ty years , hav e ta k en m y co urs e “C itiz en sh ip an d Public E th ic s,” a

r e q uir e d p art o f th e co re o f th e u nderg ra d uate p ro gra m in th e S ch ool o f

P olic y , P la n nin g, a n d D ev elo pm en t a t th e U niv ers ity o f S outh ern C alif o rn ia .

T heir b lu nt q uestio ns a n d s e rio us c h alle n ges h av e d eep en ed m y th in kin g a n d

f o rc ed m e to b e c le are r in e x pre ssin g m y v ie w s. T heir in te re st in th e s u bje ct

o f public eth ic s an d th e in te n sity of th eir str u ggle s w ith th eir ow n

p ro fe ssio nal o blig atio ns h av e s tim ula te d liv ely d eb ate s th at h av e c au se d m e

t o r e th in k m y o w n p ers p ectiv e. T he l a ck o f i n te re st i n e th ic s b y s o m e h as a ls o

l e d m e to f in d w ay s o f e n gag in g th ose w ho v ie w th e s u bje ct d if fe re n tly f ro m

m e.

I h av e als o le arn ed g re atly fro m te ach in g m y g ra d uate “P ublic E th ic s”

c o urs e e v ery s u m mer f o r th e la st f if te en y ears o r s o . T hat c la ss h as ty pic ally

i n clu ded se aso ned p ra ctitio ners , y ounger g ra d uate stu den ts ju st b eg in nin g

p ra ctic e, a n d a f e w d octo ra l s tu den ts d ev elo pin g th e b ack gro und to te ach a n

e th ic s c o urs e a n d d o re se arc h o n th e s u bje ct d urin g th eir a cad em ic c are ers .

T he m ajo r p ap er fo r th e c o urs e in volv es th e a n aly sis o f a re al c ase , e ith er

f ro m th eir ow n ex perie n ce fo r th ose with sig nif ic an t em plo ym en t

b ack gro unds o r fro m th e e x perie n ce o f s o m eo ne th ey in te rv ie w in d ep th fo r

t h ose w ho a re e arly in th eir c are ers . T hat c o urs e is a tr e at th at I a n tic ip ate

e ag erly e v ery sp rin g. In it I h av e b ro ad en ed th e sc o pe o f m y tr e atm en t o f

e th ic s to in clu de ad m in is tr a tiv e eth ic s, p olitic al eth ic s, an d p olic y eth ic s,

b ecau se t h e p eo ple w ho o ccu py r o le s r e la te d t o t h ose f ie ld s i n te ra ct w ith e ach

o th er in sig nif ic an t w ay s. H ow ev er, th e cen te r of gra v ity re sid es w ith ad m in is tr a tiv e e th ic s.

I e x pre ss m y d eep est a p pre cia tio n to th e w om en a n d m en a t a ll le v els o f

Am eric an public se rv ic e w ho hav e sh are d th eir str u ggle s, in sig hts , an d

cre ativ ity w ith m e. Their case s an d th e en su in g dis c u ssio ns in eth ic s

work sh ops I h av e c o nducte d s in ce 1 975 a re th e e m pir ic al b asis f o r th is b ook

an d a m ajo r so urc e o f a n y k now le d ge I m ay b e a b le to p ass a lo ng. I h av e

been d eep ly im pre sse d b y th eir in te n tio n to d o th e rig ht th in g in th e fa ce o f

fo rm id ab le im ped im en ts . I hold th eir co ntr ib utio ns to eth ic s in public

ad m in is tr a tio n in r e sp ectf u l tr u st a n d p ass th is k now le d ge a lo ng a s th eir g if t

to m e a n d t h e r e ad er.

I th an k m y c o lle ag ues a ro und th e w orld w ho a re te ach in g a n d e n gag in g in

re se arc h on ad m in is tr a tiv e eth ic s. O ur num bers hav e gro w n su bsta n tia lly

sin ce 1982 w hen

The R esp onsib le A dm in is tr a to r

fir s t ap peare d . T hro ugh

se ssio ns a t th e a n nual c o nfe re n ces o f A SPA a n d a t o th er s m alle r m eetin gs in

th e U nite d S ta te s, C an ad a, H ong K ong, F ra n ce, C hin a, a n d A ustr a lia , I h av e

obse rv ed th at a g en uin e c o m munity o f s c h ola rs a n d p ra ctitio ners is e m erg in g

world w id e th at is co m mitte d to th e d ev elo pm en t o f p ublic ad m in is tr a tiv e

eth ic s.

My t h an ks a ls o g o t o t h e r e v ie w ers , w ho o nce a g ain c are fu lly e x am in ed t h e

pre v io us e d itio n o f th is b ook a n d g av e m e th eir c o nstr u ctiv e a d vic e, a n d to

Allis o n B ru nner a n d A lis o n H an key a t J o sse y -B ass, w hose e x celle n t e d ito ria l

guid an ce a n d p atie n ce h av e b een i n valu ab le .

I e x pre ss a g ain m y c o ntin uin g g ra titu de to m y d eare st a n d b est c o lle ag ue,

my w if e , M eg an , w hose in sp ir a tio n, in sig hts , w ritin g s k ill, k now le d ge o f th e

fie ld o f p ublic ad m in is tr a tio n, an d p ers o nal su pport h av e b een fre ely an d

warm ly g iv en s in ce th e fir s t e d itio n a n d a g ain a t e v ery s ta g e o f th is p ro je ct.

She h elp ed m e s h ap e

The R esp onsib le A dm in is tr a to r

f ro m t h e v ery b eg in nin g

with h er a d vic e a n d s u ggestio ns a s I b eg an o utlin in g th e b ook in a m ounta in

cab in in S outh ern C alif o rn ia in th e la te 1 970s, a n d h er a ssis ta n ce a n d s u pport

co ntin ued t h ro ughout t h e w ritin g p ro cess.

I m ust a g ain a ls o a ck now le d ge t h e m ora l g uid e i n m y l if e , w ho h as b eco m e

more c o lle g ia l s in ce th e p re v io us e d itio n, m y d au ghte r, C hels e a. T hro ughout

her tw en ty -s ix y ears o f lif e , s h e h as c au se d m e to ta k e m y o w n e th ic s m ore

se rio usly . H er h onest a n d d ir e ct q uestio ns h av e c alle d m e u p s h ort a n d c au se d

me to re fle ct. H er “W hy?” q uestio ns an d h er o bse rv atio ns ab out th e g ap betw een w hat I s a y a n d w hat I d o h av e d eep en ed m y m ora l lif e . T his b ook

has m ad e its w ay th ro ugh fiv e p re v io us e d itio ns a s sh e h as g ro w n u p a n d

ta k en h er o w n p la ce i n t h e p ra ctic e o f i n te rn atio nal m ate rn al a n d c h ild h ealth .

Obse rv in g her m ora l dev elo pm en t fro m in fa n cy to young ad ulth ood has

illu m in ate d m y u nders ta n din g o f h ow w e h um an s a re m ost fu ndam en ta lly

valu in g c re atu re s. I h av e w atc h ed h er e x pre ssin g h er o w n v alu es a n d d eep

co m mitm en ts in h er w ork in p la ces lik e U gan da, S outh S udan , R w an da,

Ken ya, L ib eria , T an zan ia , S outh A fric a, A fg han is ta n , T haila n d, a n d I n dia a n d

been r e m in ded t h at I s till h av e m uch t o l e arn f ro m h er.

Fin ally , I e x pre ss m y d eep a p pre cia tio n t o B ry ce L ow ery , w hose c re ativ ity ,

hard w ork , re se arc h sk ills , ed ito ria l co m pete n ce, ex celle n t w ritin g, an d

en dle ss p atie n ce h av e b een a b so lu te ly e sse n tia l in g ettin g th is s ix th e d itio n to

th e pre ss. B ry ce is co m ple tin g his P hD dis se rta tio n an d has pre v io usly

work ed w ith m e a s a t e ach in g a ssis ta n t i n m y u nderg ra d uate “ C itiz en sh ip a n d

Public E th ic s” c la ss. H e is o n h is w ay to a d is tin guis h ed c are er a s a s c h ola r

an d t e ach er i n t h e f ie ld o f u rb an p la n nin g f o r t h e o uts ta n din g u niv ers ity l u ck y

en ough to h ir e h im . H e w ill le av e u s so m ed ay so on a ls o fu lly p re p are d to

te ach e th ic s a lo ng w ith h is m ajo r f ie ld .

All o f th ese p eo ple a n d m an y o th ers h av e h elp ed to b ro ad en , d eep en , a n d

sh arp en m y t h oughts . I d eep ly a p pre cia te t h eir g if ts t o m e a n d h ope t h at w hat

I h av e d one w ith t h em i n t h ese p ag es i s w orth y o f t h eir r e sp ect.

Los A ngele s, C alifo rn ia

Terry L . C ooper

Ju ne 2 011 The A uth or

T erry L . C ooper is th e M aria B . C ru tc h er P ro fe sso r in C itiz en sh ip an d

D em ocra tic V alu es (S ocia l E th ic s) a t th e U niv ers ity o f S outh ern C alif o rn ia

( U SC ). H is r e se arc h c en te rs o n c itiz en p artic ip atio n a n d p ublic e th ic s. H e w as

o ne of th e prin cip al in vestig ato rs in th e te n -y ear U SC N eig hborh ood

P artic ip atio n P ro je ct ( N PP), c o nductin g r e se arc h o n th e r o le o f n eig hborh ood

o rg an iz atio ns i n g overn an ce i n t h e C ity o f L os A ngele s t h ro ugh t h e s y ste m o f

n eig hborh ood c o uncils e sta b lis h ed i n 1 999. H e i s a ls o t h e d ir e cto r o f t h e U SC

C iv ic E ngag em en t I n itia tiv e, w hic h i s e x pan din g t h e w ork o f t h e N PP b ey ond

n eig hborh ood c o uncils a n d b ey ond L os A ngele s. H is c u rre n t w ork f o cu se s o n

t h e h om eo w ner a sso cia tio n m ovem en t i n C hin a, w hic h i s s e ek in g t o e sta b lis h

p ro perty rig hts fo r th ose w ho b uy c o ndom in iu m s fro m d ev elo pers a n d th en

f in d t h at t h ey r e ally o w n v ery l ittle .

Cooper is th e a u th or o f

The R esp onsib le A dm in is tr a to r: A n A ppro ach to

E th ic s f o r t h e A dm in is tr a tiv e R ole

( 5 th e d ., 2 006), a n d

An E th ic o f C itiz e n sh ip

f o r P ublic A dm in is tr a tio n

(1 991). H e is th e c o ed ito r o f

Exem pla ry P ublic

A dm in is tr a to rs: C hara cte r a nd L ea dersh ip in G overn m en t

(1 992), a n d th e

e d ito r o f

Handbook o f A dm in is tr a tiv e E th ic s

(2 nd ed ., 2 001). H is artic le s

h av e a p peare d in

Public A dm in is tr a tio n R evie w

,

Adm in is tr a tio n a nd S ocie ty

,

I n te rn atio nal R evie w of A dm in is tr a tiv e Scie n ces

,

In te rn atio nal Jo urn al of

P ublic Adm in is tr a tio n

,

Adm in is tr a tiv e Theo ry and Pra xis

,

In te rn atio nal

J o urn al of O rg aniz a tio n Theo ry and Beh avio r

,

Public Budgetin g and

F in ance

,

Am eric a n R evie w o f P ublic A dm in is tr a tio n

, a n d

The B ure a ucra t

. H e

i s a p ast m em ber o f th e e d ito ria l b oard s o f

Public A dm in is tr a tio n R evie w

a n d

A dm in is tr a tiv e T heo ry a nd P ra xis

a n d c u rre n tly s e rv es o n th e e d ito ria l b oard

o f t h e

Am eric a n R evie w o f P ublic A dm in is tr a tio n

. C ooper i s a ls o t h e e d ito r o f

t h e “ E xem pla r P ro file ” s e rie s i n t h e j o urn al

Public I n te g rity

.

Cooper h as p re v io usly se rv ed as ch air o f th e S ectio n o n E th ic s o f th e

A m eric an Socie ty fo r Public A dm in is tr a tio n. H e has co nducte d eth ic s

t r a in in g fo r m an y pro fe ssio nal gro ups at dif fe re n t le v els of govern m en t

a ro und t h e U nite d S ta te s a n d i n s e v era l o th er c o untr ie s. Chapte r O ne

In tr o du ctio n

T he R esp onsib le A dm in is tr a to r

is o ne a tte m pt to re sp ond to th e n eed fo r a

s y ste m atic tr e atm en t o f p ublic a d m in is tr a tiv e e th ic s th at is g ro unded in b oth

t h e re alitie s of pra ctic e an d th e re q uir e m en ts of so und sc h ola rs h ip . It is

i m porta n t to id en tif y th e partic u la r co ntr ib utio n in te n ded here . The

c o ncep tu al fo cu s o f th e b ook is th e ro le o f th e p ublic a d m in is tr a to r in a n

o rg an iz atio nal s e ttin g; th e c en tr a l in te g ra tin g e th ic al c o ncep t u se d in d ealin g

w ith th at ro le is re sp onsib ility . T he cen tr a l eth ic al pro cess ad opte d fo r

a d dre ssin g e th ic al p ro ble m s a sso cia te d w ith a d m in is tr a tiv e r e sp onsib ility is a

c o m pre h en siv e d esig n a p pro ach .

What I s E th ic s?

E th ic s is d efin ed in v ario us w ay s, so m e m ore te ch nic al an d p re cis e th an

o th ers . T he u su al b rie f t e x tb ook o r d ic tio nary d efin itio ns d efin e

eth ic s

a s “ th e

a tte m pt to sta te a n d e v alu ate p rin cip le s b y w hic h e th ic al p ro ble m s m ay b e

s o lv ed ” (J o nes, S onta g , B eck er, an d F ogelin , 1 969, p . 1 ), “th e n orm ativ e

s ta n dard s o f c o nduct d eriv ed fro m th e p hilo so phic al a n d re lig io us tr a d itio ns

o f so cie ty ” (M ean s, 1 970, p . 5 2), o r “ th e ta sk o f c are fu l re fle ctio n se v era l

s te p s r e m oved f ro m th e a ctu al c o nduct o f m en ” c o ncern in g “ th e a ssu m ptio ns

a n d p re su ppositio ns o f th e m ora l lif e ” (G usta fs o n, 1 965, p . 1 13). P re sto n

( 1 996) b eco m es a b it m ore s p ecif ic b y s u ggestin g th at “ eth ic s is c o ncern ed

a b out w hat is rig ht, fa ir , ju st, o r g ood; a b out w hat w e o ught to d o, n ot ju st

a b out w hat is th e c ase o r w hat is m ost a ccep ta b le o r e x ped ie n t” (p . 1 6). M .

W . M artin (1 995) d efin es e th ic s a s m ora l p hilo so phy a n d stip ula te s th at it

i n clu des f o ur m ain g oals o r in te re sts : c la rif ic atio n o f m ora l c o ncep ts ; c ritic al

e v alu atio n o f m ora l c la im s fo cu se d o n “ te stin g th eir tr u th , ju stif ic atio n, a n d

a d eq uacy ” ( p p. 7 –8); c o nstr u ctin g a n in clu siv e p ers p ectiv e b y e lu cid atin g th e

i n te rc o nnectio ns am ong m ora l id eas an d valu es; an d pro vid in g m ora l guid an ce t h ro ugh i m pro vin g p ra ctic al j u dgm en t.

Gib so n W in te r (1 966) d efin es e th ic s m ore c o m pre h en siv ely b y d esc rib in g

th e fu nctio ns it s e rv es in th e s o cia l w orld . A s a n a ctiv e e n te rp ris e , h e s a y s,

“E th ic s s e ek s to c la rif y th e lo gic a n d a d eq uacy o f th e v alu es th at s h ap e th e

world ; it a sse sse s th e m ora l p ossib ilitie s w hic h a re p ro je cte d a n d b etr a y ed in

th e s o cia l g iv e-a n d-ta k e” ( p . 2 18). A nyone e n gag ed i n e th ic al r e fle ctio n t a k es

on th e ta sk o f a n aly zin g a n d e v alu atin g th e p rin cip le s e m bodie d in v ario us

alte rn ativ es fo r c o nduct a n d s o cia l o rd er. E th ic s is , a cco rd in g to W in te r, “ a

sc ie n ce o f h um an i n te n tio nality ” ( p . 2 19).

For o ur p urp ose s in th is b ook, e th ic s m ay b e u nders to od a s th e stu dy o f

mora l co nduct an d m ora l sta tu s.

Eth ic s

an d

mora lity

are ofte n use d

in te rc h an geab ly , b ut h ere I w ill d is tin guis h th em . M ora lity assu m es so m e

accep te d m odes o f b eh av io r th at a re g iv en b y a re lig io us tr a d itio n, a c u ltu re

(in clu din g an org an iz atio nal cu ltu re ), a so cia l cla ss, a co m munity , or a

fa m ily . I t i n volv es e x pecte d c o urs e s o f c o nduct t h at a re r o ote d i n b oth f o rm al

ru le s a n d in fo rm al n orm s. M ora lity is e x pre sse d th ro ugh su ch p re cep ts a s

“d ecen t y oung p eo ple d o n ot e n gag e in p re m arita l s e x ,” “ fa m ily c o m es f ir s t,”

“o ne s h ould n ot c o nsp ic u ously d is p la y o ne's w ealth ,” “ g uests in o ne's h om e

must a lw ay s b e tr e ate d w ith re sp ect,” “ n ev er d riv e u nder th e in flu en ce,” “ a

day 's p ay r e q uir e s a d ay 's w ork ,” “ fo llo w t h e o rd ers o f t h ose a b ove y ou i n t h e

org an iz atio n,” an d sim ila r ex pecta tio ns. S om etim es th ese ex pecta tio ns are

writte n o ut in c o des o f c o nduct o r r u le s, b ut a t o th er tim es th ey a re a ssu m ed

an d ta k en fo r g ra n te d . T ypic ally th ey are asse rte d b y a tr a d itio n, cu ltu re ,

re lig io n, c o m munity , o rg an iz atio n, o r f a m ily a s s im ply w hat i s r ig ht.

Eth ic s, th en , is o ne s te p r e m oved f ro m a ctio n. I t in volv es th e e x am in atio n

an d an aly sis o f th e lo gic , v alu es, b elie fs , an d p rin cip le s th at are u se d to

ju stif y m ora lity in its v ario us f o rm s. I t c o nsid ers w hat is m ean t b y p rin cip le s

su ch a s ju stic e, v era city , o r th e p ublic in te re st; th eir im plic atio ns f o r c o nduct

in p artic u la r situ atio ns; an d h ow o ne m ig ht arg ue fo r o ne p rin cip le o ver

an oth er a s d ete rm in ativ e i n a p artic u la r d ecis io n. E th ic s t a k es w hat i s g iv en o r

pre sc rib ed a n d a sk s w hat i s m ean t a n d w hy. S o e th ic s a s r e la te d t o c o nduct i s

critic al r e fle ctio n o n m ora lity to w ard g ro undin g m ora l c o nduct in s y ste m atic

re fle ctio n a n d r e aso nin g. E th ic al r e fle ctio n a ls o in volv es a n a ffe ctiv e e le m en t

becau se it ofte n ev okes em otiv e re sp onse s of co m fo rt or dis c o m fo rt,

re so lu tio n o r q uan dary , a n d a ffir m atio n o r a n ta g onis m . Eth ic s als o deals w ith th e m ora l sta tu s of en titie s su ch as fa m ilie s,

org an iz atio ns, c o m munitie s, a n d s o cie tie s. H ere e th ic al re aso nin g is fo cu se d

on how th e ch ara cte ris tic s asso cia te d w ith th e good fa m ily , th e good

org an iz atio n, o r th e g ood s o cie ty a re g ro unded in c erta in p rin cip le s, v alu es,

belie fs , a n d lo gic al a rg um en t. E th ic s w eig hs th e a d eq uacy o f th ese a ttr ib ute s

an d a n aly zes h ow t h ey a re j u stif ie d .

Eth ic s m ay b e d ealt w ith d esc rip tiv ely o r n orm ativ ely . D esc rip tiv ely , e th ic s

atte m pts to re v eal u nderly in g a ssu m ptio ns a n d h ow th ey a re c o nnecte d to

co nduct. N orm ativ ely , eth ic s atte m pts to co nstr u ct via b le an d defe n sib le

arg um en ts fo r p artic u la r c o urs e s o f c o nduct a s b ein g b ette r th an o th ers in

sp ecif ic s itu atio ns. T his b ook e n gag es m ain ly i n a d esc rip tiv e a p pro ach t o t h e

eth ic al s itu atio n o f p ublic a d m in is tr a to rs a n d p ro vid es s o m e a n aly tic al to ols ,

in clu din g a d ecis io n m odel fo r a rriv in g a t n orm ativ e ju dgm en ts . It d oes n ot

desc rib e a p artic u la r p ublic s e rv ic e e th ic , a n e n deav or I h av e u nderta k en in

an oth er b ook,

An E th ic o f C itiz e n sh ip fo r P ublic A dm in is tr a tio n

(1 991), n or

does it s p ecif ic ally d efin e a d esc rip tiv e d ecis io n m odel. D esc rip tiv e m odels

dev elo ped b y o th ers w ill b e re v ie w ed b rie fly in C hap te r T w o a s a m ean s o f

pro vid in g b ack gro und f o r t h e n orm ativ e m odel p re se n te d h ere .

Eth ic s m ay be vie w ed fro m eith er or both of tw o m ajo r orie n ta tio ns:

deo nto lo gic a l

a n d

te le o lo gic a l

. D eo nto lo gic al a p pro ach es to e th ic s fo cu s o n

one's d uty to c erta in e th ic al p rin cip le s, s u ch a s ju stic e, f re ed om , o r v era city ,

with out re g ard fo r th e c o nse q uen ces o f o ne's a ctio ns. T ele o lo gic al e th ic s, in

co ntr a st, in volv es a c o ncern fo r th e e n ds o r c o nse q uen ces o f o ne's c o nduct.

This is th e positio n m ost nota b ly asso cia te d w ith utilita ria n is m an d its

calc u lu s o f th e g re ate st g ood f o r th e g re ate st n um ber. T his b ook a ssu m es th at

most o f u s u nderta k e d ecis io ns u sin g b oth o f th ese p ers p ectiv es m ost o f th e

tim e. T hat is , w e c o nsid er p rin cip le s th at a re im porta n t to u s in a c o ncre te

situ atio n a n d th en a sk o urs e lv es w hat th e c o nse q uen ces o f a ctin g o n th ose

prin cip le s a re lik ely to b e. T he d ecis io n-m ak in g m odel p re se n te d in th e n ex t

ch ap te r c o m bin es d eo nto lo gic al a n d t e le o lo gic al o rie n ta tio ns.

Doin g e th ic s, th en , in volv es th in kin g m ore s y ste m atic ally a b out th e v alu es

an d p rin cip le s th at a re e m bed ded in o ur c h oic es th an w e d o w hen w e m ak e

ch oic es o n p ra ctic al o r p olitic al g ro unds a lo ne. A s w e r e fle ct o n t h ese i m plic it

valu es, w e a sk o urs e lv es h ow th ey a re c o nsis te n t w ith o ur d utie s a n d to w ard

what e n ds a n d c o nse q uen ces th ey le ad . K eep in g in m in d th e o blig atio ns a n d goals o f th e r o le s w e o ccu py, w e s e ek to r a n k-o rd er th em f o r e ach p artic u la r

eth ic al d ecis io n w e c o nfro nt i n t h e c o urs e o f c arry in g o ut a s p ecif ic r o le .

The re la tio nsh ip b etw een la w a n d e th ic s o fte n c o m es u p in th e d is c u ssio n

of s p ecif ic c ase s. M y a n sw er is th at la w s p ecif ie s th e m ora l m in im um . It is

th e m in im um le v el o f c o nduct th at w e a s a s o cie ty a g re e to im pose o n a ll o f

us th ro ugh th e th re at o f f o rc e a n d s a n ctio ns. E th ic al c o nsid era tio ns a re o fte n

in volv ed in d elib era tio ns ab out p ro pose d le g is la tio n, b ut o nce cry sta lliz ed

in to la w , th e c o nduct p re sc rib ed is a ssu m ed to b e b ack ed u p b y th e c o erc iv e

pow er o f g overn m en t. H ow ev er, fro m a n e th ic is t's p oin t o f v ie w , la w m ust

alw ay s s ta n d u nder th e ju dgm en t o f e th ic s. S om etim es la w s m ay b e d eem ed

unju st a n d th ere fo re u neth ic al. T hose w ho b elie v e so m ay c h alle n ge th ose

la w s in th e c o urts a s in co nsis te n t w ith th e h um an rig hts g uara n te ed b y th e

U.S . C onstitu tio n, o r t h ey m ay e n gag e i n c iv il d is o bed ie n ce, e v en t o t h e p oin t

of b ein g a rre ste d a n d g oin g t o j a il.

Both k in ds o f c h alle n ges o ccu rre d d urin g th e c iv il r ig hts m ovem en t o f th e

1960s a n d 1 970s. T he N atio nal A sso cia tio n f o r th e A dvan cem en t o f C olo re d

Peo ple ( N AACP) e n gag ed in litig atio n a g ain st u nju st s e g re g atio n la w s in th e

Am eric an S outh . M artin L uth er K in g Jr. an d m an y o th ers em plo yed civ il

dis o bed ie n ce b y s ittin g in a t s e g re g ate d fa cilitie s, re fu sin g to s it in th e b ack

se ats o n b use s, an d d em onstr a tin g ag ain st se g re g ate d sc h ools ev en w hen

ord ere d by le g al au th oritie s not to do so . Som etim es la w s need to be

ch alle n ged o n eth ic al g ro unds. In th e lo ng tr a d itio n o f civ il d is o bed ie n ce

ex em plif ie d b y G an dhi a n d K in g, th e k ey p ro vis o is th at o ne m ust b e w illin g

to accep t th e co nse q uen ces of one's actio ns in ord er to dem onstr a te

co m mitm en t to e th ic al p rin cip le s o ver w hat a re c o nsid ere d u nju st la w s. T hat

is , o ne m ust b e w illin g to s u ffe r f in es a n d im pris o nm en t in o rd er to e v oke a

re sp onse fro m th e la rg er so cie ty to brin g ab out ch an ge in th e la w s in

questio n.

Resp on sib ilit y a n d R ole

The t e rm s

ro le

a n d

re sp onsib ility

a re p ecu lia rly m odern in c o nnota tio n. B oth

su ggest a w orld vie w in w hic h th e p ow er o f tr a d itio n is b ro ken a n d h um an

bein gs are le ft to co nstr u ct a w orld o f th eir o w n m ak in g. R ole s m ust b e

dev is e d a n d re sp onsib ility d efin ed a s w ay s o f re esta b lis h in g o blig atio ns in our m odern , p lu ra lis tic , t e ch nolo gic al s o cie ty . T ech nolo gy i s a p plie d n ot o nly

to p ro ductio n b ut a ls o t o s o cie ty i ts e lf .

Win te r (1 966) o bse rv ed : “R esp onsib ility is a re la tiv ely n ew te rm in th e

eth ic al v ocab ula ry , ap pearin g in th e n in ete en th cen tu ry w ith a so m ew hat

am big uous m ean in g. T he t e rm e v alu ate s a ctio n a n d a ttr ib ute s i t t o a n a g en t; i t

does s o in lie u o f c o sm ic o r n atu ra l s tr u ctu re s o f o blig atio n. T he h is to ric al

aw are n ess of th e nin ete en th cen tu ry , th e sc ie n tif ic an d te ch nolo gic al

re v olu tio ns, a n d th e c o lla p se o f m eta p hysic al s y ste m s h ad u nderm in ed f ix ed

notio ns o f o blig atio ns. T he te rm ‘ re sp onsib ility ’ w as a w ay o f f illin g th is g ap

by d efin in g th e s c o pe o f a cco unta b ility a n d o blig atio n in c o nte x ts o f la w a n d

co m mon c u ltu re ” ( p p. 2 54–255).

Sim ila rly , R ic h ard M cK eo n's s tu dy ( 1 957) o f th e e m erg en ce o f th e te rm in

Weste rn th ought re v eals th at

re sp onsib ility

fir s t ap peare d in E nglis h an d

Fre n ch in 1 787. It w as u se d in itia lly in re fe re n ce to th e p olitic al in stitu tio ns

aris in g o ut o f th e A m eric an a n d F re n ch re v olu tio ns, b ut its u se c o ntin ued

th ro ugh th e n in ete en th c en tu ry . W hen “ co nstitu tio nal g overn m en t w as v astly

ex te n ded , in s c o pe o f o pera tio n a n d in s p re ad a m ong n atio ns, a s a re su lt o f

co nta cts of cu ltu re s an d peo ple s” (p . 23), th e co ncep t of re sp onsib ility

becam e in cre asin gly s ig nif ic an t a s a w ay o f d efin in g a c o m mon s e t o f v alu es

am ong p eo ple o f d iv erg en t c u ltu re s a n d t r a d itio ns.

The co ncep t of ro le th en beco m es a co nven ie n t way to pack ag e

ex pecta tio ns a n d o blig atio ns a sso cia te d w ith th e m odern w orld . A s w e c ease

to v ie w s o cia l f u nctio ns a s r e ceiv ed in ta ct f ro m th e p ast a n d s e e th em in ste ad

as m an ip ula te d a n d c re ate d a n ew , w e t a k e u pon o urs e lv es b ounded o blig atio n

in th e fo rm o f v ario us ro le s. P eo ple ex erc is e re sp onsib ility an d are h eld

re sp onsib le i n s o cie ty w hen t h ey a ccep t a n d c arry o ut a n a rra y o f m ore o r l e ss

well- d efin ed ro le s: em plo yee, pare n t, citiz en , gro up m em ber. T he m ost

pro ble m atic r o le s a re th ose n ot c le arly d efin ed , u su ally b ecau se th ere is little

ag re em en t a b out th e b oundarie s o f r e sp onsib ility a sso cia te d w ith th em . W hat

does it m ean to b e a r e sp onsib le p are n t in th e f ir s t d ecad e o f th e tw en ty -fir s t

cen tu ry ? O r a r e sp onsib le s p ouse , r e sp onsib le c itiz en , r e sp onsib le p olitic ia n ,

or r e sp onsib le p ublic a d m in is tr a to r?

The pro ble m is th at alth ough public ad m in is tr a to rs are re sp onsib le fo r

certa in d utie s (th ose th at co nstitu te th e p ro fe ssio nal ro le ), th ey so m etim es

belie v e th ey are oblig ate d to act oth erw is e . This occu rs becau se ad m in is tr a to rs , a lo ng w ith e v ery one e ls e i n m odern s o cie ty , m ain ta in a n a rra y

of ro le s re la te d to fa m ily , c o m munity , a n d so cie ty , e ach c arry in g a se t o f

oblig atio ns an d v este d w ith certa in p ers o nal in te re sts . T he q uite co m mon

re su lt is co nflic t am ong ro le s as th ese co m petin g fo rc es p ush an d p ull in

opposite d ir e ctio ns. T he effe cts o f th ese co nflic ts are co m pounded b y th e

ra n ge o f d is c re tio n a d m in is tr a to rs m ust e x erc is e . T he in te n t o f le g is la tio n is

fre q uen tly s ta te d in b ro ad la n guag e, le av in g th e s p ecif ic s to a d m in is tr a to rs .

Conse q uen tly , e th ic al s ta n dard s a n d s e n sitiv ity a re c ru cia l to th e r e sp onsib le

use o f t h is d is c re tio n.

The R esp on sib le A dm in is tr a to r

The re sp onsib le a d m in is tr a to r is o ne w ho is re sp onsib le in th e tw o s e n se s I

hav e dis c u sse d brie fly here (th is su bje ct is tr e ate d m ore th oro ughly in

Chap te r F our). R esp onsib le a d m in is tr a to rs m ust b e a b le to a cco unt fo r th eir

co nduct to re le v an t o th ers , s u ch a s s u perv is o rs , e le cte d o ffic ia ls , th e c o urts ,

an d th e c itiz en ry , w hic h m ean s b ein g a b le to e x pla in a n d ju stif y w hy s p ecif ic

actio ns th ey to ok r e su lte d in p artic u la r c o nse q uen ces. T hey m ust a ls o b e a b le

to a ct in w ay s th at a re c o nsis te n t w ith th eir in ner c o nvic tio ns a s p ro fe ssio nal

guard ia n s of th e public good. T hat is , bein g a re sp onsib le ad m in is tr a to r

in clu des hav in g both obje ctiv e acco unta b ility fo r co nduct an d su bje ctiv e

co ngru en ce w ith o ne's p ro fe ssio nal v alu es. E th ic s is th e m ost fu ndam en ta l

way in w hic h one sa tis fie s both kin ds of re sp onsib ility . Resp onsib le

ad m in is tr a to rs m ust b e e th ic ally s o phis tic ate d e n ough to re aso n w ith o th ers

ab out th e w ay s in w hic h th eir c o nduct se rv es th e p ublic in te re st a n d h av e

su ffic ie n t cla rity ab out th eir ow n pro fe ssio nal eth ic al co m mitm en ts to

main ta in i n te g rity a n d a s e n se o f s e lf -e ste em .

What, th en , is th e dif fe re n ce betw een an eth ic al ad m in is tr a to r an d a

re sp onsib le ad m in is tr a to r? A p ublic ad m in is tr a to r w ho h as b een p ro perly

so cia liz ed m ay b e a b le to a ct in a cco rd an ce w ith th e c o m mon g ood s o m e o r

ev en m ost o f t h e t im e, t h us b ein g a n e th ic al a d m in is tr a to r s o m e o r m ost o f t h e

tim e, y et n ot b e a b le to g iv e sp ecif ic re aso ns fo r h is o r h er c o nduct w hen

questio ned o r c h alle n ged , a n d p erh ap s n ot e v en b e a b le to u nders ta n d in a

se lf -c o nsc io us w ay w hy h e o r s h e a cte d in a p artic u la r w ay . U nders ta n din g

one's m otiv atio ns a n d b ein g a b le to e x pla in a n d ju stif y th e a ctio ns th at flo w fro m th em a re th e e sse n tia l q ualitie s o f th e re sp onsib le a d m in is tr a to r. T his

book s e ek s to p ro vid e th e c o nce p ts , th eo rie s, a n d te ch niq ues fo r re sp onsib le

ad m in is tr a tio n.

A D esig n A ppro ach

All to o m an y tr e atm en ts o f p ro fe ssio nal e th ic s sto p w ith a c o ncep tu al a n d

th eo re tic al p hilo so phic al a n aly sis o f ty pic al e th ic al p ro ble m s. S om e le ad to a

desir e d s o lu tio n o r a p re sc rib ed s e t o f e th ic al n orm s, w here as o th ers e lu cid ate

th e p ro ble m , o ffe r s o m e a n aly sis o f v ario us a lte rn ativ es, a n d le av e th e r e ad er

with t h e i m plic atio n t h at a ll a re o f e q ual v alu e. I n t h is b ook a d esig n a p pro ach

is a d opte d a s th e c en tr a l o rg an iz in g e th ic al p ro cess. T his o rie n ta tio n a ssu m es

th at th ere is n o s in gle b est s o lu tio n to a s ig nif ic an t e th ic al p ro ble m b ut r a th er

num ero us p ossib le so lu tio ns, so m e o f e q ual v alu e a n d so m e o f g re ate r o r

le sse r w orth . T he ta sk is to d esig n a re sp onse to a p ro ble m at h an d th at

ad dre sse s th e im med ia te sh ort- te rm situ atio n b ut als o lo oks to th e w id er

org an iz atio nal, l e g al, a n d s o cia l c o nte x ts f o r t h e l o nger-te rm a n sw ers .

