PUBLIC AND BUSINESS ETHICS:

Download PDF
33 downloads 98250 Views 288KB Size Report
Comment
email [email protected] ... moral nature of these principles refers to what is judged as right, just, or good. (conduct).3. 1 Completely ... and "business ethics and public sector ethics share basic values and norms (and thus are very much ...
THE ETHICS OF GOVERNMENT AND BUSINESS: WHAT IS VALUED MOST Leo W.J.C. Huberts Emile W. Kolthoff Hans van den Heuvel

July 2003 Paper to be presented at the First Workshop of the

EGPA Study Group 'Ethics and Integrity of Governance' Oeiras Portugal september 2003 Not to be quoted. prof. Leo Huberts & prof. Hans van den Heuvel Vrije Universiteit DBL 859 De Boelelaan 1081 c 1081 HV Amsterdam The Netherlands tel 31 20 4446805 fax 31 20 4446820 email [email protected] [email protected] drs. Emile Kolthoff KPMG Ethics & Integrity Consulting Burgemeester Rijnderslaan 20 1185 MC Amstelveen The Netherlands tel 31 20 6567785 fax 31 20 6568090 email [email protected]

THE ETHICS OF GOVERNMENT AND BUSINESS: 1 WHAT IS VALUED MOST

1.

INTRODUCTION

What are the similarities and differences between the ethics of government and business? The objective of this paper is to contribute to answering that question, concentrating on values. What is valued most by public servants and which values prevail in the private sector? What are the core values of both realms? And how do public and private sector values relate to one another? A number of topics will be discussed. First, we will have a look at the meaning of some of the basic concepts: ethics, integrity, values, norms, corruption. Second, we will describe two contrasting views on the similarities and differences of public and private sector ethics. Third, the values of the public sector will be characterized. Fourth, the same is done for the business sector. Based on the inventory of public and private sector values, a panorama of organizational values is sketched. Sixth, the overview of values is used to come to a set of 23 values which might be called the central values for organizations. This result can be used as a measurement tool to be used and tested in future research. 2.

ETHICS AND VALUES

One of the important but often confusing aspects of the debate about organizational ethics and integrity concerns the content of the central concepts. Therefore, we start with a brief clarification of some of the main concepts: `ethics', `values' and `corruption'. Ethics are often associated with ideals and principles that are far removed from the daily routine. It concerns `right and wrong' when the choice to be made has significant impact on others. Ethics are about the norms and principles that "provide the basic guidelines for determining how conflicts in human interests are to be settled and for optimizing mutual benefit of people living together in groups"2. Ethics refer to the collection of values and norms, to the moral standards or principles which form the foundation of integrity. Ethics are a set of principles, often defined as a code that acts as a guide to conduct. The set of principles provides a framework for acting (Lawton, 1998: 16). The moral nature of these principles refers to what is judged as right, just, or good (conduct).3 1

Completely revised version based on a paper that was published in L.W.J.C. Huberts & J.H.J. van den Heuvel (Eds.) (1999) Integrity at the Public-Private Interface. Maastricht, Shaker, pp. 165-184. First presetned at the IIPE conference in Brisbane in 2002 (we thank the reviewer(s) for the remarks and suggestions for improvement). 2 From J.R. Rest (1986) Moral development: Advances in research and theory, Westport: Praeger, p. 1; quoted in Wittmer, 1994: 352. 3 In many definitions, `moral' and `ethical' are near identical. See e.g. Preston: "ethics is concerned about what is right, fair, just, or good; about what we ought to do, not just about what is the case or what is most acceptable or expedient" (Preston, 1996: 16); quoted in Cooper, 1998: 7. 2

Values are `judgments of worth', are principles or standards of behaviour.4 Values should have a certain weight in choice of action (what is good to do or bad to omit doing). Norms state what is morally correct behaviour in a certain situation. Values and norms guide the choice of action and provide a moral basis for justifying or evaluating what we do. Integrity is acting within the framework of moral values and norms (ethics). Therefore, a first task of any ethics management is "to define and give life to an organization's guiding values".5 Integrity or ethical behaviour means much more than not being corrupt or fraudulent. Integrity is a quality or characteristic of individual or organizational behaviour; integrity denotes the quality of acting in accordance with the moral values, norms and rules accepted by the organization's members and its stakeholders. The absence of corruption and fraud is a crucial aspect of organizational integrity. One of the most generally accepted norms for organizational behaviour and decision-making is that private interests should not interfere with organizational and public responsibilities. A functionary is corrupt when he damages organizational and/or public interests because of the personal gain involved. Table 1:

Definition of Central Concepts integrity: accordance with the relevant moral values, norms and rules organizational integrity: organizational behaviour is in accordance with the moral values and norms and the rules accepted by the organization's members and its stakeholders ethics: the collection of moral values and norms, standards and principles which provides a framework for acting moral: refers to what is judged as right, just, or good values are `judgments of worth', moral principles or standards which should have a certain weight in the choice of action norms state what is morally correct behaviour in a certain situation corruption: behaviour which damages organizational and/or public interests because of the personal gain involved

