Knowledge tools for academics

and professionals
Module Series on Integrity and Ethics

Module 13
Public Integrity and Ethics

1
 UNITED NATIONS OFFICE ON DRUGS AND CRIME
Vienna

Knowledge tools for academics and professionals

UNODC Module Series on Integrity and Ethics

MODULE 13
PUBLIC INTEGRITY AND ETHICS
Public Integrity and Ethics

Module 13
Background information

The UNODC Module Series on Integrity and Ethics offers 14 Modules focusing on a range of core issues within these two
areas. This includes universal values; ethics and society; the importance of ethics in the public and private sectors; diversity
and pluralism, behavioural ethics; and ethics and gender mainstreaming. The Modules also illustrate how integrity and ethics
relate to critical areas such as the media, business, law, public service, and various professions.

The Modules are designed for use by both academic institutions and professional academies across the world. They are built
to help lecturers and trainers deliver ethics education, including those who are not dedicated ethics lecturers and trainers but
would like to incorporate these components into their courses. Lecturers are encouraged to customize the Modules before
integrating them into their classes and courses. The Modules include discussions of relevant issues, suggestions for class
activities and exercises, recommended class structures, student assessments, reading lists (with an emphasis on open
access materials), PowerPoint slides, video materials and other teaching tools. Each Module provides an outline for a three-
hour class, as well as includes guidelines on how to develop it into a full course.

The Modules focus on universal values and problems and can easily be adapted to different local and cultural contexts,
including a variety of degree programmes as they are multi-disciplinary. The Modules seek to enhance trainees and students’
ethical awareness and commitment to acting with integrity and equip them with the necessary skills to apply and spread these
norms in life, work and society. To increase their effectiveness, the Modules cover both theoretical and practical perspectives,
and use interactive teaching methods such as experiential learning and group-based work. These methods keep students
and trainees engaged and help them develop critical thinking, problem solving, and communication skills, all of which are
important for ethics education.

The topics of the Modules were chosen following consultations with academic experts who participated in a meeting of
experts convened by UNODC, both at a global level in Vienna in March 2017, and in three regional workshops held in different
parts of the world in April 2017. The experts emphasized the need for increased integrity and ethics education globally and
advised on core areas to be addressed through the Modules. They considered it paramount that the Modules prepare university
students and trainees for value driven effective action, keep students engaged, lend themselves to adaptation to different
regional and disciplinary contexts, and allow lecturers to incorporate them as ethics components within non-ethics courses.

To achieve these objectives, the experts recommended that the Modules have a range of characteristics, ultimately being able to:

» Connect theory to practice » Draw on good practices from practitioners

» Emphasize the importance of integrity and ethics to » Link integrity and ethics to other global issues and the
everyday life SDGs
» Encourage critical thinking » Adopt a multi-disciplinary and multi-level approach
» Stress not only the importance of making ethical » Focus on global ethics and universal values while
decisions but also demonstrate how to implement leaving room for diverse regional and cultural
the decisions perspectives
» Use innovative interactive teaching methods » Employ non-technical and clear terminology
» Balance general ethics with applied ethics » Be user-friendly

Drawing on these recommendations, UNODC worked for over a year with more than 70+ academic experts from over 30
countries to develop the 14 University Modules on Integrity and Ethics. Each Module was drafted by a core team of academics
and UNODC experts, and then peer-reviewed by a larger group of academics from different disciplines and regions to ensure
a multi-disciplinary and universal coverage. The Modules passed through a meticulous clearance process at the UNODC
headquarters before finally being edited and published on its website as open-source materials. In addition, it was agreed
that the content of the Modules would be regularly updated to ensure that they are in line with contemporary studies and
correspond to current needs of educators.

The present knowledge tool has been developed by the UNODC Corruption and Economic Crime Branch (CEB), as part of the
Education for Justice initiative under the Global Programme for the Implementation of the Doha Declaration.

