Abstract
The following discussion adds to the discourse regarding the relationship between public administration reform and ethics policies. In this theoretical paper, a narrative is employed that re-reads the old Weberian model as a model of ‘institutional integrity’, which is slowly replaced by a public management concept that focuses on individual integrity. Whereas the Weberian concept defined institutional integrity as a quality of institutions, more recent management concepts define institutional integrity as a quality of public officers within institutions. This also explains why the current focus of attention is ever more on individuals (as the main cause for unethical conduct) and the bad-person model of integrity. An alternative framing of this paper is about ‘institutional ethics’ over time. During the last decades, we are moving from an institutional, but mechanical and rigid Weberian model, to an individual, but more fluid New Public Management model. We are moving towards a version of institutional integrity that tries to use new behavioural mechanism to get back to some Weberian virtues, without its structures and technical focus. This novel ‘integrity management’ movement is really all about filling the gaps left by New Public Management doctrines. However, the reform of integrity management also develops into a specialised, sophisticated and professionalised ethics bureaucracy. Trends are towards ever more broader and stricter integrity requirements. Still, ethics policies are ineffective and shortcomings in implementing integrity policies are neglected.
Highlights
Introduction and research questionOriginally, this paper started as a desk-research paper at the University of Oxford (Blavatnik School of Government)
How did the reform process changed the conceptualization of ethics policies and ethics management? How did the institutionalisation of ethics policies changed? Have ethics policies become more effective over time? And – which role and importance is allocated to individuals and which role to institutions? As the paper evolved, we decided to use empirical insights from one of the most comprehensive empirical studies about the effectiveness of ethics policies and the institutionalization of ethics in the European Union (European Parliament, 2020)
Institutional integrity can be defined as a quality of institutions that is supposed to promote the quality of public employees. Starting from this definition, we suggest to re-read the bureaucratic model as the first institutional model of ‘institutional integrity’
Summary
This paper started as a desk-research paper at the University of Oxford (Blavatnik School of Government). How did the institutionalisation of ethics policies changed? Have ethics policies become more effective over time? We decided to use empirical insights from one of the most comprehensive empirical studies about the effectiveness of ethics policies and the institutionalization of ethics in the European Union (European Parliament, 2020). The objective of the study was to survey and compare policies and implementation practices where they exist. Apart from this task, another objective was to discuss the emergence of integrity policies as a political topic with growing importance and the increasing difficulties to manage and to institutionalise ethics policies. The study concludes that current integrity policies are highly ineffective, despite the expansion of ethics policies and developments towards the emergence of a new ethics bureaucracy throughout the last years. In this paper, we are interested in the (theoretical) interpretation of the results: Why are current integrity policies not more effective than traditional integrity policies? How did our understanding of ethics policies and the institutionalisation of ethics policies change over time – and why?
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