The concepts ethics, integrity and corruption can be applied in different contexts. Individuals and organizations possess moral standards and principles (ethics) and their behaviour can be more or less in accordance with their ethics (individual, organizational integrity). The same can be said about (sub)sectors of society. Professions, for example, do share moral values and norms (professional ethics) and the professionals that act accordingly show professional integrity. In this paper we explore the ethics of (organizations in) the public and the business sector.6 4

See for example: Pollock, 1998: 13; Davis, 1998 and The Concise Oxford Dictionary. Tenth Edition. Edited by Judy Pearsall. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999. 5 Lynn Sharp Paine in Dienhardt, 2000: 33 (a reprint from Managing for Organizational Integrity, Harvard Business Review 1994). 6 The focus is on organizational ethics and integrity. Which values are important for the organization, which values do have weight in the choice of action of the organization? Of course, these values have consequences for individual behaviour in and outside the organization. Nevertheless, this focus has to be 3

3.

PUBLIC AND PRIVATE VALUES

When organizational ethics are associated with the principles, the values and norms of an organization, a logical next question concerns the content of ethics; which values and norms are part of organizational ethics? Many authors have tried to sum up the core values of the public and business sector. In the literature, contradictory visions exist on the relationship between the values in both realms. On the one hand there is the thesis which can be summarized in two statements: "moral dimensions and criteria can be applied to all kinds of organizations" (Kaptein 1998: 9) and "business ethics and public sector ethics share basic values and norms (and thus are very much alike)"7. Voth, for example, mentions truthfulness, faithfulness, commitment, dedication, compassion, integrity, tolerance and social conscience, referring to both the private and the public sector (Voth, 1999). On the other hand there is the opposite view which stresses that there is a fundamental conflict between the moral foundations of politics and commerce. Its most prominent representative is Jane Jacobs in her well-known book about moral syndromes, Systems of Survival. She described a `commercial moral syndrome' and a `guardian moral syndrome'. Both are valid and necessary systems of morals, but organizations will sink in "functional and moral quagmires... when they confuse their own appropriate moral system with the other". (1992: xii). Warnings against the confusion of morals often lead to doubts about practices from the commercial world being applied in the public sector. Who sees government and business values as contradictory, will probably also stress the potential dangers of interaction. This often focuses on imaginable problems for public sector functionaries. They are confronted with the temptations of the market sector and with behaviour which is considered prestigious in the private sector and corrupt in the public sector. Fears are often expressed that exposing managers to the private sector might cause them to lose their integrity (Bovens, 1996). How real is that fear? Empirical research should be able to answer that question. Lawton states that "the evidence is thin on the ground" (1999: 69). Integrity is linked to role, office and to concepts of trust. Apart from their personal qualities, we will trust the head teacher, the police sergeant, and the doctor because of their profession and their expertise. Their professional integrity will require them to act on behalf of the citizen. Or in other words: the integrity of public professionals will not be influenced by contacts with the private sector. The discussion about possible differences between public and private sector ethics is often intermingled with the discussion about problems arising from an intermingling of these values. It might help if we would distinguish more carefully between the different distinguished from that on individual values (and virtues). We will try to select the values that public and private sector organizations want to achieve. This means that we will not go into important and relevant discussions about the revival of Aristotelian virtues in ethical discourse (virtues: Courage, Self-control, Generosity, Magnificence, High-Mindedness, Gentleness, Friendliness, Truthfulness, Wittiness, Modesty) (in Hartman, 1998: 7) nor pay attention to Lasswell's values in 'Politics: who gets what, when, how' (1936): Power, Respect, Rectitude, Wealth, Health, Enlightment, Skill, and Affection. 7 At the Ethics in the Public Service Conference 1998 a clear majority of the participants (85%) agreed with the thesis "Business ethics and public sector ethics share basic values and norms (and thus are very much alike)". 4

aspects of this phenomenon. The following 2x2 table shows that there are four theoretical positions thinkable and it is important to note that there is no need to suggest that the differences in values automatically lead to problems (`functional and moral quagmires'). Empirical research will have to show 1. what the differences and similarities actually are between the public and the private sector (values, ethics) 2. what differences cause what kind of problems a. when a public or business organizations appreciates other sector's values b. when the two sectors meet. Table 2:

Positions on Value Differences and Value Conflicts public and private sector

intermingling is no problem

intermingling is a problem

sector values are similar sector values are different

Empirical research that offers a reliable picture of the prominence of the values in both the public and the private sector is lacking. A problem is that there appear to be two separate bodies of knowledge in public ethics and business ethics. Attempts to compare the two are scarce.8 In this paper we are trying to fill part of that gap, as far as the content of the values is concerned. We will have a look at the variety of values that are considered important for the public sector in the public ethics literature and for the business sector in the business ethics literature. 4.

