Compliance and Conflicts in Tallahassee: The Organization Interest vs. The Public Interest

Anonymous

Sat, 01/02/2010 - 04:33

City Related

Tallahassee takes a compliance approach to ethics. Its <a href="http://www.talgov.com/gov/facts/ethics.cfm" target="”_blank”">ethics code</a> is
aspirational, based on core values. Its ethics training employs a
Character First approach. Conflicts of interest are only a small
portion of a program that ranges from personnel and transparency issues
to harassment, discrimination, and fraud. 
 
This is not the sort of ethics program usually discussed in this blog,
because it is not what is traditionally referred to as "government
ethics." But since the city government calls it an ethics program, it
is important to look at what it is and how it differs from a
traditional program.

The most glaring difference is what such a compliance program lacks:
clear ethics guidelines, and central, independent ethics advice and
enforcement (except criminal enforcement of fraud statutes). 
 
Instead of a detailed series of ethics and administrative provisions,
the Tallahassee ethics code is as follows: 
As public representatives, we are responsible for applying common
sense and sound judgment in all of our decisions and actions. To
establish the highest level of public trust, we shall maintain
exemplary standards for personal integrity, truthfulness, and fairness
in carrying out our public duties. We should avoid any appearance of
improprieties or a conflict of interest in our roles as public servants
and in our personal lives. We expect our representative agents,
consultants, and vendors to be guided by these principles as well.
Our Code of Ethics is more than just a reflection of our behavioral
standards; it includes our core values as an organization:
<ul>
<li>Customer Service is Our Business: 
We are committed to make our products or perform services in ways that
we meet or exceed each customer's expectations. 
 
</li>
<li>Demonstrate Leadership & Personal Responsibility: 
We strive to always give forethought to our conduct. 
 
</li>
<li>Promote & Support Employee Excellence: 
We seek to understand our individual imperfections and are ready to
excuse "honest" mistakes. We believe in constant improvement in seeking
to be all we are created to be, as individuals, as a group, as an
organization. 
 
</li>
<li>Practice Teamwork: 
We strive to work together, in such a way that complements on another's
abilities with a common vision and related goals.</li>
</ul>
Note that the only mention of conflicts of interest is combined with
"appearance of improprieties ... in our roles as public servants and in
our personal lives." 
 
These are wonderful goals to aspire to, but impossible and often
undesirable rules to enforce. And they provide little information about
how officials and employees should act in real-life contexts,
especially where these many aspirations conflict (e.g., teamwork and personal responsibility). 
 
There are personnel
and other policies in addition to this ethics code, but the rules
applicable to the ethics program are not brought together or
rationalized (conflicts of interest are included under "Working
Conditions" -- not the best way to stress the public interest). Nor are
reporting and advice procedures centralized, other than through a hotline primarily intended for waste and fraud. Many agencies, offices,
and individuals are involved in various aspects of the ethics program. 
 
As occurs in big corporations, <a href="http://www.talgov.com/auditing/pdf/0912-ethics.pdf" target="”_blank”">an audit</a>
of this ethics program was done this year (with <a href="http://www.talgov.com/auditing/pdf/1004-ethics.pdf" target="”_blank”">a follow-up</a>
in December). The audit describes the ethics program in detail and
provides an idea of how it is operating. It also provides the results of a survey, with comparisons
to
the <a href="http://www.ethics.org/" target="”_blank”">Ethics Resource Center</a>'s <a href="http://www.ethics.org/files/u5/The_National_Government_Ethics_Survey.pd…; target="”_blank”">2007
National
Government Ethics Survey</a> local government portion (pages
31-35). 
 
The most telling result of the survey done as part of the audit is that
34% of Tallahassee employees indicated that they were aware of
misconduct at work, compared to 63% in the national survey. Of course,
it could be that there is far less misconduct going on in Tallahassee,
but it is more likely that Tallahassee employees don't have a clear
idea what constitutes misconduct. 
 
When asked about specific kinds of misconduct, the numbers are
sometimes even further short of the norm. For example, only 6% said
they were
aware of colleagues putting their own interests ahead of the
organization's, as compared with 26% in the national survey. What's
interesting is that, where the national number is lower, as in stealing
(10%), the Tallahassee number doesn't drop (7%). Are Tallahassee
government officials really more likely to steal than to put their
interests
ahead of the organization? Or do these officials have a clearer idea of
what stealing is? 
 
Equally telling is the fact that the survey, like the ethics program,
doesn't seem to care about the public interest. Note from the survey
question that it is strictly concerned
with conflicts between an official's interest and the organization's interest. This is the principal difference
between compliance and ethics programs. Ethics programs are concerned with the public
interest. 
 
A corporation can focus on the organization's interest because the stockholder's interest is, effectively, the organization's
interest. But this is not true in the government context. The
organization exists solely for the public (and not just as customers, as stated in the core values). It should have no interest of its own, other than what is needed to properly manage any
organization. A compliance program more concerned with the organization
than with the public is not
dealing with responsibly with its own conflict of interest. 
 
It is true that Florida's state ethics commission has jurisdiction over
local governments, but this has not stopped many Florida cities and
counties from adopting their own enforceable conflicts of interest
programs with clear guidelines. The ethics audit refers to the state
commission only once outside the state transparency and financial
disclosure rules (see page 6). 
 
It is also telling that the ethics audit refers outside Tallahassee only to a national survey
done by an organization that focuses on compliance. It does not
compare Tallahassee's program to the ethics programs of other Florida
cities or American cities its size, perhaps because they focus on conflicts of
interest and that might require a defense of Tallahassee's decision to opt for compliance. Like the Chicago compliance program, whose survey I discussed
in <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/node/976" target="”_blank”">a recent blog post</a>, Tallahassee's program does not seem to
acknowledge the important attributes of an ethics program that it is
missing or which are handled elsewhere. It should aspire to more. 
 
Robert Wechsler 
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics 
 
---

Search

Compliance and Conflicts in Tallahassee: The Organization Interest vs. The Public Interest

Tags

Share This Page