You are here
Winter Reading: Switch III - Goals and Destinations
Wednesday, February 13th, 2013
Robert Wechsler
A Destination for Government Ethics Training
Most cities and counties treat ethics training as a one-off phenomenon. Toss a hundred people in a room, give them a lecture about how to be good, and that's it for at least a year or two. One of the case studies in Chip and Dan Heath's book Switch: How to Change Things When Change Is Hard (Crown, 2010) offers a different vision of ethics training.
A first-grade teacher in a school that had no kindergarten found huge skill gaps among her students. The same sort of skill gaps exist among government officials and employees. She realized that she had to do more than teach them. She had to motivate them, and give them a clear destination. So at the beginning of the school year she announced that by the end of the school year, they were going to be third graders, that is, they were going to be big and smart and even cool.
A destination causes people not just to think when they are learning, but to think how to get to the destination. And it makes the whole process make sense. It's not just ethics training, it's something more.
An ethics trainer with an hour to lecture is not going to be able to promise anything. But an ethics trainer who has a vision for ongoing ethics training can. Ongoing ethics training consists of a semi-monthly newsletter, occasional quizzes, general advisory opinions, FAQs, and other sorts of info, and news in the form of summaries of ethics decisions, settlements, and advisory opinions.
With a stream of information carefully designed to be interesting and not too annoying, an ethics trainer can say to a class, By the end of the year, you're going to truly understand conflicts of interest. By the end of two years, you'll be professionally handling your conflict situations and engaging in discussions of others'. And by the end of three years, you may be leading a seminar on how government ethics applies to your department.
In other words, you will be knowledgeable, professional, and maybe even cool. Just like third graders appear to new first graders. The problem in government ethics is that, in most cities and counties, there isn't a single conflicts of interest third grader (in contrast, there are lots of management third graders, financial third graders, and public works third graders). The idea of an ethics third grader has to be instilled in people.
A Destination for a Government Ethics Program
One problem with government ethics reform is that the chosen destination is usually unrealistic, both in itself and in terms of what is done to get there. The goal is generally to end corruption and to prevent scandals. But the scandals to be prevented often have little or nothing to do with government ethics. And "corruption" includes everything from broken promises to stealing money out of campaign committee funds. As for scandals, no one has any control over them. They can be manufactured out of almost nothing. Learning to deal responsibly with conflicts won't directly bring an end to scandals or corruption. It is only one piece of the puzzle.
And it is a piece that can itself lead to scandals when, for example, an ethics commission selected by the mayor dismisses an ethics complaint against the mayor, or when the public discovers that the ethics commission has no teeth with which to penalize an ethics violator. An inadequate ethics program that appears to be under the control of high-level officials is never going to lead anyone to the promised destination.
A government ethics program's destination has to be something that can actually be attained, for example, the professional handling of conflict situations through the use of professional, independent ethics advice, the timely filing of disclosure statements by officials and by those seeking benefits from the local government, and the settling of cases when officials fail to properly handle a conflict situation.
It would be great if one could point out other cities and counties that have attained this goal. However, there is, as far as I know, no documentation of the successes of local government ethics programs, with the exception of information imbedded in ethics commission annual reports. This is something City Ethics should work on.
The language for ethics reform should not involve scandals and corruption. It should involve professionalism (pride) and gaining the public's trust through an independent, comprehensive ethics program.
No Dry Holes
There's a case study in the book about British Petroleum (BP) drilling for oil. It used to strike oil only 1 out of 5 times it drilled a well. Oil explorers felt they had succeeded if they hit .200. BP wanted to do better, so it set a goal of "no dry holes," which required explorers to put on their geologist hats and really think things through before drilling a well. They became more careful and systematic. And "no dry holes" as a goal also brought an end to rationalizations for poorly conceived operations. One especially problematic rationalization was that a business partner or a government was pressuring the company to drill ("Drill, baby, drill!"). The new goal "toughened up their resistance to governmental and partner pressures."
In local government ethics, a goal of "no ethics violations" puts prevention ahead of other concerns. It would require officials not just to wing it and play the odds, hoping that their ethics decisions either would be ignored or would be found correct by the ethics commission. Officials would have to think through (and hopefully discuss) their conflict situations and, when the way to handle it was not completely clear, seek advice from the ethics officer. A goal of "no ethics violations" would put an end to the use of rationalizations such as "I am a man of integrity" or "I learned all about ethics at church" or "It was just an oversight." It would quickly become clear that these arguments won't cut it.
A goal of "no ethics violations" would also take the pressure off officials to put loyalty to their political leaders, supervisors, and colleagues ahead of discussing or reporting the handling of a conflict situation. As the Heaths note, it toughens up the resistance of lower-level employees, giving them "an equally credible voice in the decision." Let's face it, an official's aides usually have a much better view of the official's handling of a conflict situation than the official has. If the goal is "no ethics violations," the aide will not only be helping the government, but also the official by bringing up the conflict as soon as possible, before it becomes an embarrassment for her, or even threatens her career.
But you can't just set a destination. You have to back it up with a "good behavioral script." For example, you have to provide timely, professional ethics advice. You have to provide adequate training. You have to help officials out by requiring applicants for contracts, permits, and grants to disclose their relationships with officials. You have to have clear, well-written rules, advisory opinions, decisions, and educational materials. And you need the full support of higher-level officials. In other words, you have to have a comprehensive ethics program. Otherwise, you are asking the impossible of officials.