PUBLIC ETHICS: CENTRAL VALUES

There are numerous attempts to sum up the basic values which might be seen as constituting `public sector ethics'. First, as an example, the values of a public sector organisation will be presented. Second, the results of a research project on public values will be summarized. Third, the results of an inventory of the values mentioned in public ethics literature will be presented. A well-known ethical framework for public officials was developed in the United Kingdom by the Committee on Standards in Public Life chaired by Lord Nolan. The Nolan committee sketched `Seven Principles of Public Life'9 (Table 3). Holders of public office should decide because of the public interest; private interests or obligations to outside individuals and organizations should have no influence (self8

This was one of the conclusions of the last chapter of the book we edited about Integrity at the PublicPrivate Interface (Huberts, Van den Heuvel and Punch, 1999). 9 Oliver, 1998: 132-133, based on the First Report of the Committee on Standards in Public Life, Cm 2850, 1995, p. 14. 5

lessness and integrity). They should make choices on the basis of merit (objectivity), they should be accountable for their decisions and actions (accountability) and they should be as open as possible (openness). Holders of public office have a duty to declare any private interests and resolve possible conflicts of interest (honesty). They should promote and support these principles by leadership and example (leadership). Table 3:

Seven Principles of Public life (Nolan Committee)

selflessness......

integrity ...........

objectivity .......

accountability.. openness..........

honesty ............ leadership ........

Holders of public office should take decisions solely in terms of the public interest. They should not do so in order to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves, their family or their friends. Holders of public office should not place themselves under any financial or other obligation to outside individuals or organizations that might influence them in the performance of their duties. In carrying out public business, including making public appointments, awarding contracts, or recommending individuals for rewards and benefits, holders of public office should make choices on merit. Holders of public office are accountable for their decisions and actions to the public and must subject themselves to whatever scrutiny is appropriate to their office. Holders of public office should be as open as possible about all the decisions and actions that they take. They should give reasons for their decisions and restrict information only when the wider public interest clearly demands. Holders of public office have a duty to declare any private interests relating to their public duties and to take steps to resolve any conflicts arising in a way that protects the public interest. Holders of public office should promote and support these principles by leadership and example.

Many of these values have also been used in other contexts10 as well as in codes of conduct as for example the United Nations `International Code of Conduct for Public Officials'.11 The UN Code contains a set of basic standards of integrity and performance expected from public officials, with `wide acceptance on the basis of experience acquired in various countries'. The term `public officials' is deemed to include all persons vested with the power and authority to make, implement, enforce, amend or revoke government decisions and to render services to the public, with or without 10

A number of the `Nolan values' were used by the Committee of Independent Experts (1999) which reported on fraud, mismanagement and nepotism in the European Commission of the European Union in 1999 and in the `Public Sector Ethics Act' of Queensland. This Ethics Act includes respect for the law and system of government, respect for persons (including acting honestly and responsively), integrity (always favour public interest above personal interest), diligence (and care and attention) and economy and efficiency (Whitton, 1999). The Queensland list encompasses values like `diligence', `economy', and efficiency' and these values sometimes tend to be forgotten when `ethical' values are summed up (also Sherman, 1998: 15). 11 For the text, see: Pieth and Eigen, 1999: 665-666. 6

remuneration. The Code includes `general principles': public officials shall act in the public interests, function efficiently and effectively, in accordance with the law and with integrity, and shall be attentive, fair and impartial. The code also contains rules concerning `conflicts of interest and disqualification', `disclosure of assets, acceptance of gifts and other favours', `confidential information' and `political activity'.

Importance How important are the different values for the people working in the organizations with often impressive mission statements and codes of conduct? An initial idea of the importance of the values in the eyes of politicians and civil servants themselves, can be derived from research at the Vrije Universiteit of Amsterdam (Van den Heuvel, Huberts and Verberk, 2002). 13 different values were distinguished as possibly belonging to the ethics of politicians and civil servants. A survey among 1687 politicians and civil servants with an average response of 40.7% (Table 4). When Dutch politicians are asked to select the three values which are most important for their own behaviour, they first of all select honesty (60.4% mention this value), followed by integrity and openness (both 39.2%), impartiality (31.5%), expertise (26.1%), dedication (24.3%) and lawfulness (22.1%). Unimportant are obedience, profitability and collegiality. When civil servants have to select their three values, they mention very prominently expertise (52.4%) and honesty (43.2%), followed by lawfulness, openness, integrity, dedication, efficiency and serviceability. Unimportant are obedience, profitability and acceptability.

