leading for accountability kevin p. kearns, ph.d. local government academy october 11, 2007
TRANSCRIPT
Leading for Accountability
Kevin P. Kearns, Ph.D.Local Government AcademyOctober 11, 2007
Pessimistic View of the Local Government Environment: Stormy Forecast?
Competition with each other, with nonprofits and even with for-profit firms
Race for professional talent Special threats to small
municipalities: Lack critical mass and organizational capacity
Scandals involving malfeasance and nonfeasance: Erosion of public trust
Strategist’s (Optimist’s) View: We Control Our Own Fate
Public trust is our most important strategic asset
Behind each threat is a potential opportunity
Opportunities come to those who “invest” in public trust, not to those who merely “react” to ethical controversies or accountability crises
Elected officials play a unique role as liaison between the organization and the public(s) it serves
Some Key Areas of Concern Regarding Accountability
Personal financial gain from public decisions / contracts
Ownership interests and financial disclosures Use of public property / employees for personal
purposes Acceptance of gifts, including from charities Proper oversight by the board of professional staff Program effectiveness and responsiveness
Outcomes versus outputs Financial management
Accurate Fund Accounting Abuse of position
Types of Ethical Dilemmas Commonly Faced by Local Government Officials
Personal Cost: When doing the right thing will incur costs (political or otherwise) to you personally or to the organization Moral Courage Dilemmas
Right versus Right Dilemmas: When there is a conflict between to apparently right sets of values
Discussion
What are the accountability challenges / controversies facing your community?
How is your local government responding? With what results? What has been YOUR role as a elected
official in interpreting and communicating public expectations to municipal employees?
Impacts
Loss of public confidence Erosion of citizen support Increased scrutiny and oversight Low morale among staff and
volunteers Distraction from mission - damage
control consumes energy and resources
Context of Scandals
Organizational complexity: more difficult for volunteer (or part-time) elected officials to understand the complexities of local government operations
Court of popular opinion: Media scrutiny and “talk show” politics (public and nonprofits).
Competition for competent leaders: Pay and perks become an issue (public and nonprofits)
Increased entrepreneurial activities: Local governments (and nonprofits) behaving more like businesses and looking for opportunities to diversify income
Autonomy versus Bureaucracy: Rapid response to competitive pressures requires administrative autonomy, but representative democracy sometimes requires bureaucratic control
Some Definitions of Accountability
The extent to which one must answer (“account”) to a higher authority - legal or organizational - for one’s actions
The extent to which one anticipates and responds to the needs of stakeholders
County Health Department
Classic Case: Specific claims of wrong-doing Clear chain of authority: county and
state health departments Controller’s audit is relatively precise
mechanism Relatively explicit performance criteria The “trust” contract is explicit:
certificates in restaurants
Mental Health Center
Ambiguous Case: Wide-ranging and not clearly substantiated
claims of “wrong-doing” No clear chain of authority - absence of
rigorous oversight Catalyst was an emotionally charged event
(murder), not a dry technical audit Most severe critics of the agency are not
overseers but sister agencies Nature of the “trust” relationship is
ambiguous
A Strategic Approach to Accountability
Accountability is a dynamic concept, not static
The accountability environment contains both explicit and implicit expectations of how the organization should behave
Organizations can respond to these expectations with either tactical or strategic actions
Accountability Matrix
Explicit Standard of Performance
Implicit Standard of Performance
Tactical Response from the Agency
Legal Accountability (compliance)
Negotiated Accountability (responsive)
Strategic Response from the Agency
Anticipatory Accountability (advocacy)
Discretionary Accountability (judgement)
A Few Examples of Each Type of Accountability
Compliance Accountability: Whistleblower protection, Reporting of gifts, Proper use of intergovernmental grant or transfer, contract administration, nondiscrimination
Negotiated Accountability: Red Cross and Johnson and Johnson; Mexico State University and donor anonymity; Charity gifts, City of Pittsburgh (PILOT)
Discretionary Accountability: Adherence to best practices; Implementation of Sarbanes-Oxley guidelines for board governance
Advocacy Accountability: Robert Citron and Orange County Bankruptcy
Some Accountability Tools
Mission and Values Statement, including evidence that your organization periodically assesses progress on the mission
Conflict of interest statements and enforcement mechanisms
Human resource and personnel policies governing hiring, job descriptions, work conditions, salaries and promotion criteria, and performance evaluation.
Accountability Tools (cont.)
Financial policies and reports, including budget, independent audits, internal financial controls, investment policies
Whistleblower protections Public communication and transparency
tools such as annual reports Independent, and credible, ethics
commissions
Discussion Questions
How has the “accountability environment” of local government changed in the last five years?
How will it likely change in the next five years?
What are your local government’s strengths and potential weaknesses with respect to the dynamics of the accountability environment?
The Unique Perspectives / Skills of Elected Officials
Uniquely positioned to be liaison between the organization and the public(s) it serves
Unique perspective (systemic) on the organization and its various parts
Uniquely skilled as “listeners” as well as “communicators”
Potentially more “objective” than other organizational members
A Checklist of Moral Principles (Prof. Peter Madsen, Carnegie Mellon Univ.)
What responsibilities (duties) need to be fulfilled? Have any gone unfulfilled?
What consequences might be predicted as the result of a given action? Are these harmful or beneficial?
Are there situational variables or contingencies that should be considered?
Whose values need to be considered in the decision? Individual? Organizational? Societal? Cultural? Spiritual? All?
Greatest good or common good? What legal liabilities are at stake? Implicit
contract (promise) versus legal contract?
Moral Principles (cont.)
What character traits / virtues might guide the decision?
How fair and just is the decision being contemplated? How can justice be achieved?
Is there a universal code of conduct that can be extracted from precedent or comparable circumstances?
How will the public scrutinize the decision? Will you want to read about this in the newspaper tomorrow?
Universal Ethical Values
Trustworthiness Respect Responsibility Loyalty Compassion Fairness