Ethics in Public Administration: the View of the Philosophers

Introduction

Public Administrators have a number of important roles that influence policy-making decisions in which it affects the people they serve. The work set forth by Public Administrators assumes significant responsibility as they must lead ethically to build trust in their communities, amongst their elected officials, and throughout their organization. Most Public Administrators take a constitutional official oath, which is for the faithful performance of the duties while in office. Thus it is their responsibility to act with integrity at all times and conduct themselves in a manner that is consistent with the regime's values and interests. Avoiding the pitfalls of self-serving leadership, careless mistakes that may result in legal consequences or may perceive political deception, and recognizing the dangerous signs of unethical practices will help Administrators lead an ethical organizational culture.

Political philosophy is concerned with the concept and arguments involved in political opinion as well as how decisions are made and how power is used. “All political action aims at either preservation or change. When desiring to preserve, we wish to present change to the worse; when desiring to change, we wish to bring about something better. All political action is then guided by something better or worse”. Leaders involved have to make ethically questionable decisions for what they believed would promote the greater good of the people. However through the eyes of many philosophers such as Jean-Paul Sartre and Robert Bolt, they believed when faced with a moral dilemma people will act within their conscious, even if it’s the wrong thing to do. Other philosophers like Thomas Hobbs and Immanuel Kant address equity and equality through behavioral theories and both had very different views on ethics and morality. This paper will analyze the values, ethical dilemmas, and equity vs. equality through the lens of these philosophers, as well as discuss how decisions made by Public Administrators affect the quality of life for the communities they serve.

Ethics and Morality

Ethics and morality as we know it are rules of conduct and personal beliefs of how we should behave. Ethics is a social system that guides the way someone should conduct themselves whereas morals is a person’s compass of right and wrong. In political philosophy, there is not a distinction made between ethics and morality, but philosophers generally use these two terms interchangeably, however, there is no clear agreed-upon distinction. Both mean good or bad and right or wrong. Ethics considers standards of good and bad, and right and wrong that are imposed as some outside group, i.e. an organization, business community, etc. Morality is one’s own personal sense of right and wrong and is not imposed by anyone or any society. Morality is your personal feelings of what is good or bad to you. Ethics and morality can conflict in many ways, especially if one general society agrees on a certain code of conduct that you may personally disagree with. For example, freedom of speech is the concept of a human right in America to voice one’s opinion publicly without fear or punishment, however, speech in many countries is censored.

Philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre focused on theories of existentialism and asserted that existentialism is humanism and that humankind creates its own nature. In other words, people make decisions based on subjective meaning rather than pure rationality. According to Sartre, “moral theories may define our moral duties and obligations, but they mean nothing without personal commitment”. Sartre’s view is that humans are radically free. We are in control of our emotions, thoughts, and attitudes and thus we are in control of our decisions. In politics, your role does not dictate or define your actions because you are ultimately in control of the decisions you make. In Sartre’s book, No Exit and Three Other Plays, Dirty Hands, tells the story of how to correct political action must sometimes conflict with profound moral norms. “Dirty Hands teaches us that even the worst cannot be done without the consent of the person who actually needs to assume and assert his actions”, and most elected officials and/or public administrators have “dirty hands” up to their elbows. Sartre believed that ethics is moral independence, but sometimes politicians must transgress one of their moral principles to accomplish what he sees as the right (and necessary) political action.

Philosopher Robert Bolt’s position on morality is that there is no necessary relationship between natural law and morals. In one of his most successful plays, A Man for All Seasons, Bolt “puts the debate over natural law theory into a contemporary context” and tests the theory on self-sacrifice and heroism and how far someone would go to remain honest, even if it means to die for. Bolt’s view on morality is that when one is faced with a moral dilemma, they may refuse to submit to moral absolutism over natural law. Leaders are often forced to make ethically questionable decisions for what they believe would promote the greater good of the people even if it violates the deepest constraints of morality in order to achieve the greatest good.