Pra ctic in g ad m in is tr a to rs can not liv e ex clu siv ely in th e re alm of

philo so phic al re fle ctio n b ut m ust c o nnect s u ch c o nsid era tio ns to a ctio n a n d

org an iz atio ns. A s C aro lin e W hitb eck (1 996) su ggests , “P eo ple co nfro nte d

with e th ic al p ro ble m s m ust d o m ore t h an s im ply m ak e j u dgm en ts . T hey m ust

fig ure o ut w hat t o d o” ( p . 9 ). F ar f ro m s im ply a ssu m in g t h at e th ic s i s a m atte r

of lo okin g f o r a n id eal r a tio nal s o lu tio n to a n im med ia te p ro ble m , W hitb eck

arg ues th at a p ers o n c o nfro ntin g a n e th ic al p ro ble m s h ould b e th in kin g lik e a

desig ner. “ D esig n p ro ble m s,” sh e p oin ts o ut, “ are p ro ble m s o f m ak in g (o r

re p air in g) th in gs a n d p ro cesse s to s a tis fy w an ts a n d n eed s” ( p . 1 0). A nd th is

“m ak in g” an d “re p air in g” alw ay s in volv es co nstr a in ts — in tim e, m oney ,

pow er, th e a b ility to p ers u ad e, a n d th e s tr e n gth to a b so rb c o nse q uen ces. F or

public a d m in is tr a to rs th e d esig n o f a v ia b le a n d a ccep ta b le so lu tio n to a n

eth ic al q uan dary a lw ay s ta k es p la ce in th e c o nte x t o f o rg an iz atio ns th at w ill

su pport s o m e k in ds o f c o nduct a n d im ped e o th ers . A w ork ab le r e so lu tio n o f

an e th ic al p ro ble m c an not i g nore t h at o rg an iz atio nal c o nte x t.

Follo w in g W hitb eck , th e a p pro ach d ev elo ped th ro ughout th is b ook is o ne

of c o nsid erin g th e f a cts o f a s itu atio n— its s o cia l a n d o rg an iz atio nal c o nte x t,

its c o nstr a in ts , o pportu nitie s, a n d im plic atio ns fo r a ll c o ncern ed — an d th en ad vocatin g th e desig n of co urs e s of actio n th at m ay in clu de ch an ges in

org an iz atio nal s tr u ctu re , c u ltu re , r u le s, p olic ie s, a n d p ro ced ure s. I t i s a ssu m ed

th at th ere are se v era l co nceiv ab le alte rn ativ e co urs e s to co nsid er befo re

se le ctin g, n ot a n id eal o r p erfe ct so lu tio n, b ut th e b est a m ong a n a rra y o f

possib ilitie s, s o m e o f w hic h m ay b e e q ually a ccep ta b le . T his d esig n a p pro ach

assu m es th at it is a lw ay s p ossib le to im pro ve o n a n y so lu tio n g iv en m ora l

im ag in atio n, in gen uity , a n d c re ativ ity a n d th at o ne m ust a lw ay s b rin g th ese

qualitie s to b ear o n im porta n t eth ic al q uan darie s. B ut ad m in is tr a to rs h av e

lim ite d tim e to e x erc is e th eir in ven tiv en ess a n d fin ally m ust a ct in th e s h ort

ru n w hile p la n nin g f o r t h e f u tu re .

Thus, a s th e c h ap te rs u nfo ld , th e m ean in g o f re sp onsib ility in th e p ublic

ad m in is tr a tiv e ro le will be dev elo ped by le ad in g th e re ad er th ro ugh

co nsid era tio ns o f t h e e le m en ts i n volv ed i n d esig nin g w hat t o d o i n t h e f a ce o f

eth ic al u ncerta in ty a n d c h alle n ge. H ere a re s o m e le sso ns th at W hitb eck h as

ad van ced f o r d esig nin g r e sp onse s t o m ora l p ro ble m s:

We sh ould b eg in w ith a c o nsid era tio n o f th e u ncerta in tie s in vo lv ed in

any eth ic a l pro ble m

. F or ex am ple , no one sh ould ev er assu m e th at

ap peara n ces are alw ay s tr u e. C onduct th at m ay se em to b e u neth ic al

may n ot b e w hen it is fu lly ex plo re d an d u nders to od. A ls o , h um an

beh av io r is n ot a lw ay s p re d ic ta b le . A p ers o n m ay d ecid e o n a c o urs e o f

actio n a n d t h en f in d o ut t h at t h e k ey a cto rs r e sp ond v ery d if fe re n tly f ro m

what had been ex pecte d . A s th e pro cess of ad dre ssin g a pro ble m

unfo ld s, th e natu re of th e pro ble m m ay ch an ge. O th er is su es an d

co nflic ts h ere to fo re u nknow n m ay b e d is c o vere d to b e in volv ed in th e

pro ble m .

The g en era tio n o f a lte rn ativ e s o lu tio ns t o a n e th ic a l p ro ble m i s s e p ara te

fr o m d efin in g th e p ro ble m a nd m ay n ecessita te g ath erin g a dditio nal

in fo rm atio n

. T his is re la te d to th e p re v io us le sso n. In o rd er to re d uce

uncerta in ty , it is o fte n n ecessa ry to f in d o ut m ore a b out w ho is in volv ed

in th e p ro ble m , h ow lo ng it h as e x is te d , th e c h ara cte rs o f th e k ey a cto rs ,

th e im plic atio ns o f v ario us o ptio ns f o r a ctio n f o r th e la rg er o rg an iz atio n

an d p eo ple w ith in it, a n d h ow k ey a cto rs o uts id e th e o rg an iz atio n m ay

re sp ond t o t h e p ro pose d c o urs e s o f a ctio n.

We a re a lw ays a ctin g u nder tim e p re ssu re

. B usy p ublic a d m in is tr a to rs

do n ot h av e th e lu xury o f c o nte m pla tin g a n e th ic al p ro ble m u ntil th ey are fu lly sa tis fie d th at all optio ns an d co ntin gen cie s hav e been

ex hau stiv ely c o nsid ere d . D ecis io ns h av e to b e m ad e a n d th in gs h av e to

get done, alw ay s under co nstr a in ts of sc h ed ule s an d dead lin es.

Som etim es th at m ean s p urs u in g se v era l a lte rn ativ es sim ulta n eo usly o r

dev elo pin g a c o ntin gen cy a p pro ach , w ith a d ecis io n tr e e in dic atin g w hat

will b e d one if v ario us th in gs d o n ot h ap pen a s in itia lly p la n ned . N ot

ta k in g th is a p pro ach m ay m ean th at th e o pportu nity to in te rv en e a n d

co rre ct m is c o nduct m ay b e lo st. P ostp onin g a ctio n m ay re su lt in a fa it

acco m pli. T he d am ag e m ay b e d one, a n d i r re v ers ib ly s o .

Eth ic a l p ro ble m s a re d yn am ic

. T hey ch an ge as w e b eg in to ad dre ss

th em . W hat w e m ay a t fir s t e n g ag e a s a n e th ic al p ro ble m m ay b eco m e

als o a le g al p ro ble m . O r w hile w e are b eg in nin g to w ork th ro ugh a

pla n ned c o urs e o f a ctio n to a d dre ss a n e th ic al p ro ble m , so m eo ne e ls e

may i n te rv en e a n d r e so lv e i t i n a n oth er w ay , w hic h m ay i n t u rn c re ate a n

en tir e ly n ew p ro ble m .

These l e sso ns a re r a th er a b str a ct a t t h is p oin t, b ut r e ad ers s h ould t r y t o k eep

th em in m in d as th e ch ap te rs u nfo ld . (C hap te r N in e d ev elo ps th is d esig n

ap pro ach i n s u m mary f a sh io n b y a p ply in g i t t o a c ase .)

Overv ie w o f t h e C on te n ts

The f ir s t a n d m ost b asic t a sk o f t h is b ook i s t o i llu m in ate t h e e th ic al d ecis io n-

mak in g pro cess. Chap te r Tw o beg in s with so m e basic co ncep ts fo r

unders ta n din g th e le v els of delib era tio n at w hic h eth ic al pro ble m s are

ad dre sse d . T his is fo llo w ed b y a m odel fo r a n aly zin g a n d re so lv in g th ese

pro ble m s. T he m odel is p artly lin ear, in volv in g a se q uen ce o f ste p s, an d

partly nonlin ear, re q uir in g a se arc h fo r th e in te g ra tio n of se v era l key

ele m en ts , in clu din g m ora l r u le s, e th ic al p rin cip le s, s e lf -im ag e, a n d th e n orm s

of t h e p olitic al c o m munity . I t a ls o c o m bin es r e aso nin g, e m otio ns, a n d b elie fs .

The m odel p re se n te d h ere is n ot s im ply r a tio nalis t a n d f o cu se d o n p rin cip le s

but a ls o in clu des, a s e sse n tia l, th e a ffe ctiv e d im en sio ns o f e th ic al d ecis io n

mak in g a n d c o nduct. T he lo gic e sp ouse d is n ot a lin ear s y llo gis tic c alc u lu s

but s o m eth in g m ore lik e th e lo gic o f a esth etic s o r th e lo gic o f r h eto ric . S om e

re ad ers se em to h av e m is se d th is e sse n tia l th ru st in e arlie r e d itio ns o f th e

book (B ru ce, 1992; C ooper, 1992a; C ooper, 1996; H arm on, 1995). T his ch ap te r c o nclu des w ith a s u m mary o f th e d esig n a p pro ach th at is d ev elo ped

th ro ugh t h e r e m ain in g c h ap te rs .

Chap te r Thre e dev elo ps th e so cia l co nte x t w ith in w hic h th e public

ad m in is tr a to r m ust work an d dis c u sse s th e pro ble m of defin in g an d

main ta in in g th e ad m in is tr a to r's ro le in th e div ers e an d re la tiv is tic

en vir o nm en t o f m odern s o cie ty . W ith out t h e g uid an ce o f a c o here n t t r a d itio n,

th e a d m in is tr a tiv e r o le in m odern s o cie tie s is ju st o ne m ore s e t o f o blig atio ns

an d in te re sts th at m ust b e m an ag ed a m id a n a rra y o f o th er c o m petin g ro le s.

One sig nif ic an t o utc o m e o f th is so cia l c o nte x t is th e in esc ap ab ly p olitic al

natu re o f p ublic a d m in is tr a tio n t o day .

Chap te r F our a d dre sse s th e d ual n atu re o f a d m in is tr a tiv e re sp onsib ility in

modern s o cie ty : a d m in is tr a to rs h av e b oth

obje ctiv e r e sp onsib ility

(in w hic h

one is held acco unta b le by su perio rs , th e public , an d le g is la tio n) an d

su bje ctiv e re sp onsib ility

(in w hic h one fe els an d belie v es onese lf to be

re sp onsib le ). C onflic t b etw een th ese tw o f o rm s o f r e sp onsib ility s e em s to b e

th e m ost c o m mon f o rm i n w hic h e th ic al d ile m mas e m erg e.

Chap te r F iv e f u rth er d ev elo ps t h e c o nflic t b etw een s u bje ctiv e a n d o bje ctiv e

re sp onsib ility . C onflic ts o f a u th ority , r o le , a n d in te re st a re r e v ie w ed . I t is n ot

th at th ese th re e f o rm s o f c o nflic tin g r e sp onsib ility r e q uir e d is tin ctly d if fe re n t

fo rm s o f a n aly sis t o b e r e so lv ed . R ath er, u nders ta n din g t h e d if fe re n t w ay s w e

ex perie n ce c o nflic ts h elp s u s c la rif y t h e k ey a cto rs a n d r e la tio nsh ip s t h at m ust

be e x am in ed a n d d ealt w ith i f w e a re t o a ch ie v e r e so lu tio n.

Chap te r Six pre se n ts tw o gen era l ap pro ach es to m ain ta in in g, fro m a

man ag em en t pers p ectiv e, re sp onsib le co nduct in public org an iz atio ns

— in te rn al co ntr o ls

an d

exte rn al co ntr o ls

. Exte rn al co ntr o ls in clu de

in str u m en ts im pose d o n th e in div id ual f ro m o uts id e, s u ch a s c o des o f e th ic s

an d e th ic s le g is la tio n; in te rn al c o ntr o ls in volv e th e p ro fe ssio nal v alu es a n d

sta n dard s th at public se rv an ts hav e in te rn aliz ed th ro ugh th e so cia liz atio n

pro cess, b oth p ers o nal a n d p ro fe ssio nal.

Contin uin g th e m an ag em en t p ers p ectiv e fro m C hap te r S ix , C hap te r S ev en

fo cu se s o n th e im porta n ce o f esta b lis h in g co ngru en ce am ong th e v ario us

in te rn al a n d e x te rn al c o ntr o ls . T w o e x am ple s illu str a te w hat h ap pen s w hen

th is is n ot d one. F our c o m ponen ts o f r e sp onsib le c o nduct a re th en d is c u sse d :

in div id ual attr ib ute s, org an iz atio nal str u ctu re , org an iz atio nal cu ltu re , an d

so cie ta l e x pecta tio ns. Chap te r E ig ht s h if ts th e p ers p ectiv e to a n in div id ual w ho is a tte m ptin g to

act e th ic ally in th e f a ce o f m an ag em en t th at h as b eco m e c o rru pt o r lo st s ig ht

of its m an date d m is sio n in th e public in te re st. T he pro ble m is one of

co nflic tin g lo yaltie s— to s u perio rs o n th e o ne h an d a n d to th e p ublic o n th e

oth er. W his tle -b lo w in g is r e co gniz ed a s o ne r e sp onse to th is k in d o f c o nflic t.

Sourc es of org an iz atio nal pre ssu re on in div id ual em plo yees are outlin ed ,

org an iz atio nal re m ed ie s are dis c u sse d , an d th e ultim ate necessity fo r

in div id ual re sp onsib ility is a sse rte d . T he c h ap te r c lo se s w ith a tr e atm en t o f

th e c o m ponen ts r e q uir e d f o r i n div id ual e th ic al a u to nom y.

It is im porta n t to n ote a t th e o uts e t th at e th ic al a u to nom y is n ot ta n ta m ount

to eth ic al in div id ualis m b ut m ust b e se en in th e co nte x t o f th e p re v io us

ch ap te rs a n d th e c o nclu din g m odel. I n div id ual e th ic al a u to nom y is n ecessa ry

to so m e d eg re e to p ro vid e fo r th e ex erc is e o f co nsc ie n ce in re sis ta n ce to

co rru pt a u th ority , b ut t h is e x erc is e o f c o nsc ie n ce w ill a lw ay s o ccu r f o r p ublic

ad m in is tr a to rs in org an iz atio nal, in stitu tio nal, an d so cie ta l co nte x ts . T he

ad m in is tr a to r is n ot in h is o r h er jo b s im ply fo r s e lf -fu lf illm en t b ut to s e rv e

th e citiz en ry b y en han cin g th e p ublic g ood. T he p ublic ad m in is tr a to r is a

fid ucia ry o f th e citiz en s, h old in g th eir co m mon g ood in tr u st. T hus it is

assu m ed h ere th at w om en a n d m en e n te rin g p ublic s e rv ic e m ust b e p re p are d

to f in d f u lf illm en t i n t h is p urs u it.

In C hap te r N in e, I ela b ora te th e desig n ap pro ach an d its re le v an ce to

sig nif ic an t e th ic al p ro ble m s. I re sta te th e a p pro ach in te rm s a p pro pria te fo r

th e p ublic a d m in is tr a tiv e r o le , u sin g c ase s a s e x am ple s o f h ow th e a p pro ach

would b e a p plie d . I c o nclu de th e c h ap te r b y a p ply in g th e d esig n a p pro ach to

a c o ncre te c ase a b out c o ntr a ctin g f o r g overn m en t s e rv ic es.

Chap te r Ten , th e fin al ch ap te r, su m mariz es th e arg um en t dev elo ped

th ro ughout th e pre v io us ch ap te rs an d pre se n ts a m odel of re sp onsib le

ad m in is tr a tio n th at b rin gs to geth er th e co m ponen ts o f re sp onsib le co nduct

fro m C hap te r S ev en a n d t h e c o m ponen ts o f i n div id ual e th ic al a u to nom y f ro m

Chap te r E ig ht. Illu str a tiv e m ate ria l h as b een a d ded to th is c h ap te r to c la rif y

th e p ra ctic al i m plic atio ns o f t h e m odel.

The c ase s in th e b ook a re b ase d o n r e al o ccu rre n ces a n d f ic tio naliz ed o nly

slig htly t o p ro te ct t h e p riv acy o f t h ose w ho p ro vid ed t h em . I n a f e w i n sta n ces

th ey a re c o m posite s o f s e v era l a ctu al c ase s. T hey a re in te n ded p rim arily a s

illu str a tio ns but sh ould als o stim ula te re ad ers ' th in kin g ab out th e eth ic al pro ble m s th ey portr a y . For both th ese re aso ns th e situ atio ns are le ft

unre so lv ed . To in dic ate an outc o m e w ould dim in is h th e ex perie n ce of

dile m ma th ey a re c alc u la te d to e v oke; it w ould a ls o s h ort- c ir c u it th e r e ad er's

ow n r e fle ctio ns. F or th e s a m e r e aso n, th e c ase n arra tiv es a re a b it lo nger a n d

more d eta ile d th an u su al. A gain , th e u ltim ate p urp ose o f

The R esp onsib le

Adm in is tr a to r

is to illu m in ate th e e th ic al s itu atio n o f th e p ublic a d m in is tr a to r

an d c u ltiv ate im ag in ativ e r e fle ctio n a b out it— not to p re sc rib e a p artic u la r s e t

of p ublic se rv ic e v alu es. T his is n ot to su ggest th at a ll a lte rn ativ es a re o f

eq ual v alu e b ut th at th e fo cu s o f th is b ook is n ot o n p re sc rib in g p artic u la r

co urs e s o f a ctio n.

Con clu sio n

This book is la rg ely desc rip tiv e an d an aly tic al; it is only se co ndarily

pre sc rip tiv e, a n d e v en th en o nly in a p artic u la r s e n se . It p re sc rib es a d esig n

ap pro ach to p ublic a d m in is tr a tiv e e th ic s th at in clu des te ch niq ues in div id ual

ad m in is tr a to rs c an u se in a n aly zin g e th ic al d ile m mas th ey c o nfro nt, a n d a

co m bin atio n of org an iz atio nal an d m an ag em en t co m ponen ts fo r fo ste rin g

re sp onsib le a d m in is tr a tio n.

I d o n ot a tte m pt to d ev elo p a s u bsta n tiv e e th ic f o r p ublic a d m in is tr a to rs in

th is b ook. T hat is a n ecessa ry a n d im porta n t u nderta k in g, b ut it is d ealt w ith

in a n oth er o f m y b ooks,

An E th ic o f C itiz e n sh ip fo r P ublic A dm in is tr a tio n

(1 991). T here I dev elo p th e arg um en t th at a norm ativ e eth ic fo r public

ad m in is tr a tio n is to b e fo und in th e e th ic al tr a d itio n o f c itiz en sh ip a s it h as

ev olv ed t h ro ughout U .S . h is to ry . T his tr a d itio n h as a t i ts c o re t h e id eas o f t h e

co m mon g ood, th e im porta n ce o f d em ocra tic p artic ip atio n b y th e c itiz en ry ,

an d th e ultim ate so vere ig nty of th e peo ple . T he public ad m in is tr a to r is

vie w ed th ere a s ta k in g h is o r h er e th ic al n orm s f ro m th ose o f c itiz en sh ip in a

dem ocra tic so cie ty . T he a d m in is tr a to r is a fid ucia ry p ro fe ssio nal c itiz en in

so m e s e n se . F or th e p urp ose s o f th is b ook, s o m e s u ch p ublic s e rv ic e e th ic is

assu m ed . Chapte r T w o

Understa n din g E th ic a l D ecis io n M akin g

J a m es A . M ic h en er's n ovel

Chesa pea ke

(1 978) p ortr a y s th e h is to ry o f tw o

f a m ilie s w ho s e ttle d n ear e ach o th er o n th e s h ore s o f C hesa p eak e B ay d urin g

t h e A m eric an co lo nia l era . A s Q uak ers , th e P ax m ore s te n ded to esp ouse

v alu es in b oth re lig io n a n d p olitic s q uite d if fe re n t fro m th ose o f th e S te ed s,

d ev out R om an C ath olic s. H ow ev er, in s p ite o f th eir d iv erg en t d octr in es a n d

f re q uen t c o nflic ts , t h e t w o f a m ilie s m an ag ed t o l iv e a s n eig hbors , w ith a k in d

o f g ru dgin g r e sp ect a n d a w illin gness t o w ork t h in gs o ut.

In th e c lo sin g p ag es is a s c en e in volv in g th e f a m ily p atr ia rc h s o f th e m id -

1 970s, P use y P ax m ore a n d O wen S te ed . T he t w o m en a re s ittin g o n t h e p orc h

o f t h e P ax m ore h ouse , l o okin g o ut o ver C hesa p eak e B ay a n d r e fle ctin g o n t h e

e v en ts o f W ate rg ate . P use y h ad b een a h ig h-le v el a p poin te e in th e N ix on

W hite H ouse , a n d O wen w as o ne o f th e o il c o m pan y e x ecu tiv es w ho h ad

c o vertly , a n d ille g ally , r a is e d m oney f o r C REEP, th e C om mitte e to R e-e le ct

t h e Pre sid en t. B oth m en 's care ers had been se rio usly dam ag ed by th e

s c an dals , a n d b oth h av e re tu rn ed h om e to re tir e a n d to th in k. D urin g th is

c o nvers a tio n, a n i n sig htf u l a n d p ith y e x ch an ge o ccu rs :

Ste ed

: H ow d o y ou e x pla in t h e c o rru ptio n, t h e n ear-tr e aso n?

Paxm ore

: M en w ith out c h ara cte r s lip fro m o ne p ositio n to th e n ex t. A nd

nev er c o m pre h en d t h e a w fu l d ow nw ard c o urs e t h ey 'r e o n.

Ste ed

: C ould n't N ix on h av e s to pped i t?

Paxm ore

: W oodro w W ils o n c o uld h av e. O r T ed dy R oose v elt. A nd d oes

th ee know why? Becau se th ey had accu m ula te d th ro ugh years of

ap pre n tic esh ip a th eo ry o f g overn m en t. A th eo ry o f d em ocra cy , if th ee

will. A nd t h ey w ould h av e d ete cte d t h e r o t t h e m in ute i t s ta rte d .

Ste ed

: W hy d id n't t h e C alif o rn ia n s?

Paxm ore

: F or a s im ple re aso n. T hey w ere d efic ie n t in e d ucatio n. T hey 'd

gone to th ose c h ro m e-a n d-m ir ro r s c h ools w here p ro ced ure s a re ta u ght, n ot prin cip le s. I d oubt if a n y o ne o f th em h ad e v er c o nte m pla te d a r e al m ora l

pro ble m , i n t h e a b str a ct w here c h ara cte r i s f o rm ed [ p . 1 049].

This bit of dia lo gue su ggests th e underly in g assu m ptio n of th is book:

eth ic a l p ublic a dm in is tr a tio n r e q uir e s a t h eo re tic a l p ersp ectiv e o n t h e r o le o f

th e public adm in is tr a to r

. M ore o ver, th is th eo re tic al pers p ectiv e m ust be

dev elo ped b y p ra ctic in g a d m in is tr a to rs t h ro ugh a c o m bin atio n o f p ro fe ssio nal

ex perie n ce, c o nte m pla tio n, s tu dy, a n d d elib era tio n w ith c o lle ag ues, w heth er

in a s tr u ctu re d c o urs e o r t h ro ugh s e lf -m otiv ate d i n quir y .

The th eo rie s of oth ers , in clu din g sc h ola rs fro m vario us dis c ip lin es an d

his to ric al perio ds, are esse n tia l in gre d ie n ts in a pro fe ssio nal eth ic , but a

fu ndam en ta l a ssu m ptio n o f t h is b ook i s t h at k now in g t h e t h oughts o f o th ers i s

only th e b eg in nin g. A dm in is tr a to rs m ust a ls o d ev elo p s k ill in th in kin g a b out

eth ic al p ro ble m s, to w ard th e e n d o f c re atin g a w ork in g p ro fe ssio nal e th ic o f

th eir o w n. W ith out c u ltiv atin g th is a b ility to th eo riz e a n d g en era liz e fro m

ex perie n ce, n o p ublic a d m in is tr a to r c an t r a n sc en d t h e b oundarie s o f p artic u la r

ev en ts to c o m pre h en d a n d a sse ss th em . W ith out th e illu m in atio n b orn o f th e

marria g e o f a b str a ct th ought a n d p ra ctic al e x perie n ce, it is im possib le to s e e

where w e a re g oin g. C hoic e is c o nstr a in ed a n d f re ed om is u ltim ate ly s tu nte d

by th e u nfo re se en c o nse q uen ces o f o ur a ctio ns. W ith out th e m ora l c o m pass

cre ate d b y r e g ula r d elib era tio n w ith o th ers a b out r e al e th ic al is su es, w heth er

fe llo w p ra ctitio ners , e le cte d o ffic ia ls , o r c itiz en s, o ur e th ic s m ay b e n arro w

an d s e lf -s e rv in g.

This c h ap te r p re se n ts a se q uen ce o f ste p s y ou m ig ht e m plo y in th in kin g

ab out e th ic al is su es y ou c o nfro nt. T he g oal is n ot o nly to d ev elo p s k ills in

re so lv in g p artic u la r situ atio ns b ut als o to cu ltiv ate a h ab it o f u sin g su ch

in sta n ces a s o pportu nitie s to d ev elo p a n d re fin e a w ork in g

th eo ry

o f e th ic al

co nduct. C ase m ate ria l (b ase d o n a ctu al s itu atio ns b ut p artia lly fic tio naliz ed

to p ro te ct th e p ers o ns in volv ed ) is in tr o duced h ere a n d th ro ugho ut th e r e st o f

th e b ook to illu str a te th e tr e atm en t o f c o ncre te a d m in is tr a tiv e p ro ble m s. T o

stim ula te y our t h in kin g, t h e c ase s a re g en era lly l e ft u nre so lv ed .

Eth ic a l P ro b le m s

Im ag in e th at y ou h av e b een re cen tly h ir e d a s th e m an ag er o f a m unic ip al

dep artm en t o f p ark s a n d r e cre atio n. S oon a fte r y ou a ssu m ed y our d utie s, y ou dis c o vere d th at th e pay ro ll cle rk w as fa ls if y in g th e pay ro ll acco unt by

co ntin uin g to c arry th e n am es o f la id -o ff e m plo yees. W hen th e c le rk p ic k ed

up th e p ay ro ll a t c ity h all, h e w ould p ull o ut th ose c h eck s, e n dors e a n d c ash

th em , a n d k eep t h e m oney .

Most a d m in is tr a to rs w ould h av e n o d if fic u lty r e co gniz in g th at th is c le rk is

not o nly in volv ed in u neth ic al c o nduct b ut is a ls o c le arly v io la tin g th e la w .

Both m ora l an d le g al sa n ctio ns ag ain st ste alin g are w ell esta b lis h ed an d

gen era lly accep te d . Y ou are im med ia te ly aw are th at th is beh av io r is

unaccep ta b le a n d m ust b e sto pped , a lth ough y ou w ould p ro bab ly p au se to

th in k c are fu lly a b out th e b est c o urs e o f a ctio n. Y our re sp onsib ility fo r th e

im ag e o f th e o rg an iz atio n m ay s u ggest fir in g th e c le rk q uie tly , in volv in g a s

fe w o th er p eo ple a s p ossib le . H ow ev er, y our re sp onsib ility fo r m ain ta in in g

th e p ublic tr u st m ay le ad y ou to c o nsid er fo rm al c h arg es a n d p ro se cu tio n.

Som etim es, as in th is case , th e eth ic al situ atio n is quite cle ar, but th e

dem an ds o f a d m in is tr a tiv e re sp onsib ility fo r re so lv in g it a re m uch le ss so .

More ofte n , how ev er, both th e eth ic al is su e an d its im plic atio ns fo r

ad m in is tr a tiv e r e sp onsib ility a re c o m ple x a n d a m big uous.

Consid er an oth er situ atio n. Y ou are th e dir e cto r of a unit in a fe d era l

re g ula to ry ag en cy th at is ch arg ed w ith m onito rin g th e use of pote n tia lly

harm fu l c o m merc ia l c h em ic als . L in da, a ju nio r p ro je ct m an ag er u nder y our

su perv is io n, is r e sp onsib le f o r s tu dyin g a b ro ad -s p ectr u m in se ctic id e u se d in

ag ric u ltu re b y s m all g ra in f a rm ers , la rg e tr u ck g ard en ers , a n d c o tto n f a rm ers ,

an d in th e liv esto ck in dustr y a s a n a n im al s p ra y . S he h as b een a ssig ned to

dete rm in e w heth er th is p ro duct sh ould b e re m oved fro m th e m ark et. A t a

party , L in da m et a m an nam ed G eo rg e, w ho sh e la te r le arn ed w as th e

Wash in gto n re p re se n ta tiv e fo r th e in se ctic id e m an ufa ctu re r. A fte r se v era l

date s w ith G eo rg e, s h e b ecam e r a th er f o nd o f h im a n d w an te d to p urs u e th e

re la tio nsh ip . H ow ev er, L in da re aliz ed th at th eir p ro fe ssio nal ro le s c re ate d a

pote n tia l c o nflic t o f in te re st fo r h er, a n d sh e d ecid ed to te ll y ou a b out th e

situ atio n. S he in te n ded to c o ntin ue s e ein g G eo rg e, s h e s a id ; s h e c o nsid ere d

hers e lf m atu re e n ough to m ain ta in a s e p ara tio n b etw een h er p ro fe ssio nal a n d

priv ate liv es. L in da in sis te d th at h er f e elin gs f o r G eo rg e w ould n ot in flu en ce

her ju dgm en t in a n y w ay ; in fa ct s h e a n d G eo rg e h ad n ev er e v en d is c u sse d

th e c h em ic al i n q uestio n.

In th is case th e eth ic al situ atio n is m uch le ss cle ar. H as L in da done an yth in g th at re p re se n ts a bre ach of pro fe ssio nal eth ic s? B ecau se of her

re la tio nsh ip w ith G eo rg e, it m ig ht w ell be dif fic u lt fo r her to m ain ta in

obje ctiv ity in d is c h arg in g h er d utie s. B ut p erh ap s it m ig ht n ot b e. P eo ple

dif fe r in th eir ab ility to m an ag e te n sio ns o f th is k in d. A nd w hat is y our

re sp onsib ility ? I s i t m ore i m porta n t t o a v oid e v en t h e a p peara n ce o f u neth ic al

co nduct w ith in your org an iz atio n or to su pport an em plo yee's rig ht to

fre ed om in her priv ate lif e ? S hould L in da be tr u ste d until her beh av io r

dem onstr a te s o th erw is e ? W hat a re y our a lte rn ativ es?

To in te n sif y th e quan dary a bit, im ag in e th e fo llo w in g situ atio n. Y our

sp ouse w ork s fo r a co ntr a cto r th at pro vid es su pport se rv ic es to your

org an iz atio n u nder c o ntr a ct. T he tw o o f y ou w ork in r o le s th at d o n ot r e q uir e

you to d eal w ith e ach o th er p ro fe ssio nally , n or is th ere a n y p ossib le c o nflic t

of in te re st, e ith er re al o r p erc eiv ed , u nder n orm al c ir c u m sta n ces. H ow ev er,

you le arn th ro ugh th e gra p ev in e th at th e co ntr a ct w ith your sp ouse 's

org an iz atio n m ay be te rm in ate d in th e near fu tu re . B ecau se th e sp ouse 's

org an iz atio n is s m all, th e lo ss o f th e c o ntr a ct is lik ely to r e su lt in b udget c u ts

an d co nse q uen tly his te rm in atio n. A lth ough you are a m an ag er in your

org an iz atio n, y ou h av e n o d ir e ct o r in dir e ct d ecis io n-m ak in g a u th ority o ver

th is c o ntr a ct, s o t h ere i s n o l e g al c o nflic t o f i n te re st. H ow ev er, y ou k now t h at

th e co ntr a cto r is u naw are o f th e p ossib le co ntr a ct te rm in atio n, an d if th at

in fo rm atio n w ere d iv ulg ed , it c o uld e ro de p erfo rm an ce. F or th at re aso n th is

in fo rm atio n i s c o nsid ere d s e n sitiv e a n d c o nfid en tia l w ith in y our o rg an iz atio n.

If y ou te ll y our s p ouse in o rd er to g iv e h im tim e to p la n f o r a p ossib le la y off,

he w ill no doubt fe el so m e oblig atio n to te ll his em plo yer an d fe llo w

em plo yees.

Als o , you are pain fu lly aw are of tw o oth er pro ble m s. F ir s t, your ow n

fin an cia l w ell- b ein g is tie d to th at o f y our s p ouse ; if h e is la id o ff w ith s h ort

notic e, b oth o f y ou w ill s u ffe r fin an cia lly . S eco nd, if y ou re m ain s ile n t a n d

th e c o ntr a ct is te rm in ate d , s o oner o r la te r y our s p ouse w ill f in d o ut th at y ou

knew w hat w as c o m in g a n d k ep t it fro m h im . T hat fa ilu re to b e h onest a n d

fo rth co m in g in a m arita l r e la tio nsh ip w ill lik ely h urt y our s p ouse d eep ly a n d

dam ag e t h e m arria g e.

In th is case fu ndam en ta l lo yaltie s an d atte n dan t oblig atio ns co m e in to

dir e ct c o nflic t. W here d o y our p rim ary o blig atio ns lie : w ith th e e m plo yer o r

with th e sp ouse ? C an y ou tr u st y our sp ouse n ot to te ll h is em plo yer an d co lle ag ues? S hould y ou e x pect th at o f h im ? C an y ou tr u st y our b oss e n ough

to d is c u ss t h is w ith h er a n d t r y t o w ork o ut s o m e k in d o f a cco m modatio n t h at

does n ot re q uir e y ou to sa crif ic e e ith er y our m arria g e o r y our jo b? S hould

you e x pect th at o f y our b oss? D oes a b oss b ear a n y e th ic al o blig atio n f o r th e

well- b ein g o f e m plo yees b ey ond t h e w ork pla ce?

Consid er y et a n oth er s itu atio n. A s o il b acte riu m c o m mon to w arm c lim ate s

can s o m etim es b e fo und in th e g ro undw ate r o f s u ch a re as. It s e ld om c au se s

dis e ase in h um an s, b ut w hen it d oes, th e in fe ctio n is s e v ere . T he b acte riu m

en te rs t h e b ody t h ro ugh a n o pen w ound a n d p ro duces i n fe ctio ns r e su ltin g i n a

morta lity r a te o f 7 5 p erc en t.

You a re a d ep artm en t m an ag er fo r a p ublic u tility d is tr ic t th at p ro duces

ele ctr ic ity th ro ugh s te am -d riv en tu rb in es. T he d ep artm en t h as c o nstr u cte d a

la k e fo r th is p urp ose , w hic h is a ls o o pen to th e p ublic fo r re cre atio nal u se .

Recen tly a m an w as in ju re d in a b oatin g a ccid en t th at s e v ere ly la cera te d h is

le g s. H e d ev elo ped g an gre n e a n d, a fte r a d ouble a m puta tio n, e v en tu ally d ie d .

A te ch nic ia n in your dep artm en t su sp ecte d th at th e m an m ig ht hav e

co ntr a cte d th e b acte ria l in fe ctio n, a n d h e d ecid ed to ru n te sts . H e re p orte d

th at th e b acte riu m is in deed in e v id en ce th ro ughout th e la k e, a n d a lth ough h e

can not b e c erta in w ith out a n a u to psy , h e b elie v es it w as th e c au se o f d eath .

Has th e d ep artm en t c o m mitte d a n u neth ic al a ct b y n ot m onito rin g th e q uality

of th e w ate r m ore c are fu lly ? D oes it h av e a m ora l o blig atio n to in fo rm th e

public h ealth a u th oritie s, th e v ic tim 's fa m ily , o r th e g en era l p ublic ? W hat is

your r e sp onsib ility to y our o rg an iz atio n in th e f a ce o f p ossib le litig atio n a n d

public o utc ry ? W hat is y our r e sp onsib ility to th ose w ho h av e b een u sin g th e

la k e f o r r e cre atio n a n d t h ose w ho m ay u se i t i n t h e f u tu re ?

Here y ou a re d ealin g n ot s im ply w ith th e q uestio nab le o r c le arly im mora l

actio ns o f a p artic u la r in div id ual b ut ra th er w ith a m atte r o f o rg an iz atio nal

polic y . H ow s h ould th e d ep artm en t d efin e its o blig atio ns to s o cie ty ? D oes it

ow e s o m eth in g to th e d ecease d m an 's f a m ily a n d to o th ers w ho m ay u se th e

la k e? S hould i t m ere ly t r y t o r id t h e l a k e o f t h e b acte riu m a n d l e av e i t o pen t o

use ?