4
Public Integrity and Ethics

Module 13
Disclaimers

The contents of the UNODC Module Series on Integrity and Ethcis do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the United
Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), Member States or contributory organizations, and neither do they imply any
endorsement. The designations employed and the presentation of material in these modules do not imply the expression of any
opinion whatsoever on the part of the UNODC concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city, or area,
or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. UNODC encourages the use, reproduction,
and dissemination of material in these modules. Except where otherwise indicated, content may be copied, downloaded, and
printed for private study, research, and teaching purposes, or for use in non-commercial products or services, provided that
appropriate acknowledgement of UNODC as the source and copyright holder is given and that UNODC endorsement of users’
views, products or services is not implied in any way.

Materials provided in this document are provided “as is”, without warranty of any kind, either express or implied, including,
without limitation, warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose and non-infringement. UNODC specifically
does not make any warranties or representations as to the accuracy or completeness of any such Materials. UNODC
periodically adds, changes, improves or updates the Materials in the module without notice.

Under no circumstances shall UNODC be liable for any loss, damage, liability or expense incurred or suffered that is claimed
to have resulted from the use of this module, including, without limitation, any fault, error, omission, interruption or delay
with respect thereto. The use of this module is at the User’s sole risk. Under no circumstances, including but not limited to
negligence, shall UNODC be liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, special or consequential damages, even if UNODC has
been advised of the possibility of such damages.

The User specifically acknowledges and agrees that UNODC is not liable for any conduct of any User.
Links to Internet sites contained in the present modules are provided for the convenience of the reader and are accurate at
the time of issue. The United Nations takes no responsibility for their continued accuracy after issue or for the content of any
external website.

Preservation of immunities

Nothing herein shall constitute or be considered to be a limitation upon or a waiver of the privileges and immunities of the
United Nations, which are specifically reserved.

The United Nations reserves its exclusive right in its sole discretion to alter, limit or discontinue the Site or any Materials in any
respect. The United Nations shall have no obligation to take the needs of any User into consideration in connection therewith.

The United Nations reserves the right to deny in its sole discretion any user access to this Site or any portion thereof without
notice.

No waiver by the United Nations of any provision of these Terms and Conditions shall be binding except as set forth in writing
and signed by its duly authorized representative.

These modules have not been formally edited.

5
Public Integrity and Ethics

Module 13
Table of Contents
Introduction 07

Learning outcomes 07

Key issues 08
Public service goals, values and obligations 09
Public integrity management 11
Ethical codes and other integrity instruments 13
References 17

Exercises 18
Exercise 1: Reception on values 18
Exercise 2: Ethics codes for public servants 19
Exercise 3: Integrity breaching practices 19
Exercise 4: Case studies and structured ethical reflection 20

Possible class structure 23

Core reading 25

Advanced reading 26

Student assessment 28

Additional teaching tools 29

Case studies 29
Video material 29

Guidelines to develop a stand-alone course 31

6
Public Integrity and Ethics

Module 13
Introduction

This Module examines methods and approaches to strengthening integrity in the public sector. It is
designed to be used by lecturers who wish to introduce students to the importance of public service
integrity and the ways in which public organizations can promote ethical working environments. The
Module explores the concept of integrity management in the public sector. It also discusses other
ethical frameworks that apply to public organizations, such as codes of ethics and codes of conduct.
After highlighting the importance of integrity in the public sector – or public integrity – the Module
focuses on two main ideas. The first idea is that ethical behaviour is driven by both external and
internal incentives. Therefore, establishing ethical public organizations requires processes that reach
stakeholders’ minds and hearts. The second idea examined in the Module is that strengthening the
integrity of public organizations requires working in parallel on personal ethics, organizational culture,
and management systems. The discussions build on the concepts elaborated in E4J Integrity and
Ethics Module 1 (Introduction and Conceptual Frameworks) and Module 14 (Professional Ethics).
Going beyond theoretical and conceptual explanations, the Module includes interactive exercises that
help students reach a deeper understanding of the issues.