Table 4:

Politicians, Civil Servants and 13 Values

value

acceptability (in accordance with wishes of the public)............ collegiality (act loyally, in solidarity with colleagues).............. expertise (with competence and expertise)................................ serviceability (respectfully and helpfully towards the public) .. efficiency (attain goals at least possible costs).......................... honesty (truthfully, keep one's promises).................................. obedience (comply with policies, instructions of superiors) .... impartiality (unbiased by specific group interests).................... integrity (unbiased by self-interest)........................................... openness (openly, transparently, without secrecy).................... profitability (political of bureaucratic gain) .............................. lawfulness (in accordance with laws, rules, regulations) .......... dedication (task performance with diligence and dedication) ...

Politicians (value among three most important for own behaviour) 19.8% 5.4% 26.1% 16.7% 14.0% 60.4% 0.0% 31.5% 39.2% 39.2% 1.4% 22.1% 24.3%

Civil servants (value among three most important for own behaviour) 3.8% 18.5% 65.5% 28.8% 30.9% 34.7% 0.5% 18.0% 19.6% 21.4% 1.4% 30.6% 26.3%

One of the problems in this type of survey research of course is that the answers reflect self-images with a mix of respondents views on two types of questions: `What are the key values?' and `What should be the key values?'. 7

In research carried out among 45 middle and senior managers drawn from across the public services in the United Kingdom, both questions were asked (Lawton, 1998: 29; Table 5). The managers were asked to rank different values. What should be the key principles and which values actually are prominent in the public sector? Effectiveness and obedience appear to be much more important than they should be, while values like integrity, accountability, responsiveness and openness are less important. Table 5:

Values and management of public services

What should be the key principles

What are the key principles

1 Integrity 2 Accountability 3 Responding to client/customer 4 Openness 5 Commitment to public service ethos 6 Objectivity 7 Loyalty 8 Honesty 9 Leadership 10 Selflessness 11 Meeting targets 12 Thoroughness

1 Meeting targets 2 Obeying rules Obeying superiors 4 Political awareness 5 Competitiveness 6 Accountability 7 Responding to client/customer 8 Integrity 9 Opportunism 10 Honesty Openness Working hard

Overview The presented examples from the literature give a first impression of the variety and multitude of values with relevance for public sector behaviour.12 When we try to summarize the content of the literature and present an overview of the mentioned values, an extensive list of public sector values arises (Table 6). None of the values is identical to another one, although of course some of them are related, sometimes closely related.13 Table 6:

Public Sector Values: A First Overview

acceptability accountability attentiveness being brother's keepers benevolence care collegiality compassion competitiveness courage creativity 12

fairness general interest honesty impartiality independence informedness integrity lawfulness leadership loyalty meeting targets

public interest public ethos commitment quality reliability representativeness respect for the law respect for persons respect for the public respect for system of government responsiveness selflessness

Based on the mentioned literature and on: Sampford & Preston, 1998; Vermeulen, 1998; Caiden, 1999; Huberts & Van den Heuvel, 1999. 13 Some of the values with a more comprehensive description haven been summarized, but our objective is to cover all the values which were mentioned in this paragraph. 8

dedication to the country diligence discretion economy effectiveness efficiency equality equity expertise

5.

neutrality non-discrimination obedience objectivity openness opportunism optimism political awareness professionalism

serviceability social responsibility thoroughness transparency truthfulness working hard

BUSINESS ETHICS: CENTRAL VALUES

De George stresses the importance of integrity and ethics for international and global business. A company's reputation is one of its most important assets and "Reputation is a result of continuous ethical action and of an ethical corporate culture" (1993: 7). De George mentions three basic moral norms applying to people everywhere (1993: 1920): the injunction against arbitrarily killing members of one's own society (including respecting the lives of those with whom citizens and companies do business), truthfulness (to tell the truth, not to lie) and respect for property. In addition certain other norms are required if any business is to function. He mentions two (1993: 20-21): -honouring contracts: if one does enter a contract, one is obliged to honour it -exercising fairness in business dealings (each party to the contract having a reasonable expectation of gaining something by it). These general ethical norms apply to all businesses in all countries and across all borders. All business actors will have to respect these norms. A company that wishes to act with integrity, however, will have to meet more demands: it has to act in accord with its self-imposed values - which cannot be less than the ethical minimum, but may well exceed this (1993: 39). Kaptein and Wempe (1999) point out that working on integrity means that organizations will have to discover and formulate these 'self-imposed values' themselves. This could be focused on establishing the aspects of which everyone within the organization believes they should be taking into account when decisions are being made.14 The Shell General Business Principles are an example of a code of conduct of a multinational company15 in which a selection of values and principles can be found.16 The core values 14