Click here to read the other six blog posts on Switch.
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
Most cities and counties treat ethics training as a one-off phenomenon. Toss a hundred people in a room, give them a lecture about how to be good, and that's it for at least a year or two. One of the case studies in Chip and Dan Heath's book Switch: How to Change Things When Change Is Hard (Crown, 2010) offers a different vision of ethics training.
A first-grade teacher in a school that had no kindergarten found huge skill gaps among her students. The same sort of skill gaps exist among government officials and employees. She realized that she had to do more than teach them. She had to motivate them, and give them a clear destination. So at the beginning of the school year she announced that by the end of the school year, they were going to be third graders, that is, they were going to be big and smart and even cool.
A destination causes people not just to think when they are learning, but to think how to get to the destination. And it makes the whole process make sense. It's not just ethics training, it's something more.
An ethics trainer with an hour to lecture is not going to be able to promise anything. But an ethics trainer who has a vision for ongoing ethics training can. Ongoing ethics training consists of a semi-monthly newsletter, occasional quizzes, general advisory opinions, FAQs, and other sorts of info, and news in the form of summaries of ethics decisions, settlements, and advisory opinions.
With a stream of information carefully designed to be interesting and not too annoying, an ethics trainer can say to a class, By the end of the year, you're going to truly understand conflicts of interest. By the end of two years, you'll be professionally handling your conflict situations and engaging in discussions of others'. And by the end of three years, you may be leading a seminar on how government ethics applies to your department.
In other words, you will be knowledgeable, professional, and maybe even cool. Just like third graders appear to new first graders. The problem in government ethics is that, in most cities and counties, there isn't a single conflicts of interest third grader (in contrast, there are lots of management third graders, financial third graders, and public works third graders). The idea of an ethics third grader has to be instilled in people.
A Destination for a Government Ethics Program
One problem with government ethics reform is that the chosen destination is usually unrealistic, both in itself and in terms of what is done to get there. The goal is generally to end corruption and to prevent scandals. But the scandals to be prevented often have little or nothing to do with government ethics. And "corruption" includes everything from broken promises to stealing money out of campaign committee funds. As for scandals, no one has any control over them. They can be manufactured out of almost nothing. Learning to deal responsibly with conflicts won't directly bring an end to scandals or corruption. It is only one piece of the puzzle.
And it is a piece that can itself lead to scandals when, for example, an ethics commission selected by the mayor dismisses an ethics complaint against the mayor, or when the public discovers that the ethics commission has no teeth with which to penalize an ethics violator. An inadequate ethics program that appears to be under the control of high-level officials is never going to lead anyone to the promised destination.
A government ethics program's destination has to be something that can actually be attained, for example, the professional handling of conflict situations through the use of professional, independent ethics advice, the timely filing of disclosure statements by officials and by those seeking benefits from the local government, and the settling of cases when officials fail to properly handle a conflict situation.
It would be great if one could point out other cities and counties that have attained this goal. However, there is, as far as I know, no documentation of the successes of local government ethics programs, with the exception of information imbedded in ethics commission annual reports. This is something City Ethics should work on.
The language for ethics reform should not involve scandals and corruption. It should involve professionalism (pride) and gaining the public's trust through an independent, comprehensive ethics program.
No Dry Holes
There's a case study in the book about British Petroleum (BP) drilling for oil. It used to strike oil only 1 out of 5 times it drilled a well. Oil explorers felt they had succeeded if they hit .200. BP wanted to do better, so it set a goal of "no dry holes," which required explorers to put on their geologist hats and really think things through before drilling a well. They became more careful and systematic. And "no dry holes" as a goal also brought an end to rationalizations for poorly conceived operations. One especially problematic rationalization was that a business partner or a government was pressuring the company to drill ("Drill, baby, drill!"). The new goal "toughened up their resistance to governmental and partner pressures."
In local government ethics, a goal of "no ethics violations" puts prevention ahead of other concerns. It would require officials not just to wing it and play the odds, hoping that their ethics decisions either would be ignored or would be found correct by the ethics commission. Officials would have to think through (and hopefully discuss) their conflict situations and, when the way to handle it was not completely clear, seek advice from the ethics officer. A goal of "no ethics violations" would put an end to the use of rationalizations such as "I am a man of integrity" or "I learned all about ethics at church" or "It was just an oversight." It would quickly become clear that these arguments won't cut it.
A goal of "no ethics violations" would also take the pressure off officials to put loyalty to their political leaders, supervisors, and colleagues ahead of discussing or reporting the handling of a conflict situation. As the Heaths note, it toughens up the resistance of lower-level employees, giving them "an equally credible voice in the decision." Let's face it, an official's aides usually have a much better view of the official's handling of a conflict situation than the official has. If the goal is "no ethics violations," the aide will not only be helping the government, but also the official by bringing up the conflict as soon as possible, before it becomes an embarrassment for her, or even threatens her career.
But you can't just set a destination. You have to back it up with a "good behavioral script." For example, you have to provide timely, professional ethics advice. You have to provide adequate training. You have to help officials out by requiring applicants for contracts, permits, and grants to disclose their relationships with officials. You have to have clear, well-written rules, advisory opinions, decisions, and educational materials. And you need the full support of higher-level officials. In other words, you have to have a comprehensive ethics program. Otherwise, you are asking the impossible of officials.
Click here to read the other six blog posts on Switch.
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
- Robert Wechsler's blog
- Log in or register to post comments
