33 means defining administrative ethics warwick 1981

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: estraints on the (5) means chosen to accomplish organizational ends. 33 means Defining Administrative Ethics Warwick (1981) further specifies the four sources of Warwick ethical decision making by public-sector leaders as public interest, constituency interests, personal interest, and bureaucratic interest. Similarly Cooper (1990) identifies the sources as individual attributes. (1990) In his article Integrity in the public-sector, Dobel (1990) In states that “public officials need a complex array of moral resources to exercise discretion,” and that adequate discretion by public officials “should be that seen as an iterative process among three mutually supporting realms of judgment”. supporting Thus he argues that regime accountability, personal Thus responsibility, and prudence (the ability to govern and responsibility, the discipline oneself by the use of reason) are the keys to ethical decision making for individuals in the publicto sector. 34 Defining Administrative Ethics According to Dennis Thompson “administrative ethics involves the application of mor...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 02/11/2014 for the course BSC 2501 taught by Professor Frigerio during the Fall '12 term at Kazakhstan Institute of Management, Economics and Strategic Research.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online