For the Schiphol Airport Company, this procedure led to four basic headings: loyalty, collegiality, care and credibility. The Rabobank groups them under the following headings: member and customer functionalism, sustainable relationships, integrity of action and a sense of community. For ABN AMRO Bank teamwork, professionalism, respect and integrity are the fundamental considerations governing employee actions. 15 Another company which is often mentioned in relation to social responsibility is The Body Shop. Its mission statement expresses that responsibility, although it does not forget that `making fun' is not as unimportant as most ethical deliberations and codes of conduct suggest (Hartman, 1998: 551): "Our reason for being: To dedicate our business to the pursuit of social and environmental change. To Creatively balance the financial and human needs of our stakeholders: employees, customers, franchises, suppliers and shareholders; To Courageously ensure that our business is ecologically sustainable: meeting the needs of the present without compromising the future. 9

of the company are honesty, integrity and respect for people and it also firmly believes in the promotion of trust, openness, teamwork and professionalism, and in pride in what the companies do. These underlying corporate values determine the business principles which concern the objectives of the company (to engage efficiently, responsibly and profitably in business); - its responsibilities to shareholders, customers, employees, those with whom Shell does business and to society; - economic principles (profitability is essential); - business integrity; - political activities of companies and employees; - health, safety and the environment; - the community; - competition; - communications. Business integrity, for example, means that "Shell companies insist on honesty, integrity and fairness in all aspects of their business and expects the same in their relationships with all those who with whom they do business. The direct or indirect offer, payment, soliciting and acceptance of bribes in any form are unacceptable practices. Employees must avoid conflicts of interests between their private financial activities and their part in the conduct of company business". More in general, Wempe (1998) and Kaptein (1998) have described in more detail what the expectations of stakeholders are regarding the moral trustworthiness of the organization. Wempe (1998: ch.10) distinguished three moral qualities which ensure the integrity of the corporation and which can be expressed in the organizational culture and structure: 1. Fairness (be open, consider consequences, be prepared to learn); 2. Independence (clear choices made and communicated, coherent and consistent; hardness: go for the best); 3. Unity (internally open; stimulate cooperation; management concerned about employees).

To Meaningfully contribute to (-) communities in which we trade, by adopting a code of conduct which ensures care, honesty, fairness and respect; To Passionately campaign for the protection of the environment, human and civil rights, and against animal testing within the cosmetics and toiletries industry; To Tirelessly work to narrow the gap between principle and practice, whilst making fun, passion and care part of our daily lives". 16 Information about Shell: `http://www.shell.com', including its General Business Principles, the Shell Reports (`Profits and Principles - does there have to be a choice', Shell, 1998; `The Shell Report 1999', Shell, 1999) and Management Primers (e.g. the primer `Dealing with Bribery and Corruption'). 10

Kaptein expects that the stakeholders of a company have identical procedural expectations. These would include the following criteria: unity (or consistency), openness, honesty, liberty (for stakeholders), subsidiarity (right level of centralization), equality in treatment, reciprocity (expect the same standards from others), adequacy (in reacting to potential damage), solidarity (solving social problems), faithfulness (to fulfil expectations raised), sustainability (compensate for unfair harm to other interests) and readiness to learn (Kaptein, 1998: 125-126).17 Dynamics in Business Ethics A nationwide descriptive ethics survey of U.S. managerial values, consisting of responses from more than 1,000 members of the American Management Association (AMA) representing diverse industries, organizations, functions, and levels, compared the changes and constants in the way U.S. managers viewed themselves and their work between 1981 and 1991 (Petrick & Quinn, 1997: 57-58). This comparison of U.S. managerial values with a decade in between highlights the national normative value shifts among managers. Table 7 summarizes the results.

17

Additionally it is worth mentioning that attention is being paid to organizational values and ethical behaviour in many of the textbooks about organizational behaviour and management. Kreitner, Kinicki & Buelens (1999), for example, identify seven general moral principles for managers: `respect for the value and dignity of human life', `autonomy and all persons right to self-determination', `honesty', 'loyalty', `fairness (treat people justly)', `humaneness (accomplish good and avoid doing evil)' and 'the common good: trying to accomplish the greatest good for the greatest number' (1999: 77). Business strategy and business ethics are often discussed in relation to corporate governance and the stakeholder model. Corporate governance "determines whom the organization is there to serve and how the purposes and priorities of the organization should be decided" (Johnson and Scholes, 1999: 203). Which stakeholders have to be taken into account? Stakeholders are all those who have a stake in an organizations performance, be they internal or external to it (Whysall, 1994: 249). Often the 'environment' is included (Lee, Newman and Price, 1999: 205-212). 11

Table 7

Changes and Constants in U.S. Managerial Values

Changes in U.S. Managerial values

1. quality and customer service as new values 2. stronger feeling that improvements in the quality of life require a society with a cooperative value system 3. home and personal considerations are taking greater precedence over employers demands 4. greater attention on others than on personal needs 5. increased appreciation for the importance of government and public private partnerships 6. greater challenges face managers in aligning personal and organizational values

Constants in U.S. Managerial Values

1. managers value honesty and competence above every other quality 2. optimism about the future 3. stable relative importance of various principles and goals 4. customers in centre stage as a firms key stakeholders 5. ethics codes and workshops a peripheral part of the corporate environment 6. behaviour of those in charge as principal determinant in setting the firm's ethical tone

Source: Petrick & Quinn, 1997: 58 (Copyright 1992, by The Regents of The University of California (California Management Review, Vol. 32, No. 3). By permission of The Regents).

