Search results

An organizational integrity system consists of the range of institutions, policies, actors, and practices that are meant to promote the integrity of an organization. These include compliance-based mechanisms, values-based mechanisms, and the informal day-to-day practices that contribute to its ethical climate. Crucially, the way in which these various elements of the system interact can have the effect of either mitigating or exacerbating an organization's vulnerability to integrity violations. This research draws on insights from the field of behavioral ethics to highlight the manner in which a systems approach can aid in assessing and managing the factors that contribute to organizational integrity risks. Along these lines, the integrity system of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is analyzed, with particular emphasis on a case study of the events surrounding the so-called 2014 waitlist scandal. On one hand, the VA has an elaborate integrity system consisting of conceptually well-designed compliance and values-based mechanisms, especially with respect to its award-winning IntegratedEthics program. On the other hand, certain policies and practices within the VA, as well as a number of external pressures outside its control, had the effect of undermining these formal elements of the system. Consequently, the case of the 2014 VA waitlist scandal appears to have been a perfect storm of integrity risk factors that illustrates the importance of taking a systems approach to managing organizational integrity risks.

This article argues that, from the perspective of Lawrence Kohlberg's theory of moral development, the imposition of market values onto public organizations creates situational factors in which it becomes difficult for public administrators to discern and advance the public interest. This is particularly true in those instances where administrators must subordinate their personal and organizational interests to the public interest, as the American Society for Public Administration's Code of Ethics calls for them to do. From a Kohlbergian perspective, the ability to reflect on the public interest – and especially to subordinate personal and organizational interests to the public interest – requires 'Post-conventional moral reasoning,' i.e., consideration of the conditions that make for a good society, respect for individual rights, and concern for universal principles of justice. However, the imposition of market values onto a public organization creates situational factors in which the administrator is likely to focus on the accumulation of rewards and the avoidance of sanctions; hallmarks of what Kohlberg terms 'Pre-conventional' moral reasoning. Therefore, this article concludes that if we expect public administrators to consistently pursue the public interest, we should not create situational factors that will compromise their ability to do so by imposing the values of the market onto our public organizations.

The purpose of this article is to offer a useful approach for improving cultural competence among public administrators by examining differences in public service value congruence across racial lines. Instruments that assess the degree of fit between the values of citizens and public administrators may be helpful, as one tool among an array of tools, for improving the cultural competence of public administrators. Along these lines, this article reports the results of a study that utilized an original survey instrument to measure differences across racial lines in public service value congruence between citizens and police officers, its effects on citizen perceptions of police-community relations, and the implications that these differences have for the development of cultural competence.