Eth ic s a s a n A ctiv e P ro cess

As th ese case s dem onstr a te , eth ic al is su es aris e in m an y fo rm s fo r ad m in is tr a to rs , but th ey nearly alw ay s ra is e dif fic u lt questio ns of

ad m in is tr a tiv e re sp onsib ility . T he a n sw ers w e g iv e to th ese q uestio ns o ver

tim e a m ount t o a d e f a cto a d m in is tr a tiv e e th ic . T he c en tr a l t h esis o f t h is b ook

is th at it is th ro ugh th is p ro cess o f d efin in g p ro fe ssio nal re sp onsib ility in

sp ecif ic , co ncre te ad m in is tr a tiv e situ atio ns th at an opera tio nal eth ic is

dev elo ped . E very a d m in is tr a to r h as s u ch a n e th ic b y v ir tu e o f h av in g m ad e

decis io ns a b out e th ic al i s su es, e v en w hen t h e d ecis io n i s t o i g nore a p ro ble m .

A decis io n to ta k e no actio n is in fa ct a decis io n ab out pers o nal

re sp onsib ility .

This o pera tio nal e th ic , h am mere d o ut i n a ctu al d ecis io n m ak in g, i s t h e b asic

co ncern h ere . P ut in to th e la n guag e o f e th ic s, th is w ork in g e th ic b eco m es th e

su bsta n ce o f o ne's p ro fe ssio nal c h ara cte r o ver tim e. It c re ate s a n in clin atio n

or p re d is p ositio n to b eh av e in c erta in w ay s, w hic h is o ne c o m mon w ay o f

unders ta n din g th e m ean in g of th e te rm

ch ara cte r

. M an y pro fe ssio nal

asso cia tio ns, b usin ess fir m s, a n d g overn m en ta l o rg an iz atio ns h av e a d opte d

co des o f e th ic s. T hey a m ount to o ffic ia l sta te m en ts o f a p pro pria te c o nduct

th at re fle ct n oble b ut o fte n g en era l a n d a b str a ct p rin cip le s. F orm al c o des o f

th is kin d do se rv e a use fu l fu nctio n, but w ith out th e su pport of oth er

te ch niq ues in volv in g d ay -to -d ay d ecis io n m ak in g, th ey te n d to b e in effe ctiv e

as a w ay o f a ch ie v in g d esir e d c o nduct. T hey d o n ot h av e a n im pact o n th e

opera tio nal e th ic o f p ro fe ssio nals f o r w hom th ey w ere w ritte n ; th ey n ev er g et

to th e le v el o f in te rn al e th ic al d ev elo pm en t w here c h ara cte r is fo rm ed a n d

in te g rity o f c o nduct d ev elo ped . S uch c o des o f e th ic s s e rv e a n eed ed f u nctio n

of c la rif y in g m in im um s ta n dard s o f c o nduct, m uch a s th e la w fu nctio ns fo r

th e l a rg er s o cie ty , b ut t h ey r e m ain e x te rn ally i m pose d c o ntr o ls .

As d is c u sse d i n t h e p re ced in g c h ap te r, t h e f o cu s o f t h is b ook i s e th ic s a s a n

activ e pro cess of desig n, an ongoin g pro cess th at occu rs when ev er

cir c u m sta n ces f o rc e u s t o d eal w ith c o nflic t, t e n sio n, u ncerta in ty , a n d r is k . A s

ad m in is tr a to rs d efin e th e b oundarie s an d co nte n t o f th eir re sp onsib ility in

re so lv in g sp ecif ic eth ic al d ile m mas b oth g re at an d sm all, th ey cre ate fo r

th em se lv es a n e th ic al id en tity a n d fo rm c h ara cte r tr a its . O fte n th is is d one

with out c o nsis te n t, i n te n tio nal, a n d s y ste m atic r e fle ctio n, b ut t h at n eed n ot b e

th e c ase . S kill i n a d dre ssin g e th ic al i s su es c an b e l e arn ed a n d c u ltiv ate d i f w e

re co gniz e th e im porta n ce o f d oin g s o . W e c an v ie w o ur tr e atm en t o f e th ic al

pro ble m s a s a n o ngoin g p ro cess o f d esig nin g th e b est c o urs e s o f a ctio n fo r sp ecif ic situ atio ns w e fa ce, w ith in th e c o nstr a in ts o f tim e a n d in fo rm atio n.

Our in itia l s te p m ust b e to e sta b lis h a f ra m ew ork f o r u nders ta n din g e th ic s in

dynam ic ra th er th an sta tic te rm s. T he fo llo w in g fra m ew ork fo r eth ic al

decis io n m ak in g i llu str a te s t h is d ynam ic p ro cess.

Lev els o f E th ic a l R efle ctio n

Hen ry D av id A ik en ( 1 962) c o nstr u cte d a f ra m ew ork f o r e x pla in in g th e f lu id

natu re o f e th ic al a rg um en t t h at w e c an a d opt f o r u nders ta n din g t h e p ro cess o f

ord erin g o ur v alu es an d m ak in g d ecis io ns ab out eth ic al d ile m mas. A ik en

assu m es th at in a b ro ad s e n se , e th ic s h as to d o w ith c o ncep ts s u ch a s

good

,

rig ht

, a n d

ought

, b ut in th e a re n a o f e v ery day lif e , c o nsid erin g th e p ra ctic al

mean in gs o f th ese a b str a ct c o ncep ts c au se s u s to d eal w ith th em a t d if fe re n t

le v els of se rio usn ess an d sy ste m atic re fle ctio n. O fte n w e sim ply ex pre ss

em otio n a b out w hat i s g ood o r w hat s o m eo ne o ught t o d o. L ess f re q uen tly w e

fa ce eth ic al questio ns th at fo rc e us to re fle ct lo ng an d hard ab out our

fu ndam en ta l w orld vie w — ev en t h e m ean in g o f l if e i ts e lf .

Fro m A ik en 's p ers p ectiv e it is p ossib le to id en tif y fo ur d is tin ct le v els a t

whic h w e d eal w ith e th ic al c o ncern s.

The E xpre ssiv e L evel

Man y tim es e v ery d ay w e fin d o urs e lv es s im ply v en tin g o ur fe elin gs a b out

so m eth in g. W hen y ou l e arn ed a b out t h e m is d eed s o f t h e p ay ro ll c le rk i n y our

dep artm en t, Lin da's in volv em en t with Geo rg e, th e possib le co ntr a ct

te rm in atio n, o r th e p re se n ce o f th e b acte riu m in th e la k e w ate r, y ou m ay w ell

hav e re sp onded fir s t a t th e e x pre ssiv e le v el: “ T hat s tu pid c le rk s h ould h av e

know n b ette r!” “ L in da, th is r e la tio nsh ip d is tu rb s m e d eep ly .” “ W hat d id I d o

to dese rv e bein g cau ght in th is bin d betw een m y sp ouse an d m y

org an iz atio n?” “ W e m ust h av e a b unch o f in co m pete n ts m an ag in g th e la k e

opera tio n!” These sp onta n eo us, unre fle ctiv e ex pre ssio ns of em otio n are

perh ap s th e m ost co m mon fo rm o f v alu e ju dgm en t. T hey n eith er in vite a

re p ly nor atte m pt to pers u ad e oth ers . T hey pro vid e neith er ev id en ce nor

deta ile d d esc rip tio ns o f a s ta te o f a ffa ir s . H ow ev er, d ep en din g o n w ho u tte rs

th em an d how in te n se ly , th ey m ay be fo llo w ed by a m ore ra tio nal an d

sy ste m atic t r e atm en t o f t h e p ro ble m . The M ora l R ule s L evel

The l e v el o f m ora l r u le s i s t h e f ir s t l e v el a t w hic h s e rio us q uestio ns a re r a is e d

an d se rio us an sw ers are giv en . W e ad dre ss th e pro ble m of ap pro pria te

co nduct a n d b eg in t o a sse ss a lte rn ativ es a n d c o nse q uen ces. W e c o nsid er t h ese

co urs e s o f a ctio n a n d th eir a n tic ip ate d o utc o m es in th e lig ht o f c erta in r u le s,

max im s, a n d p ro verb s t h at w e h old a s m ora l g uid es. F or e x am ple :

“A lw ay s b e a g ood t e am p la y er.”

“L oyalty t o y our c lie n ts c o m es f ir s t.”

“If y ou'r e n ot p art o f t h e s o lu tio n, y ou'r e p art o f t h e p ro ble m .”

“H onesty i s t h e b est p olic y .”

“T ru th w ill w in o ut.”

“M y c o untr y , r ig ht o r w ro ng.”

“N ev er f ig ht a b attle y ou c an 't w in .”

“T ak e c are o f n um ber o ne.”

“T he p ublic s h ould b e t r u ste d .”

“L ove y our n eig hbor a s y ours e lf .”

“D o u nto o th ers a s y ou w ould h av e t h em d o u nto y ou.”

“D on't a ir d ir ty l in en o uts id e t h e o rg an iz atio n.”

“It i s e asie r t o a sk f o rg iv en ess t h an t o a sk p erm is sio n.”

“It i s b ette r t o b e s a fe t h an s o rry .”

“G o a lo ng t o g et a lo ng.”

“If i t a in 't b ro ke, d on't f ix i t.”

Som e o f th e m ore c o lo rfu l m ora l r u le s e m erg e a ro und p artic u la r r o le s a n d

re fle ct th e in fo rm al m ora l c o de o f th ose ro le s a n d th e o rg an iz atio nal c u ltu re

in w hic h t h ey a re e n acte d . H ere a re a f e w f ro m t h e f ie ld o f l a w e n fo rc em en t:

“It i s b ette r t o b e t r ie d b y t w elv e t h an c arrie d b y s ix .”

“Y ou c an 't m ak e a n o m ele t w ith out b re ak in g a f e w e g gs.”

“W hat g oes a ro und c o m es a ro und.”

“D on't e m barra ss t h e b ure au .”

“D on't r a t o n a f e llo w o ffic er.”

These a re e x am ple s o f m ora l ru le s w e a cq uir e th ro ugh th e so cia liz atio n

pro cess fro m o ur fa m ilie s, re lig io us a ffilia tio ns, e d ucatio n, a n d p ro fe ssio nal

ex perie n ces. F or b ette r o r w ors e , t h ey p ro vid e r u le s o f t h um b f o r a p pra is in g a situ atio n a n d d ecid in g w hat o ught t o b e d one.

Consid er th e p ro ble m o f L in da a n d G eo rg e. A fte r y our in itia l e m otio nal

re actio n, y ou h av e to th in k a b out h ow to h an dle th is h ig hly s e n sitiv e s ta te o f

affa ir s . S om e a lte rn ativ es c o m e i m med ia te ly t o m in d:

Ord er L in da t o s to p s e ein g G eo rg e.

Tra n sfe r h er t o a n oth er t a sk .

Dis c u ss t h e m atte r w ith y our s u perv is o r.

Tru st L in da t o d o t h e j o b w ith out b ein g b ia se d b y t h e r e la tio nsh ip .

Then y ou c o nsid er t h e p ossib le c o nse q uen ces:

Lin da m ay r e sig n.

Pro gre ss o n i n vestig atin g t h e c h em ic al m ay b e d ela y ed .

The m ed ia m ay p ic k u p t h e s to ry .

A b ia se d d ecis io n m ay b e re ach ed ab out th e ch em ic al, w ith se rio us

co nse q uen ces f o r t h e p ublic .

You m ay b e b la m ed f o r ir re sp on sib le c o nduct if y our s u perio r d is c o vers

th e r e la tio nsh ip w ith out b ein g i n fo rm ed b y y ou.

As y ou e v alu ate th e a lte rn ativ es a n d th eir p ossib le c o nse q uen ces, v ario us

mora l ru le s a n d m ax im s c o m e to m in d a s re fe re n ce p oin ts fo r a rriv in g a t a

decis io n:

“Y ou s h ould b e fa ir w ith s u bord in ate s u nder y our s u perv is io n.” W ould

you h an dle th is situ atio n d if fe re n tly if it in volv ed a m ale m em ber o f

your s ta ff?

“A void ev en th e ap peara n ce o f ev il.” E ven if L in da p erfo rm s in an

obje ctiv e, p ro fe ssio nal m an ner, w ill th e c re d ib ility o f y our o rg an iz atio n

be e ro ded i f t h is s itu atio n i s p ic k ed u p b y t h e p re ss?

“H onesty is th e b est p olic y .” I f y ou ta k e a n y a ctio n th at L in da p erc eiv es

as p unis h m en t o r d is tr u st, a re y ou d is c o ura g in g h onest c o m munic atio n

fro m y our sta ff? S hould y ou te ll y our b oss, o r sh ould y ou m ain ta in

Lin da's co nfid en ce an d accep t re sp onsib ility fo r dealin g w ith th e

situ atio n y ours e lf ?

Most o f th e tim e th e p ro ble m is re so lv ed a t th is le v el. A s w e re v ie w th e

fa cts o f th e c ase , th e a lte rn ativ es f o r a ctio n, a n d th eir lik ely c o nse q uen ces o n

th e o ne h an d, a n d a sso cia te t h em w ith o ur s to ck o f r e le v an t m ora l r u le s o n t h e

oth er, th e f ie ld o f a lte rn ativ es b eg in s to n arro w a n d o ne o r tw o r u le s e m erg e as c ru cia l. W e m ove to w ard a d ecis io n, w ith th e p ra ctic al c o nse q uen ces a n d

th e m ora l j u stif ic atio n r e la te d i n s o m e w ay t h at i s a ccep ta b le t o u s.

Our d ecis io ns a re n ot n ecessa rily c o nsis te n t f ro m c ase to c ase . A t th e le v el

of m ora l ru le s, w hic h is w here m ost p ra ctic al a d m in is tr a tiv e d ecis io ns a re

mad e, r a tio nality a n d s y ste m atic r e fle ctio n a re in volv ed b ut o nly in a lim ite d ,

pie cem eal fa sh io n. M ost o f th e tim e w e are ad h oc p ro ble m so lv ers , n ot

co m pre h en siv e m ora l p hilo so phers . H ow ev er, o n o ccasio n w e a re d riv en to

th e n ex t le v el o f g en era lity a n d a b str a ctio n, u su ally b ecau se w e a re u nab le to

re ach a d ecis io n b y a p ply in g o ur a v aila b le r e p erto ir e o f p ra ctic al m ora l r u le s.

The E th ic a l A naly sis L evel

When th e a v aila b le m ora l ru le s p ro ve in effe ctiv e in a p artic u la r c ase , w hen

th ey c o nflic t w ith e ach o th er, o r w hen th e a ctio ns th ey s e em to p re sc rib e d o

not fe el rig ht, a fu ndam en ta l re co nsid era tio n of our m ora l co de m ay be

re q uir e d . I n th e n orm al r o utin e o f th e a d m in is tr a tiv e r o le , w e d o n ot u su ally

underta k e th is k in d o f b asic re a sse ssm en t. H ow ev er, s o m etim es a n is su e is

uniq ue, s o c o m ple x , o r s o p ro fo und in th e c o nse q uen ces o f its r e so lu tio n th at

we h av e n o c h oic e b ut to r e ex am in e th e e th ic al p rin cip le s th at a re im plic it in

our r o utin e n orm s f o r c o nduct.

A b rie f b ut a d eq uate d efin itio n o f

prin cip le

is “ a g en era l la w o r ru le th at

pro vid es a g uid e fo r a ctio n.” A n

eth ic a l p rin cip le

is a s ta te m en t c o ncern in g

th e c o nduct o r s ta te o f b ein g th at is r e q uir e d f o r th e f u lf illm en t o f a v alu e; it

ex plic itly lin ks a v alu e w ith a g en era l m ode o f a ctio n. F or e x am ple , ju stic e

may b e c o nsid ere d a s ig nif ic an t v alu e, b ut t h e t e rm i ts e lf d oes n ot t e ll u s w hat

ru le f o r c o nduct o r w hat s ta te o f s o cie ty w ould f o llo w if w e in clu ded ju stic e

in o ur v alu e s y ste m . W e w ould n eed a p rin cip le o f ju stic e to s h ow u s w hat

patte rn o f a ctio n w ould re fle ct ju stic e a s a v alu e. A c o m mon fo rm o f th e

ju stic e p rin cip le is “ T re at e q uals e q ually a n d u neq uals u neq ually .” W e m ig ht

in te rp re t th is p rin cip le as m ean in g th at if all ad ult citiz en s are p olitic ally

eq ual, th ey s h ould a ll h av e th e s a m e p olitic al rig hts a n d o blig atio ns. If o ne

has t h e v ote , a ll m ust h av e i t.

Or i f w e l o ok a t a n oth er v alu e, t r u th , w e m ig ht s ta rt w ith a g en era l p rin cip le

to i n dic ate i ts m ean in g f o r c o nduct a n d t h en d ev elo p m ore s p ecif ic s ta te m en ts

fo r p artic u la r c o nditio ns. G en era lly w e m ig ht s u pport th is p rin cip le : “ A lw ay s

te ll t h e t r u th .” B ut w hen f a ced w ith a p artic u la r s itu atio n, w e m ig ht r e v is e t h e prin cip le : “A lw ay s te ll th e tr u th unle ss in nocen t th ir d partie s w ould be

se rio usly h arm ed .”

Defin in g th e e th ic al d im en sio ns o f a p ro ble m m ay re q uir e te asin g o ut n ot

only th e v alu es th at a re in c o nflic t b ut a ls o th e u nartic u la te d p rin cip le s th at

in dic ate th e m utu ally ex clu siv e kin ds of co nduct th ose valu es dic ta te .

Oth erw is e v alu es can b e fa r to o v ag ue to h av e m uch m ean in g in eth ic al

an aly sis . T o s a y w e b elie v e in fre ed om o r lib erty c o nvey s m ean in g o f o nly

th e m ost g en era l s o rt. I f, h ow ev er, w e id en tif y a n d e la b ora te p rin cip le s a b out

lib erty , th e m ean in g b eco m es m ore s p ecif ic a n d e th ic ally u se fu l. W e m ig ht,

fo r ex am ple , in dic ate th at if w e v alu e lib erty , w e o ught n ot to in te rfe re ,

with out sp ecia l ju stif ic atio n, in th e c h ose n c o urs e o f a n y ra tio nal b ein g o r

im pose o n h im c o nditio ns th at w ill p re v en t h im fro m p urs u in g h is c h ose n

co urs e s o f a ctio n. A lth ough th is s ta te m en t d oes n ot p re sc rib e p re cis e ly w hat

sh ould be done in ev ery situ atio n, it does pro vid e so m e co nditio ns an d

qualif ic atio ns f o r t h e r a n ge o f c o nduct t h at f a lls u nder l ib erty .

There a re se v era l w ay s to tr a in p eo ple to c la rif y th is d is tin ctio n b etw een

valu es an d prin cip le s an d cu ltiv ate th e sk ill of th in kin g in a prin cip le d

fa sh io n. O ne w ay is to g iv e th e tr a in in g p artic ip an ts a lis t o f v alu es, o r h av e

th em m ak e u p th eir o w n, a n d th en a sk th em to d ev elo p th ese v alu es in to

sta te m en ts o f p rin cip le , v ary in g fro m b rie f a n d g en era l to h ig hly e la b ora te

an d sp ecif ic . A noth er is to sp en d tim e d ev elo pin g p rin cip le s a s p art o f th e

ex erc is e in d efin in g e th ic al is su es d is c u sse d la te r in th is c h ap te r. F ir s t, h av e

th e p artic ip an ts id en tif y th e c o nte n din g v alu es in a c ase ; th en a sk th em to

write s ta te m en ts o f p rin cip le fo r e ach v alu e. F in ally , w hen tim e a n d in te re st

perm it, re ad in gs o n sp ecif ic eth ic al p rin cip le s m ig ht b e assig ned , su ch as

Sis se la B ok (1 984) o n se cre cy an d tr u th fu ln ess o r Jo hn R aw ls (1 971) o n

ju stic e.

To g et a b ette r i d ea o f t h e u se o f p rin cip le a t t h e l e v el o f e th ic al a n aly sis , l e t

us re tu rn to th e e x am ple o f th e c o nta m in ate d la k e. If y ou, th e d ep artm en t

man ag er, dis c o ver th at eig ht oth er peo ple hav e dev elo ped sy m pto m s

su sp ic io usly s im ila r to th ose a sso cia te d w ith th e b acte riu m , th e p ro ble m w ill

hav e c h an ged sig nif ic an tly . N ow th e fa te o f h um an liv es m ay c le arly a n d

dir e ctly d ep en d o n w hat y ou d o; e x ped itio us a ctio n is r e q uir e d . B ecau se th e

co nse q uen ces fo r th e d ep artm en t w ill b e se rio us in deed , y ou g o to y our

su perv is o r w ith out d ela y . You a re m et w ith a n u nex pecte d ly c o ol a n d c au tio us re sp onse . H e lis te n s

an d a sk s a f e w q uestio ns b ut s e em s n ot to s h are y our s e n se o f u rg en cy . A fte r

a l e n gth y d is c u ssio n, d urin g w hic h y ou b eco m e i n cre asin gly a n gry , h e f in ally

in fo rm s y ou th at h e h as k now n a b out th e b acte riu m f o r s o m e tim e. W hen th e

la k e w as b uilt m ore th an tw o y ears a g o, th e b acte riu m w as d ete cte d th ro ugh

ro utin e w ate r a n aly se s. B ecau se th ere w as n o p ra ctic al w ay o f rid din g th e

wate r o f th is b acte riu m an d b ecau se th e u tility d is tr ic t h ad n eed ed p ublic

su pport f o r t h e p ro je ct, h e h ad d ecid ed t o k eep t h e e n tir e m atte r q uie t. H e h ad

been ad vis e d th at at ex is tin g le v els o f co nta m in atio n, th e ris k o f h um an

in fe ctio n w as l o w .

The a d m in is tr a to r o rd ers y ou to ta k e n o a ctio n a n d in ste ad to le av e th e

pro ble m e n tir e ly i n h is h an ds. H e t e lls y ou t h ere i s l ittle l ik elih ood t h at a n y o f

th e e ig ht p eo ple c o uld b e t r e ate d e ffe ctiv ely f o r t h e e x posu re a t t h is p oin t a n d

th at a n y a ctio n w ould je o pard iz e th e fu tu re o f th is fa cility a n d p re cip ita te

se rio us d am ag e to b oth th e d ep artm en t's p ublic im ag e a n d its f in an cia l w ell-

bein g.

What d o y ou d o? N one o f y ou r w ell- w orn p re cep ts a b out lo yalty to th e

org an iz atio n o r s o cia l r e sp onsib ility h elp h ere . Y ou a re n ot s a tis fie d to k eep

quie t a n d l e av e i t t o t h e b oss, b ut y ou h av e n o h ope o f c h an gin g h is m in d. H e

se em s f ir m ly c o m mitte d t o w aitin g t h e s itu atio n o ut, h opin g i t w ill b lo w o ver.

And if y ou g o to th e p ublic o r th e lo cal e le cte d o ffic ia ls w ith th e s to ry , y ou

will l o se y our j o b a n d p ro bab ly h av e g re at d if fic u lty f in din g a n oth er o ne.

Confro nte d w ith th is k in d o f d ile m ma, y ou b eg in to re fle ct o n th e th in gs

you v alu e m ost. Y ou a sk y ours e lf w hat y ou a re w illin g to r is k a n d w hat y ou

wan t t o p re se rv e a t a ll c o sts . M ore s p ecif ic ally , y ou t h in k a b out y our p ers o nal

in te g rity , p ro fe ssio nal re p uta tio n, fin an cia l se cu rity , th e w ell- b ein g o f y our

fa m ily , t h e i m porta n ce o f y our c are er, a n d t h e e x te n t o f y our o blig atio n t o t h e

org an iz atio n, i ts e m plo yees, a n d m an ag em en t. Y ou w onder w hat y ou o w e t h e

public ; y ou c o nsid er y our d uty t o t h e l o cal e le cte d o ffic ia ls . F urth erm ore , y ou

beg in t o im ag in e th e f u tu re c o nse q uen ces o f a llo w in g th is k in d o f m an ag eria l

co nduct to c o ntin ue. A s y ou e n gag e in th is in ven to ry a n d e v alu atio n o f y our

fu ndam en ta l p rin cip le s, a k in d o f r o ugh h ie ra rc h y b eg in s t o e m erg e.

This p artic u la r d ile m ma c au se s y ou to c la rif y a n d re o rd er y our p rio ritie s.

You re aliz e th at if y ou a re to c o ntin ue in y our p ositio n, y ou m ust m ain ta in

your o blig atio n to a c en tr a l p rin cip le — th e p ublic in te re st. Y ou to ok a n o ath to uphold th e public in te re st w hen you accep te d th e positio n. A ll oth er

co m mitm en ts a n d v alu es m ust b e v ie w ed i n r e la tio n t o t h at r e sp onsib ility t o a

basic p rin cip le . T he p ote n tia l n eg ativ e c o nse q uen ces fo r th e p eo ple o f th e

are a a re g re at, a n d t h eir r ig ht t o k now t h e r is k m ust b e u pheld . U ltim ate ly t h e

prin cip le o f d em ocra cy a n d t h e i n te g rity o f d em ocra tic g overn m en t a re a ls o a t

sta k e. If m an ag ers lik e your div is io n ch ie f are allo w ed to co ntin ue

with hold in g in fo rm atio n, s e lf -g overn m en t w ill b e s u bverte d ; p eo ple n eed to

know w hat is g oin g o n in p ublic a g en cie s if th ey a re to tr u ly p artic ip ate in

govern in g. I n fo rm atio n a b out m atte rs o f p ublic s a fe ty a n d w elf a re s h ould n ot

be w ith held f ro m t h e p eo ple a n d t h eir e le cte d r e p re se n ta tiv es. H ow ev er, w hen

you to ok your jo b, you als o accep te d an oth er prin cip le : lo yalty to th e

org an iz atio nal hie ra rc h y of your dep artm en t. T he ord erly co nduct of th e

public 's busin ess re q uir e s th at su bord in ate s w ork th ro ugh su perio rs if

acco unta b ility a n d e ffic ie n cy a re to b e m ain ta in ed . B ut th is lo yalty is n ot a n

en d in its e lf ; it e x is ts fo r th e u ltim ate b en efit o f th e c itiz en ry , fo r th e p ublic

in te re st.

Anoth er c o ncern is th e s e rv ic e p ro vid ed b y th e d ep artm en t. S tr o ng p ublic

re sis ta n ce to b uild in g a d am h ad b een o verc o m e b y p ro m is in g th at th e la k e

would b e a re cre atio nal fa cility . C lo sin g th e la k e in th e w ak e o f d is c lo su re s

ab out b acte ria l co nta m in atio n m ig ht w ell re su lt in d em an ds to can cel th e

dep artm en t's o pera tin g lic en se . I f th e g en era tin g p la n t w ere c lo se d s u dden ly ,

ele ctr ic al s e rv ic e w ould b e s e v ere ly c u rta ile d . W ith out e le ctr ic ity , in dustr ia l

fir m s w ould hav e to cu t back pro ductio n an d la y off w ork ers . H osp ita l

se rv ic es m ig ht b e je o pard iz ed . H ig h-ris e o ffic e b uild in gs a n d s c h ools m ig ht

be u nab le to f u nctio n. T he p ublic in te re st w ould b e s e rio usly a n d e x te n siv ely

dam ag ed .

If th e p ublic in te re st is y our fu ndam en ta l c o ntr o llin g p rin cip le , y ou m ust

weig h th e p ro bab le p ublic im pact fo r e ach a lte rn ativ e. U ltim ate ly th e h ealth

of t h e c itiz en ry m ust b e p ro te cte d , b ut y our s e n se o f d ue p ro cess r e q uir e s t h at

you act in a m easu re d an d p ru den t fa sh io n. Y ou d ecid e o n th e fo llo w in g

se q uen ce o f s te p s.

Fir s t, y ou w ill a p pro ach t h e g en era l m an ag er o f t h e d ep artm en t, y our b oss's

boss, t h us m ain ta in in g l o yalty t o t h ose a b ove y ou w ho a re r e sp onsib le f o r t h e

pro per opera tio n of th e org an iz atio n. This pro vid es fo r th e ord erly

man ag em en t o f t h e p ro ble m w ith out u nduly a la rm in g t h e p ublic . Then , if th e g en era l m an ag er d oes n ot a ct to r e m ed y th e s itu atio n, y ou w ill

ta k e y our in fo rm atio n to th e m ay or a n d c ity c o uncil. I n th is w ay y ou p re v en t

th e p olitic al p ro cess fro m b ein g c ir c u m ven te d w hen s e rio us p ublic c o ncern s

are a t s ta k e, e v en t h ough o rd erly p ro ced ure m ay b e s a crif ic ed .

Fin ally , if th e e le cte d o ffic ia ls f a il to ta k e a ctio n, y ou w ill in fo rm th e lo cal

med ia . O rd erly an d effic ie n t re so lu tio n o f th e p ro ble m w ill lik ely b e lo st

alto geth er, b ut th e u ltim ate rig ht o f a d em ocra tic citiz en ry to co ntr o l th e

govern m en ta l b odie s e sta b lis h ed f o r i ts b en efit w ill b e p re se rv ed .

If, how ev er, you are unab le to arriv e at an ord erin g of prin cip le s an d

alte rn ativ es t h at s a tis fie s y ou, i t m ay b e n ecessa ry t o m ove t o t h e n ex t l e v el.

The P oste th ic a l L evel

The co nsid era tio ns at th e fin al, poste th ic al le v el are ex em plif ie d by th e

questio n, W hy sh ould I b e m ora l? M ost ad m in is tr a to rs se ld om re ach th is

fu ndam en ta l philo so phic al le v el of re fle ctio n. O nly w hen push ed by a

partic u la rly p ers is te n t o r c y nic al a d vers a ry o r u nder th e sw ay o f a d eep ly

dis illu sio nin g e x perie n ce o r c o nfro ntin g a p ro fo und p ers o nal c ris is a re w e

lik ely to fu nctio n a t th is le v el. H ere th e str u ggle is to fin d so m e b asis fo r

valu in g th ose th in gs th at w ere id en tif ie d a t th e le v el o f e th ic al a n aly sis . W hy

is i n te g rity i m porta n t? O r t r u th ? O r s e cu rity ? O r l o yalty ? O r t h e w ell- b ein g o f

oth ers ? A t th is le v el w e b eg in to q uestio n o ur w orld vie w — our v ie w s o f

hum an n atu re , h ow w e k now a n yth in g to b e tr u e, a n d th e m ean in g o f lif e .

Reso lu tio n a t th is le v el is a ch ie v ed o nly w hen p ra ctic al in decis io n h as b een

re m oved . I t m ay r e q uir e d ev elo pin g o r c o nfir m in g a w orld vie w g ro unded in

philo so phic al or re lig io us pers p ectiv es. W hen w e hav e dis c o vere d an

ad eq uate m otiv e to a llo w o urs e lv es to “ p la y th e m ora l g am e,” th is le v el is

re so lv ed .

A D yn am ic P ro cess

This fo ur-tie re d fra m ew ork sh ould b e v ie w ed a s h ig hly d ynam ic . O nly in

books o r s c h ola rly p ap ers d o p eo ple m ove lo gic ally th ro ugh th ese d ecis io n-

mak in g s te p s. I n r e al l if e w e m ove b oth u p a n d d ow n t h ro ugh t h e l e v els a s w e

gra p ple w ith w hat is g ood o r w hat w e o ught to d o, an d w ork w ith in th e

co nstr a in ts o f tim e a n d c o nte x t. W e m ay f ir s t e n gag e a p ro ble m e x pre ssiv ely as w e re act sp onta n eo usly w ith o ur im med ia te fe elin gs, b ut th en w e m ay

move r a th er q uic k ly t o p ro ble m s o lv in g a t t h e l e v el o f m ora l r u le s. A s w e g et

new in fo rm atio n a n d th e situ atio n b eco m es m ore c o m ple x , w e m ay m ove

back to th e ex pre ssiv e le v el. Then , hav in g ven te d our ir rita tio n an d

fru str a tio n, w e m ay m ove b ack ag ain to th e se arc h fo r ap pro pria te m ora l

ru le s.

If th e is su e p ro ves u nsu sc ep tib le to a n y o f o ur p ra ctic al m ax im s a n d r u le s,

we m ay m ove b rie fly b ack to a n e x pre ssio n o f f e elin gs a n d th en to th e le v el

of e th ic al a n aly sis . A fte r a p ro cess o f e v alu atin g o ur b asic p rio ritie s, w e m ay

fin ally b e a b le to r e ach a n a ctio n d ecis io n b y a p ply in g r u le s th at n ow a p pear

to be co nsis te n t w ith our new ly esta b lis h ed prio ritie s. O r w e m ay fin d

ours e lv es in s u ch a p ro fo und q uan dary th at w e m ove to th e p oste th ic al le v el

an d p onder w hy w e a re s o c o ncern ed w ith m ora lity a n yw ay .

This m ovem en t a m ong t h e v ario us l e v els , a lth ough i t m ay b e i n te n tio nal, i s

usu ally n ot a m atte r o f c o nsc io us c h oic e. T he tr a n sitio ns o ccu r b ecau se w e

need to s o lv e a p ro ble m , n ot n ecessa rily b ecau se w e c o nsc io usly th in k a b out

whic h le v el is a p pro pria te . I n a c o ncre te s itu atio n, a s w e a tte m pt to in te g ra te

know n f a cts w ith u nknow n b ut p ossib le c o nse q uen ces o f a ctio n, f e elin gs, a n d

valu es, w e f in d o urs e lv es m ovin g th ro ugh th ese s ta g es w ith v ary in g d eg re es

of ra tio nal re fle ctio n a n d a b str a ctio n. In d ay -to -d ay a d m in is tr a tiv e d ecis io n

mak in g w e m an ag e th is p ro cess w ith out g iv in g it m uch re fle ctiv e th ought.

How ev er, a b asic a ssu m ptio n o f th is b ook is th at th e m ore w e c o nsc io usly

ad dre ss a n d s y ste m atic ally p ro cess t h e e th ic al d im en sio ns o f d ecis io n m ak in g

when w e c o nfro nt s ig nif ic an t is su es, th e m ore r e sp onsib le w e b eco m e in o ur

work a s a d m in is tr a to rs . I t is th en th at w e a re a b le to a cco unt f o r o ur c o nduct

to s u perio rs , th e p re ss, th e c o urts , a n d th e p ublic . T his d oes n ot a m ount to

fin ally a d vocatin g a sim ple lin ear ra tio nality b ut ra th er to b ein g se lf -a w are

an d c le ar a b out t h e b ase s f o r o ur a ctio ns.

Use s o f t h e F ra m ew ork

To d esig n e ffe ctiv e r e sp onse s to e th ic al p ro ble m s, it is im porta n t to b e a w are

not o nly o f w here w e a re in th is f ra m ew ork a t a n y g iv en m om en t, b ut a ls o o f

where o ur c o lle ag ues a re o pera tin g a s w e d is c u ss is su es w ith th em . O fte n

co nfu sio n i s g en era te d w ith in a s ta ff b ecau se s o m e a re v en tin g e m otio n w hile

oth ers a re a rtic u la tin g v ario us m ora l ru le s a n d still o th ers a re re fle ctin g o n basic p rin cip le s. S om etim es e v ery one is p re se n tin g m ora l r u le s, b ut th e r u le s

are in c o nflic t, a n d s o m eo ne n eed s to m ove to th e le v el o f e th ic al a n aly sis .

Fundam en ta l v alu es, p rin cip le s, g oals , a n d o bje ctiv es n eed t o b e c la rif ie d a n d

ord ere d , fo r b oth th e in div id uals a n d th e o rg an iz atio n, b efo re a n a ccep ta b le

ru le f o r a ctio n c an b e i d en tif ie d .

This fra m ew ork help s us fo cu s our atte n tio n on th e sta g es in eth ic al

decis io n m ak in g. It s u ggests th at if w e w an t to b eco m e m ore s y ste m atic in

han dlin g e th ic al is su es, w e n eed to e x am in e m ore c are fu lly w hat ta k es p la ce

at th e le v el w here ra tio nal re fle ctio n is m ost critic al: th e le v el o f eth ic al

an aly sis . T his is w here s k ill in d ecis io n m ak in g c an b e c u ltiv ate d . H ere w e

atte m pt to th in k a b out w hat w e s h ould d o; th ere is in te n tio nality a n d s o m e

deg re e o f s y ste m atic tr e atm en t o f th e p ro ble m . A t th e e x pre ssiv e le v el o nly

em otio n i s i n volv ed ; i t i s n ot t h at e m otio n i s b ad , b ut i t i s o nly o ne e le m en t o f

eth ic al d ecis io n m ak in g. A t th e le v el o f m ora l r u le s w e a re la rg ely r e fle ctin g

our s o cia liz atio n, w hic h c an a m ount t o a s e t o f b lin ders t h at l im its o ur c ritic al

th in kin g. A t th e p oste th ic al le v el th e co nsid era tio ns are to o ab str a ct, to o

pers o nal, a n d in m odern p lu ra lis tic s o cie tie s, to o v arie d to b e s u sc ep tib le to

an y g en era liz ed a p pro ach . P eo ple h old in g r a d ic ally d if fe re n t p hilo so phie s a n d

th eo lo gie s a re n ot lik ely to r e ach a g re em en t a t th is le v el, a lth ough th ey m ay

do s o a t t h e s e co nd a n d t h ir d l e v els . A ls o , p ublic a cco unta b ility i n t h is k in d o f

hete ro gen eo us so cie ty re q uir e s re aso ned ap plic atio n of eth ic al prin cip le s

ra th er th an m eta p hysic al a sse rtio ns. A s p ublic se rv an ts w e a re e x pecte d to

ex pla in a n d j u stif y o ur c o nduct o r t o b e p re p are d t o d o s o w hen r e q ueste d .