Learning outcomes
• Understand the key instruments for strengthening public integrity and ethics and the processes of
integrity management in public organizations
• Appreciate the challenges involved in strengthening integrity and ethics in the public service
• Analyse codes of ethics as specific sets of public values and action principles, and understand the
interdependence of the values
• Evaluate and analyse public service scenarios and understand how to identify and manage the risk
of integrity breaches

7
Public Integrity and Ethics

Module 13
Key issues

Integrity of the public sector – or public integrity – refers to the use of powers and resources entrusted
to the public sector effectively, honestly and for public purposes. Additional related ethical standards
that the public sector is expected to uphold include transparency, accountability, efficiency and
competence. Staff members of the United Nations, for example, are required to “uphold the highest
standards of efficiency, competence and integrity”, and integrity is defined by the United Nations Staff
Regulations as including but not limited to “probity, impartiality, fairness, honesty and truthfulness
in all matters affecting their work and status” (UN Staff Regulations 1.2(b). The concept of public
integrity has also been defined in broader terms as “the consistent alignment of, and adherence to,
shared ethical values, principles and norms for upholding and prioritising the public interest over
private interests in the public sector” (OECD, 2017, p. 7).

Public integrity is essential for advancing the public good and ensuring the legitimacy of public
organizations. It is also considered an antithesis to corruption, as recognized by articles 7 and 8
of the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC)1. However, strengthening integrity in
the public service is a complex challenge that involves more than merely requiring staff members to
uphold personal and professional ethical standards. Without an ethical culture and an appropriate
integrity management system at the organizational level, civil servants may confront obstacles which
will prevent them from acting with integrity on the individual level despite their best efforts.

Integrity and Ethics Module 1 (Introduction and Conceptual Framework) and Module 14 (Professional
Ethics) explore in detail the issues of personal and professional standards of integrity and ethics, which
apply at the individual level. The present Module, by contrast, focuses on the approaches through
which integrity and ethics can be strengthened in the public sector at the organization level. Such an
organizational perspective is not entirely divorced from the individual level standards, but it amounts
to a systemic approach that combines measures for promoting ethics at the individual level (e.g.
training, leading by example) with organizational measures such as audits, complaint mechanisms,
hotlines, disciplinary bodies and proceedings, rules and procedures aimed to reduce opportunities
for unethical behaviour, and incentives for encouraging individuals to speak up against unethical
behaviour (such as those discussed in Integrity and Ethics Module 7 (Strategies for Ethical Action)).

Against this backdrop, the Module discusses public integrity from an organizational perspective. In
this context, it examines the concept of ‘integrity management’, as well as the use of codes of conduct
and other measures for promoting ethics within public organizations. Its key message is that to ensure
integrity and ethics in public organizations, there is a need for a systemic approach which combines
compliance-based (or rule-based) and value-based elements (Huberts, 2014, p. 179). To situate the
discussion within the broader context of public service, the Module begins with an overview of public
service goals, values and obligations. It subsequently discusses public integrity management and
some of the key instruments for strengthening public integrity.

1 Available from the website of UNODC (www.unodc.org)

8
Public Integrity and Ethics

Module 13
Public service goals, values and obligations
The public service in any country consists of public organizations and the individuals working within
them. Public organizations are specifically established by the State to fulfil public purposes and
remain directly accountable to the state. Such organizations include ministries, public hospitals,
public schools, the military, police, and so on. The purpose of public organizations is to serve the
public interest, i.e. the interest of the whole community. This contrasts with private organizations,
such as companies, that often only serve private interests of the owners or shareholders.

Another key difference between public and private organizations is that the former are funded largely
by obligatory contributions from citizens, namely, taxes and fees. This means that individuals have no
choice but to finance the services, as opposed to the free choice at the basis of consumer decisions
in the private sector. The legitimacy of the public service, therefore, depends on citizens’ trust. To win
this trust, public service needs to be just, fair, transparent, responsive to citizens’ needs, and compliant
with the relevant laws, regulations and quality standards. In addition, results must be achieved through
an impartial, lawful and accountable process. These are key public service values, which underpin
the effective operation of the governance system. When citizens regard public service delivery as a
legitimate process, they are likely to comply with the relevant rules and norms. This, in turn, will lead
to a more efficient governance system which can focus on delivering services and promoting public
interests rather than coercing compliance.