12

Conclusion Of course, also the presented sketch of the business ethics literature and the selection of actual company codes is far from complete. Nevertheless an extensive number of business sector values have been mentioned.18 None of the values is identical to another one, although of course some of them are related, sometimes closely related. Table 8 Business Sector Values: A First Overview adequacy autonomy care clarity coherence collegiality common good community-orientation competence competitiveness consistency cooperativeness courage creativity credibility customer oriented efficiency employee-concerned equality in treatment fairness faithfulness

6.

fun making functionalism (member and customer) hardness/go for the best home & personal considerations honesty honouring contracts humaneness independence integrity leadership learnability/readiness to learn liberty (for stakeholders) loyalty openness optimism passion pride professionalism

profitability quality reciprocity respect respect for persons respect for property responsibility self-determination service (to customer) social responsibility solidarity subsidiarity sustainability sustainable relationships teamwork trust truthfulness unity

PUBLIC AND PRIVATE ETHICS: SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES

After the sketches of the values from the private and public sector, an obvious question is which values have been detected in both spheres and how the conglomerates of values relate to one another. The answer however, is not an easy one. In public as well as in business ethics many different values are mentioned as important for governmental and commercial organizations. In alphabetical order, the result is an extended list of values. The values which have been mentioned among the public as well as the business sector values are printed in italic: acceptability, accountability, adequacy, attentiveness, autonomy, being brother's keepers, benevolence, care, clarity, coherence, collegiality, common good, community-orientation, compassion, competence, competitiveness, consistency, cooperativeness, courage, creativity, credibility, customer oriented, dedication (to the country), diligence, discretion, 18

As in the summary of public sector values, some of the mentioned values have been summarized or combined. 13

economy, effectiveness, efficiency, employee-concerned, equality, equality in treatment, equity, expertise, fairness, faithfulness, fun making, functionalism (member and customer), general interest, hardness/go for the best, home & personal considerations, honesty, honouring contracts, humaneness, impartiality, independence, informedness, integrity, lawfulness, leadership, learnability/readiness to learn, liberty (for stakeholders), loyalty, meeting targets, neutrality, non-discrimination, obedience, objectivity, openness, opportunism, optimism, passion, political awareness, pride, professional excellence, professionalism, profitability, public interest, public ethos commitment, quality, reciprocity, reliability, representativeness, respect, respect for property, respect for persons, respect for system of government, respect for the public, respect for the law, responsibility, responsiveness, selfdetermination, selflessness, service (to customer), serviceability, social responsibility, solidarity, subsidiarity, sustainability, sustainable relationships, teamwork, thoroughness, transparency, trust, truthfulness, unity, working hard. About one hundred different values and the list will be all but exhaustive for public ethics and business ethics literature. None of the values is identical to another one, although it is obvious some of them are related, sometimes closely related. The complex mosaic of values makes it hard to cluster them for research. That clustering is nevertheless required to enable a rational discussion about public and business sector ethics. We suggest a clustering in the line of Pollock's typology of unethical behaviour. Pollock distinguished four levels: 'the individual and the organization' (unethical behaviour concerning overtime abuse, gifts and gratuities), `the organization and employees' (discouraging honest criticism, unrealistic demands), the individual and other employees' (sexual harassment, gossip) and `the individual and the public' (misuse of authority, lack f expertise in profession) (Pollock, 1998: 13). We distinguish between the following levels: external the organization and its environment the organization and other organizations the organization and its public internal the organization and its employees the employee and the organization the employee and other employees the employee Table 9 presents an overview of the classification characteristics of the distinguished values. Some of the values belong to more categories.

14

Table 9:

Values and Levels

organization and its environment as for example common good, community orientation, equality, public ethos commitment, public interest, respect for property, respect for the law, respect for the system of government, social responsibility, social solidarity, sustainability. organization and other organizations, e.g. competitiveness, cooperativeness, honouring contracts, reciprocity. organizational policies/products and its public, e.g. acceptability, accountability, care, clarity, coherence, compassion, consistency, credibility, customer oriented, effectiveness, efficiency, equality in treatment, fairness, faithfulness, hardness (go for the best), opportunism, profitability, quality, reliability, responsiveness, serviceability, transparency, trust(worthiness) organization and its employees, e.g. employee-concerned, fairness, leadership, subsidiarity. employee and the organization, e.g. accountability, care, competence, courage, creativity, diligence, discretion, economy, expertise, honesty, impartiality, independence, obedience, objectivity, openness, optimism, pride, professionalism, selflessness, truthfulness, working hard. employee and other employees, e.g. collegiality, loyalty, solidarity, teamwork. employee, e.g. autonomy/self-determination, fun making, home and personal considerations, liberty, passion, self-determination (self-fulfilment)