It is a t th e le v el o f e th ic al a n aly sis , th en , th at w e a re m ost lik ely to b e a b le

to a cco unt fo r o ur c o nduct p ublic ly in te rm s th at p olitic al o ffic ia ls a n d th e

citiz en ry c an e v alu ate . I f w e p ro ceed w ith r e aso ned ju stif ic atio n, lin kin g th e

co nse q uen ces o f o ur d ecis io ns w ith a tr a d itio n o f e th ic al p rin cip le s, th en o ur

co nduct is re v ie w ab le by m em bers of th e politic al co m munity an d our

delib era tio ns an d deed s are accessib le fo r public deb ate an d lo gic al

asse ssm en t. T he hig her w e m ove up th e la d der of public org an iz atio nal

le ad ers h ip , t h e m ore i m porta n t i t b eco m es f o r u s t o b e a b le t o a cco unt f o r o ur

actio ns in th is w ay . T here fo re th e re m ain der of th is book is dev ote d to

ap ply in g sy ste m atic re fle ctio n a t th e le v el o f e th ic al a n aly sis a s w e d esig n

so lu tio ns.

This o rie n ta tio n d oes n ot a ssu m e th at e th ic al d ecis io ns a re , c an , o r s h ould be p ure ly ra tio nal a n d p rin cip le d .

The R esp onsib le A dm in is tr a to r

d oes n ot

ad vocate an ex clu siv ely ra tio nalis t pers p ectiv e; hum an fe elin gs are an

esse n tia l part of our eth ic al lif e an d in se p ara b le fro m ch ara cte r. A s

neu ro sc ie n tis t A nto nio D am asio (2 010) su ggests , em otio nal fe elin gs are

prim ord ia l— co m ple x , sp onta n eo us m an if e sta tio ns of ex perie n ce th at are

cen tr a l to o ur v ery c o ncep tio ns o f se lf . F ir s t a n d fo re m ost, w e a re fe elin g,

em otio nal b ein gs, a n d th is in flu en ces b oth th e w ay s w e th in k a b out a n d th e

way s w e re so lv e e th ic al d ile m mas. H ow ev er, th e a p pro ach a d opte d h ere is

pre m is e d o n th e f a ct th at in o ur p ublic s e rv ic e r o le s, lo gic al, p rin cip le d , a n d

re la tiv ely c o m pre h en siv e ju stif ic atio ns fo r o ur a ctio ns a re e x pecte d b y th e

public a n d e le cte d o ffic ia ls .

Desc rip tiv e M od els o f E th ic a l D ecis io n

Mak in g: T he W orld a s I t I s

Befo re d elv in g in to th e f o cu s o f th is v olu m e, th e d ev elo pm en t o f a m odel f o r

arriv in g a t n orm ativ e j u dgm en ts , i t i s u se fu l t o c o nsid er d esc rip tiv e m odels o f

eth ic al decis io n m ak in g. D esc rip tiv e m odels are fo cu se d on how peo ple

ty pic ally m ak e e th ic al d ecis io ns o n th eir o w n in th e c o urs e o f th eir d aily

liv es. They pro vid e an im porta n t fo undatio n fo r th e dev elo pm en t of

pre sc rip tiv e m odels . T hese p re sc rib e h ow e th ic al d ecis io ns o ught t o b e m ad e,

both a s a f ra m ew ork f o r u nders ta n din g t h e c o gnitiv e a n d e m otio nal a sp ects o f

decis io n m ak in g an d as a m ean s of bette r ex pla in in g th e w ay s decis io n

mak in g is in flu en ced by en vir o nm en ta l fa cto rs , both org an iz atio nal an d

so cie ta l. N orm ativ e, or pre sc rip tiv e, m odels are put fo rw ard as w ay s of

im pro vin g o ur eth ic al d ecis io n m ak in g. P re sc rib in g h ow eth ic al d ecis io ns

ought to b e m ad e is th e m ain p urp ose o f th is c h ap te r, b ut w e f ir s t ta k e a lo ok

at h ow p eo ple te n d to m ak e th ese d ecis io ns w ith out r e fe re n ce to a n y f o rm al

model.

Writin g in 1 980, A nto nio B la si la m en te d th e la ck o f s ig nif ic an t e v id en ce

lin kin g c o gnitio n, e m otio n, a n d a ttitu de to m ora l b eh av io r, d ecla rin g th at “ at

pre se n t… it is not know n how gen era l str u ctu re s of m ora l re aso nin g an d

gen era l a ttitu des in te ra ct in th e p ro ductio n o f b eh av io r” (p . 1 0). H is re v ie w

an d asse ssm en t of stu die s of m ora l re aso nin g is critic al of peo ple 's unders ta n din g o f t h e c o gnitiv e a sp ects o f e th ic al d ecis io n m ak in g a t t h at t im e.

Bla si n ote s th at o ne o f th e r e aso ns f o r th e la ck o f s c h ola rs h ip m ay b e th e f a ct

th at sc h ola rs w ere p re d is p ose d to v ie w m ora l b eh av io r a s e ith er ir ra tio nal,

fo unded in p ro cesse s th at are in tu itiv e, au to m atic , an d su bje ctiv e, o r as a

ra tio nal, w illin g a ct, p re d ic ate d o n r e aso ned a n aly sis o f th e p ro ble m a t h an d.

Atte m ptin g to r e co ncile th e r a tio nal a n d ir ra tio nal v ie w s o f m ora l r e aso nin g,

Bla si n ote s th at it is im possib le to s u ggest th e p rim acy o f o ne v ie w o ver th e

oth er. U ltim ate ly , “ th e re la tiv e im porta n ce o f th e m ora l ru le s… an d o f th e

situ atio ns… can not b e s ta tis tic ally s e p ara te d a n d q uan tita tiv ely w eig hte d ” ( p .

4). T his d ic h oto m y se rv ed to re str ic t effo rts aim ed at ad dre ssin g th e g ap

betw een t h e t w o v ie w s.

Bla si c o nclu des h is d is c u ssio n w ith a c h alle n ge b ase d o n h is f in din gs. “ T he

pro cesse s th at fill th e sp ace betw een a co ncre te m ora l ju dgm en t an d its

co rre sp ondin g a ctio n s h ould b e d ete rm in ed ” (1 980, p . 4 0). S in ce th at tim e,

re se arc h a n d s c h ola rs h ip h av e c o ntr ib ute d s ig nif ic an tly to o ur u nders ta n din g

of th e en vir o nm en ta l an d in div id ual in flu en ces of beh av io r an d decis io n

mak in g. B eh av io ra l re se arc h c o ntin ues to e x pan d o ur k now le d ge a b out th e

sp ace b etw een m ora l ju dgm en t an d m ora l actio n th at B la si re fe rre d to in

1980, sp ecif ic ally in a re as c o ncern ed w ith e m otio n, a ffe ct, a n d th e ro le o f

co nte x t. D en nis W ittm er's gen era l m odel, fir s t dev elo ped in 1993 an d

ex pan ded u pon in 2 005, p ro vid es a u se fu l fra m ew ork fo r illu str a tin g re cen t

dev elo pm en ts in our unders ta n din g of th e w ay in div id uals m ak e eth ic al

decis io ns. W ittm er (2 005) fo cu se s atte n tio n o n a “co gnitiv e p ro cess… th at

beg in s w ith aw are n ess, perc ep tio n, or se n sitiv ity to th e m ora l is su e…

pro ceed s th ro ugh ju dgm en t… en din g w ith th e a ctu al b eh av io r o f th e d ecis io n

mak er” (p . 5 4), b ut h e als o su ggests th at th is p ro cess is co ntin gen t o n a

varie ty o f i n div id ual a n d e n vir o nm en ta l i n flu en ces.

Wittm er's g en era l m odel re su lts fro m th e sy nth esis o f se v era l p re v io usly

dev elo ped m odels o f e th ic al d ecis io n m ak in g, b ut tw o th em es c an b e se en

em erg in g fro m th e se t o f m odels . T he fir s t is th at e th ic al d ecis io n-m ak in g

pro cesse s are in here n tly co gnitiv e. T his v ie w is ex em plif ie d b y W ittm er's

re lia n ce o n Ja m es R est's fo ur c o m ponen t m odel (R est, 1 984, 1 986). R est's

model p ro vid es a b asis f o r u nders ta n din g t h e e th ic al d ecis io n-m ak in g p ro cess

fro m a psy ch olo gic al pers p ectiv e. R est posits th at th e decis io n pro cess

co nsis ts o f fo ur c o m ponen ts : in te rp re ta tio n o f th e s itu atio n, ju dgm en t o f th e situ atio n, s e le ctio n f ro m a lte rn ativ e c o urs e s o f a ctio n, a n d a ctio n. T he s e co nd

th em e is th at e th ic al d ecis io n-m ak in g p ro cesse s a re in flu en ced b y in div id ual

an d e n vir o nm en ta l c h ara cte ris tic s. W ittm er r e lie s o n L in da T re v in o's p ers o n-

situ atio n in te ra ctio nis t m odel (1 986) to su pport th e in clu sio n of both

in div id ual a n d e n vir o nm en ta l c h ara cte ris tic s in h is g en era l m odel o f e th ic al

decis io n m ak in g. D ra w in g o n t h ese t w o t h em es, W ittm er ( 2 005) s u ggests t h at

arriv in g at eth ic al d ecis io ns is co ntin gen t u pon th e in te ra ctio n o f b oth a

co gnitiv e p ro cess a n d i n div id ual a n d e n vir o nm en ta l i n flu en ces. T his m odel i s

th eo re tic ally ric h , b ut W ittm er s u ggests th at a t th e s a m e tim e it p ro vid es a

basis fo r “ u nders ta n din g th e c o m ponen ts o f e th ic al d ecis io n m ak in g” a s a

mean s o f c re atin g “ p ro gra m s th at a re b ette r d esig ned to a d dre ss se p ara te ly

se n sitiv ity , r e aso nin g, o r s tr a te g ie s f o r c arry in g o ut e th ic al c h oic es” ( p . 6 4).

A P resc rip tiv e D ecis io n -M ak in g M od el: T he

World a s W e W ou ld L ik e I t t o B e

This b ook a rg ues th at d esc rip tio ns o f h ow p eo ple m ak e e th ic al d ecis io ns a re

not s u ffic ie n t f o r t h ose h old in g p ublic r o le s. R ath er, i t i s i m porta n t t o a d dre ss

how peo ple w ith th ose im porta n t fid ucia ry re sp onsib ilitie s sh ould m ak e

eth ic al decis io ns. In ad dre ssin g eth ic al is su es, w e w an t to m ove fro m

re co gniz in g a p ro ble m to d esig nin g a c o urs e o f a ctio n th at w ill re so lv e it.

This m ovem en t in volv es both desc rip tio n an d pre sc rip tio n. T hat is , w e

desc rib e to o urs e lv es, a n d so m etim es to o th ers , w hat w e b eli e v e to b e th e

obje ctiv e sta te o f a ffa ir s a n d th en a tte m pt to p re sc rib e w hat sp ecif ic ste p s

sh ould be ta k en to ch an ge th e situ atio n. B etw een th ese tw o actio ns, w e

perfo rm th e k in ds o f re fle ctio n in volv ed at th e le v els o f m ora l ru le s an d

eth ic al a n aly sis . I t is f a r m ore im porta n t f o r u s to c o m pre h en d th ese s te p s f o r

ours e lv es an d d ev elo p th e re q uir e d sk ills th an it is fo r u s sim ply to re ad

so m eo ne e ls e 's p re sc rip tio ns.

Books, artic le s, an d tr a in in g ap pro ach es th at atte m pt to pre sc rib e fo r

ad m in is tr a to rs m ay b e i n sp ir in g o r t h ought p ro vokin g, b ut t h ey a re u su ally s o

gen era l a s to p ro vid e little g uid an ce fo r sp ecif ic d ecis io ns. A lth ough th ey

offe r valu e orie n ta tio ns th at ad m in is tr a to rs m ay fin d ap pealin g, th e lin k

betw een a v alu e s y ste m a n d a c o ncre te s itu atio n is m is sin g. T his p ro ble m is ofte n re fe rre d to a s th e

pro ble m o f a pplic a tio n

. A n in div id ual m ay w an t to

ap ply a se t o f v alu es th at se em s co m patib le w ith h is o r h er v ie w o f th e

ad m in is tr a tiv e r o le , b ut t h e w ay t o m ove f ro m g en era l t o s p ecif ic p re sc rip tio n

is n ot c le ar.

The re fle ctiv e lin k betw een desc rip tio n an d pre sc rip tio n has se v era l

im porta n t s te p s, s h ow n in th e m odel in

Fig ure 2 .1

. T his m odel re p re se n ts a

fra m ew ork fo r arriv in g at a ju dgm en t an d th en d ecid in g w hat to d o. N o

model, th is o ne in clu ded , c an le ad y ou to th e o ne, b est p ossib le , “ co rre ct”

so lu tio n, but it can pro vid e a te m pla te fo r cre ativ ely desig nin g th e best

so lu tio ns f o r a g iv en in div id ual in a s p ecif ic s itu atio n w ith in th e u ncerta in tie s

an d tim e lim its o f re al a d m in is tr a tiv e lif e . A s in a n y o th er k in d o f d esig n

pro cess, th e c o urs e o f a ctio n s h ould ta k e a c o ntin gen cy a p pro ach , p ro vid in g

fo r th e p urs u it o f s e v era l a lte rn ativ es s im ulta n eo usly o r s e q uen tia lly u ntil th e

co nse q uen ces b eco m e c le are r. E th ic al p ro ble m s, l ik e t r a n sp orta tio n p ro ble m s,

arc h ite ctu ra l p ro ble m s, o r su rg ic al p ro ble m s, a re d ynam ic , so o ne m ust b e

pre p are d to a lte r c o urs e a s o ne le arn s f ro m a ctio ns ta k en a n d a s th e s itu atio n

ch an ges o ver t im e.

Fig u re 2 .1

T he P re sc rib ed E th ic al D ecis io n-M ak in g M odel. The D esc rip tiv e T ask When a pro ble m co m es to our atte n tio n, it is usu ally pre se n te d in a

fra g m en ta ry or dis to rte d fa sh io n, ofte n w ith ju dgm en ta l la n guag e an d

in fle ctio ns. I n th e c ase o f th e p ay ro ll c le rk d is c u sse d a t th e b eg in nin g o f th is

ch ap te r, y ou m ay l e arn a b out h is c o nduct f ro m a s e cre ta ry i n t h e o ffic e w hom

he h as tr e ate d ru dely . H av in g d is c o vere d se v era l su sp ic io us n am es o n th e

pay ro ll lis t, s h e e ag erly r e ta lia te s b y c o nclu din g th at h e is in volv ed in ille g al

activ itie s. The se cre ta ry 's re p ort to you may in clu de co nsid era b le

em bellis h m en t o f w hat s h e a ctu ally k now s t o b e t r u e, a lo ng w ith a d ero gato ry

ap pra is a l o f t h e p ay ro ll c le rk 's c h ara cte r.

Any ex perie n ced ad m in is tr a to r w ould k now th at su ch a re p ort d oes n ot

re p re se n t a n a d eq uate d esc rip tio n o f th e c le rk 's a ctiv itie s. T he n am es m ay

ap pear s u sp ic io us to th e s e cre ta ry b ecau se s h e d oes n ot k now th em , b ut th ere

may b e a re aso nab le e x pla n atio n. M ay be h e h as in deed b een se x is t in h is

dealin gs w ith h er b ut sc ru pulo usly h onest in h is h an dlin g o f th e p ay ro ll.

Sex is m is a p ro ble m to b e d ealt w ith , b ut it m ust n ot b e c o nfu se d w ith th e

pay ro ll i s su e. I t i s c le ar t h at y ou m ust g ath er m ore f a ctu al i n fo rm atio n a n d s if t

out u nfo unded ju dgm en ts b efo re y ou h av e a fu ll a n d o bje ctiv e d esc rip tio n.

With out t h is , y ou d are n ot p ro ceed t o a n y k in d o f p re sc rip tio n.

In th is e x am ple , it is o bvio us th at th e d esc rip tiv e ta sk is c ritic al, b ut th ere

are m an y s itu atio ns w here it is e q ually im porta n t b ut m uch le ss o bvio usly s o .

If th e r e p ort c o m es to u s n ot f ro m a s e cre ta ry b ut f ro m s o m eo ne a b ove u s in

th e o rg an iz atio nal h ie ra rc h y, w e are m uch m ore lik ely to accep t it as an

accu ra te d esc rip tio n o f e v en ts . H ow ard B eck er ( 1 973) r e fe rs to th is te n den cy

as th e

hie ra rc h y o f c re d ib ility

. H e s u ggests th at “ fro m th e p oin t o f v ie w o f a

well so cia liz ed p artic ip an t in th e sy ste m , a n y ta le to ld b y th ose a t th e to p

in tr in sic ally d ese rv es to b e r e g ard ed a s th e m ost c re d ib le a cco unt o bta in ab le

of t h e o rg an iz atio n's w ork in gs” ( p . 7 ).

Adm itte d ly , u nder th e p re ssu re o f lif e in m ost o rg an iz atio ns, w e se ld om

hav e th e tim e o r r e so urc es to c o nduct a f u ll in vestig atio n. H ow ev er, w e m ust

alw ay s a tte m pt t o a sc erta in a n d d esc rib e a s o bje ctiv ely a s p ossib le t h e f a cts o f

a s itu atio n. T his m ig ht in clu de id en tif y in g th e k ey a cto rs , th e v ie w poin ts o f

each o f t h em , t h e i s su es, t h e s e q uen ce o f e v en ts , a n d t h e r is k s.

Alth ough it is im possib le to a v oid v alu e-la d en la n guag e a lto geth er, it is

possib le to r e sis t u sin g w ord s a n d p hra se s th at b la ta n tly c re ate a c ast o f g ood

guys a n d b ad g uys. T his is a u se fu l s k ill to c u ltiv ate in d ealin g w ith e th ic al pro ble m s b ecau se it h elp s to p ush u s b ey ond th e e x pre ssiv e le v el. W heth er

we a re s tr u gglin g w ith a d ecis io n a lo ne o r d is c u ssin g it w ith s o m eo ne e ls e

(s u ch a s a s ta ff p ers o n o r a s u perv is o r), w e m ust f o rc e o urs e lv es to d esc rib e

th e s itu atio n i n t e rm s b ey ond o ur g ut r e actio n t o i t. I f w e a re t o d eal w ith r e al

peo ple in volv ed in re al e v en ts , w e m ust fir s t fa ce, to th e b est o f o ur a b ility ,

what h as a ctu ally h ap pen ed .

Defin in g t h e E th ic a l I ssu e

With th e n ecessa ry d eta ils b efo re u s, th e n ex t ste p is to d efin e th e e th ic al

is su e. A n e th ic al i s su e e x is ts w hen c o m petin g o r c o nflic tin g e th ic al p rin cip le s

or v alu es a re e m bed ded in a p ra ctic al p ro ble m . E xperie n ce w ith w ork sh ops

on eth ic s in dic ate s th at public ad m in is tr a to rs se em to hav e th e gre ate st

dif fic u lty w ith th is s e co nd s te p . I t is n ot th at th ey a re u nab le to r e co gniz e a n

eth ic ally pro ble m atic situ atio n; th eir se n sitiv ity to su ch matte rs is

en co ura g in gly k een . T hey k now w hen th ey a re c o nfro nte d w ith e x pecta tio ns,

dem an ds, opportu nitie s, an d co nflic tin g in te re sts th at hav e eth ic al

sig nif ic an ce. B ut m an y hav e dif fic u lty in artic u la tin g w hic h valu es an d

prin cip le s a re a t sta k e. T he te n den cy is to d efin e th e p ro ble m in p ra ctic al

ra th er t h an e th ic al t e rm s.

Consid er an ad m in is tr a to r who is ask ed by a su perio r to pro vid e

co nfid en tia l in fo rm atio n a b out a c o lle ag ue b ein g c o nsid ere d f o r p ro m otio n—

so m eo ne w ho is a clo se p ers o nal frie n d an d is n ot q ualif ie d fo r th e jo b.

Work sh op p artic ip an ts u su ally d efin e th e p ro ble m a s k eep in g th e b oss h ap py

but n ot h urtin g o r o ffe n din g th e frie n d. T his is a d efin itio n o f th e p ra ctic al

dile m ma, but beh in d th ese pra ctic al co nsid era tio ns are so m e co nflic tin g

valu es a n d p rin cip le s th at n eed to b e id en tif ie d . T here is a n e th ic al d ile m ma

to b e d efin ed b y r e fe re n ce to c erta in s p ecif ic c o nflic tin g o r c o m petin g e th ic al

prin cip le s.

“C onflic tin g lo yaltie s” w ould b e th e m ost g en era l s ta te m en t o f th e e th ic al

is su e in volv ed h ere . H ow ev er, w e c o uld g o f u rth er a n d c o nsid er o blig atio ns.

On th e o ne h an d a re th e o blig atio ns to a f rie n d to p re se rv e c o nfid en tia lity , to

be h onest, a n d to b e tr u stw orth y. O n th e o th er h an d is th e o blig atio n to a

su perio r to p ro vid e h onest a n d o bje ctiv e in fo rm atio n a b out c o w ork ers b ein g

co nsid ere d fo r g re ate r re sp onsib ility . F ulf illin g th is o blig atio n is in th e b est

in te re sts o f th e o rg an iz atio n. A ls o , a d m in is tr a to rs h av e a n o blig atio n to th e citiz en ry to u phold th e p ublic in te re st. T hus th e p ro ble m c o uld b e d efin ed a s

co nflic tin g l o yaltie s o r c o nflic tin g o blig atio ns, d ep en din g o n t h e d eta ils o f t h e

case a n d o ur o w n e th ic al p rio ritie s.

Unle ss w e c an f o cu s th e a n aly sis o n u nderly in g e th ic al is su es o f th is k in d,

we m ay re so lv e th e m atte r o n p ure ly p ra ctic al g ro unds. W e m ay m ak e a

decis io n w ith out e v er r e ally e n gag in g t h e i m porta n t v alu es a n d p rin cip le s t h at

are p ullin g u s i n d if fe re n t d ir e ctio ns. E th ic al a n aly sis s k ills , e th ic al a u to nom y,

an d u ltim ate ly o ur e th ic al id en tity a re d ev elo ped th ro ugh e n gag em en t o f th is

kin d. I t i s t h e p ro cess t h ro ugh w hic h c h ara cte r i s f o rm ed . W ith out t h is k in d o f

co m ple x ch ara cte r-fo rm in g en gag em en t, th e pra ctic al dem an ds an d

ex ig en cie s o f a s itu atio n a re lik ely to w hip u s a ro und in a m an ner d estr u ctiv e

of e th ic al j u dgm en t a n d a n tith etic al t o p ers o nal i n te g rity .

Becau se th is ste p of defin in g eth ic al is su es is so dif fic u lt, th ose w ho

co nduct tr a in in g se ssio ns o r c la ssro om in str u ctio n m ust sp en d c o nsid era b le

tim e w ork in g o n it in a v arie ty o f w ay s b efo re m ovin g o n to th e f u ll r a n ge o f

ste p s le ad in g to fin al re so lu tio n. S om e le ctu rin g to illu str a te th e d is tin ctio n

betw een th e pra ctic al an d eth ic al dim en sio ns of a pro ble m is pro bab ly

necessa ry a t t h e o uts e t.

The nex t ste p sh ould in volv e th e partic ip an ts , under th e in str u cto r's

le ad ers h ip , w ork in g t h ro ugh t h e d efin itio nal p ro ble m i n a c ase o r t w o. T hen i t

se em s h elp fu l to d iv id e th e p artic ip an ts in to g ro ups o f th re e o r fo ur, e ach

gro up w ith a d if fe re n t c ase s itu atio n, a n d to a sk th ese g ro ups to d efin e th e

eth ic al is su e in th e c ase o n th eir o w n. W hen th e g ro ups g ath er to geth er a n d

re p ort w hat th ey d ecid ed , all th e p artic ip an ts are th en ex pose d to se v era l

dif fe re n t d efin itio nal p ro ble m s.

Id en tif y in g A lt e rn ativ e C ou rse s o f A ctio n

With a n a d eq uate d efin itio n o f th e e th ic al is su e b efo re u s, w e a re re ad y to

move o n to id en tif y in g alte rn ativ e co urs e s o f actio n. A fte r d esc rib in g th e

situ atio n a s o bje ctiv ely a s p ossib le a n d d efin in g th e e th ic al is su e, th e m ost

dif fic u lt re q uir e m en t is re sis tin g th e in clin atio n to v ie w th e a lte rn ativ es in

dic h oto m ous te rm s, a s m ean in g th at y ou m ust d o e ith er th is o r th at. E ith er

you te ll L in da to sto p se ein g G eo rg e, or you tr u st her to han dle th e

re la tio nsh ip in a p ro fe ssio nal m an ner. E ith er y ou te ll y our s p ouse a b out th e

possib le c o ntr a ct te rm in atio n, o r y ou r e m ain s ile n t. T his e ith er-o r v ie w is th e most c o m mon tr a p in th e e th ic al p ro cess. R are ly d oes a n e th ic al is su e h av e

only t w o o r t h re e p ossib le s o lu tio ns, b ut t h ere a p pears t o b e a f o rc e w ith in u s,

as p erv asiv e a s g ra v ity , t h at i m ped es t h e s p in nin g o ut o f a lte rn ativ es.

Use w hate v er m eth ods o r te ch niq ues a re n ecessa ry to m ove b ey ond e ith er-

or th in kin g, becau se until at le ast th e m ost sig nif ic an t alte rn ativ es are

ack now le d ged , y ou r is k o verlo okin g th e b est s o lu tio n. A s im ple , tw o-c o lu m n

grid c an h elp d ecis io n-m ak in g g ro ups to b ro ad en th eir p ers p ectiv e. F ir s t, o n

th e le ft s id e, g ro up m em bers lis t a ll th e a lte rn ativ es th ey c an th in k o f. T hey

bra in sto rm th ese a lte rn ativ es fo r te n to fif te en m in ute s, w ith out e v alu atin g

an y o f th em ; if a n a lte rn ativ e is c o nceiv ab le , th ey a re r e q uir e d to lis t it. T his

may s o und lik e a s im ple p ro ced ure , b ut e x perie n ce w ith a la rg e n um ber o f

gro ups in dic ate s th at so m e p eo ple h av e an alm ost ir re sis tib le te n den cy to

re je ct a n a lte rn ativ e a s s o on a s it is u tte re d . S eco nd, o n th e rig ht s id e, th ey

write th e pro bab le co nse q uen ces of each alte rn ativ e, both positiv e an d

neg ativ e.

Pro je ctin g t h e P ro b ab le C on se q uen ces

Once th e ra n ge o f a lte rn ativ e so lu tio ns h as b een w id en ed , th e p ositiv e a n d

neg ativ e a n tic ip ate d c o nse q uen ces o f e ach p ossib le c o urs e o f a ctio n n eed to

be p ro je cte d . If y ou te ll L in da to sto p se ein g G eo rg e, w hat is th e lik ely

outc o m e? W hat if y ou tr a n sfe r h er to a n oth er p ositio n? A sk a n oth er m em ber

of th e s ta ff to w ork a lo ng w ith h er? T ig hte n y our s u perv is io n o f h er w ork ?

What c h ain o f e v en ts w ill lik ely u nfo ld , a n d to w ard w hat e n d? If y ou te ll

your s p ouse a b out t h e p ote n tia l c o ntr a ct t e rm in atio n, w hat i s h e l ik ely t o d o?

Pro je ctin g t h e c o nse q uen ces o f a lte rn ativ es i s a k ey d ynam ic i n o ur n atu ra l,

in fo rm al d ecis io n m ak in g. A s w e c o nsid er w hat w e s h ould d o, w e u su ally r u n

a m ovie in o ur m in ds. F or ea ch alte rn ativ e w e co nstr u ct a sc en ario w ith

acto rs , in te ra ctio ns, a n d c o nse q uen ces. H ere , w e a re a tte m ptin g to ra is e th is

in fo rm al p ro cess t o a m ore f o rm al, c o nsc io us, a n d s y ste m atic l e v el. W e b eg in

by in te n tio nally push in g out th e boundarie s of our ra n ge of co nsid ere d

alte rn ativ es, a n d th en a tte m ptin g to b e m ore im ag in ativ e in o ur c re atio n o f

th ese p ro je ctio ns i n to t h e f u tu re .

Jo hn D ew ey ( 1 922) d esc rib ed t h is p ro cess a s o ne o f “ d elib era tio n” i n w hic h

we e x perim en t w ith “ a d ra m atic re h ears a l,” in o ur im ag in atio n, o f “ v ario us

co m petin g possib le lin es of actio n” (p . 190; se e als o S ch utz , 1970). A re aso nab le c h oic e o f a c o urs e o f c o nduct r e q uir e s u s t o c o nsid er t h e f u ll r a n ge

of a lte rn ativ es r a th er th an o nly th e o ne o r tw o th at d om in ate o ur f e elin gs a n d

im ag in atio n.

The sk ill in volv ed h ere is m ora l im ag in atio n— th e ab ility to p ro duce a

movie in o ur m in ds w ith re alis tic c h ara cte rs , a b elie v ab le sc rip t, a n d c le ar

im ag ery . T he m ovie s w e c re ate te n d to b e m ore lik e slid e sh ow s o r je rk y,

bla ck -a n d-w hite , s ile n t m elo dra m as r a th er t h an e p ic p ro ductio ns i n c o lo r w ith

ste re o phonic s o und a n d c o m ple x p lo ts . T he m ore im ag in ativ e w e c an b e in

pro je ctin g t h e p ro bab le c o nse q uen ces o f e ach a lte rn ativ e, t h e m ore o ur e th ic al

decis io n m ak in g is e n han ced . T his k in d o f v iv id p ro je ctio n o f a lte rn ativ es

te sts th eir c o here n ce a n d p la u sib ility , a s w ell a s e v okin g th e f e elin gs w e c an

ex pect to a cco m pan y e ach o ne. It is a k ey c o nnectio n b etw een th e ra tio nal

an d t h e a ffe ctiv e d im en sio ns o f e th ic al d ecis io n m ak in g.

Writin g sc en ario s fo r each alte rn ativ e m ay help you dev elo p m ora l

im ag in atio n. A lth ough n o a d m in is tr a to r h as th e tim e to d o th is w ith e v ery

is su e, it m ay b e a w orth w hile e x erc is e fo r p artic u la rly c o m ple x p ro ble m s.

Gro ups c an u se th e g rid d esc rib ed e arlie r. A fte r lis tin g p ossib le a lte rn ativ es

dow n th e le ft sid e a n d th e p ro bab le c o nse q uen ces fo r e ach a lo ng th e rig ht

sid e, th e g ro up ta lk s th ro ugh a s c en ario f o r e ach o ne, a tte m ptin g to r e fin e th e

pro je cte d c o nse q uen ces.

It s h ould b e e m phasiz ed a t th is p oin t th at c o nsid erin g th e c o nse q uen ces o f

each alte rn ativ e d oes n ot m ean th at th is co nsid era tio n is th e o nly o r th e

dete rm in in g fa cto r in a rriv in g a t a d ecis io n. E th ic is ts re fe r to

deo nto lo gic a l

(d uty -o rie n te d ) a n d

te le o lo gic a l

( c o nse q uen ce-o rie n te d ) a p pro ach es t o e th ic al

decis io ns. The fo rm er ap pro ach is fo cu se d on duty to certa in eth ic al

prin cip le s, s u ch a s h onesty o r ju stic e, in a q uest to d ete rm in e w hic h d uty is

prim ary . T he la tte r w eig hs th e co nse q uen ces o f a co urs e o f actio n, as in

utilita ria n is m w ith its c alc u lu s o f th e g re ate st g ood fo r th e g re ate st n um ber,

lo okin g fo r th e b est o utc o m es. T he m odel u nder d is c u ssio n h ere in clu des

both p ers p ectiv es, as it is n ev er p ossib le to co m ple te ly se p ara te th em in

pra ctic e. A d uty to re sp ect h um an d ig nity is in se p ara b le fro m th e h arm fu l

co nse q uen ces o f n ot d oin g s o .

Fin din g a F it

The re m ain der of th e pro cess is no lo nger lin ear in natu re . A ch ie v in g re so lu tio n in volv es a s e arc h f o r a f it a m ong th e f o ur e le m en ts in th e c ir c le in

Fig ure 2 .1

, a n d t h at s e arc h i s n ot s im ply a m atte r o f r e aso nin g f ro m o ne t h in g

to th e n ex t. T his b asis fo r s u ch a fit is m ore lik e th e lo gic o f a esth etic s; it

re q uir e s p ro portio n a n d b ala n ce a m ong t h e f o ur e le m en ts .

The fir s t c o nsid era tio n is th e m ora l ru le s th at c an b e a d duced to su pport

each a lte rn ativ e a n d t h e p ro je cte d c o nse q uen ces. I d en tif y in g t h ese m ora l r u le s

will te n d to h ap pen q uite n atu ra lly in a g ro up se ttin g as in div id uals are

allo w ed to o pt fo r a p artic u la r d ecis io n a lte rn ativ e a n d d efe n d it. H ow ev er,

an yone e n gag ed i n th is p ro cess a lo ne o r le ad in g a g ro up s e ssio n m ust b e s u re

th at a ll a lte rn ativ es a re a d dre sse d a n d n one d is m is se d t o o e asily o r q uic k ly .

The n ex t c o nsid era tio n is a r e h ears a l o f d efe n se s. T his is s o m etim es c alle d

th e

Six ty M in ute s te st

o r th e

New Y ork T im es te st

. H ere w e sy ste m atic ally

co nsid er each alte rn ativ e by ask in g ours e lv es, H ow w ould I defe n d th is

partic u la r o ptio n i f r e q uir e d t o d o s o b efo re a b ro ad a u die n ce? T his i s t h e t e st

of h ow w ell a p artic u la r a lte rn ativ e w ill fit w ith th e a ccep te d n orm s o f th e

wid er p ro fe ssio nal a n d p olitic al c o m munitie s o f w hic h w e a re a p art. O nce

ag ain , m ora l im ag in atio n is a c ritic al s k ill a s w e tr y to p ic tu re o urs e lv es, a s

viv id ly a s p ossib le , e x pla in in g to a s u perio r o r s u bord in ate s o r p ro fe ssio nal

peers o r th e p re ss o r a c o urt o f la w w hy e ach p ossib le c o urs e o f a ctio n w as

ch ose n . In g ro up s itu atio ns th is e x erc is e is m ost u se fu l a s th e fie ld n arro w s

to w ard o ne o r t w o a lte rn ativ es.

Harla n C le v ela n d ( 1 972) a d vocate s a n a p pro ach o f th is k in d b y s u ggestin g

th at a n a d m in is tr a to r a sk h im se lf o r h ers e lf th e f o llo w in g k ey q uestio n b efo re

gettin g c o m mitte d to a n y p artic u la r c o urs e o f c o nduct: “ If th is a ctio n is h eld

up to p ublic s c ru tin y, w ill I s till fe el th at it is w hat I s h ould h av e d one a n d

how I s h ould h av e d one it? ” ( p . 1 04). C le v ela n d in sis ts th at if th ose in volv ed

in w ell- k now n case s of co rru ptio n had se rio usly ask ed th em se lv es th is

questio n an d an sw ere d it h onestly , m ost o f th ese in sta n ces o f b etr a y al o f

public tr u st w ould nev er hav e hap pen ed . Part of th e pow er of ask in g

ours e lv es t h ese q uestio ns i s t h at t h ey h elp u s n ot o nly t o t h in k b ut a ls o t o f e el

our w ay t h ro ugh a n e th ic al p ro ble m .