State-owned enterprises are sometimes viewed as a bridge between the two sectors, because
they are owned by the State and usually support a key socio-economic objective (e.g. electricity or
telecommunications), but they operate on commercial principles. However, since they are State-owned
and State-funded they should adhere to ethical standards of public organizations. There can of course
be private organizations that provide services with social characteristics, such as private hospitals.
But they are not State-owned or State-funded and therefore not considered public organizations. It
is noted that irrespective of the differences between the private and public sectors, all organizations
must comply with the laws and regulations specific to their area of work, such as those related to health
and safety standards, data protection rules, and environmental regulations. In addition, professional
employees, where in public or private organizations, must uphold professional ethical standards.

The employees of public organizations are often called public servants or public officials. The latter
term is defined broadly by the UNCAC as:

(i) any person holding a legislative, executive, administrative or judicial office of a State Party,
whether appointed or elected, whether permanent or temporary, whether paid or unpaid,
irrespective of that person’s seniority; (ii) any other person who performs a public function,
including for a public agency or public enterprise, or provides a public service, as defined in the
domestic law of the State Party and as applied in the pertinent area of law of that State Party; (iii)
any other person defined as a “public official” in the domestic law of a State Party.

For present purposes, the terms public servant and public official are understood according to the
broad UNCAC definition.

9
Public Integrity and Ethics

Module 13
Public servants are expected to make decisions with high levels of professionalism and commitment
to the public good, and in a transparent and accountable manner. The three most essential obligations
of public servants, which underpin their public decision-making, are to follow the law, use public
resources in an effective manner, and act ethically. The importance of the obligation to act ethically
is emphasized in article 8 of the UNCAC, which requires States to promote “integrity, honesty and
responsibility among its public officials” in order to prevent corruption. In addition, public servants
are also expected to reflect on all the values and principles included in the code of ethics or code of
conduct that guide the work of their institution (Lewis and Gilman, 2012, pp. 28-30). Failure on any
of these fronts would carry the risk of damaging public trust, and therefore harming the quality and
effectiveness of the system. Lewis and Gilman have described the public servant as a “temporary
steward” who is entrusted with power and authority to make decisions on behalf of the community.
They refer to five core ethical values in the public service: accountability, impartiality, justice and
fairness, avoiding harm, and doing good. They break down these core values into action principles as
illustrated in the following table:

Table 1: Public Service Core Values and Action Principles

Value 1 - Accountability
Action principles:
• Reject incompetence
• Seek efficiency
• Seek effectiveness
• Take responsibility for what is done and how
• Facilitate transparency
• Listen and be responsive

Value 2 - Impartiality
Action principles:
• Avoid conflict of interest
• Seek inclusion
• Be objective
• Pursue the public interest

Value 3 - Justice and fairness

Action principles:
• Comply with law
• Seek procedural and substantive justice
• Seek fair distribution of public benefits

Value 4 - Avoiding doing harm

Action principles:
• Provide remedy or relief
• Use moral imagination
Value 5 - Do good
Action principles:
• Employ empathy
• Give affirmative help

10
Public Integrity and Ethics

Module 13
Public integrity management
As noted earlier, public organizations serve the welfare of the community. They are under an obligation
to use the resources entrusted to them effectively and efficiently, and according to legal norms and
shared ethical values. The traditional approach to promoting ethics in public organizations was based
on enforceable rules and discipline. During the last decades, however, the increasing level of complexity
and speed of change in the world called for more flexible adjustment processes in public service
delivery. In this context, delegation of decision making and wider discretion was allocated to staff.
While such delegation and discretion potentially produces better results and more motivated public
servants, they also carry the risk of misuse by unethical officials, who may use their power for private
gain instead of advancing the public interest. To manage the ethical risk involved in discretionary
decisions, and to strengthen the organizational integrity, public organizations put in place internal
controls as well as performance and accountability frameworks. In parallel, public organizations adopt
procedures aimed at strengthening employee motivation and promoting rule-based and principled
decision-making. Alongside these, legal norms and regulations external to the organization require
adherence to certain standards. Finally, a variety of internal and external bodies promote public integrity
and compliance through means of investigation, auditing, training, and other functions. The system of
laws, regulations, policies, practices, officials, bodies and units that promote ethical decision making,
prevent corruption and advance the public good is generally referred to as an integrity management
system (OECD, 2017, p. 9). Such systems might not always be called ‘integrity management systems’
but the concept is useful for present purposes as it acknowledges that promoting integrity and ethics
in the public sector requires a systemic approach.

