管理层次在地方政府管理人员道德推理中的作用

IF 2.1 4区 管理学 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Nicole El Haber, Swati Nagpal
{"title":"管理层次在地方政府管理人员道德推理中的作用","authors":"Nicole El Haber, Swati Nagpal","doi":"10.1111/1467-8500.12633","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<jats:label />Falling public trust in Australia's institutions warrants revisiting how public sector managers approach ethical decision‐making. This study presents the findings of in‐depth interviews with 35 local government managers in Australia and seeks to understand how managerial hierarchy influences the moral reasoning of managers. Through the lens of social learning and moral development theoretical perspectives, the findings indicate that local government managers do engage in different types of moral reasoning when presented with hypothetical ethical dilemmas, and their managerial status plays a pronounced role in shaping the content of that reasoning. We also find support for differences in moral reasoning across gender, which appear more evident at lower levels of management. Through providing an in‐depth analysis of managerial hierarchy and ethical decision‐making, the findings from this study can be used to guide organisational and individual managers’ ethics training and development.Points for practitioners<jats:list list-type=\"bullet\"> <jats:list-item>The declining public trust in public administrators warrants regular risk management audits of internal and external environments of public sector organisations to identify potential or existing ethical challenges that require a response.</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>Moral reasoning and ethical decision‐making are context specific and include the ethical climate of the organisation. We find support for the importance of organisational leadership visibly ‘walking the talk’ when it comes to ethics.</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>While management hierarchy is seen to influence moral reasoning, or the deliberations when arriving at a decision, there is widespread acceptance of the basic tenets of abiding by the law and being truthful. Therefore, organisational ethical policies and codes of conduct should clearly articulate the legal implications, and consequences of any breaches.</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>A one‐size‐fits‐all approach to ethics training is not advised. We find that moral reasoning differs with managerial experience. A case is made to account for training tailored at different managerial levels, along with scenario‐based training and mentoring from higher levels of management.</jats:list-item> </jats:list>","PeriodicalId":47373,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","volume":"245 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The role of managerial hierarchy in the moral reasoning of local government managers\",\"authors\":\"Nicole El Haber, Swati Nagpal\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1467-8500.12633\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<jats:label />Falling public trust in Australia's institutions warrants revisiting how public sector managers approach ethical decision‐making. This study presents the findings of in‐depth interviews with 35 local government managers in Australia and seeks to understand how managerial hierarchy influences the moral reasoning of managers. Through the lens of social learning and moral development theoretical perspectives, the findings indicate that local government managers do engage in different types of moral reasoning when presented with hypothetical ethical dilemmas, and their managerial status plays a pronounced role in shaping the content of that reasoning. We also find support for differences in moral reasoning across gender, which appear more evident at lower levels of management. Through providing an in‐depth analysis of managerial hierarchy and ethical decision‐making, the findings from this study can be used to guide organisational and individual managers’ ethics training and development.Points for practitioners<jats:list list-type=\\\"bullet\\\"> <jats:list-item>The declining public trust in public administrators warrants regular risk management audits of internal and external environments of public sector organisations to identify potential or existing ethical challenges that require a response.</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>Moral reasoning and ethical decision‐making are context specific and include the ethical climate of the organisation. We find support for the importance of organisational leadership visibly ‘walking the talk’ when it comes to ethics.</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>While management hierarchy is seen to influence moral reasoning, or the deliberations when arriving at a decision, there is widespread acceptance of the basic tenets of abiding by the law and being truthful. Therefore, organisational ethical policies and codes of conduct should clearly articulate the legal implications, and consequences of any breaches.</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>A one‐size‐fits‐all approach to ethics training is not advised. We find that moral reasoning differs with managerial experience. A case is made to account for training tailored at different managerial levels, along with scenario‐based training and mentoring from higher levels of management.</jats:list-item> </jats:list>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47373,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian Journal of Public Administration\",\"volume\":\"245 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian Journal of Public Administration\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12633\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12633","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

公众对澳大利亚机构的信任度不断下降,因此有必要重新审视公共部门管理人员如何进行道德决策。本研究介绍了对澳大利亚 35 名地方政府管理人员的深入访谈结果,并试图了解管理层次如何影响管理人员的道德推理。通过社会学习和道德发展理论的视角,研究结果表明,地方政府管理人员在面临假设的道德困境时,确实会进行不同类型的道德推理,而他们的管理者地位在影响推理内容方面起着明显的作用。我们还发现,不同性别的道德推理存在差异,这种差异在较低的管理级别中更为明显。通过对管理层次和道德决策的深入分析,本研究的结果可用于指导组织和个人管理者的道德培训和发展。 对从业人员的启示 公众对公共管理者的信任度不断下降,这就要求我们定期对公共部门组织的内部和外部环境进行风险管理审计,以发现潜在或现有的道德挑战,并采取应对措施。道德推理和道德决策与具体环境有关,包括组织的道德氛围。我们发现,在道德问题上,组织领导层明显 "言行一致 "的重要性得到了支持。虽然管理层次被认为会影响道德推理或决策时的审议,但遵守法律和实事求是的基本原则已被广泛接受。因此,组织的道德政策和行为准则应明确阐明法律影响和任何违法行为的后果。我们不建议对道德培训采取 "一刀切 "的做法。我们发现,管理经验不同,道德推理也不同。因此,有必要针对不同的管理级别开展培训,同时开展情景模拟培训,并由更高级别的管理人员提供指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The role of managerial hierarchy in the moral reasoning of local government managers
Falling public trust in Australia's institutions warrants revisiting how public sector managers approach ethical decision‐making. This study presents the findings of in‐depth interviews with 35 local government managers in Australia and seeks to understand how managerial hierarchy influences the moral reasoning of managers. Through the lens of social learning and moral development theoretical perspectives, the findings indicate that local government managers do engage in different types of moral reasoning when presented with hypothetical ethical dilemmas, and their managerial status plays a pronounced role in shaping the content of that reasoning. We also find support for differences in moral reasoning across gender, which appear more evident at lower levels of management. Through providing an in‐depth analysis of managerial hierarchy and ethical decision‐making, the findings from this study can be used to guide organisational and individual managers’ ethics training and development.Points for practitioners The declining public trust in public administrators warrants regular risk management audits of internal and external environments of public sector organisations to identify potential or existing ethical challenges that require a response. Moral reasoning and ethical decision‐making are context specific and include the ethical climate of the organisation. We find support for the importance of organisational leadership visibly ‘walking the talk’ when it comes to ethics. While management hierarchy is seen to influence moral reasoning, or the deliberations when arriving at a decision, there is widespread acceptance of the basic tenets of abiding by the law and being truthful. Therefore, organisational ethical policies and codes of conduct should clearly articulate the legal implications, and consequences of any breaches. A one‐size‐fits‐all approach to ethics training is not advised. We find that moral reasoning differs with managerial experience. A case is made to account for training tailored at different managerial levels, along with scenario‐based training and mentoring from higher levels of management.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
9.10%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Aimed at a diverse readership, the Australian Journal of Public Administration is committed to the study and practice of public administration, public management and policy making. It encourages research, reflection and commentary amongst those interested in a range of public sector settings - federal, state, local and inter-governmental. The journal focuses on Australian concerns, but welcomes manuscripts relating to international developments of relevance to Australian experience.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信