In th is p ro cess o f re h ears in g d efe n se s, w hic h e th ic is ts s o m etim es c all

th e

te st o f p ublic ity

, w e m ay fin d it n ecessa ry to m ove fro m th e d is c o very a n d

ap plic atio n o f m ora l r u le s t o t h e t h ir d c o nsid era tio n: a n a tte m pt t o d is c ern t h e

im plic it e th ic al p rin cip le s a t s ta k e. T his o ccu rs w hen t h e a v aila b le m ora l r u le s are n ot s u ffic ie n tly s a tis fy in g to p erm it r e so lu tio n. O ne a lte rn ativ e m ay te n d

to m ax im iz e th e se cu rity o f th e in div id ual o r o rg an iz atio n, w here as o th ers

may pro m ote so cia l ju stic e or en han ce dem ocra cy . A s w e co nsid er th e

hie ra rc h y o f b asic p rin cip le s, w e ag ain re h ears e th e ju stif ic atio n fo r each

optio n: a sk in g, fo r e x am ple , H ow c o uld I ju stif y g iv in g h ig her p rio rity to

so cia l ju stic e th an o rg an iz atio nal s e cu rity in th is in sta n ce? A s w e e n gag e in

th is p ro cess o f a rra y in g a lte rn ativ es, d ra w in g o ut th e p ro bab le c o nse q uen ces

in th e m ost re alis tic te rm s, an d re h ears in g th e ap plic atio n of ru le s an d

prin cip le s, b oth a ra tio nal a n d a n e m otio nal se arc h fo r re so lu tio n is u nder

way . B ut w hat c o nstitu te s r e so lu tio n?

Reso lu tio n is re ach ed w hen w e d is c o ver an alte rn ativ e th at p ro vid es an

accep ta b le b ala n ce o f o ur d uty to p rin cip le a n d th e lik ely c o nse q uen ces a n d

sa tis fie s o ur n eed to h av e s o und r e aso ns f o r o ur c o nduct a n d o ur n eed to f e el

sa tis fie d w ith th e d ecis io n. B ecau se n eith er a p erfe ct b ala n ce o f d uty a n d

co nse q uen ces n or a su pre m ely ra tio nal alte rn ativ e th at p ro vid es co m ple te

em otio nal sa tis fa ctio n is ofte n av aila b le , re so lu tio n is ord in arily an

ap pro xim ate s ta te . W hat w e c an e x pect to a ch ie v e is th e b est b ala n ce o f d uty

an d c o nse q uen ces a n d th e b est c o m bin atio n o f r e aso ns a n d a ffe ctiv e c o m fo rt

under th e cir c u m sta n ces. It sh ould be em phasiz ed , how ev er, th at th e

assu m ptio n h ere is th at b oth th e c o m bin atio n o f r e aso ns a n d f e elin gs a n d th e

bala n ce o f d uty a n d c o nse q uen ces in volv ed in th is r e so lu tio n s h ould in clu de

th e o blig atio ns o f th e p ublic s e rv ic e r o le . T his d ecis io n-m ak in g p ro cess m ust

be in fo rm ed b y e d ucatio n, tr a in in g, a n d g uid ed so cia liz atio n in to a p ublic

se rv ic e e th ic if th e p ublic in te re st is to b e a p pro xim ate d . E th ic al d ecis io ns

must b e b uttr e sse d b y o ur p ublic s e rv ic e c h ara cte r— th e in clin atio n to d o th e

rig ht th in g as w e en gag e in decid in g w hat th at sh ould be. H ere w e are

desc rib in g a n d s y ste m atiz in g th e p ro cess th at n eed s to b e in fo rm ed b y s u ch

an e th ic r o ote d i n c h ara cte r.

Sortin g th ro ugh a n d s e le ctin g a d eq uate r e aso ns o ccu rs th ro ugh th e p ro cess

ju st d esc rib ed . A rriv in g a t a fe elin g o f s a tis fa ctio n w ith a d ecis io n h ap pen s

durin g t h e s a m e p ro cess b ut i n volv es a s e t o f d ynam ic s n ot y et d esc rib ed . I t i s

tim e to c o nsid er th e fo urth e le m en t in th e c ir c le : a n tic ip ato ry s e lf -a p pra is a l.

This is th e te st o f h ow w ell a c o urs e o f a ctio n f its w ith o ur o w n s e lf -im ag e.

As w e im ag in e o urs e lv es u nderta k in g v ario us co urs e s o f actio n, w e m ay

ex perie n ce se lf -d is a p pro val in co nnectio n with certa in alte rn ativ es. Acco rd in g to Ja n is a n d M an n (1 977), th ese a n tic ip atio ns c an a ro use g uilt,

re m ors e , an d se lf -re p ro ach . W hen w e se e ours e lv es, in our m in d's ey e,

carry in g o ut a d ecis io n th at is in co nsis te n t w ith o ur c o re v alu es, w e d o n ot

lik e th e s e lf w e e n vis io n. W hen w e p ro je ct o urs e lv es in to th e f u tu re a n d lo ok

back o n th e a ct a s th ough it h ad b een c o m ple te d , w e a re d is sa tis fie d w ith

ours e lv es. W e a n tic ip ate n ot f e elin g g ood th e m orn in g a fte r. W e e x perie n ce,

in a d van ce, a k in d o f e th ic al h an gover.

In th e sa m e w ay , oth er decis io n alte rn ativ es cre ate se lf -a p pro val. T he

movie in o ur m in ds p ortr a y s u s a ctin g in a w ay th at m ak es u s f e el p ro ud a n d

dra w s p ra is e , o r a t le ast a p pro val, f ro m p eo ple w hose o pin io ns w e v alu e. W e

are d ra w n to w ard th ese o ptio ns b y th e re in fo rc in g p ow er o f an tic ip ato ry

fe elin gs o f s a tis fa ctio n. A ctin g in w ay s th at e v oke th is a n tic ip ato ry a p pro val

is th e w ay w e d ev elo p p re d is p ositio ns to a ct s im ila rly in th e f u tu re , w hic h is

one w ay o f u nders ta n din g t h e e sse n ce o f c h ara cte r.

These an tic ip ato ry fe elin gs are u su ally n ot ap pra is e d sy ste m atic ally , b ut

th ey cre ate in clin atio ns eith er to re je ct alte rn ativ es th at se em in co ngru en t

with o ur v alu es o r th e n orm s o f sig nif ic an t re fe re n ce g ro ups o r to c h oose

co ngru en t o nes. T o t h e e x te n t t h at w e a re a b le t o r e la te t h is e m otio nal p ro cess

to th e ra tio nal p ro cess, w e g ain eth ic al au to nom y. T o th e ex te n t th at w e

cu ltiv ate a p atte rn o f c o nsis te n tly a ctin g in w ay s th at c o m bin e s o und r e aso ns

with affe ctiv e co nfid en ce, w e d ev elo p in te g rity . W e can in te n tio nally an d

sy ste m atic ally a sse ss d ecis io n a lte rn ativ es in te rm s o f th e s o undness o f o ur

re aso ns f o r s e le ctin g e ach o ne a n d t h e q uality o f t h e f e elin gs w e c an e x pect t o

hav e a b out c h oosin g it. W e m ay a ls o b e a b le to id en tif y th e s o urc es o f th ose

positiv e o r n eg ativ e fe elin gs. A re w e an tic ip atin g ap pro val o r d is a p pro val

fro m o ur c o lle ag ues in th e lo cal c h ap te r o f th e A m eric an S ocie ty fo r P ublic

Adm in is tr a tio n? F ro m th e b oss? O r a re lo ng-h eld p ers o nal v alu es in volv ed ?

How im porta n t is th e so urc e o f th ose fe elin gs? A re th ere o th er p ers o ns o r

gro ups w hose e v alu atio n o f t h e d ecis io n i s e q ually , o r m ore , i m porta n t?

Ben efit s o f U sin g t h e M od el

In b rie f, th ese a re th e s te p s in a fu lly s y ste m atic a n d s e lf -c o nsc io us e th ic al

decis io n-m ak in g pro cess. O bvio usly no pra ctic in g ad m in is tr a to r co uld be

ex pecte d to a p ply th is m odel to e v ery e th ic al is su e. H ow ev er, th e a ssu m ptio n

here is th at if th is m odel is use d w ith th e m ore sig nif ic an t pro ble m s, ad m in is tr a to rs w ill c u ltiv ate o ver tim e s o m eth in g lik e a n in tu itiv e d ecis io n-

mak in g sk ill, w hic h w ill se rv e th em w ell w hen th ere is n o tim e fo r su ch

ex plic it an d fo rm al ex erc is e s. D an ie l Is e n berg 's (1 984) re se arc h o n se n io r

man ag ers in dic ate s th at th e m ost e ffe ctiv e o nes s y ste m atic ally d ev elo p s u ch

in tu itiv e decis io n m odels th at m ak e possib le “th e sm ooth au to m atic

perfo rm an ce o f le arn ed b eh av io r s e q uen ces.” I s e n berg m ain ta in s th at th is “ is

not a rb itr a ry o r ir ra tio nal, b ut is b ase d o n y ears o f p ain sta k in g p ra ctic e a n d

han ds-o n e x perie n ce th at b uild s sk ills ” (p . 8 5). W hen th ese sk ills a re u se d

under th e p re ssu re o f lim ite d tim e fo r re fle ctio n, “w e co m pre ss y ears o f

ex perie n ce a n d le arn in g in to sp lit se co nds. T his c o m pre ssio n is o ne o f th e

base s o f w hat w e c all i n tu itio n, a s w ell a s t h e a rt o f m an ag em en t” ( p . 8 3).

By usin g th e m odel w e ach ie v e a gre ate r deg re e of eth ic al au to nom y

becau se w e b eco m e m ore a w are o f b oth o ur o w n v alu es a n d th e e x te rn al

oblig atio ns u nder w hic h w e a ct. E ven w hen w e d ev elo p in tu itiv e s k ill, it is

possib le t o r a is e t h e g ro unds f o r o ur c o nduct t o c o nsc io us c o nsid era tio n w hen

necessa ry . J a n is a n d M an n ( 1 977) o bse rv e th at a u th oritie s s o m etim es a tte m pt

to e lic it o bed ie n ce b y c re atin g th e illu sio n th at s u bord in ate s h av e n o c h oic e

but to fo llo w o rd ers . T he p ow er o f th is m an ip ula tio n o f th e p erc eiv ed ra n ge

of re al ch oic es is viv id ly portr a y ed in th e ex perim en ts on obed ie n ce to

au th ority co nducte d by S ta n le y M ilg ra m (1 974), w hic h are dis c u sse d at

gre ate r le n gth in C hap te r E ig ht. T hese s tu die s d em onstr a te d th at m ore th an

half o f a ra n dom s a m ple o f A m eric an c itiz en s w ere w illin g to c o m ply w ith

ord ers th at a p peare d to re su lt in s e rio us h arm to a n oth er p ers o n. O ne o f th e

critic al fa cto rs in th eir d ecis io n to fo llo w d is ta ste fu l in str u ctio ns w as th e

sc ie n tis t's re p eate d sta te m en t: “ Y ou h av e n o o th er c h oic e. T he e x perim en t

re q uir e s th at y ou c o ntin ue.” D efin in g th e s itu atio n in s u ch c o nstr a in ed te rm s

le av es a d ecis io n m ak er f e elin g h elp le ss b efo re a s in gle u naccep ta b le o ptio n;

co nsc io usn ess of alte rn ativ e ch oic es is fo re clo se d . Eth ic al au to nom y is

re d uced t o z ero , c h ara cte r i s e ro ded , a n d i n te g rity u nderm in ed .

Alth ough it is e asie r to c o nceiv e o f th is k in d o f e th ic al tu nnel v is io n in

case s w here w e are bein g m an ip ula te d by an au th ority , it occu rs m ore

perv asiv ely . W e d ev elo p b lin ders th at a llo w u s to s e e o nly o ne a lte rn ativ e o r

at m ost a very fe w . U ntil w e ta k e th e in itia tiv e to sy ste m atic ally an d

ag gre ssiv ely w id en th e r a n ge o f c o nceiv ab le o ptio ns a n d a sse ss h ow th ey f it

both r a tio nally a n d e m otio nally w ith o ur v alu e s y ste m , w e a re a t t h e m erc y o f th e m ost o bvio us c o urs e s o f a ctio n. D ev elo pin g m ora l im ag in atio n re q uir e s

dis c ip lin e a n d p ra ctic e a s d em an din g a s a n y o th er in te lle ctu al a n d c re ativ e

activ ity , b ut its re w ard s a re g re ate r m easu re s o f s e lf -a w are n ess, s e lf -c o ntr o l,

an d d ecis io n-m ak in g fle x ib ility . T hese a re e sse n tia l fo r th e s tr e n gth en in g o f

ch ara cte r th at in clin es us to act on our co nvic tio ns an d th e build in g of

in te g rity th at keep s us fro m w eav in g th ro ugh lif e lik e a dru nkard , fir s t

stu m blin g i n o ne d ir e ctio n a n d l a te r i n q uite a n oth er.

Im ple m en tin g a D ecis io n : T he D esig n A ppro ach

These p ro ble m s o f p re se rv in g eth ic al au to nom y su ggest th at arriv in g at a

decis io n u sin g th e m odel d is c u sse d p re v io usly is o nly o ne p art o f a la rg er

pro cess. T hat m ore in clu siv e p ro cess, w hic h I h av e c h ara cte riz ed a s a

desig n

appro ach

to ad m in is tr a tiv e eth ic s, w ill be dis c u sse d at gre ate r le n gth in

Chap te r N in e, b ut it m ay b e h elp fu l a t th is p oin t to in dic ate s o m e o f th e k ey

co nsid era tio ns i n m ovin g f o rw ard w ith a d ecis io n:

1.

It is im porta n t to u nders ta n d th e ch ara cte ris tic s o f th e o rg an iz atio nal

str u ctu re a n d c u ltu re th at m ay e n co ura g e o r im ped e a ctin g o n th e d ecis io n.

Is t h ere a n yth in g a b out t h e h ie ra rc h ic al s tr u ctu re a n d t h e p eo ple w ho o ccu py

key p ositio ns in it th at e ith er m ay m ak e it d if fic u lt f o r y ou to c arry o ut th e

ch ose n d ecis io n o r m ay p ro vid e s u pport f o r y our c o nduct? A re th ere n orm s

in t h e o rg an iz atio n's c u ltu re t h at m ay r e sis t y our i m ple m en tin g t h e d ecis io n,

perh ap s th ro ugh in fo rm al sa n ctio ns, o r a re th ere n orm s th at m ay su pport

your a ctio ns?

2.

W hat c h an ges w ould n eed to b e m ad e in th e o rg an iz atio nal s tr u ctu re a n d

cu ltu re to m ak e th em m ore s u pportiv e o f th e d ecis io n y ou h av e a rriv ed a t

usin g th e m odel? D oes th e s tr u ctu re n eed to b e m ad e fla tte r? A re d is se n t

ch an nels s u ch a s h otlin es o r in sp ecto rs g en era l n eed ed to p re v en t u neth ic al

pre ssu re fro m a b ove? D o s o m e o f th e in fo rm al p ra ctic es th at p ro te ct th ose

guilty o f m is c o nduct n eed t o b e a d dre sse d t h ro ugh t r a in in g o r o rg an iz atio nal

dev elo pm en t e ffo rts ?

3.

W hat k in ds o f m an ag em en t in te rv en tio n s tr a te g ie s w ould b e a p pro pria te

to e ffe ct th ese c h an ges? D oes c h an ge c all f o r a to p-to -b otto m m an ag em en t

au dit, a n o rg an iz atio nal d ev elo pm en t e x erc is e , a n ew tr a in in g p ro gra m , a

re v ie w o f t h e o rg an iz atio n's s tr u ctu re , a c o de o f e th ic s, o r e th ic s t r a in in g?

As w ill b e s e en in th e c h ap te rs th at f o llo w , e th ic al d ecis io n m ak in g c an not be carrie d in to pra ctic e effe ctiv ely w ith out th is kin d of an aly sis of th e

org an iz atio nal c o nte x t.

Con clu sio n

I b eg an t h is c h ap te r b y e x am in in g s o m e t y pic al p ublic a d m in is tr a tiv e c ase s i n

whic h a n e th ic al d ile m ma c o uld b e d is c ern ed . I th en d efin ed e th ic s a s a n

activ e pro cess in volv in g th e ord erin g of our valu es w ith re sp ect to a

partic u la r d ecis io n. N ex t I c o nsid ere d th e fo ur le v els o f re fle ctio n a t w hic h

th is p ro cess o ccu rs . A d esc rip tiv e m odel o f e th ic al d ecis io n m ak in g w as th en

outlin ed as th e w ay p eo ple ty p ic ally m ak e eth ic al d ecis io ns. T he ch ap te r

co nclu ded w ith a r e v ie w o f a p re sc rip tiv e d ecis io n-m ak in g m odel t h at m ay b e

use d to s y ste m atic ally a n d s e lf -c o nsc io usly m ove f ro m th e d esc rip tio n o f a n

eth ic al p ro ble m to p re sc rib ed c o urs e s o f a ctio n a n d o rg an iz atio nal a n aly sis .

This is th e fir s t sta g e o f th e d esig n a p pro ach to a d m in is tr a tiv e e th ic s— th e

le v el o f i n div id ual d ecis io n m ak in g a n d c o nduct.

In th e n ex t c h ap te r, I s te p b ack f ro m p artic u la r e th ic al d ecis io ns to lo ok a t

th e so cia l a n d p olitic al se ttin g in w hic h p ublic a d m in is tr a to rs m ak e e th ic al

decis io ns. T his s e ttin g im pose s c erta in c o nditio ns th at s ig nif ic an tly s h ap e th e

natu re of th e pro ble m s th at public ad m in is tr a to rs en co unte r. T o desig n

effe ctiv e r e sp onse s t o e th ic al p ro ble m s, o ne m ust a lw ay s d o s o w ith r e fe re n ce

to t h e c o nte x t. Part O ne

Eth ic s f o r I n div id u al A dm in is tr a to rs Chapte r T hre e

Public A dm in is tr a tio n i n M odern a n d

Postm odern S ocie ty : T he C on te x t o f

Adm in is tr a tiv e E th ic s

The C on te x t o f A dm in is tr a tiv e E th ic s

T o b est e x am in e th e e th ic al d im en sio ns o f a d m in is tr a tio n, it is n ecessa ry to

u nders ta n d th e ad m in is tr a tiv e ro le as it re la te s to th e so cia l an d cu ltu ra l

c o nte x t in w hic h it f u nctio ns. T his p ers p ectiv e is c ru cia l f o r b oth a d eq uate ly

d esc rib in g e th ic al s itu atio ns a n d d ev elo pin g r e alis tic p re sc rip tio ns f o r d ealin g

w ith t h em . D esig nin g r e sp onse s t o e th ic al p ro ble m s r e q uir e s a d ap ta tio n t o t h e

c h ara cte ris tic s o f t h e s itu atio ns i n w hic h t h ey o ccu r.

The k ey c o ncep ts in a s o cio cu lt u ra l p ers p ectiv e o n th e a d m in is tr a tiv e ro le

a re m odern iz atio n a n d p ostm odern iz atio n. W e a re in a tim e o f tr a n sitio n in

w hic h t h e m odern h erita g e o f p ublic a d m in is tr a tio n i s i n cre asin gly i n c o nflic t

w ith a postm odern w orld . T he fo rm ativ e co ncep ts an d id eas of public

a d m in is tr a tio n hav e th eir ro ots in th e m odern iz in g w orld of th e la te

n in ete en th a n d e arly t w en tie th c en tu rie s, b ut t h e s o cie ty p ublic a d m in is tr a tio n

f u nctio ns i n i s i n cre asin gly p ostm odern .

M odern

is a g lo bal te rm fo r d esc rib in g th e s o cia l, c u ltu ra l, a n d e co nom ic

a ttr ib ute s asso cia te d w ith urb an in dustr ia l so cie ty . B erg er, B erg er, an d

K elln er (1 973) a rg ue th at th e k ey p hen om en a o f m odern ity a re b ure au cra cy

a n d te ch nolo gic al p ro ductio n. I n f a ct, th ey c o nte n d th at th ese a re th e c arrie rs

o f m odern co nsc io usn ess. A s w e beco m e in volv ed w ith bure au cra tic

o rg an iz atio n an d th e pro cess of te ch nolo gic al pro ductio n, a dis tin ctiv ely

m odern w ay o f t h in kin g a b out t h e w orld a n d o ur p la ce i n i t b eg in s t o e m erg e.

Postm odern

is a te rm in te n ded to c h ara cte riz e a w orld in w hic h th e f in ality

a n d ab so lu tis m of once fo undatio nal assu m ptio ns are bein g dis c re d ite d . Assu m ptio ns a b out s o m e k in d o f o bje ctiv ely r e al a n d u niv ers a l h um an n atu re ,

or n atu ra l la w , o r ab so lu te v alu es an d u ltim ate tr u th s, in clu din g th ose o f

sc ie n ce, n o lo nger h old s w ay o ver th e e n tir e s o cie ty . F ox a n d M ille r (1 996)

hav e c o ntr a ste d m odern a n d p ostm odern v ie w s o f th e w orld a s fo llo w s (p .

45):

In te g ra tio n v ers u s d is in te g ra tio n

Cen tr a liz atio n v ers u s d ecen tr a liz atio n

Cen tr ip eta l v ers u s c en tr if u gal

Tota liz atio n v ers u s f ra g m en ta tio n

Meta n arra tiv es v ers u s d is p ara te t e x ts

Meltin g p ot v ers u s s a la d

Com men su ra b le v ers u s i n co m men su ra b le

The i m puls e t o u nif y v ers u s h yperp lu ra lis m

Univ ers a lis m v ers u s r e la tiv is m

New to n v ers u s H eis e n berg

The m ost obvio us ex am ple of th ese dif fe re n ces is th e m odern id ea of

so cie ty b ein g a m eltin g p ot, in w hic h d if fe re n t p eo ple a n d c u ltu re s a ssim ila te

in to o ne, s im ila r s o cie ty . I n th e p ostm odern w orld th at p ot is a s a la d b ow l, in

whic h th e v ario us e le m en ts m ain ta in th eir d is tin ct in te g rity a n d c o m ple m en t

each o th er. S im ila rly , a lth ough Is a ac N ew to n is c o nsid ere d o ne o f th e m ost

in flu en tia l s c ie n tis ts , th e a b ility o f h is la w s o f m otio n a n d g ra v ity to p re d ic t

sc ie n tif ic occu rre n ces was la te r ch alle n ged by sc ie n tis ts lik e W ern er

Heis e n berg a n d h is u ncerta in ty p rin cip le . T he s ig nif ic an ce o f th e p ostm odern

way of th in kin g is th at th e notio ns of gen eric , fix ed w ay s of liv in g,

str u ctu rin g p ublic i n stitu tio ns, a d m in is te rin g p ublic a g en cie s, a n d e sta b lis h in g

pro fe ssio nal eth ic al n orm s n o lo nger h av e an u ltim ate b asis o n w hic h to

sta n d.

Accep tin g t h ese a ttr ib ute s a s d om in an t i n o ur s o cie ty c an l e av e u s i n a s ta te

of re la tiv ity , re d uced to n orm le ssn ess, a n d w ith a c o nclu sio n th at a n yth in g

goes, b ecau se n o o ne h as a b asis f o r a c la im t o m ora l r e ctitu de a n d o blig atio n.

Gen era lly c o nsis te n t w ith F ox a n d M ille r ( 1 996), th e p ositio n a d opte d h ere is

th at p ostm odern s o cie ty d oes n ot le av e u s w ith out m ean in g o r n orm s b ut th at

we c o nstr u ct o ur v alu es, b elie fs , a n d e th ic al n orm s so cia lly , a s w e in te ra ct

with e ach o th er o ver t im e. There m ay n ot b e a u niv ers a lly a ccep te d s e t o f v alu es a n d n orm s “ lo w ere d

dow n f ro m h eav en o n a s tr in g.” N ev erth ele ss, t o geth er w e c ra ft f o r o urs e lv es,

th ro ugh d is c o urs e a n d d elib era tio n, c o nven tio ns s u ch a s v alu es, b elie fs , a n d

eth ic al n orm s to g iv e m ean in g a n d o rd er to o ur liv es. C olle ctiv e d ecis io n

mak in g in th e g overn an ce p ro cess, in clu din g p ublic ad m in is tr a tio n, w ork s

best in a postm odern so cie ty when it em erg es out of an in clu siv e

co nvers a tio n a b out h ow to c re ate o rd er a n d m ean in g in o ur liv es to geth er.

Hen ce, dem ocra tic govern an ce pro vid es m ech an is m s an d are n as fo r th is

so cia l pro cess. G utm an n (1 995) calls th is delib era tiv e pro cess

ete rn al

vig ila nce

an d arg ues th at delib era tio n is th e dem ocra tic se lf -c o nstr a in t

th ro ugh w hic h w e w ard off ty ra n ny an d pro te ct th e basic lib ertie s of

dem ocra cy . ( S ee D en nard , 1 997, a n d o th er a rtic le s in th e s a m e s p ecia l is su e

of

Am eric a n B eh avio ra l S cie n tis t

c o ncern in g th e im plic atio ns o f p ostm odern

th ought f o r p ublic a d m in is tr a tio n.)

Our c o lle ctiv e a g re em en ts a rriv ed a t th ro ugh d em ocra tic g overn an ce m ay

not h av e a n y u niv ers a l o r u ltim ate f o undatio ns in th e n atu re o f th e u niv ers e ,

but th ey s e rv e a s s u rro gate o r a d h oc f o undatio ns f o r u s, c h an gin g f ro m tim e

to tim e to fit o ur c h an gin g s o cia l a g re em en ts . In d em ocra tic s o cie ty , w here

th e c o nnectio n b etw een o ne's in div id ual a ctio ns a n d th e v alu es o f s o cie ty is

co nsta n tly ev olv in g, so m e valu es pers is t where as oth ers go th ro ugh

tr a n sfo rm ativ e a d ap ta tio n to a cco unt fo r c h an gin g p ublic se n tim en t. In th is

re g ard , public ad m in is tr a to rs sh ould atte m pt to bette r unders ta n d th e

in te rs u bje ctiv ity a m ong th e v ario us s h are d v alu es, a ssu m ptio ns, a n d b elie fs

when c arry in g o ut t h eir r o le s.

Natu ra lly , s u ch a v ie w s u ggests th at o ur w orld is s o cia lly c o nstr u cte d , b uilt

upon la y ers of m ean in g w e assig n to th e peo ple , pla ces, an d th in gs w e

en co unte r. F ro m s u ch a p ers p ectiv e, b ro ad -b ase d a g re em en t p ro vid es a le v el

of r e lia b ility f o r m ak in g d ecis io ns, p artic u la rly in a d iv ers e s o cie ty . B ro ad ly

ag re ed -o n norm s an d valu es pro vid e fo undatio nal re fe re n ce poin ts an d

co nven tio ns f o r p ublic a d m in is tr a to rs i n volv ed i n t h e p ro cess o f s a fe g uard in g

th e p ublic g ood. S om etim es th ese a re e x plic it a g re em en ts , b ut m ore o fte n

th ey co nsis t of sh are d assu m ptio ns th at hav e ev olv ed th ro ugh so cia l

in te ra ctio n o ver tim e. F or e x am ple , c o nstitu tio ns, g overn m en ta l in stitu tio ns,

an d la w s p ro vid e a re co rd o f o ur co lle ctiv e so cia l ev olu tio n th ro ugh th e

fo rm al ag re em en ts , docu m en ts , an d co nven tio ns th at re fle ct our sh are d norm s, v alu es, a n d a ssu m ptio ns.

Agre em en t o n th ese p ublic a sp ects o f lif e m ust b e a cco m plis h ed th ro ugh

bro ad p artic ip atio n in th e g overn an ce d eb ate if th e in stitu tio ns c re ate d a re to

hav e le g itim acy th ro ugh in te rs u bje ctiv e re lia b ility . Sim ply im posin g

au th ority d oes n ot w ork in th is k in d o f w orld . A re as o f o ur liv es n ot liv ed

in te rd ep en den tly , o fte n c alle d

priv a te ,

a re le ft in w hic h v ario us su bgro ups

can f a sh io n d iv ers e p ers p ectiv es a n d w ay s o f l if e .

Pro b le m s w it h M od ern it y i n a P ostm od ern

World

Rem nan ts o f m odern ity s till e x is t in to day 's p ostm odern w orld , a n d th e c la sh

betw een th ese tw o w orld vie w s c an c re ate c o nflic t. T he m odern w orld vie w is

ch ara cte riz ed b y t h e f o llo w in g t r a its r e le v an t t o a d m in is tr a tiv e e th ic s.

The A tte m pt t o A pply S cie n tif ic P rin cip le s t o M uch

of L if e

The th ought o f th e la te n in ete en th a n d e arly tw en tie th c en tu rie s w as h eav ily

in flu en ced b y a b elie f th at s c ie n ce c o uld b e in tr o duced in to m ore a n d m ore

are as o f h um an l if e ( N els o n, 1 982). T his l e d q uite n atu ra lly t o a n e m phasis o n

in str u m en ta l ra tio nality . It w as th ought th at sc ie n ce co uld pro vid e bette r

meth ods f o r e v ery th in g, f ro m c o nductin g o ur p ers o nal a ffa ir s to m an ag in g a

fa m ily to ru nnin g a fa cto ry to p ro vid in g p ublic g oods an d se rv ic es. T he

te n den cy w as to lo ok to s c ie n ce fo r o ne b est w ay o f d oin g th in gs th at w as

co nsis te n t w ith g en eric s c ie n tif ic p rin cip le s. T hus w e b eg an t o t h in k a b out t h e

need t o o rd er a n d s ta n dard iz e s o cie ty a s w ell a s o ur o w n l iv es.

Under th e s w ay o f th is s c ie n tif ic a p pro ach to lif e , e ffic ie n cy o f in te ra ctio n

an d p ro ductio n b eco m es a c o ncern , a lo ng w ith p re d ic ta b ility o f th e b eh av io r

of o th ers . I n m odern s o cie ty , tr a d itio n n o lo nger p ro vid es s ta b ility , o rd er, a n d

co nsis te n cy o f c o nduct; t h ese t h in gs h av e t o b e t h ought a b out a n d w ork ed o ut

th ro ugh o rg an iz atio ns, ru le s, la w s, an d p ublic p olic ie s b ase d o n sc ie n tif ic

prin cip le s. Scie n ce pro vid es th e unif y in g fo undatio nal assu m ptio ns fo r

modern s o cie ty , to re p la ce th ose o f tr a d itio n ro ote d in h is to ry , c u sto m , a n d re lig io n, w hic h h av e b eco m e r e la tiv iz ed .

How ev er, to th e ex te n t th at p ostm odern th ought h as b eg un to d is p la ce

modern ity , f o undatio nal a ssu m ptio ns, in clu din g th ose b ase d o n s c ie n ce, lo se

th eir p ow er to d efin e u ltim ate r e ality . S cie n ce is in cre asin gly s e en a s a n oth er

so cia l c o nstr u ct th at s h ap es o ur p erc ep tio ns o f th e w orld b ut w ith n o g re ate r

au th ority th an o th er s u ch p ers p ectiv es. T he u se o f s c ie n tif ic p rin cip le s a s th e

so le b asis f o r d esig nin g a n d a d m in is te rin g p ublic o rg an iz atio ns is d is c re d ite d

(J u n a n d R iv era , 1 997).

Mult ip lic it y a n d D if fe ren tia tio n o f R ole s

Socia l re la tio nsh ip s a n d p ers o nal id en tity b eco m e m ore c o m ple x in m odern

so cie ty . P eo ple n o lo nger id en tif y th em se lv es w ith o ne ro le o r e v en a fe w .

Our liv es b eco m e a n in tr ic ate n etw ork o f in te rre la te d ro le s, a n d w e m ove

th ro ugh th ese ro le s w ith out th in kin g v ery ex plic itly ab out th e ch an ges in

beh av io r th ey r e q uir e . D urin g th e c o urs e o f o ne d ay , w e m ay a ssu m e a b ro ad

arra y of ro le s— pare n t, sp ouse , neig hbor, ad m in is tr a to r, ch urc h m em ber,

in vesto r, c itiz en , ro w in g p artn er— each w ith its o w n b eh av io ra l p atte rn a n d

se t o f o blig atio ns. R obert J a y L if to n ( 1 993) h as d esc rib ed th e w ay w e m ove

am ong ro le s, u sin g th e id ea o f th e

pro te a n s e lf

. P ro te u s w as a g od in G re ek

myth olo gy w ho h ad t h e p ow er t o c h an ge h is s h ap e a t w ill— to

morp h

h im se lf

fro m a h um an a p peara n ce to th at o f a b ir d o r a s n ak e o r a lio n o r ru nnin g

wate r o r a n yth in g e ls e i m ag in ab le . I n t h is w ay h e c o uld e lu de a n yone s e ek in g

to cap tu re him . T he pro te an m eta p hor w as als o use d in early A m eric an

vau dev ille th eate r, w hic h in volv ed tr a v elin g v arie ty s h ow s. T he

pro te a n a ct

was o ne o f th e sta n dard fa v orite s in th e v au dev illia n re p erto ir e , p ut o n b y

quic k -c h an ge a rtis ts . P ro te an a cto rs w ould m ove ra p id ly o n a n d o ff sta g e,

co stu m ed v ery d if fe re n tly f ro m m om en t t o m om en t. A k nig ht i n a rm or w ould

su dden ly b e tr a n sfo rm ed in to a V ic to ria n la d y, fo llo w ed b y a c o w boy, a n d

th en a b ib lic al fig ure , a n d o n a n d o n, to th e a m azem en t a n d d elig ht o f th e

au die n ce. T he dis tin guis h ed so cio lo gis t E rv in g G offm an (1 973) sim ila rly

em plo yed a d ra m atu rg ic al a p pro ach to u nders ta n din g th e w ay s in div id uals in

modern s o cie ty p re se n t th em se lv es a s d if fe re n t a cto rs a s th ey m ove f ro m o ne

se ttin g an d ro le to th e n ex t. C erta in ly , in th e p ostm odern w orld w ith its

co m ple x ity a n d m ultip le r o le s, w e c an a ll b e v ie w ed a s p ro te an a t a n y g iv en

tim e. Salm an R ush die ( 1 997) h as d esc rib ed th e e x tr e m ity o f th is p hen om en on a s

fo llo w s:

In th e m odern ag e, w e hav e co m e to unders ta n d our ow n se lv es as

co m posite s, o fte n c o ntr a d ic to ry , e v en in te rn ally in co m patib le . W e h av e

unders to od th at e ach o f u s is m an y d if fe re n t p eo ple . O ur y ounger s e lv es

dif fe r f ro m o ur o ld er s e lv es; w e c an b e b old i n t h e c o m pan y o f o ur l o vers

an d tim oro us befo re our em plo yers , prin cip le d w hen w e in str u ct our

ch ild re n a n d c o rru pt w hen o ffe re d s o m e s e cre t t e m pta tio n; w e a re s e rio us

an d friv olo us, lo ud a n d q uie t, a g gre ssiv e a n d e asily a b ash ed . T he 1 9th

cen tu ry c o ncep t o f th e in te g ra te d s e lf h as b een re p la ced b y th is jo stlin g

cro w d o f “ I” s. A nd y et, u nle ss w e a re d am ag ed , o r d era n ged , w e u su ally

hav e a r e la tiv ely c le ar s e n se o f w ho w e a re . I a g re e w ith m y m an y s e lv es

to c all a ll o f t h em “ m e” [ p . 3 6].

In th is R ush dia n w orld , th e m odern id ea o f a u nita ry , in te g ra te d s e lf b eg in s

to tr a n sm ute in to th e n otio n th at o ne s e q uen tia lly ta k es o n th e v ario us ro le s

th at c o lle ctiv ely o ne id en tif ie s a s o nese lf . P ostm odern v ie w s in te n sif y th is

pro ble m o f ro le s, fo r w ith out a n y d efin itiv e fo undatio nal a ssu m ptio ns a b out

hum an e x is te n ce a n d th e w orld a ro und u s, w e h av e n o a u th orita tiv e p la ce to

tu rn f o r d ete rm in in g w hic h r o le s o ught to h av e p rio rity . W e a re le ft in a s ta te

of c o nsta n t p erp le x ity a b out h ow to a llo cate o ur a tte n tio n, tim e, a n d e ffo rt

am ong th e a rra y o f c o m petin g r o le s. H ow d o I w eig h m y f a m ily o blig atio ns

ag ain st th ose o f th e o rg an iz atio n in w hic h I a m e m plo yed ? W hic h c o m es

fir s t: m y p ro fe ssio nal o blig atio ns o r t h ose o f m y o rg an iz atio n? W hat h ap pen s

when m y re lig io us v ie w s c o m e in to c o nflic t w ith d utie s a ssig ned a t w ork ?