The starting point for the design of a public integrity management system is the mission: serving the
community. Organizations define goals and values that derive from that mission, and translate those
into operational rules that are conducive to the desired results. To ensure that daily activities are
carried out in accordance with the operational rules, organizations establish internal control systems
(e.g. in financial management and procurement). For operational rules and the corresponding internal
control systems to make sense and be effective, the values and goals of the organization need to be
aligned with the professional standards of the contributing professions. This can be a challenge in the
case of public organizations that have wide and diverse mandates and many contributing professions
that are guided by very different paradigms, such as in the case of a local municipality.

Take, for example, a local municipality’s budgeting rules. The declared values of the organization (the
local municipality) include responsiveness to citizens’ expectations, accountability, respect for social
cohesion, and sustainability. The declared goals are to support the vulnerable, ensure infrastructure
availability throughout the municipality, maintain economic activities and working opportunities within
the jurisdiction, promote effective and efficient use of resources, and maintain sustainable financial
management. In a budget allocation process, the finance professionals will expect adequate spending
ceilings and cost-benefit calculations. The engineers who implement infrastructure projects, in most
cases, can easily provide quantitative calculations and adjust them to spending ceilings. The social
service professionals, on the other hand, will require some discretion in individual cases in order to
provide effective support for the vulnerable, as such support should be tailored to meet the needs in
each individual case. Thus, the decision criteria for infrastructure projects could be quite simple and
may even be included in the infrastructure strategy.

11
Public Integrity and Ethics

Module 13
But for social assistance schemes, a different decision making procedure needs to be in place, with
discretion allocated to the social department and the establishment of an internal control system that
would ensure that the decisions are not biased or corrupt (e.g. involving a social committee or a higher
decision maker as well as the legal department). Hence, different domains require different processes
that lead to budgetary decisions, as well as different kinds of operational rules and internal controls.

Moreover, rules and regulations are not sufficient on their own to guarantee integrity. Organizations
must ensure that their integrity management system exists not only on paper, but is also translated into
day-to-day practice. Part of this is a question of competencies, skills and discipline of staff. Another
part is aspirational: staff should be committed to apply the rules. For this to occur, the personal and
professional values of staff need to be aligned with organizational goals and practices. In this sense,
an integrity management system aims to align these components, for example, through training,
codes of conduct and codes of ethics. Such a systemic approach to integrity management is valuable
because it targets the organization as a whole and seeks to ensure that organizational rules and
values are mutually supportive and shared by all stakeholders.

While staff commitment and competence are essential for ensuring public ethics, accountability and
enforcement measures are important as well. In this context, organizations must adopt procedures
for reporting on integrity breaches as well as protection measures for those who report. Organizations
should also put in place disciplinary regimes and control mechanisms such as internal audits and
internal investigations. As discussed in further depth in Integrity and Ethics Module 7 (Strategies for
Ethical Action), promoting a culture of integrity requires encouraging staff and organizations to learn
from their mistakes rather than rely on blaming and punishing. However, in certain cases, ensuring
compliance requires taking action against staff who violate the rules. There is a fine balance that
needs to be struck between accountability and ‘softer’ learning processes.

However, even with the best enforcement mechanisms, rules can be broken. Therefore, not only
material incentives but also abstract rewards should be used for establishing an ethical climate.
This is consistent with the understanding that decision-making is not only rational but also driven by
context and emotions, as explained in further detail in Integrity and Ethics Module 6 (Challenges to
Ethical Living) and Module 8 (Behavioural Ethics). Therefore, while material incentives and sanctions
are important, human behaviour is also influenced by more abstract rewards such as the feeling of
belonging to the community or being seen as a valuable employee. Research shows that humans
often put abstract rewards ahead of their biological needs (Eagleman, 2016, p. 114). This insight could
guide strategies for strengthening ethical action in public organizations.