Equity vs. Equality

There is a misconception that equity and equality are somewhat parallel and that their meanings can be used interchangeably. Equity means fairness which is that everyone gets treated equally the same based on their situation. Equality aims to promote fairness. The debate between the two dates to Aristotle whose conception was that “equality has two distinctions, proportional equality, and numerical equality. Numerical equality is the claim that all people should be treated the same. Proportional equality is the claim that all people are treated equally to what they have or what they need” ('Equity vs Equality (Philosophical Distinction)'). Equity requires giving people who have less more and that have more, less. Equity also tends to give the needed support and support structures to the needed groups who may have less. No matter how much or little you are given or may have, equity guarantees that all groups of people have equal access to the same thing. Because we are all not equal, equity adjusts proportionally to ensure there is an equal balance across the playing field.

Adversity plays a major role in equity as many face barriers to obtaining equalized support. For example, there is an inequity is access to the best public schools and colleges in the United States and lower-income families generally experience this factor. Colleges specifically are now addressing the issue by “testing an adversity index” dropping the requirement of SAT and ACT scores as part of their admissions policy because students may have experienced socioeconomic disadvantages. “The College Board has just finished the first two pilots of a system, the Environmental Context Dashboard that is designed to help colleges be more precise when deciding who deserves that edge. One of the colleges that employed the system in a test review of applications after decisions had already been made reported that up to 20 percent of admissions decisions might have been made differently using the dashboard”.

Equality is more commonly associated with social issues, ensuring that everyone is treated the same, whereas equity means that people are treated proportionally to their needs. A judgment of equality assumes that there is a difference between things being compared. “According to this definition, the notion of ‘complete’ or ‘absolute’ equality is self-contradictory. Two non-identical objects are never completely equal; they are different at least in their spatiotemporal location. If things do not differ they should not be called ‘equal,’ but rather, more precisely, ‘identical,’ as e.g., the morning and evening star.

When comparing both equity and equality they clearly do not offer the same thing as both are different strategies to produce fairness. “The legal principle of social equality in the United States was confirmed in 1868 by the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which provides that “nor shall any State ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws”. In the landmark case Grutter vs. Bollinger, the University of Michigan Law School favored unrepresented minority groups in which violated the Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Clause, claiming that a white student was rejected because the school uses race as a predominant factor in their admissions process. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the admissions policies were unconstitutional they clearly considered in promoting student diversity. Moral principles are proponents of affirmative action as they work to ensure equalized opportunities for disadvantaged groups. While one side of affirmative action works to protect minority groups the other side works to accomplish a goal. Decisions of Public Administrators

There are many determinants that Public Administrators must consider when making choices as their decisions have an effect on the people they serve. Their role influences opinions and can impact the way policy is shaped. “Bureaucrats authoritatively determine the allocation of values, that they frequently decide who gets what and that they pursue the common good of our society through the agency of the state”. Public Administrators must be open to a wide range of opinions and act in a fair and transparent manner. They have an objective responsibility to serve the will of the public through an appreciation of neutrality and respect. As Rohr explained, some approaches to ethics are in two parts, the “low road” which addresses ethical issues exclusively in adherence to agency formal rules such as ethical rules of conduct, and the “high road” which addresses social equity. The low road approach may be viewed as a “negative approach that focuses on blind adherence to formal rules to keep public servants out of trouble. Rohr considers the low road as the worst-case scenario because it prompts career public servants to not only do the minimum but also to focus on trivial issues”. The “high road” is more favored because it incorporates the ethical standards into every decision made which is more accepted by the public. The “high road” serves as a guideline for Public Administrators in making ethical decisions. Public Administrators face multiple competing values, both personal and public. It is important when in the decision-making process, they align their values with the values of political leadership and the community they serve.