How d o I so rt o ut th e p rio rity o f th e o blig atio ns asso cia te d w ith b ein g a

citiz en in a d em ocra tic so cie ty an d th ose asso cia te d w ith b ein g a p ublic

ad m in is tr a to r?

Fro m S ep ara tio n t o C o-M in glin g W ork a n d P riv ate

Lif e

In m odern s o cie ty , w ork n o lo nger b le n ds e asily in to o ur p riv ate liv es a s w as

tr u e o f tr a d itio nal so cie ty . It is se p ara te d in tim e an d sp ace fro m h om e,

fa m ily , a n d n eig hborh ood. I n t r a d itio nal s o cie ty t h e f a rm er o r h erd sm an l iv ed

at h is p la ce o f w ork a n d m ad e n o p re cis e t e m pora l d is tin ctio ns b etw een w ork an d nonw ork . The sa m e w as ty pic al fo r physic ia n s, artis ts , la w yers ,

sh opkeep ers , a n d c ra fts p eo ple . H ow ev er, in m odern s o cie ty , w ork is d one in

a p artic u la r p la ce a n d d urin g d efin ed h ours . D ev ia tio ns fro m th is n orm a re

vie w ed a s in tr u sio ns o f w ork in to o ur p riv ate lif e , o r v ic e v ers a . T his s p atia l

an d c h ro nolo gic al s e p ara tio n h as b een c o nduciv e to th e d ev elo pm en t o f a n

eth ic al id en tity f o r th e e m plo ym en t r o le th at m ay b e q uite d if fe re n t f ro m th e

eth ic al i d en titie s a sso cia te d w ith o th er r o le s. A lth ough t h at m ay t h re ate n o ne's

in te g rity a s a w hole p ers o n, i t m ay a ls o m ak e i t e asie r t o u phold a p ublic e th ic

with out u ndue i n flu en ce b y t h e n orm s o f m ore p ers o nal a n d p riv ate r o le s.

The str ic t se p ara tio n o f w ork a n d p riv ate re alm s b eg in s to b lu r a g ain in

postm odern so cie ty . A s org an iz atio ns decen tr a liz e an d m ove aw ay fro m

unif o rm w ork r e g im en s, a s d ealin g w ith i n fo rm atio n b eco m es m ore a n d m ore

th e m ean s o f c o nductin g w ork , a n d a s te ch nolo gy e n han ces c o m munic atio n,

in cre asin g n um bers o f p eo ple w ork at le ast p art o f th e tim e at h om e o r

an oth er p la ce o th er th an a c en tr a l o ffic e. B ein g in a s p ecif ic p la ce to d o o ne's

work b eco m es le ss a n d le ss im porta n t. C om pute rs , s c an ners , fa x m ach in es,

pag ers , c ellu la r p hones, a n d s m art p hones m ak e s p ace l e ss r e le v an t t h an t im e.

Som e e m plo yees w ork o ut o f c ars , a ir p la n es, h ote ls , te m pora ry o ffic es, a n d

hom es, a n d g o to th e p la ce o f th e o rg an iz atio n o nly in fre q uen tly . T he 2 009

Geo rg e C lo oney m ovie

Up i n t h e A ir

d ep ic ts a n e x tr e m e f o rm o f th is r o otle ss

sty le o f w ork .

These ch an ges m ay te n d to m ak e eth ic al id en titie s asso cia te d w ith

em plo ym en t ro le s le ss d is tin ct an d als o su sc ep tib le to in flu en ce b y o th er

ro le s. O blig atio ns f o r p ublic e th ic al n orm s s u ch a s th e p ublic in te re st m ay b e

in flu en ced b y th e in te re sts o f p riv ate ro le s. O r th e lo ss o f th e g eo gra p hic al

co ntin uity a n d re g ula r s u sta in ed re la tio nsh ip s o fte n fo und in th e w ork pla ce

may se rio usly atte n uate th e se n se o f co nnecte d ness th ro ugh w hic h eth ic al

sta n dard s a re r e in fo rc ed a n d m ain ta in ed .

Sch ultz (2 004) h as n ote d th is b lu rrin g o f b oundarie s in th e p ostm odern

world a n d its e ffe cts o n p ro fe ssio nal e th ic s. H e a rg ues th at “ in a p ostm odern

so cie ty m ark ed b y a b lu rrin g o f t h e l in e b etw een p ublic a n d p riv ate a s w ell a s

by th e g re ate r in te g ra tio n o f th e th re e e co nom ic s e cto rs , th e e th ic al r u le s th at

ap ply t o d if fe re n t f a cets o f l if e a n d w ork a re b ein g c h alle n ged , n ecessita tin g a

re th in kin g of m ora l boundarie s an d th e ru le s govern in g pro fe ssio nal

beh av io r” ( p . 2 81). H e s u ggests t h at w e m ay n eed t o r e co ncep tu aliz e e th ic s t o acco m modate th e m ove a w ay f ro m th e “ eth ic al c o m partm en ta liz atio n” o f th e

modern w orld .

Rela tiv is m

Neith er r o le s n or v alu es a re v ie w ed a s a b so lu te in m odern s o cie ty . R ole s a re

acq uir e d an d giv en up, an d th ey vary in im porta n ce fro m tim e to tim e.

Conse q uen tly th ey a re o fte n m ain ta in ed w ith c o nsid era b le r o le d is ta n ce. T hat

is to s a y , th ey a re n ot a llo w ed to c o m pre h en d o ur id en tity . R ole s a re r e la tiv e

to p artic u la r tim es a n d p la ces; th ey a re n ot in here n t in o ur m ost e sse n tia l

se lv es.

Sim ila rly , v alu es w ith in s o cie ty e x hib it e n orm ous d iv ers ity . S om e p eo ple

belie v e o ne th in g a n d s o m e a n oth er. W e a re n ot s h ock ed to d is c o ver th is f a ct

in m odern so cie ty ; in ste ad w e te n d to ack now le d ge an d em phasiz e th e

re la tiv ity o f v alu es.

Postm odern is m fu rth ers th e ero sio n of fo undatio nal assu m ptio ns as th e

univ ers a l an d u ltim ate sta tu s o f th e co re b elie fs o f m odern is m , ro ote d in

sc ie n ce, is als o calle d in to q uestio n. T he re la tiv ity o f v alu es th re ate n s to

underm in e an y belie f in oblig atio n an d duty . T hus th e in te n tio nal so cia l

co nstr u ctio n of public eth ic al norm s beco m es ev en m ore cru cia l. In th e

ab se n ce o f u niv ers a lly accep te d m ora l ab so lu te s, w ork in g o ut ag re em en ts

th ro ugh d is c o urs e , b oth i n p ers o n a n d e le ctr o nic ally , c o ncern in g t h e n orm s o f

our in te rd ep en den t p ublic lif e is e sse n tia l fo r e sta b lis h in g a b asis fo r s o cia l

sta b ility . In o th er w ord s, a lth ough w e m ay b e a b le to a g re e o n fu ndam en ta l

dem ocra tic v alu es, w e in te rs e ct in o ur c o lle ctiv e o r p ublic liv es a n d w e m ay

need to d elib era te a n d s o cia lly c o nstr u ct a s e t o f n orm s to a cco m modate th is

in te rs e ctio n.

Plu ra liz a tio n o f S ocie ty

The sig nif ic an t dynam ic beh in d all fo ur of th ese ch ara cte ris tic s is th e

plu ra liz atio n o f m odern s o cie ty . A s p eo ple f ro m d iv ers e c u ltu re s h av e m oved

with g re at ra p id ity in to u rb an c o m merc ia l a n d in dustr ia l c en te rs d urin g th e

past tw o hundre d years , th ey hav e fo und it necessa ry to co nfro nt one

an oth er's dif fe re n ces. The hom ogen eity of tr a d itio nal so cie ty , w ith its

unif y in g a n d s ta b iliz in g c u ltu ra l b onds, h as b een b ro ken . V ery little c an b e assu m ed o r ta k en fo r g ra n te d . N ew fo rm s o f o rg an iz atio n h av e d ev elo ped ,

an d new w ay s of co pin g w ith a bro ad sp ectr u m of lif e sty le s, die ts ,

pre fe re n ces, p olitic al p hilo so phie s, re lig io us v ie w s, a n d m odes o f e x ch an ge

hav e e v olv ed . T his “ p lu ra liz atio n o f lif e w orld s” h as le d to th e s e g m en ta tio n

of in div id ual liv es a s p eo ple h av e a tte m pte d to r e la te th em se lv es to “ se v ere ly

dis c re p an t w orld s o f m ean in g a n d e x perie n ce” ( B erg er, B erg er, a n d K elln er,

1973, p . 6 4).

The e arly sta g es o f th is p lu ra liz in g p ro cess a re v iv id ly illu str a te d in th e

music al

Fid dle r o n th e R oof

. In a little R ussia n v illa g e n am ed A nate v ka, a n

orth odox Je w is h co m munity liv es out a pre d ic ta b le an d sta b le ex is te n ce

th ro ugh its hig hly in te g ra te d w eb of tr a d itio n, w hic h en co m passe s daily

ro utin es as w ell as m ajo r ev en ts su ch as b ir th , m arria g e, an d d eath . T he

le ad in g fig ure , T ev ye, co nsta n tly re m in ds him se lf an d th e au die n ce th at

tr a d itio n is h ow h e k now s w ho h e is a n d w hat G od e x pects o f h im . “ W ith out

our tr a d itio n,” h e sa y s, “ w e a re a s sh ak y a s a fid dle r o n th e ro of” (S te in ,

1971, p . 6 4).

And, i n deed , i n t h e c o urs e o f t h e p la y , w e s e e t h e i n te g rity a n d a b so lu te n ess

of A nate v ka's tr a d itio ns ch alle n ged by th e arriv al of th e czar's tr o ops.

Fam ilia r tr a d itio ns govern in g co urts h ip , m arria g e, an d fa m ily ro le s are

co nfro nte d w ith d if fe re n t tr a d itio ns f ro m a n a lie n s o cie ty a n d r o bbed o f th eir

pow er. A lth ough in th is case it is a m atte r o f m odern so cie ty in vad in g a

tr a d itio nal c o m munity r a th er th an th e m ig ra tio n o f r u ra l v illa g ers to a n u rb an

are a, t h e p ro cess o f p lu ra liz atio n i s e sse n tia lly t h e s a m e.

In 1 927, in

The P ublic a nd Its P ro ble m s

, J o hn D ew ey d esc rib ed h ow th is

em erg in g hete ro gen eity gav e ris e to a m ultip lic ity of “p ublic s.” Fro m

Dew ey 's p ers p ectiv e, th ere is n o su ch th in g a s a u nita ry p ublic in m odern

so cie ty . As peo ple purs u e th eir vario us se lf -in te re sts th ro ugh so cia l

in te ra ctio n, th ere a re c erta in u nin te n ded , in dir e ct c o nse q uen ces, w hic h m ay

be v ie w ed p ositiv ely o r n eg ativ ely . E ntr e p re n eu rs w ho e sta b lis h s te el m ills t o

mak e a p ro fit i n dir e ctly c re ate a ir p ollu tio n. H ow ev er, t h ey m ay a ls o , w ith out

pla n nin g to d o s o , c re ate a m ark et fo r s m alle r b usin esse s in th e s u rro undin g

are a. P ublic s eith er dim in is h or en han ce th ese in dir e ct co nse q uen ces by

callin g f o r t h e a p poin tm en t o f p ublic o ffic ia ls a n d t h e p assa g e o f l a w s.

Thus g overn m en ta l o rg an iz atio ns h av e se rv ed an in cre asin gly p lu ra liz ed

public d urin g th e p ast h undre d y ears . T hese p ublic s, a cco rd in g to D ew ey 's th esis , a re g en era te d b y th e h ete ro gen eo us c o m positio n o f m odern in dustr ia l

so cie ty . A s w e atte m pt to re aliz e our ow n in te re sts , w e in varia b ly fin d

ours e lv es lin ked in te rd ep en den tly w ith o th ers w ho are d if fe re n t an d h av e

dif fe re n t in te re sts . W e a re s o m etim es in hib ite d in a ch ie v in g o ur g oals b y th e

activ itie s o f o th ers a n d s o m etim es h elp ed , b ut w hate v er th e c ase , w e b eg in to

re aliz e th at o ur fa te is b ound u p w ith th e d ecis io ns a n d b eh av io rs o f o th er

peo ple w hose v alu es d if fe r, i n w ay s b oth l a rg e a n d s m all, f ro m o ur o w n.

Postm odern c o nditio ns u nle ash th e in cre asin gly a sse rtiv e e x pre ssio n o f th is

so cio cu ltu ra l d iv ers ity . O ne re su lt is th at g overn m en t b ase d o n b ure au cra tic

ra tio nality , a tte m ptin g to o ffe r s ta n dard iz ed s e rv ic es a n d g oods, in cre asin gly

alie n ate s t h is d iv ers e c itiz en ry . O pera tin g w ith m odern a ssu m ptio ns a d van ced

by th e A m eric an Pro gre ssiv e m ovem en t of th e early tw en tie th cen tu ry ,

govern m en t fin ds its e lf in in te rm in ab le c o nflic t w ith th e p eo ple it se ek s to

se rv e. T he P ro gre ssiv es b elie v ed th at g overn m en t s h ould tr e at e v ery one th e

sa m e i n o rd er t o b e f a ir , a r e aso nab le a ssu m ptio n g iv en t h e p ow er o f p olitic al

mach in es in th at e ra . H ow ev er, n ow so m etim es g overn m en t is e x pecte d to

tr e at ev ery one eq ually (v otin g rig hts , access to em plo ym en t, ju dic ia l

pro cesse s) a n d a t o th er tim es to tr e at th em d if fe re n tly (h an dic ap ped a ccess,

Head Sta rt, affir m ativ e actio n). Sta n dard iz ed polic ie s an d pro gra m s are

in cre asin gly a t o dds w ith d iv ers e a n d v ocal p ublic s.

Im plic a tio n s f o r P ublic A dm in is tr a tio n

It ap pears th at m odern iz atio n h as h ad th re e m ajo r im plic atio ns fo r p ublic

ad m in is tr a tio n.

The P olit ic a l N atu re o f P ublic A dm in is tr a tio n

An in itia l im pact o f m odern iz atio n o n p ublic a d m in is tr a tio n w as th e a tte m pt

to se p ara te p olitic s fro m ad m in is tr a tio n in o rd er to d ev elo p a sc ie n ce o f

ad m in is tr a tio n, a sc ie n ce th at w as ex pecte d to le ad to a m ore effic ie n t

deliv ery o f p ublic g oods a n d s e rv ic es, o ne u nin flu en ced b y th e d iv ers io ns o f

politic al in flu en ce. T o th e p ro gre ssiv e re fo rm ers o f th e la te n in ete en th a n d

early tw en tie th c en tu rie s, th is s e em ed to o ffe r a n a d van ce b ey ond th e h ig hly

politic iz ed p ublic a d m in is tr a tio n th at h ad e x is te d u nder th e u rb an p olitic al

mach in es o f th e n in ete en th c en tu ry a n d in tr a d itio nal so cie tie s fo r m ost o f hum an h is to ry . H ow ev er, th e p ara d ox w as th at alth ough m odern th in kin g

em phasiz ed th e ap plic atio n of sc ie n tif ic ra tio nality to govern m en t, oth er

ch ara cte ris tic s o f m odern so cie ty m ad e th is n o m ore p ossib le in tw en tie th -

cen tu ry A m eric a th an it h ad b een in th e tr a d itio nal s o cie tie s o f th e p ast. T he

div ers if ic atio n of so cie ty pro duced a m ore tu rb ule n t en vir o nm en t fo r

ad m in is tr a to rs , o ne th at f u rth er im ped ed th e r e m oval o f p ublic a d m in is tr a tio n

fro m t h e s tr if e o f p olitic s.

In p ostm odern s o cie ty it h as b eco m e in cre asin gly c le ar th at a tte m ptin g to

defin e th e ad m in is tr a tiv e ro le as se p ara te d fro m politic s sim ply is o la te s

ad m in is tr a to rs fro m a hig hly dif fe re n tia te d popula ce an d dis c o ura g es

ad m in is tr a to rs fro m fa cin g th e su bsta n tiv e p olitic al ro le th ey d o p la y . T he

se p ara tio n o f p olitic s fro m a d m in is tr a tio n m ay h av e e x is te d in th e m in ds o f

Max W eb er ( 1 946), W oodro w W ils o n ( 1 887), L eo nard W hite ( 1 926), F ra n k

Goodnow (1 900), a n d a g en era tio n o f o th er sc h ola rs , b ut a lm ost n ow here

els e . T he n otio n th at p olitic ia n s m ak e p olic y d ecis io ns th ro ugh a p ro cess

in volv in g su bsta n tiv e ra tio nality a n d th at a d m in is tr a to rs sim ply a p ply th eir

best sc ie n tif ic in str u m en ta l re aso nin g to w ard im ple m en ta tio n has been

su ffic ie n tly atta ck ed to re q uir e no ex te n siv e tr e atm en t here (G au s, 1936;

Wald o, 1948). Postm odern iz atio n cre ate s pre ssu re s an d dynam ic s th at

co m pel a d m in is tr a to rs to b e in volv ed in d ecis io ns a b out g oals a n d p olic ie s

an d to co m pete w ith oth ers fo r pow er an d re so urc es (B en ven is te , 1977;

Cooper, 1 994; W am sle y a n d Z ald , 1 973).

The m ultip lic atio n a n d d if fe re n tia tio n o f r o le s a re t h e c ritic al p hen om en a i n

th e p olitic s o f th e p ublic a d m in is tr a tiv e r o le . E ach r o le is c o nstitu te d b y a s e t

of o blig atio ns— well o r p oorly d efin ed — th at a d m in is tr a to rs m ust c arry o ut t o

main ta in th e ro le , an d a se t of in te re sts — in co m e, so cia l sta tu s, an d jo b

sa tis fa ctio n— th at th ey d eriv e f ro m th e r o le . W e m ust b ear th e o blig atio ns if

we a re to s e cu re th e in te re sts . S om e o f th ese r o le s b elo ng e x clu siv ely to th e

priv ate l if e o f h om e, f a m ily , a n d c o m munity ; s o m e h av e t o d o w ith t h e w orld

of w ork ; an d so m e overla p th e tw o re alm s. T ogeth er th ey re p re se n t th e

co m ple x m ultif a cete d id en tity of a m odern ad m in is tr a to r (D ow nie , 1971;

Mean s, 1 970). F ro m tim e to tim e th ese ro le s c o m e in to c o nflic t w ith e ach

oth er; th e in te re sts an d o blig atio ns asso cia te d w ith th em co m pete fo r o ur

tim e, atte n tio n, an d en erg y. W e m ust m an ag e th is co nflic t effe ctiv ely to

pre v en t c o nflic ts o f i n te re st t h at c o uld d etr a ct f ro m o ur o bje ctiv e j u dgm en t a s ad m in is tr a to rs o r t h at a t l e ast c o uld b e p erc eiv ed t h at w ay b y t h e c itiz en ry .

The co nflic t betw een th ese ro le s aris e s fro m th e te n sio n cre ate d by

an tith etic al attr a ctio ns: pers o nal eco nom ic in te re sts an d th e oblig atio n to

pro te ct th e p ublic in te re st. T he p olitic s o f th e a d m in is tr a tiv e r o le is r o ote d in

th is k in d o f t e n sio n ( C ro zie r, 1 973; T ullo ck , 1 965; W am sle y a n d Z ald , 1 973).

Becau se th e vario us valu es in postm odern so cie ty are not univ ers a lly

accep te d , th ere a re n o a b so lu te s to d efin e p re cis e ly w hat o ught to b e d one

when r o le s c o nflic t. V alu es a re o rd ere d a n d p rio ritie s e sta b lis h ed a m ong r o le s

th ro ugh n eg otia tio n w ith o urs e lv es an d o th ers in each situ atio n, g en era lly

alo ng th e lin es d esc rib ed in C hap te r T w o. I t is in tr a d in g o ff o ur o w n v arie d

in te re sts f o r t h e i n te re sts o f t h e o rg an iz atio n w e w ork f o r, a n d v ic e v ers a , t h at

th e p olitic al d ynam ic s o f t h e a d m in is tr a tiv e r o le e m erg e.

Sheld on W olin (1 960) h as p ro vid ed th e b asis fo r a fu rth er e x pla n atio n o f

org an iz atio nal p olitic s. H is f o cu s i s t h e e v olu tio n o f c o m munitie s t h ro ugh t h e

modern iz in g p ro cess. W olin a rg ues th at d urin g th e n in ete en th a n d tw en tie th

cen tu rie s, th e “o rg an ic ,” in te g ra te d , tr a d itio n-b ase d co m munitie s of th e

pre in dustr ia l a n d p re u rb an e ra b eg an to c ru m ble in th e fa ce o f m ig ra tio n to

urb an an d in dustr ia l are as. Peo ple beg an to lo ok fo r sta b ility , id en tity ,

belo ngin g, se cu rity , purp ose , an d pow er in org an iz atio ns of all kin ds:

re lig io us, in dustr ia l, la b or, re fo rm , politic al, sc ie n tif ic , co m merc ia l, an d

govern m en ta l.

In th is p ro cess th e “ n atu ra l” n etw ork s o f r e la tio nsh ip s o f th e o ld er o rg an ic

co m munitie s w ere bro ken up, an d tr a n sfo rm ed by th e ra tio nality an d

in te n tio nality o f o rg an iz atio ns i n to i n str u m en ts f o r a ch ie v in g p artic u la r g oals .

They w ere d esig ned to r e fin e s te el, m an ufa ctu re a u to m obile s, p ro vid e w ate r,

re fo rm g overn m en t, o pera te tr a n sit f a cilitie s, a n d e n fo rc e b uild in g a n d s a fe ty

re g ula tio ns. H ow ev er, co ntr a ry to W eb er's id eal ty pe, peo ple re fu se to

partic ip ate in th ese o rg an iz atio ns in a p artia l fa sh io n. T hey te n d to w an t to

partic ip ate i n o rg an iz atio ns a s w hole s; t h ey t r y t o s p ill o ver t h e b oundarie s o f

ro le s in a driv e to cre ate su bstitu te s fo r “n atu ra l co m munitie s.” T hese

su bstitu te c o m munitie s, d esc rib ed b y S elz n ic k (1 966), su bvert th e g oals o f

org an iz atio ns a n d d iv ert th eir r e so urc es to w ard s a tis fy in g th e p ers o nal n eed s

of t h eir m em bers .

This i n te rm in glin g o f t w o s e ts o f c o nflic tin g g oals c re ate s t h e m otiv atio n t o

en gag e in politic al activ ity both w ith in an d bey ond th e org an iz atio n. Mem bers o f a n o rg an iz atio n b rin g w ith th em th e o fte n u nartic u la te d g oal o f

se lf -fu lf illm en t th ro ugh so cia l re la tio nsh ip s an d in te ra ctio n, but th e

org an iz atio n i s e sta b lis h ed t o a ch ie v e c erta in s p ecif ic g oals f o r a p ublic o r f o r

th e o w ners o f th e o rg an iz atio n. N eg otia tin g th e te n sio n b etw een th ese g oals

re q uir e s co ntin ual p olitic al tr a n sa ctio ns w ith in an o rg an iz atio n an d am ong

ex te rn al f o rc es.

Furth erm ore , th e o pportu nity to e n gag e in p olitic al b eh av io r is h eig hte n ed

by th e la titu de o f d is c re tio n g ra n te d to p ublic a d m in is tr a to rs (N ach m ia s a n d

Rose n blo om , 1980; R ohr, 1989). T he gro w in g co m ple x ity an d te ch nic al

natu re o f p ro ble m s ad dre sse d b y g overn m en t h av e cre ate d a te n den cy in

le g is la to rs to d ele g ate e n orm ous p ow ers to a d m in is tr a to rs , w ho a re p re su m ed

to hav e sp ecia liz ed know le d ge of partic u la r polic y are as. Thus th e

im ple m en ta tio n o f le g is la tio n b eco m es, in fa ct, an ex erc is e in su bsta n tiv e

polic y m ak in g. B ro ad le g is la tiv e “ sh ells ,” d eb ate d p ublic ly a n d a p pro ved b y

ele cte d o ffic ia ls , a re th en fille d w ith a m ultitu de o f a d m in is tr a tiv e d ecis io ns

th at a re f a r le ss v is ib le a n d f a r m ore d if fic u lt to m onito r. T hese b ure au cra tic

ru le s an d re g ula tio ns b eco m e th e re al su bsta n ce o f p ublic p olic ie s. T hese

cir c u m sta n ces are hig hly co nduciv e to politic al tr a n sa ctio ns (B en ven is te ,

1977; D av is , 1 969; L ie b erm an , 1 973; L ow i, 1 979).

Conse q uen tly it is n ot su rp ris in g to d is c o ver th at stu die s o f ro le o verla p

betw een p olitic ia n s a n d a d m in is tr a to rs i n W este rn d em ocra cie s r e v eal i t t o b e

su bsta n tia l. A berb ach , P utn am , a n d R ock m an ( 1 981) e x am in ed th e e x te n t to

whic h a d m in is tr a tiv e a n d p olitic al o ffic ia ls e n gag e in s im ila r a ctiv itie s. T hey

fo und su bsta n tia l co nverg en ce of th e tw o ro le ty pes, w ith ad m in is tr a to rs

sig nif ic an tly in volv ed in polic y m ak in g an d politic ia n s en gag in g in

ad m in is tr a tiv e m atte rs . T he g re ate st o verla p w as f o und i n t h e U nite d S ta te s.

If th e a d m in is tr a tiv e ro le in p ostm odern s o cie ty is in ev ita b ly p olitic al a n d

heav ily d is c re tio nary in n atu re , sig nif ic an t eth ic al co nsid era tio ns m ust b e

ack now le d ged . F or e x am ple , u sin g th e tw o b ro ad c ate g orie s o f in te rn al a n d

ex te rn al p olitic al tr a n sa ctio ns, w e c an id en tif y th re e ty pes o f e th ic al c o ncern s

asso cia te d w ith e ach : c o rru ptio n, l o ss o f e ffic ie n cy , a n d a b use o f p ow er. I f w e

lo ok at so m e ty pic al ex te rn al p olitic al tr a n sa ctio ns, w e fin d th ese eth ic al

co ncern s m an if e ste d i n t h e f o llo w in g w ay s:

Agen cy– politic a l p arty

. In tr a n sa ctio ns b etw een a p ublic a g en cy a n d a

politic al p arty th e e th ic al c o ncern is u su ally th e p ote n tia l c o rru ptio n o f th e a g en cy 's le g ally m an date d m is sio n. T he p arty m ay u se its in flu en ce

with ag en cy em plo yees to cir c u m ven t esta b lis h ed pro ced ure fo r th e

ben efit o f th e p arty o r c erta in o f its m em bers . T his c o rru pts th e p ublic

in te re st t h at a ll p ublic s e rv an ts a re o blig ate d t o u phold .

Agen cy– agen cy

. W hen t w o p ublic a g en cie s b eco m e i n volv ed i n p olitic al

tr a n sa ctio ns, th e c o ncern is f o r lo ss o f e ffic ie n cy . T his k in d o f s itu atio n

ty pic ally in volv es c o m petitio n fo r re so urc es a n d ju ris d ic tio n— th at is , a

str u ggle f o r p ow er. T he tim e a n d e ffo rt e x pen ded a m ount to a w aste o f

th e citiz en s' m oney as w ell as a bre ach of th eir good fa ith . Poor

ste w ard sh ip o f p ublic re so urc es is u ltim ate ly th e e q uiv ale n t o f s te alin g

fro m t h ose w ho h av e e n tr u ste d t h e a g en cy w ith t h eir p ro perty .

Agen cy– co nstitu tio nal bra nch of govern m en t

. Politic al in te ra ctio n

betw een a n a g en cy a n d m em bers o f t h e e x ecu tiv e, l e g is la tiv e, o r j u dic ia l

bra n ch es o f g overn m en t p ro duces a c o ncern f o r a b use o f p ow er a n d f o r

co rru ptio n. A buse o f p ow er m ay o ccu r w hen m em bers o f t h ese b ra n ch es

atte m pt to u se a n a d m in is tr a tiv e a g en cy fo r th eir o w n a d van ta g e. F or

ex am ple , a p re sid en t w ho t r ie s t o u se t h e p ow ers o f t h e I n te rn al R ev en ue

Serv ic e or th e Fed era l Bure au of In vestig atio n ag ain st politic al

opponen ts is g oin g b ey ond th e a p pro pria te u se o f h is e x ecu tiv e p ow er.

Convers e ly , if an ag en cy b eco m es in volv ed in u sin g its re so urc es in

unusu al w ay s to in flu en ce p ublic o ffic ia ls , th at m ay a ls o b e a m atte r o f

co rru ptio n. W hen , fo r ex am ple , a p la n nin g d ep artm en t co opera te s in

brib in g m em bers o f a c ity c o uncil to g ain fa v ors fo r a d ev elo per, th at

ag en cy 's m ain te n an ce o f t h e p ublic t r u st h as b eco m e c o rru pte d .

Agen cy– in te re st g ro ups

. C orru ptio n is als o th e co ncern w hen in te re st

gro ups b eco m e in volv ed in e ffo rts to in flu en ce a p ublic a g en cy . W hen

la b or unio ns, ch am bers of co m merc e, co m munity im pro vem en t

asso cia tio ns, p ro fe ssio nal a sso cia tio ns, i n dustr ia l a sso cia tio ns, t a x pay ers '

org an iz atio ns, a n d l o bbie s o f v ario us k in ds m ove b ey ond p ers u asio n a n d

beg in t o o ffe r f a v ors , c o rru ptio n i s i m min en t. T he a g en cy m ay f in d i ts e lf

on th e ta k e. Its c h arg e to s e rv e th e p ublic in te re st is th en c o rru pte d b y

th e r e w ard s o f s p ecia l i n te re sts .

When w e tu rn to th e in te rn al p olitic s o f p ublic o rg an iz atio ns, th e p rim ary

co ncern is w ith lo ss o f e ffic ie n cy . W hen in div id ual m em bers o r s u bunits o f

an a g en cy b eg in to c o m pete f o r r e so urc es a n d ju ris d ic tio n o r b uild c o alitio ns with o th ers , th e re so urc es p ro vid ed b y th e c itiz en ry to a cco m plis h a le g ally

esta b lis h ed m is sio n are sip honed off. T he politic al gam esm an sh ip of th e

mem bers o f th e o rg an iz atio n d iv erts tim e, m oney , a n d e ffo rt a w ay fro m th e

pro vis io n o f p ublic g oods a n d s e rv ic es. T he ta x pay ers a re d ep riv ed o f s o m e

portio n o f w hat g overn m en t r ig htf u lly o w es t h em .

The p olitic s o f p ublic a d m in is tr a tio n, th en , ra is e s s o m e p ote n tia lly s e rio us

co ncern s fo r th e eth ic al p erfo rm an ce o f ad m in is tr a to rs . A s w e all k now ,

politic s is unav oid ab le . G iv en th e dynam ic s of m odern so cie ty an d th e

in te rm in glin g o f p ers o nal an d o rg an iz atio nal g oals th at re su lts fro m th ese

dynam ic s, th e n otio n o f c le arly s e p ara tin g p olitic s f ro m a d m in is tr a tio n is n ot

valid . H ow ev er, it is p ossib le to id en tif y a s p ectr u m o f a d m in is tr a tiv e p olitic s

ra n gin g fro m m in im al to perv asiv e. It als o is possib le to co nceiv e of

ap pro ach es to re d ucin g, o r m in im iz in g, th e c le arly u neth ic al m an if e sta tio ns

of p olitic al c o nduct. ( T hese a re d is c u sse d f u rth er in C hap te rs S ix a n d S ev en .)

The sig nif ic an t questio n is not how to re m ove politic s en tir e ly fro m

ad m in is tr a tio n, but how an d under w hat cir c u m sta n ces to co nstr a in it.

Acco m plis h in g th is ta sk o r, m ore a ccu ra te ly , e n gag in g it re g ula rly re q uir e s

th at m an ag ers th in k n ot in te rm s o f d is c re te d ecis io ns b ut ab out w ay s to

desig n pro cesse s an d str u ctu re s. Polic ie s, pro ced ure s, org an iz atio nal

arra n gem en ts , tr a in in g, a n d sa n ctio ns (b oth p ositiv e a n d n eg ativ e) m ust b e

cra fte d t o e n co ura g e e th ic al c o nduct a n d r e in fo rc e i ts i m porta n ce.

Sep ara tio n o f t h e P ublic A dm in is tr a tiv e a n d C it iz en

Role s

The s e co nd i m pact o f m odern s o cie ty o n p ublic a d m in is tr a tio n i s t h at t h ere i s

a te n den cy to se p ara te th e ro le of public ad m in is tr a to r fro m th e ro le of

citiz en . A ll w ho w ork fo r a g overn m en t b ear a d ual o blig atio n: th ey are

re sp onsib le f o r s e rv in g t h e p ublic a n d t h ey a re m em bers o f t h e p ublic t h ey a re

su ppose d to se rv e. Els e w here I hav e arg ued th at th is dic h oto m y, th e

se p ara tio n o f th e p ublic a n d p riv ate r o le s o f th e p ublic a d m in is tr a to r, is b est

vie w ed o n a p ublic -p riv ate c o ntin uum (C ooper, 1 991). A s o ne m oves m ore

to w ard th e p ublic e n d o f th e c o ntin uum , c iv ic v ir tu e a n d th e c o m mon g ood

beco m e e v en m ore c ritic al, a s d oes th e n eed f o r th e r e sp onsib le a d m in is tr a to r

to e m bra ce t h e r o le o f c itiz en -a d m in is tr a to r. These dual ro le s so m etim es cre ate co nflic tin g oblig atio ns. T he ro le of

em plo yee of a sp ecif ic org an iz atio n, alth ough th eo re tic ally only an

ex pre ssio n o f a la rg er p ublic s e rv an th ood, is f a r m ore p ow erfu l a n d c o ncre te

in i ts s a n ctio ns a n d i n cen tiv es t h an t h at l a rg er r o le . T he r o le o f p ublic s e rv an t

quite e asily b eco m es lim ite d to , a n d d efin ed b y, th e p artic u la r o rg an iz atio n.

When th is o ccu rs , lo yalty to th e o rg an iz atio n m ay b eco m e co nfu se d w ith

duty to u phold th e p ublic in te re st. T his in tu rn o fte n g ets tr a n sla te d in to a n

assu m ptio n t h at c arry in g o ut t h e o rd ers o f s u perio rs i s t a n ta m ount t o f u lf illin g

one's d uty a s a p ublic s e rv an t.

Web er's (1 946) em phasis on fu nctio nal ra tio nality fo r ad m in is tr a to rs , a

re fle ctio n o f m odern iz atio n, e n co ura g es th e b if u rc atio n o f th ese tw o c ritic al

ro le s. W e t h in k s u bsta n tiv ely a b out t h e g oals a n d e n ds o f g overn m en t o nly i n

th e p riv ate s p here o f c itiz en sh ip . I n t h e r o le o f p ublic a d m in is tr a to r, h ow ev er,

we a re e n co ura g ed to th in k o nly o f th e b est m ean s to a cco m plis h th e g oals

pre d ete rm in ed by su perio rs or ele cte d offic ia ls . T he dic h oto m iz atio n of

citiz en a n d a d m in is tr a tiv e r o le s is s e ld om c o m ple te ; h ow ev er, th e p re ssu re to

move in th is d ir e ctio n is s tr o ng in m odern s o cie ty , a n d th e o utc o m e a m ounts

to a n u nknow n n um ber o f p ublic a d m in is tr a to rs w ho h av e g iv en u p so m e

measu re o f t h eir c itiz en sh ip a t t h e w ork pla ce.