The value systems of organizations inevitably are complex entities with many values concerning their environment, their relationship with other organizations, their policies and products and their employees. Nevertheless, for each of those elements or dimensions, a number of important values can be described and selected. What follows can be read as a proposal to summarize the essential values. organization and its environment: social justice, sustainability organization and other organizations: competitiveness, cooperativeness organizational policies/products and its public: accountability, consistency, effectiveness, efficiency, honesty, lawfulness, profitability, responsiveness, service orientation, transparency employees and their work: courage, dedication, expertise, honesty, impartiality, innovativeness, obedience, selflessness employee and other employees: collegiality employee: self-fulfilment. Thus, in alphabetical order, the following set of core values of organizations can be distinguished: - accountability: be answerable, be willing to justify action - collegiality: act loyally, show solidarity with one's colleagues - competitiveness: act as good as or better than comparable others - consistency: act congruous, united, consistent, reliable - cooperativeness: act together, to achieve mutual benefit - courage: act with determination, willing to take risks - dedication: perform one's task with diligence, dedication and care 15

- effectiveness: act to produce the desired or intended result - efficiency: act to produce results with minimum wasted effort/expense - expertise: act with competence, skill, knowledge - honesty: act truthfully, faithfully and keep one's promises - impartiality: act unbiased, unprejudiced by group interests, independent - innovativeness: act with imagination, introduce new policies or products - lawfulness: act in accordance with existing laws, rules, regulations - obedience: act in agreement with instructions and policies of the organization - profitability: act to maximize organizational gain/benefits - responsiveness: act in accordance with the wishes of the public - self-fulfilment: act to maximize personal goals, well-being - selflessness: act unbiased, unprejudiced by self interest - service orientation: act respectfully and helpfully towards customer/citizen - social equity: act because of the common good, to achieve social justice - sustainability: act to prevent harm to the environment - transparency: act openly and transparently, without secrecy Research will have to clarify how important the different values are for public and private sector ethics. At the same time it is clear that the presented examples from business ethics and the ethical involvement of companies show that private companies can share a number of the ethical concerns which are discussed in public settings. Values like honesty and openness, often prominent in public sector codes of conduct, are also present in lists of `business values'. We hypothesize that there are similarities as well as differences and contradictions between public and private sector ethics. Business and government differ and both sectors will have to take into account these differences and contradictions. Whether this leads to problems and conflicts, is another question.

16

References Bovens, Mark (1996) The integrity of the Managerial States, Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management 4 (3), 1996, pp. 125-132. Caiden, Gerald E. (1999) The Essence of Public Service Ethics and Professionalism. In L.W.J.C. Huberts and J.H.J. van den Heuvel (Eds.), Integrity at the Public-Private Interface. Maastricht: Shaker, pp. 21-44. Chandler, R.C. (1990) A guide to ethics for public servants. In: J.L. Perry (Ed.), Handbook of public administration. (p. 602-618). San Francisco & Oxford: Jossey Bass. Committee of Independent Experts (1999) First Report on Allegations regarding Fraud, Mismanagement and Nepotism in the European Commission. 15 March 1999. Cooper, Terry L. (1994) Handbook of Administrative Ethics. New York (etc.): Marcel Dekker. De George, Richard T. (1993) Competing With Integrity in International Business. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dienhart, John W. (2000) Business, Institutions and Ethics. A Text with Cases and Readings. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hartman, Laura Pincus (1998) Perspectives in Business Ethics. Chicago: Irwin McGraw-Hill. Huberts, L.W.J.C. and J.H.J. van den Heuvel (Eds.) (1999) Integrity at the Public-Private Interface. Maastricht: Shaker. Huberts, L.W.J.C. and J.H.J. van den Heuvel (1999) Integrity at the Public-Private Interface: Introduction. In L.W.J.C. Huberts and J.H.J. van den Heuvel (Eds.), Integrity at the Public-Private Interface. Maastricht: Shaker, pp. 7-14. Huberts, L.W.J.C., J.H.J. van den Heuvel and M. Punch (1999) Ethics and Integrity and the Public-Private Interface. In L.W.J.C. Huberts and J.H.J. van den Heuvel (Eds.), Integrity at the Public-Private Interface. Maastricht: Shaker, pp. 165-184. Jacobs, Jane (1992) Systems of Survival. A Dialogue on the Moral Foundations of Commerce and Politics. London (etc.): Hodder & Stoughton. Johnson, Gery and Kevan Scholes (1999) Exploring Corporate Strategy. Fifth Edition. Hertfordshire: Prentice Hall Europe. Johnston, Michael (1993) "Corruption as a Process." In Maurice Punch et al., Coping with Corruption in a Borderless World. Deventer (etc.): Kluwer Law and Taxation Publishers (etc.), pp. 39-57. Kaptein, Muel (1998) Ethics Management: Auditing and Developing the Ethical Content of Organizations. Issues in Business Ethics. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Kaptein, Muel and Johan Wempe (1999) Working on Integrity: Differences and Similarities. Between Public and Private Sector Organizations. In L.W.J.C. Huberts and J.H.J. van den Heuvel (Eds.), Integrity at the Public-Private Interface. Maastricht: Shaker, pp. 113-131. Kreitner, Robert, Angelo Kinicki and Marc Buelens (1999) Organizational Behaviour. Berkshire: McGraw-Hill Lasswell, Harold D. (1958) Politics: Who Gets What, When, How? Cleveland: The World Publishing Co. (orig.: 1936) Lawton, Alan (1999) Social Enterprise and the Public Services Manager. In L.W.J.C. Huberts and J.H.J. van den Heuvel (Eds.), Integrity at the Public-Private Interface. Maastricht: Shaker, pp. 57-73. Lawton, Alan (1998) Ethical Management for the Public Services. Buckingham & Philadelphia: Open University Press. Lee, David, Philip Newman and Robert Price (1999) Decision Making in Organizations. London: Financial Times Management. Montefiori, Alan 17

