The Ethical Bureaucrat

An honest and ethical bureaucrat is indeed a national treasure. But the Devil is in the details and this question is no different. In this paper, the conversation will flow from "What are the ethics of bureaucracies?" to "What constitutes an ethical bureaucrat?" to "Is there a way to 'enforce' that code of ethics?"

Ethics are varied things, changing from one setting or culture to another. What is acceptable and innocuous in one area is a great offense in another. But generally speaking ethics "is the study of values and customs of a person or group. It covers the analysis and employment of concepts such as right and wrong, good and evil, and responsibility." The conflict is that within society as a whole (which has one set of values) there are plenty of sub-sets (which have their own set of somewhat modified values.) Bureaucracies are no exception. "Bureaucracy...is often in tension with traditional social values" (Rosenbloom and Kravchuk, 2005, p. 440). They emphasize problem-processing and administrative action whereas society (writ large) is more concerned with personal interaction.

The ethics of bureaucracies are by their nature in contrast with the ethics of the larger society. And where any two groups are connected they will inevitably influence one another. But, the ethical bureaucrat must first and foremost remember that he or she is part of the general public, a group with its own set of values and customs, which should take priority over any others because the person is a human being first and an employee second. Bureaucrats are ethical when they remember that they are executors of a job or position; they are not the embodiment of the position itself. In the extreme view posited in the text, this is when affection and tender feelings for the people being served is exchanged for good feelings about the task and the power behind it (Rosenbloom and Kravchuk, 2005, p. 441). This is an ongoing controversy about bureaucracy, specifically the perversion of means and ends so that means become ends in themselves. When the guiding star changes from accomplishment of a greater good to finishing the job or assignment, much has been lost. If left uncontrolled the petty, sectional interest of the bureaucracy will become the focus of all work and effort, creating a larger, more self-serving and possibly (probably) corrupt organization. On the other hand it would be better for them to look to the general interest, that of serving society in whatever function or role they are performing. NPM was intended to rid the government of the first and encourage the second thus creating, by default, more ethical bureaucrats.

A bureaucratic official is one who is employed by a governmental organization. He or she received the job on the basis of conduct and technical qualifications. Therefore, the first step to an ethical bureaucrat is an 'open hiring.' They got the position by what they knew, not whom they knew or anything more nefarious.

As a bureaucrat, there are a few things that must be guarded against that would simply make 'the job' easier, as well as maintain a low level of acceptable ethics. A very narrow job description, inflexibility and a lack of modernization are three culprits to beware of. Overspecialization refers to how the actions of one person does not seem to have an affect elsewhere and it also refers to individual officials that are not aware of the larger consequences of their actions. Rigidity of procedures makes decision-making slow and sometimes impossible when facing some unusual case. Its twin, delaying evolution of old procedures to new circumstances does the same.

In completing the day to day tasks, the bureaucrat must exercise his or her judgment and skills, but duty requires these to be placed at the service of a higher authority; ultimately he or she is responsible only for the impartial execution of assigned tasks and must sacrifice personal judgment if it runs counter to the official duties.

The easiest part of being an ethical bureaucrat is not taking advantage of the position. If the position affords one access to knowledge and information not yet revealed to the public (and it certainly does in one manner or another) then