Only b y d ev is in g w ay s o f e n co ura g in g p ublic a d m in is tr a to rs to m ain ta in a

lin kag e b etw een th ese tw o r o le s c an w e s u sta in a b ro ad er v ie w o f th e r o le o f

public se rv an t th an sim ply lo yalty to a govern m en ta l org an iz atio n. T he

te n sio n pro vid ed by th e citiz en sh ip ro le str e tc h es th e boundarie s of th e

ad m in is tr a tiv e ro le to in clu de th e hie ra rc h y of la w an d th e dem ocra tic

tr a d itio n. T his re d efin es th e public ad m in is tr a tiv e ro le in a w ay th at is

ap pro pria te f o r a n in cre asin gly d em an din g c itiz en ry in p ostm odern s o cie ty . I t

positio ns th e ad m in is tr a to r to en gag e citiz en s in th e pro cess of so cia lly

co nstr u ctin g a p olitic al o rd er ra th er th an se ek in g to im pose a u th orita tiv ely

ex pert so lu tio ns. (In m y earlie r w ork , I hav e arg ued th at th e public

ad m in is tr a to r sh ould a ct a s a fid ucia ry a d m in is tr a to r. F or a m ore c o m ple te

dis c u ssio n of th e fid ucia ry ad m in is tr a to r, se e C ooper, 1991, partic u la rly

Chap te r F iv e.)

The e th ic al s ig nif ic an ce o f th ese d ual ro le c h ara cte ris tic s s h ould b e c le ar.

One o f th e re aso ns civ il se rv ic e p ositio ns are g en era lly av aila b le o nly to

citiz en s is th e assu m ptio n th at th ey w ill carry in to p ublic o rg an iz atio ns a prim ary lo yalty to th e p eo ple . T his lo yalty , w hic h s h ould p re ced e lo yaltie s to

an y partic u la r ag en cy or govern m en t offic ia l, will en han ce th e

tr u stw orth in ess o f th eir se rv ic e (S ta h l, 1 976). B ecau se p ublic se rv ic e is a

fid ucia ry r o le , a n yone w ho a ccep ts s u ch e m plo ym en t is u ltim ate ly b ound b y

an oblig atio n to th e public of th at ju ris d ic tio n. This bond of tr u st is

main ta in ed o nly if o ne a cts w ith in a p ublic o rg an iz atio n a s a c itiz en w ith

certa in a d ded re sp onsib ilitie s— as a c itiz en , fir s t, a n d a s o ne c itiz en a m ong

oth ers w ho a g re es to d o w ork o n b eh alf o f a ll, s e co nd. P au l A pple b y ( 1 965)

has ch ara cte riz ed th e occu pan ts of th is dual ro le as “th e esp ecia lly

re sp onsib le c itiz en s w ho a re o ffic ia ls ” ( p . 3 35).

This is p artic u la rly c ritic al fo r th ose w ho a ssu m e a d m in is tr a tiv e ro le s, fo r

th ey ta k e o n th em se lv es e v en g re ate r fid ucia ry re sp onsib ilitie s. T hey a g re e

not only to perfo rm w ork on beh alf of th e peo ple of a govern m en ta l

ju ris d ic tio n but als o to assis t in str u ctu rin g, co ord in atin g, su pportin g,

su perv is in g, a n d e v alu atin g th e w ork o f o th ers w ho h av e c h ose n to s e rv e th e

co lle ctiv e w eal. I n t h e w ord s o f M ic h ael W alz er ( 1 970), “ T hey a re c itiz en s i n

lie u o f th e re st o f u s; th e c o m mon g ood is , s o to s p eak , th eir s p ecia lty ” (p .

216). T hey b ear r e sp onsib ility n ot o nly f o r th eir o w n u se o f p ublic r e so urc es

but a ls o fo r a ch ie v in g th e m ost e ffic ie n t a n d e ffe ctiv e e x pen ditu re o f th ose

re so urc es b y o th ers .

This c o m pound fid ucia ry re sp onsib ility o f p ublic a d m in is tr a to rs su ggests

th at w hen ev er an em plo yin g o rg an iz atio n is fo und to b e carry in g o ut its

mis sio n in a fa sh io n n ot in th e b est in te re sts o f th e citiz en ry , all p ublic

ad m in is tr a to rs , a n d in deed a ll p ublic e m plo yees, s h ould fe el d uty b ound to

ta k e a ctio n o n b eh alf o f t h eir f e llo w c itiz en s. T he f a ilu re t o d o s o r e p re se n ts a

bre ach o f tr u st a n d a d en ia l o f th e re sp onsib ilitie s o f c itiz en sh ip . T his is a n

eth ic al c o ncern o f t h e m ost f u ndam en ta l s o rt.

The re sp onsib ility asso cia te d w ith th e ro le of th e citiz en is ad m itte d ly

pro ble m atic . F or m ost of us, th ere is no fo rm al sta te m en t of w hat th at

re sp onsib ility e n ta ils , a s o nly n atu ra liz ed c itiz en s a re r e q uir e d to ta k e a n o ath

to u phold th e U .S . C onstitu tio n. H ow ev er, it s e em s re aso nab le to a rg ue th at

what is re q uir e d fo r th ose s e ek in g c itiz en sh ip is im plie d fo r th ose w ho a re

citiz en s b y b ir th .

Anoth er k in d o f p ro ble m is r a is e d b y W alz er ( 1 970), w ho s u ggeste d in th e

mid -tw en tie th c en tu ry th at s o m e p eo ple s e rio usly q uestio n th e m ora l p rio rity of c itiz en sh ip b ecau se o f th e a lie n atio n a n d p ow erle ssn ess th at m an y f e el. H e

arg ued t h at “ th ey e x perie n ce a k in d o f m ora l u neasin ess; t h eir c itiz en sh ip i s a

so urc e o f a n xie ty a s w ell a s o f s e cu rity a n d p rid e” ( p . 2 04).

Nev erth ele ss, W alz er an d oth er citiz en sh ip th eo ris ts hav e asse rte d th e

im porta n ce o f th e c o ncep t a n d th e fu nctio ns it s u ggests . D en nis T hom pso n

(1 970) arg ues th at n orm ativ e citiz en sh ip th eo ry fu nctio ns as an id eal an d

pic tu re s a d esir a b le s ta te o f a ffa ir s th at is n ot y et re aliz ed . W e m ig ht a rg ue

th at re h ab ilita tio n an d en han cem en t o f th e m ean in g o f citiz en sh ip are o f

cru cia l im porta n ce in th e m odern dem ocra tic ad m in is tr a tiv e sta te . If

dem ocra tic c itiz en sh ip c o ntin ues to w an e in m ean in g a n d d im in is h in r e ality ,

dem ocra tic a d m in is tr a tio n w ould s e em t o b e i m possib le . T he r e sp onsib ility o f

th e public ad m in is tr a to r m ust be gro unded in an unders ta n din g of th e

re sp onsib ility o f t h e c itiz en .

As w ell, in to day 's tr a n sn atio nal w orld th e m ean in g an d sig nif ic an ce o f

natio nal c itiz en sh ip m ay b e le ss m ean in gfu l a n d u se fu l th an it o nce w as a s a

dis tin ctio n th ro ugh w hic h w e c ate g oriz e o ur p ublic o blig atio ns (C ooper a n d

Yoder, 1 999). A s th e b oundarie s o f th e n atio n-s ta te a re in cre asin gly b lu rre d

an d th e n atio ns a ro und th e w orld b eco m e in cre asin gly in te rd ep en den t, th e

ta sk o f re d efin in g c itiz en sh ip a n d e v en o f c o nsid erin g

den iz e n sh ip

m ay b e

necessa ry .

Alth ough not all th e citiz en sh ip lite ra tu re pro je cts th e sa m e id eal, tw o

th re ad s s e em to r u n th ro ugh th ose th eo rie s th at a re d em ocra tic in o rie n ta tio n.

One o f th ese is , o f co urs e , p artic ip atio n o f so m e k in d in th e m ak in g o f

politic al d ecis io ns. T he o th er, w hic h is m ore d ir e ctly re le v an t h ere , is an

oblig atio n to co nsid er th e opin io ns an d w is h es of oth er m em bers of th e

citiz en ry a lo ng w ith o ne's o w n. I n P ra n ger's w ord s ( 1 968), “ In cu m ben t u pon

th e good m em ber, th e vir tu ous citiz en , is th e ab ility to m ak e politic al

decis io ns w hic h a t o nce p ro te ct h is o w n in te g rity a n d ta k e c o gniz an ce o f th e

in te g rity o f o th ers ” (p . 1 02). S im ila rly , W alz er (1 970) m ain ta in s th at u nle ss

citiz en s h av e “ a s e n se o f th e w hole o ver a n d a b ove th eir s e n se o f th em se lv es

as p artic u la r p ers o ns,” th ey w ill h av e little in te re st in p artic ip atin g in p olitic s.

He c o nclu des th at “ it is u pon s o m e s u ch s e n se o f th e w hole th at th e id eal o f

citiz en sh ip r e sts ” ( p . 2 15).

Does th is p rim ary o blig atio n to th e citiz en sh ip ro le su ggest th at p ublic

ad m in is tr a to rs sh ould ru n to th e p re ss, a n e le cte d o ffic ia l, o r a p ro se cu to r ev ery tim e s o m eth in g o ccu rs th at is n ot to ta lly c o nsis te n t w ith th e le g is la tiv e

man date fo r th eir o rg an iz atio n? C erta in ly n ot! It is im porta n t to a sse ss th e

se rio usn ess o f a s itu atio n, c o nsid er th e f u ll r a n ge o f v alu es a t s ta k e, a n d th en

act in p ro portio n to th ese c ir c u m sta n ces. T here is n oth in g to b e g ain ed a n d

much t o b e l o st b y o verre actin g t o a p erc eiv ed p ro ble m . A p re ss c o nfe re n ce i s

hard ly w arra n te d t h e f ir s t t im e t h e b oss a sk s y ou t o h ir e a f rie n d w ho d oes n ot

ra n k a s h ig hly a s o th er c an did ate s fo r a p ositio n. A ta lk w ith th e b oss to

ex pre ss y our d is a p pro val o f th e re q uest m ig ht b e m ore a p pro pria te . G eo rg e

Gra h am (1 974) p ro pose s a s e rie s o f s te p s th at a re g en era lly c o nsis te n t w ith

th is “ p ro portio nal” a p pro ach . H is p re sc rip tio ns a re f o unded o n th e c o ncep t o f

due p ro cess, w hic h re q uir e s “ all a d m in is tr a to rs in e x erc is in g th e p ow er a n d

dis c re tio nary a u th ority w ith w hic h th ey a re e n tr u ste d to b e in fo rm ed , to b e

fa ir , t o b e r a tio nal, a n d t o b e r e aso nab le ” ( p . 9 ).

Main ta in in g a citiz en sh ip ro le w hile se rv in g as an ad m in is tr a to r o f th e

public 's b usin ess re q uir e s a h ealth y se n se o f critic al p ers p ectiv e ab out an

ag en cy 's c o nduct, b ut it d oes n ot n ecessita te d is p ro portio nate re sp onse s to

mis d eed s th at m ay do m ore harm to th e org an iz atio n th an good. T he

org an iz atio n its e lf is a p ie ce o f th e p ublic 's p ro perty . A tte n tio n to th e d ouble

oblig atio ns o f b ein g a c itiz en -a d m in is tr a to r im plie s th e c are fu l a d ju stm en t,

re p air , or on occasio n m ajo r overh au l of th e public 's m ach in ery . M ora l

im ag in atio n is th e re q uis ite sk ill an d eth ic al au to nom y is th e quality of

ch ara cte r n ecessa ry f o r s u ch s te w ard sh ip .

The n orm ativ e b asis fo r v ie w in g th e a d m in is tr a to r in th is w ay is fo und in

our h is to ric al tr a d itio n o f eth ic al citiz en sh ip . T his tr a d itio n is n ot sim ply

re ceiv ed a s a g iv en fro m th e p ast b ut ra th er is a so cia l c o nstr u ct th at w e

ours e lv es h av e c o nsc io usly c re ate d o ver tim e th ro ugh d elib era tio n a n d th e

weav in g to geth er o f se v era l str a n ds o f p olitic al th ought: A nti- F ed era lis m ,

Je ffe rs o nia n is m , th e Colo nia l Purita n s' dem ocra tic id eas, an d an

unders ta n din g o f th e im porta n ce o f v olu nta ry asso cia tio ns. T his h is to ric al

so cia l c o nstr u ct s e rv es t h e f u nctio n o f a f o undatio nal s o urc e i n t h e a b se n ce o f

a u niv ers a l o ne. (S ee C ooper, 1 991, fo r an ela b ora tio n o f th is n orm ativ e

arg um en t.)

Man agers o f D iv ersit y

The t h ir d i m plic atio n o f t h e p ostm odern e ra i s t h at p ublic a d m in is tr a to rs m ust be m an ag ers o f d iv ers e in te re sts . I n th e a b se n ce o f a n y u nita ry v alu e s y ste m

with ab so lu te au th ority in p ostm odern so cie ty , b oth th e p olitic al an d th e

ad m in is tr a tiv e pro cesse s of govern m en t beco m e th e fo cu s of div ers e

in te re sts . A s c itiz en s a tte m pt to c o nstr u ct so cia lly a se t o f in stitu tio ns a n d

polic ie s to se rv e th e fu nctio ns once pro vid ed by re ceiv ed tr a d itio n an d

su bse q uen tly b y th e s c ie n tif ic p ers p ectiv e a d van ced b y m odern p ro gre ssiv e

re fo rm ers , a d m in is tr a to rs f in d t h em se lv es b esie g ed b y t h is a sse rtiv e c itiz en ry .

The a d m in is tr a tiv e a rm o f g overn m en t b eco m es sig nif ic an tly in volv ed in

man ag in g c itiz en s' d iv ers e in te re sts b ecau se , e v en w ith th e c o m ple x p olitic al

re p re se n ta tio n p ro vid ed b y th e fe d era l g overn m en t, p eo ple still d o n ot fe el

th at th eir p re fe re n ces, n eed s, a n d p ro ble m s a re c are d fo r a d eq uate ly . T hey

te n d to o rg an iz e in v olu nta ry a sso cia tio ns, w hic h a sse rt th eir o w n p ro posa ls

an d dem an ds at ev ery poin t in th e polic y m ak in g pro cess, fro m ele cto ra l

politic s to th e le g is la tiv e p ro cess to th e s ta g e in w hic h la w s a re im ple m en te d .

Ken neth M eie r (1 979) p oin ts o ut th at m ost o f th ese g ro ups h av e lo ng s in ce

le arn ed th at ad m in is tr a tiv e ag en cie s are k ey le v era g e p oin ts b ecau se m ost

le g is la tiv e p ro posa ls o rig in ate t h ere a n d t h e r e su ltin g l a w s a re t h en s h ap ed b y

th ese ag en cie s in sig nif ic an t w ay s d urin g im ple m en ta tio n (s e e als o L ow i,

1979).

In te re st gro up th eo ris ts su ch as B en tle y (1 949), C alh oun (1 953), an d

Tru m an ( 1 951) h av e a rg ued th at th ese c itiz en o rg an iz atio ns a re e sse n tia l f o r

dem ocra tic re p re se n ta tio n in th e m odern sta te . T he fo rm al m ach in ery of

govern m en t co uld not possib ly be desig ned to re p re se n t th e ch an gin g

sp ectr u m o f in te re sts in a p lu ra lis tic m ass s o cie ty lik e th e U nite d S ta te s w ith

su ffic ie n t p artic u la rity . It is fa r m ore e ffic ie n t a n d e ffe ctiv e to a llo w th ese

gro ups to fo rm th em se lv es an d pro je ct th eir ow n dem an ds in to th e

govern m en ta l p ro cess ( O rn ste in a n d E ld er, 1 978).

How ev er, Pare n ti (1 970) has id en tif ie d a se rio us pro ble m w ith th is

th eo re tic al pers p ectiv e. It assu m es th at all sig nif ic an t in te re sts can be

re p re se n te d in th is fa sh io n. In h is c ase stu dy o f e ffo rts to o rg an iz e a lo w -

in co m e c o m munity in N ew J e rs e y , P are n ti c o nclu des th at o nly th ose w ith th e

necessa ry eco nom ic re so urc es can m ak e th em se lv es heard effe ctiv ely by

govern m en t th ro ugh in te re st g ro up a ctiv ity . T he im ped im en ts th at c itiz en s

must su rm ount in ord er to in flu en ce public decis io n m ak in g hav e been

co ncep tu aliz ed as

partic ip atio n co sts

by a num ber of sc h ola rs , in clu din g Buch an an an d T ullo ck (1 962), W arre n an d W esc h le r (1 975), an d m yse lf

(C ooper, 1 979).

The gre ate st le v era g e fo r re d ucin g or su bsid iz in g th ese co sts lie s w ith

public ad m in is tr a to rs . A dm in is tr a to rs hav e gre at pote n tia l fo r in flu en cin g

polic y d ev elo pm en ts th at a ffe ct s e rv ic es, a n d o fte n c o nsid era b le d is c re tio n in

th e actu al deliv ery of se rv ic es. A dm in is tr a tiv e in itia tiv e in m an ag in g th e

plu ra l in te re sts of m odern so cie ty is esse n tia l fo r effe ctiv e govern m en t.

Adm in is tr a to rs c an p ro vid e a lin k b etw een c itiz en s a n d e le cte d o ffic ia ls th at

is v ita l fo r th e n atio nal, sta te , co unty , an d ev en city g overn m en ts w hose

popula tio ns h av e e x pan ded s u bsta n tia lly d urin g t h e p ast f if ty y ears .

How ev er, th e te n den cy of public ad m in is tr a tio n durin g th e fir s t th re e-

quarte rs o f th e tw en tie th c en tu ry w as to p la ce a h ig h v alu e o n s ta n dard iz ed

se rv ic es a n d to r e sp ond to th e p lu ra liz atio n o f s o cie ty w ith r e lu cta n ce ( C aro ,

1975). F ro m W eb er to W ils o n to G oodnow to W hite to U rw ic k a n d G ulic k

(1 957), w e fin d a ra th er c o nsis te n t d ev elo pm en t o f th e n otio n th at th e c h ie f

ta sk o f p ublic a d m in is tr a to rs is to im ple m en t p olic y e ffic ie n tly b y a p ply in g

gen eric sc ie n tif ic p rin cip le s. T his p ers p ectiv e e sc h ew ed n otio ns th at so cia l

an d c u ltu ra l v aria tio n m ig ht s ig nif ic an tly a ffe ct a d m in is tr a tiv e p rin cip le s. A

gen eric ap pro ach to ad m in is tr a tio n, co m bin ed with an em phasis on

effic ie n cy , gav e ris e to a te n den cy to sta n dard iz e public se rv ic es.

Cen tr a liz atio n, of co urs e , has been one of th e lo gic al co nco m ita n ts of

sta n dard iz atio n, p artic u la rly d urin g th e N ew D eal, W orld W ar II, an d th e

postw ar y ears .

Anoth er fa cto r c o ntr ib utin g to th e te n den cy to s ta n dard iz e s e rv ic es is th e

bure au cra tic assu m ptio n th at eq uality is th e eq uiv ale n t o f eq uity (C ooper,

1979)— th at if e v ery one is tr e ate d th e sa m e, th en e v ery one w ill b e tr e ate d

fa ir ly . T his assu m ptio n ap pears to hav e gain ed dom in an ce th ro ugh th e

Am eric an P ro gre ssiv e m ovem en t o f th e la te n in ete en th a n d e arly tw en tie th

cen tu rie s. R eactin g ag ain st th e sp ecia l fa v ors , p atr o nag e, an d n ep otis m o f

co rru pt m ach in e g overn m en ts , th e P ro gre ssiv es c alle d f o r e q ual tr e atm en t o f

all c itiz en s a n d g overn m en t e m plo yees. “ W ith out f e ar o r f a v or” w as th e w ay

public ad m in is tr a to rs w ere to p erfo rm th eir d utie s. G ood g overn m en t w as

unders to od a s s ta n dard iz ed g overn m en t, w hic h w ould in tu rn y ie ld e ffic ie n t

govern m en t.

The g oal o f th e r a tio nal m an ag em en t o f s o cie ty h as im plie d th at u nif o rm ity an d o rd er a re re q uis ite s fo r e ffic ie n cy . H ow ev er, in a d iv ers e so cie ty w ith

min im al sh are d assu m ptio ns ab out valu es an d lif e sty le s, th is kin d of

ra tio nality n o lo nger w ork s fo r m an y a d m in is tr a tiv e fu nctio ns. H ugh M ille r

(2 002) n ote s th at in a p ostm odern v ie w o f th e w orld , th e v ery n otio n o f

ra tio nality is m ore lim ite d th an it w as in th e m odern v ie w . M ille r a sse rts th at

“o ur a tte m pts t o b e e v er m ore r a tio nal s e em t o g et i n o ur o w n w ay . R ule s p ile

up o n r u le s… . R ule s a re in te n ded to b e n eu tr a l, p erh ap s, b ut th ey f a v or s o m e

in div id ual o r g ro up i n s p ite o f t h e b est i n te n tio ns… . C ontin ued a tte m pts t o b e

a m ore ra tio nal so cie ty b rin g a b out ra tio nality 's o w n c o rro sio n” (p p. x –xi) .

What se em s to be re q uir e d is a new unders ta n din g of ad m in is tr a tiv e

ra tio nality th at is r o ote d m ore in n otio ns o f d iv ers ity , c o m ple x ity , tu rb ule n ce,

an d d is o rd er a n d a ls o i n t h e i d ea t h at r a tio nality i s n ot s tr ic tly l in ear.

We a re n ow r e aliz in g th at th e o ld a p pro ach is u nw ork ab le a n d im pra ctic al.

A m ore s y ste m ic v ie w o f th e re la tio nsh ip b etw een p ublic a g en cie s a n d th e

citiz en ry is re q uir e d . If th e ad m in is tr a tiv e ag en cie s o f g overn m en t are to

re m ain e ffe ctiv e a n d v ia b le , th ey m ust v ie w th em se lv es a s o pen s y ste m s in

tu rb ule n t e n vir o nm en ts . T he c itiz en ry , th e m ost im porta n t c o m ponen t o f th e

en vir o nm en t, m ust n ot b e ig nore d o r e v en y ie ld ed to re lu cta n tly u nder th e

pre ssu re of in te re st gro ups. R ath er, th ose w ho dir e ct an d m an ag e th ese

sy ste m s m ust act w ith in itia tiv e to be certa in th at in put fro m th e so cia l

en vir o nm en t is b ein g s o ught a n d e n co ura g ed a n d th at p artic ip atio n c o sts a re

re d uced o r s u bsid iz ed a s m uch a s p ossib le .

This k in d o f d ynam ic i n te ra ctio n w ith t h e s o cia l e n vir o nm en t m ay t r a d e o ff

so m e m easu re o f p ro ductio n e ffic ie n cy f o r a v arie d a rra y o f s e rv ic e t y pes a n d

deliv ery m odes. It m ay e v en le ad to th e d ev olu tio n o f s e rv ic e p ro vis io n o r

deliv ery t o l o w er l e v els o f s c ale , s u ch a s n eig hborh oods. ( S ee B erry , P ortn ey ,

an d T hom pso n, 1 991, fo r re se arc h o n n eig hborh ood g overn an ce.) A ll th is

may lo ok le ss o rd erly a n d th ere fo re le ss e ffic ie n t in th e sh ort ru n b ut m ay

re p re se n t a m ore effe ctiv e ad ap ta tio n to th e plu ra lis tic en vir o nm en t of

modern s o cie ty . I t m ay b e a m atte r o f g iv in g u p a lim ite d k in d o f e ffic ie n cy ,

whic h su boptim iz es th e p ro ductio n a t th e le v el o f sin gle a g en cie s, fo r th e

sa k e o f th e b ro ad er e ffic ie n cy o f th e e n tir e d em ocra tic g overn m en ta l s y ste m

(B en nis , 1 966).

The e th ic al c o ncern r e la te d t o t h is t h ir d p ro positio n i s f o r s o cia l e q uity . T he

assu m ptio n t h at e q ual t r e atm en t i s f a ir t r e atm en t n eed s t o b e r e ex am in ed . I f i n fa ct m em bers o f a p opula tio n a re n ot th e s a m e a n d a re q uite v arie d in th eir

ta ste s, n eed s, p re fe re n ces, an d b ack gro unds, th en tr e atin g th em as th ough

th ey w ere t h e s a m e i s n ot f a ir .

In eq uity h as o fte n b een in stitu tio naliz ed in th e p ra ctic es o f p ublic a g en cie s

under th e b an ner o f sta n dard iz atio n. T his is b ecau se th e sta n dard s a d opte d

hav e te n ded to b e th e k ey a ttr ib ute s o f o ne p opula tio n g ro up— ofte n th ose o f

th e m ajo rity . C onse q uen tly , s o -c alle d s ta n dard iz ed c iv il s e rv ic e e x am s h av e

ofte n a ssu m ed th e a ttr ib ute s o f w hite , A nglo -S ax on, P ro te sta n t m ale s a s th e

norm s. P ublic e d ucatio n h as b een b uilt a ro und c u rric u la r a ssu m ptio ns th at

fa v or th e offs p rin g of m id dle -c la ss, Englis h -s p eak in g nucle ar fa m ilie s.

Housin g c o des h av e b een sta n dard iz ed a ro und id eal, n ew ly b uilt str u ctu re s

an d co nta in a bia s ag ain st th e vary in g co nditio ns an d need s of old er

neig hborh oods.

Ach ie v in g s o cia l e q uity r e q uir e s a r e sp onse f ro m p ublic a g en cie s t h at s e ek s

to a p pro xim ate t h e n eed s, p re fe re n ces, a n d d em an ds o f t h e c itiz en ry . B ecau se

ev ery one i s n ot t h e s a m e i n t h ese r e sp ects , p ublic a d m in is tr a to rs n eed a s e t o f

te ch niq ues fo r g en era tin g c itiz en in put in to o rg an iz atio nal d ecis io n m ak in g,

an d th e s k ills to u se th ese te ch niq ues a n d to m ain ta in a n a ccu ra te a sse ssm en t

of t h e s o cia l e n vir o nm en t. T his k in d o f i n te llig en ce w ould m ak e i t p ossib le t o

co nsid er a n a rra y o f s e rv ic es a n d m ean s o f s e rv ic e d eliv ery c o ngru en t w ith a n

org an iz atio n's c o nstitu en t g ro ups.

This i s n ot s im ply a p ra g m atic a tte m pt t o a ch ie v e g re ate r c lie n t s a tis fa ctio n.

Alth ough it is c o ncern ed w ith p ro vid in g p ublic s e rv ic es in a m ore s a tis fy in g

fa sh io n, it is m ore fu ndam en ta lly a m atte r of eq uita b le tr e atm en t of all

citiz en s. F urth erm ore , fro m o ne p ers p ectiv e, in a m odern in dustr ia l so cie ty

th e fu ll re aliz atio n of citiz en sh ip in volv es th e ab ility to co nsu m e public

se rv ic es. A cco rd in g to W arre n a n d W esc h le r (1 975), c itiz en sh ip in su ch a

so cie ty r e q uir e s m ore t h an t h e l e g al c o nstitu tio nal r ig hts n orm ally a ssu m ed t o

be th e p riv ile g es o f c itiz en sh ip . T hey a rg ue th at p eo ple a re d ep riv ed o f th eir

fu ll c itiz en sh ip if s e rv ic es a re p ro vid ed in s u ch a w ay th at th ey a re to o c o stly

to c o nsu m e.

Warre n a n d W esc h le r (1 975) d efin e

co nsu m ptio n c o sts

as in cre m en ts o f

tim e, e ffo rt, a n d m oney th at m ust b e a d ded b y a c itiz en -c o nsu m er to a p ublic

good o r s e rv ic e t o m ak e i t c o nsu m ab le . I f o ne h as t o w alk o r d riv e t h re e m ile s

to r e ach th e n eare st b us s to p, th ose tr a v el c o sts m ust b e a d ded to th e f a re to asc erta in th e tr u e co st o f u sin g th at b us se rv ic e. T hus w hen se rv ic es are

sta n dard iz ed , th e co sts of co nsu m in g public se rv ic es w ill be dis tr ib ute d

dis p ro portio nate ly to re so urc es. J u stic e in th e d is tr ib utio n o f p ublic s e rv ic es

will n ot b e a ch ie v ed o r e v en a p pro xim ate d .

A p ara lle l e th ic al c o ncern h as t o d o w ith t h e d is tr ib utio n o f t h e p artic ip atio n

co sts . It h as b een a rg ued th at if p ublic a d m in is tr a to rs a re to d ev elo p m ore

accu ra te a sse ssm en ts o f c itiz en s' n eed s, p re fe re n ces, a n d d em an ds, th e a ctiv e

purs u it o f c itiz en in put is n ecessa ry . T o a ch ie v e th at g oal, p artic ip atio n c o sts

must b e lo w en ough to allo w th e fu ll p opula tio n sp ectr u m to p artic ip ate .

Again , th is is n ot o nly a m atte r o f p ra ctic al n ecessity b ut als o an eth ic al

co nsid era tio n. C itiz en s s h ould n ot b e d ep riv ed o f th e rig ht to p artic ip ate in

public d ecis io n m ak in g b ecau se it re q uir e s a g re ate r ex pen ditu re o f tim e,

effo rt, a n d m oney th an th ey c an a ffo rd o r th an th e a n tic ip ate d b en efits s e em

to w arra n t.

Public a d m in is tr a to rs in m odern s o cie ty n eed to b e e ffe ctiv e m an ag ers o f

div ers e in te re sts . A s b oth O str o m (1 974) a n d W ald o (1 965) h av e a rg ued , if

dem ocra tic ad m in is tr a tio n is to ta k e pla ce, public ad m in is tr a to rs m ust

ab an don t h eir a lm ost e x clu siv e p re o ccu patio n w ith t h e c o sts o f p ro vid in g a n d

pro ducin g p ublic g oods a n d s e rv ic es a n d b eg in to b ala n ce th ese c o sts a g ain st

th e c o sts th at m ust b e b orn e b y c itiz en s. W ald o s ta te s th e c ase th us: “ It h as

lo ng se em ed to m e th at our ap pro ach to ad m in is tr a tio n is fa r to o m uch

‘p ro ducer o rie n te d ,’ f a r to o little ‘ c o nsu m er o rie n te d .’ … But if w e v alu e n ot

only e ffic ie n cy a n d p ro ductiv ity , b ut a ls o se ek to in cre ase h um an e q uality

an d t h e v alu es o f p artic ip atio n, d o w e g iv e t h ese th e a tte n tio n th ey d ese rv e i n

an d r e la tin g t o t h e a d m in is tr a tiv e p ro cess? ” ( p . 4 5).

Polit ic a l T heo ry a n d A dm in is tr a tiv e E th ic s

Sin ce th e f ir s t e d itio n o f th is b o ok w as p ublis h ed , it h as b eco m e in cre asin gly

cle ar th at an ad eq uate n orm ativ e th eo ry o f th e p ublic ad m in is tr a tiv e ro le ,

in clu din g a n orm ativ e e th ic al t h eo ry , m ust b e d ev elo ped w ith in t h e c o nte x t o f

a la rg er p olitic al th eo ry o f p ublic a d m in is tr a tio n. S uch a th eo ry lie s b ey ond

th e s c o pe o f th is b ook, b ut it s e em s a p pro pria te to in dic ate a t th is p oin t s o m e

of t h e e th ic al i s su es t h at w ill n eed t o b e d ealt w ith i n s u ch a t h eo ry .

The d iv ers ity o f m odern s o cie ty , t h e t e n den cy t o s e p ara te t h e a d m in is tr a tiv e ro le fro m th e citiz en sh ip ro le , an d th e dem is e of th e m odern notio n of

se p ara tin g p olitic s an d ad m in is tr a tio n, w ith its en su in g re co gnitio n o f th e

unav oid ab ility of ad m in is tr a tiv e dis c re tio n— all th ese fo rc es pose so m e

se rio us p ro ble m s fo r a d efin itio n o f th e a d m in is tr a tiv e ro le . It is n ow c le ar

th at public ad m in is tr a to rs m ak e politic al ju dgm en ts th at ra n ge fro m th e

tim in g of polic y pro posa ls to budget str a te g ie s to ex te n siv e ru le s an d

re g ula tio ns p urs u an t to la w s th at le g is la to rs in te n tio nally m ad e v ag ue. P ublic

ad m in is tr a to rs ex erc is e dis c re tio n, an d th ey do so politic ally w ith both

le g is la to rs a n d c lie n te le g ro ups. A dm in is tr a to rs s e em to b e f ir m ly e n sc o nced

with in t h e p olic y “ ir o n t r ia n gle ” a s k ey p artic ip an ts i n t h e p olitic al p ro cess o f

public p olic y f o rm atio n a n d a d optio n ( s e e S m ith , 1 988, f o r e x am ple s o f t h is ).

How ev er, ev en th ough w e ack now le d ge th is fa ct an d fin d no dearth of

desc rip tiv e a n aly se s o f th e d ynam ic s in volv ed , w e h av e n oth in g a p pro ach in g

an a d eq uate p re sc rip tiv e p olitic al th eo ry o f th e a d m in is tr a tiv e r o le th at w ould

defin e t h e o blig atio ns o f t h e a d m in is tr a to r i n t h e p olitic s o f t h e p olic y p ro cess

(F le is h m an , L ie b m an , a n d M oore , 1 981).

Fro m th is la ck o f n orm ativ e cla rity , eth ic al is su es em erg e aro und th re e

re la te d asp ects of th e dem ocra tic public polic y pro cess: re p re se n ta tio n,

ed ucatio n, a n d i m ple m en ta tio n.

Rep rese n ta tio n

In m odern dem ocra cie s it is assu m ed th at th e peo ple m ain ta in politic al

so vere ig nty b ut th at th eir in te re sts , d em an ds, a n d p re fe re n ces a re r e fle cte d in

th e p ublic p olic ie s th at a re a d opte d . T his h as b een u nders to od a s o ccu rrin g

th ro ugh th e pro cess of re p re se n ta tio n, w hic h until re cen t years has been

assig ned e n tir e ly to th e p olitic al ro le . H ow ev er, if w e h av e n ow d is c o vere d

th at ad m in is tr a to rs als o act in politic ally sig nif ic an t w ay s in th e polic y

pro cess, th en it is u ncle ar w heth er in s o d oin g th ey a ls o in cu r o blig atio ns f o r

re p re se n ta tio n. It se em s pla u sib le to arg ue th at in a dem ocra tic polity ,

re p re se n ta tio n o f p opula r p re fe re n ces, d em an ds, a n d in te re sts m ust o pera te in

so m e fa sh io n w hen ev er s u bsta n tiv e p olic y d ecis io ns a re b ein g m ad e. If th is

pro positio n is v alid , p ublic a d m in is tr a to rs b ear a n o blig atio n to r e p re se n t th e

citiz en ry w hen ev er th ey are in flu en cin g or dete rm in in g th e su bsta n tiv e

co nte n t o f p olic ie s ( C han dle r, 1 984).

Should w e a ccep t th e re p re se n ta tiv e o blig atio ns o f p ublic a d m in is tr a to rs , th ere a re o nly m ore q uestio ns to b e a n sw ere d . W e m ust th en a sk to w hat

ex te n t an d in w hat w ay s ad m in is tr a to rs are so o blig ate d . H ow m ust th eir

ex erc is e o f d is c re tio n b e i n fo rm ed b y t h e p eo ple ? I s s o m e k in d o f r e g ula r a n d

sy ste m atic acco untin g to th e public re q uir e d , an alo gous to th e ele cto ra l

pro cess, o r is a cco unta b ility m ain ta in ed th ro ugh e le cte d o ffic ia ls ? In o th er

word s, s h ould a d m in is tr a tiv e r e p re se n ta tio n i n volv e a d ir e ct r e la tio nsh ip w ith

th e p eo ple o r o ne t h at i s i n dir e ct? I f i t i s d ir e ct, s y ste m atic a n d r e g ula r c itiz en

partic ip atio n se em s an esse n tia l fu nctio n fo r th e ad m in is tr a to r. If in dir e ct,

th en e le cte d o ffic ia ls a n d a d m in is tr a to rs b ear re sp onsib ility fo r d is c o verin g

way s o f a ck now le d gin g a n d c arry in g o ut a s h are d o blig atio n.

Furth erm ore , if public ad m in is tr a to rs are oblig ate d to re p re se n t th e

citiz en ry in so m e fa sh io n, th e cla ssic d eb ate o ver

tr u ste e

v ers u s

dele g ate

defin itio ns o f re p re se n ta tio nal o blig atio n m ust b e a d dre sse d o nce m ore , th is

tim e in th e a d m in is tr a tiv e c o nte x t. A re p ublic a d m in is tr a to rs tr u ste es o f s u ch

norm ativ e g oals a s t h e p ublic i n te re st, s o cia l e q uity , o r r e g im e v alu es? S hould

it b e th eir re sp onsib ility to a d vocate s u ch v alu es a n d p rin cip le s, e v en if th e

peo ple d o n ot c le arly s u pport t h em ?