(1999) Integrity: a philosopher's introduction. In Alan Montefiori and David Vines (Eds.), Integrity in the Public and Private Domains. London: Routledge, pp. 3-18. Montefiori, Alan and David Vines (Eds.) (1999) Integrity in the Public and Private Domains. London: Routledge. Oliver, Dawn (1997) Regulating the Conduct of MP's. The British Experience of Combating Corruption. In: Paul Heywood, Political Corruption. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 123-142. Paine, Lynn Sharp (1994). Managing for Organizational Integrity. Harvard Business Review, Reprinted in John W. Dienhart (2000) Business, Institutions and Ethics. A Text with Cases and Readings. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 28-39. Petrick, Joseph A. and John F. Quinn (1997) Management ethics. Integrity at work. Thousand Oaks (etc.): SAGE. Pieth, Mark and Peter Eigen (Eds.) (1999) Korruption im internationalen Geschäftsverkehr. Bestandsaufnahme. Bekämpfung. Prävention. Neuwied, Kriftel: Luchterhand. Plant, Jeremy F. (1994) Codes of ethics. In: Terry L. Cooper (Ed.), Handbook of administrative ethics. New York (etc.): Marcel Dekker, pp. 221-241. Pollock, Joycelyn M. (1998) Ethics in Crime and Justice. Dilemmas and Decisions. 3rd ed. Belmont CA: Wadsworth. Punch, Maurice (1996) Dirty business. Exploring Corporate Misconduct. London (etc.): Sage. Quah, Jon S.T. (1995) Controlling Corruption in City-states: A Comparative Ctudy of Hong Kong and Singapore. Crime, Law & Social Change 22: 391-414. Sampford, Charles and Noel Preston (with C-A Bois) (Eds.) (1998) Public Sector Ethics. Finding and Implementing Values. Annandale: The Federation Press and London: Routledge. Sherman, Tom (1998) Public Sector Ethics: Prospects and Challenges. In Charles Sampford and Noel Preston (with C-A Bois) (Eds.), Public Sector Ethics. Finding and Implementing Values. Annandale: The Federation Press and London: Routledge, pp. 13-25. Taylor, Martyn (1999) The Australian Department of Defence's Interface with the Private Sector. In L.W.J.C. Huberts and J.H.J. van den Heuvel (Eds.), Integrity at the Public-Private Interface. Maastricht: Shaker, pp. 85-98. UNDP United Nations Development Programme (1998) Corruption & Integrity Improvement Initiatives in Developing Countries. New York: UNDP. Voth, Arthur (1999) Professionalism in Practice. Bridges to the Century. In L.W.J.C. Huberts and J.H.J. van den Heuvel (Eds.), Integrity at the Public-Private Interface. Maastricht: Shaker, pp. 45-56. Wempe, Johan (1998) Market and Morality. Delft: Eburon. Whitton, Howard (1999) Legislating for Ethics: Responses to the Public Sector Ethics Act in the Queensland Public Sector. In L.W.J.C. Huberts and J.H.J. van den Heuvel (Eds.), Integrity at the Public-Private Interface. Maastricht: Shaker, pp. 99-112. Whysall, Paul (1994) Ethics in decision making. In David Jennings and Stuart Wattam, Decision Making. An Integrated Approach. London: Pitman, pp. 242-266. Wittmer, Dennis P. (1994) Ethical Decision-making. In: Terry L. Cooper (Ed.), Handbook of Administrative Ethics. New York (etc.): Marcel Dekker, pp. 349-372.

18