Conclusion

Ethics in public administration are important key values that every public servant and political leader must assume. A truly effective leader is seen as a servant first; as being motivated primarily by the desire to ensure the well-being and success of those assigned to his/her organization's care. A great leader makes sure that their communities’ highest priorities are being served first. This type of behavior leads to higher engagement, more public trust, and builds strong relationships. Many philosophers had distinct views of ethics and morality. Kant viewed ethics as a matter of one’s inner convection and autonomy; self-directed beings, make our own free choices. Kant also believed that action has moral worth if it is done for the sake of duty whereas morality examines the nature of one's actions rather than the goals achieved. Sartre viewed ethics as moral independence, that man is condemned to be free and existence proceeds essence. In other words, Sartre emphasized that we are entirely responsible for not only what we are but what we will be because we are solely responsible for our actions.

Equity and Equality are often used interchangeably but do not mean the same. Equity is defined as the provision of varying levels of support while equality is defined as treating everyone the same while ensuring people have the same access to the same opportunities. To achieve equity, policies, and procedures may result in an unequal distribution of resources. A public policy example would be when a community if forced to cut its budget for its several neighborhood libraries. Cutting hours of operation and employees' time by the same amount would be a solution representing equality. Equity, on the other hand, would be for the community to first determine which neighborhoods actually use their libraries the most and reduce the library operational hours of the less often visited. “Issues of inequity are at the center of policy debates and public frustration regarding a variety of social problems. Widening income gaps, unequal access to health and education resources, and tensions between racial and social groups are at the forefront of conversations, in particular for the public agencies looking to resolve them”.

Leaders in public administration and in the private sector set the tone at the top and are required to set high standards and act in accordance with them. They influence ethical values through their behavior and serve as a role model for their followers. Adhering to the code of ethics promotes faith in integrity, impartiality, and transparency by maintaining ethical behavior built on the highest standards of public service. Politicians are faced with the decision to ignore their moral principles and do what is necessary to advance the common good. Public servants must decide on whether to take the low road or high road of doing the right thing for the greater good over what is deemed to be morally wrong. Ethical decisions involve choosing not between actions of good and bad, but between our actions between good and better or actions between bad and worse. Political leaders and public administrators conquer the corridors of power. They have the ability to influence behaviors and put a policy in action, which can have a dramatic impact on the quality of life for many citizens. Leaders can either motivate or manipulate, but whichever method they decided to use since power is transient, they reap what they sow in equal measure.

References

1. Equity vs Equality (Philosophical Distinction). (2017). Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z68vke2iD6E
2. Gosepath, Stefan, 'Equality', The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2011 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = .
3. Jaschik, S. (2017, February 28). College Board pilots new way to measure adversity when considering applications, but some fear impact of leaving out race. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/02/28/college-board-pilots-new-way-measure-adversity-when-considering-applications-some.
4. Longley, R. (2019, August 29). Equity vs. Equality: What Is the Difference? Retrieved from https://www.thoughtco.com/equity-vs-equality-4767021.
5. Messerly, J., Rogers, J., Messerly, J., & Kramer-Smart, J. (2019, November 7). Summary of Sartre's Ethics. Retrieved from https://reasonandmeaning.com/2017/11/15/ethics-existentialism/.
6. Strauss, L. (1957). What is Political Philosophy? The Journal of Politics, 19(3), 343-368. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/2126765
7. Tim, D. (2012, December 10). Sartre: Dirty Hands Summary. Retrieved from https://www.the-philosophy.com/sartre-dirty-hands-summary.
8. Vogelsang-Coombs, V. (2016). The Political Ethics of Public Service. New York: Palgrave Macmillan US :Imprint: Palgrave Macmillan.
9. Whiteley, P., & Bolt, R. (2002). Natural Law and the Problem of Certainty: Robert Bolt's 'A Man for All Seasons'. Contemporary Literature, 43(4), 760-783. doi:10.2307/1209041
10. Wooldridge, B., & Bilharz, B. (n.d.). SOCIAL EQUITY: THE FOURTH PILLAR OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION. Retrieved from https://icma.org/sites/default/files/SOCIAL EQUITY- THE FOURTH PILLAR OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Wooldridge & Bilharz.pdf.