Or a re a d m in is tr a to rs m ore lik e d ele g ate s o f th e p eo ple , w hose p rim ary

co ncern s h ould b e d is c ern in g p ublic p re fe re n ces a n d d em an ds a n d r e sp ondin g

to th e p ublic w ill? H ow a re p ro fe ssio nal ju dgm en t a n d p opula r s o vere ig nty

re co ncile d w ith e ach o th er? If th ey a re ir re co ncila b le , w hic h s h ould re ceiv e

prio rity ( G ru neb au m , 1 981)? O f c o urs e t h e v ery n atu re o f p ro fe ssio nalis m f o r

public a d m in is tr a to rs tu rn s o n th e a n sw er to th ese q uestio ns. Is p ro fe ssio nal

ju dgm en t f u ndam en ta lly o rie n te d to w ard te ch nic al e x pertis e o r p opula r w ill?

Whic h t a k es p rio rity ?

We m ig ht b e te m pte d to c o nclu de to o q uic k ly th at th e tr u ste e d efin itio n is

more a p pro pria te f o r th e a d m in is tr a to r, a s th at is a n onele ctiv e r o le . I t m ig ht

ap pear th at re p re se n ta tio n th ro ugh d ele g atio n o ccu rs o nly th ro ugh a s p ecif ic

overt a ct, s u ch a s e le ctio n. W e m ig ht a ssu m e t h at u nle ss t h e p eo ple e n gag e i n

an a ct o f c h oosin g s o m e in div id ual to r e p re se n t th em , d ele g atio n o f p olitic al

re sp onsib ility can not occu r. This is not necessa rily th e case , how ev er.

Dele g atio n o f a u th ority a n d r e sp onsib ility to o rg an iz atio ns a n d c ate g orie s o f

pers o nnel a ls o o ccu rs th ro ugh le g is la tio n, in clu din g th e n orm al p ro cess a n d,

in s o m e s ta te s, th e in itia tiv e o f c itiz en s. T hese a re a cts o f g en era l d ele g atio n.

Pre su m ab ly pers o ns w ho th en accep t positio ns w ith in th ose desig nate d org an iz atio ns a re a g re ein g to b ear re sp onsib ility fo r c arry in g o ut th e p ublic

will e x pre sse d in th e la w . I f th at w ill is n ot c le arly d efin ed in la w , w e m ig ht

co nclu de th at th ere is a n im plie d o blig atio n to d is c ern it th ro ugh w hate v er

mean s p ossib le .

Of c o urs e th e p ro ble m w ith c arry in g o ut th e d ele g ate ro le in m an y su ch

case s is th at a ll to o o fte n th e le g is la tio n, o f n ecessity , d oes n ot s p ell o ut th e

public 's w ill w ith g re at c la rity . T hus t h e a d m in is tr a to r i s l e ft w ith a d ele g atio n

of p ublic a u th ority a n d re sp onsib ility th at d oes n ot sp ecif y in m uch d eta il

what is ex pecte d . Politic al co nflic ts av oid ed an d te ch nic al questio ns

unad dre sse d in th e le g is la tiv e p ro cess a re p asse d a lo ng to a d m in is tr a to rs fo r

re so lu tio n.

The q uan dary o ver d ele g ate v ers u s t r u ste e o blig atio ns i s e m bed ded i n t h ese

ch ara cte ris tic s of m uch of our le g is la tio n. O n th e one han d, unre so lv ed

politic al is su es call fo r ad m in is tr a to rs to act as re sp onsiv e dele g ate s in

arriv in g a t so m e p ublic ly a ccep ta b le a ctio ns. O n th e o th er h an d, te ch nic al

co nsid era tio ns se em to re q uir e tr u ste es w ho e x erc is e th e b est p ro fe ssio nal

ju dgm en t in g ettin g th e jo b d one w hile s e rv in g th e b ro ad n orm ativ e g oals o f

th e p olity . C onse q uen tly th e q uestio n s till r e m ain s: W hic h o f th ese a sp ects o f

public p olic y sh ould ta k e p re ced en ce? S hould th e p ublic ad m in is tr a to r b e

oblig ate d to r e p re se n t th e c itiz en ry p rim arily a s a d ele g ate o r a s a tr u ste e? I s

th e a n sw er v aria b le , a n d if s o u nder w hat c o nditio ns s h ould o ne o r th e o th er

beco m e d om in an t?

Educa tio n

It is g en era lly a ssu m ed in d em ocra tic th eo ry th at n ot o nly d o th e s o vere ig n

peo ple v ote b ut th ey c ast a m ore o r l e ss in fo rm ed b allo t. O ne j u stif ic atio n f o r

politic al d eb ate is its e d ucatio nal v alu e. W hen p oin ts o f v ie w a re e x ch an ged ,

re aso n is put to th e te st of opposin g id eas, perc ep tio n is bro ad en ed ,

in fo rm atio n is acq uir e d , an d se lf -in te re st is te m pere d by th e in te re sts of

oth ers . I t is th ro ugh th is p ro cess o f in div id uals ta lk in g to o ne a n oth er a n d to

th eir politic al le ad ers th at a public is fo rm ed an d public opin io n is

tr a n sfo rm ed in to p ublic ju dgm en t (Y an kelo vic h , 1 981). Y an kelo vic h (1 991)

arg ues th at p ublic o ffic ia ls a n d o th er e x perts h av e p aid to o little a tte n tio n to

th e dev elo pm en t of m atu re , in fo rm ed , co nsis te n t public ju dgm en t fro m

re activ e, em otio nal, ill- in fo rm ed , an d in co nsis te n t p ublic o pin io n. O n th e basis o f ex perim en ta l re se arc h , h e p re sc rib es th e n ecessa ry sta g es o f th is

pro cess i n w ay s h elp fu l t o a d m in is tr a to rs .

In th e c la ssic d em ocra tic fo rm ula tio n, th e k ey a cto rs in th is e d ucatio nal

pro cess of deb ate an d delib era tio n are th e citiz en ry an d th eir ele cte d

re p re se n ta tiv es. H ow ev er, in th e m odern a d m in is tr a tiv e s ta te , th e ro le o f th e

care er public ad m in is tr a to r m ust be acco unte d fo r in so m e w ay . Som e

ad m in is tr a to rs a re c lo se to th e p ro ble m s, p osse ss s p ecia liz ed k now le d ge a n d

te ch nic al e x pertis e , h av e o ngoin g re la tio nsh ip s w ith th eir c lie n te le g ro ups,

an d te n d to m ain ta in lo nger te n ure in govern m en t th an m ost politic ia n s.

These ap pear to be esse n tia l partic ip an ts in th e dem ocra tic ed ucatio nal

pro cess, a n d th eir c o ntr ib utio ns s e em n ecessa ry fo r th e fu ll d ev elo pm en t o f

public j u dgm en t.

How ev er, t h e o blig atio ns o f t h is a sp ect o f t h e a d m in is tr a tiv e r o le — te ach in g

an d le arn in g th ro ugh public delib era tio n— are neith er cle arly defin ed nor

gen era lly a ck now le d ged . F or e x am ple , o ne c an re ad th e e n tir e w in te r 1 985

is su e o f t h e

Kette rin g R evie w

( d ev ote d to e x plo rin g h ow th e p ublic le arn s th e

public 's b usin ess, w ith a rtic le s b y th oughtf u l in div id uals s u ch a s D ere k B ok,

Dan ie l Yan kelo vic h , Robert M acN eil, Gera ld in e Ferra ro , an d Dav id

Math ew s) a n d b e le ft w ith th e im pre ssio n th at p ublic a d m in is tr a to rs h av e n o

ro le to p la y in th is p ro cess. T his jo urn al— gen era lly in sig htf u l, s o phis tic ate d ,

an d “d ed ic ate d to im pro vin g th e quality of public lif e in th e A m eric an

dem ocra cy ”— mak es no m en tio n of public ad m in is tr a to rs as sig nif ic an t

partic ip an ts in th e public dia lo gue. T he cla ssic al assu m ptio ns, fo cu sin g

ex clu siv ely o n th e c itiz en s a n d th eir p olitic al le ad ers , s e em n ot to h av e b een

re v is e d here fo r th e m odern ad m in is tr a tiv e sta te . The m ed ia an d th e

univ ers ity c o m munity a re a ck now le d ged , b ut n ot t h e b ure au cra ts w ho r u n o ur

govern m en ts o n a d ay -to -d ay , y ear-to -y ear b asis .

How ev er, if th e o blig atio n o f p ublic a d m in is tr a to rs fo r a k ey e d ucatio nal

ro le in th e pub lic polic y pro cess is to be esta b lis h ed , th ere are dif fic u lt

questio ns to be an sw ere d an d is su es to be re so lv ed . T he oblig atio n fo r

in fo rm in g an d ed ucatin g ele cte d offic ia ls beh in d th e sc en es is gen era lly

accep te d . A naly zin g d ata , co nductin g re se arc h , p re p arin g b rie fin g p ap ers ,

pro vid in g ev alu atio n stu die s, an d dev elo pin g co st estim ate s fo r ele cte d

offic ia ls on re q uest are all w ell w ith in th e cla ssic al vie w of public

ad m in is tr a to rs as n onpolitic al in str u m en ts in th e h an ds o f p olitic ia n s. B ut once w e m ove a w ay f ro m th at v ie w , h ow d o w e r e d efin e th e o blig atio ns a n d

re sp onsib ilitie s o f a d m in is tr a to rs fo r e d ucatin g p olitic ia n s a n d le arn in g fro m

th em ? H ow sh ould w e unders ta n d th e ed ucatio nal re la tio nsh ip betw een

ad m in is tr a to rs a n d p olitic ia n s i n t h e p olic y p ro cess?

For ex am ple , is th ere an o blig atio n to g o b ey ond th e re activ e m ode o f

pro vid in g in fo rm atio n o nly w hen re q ueste d ? S hould th e a d m in is tr a to r ro le

in clu de p re p arin g a n d d is se m in atin g in fo rm atio n n ot re q ueste d ? S hould a n

ag en cy ad m in is tr a to r fe el oblig ate d to pla n an d co nduct a sy ste m atic

ed ucatio nal p ro cess, f o rm al o r i n fo rm al, f o r p olitic ia n s? S hould t h is i n clu de a

delib era te ch alle n ge of politic al positio ns th at do not ap pear to be w ell

gro unded in f a ctu al k now le d ge, o f v alu es a n d p rin cip le s th at a re in co nsis te n t

with th e A m eric an politic al tr a d itio n, or of pro posa ls th at re st on fa u lty

meth ods? P ublic a d m in is tr a to rs u se th ese a p pro ach es fro m tim e to tim e, b ut

sh ould w e n ow i n clu de t h em a m ong t h e d efin ed p ro fe ssio nal o blig atio ns?

Furth erm ore , s h ould w e s o m etim es e x pect a d m in is tr a to rs to c arry o n th is

ed ucatio nal p ro cess n ot b eh in d th e sc en es b ut o ut o n c en te r sta g e, in fu ll

public v ie w ? I f p olitic s a n d a d m in is tr a tio n c an not b e n eatly s e p ara te d , d oes i t

mak e s e n se to th in k in te rm s o f th e to ta l s u bord in atio n o f th e a d m in is tr a tiv e

ro le to th e p olitic al o ne? O r s h ould w e u nders ta n d a d m in is tr a tiv e o blig atio ns

as i n clu din g t h e c h aste n in g o f p o litic al w him s a n d p assio ns w ith i n fo rm atio n,

ex pertis e , a n d e x perie n ce? I f p ublic a d m in is tr a to rs a re “ citiz en s in lie u o f th e

re st o f u s,” s h ould w e n ot h old th em r e sp onsib le f o r p ublic ly a sk in g th e h ard

questio ns an d artic u la tin g th e co unte ra rg um en ts th at ex pan d an d bala n ce

politic al d eb ate , s o t h at t h eir f id ucia ry o blig atio ns a re v is ib ly e x ecu te d ?

Lik ew is e , how sh ould we unders ta n d th e oblig atio n of th e public

ad m in is tr a to r t o l e arn f ro m e le cte d o ffic ia ls ? T he p ro fe ssio nal p ers p ectiv es o f

th e a d m in is tr a to r, ro ote d in s p ecia liz ed k now le d ge, te ch nic al e x pertis e , a n d

clie n te le r e la tio nsh ip s, m ay n eed to b e le av en ed w ith p olitic al k now le d ge o f

partic u la r c o nstitu en cie s a n d th e w ay s o f le g is la tiv e b odie s. A dm in is tr a tiv e

sp ecia lis ts c an b eco m e n arro w ly f o cu se d a n d is o la te d f ro m th e te x tu re o f th e

politic al c o m munity . T hey m ay b e o verly i n flu en ced b y c lie n t g ro ups a n d t o o

fir m ly c o nvin ced o f th e “ o ne b est w ay ” o f g ettin g th e jo b d one. T hey m ay

fo rg et t h e i m porta n ce o f p olitic al s u pport, n ot o nly i n a d optin g p olic y b ut a ls o

in c arry in g it o ut. L eg is la tiv e p ro posa ls , a d m in is tr a tiv e r u le s a n d r e g ula tio ns,

an d ag en cy im ple m en ta tio n p la n s m ay n eed to b e in fo rm ed re g ula rly b y politic al r e alitie s.

In ad ditio n to a m utu al oblig atio n fo r m utu ally ed ucativ e in te ra ctio n

betw een a d m in is tr a to rs a n d e le cte d o ffic ia ls , w e m ust a ls o th in k th ro ugh a

sim ila r re la tio nsh ip betw een citiz en s an d public ad m in is tr a to rs . Perh ap s

ad m in is tr a to rs w ho cu ltiv ate th e k in d o f re la tio nsh ip w ith p olitic ia n s ju st

outlin ed s h ould b e p re p are d to o ffe r tw o k in ds o f k now le d ge to th e c itiz en ry .

The fir s t is th eir o w n s u bsta n tiv e k now le d ge o f p artic u la r p olic y a re n as a n d

is su es, an d th e se co nd is pro ced ura l know le d ge ab out how govern m en t

work s. I f p ublic a d m in is tr a to rs a re i n deed “ th e e sp ecia lly r e sp onsib le c itiz en s

who a re o ffic ia ls ,” s h ould n ot te ach in g th eir fe llo w c itiz en s th ese th in gs b e

am ong th eir c en tr a l re sp onsib ilitie s? If th e re st o f u s a re to b e a b le to c arry

out o ur c itiz en sh ip o blig atio ns, is it n ot e sse n tia l th at c itiz en -a d m in is tr a to rs

pro vid e us w ith th eir best te ch nic al in fo rm atio n an d ju dgm en ts , in an

unders ta n dab le f o rm , a s w ell a s a m ore e ffe ctiv e u nders ta n din g o f h ow b oth

th e b ure au cra cy a n d t h e l e g is la tiv e p ro cess w ork ?

Com munic atin g su bsta n tiv e in fo rm atio n to th e p ublic is e sse n tia l if se lf -

govern m en t is to b e ev en ap pro xim ate d . S hould n ot p ublic ad m in is tr a to rs

unders ta n d t h is a s a n o ngoin g, p rim ary r o le o blig atio n t h at c an not b e s e t a sid e

or c u rta ile d in o rd er to g et o n w ith th e jo b? I s th at n ot th e m ost f u ndam en ta l

jo b, a p art f ro m w hic h a d m in is tr a tiv e e ffic ie n cy i s s h orts ig hte d a n d d oom ed t o

fa ilu re ?

Should w e n ot a ls o a g re e th at c are er p ublic a d m in is tr a to rs a re lik ely to b e

th e b est c iv ic s te ach ers a v aila b le to th e c itiz en ry ? E xperie n ce w ith s tu den ts ,

esp ecia lly underg ra d uate s, su ggests th at one of th e w eak est lin ks in our

dem ocra tic pro cess is th e te ach in g of young peo ple ab out how th eir

govern m en t r e ally w ork s. S om eh ow t h ey a rriv e a t t h e u niv ers ity w ith , a t b est,

a w ooden , o vers im plif ie d c o ncep tio n o f th e w ay p ublic p olic y is f o rm ed a n d

im ple m en te d . T his c aric atu re , a cq uir e d fro m te x tb ooks, is c arrie d o ver in to

ad ult lif e . Q uite u nders ta n dab ly th en , m ost o f o ur c itiz en s h av e little o r n o

in te re st in g overn m en t b ecau se it ap pears b orin g in th e ex tr e m e, o r th ey

beco m e q uic k ly d is illu sio ned o ver th e g ap b etw een th e w orld a s it is a n d th e

world as th ey w ould lik e it to b e. In eith er case th ey re m ain alo of an d

dis e n gag ed fro m activ itie s th at ap pear to be eith er dull or bey ond th eir

pow ers .

Adm in is tr a to rs en gag ed w ith th e g overn m en ta l p ro cess o n a d aily b asis may b e th e b est so urc es o f a ric h er a n d m ore in te re stin g k now le d ge o f its

pra ctic al w ork in gs. H ow can w e best co ncep tu aliz e a public ed ucatio nal

oblig atio n f o r a d m in is tr a to rs ? M ig ht it c all f o r a n e x pan ded u nders ta n din g o f

how ad m in is tr a to rs are in volv ed in polic y m ak in g, perh ap s as pro ced ura l

co ach es o r tu to rs fo r c itiz en s a s w ell a s su bsta n ce e x perts ? Y an kelo vic h 's

work ( 1 991) s u ggests t h at a d m in is tr a to rs h av e a p ote n tia lly s ig nif ic an t r o le t o

pla y i n h elp in g c itiz en s m ove f ro m p ublic o pin io n t o p ublic j u dgm en t.

Now l e t u s t u rn t o t h e r e cip ro cal a sp ect o f t h e e d ucativ e o blig atio n b etw een

ad m in is tr a to rs an d citiz en s. Is th ere not th e re sp onsib ility to le arn fro m

citiz en s a s w ell a s te ach th em ? If a d m in is tr a to rs sta n d in a re p re se n ta tiv e

re la tio nsh ip to th e citiz en s, is it not esse n tia l th at th ey unders ta n d th e

pers p ectiv es, p ro ble m s, p erc eiv ed n eed s, a n d p rio ritie s o f c itiz en s? B ecau se

ad m in is tr a to rs c o ntr o l f o cu se d p ublic r e so urc es, a re th ey n ot o blig ed to r e ach

out b ey ond t h eir c lie n te le g ro ups a n d p olitic al a llie s t o h elp c u ltiv ate a p ublic

co nvers a tio n? D av id M ath ew s (1 985) a rg ues p ers u asiv ely th at a d em ocra tic

public can not fo rm an d act on its ow n beh alf w ith out su ch ongoin g

co nvers a tio n. It c an not m ove b ey ond p ublic o pin io n to p ublic k now le d ge,

an d f in ally to p ublic ju dgm en t, w ith out th is c o m munic atio n. M ath ew s in sis ts

th at “ a d em ocra tic c o m munity b eg in s w ith — in fa ct, is — a c o nvers a tio n o f

peo ple ta lk in g to one an oth er. If th e public is not ta lk in g, th ere is no

dem ocra tic s ta te ” (p . 6 0). U nfo rtu nate ly M ath ew s's a ssu m ptio n s e em s to b e

th at only ele cte d offic ia ls an d th e m ed ia bear th e re sp onsib ility fo r th is

co m munic ativ e pro cess. D oes th at not am ount to th e om is sio n of an

en orm ous s e t o f a cto rs w ith k now le d ge, e x perie n ce, a n d re so urc es? S hould

we not ag re e th at th e ad m in is tr a tiv e ro le als o carrie s w ith it a cen tr a l

oblig atio n t o s tim ula te t h is c o nvers a tio n a m ong c itiz en s a n d t o l e arn f ro m i t?

Moore ( 1 995) r e fe rs to th is k in d o f e n gag em en t a s “ p ublic d elib era tio n” in

whic h c itiz en s m ust c o m e to g rip s w ith c o nflic tin g v ie w poin ts e x pre sse d b y

oth ers a n d in th e p ro cess s e ek s o m e k in d o f a cco m modatio n, s o m e fo rm o f

“p ublic v alu e.” H e v ie w s t h is k in d o f “ so cia l l e arn in g” a s a k ey r e sp onsib ility

of g overn m en t l e ad ers h ip .

We te n d to a ssu m e th at p ublic d elib era tio n c an o ccu r o nly o n a re la tiv ely

sm all sc ale , but w e hav e se en th e em erg en ce of vario us te ch niq ues fo r

co nductin g la rg e-s c ale d elib era tio n. O ne e x celle n t e x am ple is th e w ork b ein g

done b y A m eric a S peak s, u nder th e le ad ers h ip o f C aro ly n L uken sm ey er. T he org an iz atio n has co nducte d delib era tiv e ex erc is e s fo r as m an y as fiv e

th ousa n d p eo ple , u sin g a c o m bin atio n o f te ch nolo gy a n d s k ille d fa cilita tio n.

The a ssu m ptio n u nderly in g th is w ork is th at p ublic o ffic ia ls a n d th e p ublic

can le arn fro m e ach o th er in c o m ple x w ay s. S pecif ic p ro je cts a re d esc rib ed

on th e Am eric a Speak s W eb site (

www.a m eric asp eak s.o rg

), an d th e

org an iz atio n's n ew est a n d m ost w id ely a v aila b le o ffe rin g is a n o nlin e f o ru m ,

The A m eric an S quare (

th eam eric an sq uare .o rg

).

Im ple m en ta tio n

Fin ally , th e th ir d a sp ect o f th e p olic y p ro cess th at g iv es r is e to e th ic al is su es

ab out th e a d m in is tr a tiv e r o le in a p olitic al e n vir o nm en t is im ple m en ta tio n. I n

th e c la ssic al p ara d ig m th is w as th e a d m in is tr a tiv e a re a o f re sp onsib ility . It

was assu m ed th at ad m in is tr a to rs re ceiv e p olic y d ecis io ns ad opte d b y th e

politic ia n s a n d t h en a p ply t h eir b est f u nctio nal r a tio nality t o p uttin g t h em i n to

pra ctic e. A dm in is tr a to rs w ere ex pecte d to u se th eir p ro fe ssio nal ju dgm en t

ab out th e m ost e ffic ie n t m ean s fo r a ch ie v in g th e p urp ose s d efin ed b y th e

le g is la tiv e p ro cess.

How ev er, o nce w e ack now le d ge th e in esc ap ab ly p olitic al n atu re o f th e

public ad m in is tr a tiv e ro le , th e oblig atio ns of th e ad m in is tr a to r in

im ple m en ta tio n a re n o lo nger s o c le ar. F or e x am ple , a s le g is la tiv e p ro posa ls

ofte n o rig in ate th ro ugh a d m in is tr a tiv e in itia tiv e, w hat o blig atio n s h ould th e

ad m in is tr a to r b ear f o r s p ecif y in g a t th e o uts e t h ow a p ro pose d p olic y w ould

lik ely b e im ple m en te d ? S hould te n ta tiv e ru le s, re g ula tio ns, sta n dard s, an d

tim e sc h ed ule s be co nsid ere d alo ng w ith th e polic y sta te m en t durin g

le g is la tiv e d eb ate , ra th er th an b e le ft u ntil la te r fo r a d m in is tr a to rs to h an dle ,

as is ty pic ally th e case now ? W ould th is se rv e th e purp ose of m ak in g

ad m in is tr a tiv e actio n more vis ib le , an d th ere fo re more politic ally

acco unta b le ?

Als o , w e fa ce ag ain a pro ble m ra is e d in th e earlie r dis c u ssio n of th e

re p re se n ta tio nal oblig atio ns of th e public ad m in is tr a to r. H ow sh ould w e

ex pect a d m in is tr a to rs to b ala n ce p ro fe ssio nal e x pertis e w ith r e p re se n ta tio n o f

th e citiz en durin g th e im ple m en ta tio n phase ? A sid e fro m w hate v er is

cu rre n tly re q uir e d b y la w fo r citiz en p artic ip atio n in th e im ple m en tin g o f

polic ie s, sh ould public ad m in is tr a to rs bear an eth ic al oblig atio n fo r

re p re se n tin g t h e i n te re sts , p re fe re n ces, a n d d em an ds o f t h e p eo ple t h ro ughout th is p ro cess? I f s o , is th e tr u ste e o r th e d ele g ate p ers p ectiv e m ore a p pro pria te

here a t th e im ple m en ta tio n s ta g e? S hould w e u nders ta n d th e a d m in is tr a to rs '

best pro fe ssio nal ju dgm en t as ta n ta m ount to th e tr u ste e ap pro ach to

re p re se n ta tio n a n d th ere fo re s u ffic ie n t? O r s h ould w e e x pect a d m in is tr a to rs ,

in im ple m en tin g p olic ie s, to th in k o f th em se lv es as d ele g ate s in n eed o f

re g ula r in str u ctio ns fro m th e peo ple ? Is th ere an ap pro pria te sh if t fro m

dele g ativ e r e p re se n ta tio n i n t h e a d optio n s ta g e, a s p olic y i s b ein g f o rm ed , t o a

tr u ste e pers p ectiv e in im ple m en ta tio n, as te ch nic al ju dgm en ts are m ost

pro m in en t a t t h at p oin t? O r a g ain , i s t h e a p pro pria te p ers p ectiv e v aria b le f ro m

polic y to p olic y , d ep en din g o n c o m ple x ity , s p ecif ic ity , s c o pe, s ig nif ic an ce o f

pro bab le i m pact, a n d o th er f a cto rs ?

Con clu sio n

Fro m th ese th re e asp ects of th e public polic y pro cess— re p re se n ta tio n,

ed ucatio n, an d im ple m en ta tio n— a ple th ora of eth ic al is su es em erg es

co ncern in g t h e p ro per d efin itio ns o f t h e a d m in is tr a tiv e r o le i n a n u nav oid ab ly

politic al c o nte x t. N o a n sw ers h av e b een p ro vid ed , b ut th e q uestio ns ra is e d

beg in t o s k etc h o ut a n a g en da f o r n orm ativ e t h eo ry d ev elo pm en t.

These attr ib ute s of th e ad m in is tr a tiv e ro le in m odern an d postm odern

so cie ty a n d t h e e th ic al c o ncern s t h at e m erg e f ro m t h em l e ad q uite n atu ra lly t o

a c o nsid era tio n o f a d m in is tr a tiv e r e sp onsib ility . T he n ex t c h ap te r b eg in s th is

co nsid era tio n w ith a d is c u ssio n o f th e o rig in s o f th e te rm

re sp onsib ility

a n d

tw o w ay s o f c o ncep tu aliz in g i t. Chapte r F ou r

Adm in is tr a tiv e R esp on sib ility : T he K ey t o

Adm in is tr a tiv e E th ic s

The K ey t o A dm in is tr a tiv e E th ic s

R esp onsib ility i s t h e k ey c o ncep t i n d ev elo pin g a n e th ic f o r t h e a d m in is tr a tiv e

r o le . F re d eric k M osh er (1 968) o nce o bse rv ed , “ R esp onsib ility m ay w ell b e

t h e m ost im porta n t w ord in a ll th e v ocab ula ry o f a d m in is tr a tio n, p ublic a n d

p riv ate ” ( p . 7 ). T w o m ajo r a sp ects o f th at c o ncep t, a s d efin ed b y M osh er, a re

u se d h ere : s u bje ctiv e r e sp onsib ility a n d o bje ctiv e r e sp onsib ility .

W hen y ou a re c o nfro nte d w ith a p ro ble m o ver w hat y ou sh ould d o in a

g iv en s itu atio n, y ou a re e x perie n cin g t h e n eed t o d efin e y our r e sp onsib ility i n

t h e a d m in is tr a tiv e r o le . F or e x am ple , a ssu m e th at y ou a re a n a d m in is tr a to r in

a fe d era l ag en cy th at allo cate s fu nds to sta te ag en cie s fo r hig hw ay

c o nstr u ctio n. Y our org an iz atio n's m is sio n is to re v ie w pro pose d hig hw ay

r o ute s fo r th eir an tic ip ate d en vir o nm en ta l im pact. H ig hw ay pro je cts th at

s ig nif ic an tly affe ct th e en vir o nm en t re q uir e an en vir o nm en ta l im pact

s ta te m en t (E IS ); o th ers d o n ot. O ne s e ctio n o f a fe d era l la w m an date s th at

h ig hw ay s c o nstr u cte d w ith f e d era l m oney m ay n ot h av e a n im pact o n o r u se

p ublic p ark la n d u nle ss it h as b een d ete rm in ed th at th ere is n o fe asib le a n d

d esir a b le a lte rn ativ e— a d ete rm in atio n th at is n orm ally m ad e b y c o nductin g

a n E IS .

A m em ber o f y our s ta ff c o m es t o y ou w ith a p ro ble m . S he h as r e cen tly m et

w ith offic ia ls fro m a certa in sta te to dis c u ss a pro pose d hig hw ay

i m pro vem en t. T he ex is tin g h ig hw ay is n arro w , w ith n o sh ould ers , an d is

h eav ily u se d b y e le m en ta ry sc h ool stu den ts o n b ic y cle s a n d o n fo ot. It is

e x tr e m ely u nsa fe , a s th e n um ber o f a ccid en ts c le arly in dic ate s. T he sc h ool

b oard , th e p are n ts ' a sso cia tio n, th e lo cal n ew sp ap er, th e c o uncil o f c h urc h es,

a n d s ta te h ig hw ay o ffic ia ls a re a ll c allin g fo r im med ia te a ctio n to w id en th e hig hw ay a n d a lle v ia te th ese h azard ous c o nditio ns. T he p ro ble m , a cco rd in g to

th e sta te hig hw ay pla n ners , is th at w id en in g th e ro ad su ffic ie n tly w ould

re q uir e ta k in g a s tr ip o f la n d f iv e f e et w id e b y o ne h undre d f e et lo ng f ro m a

fif ty -a cre m unic ip al p ark . T his c an b e d one w ith in th e la w , b ut a n E IS m ust

be p re p are d to id en tif y a n d ju stif y th e e n vir o nm en ta l im pact. T his p ro cess

ty pic ally t a k es t w o y ears t o c o m ple te .

You are re sp onsib le fo r co m ply in g w ith th e la w under w hic h your

org an iz atio n o pera te s, b ut y ou als o b elie v e y our re sp onsib ility is to h elp

re d uce th e h azard ous ro ad c o nditio n a s q uic k ly a s p ossib le . T w o ty pes o f

re sp onsib ility c an b e i d en tif ie d i n t h is c ase . T hey a re s o m etim es r e fe rre d t o a s

obje ctiv e r e sp onsib ility a n d s u bje ctiv e r e sp onsib ility ( M osh er, 1 968; W in te r,

1966).

Obje ctiv e re sp onsib ility

h as to d o w ith ex pecta tio ns im pose d fro m

outs id e o urs e lv es, w here as

su bje ctiv e r e sp onsib ility

c o ncern s th ose th in gs f o r

whic h w e fe el a re sp onsib ility . A s w e s h all s e e, th is d is tin ctio n is n ot to b e

unders to od a s a d if fe re n ce b etw een r e al a n d u nre al; s u bje ctiv e r e sp onsib ility ,

as an ex pre ssio n of our belie fs , pers o nal an d pro fe ssio nal valu es, an d

ch ara cte r t r a its , i s j u st a s r e al a s t h e m ore t a n gib le m an if e sta tio ns o f o bje ctiv e

re sp onsib ility . T hese co ncep ts are th e m ain fo cu s o f th is ch ap te r, as th ey

se em to re p re se n t th e m ost c o m mon w ay s in w hic h a d m in is tr a to rs a ctu ally

ex perie n ce p ro ble m s i n d efin in g t h eir r e sp onsib ility i n c o ncre te s itu atio ns.

Obje ctiv e R esp on sib ilit y

The sp ecif ic fo rm s o f o bje ctiv e re sp onsib ility d is c u sse d h ere in volv e tw o

dim en sio ns: acco unta b ility an d im pose d oblig atio n. All obje ctiv e

re sp onsib ility in volv es re sp onsib ility

to

so m eo ne, o r so m e c o lle ctiv e b ody,

an d re sp onsib ility

fo r

certa in ta sk s, su bord in ate pers o nnel, an d goal

ach ie v em en t. T he fo rm er is

acco unta bility

an d th e la tte r is

oblig atio n

.

Acco unta b ility a n d o blig atio n, re sp onsib ility

to

s o m eo ne e ls e

fo r

so m eth in g

—th ese a re t h e d ual d im en sio ns o f o bje ctiv e a d m in is tr a tiv e r e sp onsib ility .

Prin cip al- a g en t th eo ry , in its c u rre n t u se d ra w n la rg ely fro m e co nom ic s,

atte m pts to desc rib e an d ex pla in obje ctiv e re sp onsib ility in te rm s of

re la tio nsh ip s betw een th ose w ith th e prim ary rig ht to ex erc is e au th ority

( prin cip als

) an d th ose ch arg ed w ith carry in g out th eir w is h es (

agen ts

).

Sap pin gto n ( 1 991) id en tif ie s th e c en tr a l c o ncern o f th is p ers p ectiv e a s “ h ow th e p rin cip al c an b est m otiv ate th e a g en t to p erfo rm a s th e p rin cip al w ould

pre fe r, t a k in g i n to a cco unt t h e d if fic u ltie s i n m onito rin g t h e a g en t's a ctiv itie s”

(p . 4 5).

The l im ita tio ns o f t h is p ers p ectiv e f o r u se i n a d m in is tr a tiv e e th ic s a re t h at i t

overs im plif ie s th e p rin cip al- a g en t r e la tio nsh ip ; it f o cu se s o n th e s in gle v alu e

of effic ie n cy an d fa ils to deal w ith th e eth ic al dim en sio ns. T he public

ad m in is tr a to r's ro le a s a n a g en t is c o m plic ate d b y re sp onsib ility to m ultip le

prin cip als , in clu din g o rg an iz atio nal s u perio rs , p olitic al o ffic ia ls , p ro fe ssio nal

asso cia tio ns, an d th e citiz en ry . A lth ough effic ie n cy is h ig hly im porta n t in

ad m in is tr a tiv e w ork , it is n ot n ecessa rily th e m ost im porta n t v alu e; ju stic e,

rig hts ( s u ch a s p riv acy ), h onesty , a n d a w hole h ost o f o th er v alu es m ust a ls o

be co nsid ere d . The need to deal w ith co nflic ts am ong prin cip als an d

co m petin g v alu es, a n d b etw een a cco unta b ility a n d o blig atio n, r e q uir e s e th ic al

re fle ctio n an d an aly sis gen era lly ig nore d by prin cip al- a g en t th eo ry (D e

Geo rg e, 1 992; D ees, 1 992).

In te rm s of re la tiv e im porta n ce, oblig atio n is th e m ore fu ndam en ta l,

where as a cco unta b ility is th e m ean s f o r e n su rin g th e f u lf illm en t o f o blig atio n

in a hie ra rc h ic al str u ctu re . Acco unta b ility im plie s su perio r-s u bord in ate

re la tio nsh ip s a n d th e e x erc is e o f a u th ority f ro m th e to p d ow n to m ain ta in th e

flo w o f w ork to w ard th e ach ie v em en t o f m an date d g oals . If w e ex plic ate

th ese tw o asp ects of obje ctiv e re sp onsib ility in th e org an iz atio nal an d

politic al co nte x ts of th e public ad m in is tr a tiv e ro le , w e can cla rif y th e

re la tio nsh ip s am ong th e key acto rs in th e polic y pro cess in te rm s of

re sp onsib ilitie s. They will be ord ere d fro m m ore to le ss pro xim ate

re la tio nsh ip s of acco unta b ility an d fro m le ss to more fu ndam en ta l

re la tio nsh ip s o f o blig atio n.

Fir s t, public ad m in is tr a to rs are m ost im med ia te ly re sp onsib le to th eir

org an iz atio nal su perio rs fo r carry in g o ut th e su perio rs ' d ir e ctiv es an d als o

mutu ally a g re ed -o n g oals a n d f o r t h e c o nduct o f t h eir o w n s u bord in ate s. T hey

must be ab le to ex pla in th eir co nduct an d allo catio n of tim e an d oth er

re so urc es a s c o nsis te n t w ith t h e w ork p la n a n d o bje ctiv es o f t h e o rg an iz atio n,

wheth er th e pla n an d obje ctiv es re su lt fro m ord ers orig in ate d in a str ic t

hie ra rc h ic al fa sh io n or fro m so m e co lla b ora tiv e decis io n-m ak in g pro cess.

This is th e m ost p ro xim ate r e la tio nsh ip o f a cco unta b ility , in volv in g a r e g ula r

re p ortin g p ro cess. H ow ev er, th e re la tio nsh ip o f o blig atio n h ere is th e le ast fu ndam en ta l. T