The essence of such abstract rewards is to publicly recognize the ethical, efficient and effective work of
the public servant frequently and sometimes even immediately after appropriate performance. While
there is little research on what rewards public servants value most, it can reasonably be assumed that
the sense of accomplishment, recognition and ownership would be more important to a public servant
than performance-related-pay. This has been confirmed by an OECD study which encourages the use
of performance-related-pay but at the same time suggests that its effects should not be overestimated
(OECD, 2007, p 5). Aside from recognition, public servants could also receive developmental rewards
such as training, interesting/challenging assignments, and delegation of authority and responsibility.
This motivates public servants to perform better and could encourage ethical conduct.

12
Public Integrity and Ethics

Module 13
Organizations can also strengthen ethical awareness by promoting ongoing conversations about
integrity, ethics and quality of work. Such conversations could help build public service motivation
and prevent moral disengagement. They can create shared values, a safe environment and trust in
organizations. Finally, organizations can establish an Ethics Office that can provide advice on ethical
issues.

Against this background, public integrity management can be conceptualized as a process that uses
rational, material, and emotional incentives to ensure ethical conduct of individuals and organizations.
This process combines (external) rule-based incentives with (internal) value-based incentives that
strengthen the motivation of staff to serve the goals of the organization. Both are necessary for public
service integrity. The following paragraphs address possible approaches and instruments that can
create a culture of integrity and promote ethical and rule-consistent behaviour of public servants and
organizations.

Ethical codes and other integrity instruments

A key instrument for strengthening integrity in any public organization is the code of ethics or code of
conduct. These codes are formulated to capture the ethos of public service domains and professions,
and guide the behaviour of actors. Both international organizations and national governments
formulate ethical codes for the public service. The UNCAC, for example, urges States to apply “codes
or standards of conduct for the correct, honourable and proper performance of public functions”.
Given that the meaning of honourable and proper performance may sometimes be context-dependent,
the formulation of public service codes differs from one State to the other. In addition, different codes
adopted for different public service domains or types of stakeholder relations (e.g. Code of Good
Governance or Code for Civil Servants) might reflect specific contextual values.

Like the professional codes discussed in Integrity and Ethics Module 14 (Professional Ethics), codes
of conduct for the public service are in some cases concise and in other cases more elaborate,
containing a long list of values and principles. Public servants are expected to internalize the code
so that it becomes an internal ethical compass for their decisions. Examples of how values such
as accountability, transparency and responsiveness have been incorporated into public sector codes
can be found in the collection of ethical codes on the OECD website2. As a model, the United Nations
developed the International Code of Conduct for Public Officials contained in the annex to General
Assembly resolution 51/59 of 12 December 1996. The UNCAC refers to this model code as a source
of guidance for States seeking to develop ethical codes for their public sector.

As explained in Module 14, a code of ethics can be distinguished from a code of conduct on the
basis that the former typically provides goals or aspirations for professionals to reach (and is
sometimes called an aspirational code) while the latter provides sanctions for failure to meet code
requirements (and is sometimes called a compliance-based code or a disciplinary code). Aspirations
can be standards to meet or matters to avoid. They can be stated with different degrees of precision.
They are not necessarily addressed to actual behaviour, and they can recommend that staff strives to
have certain attitudes, character, and take certain points into consideration during a decision-making
process.

2 Available at www.oecd.org/gov/ethics/ethicscodesandcodesofconductinoecdcountries.htm

13
Public Integrity and Ethics

Module 13
Public service codes of ethics are put in place to strengthen values and intrinsic motivation of public
servants. Because of their aspirational nature, not only the text but the process of creating and
internalizing the code is also important. When staff members are involved in the process of designing the
code (or other comparable rules) they become more aware of and emotionally committed to following
the code. Communication, consensus building, co-creation, application discussions, induction and
oath for new staff are additional instruments that can shape and strengthen the public service ethos.
The very important ‘tone from the top’ as well as organizational rituals and on-going conversations
about ethics at the workplace raise the awareness of public servants to ethical considerations and
increase the chance that ethical issues and dilemmas are recognized as such, and not swept under
the carpet by moral disengagement or automatic and technocratic responses. The resulting ethical
climate creates positive peer and community pressure that increases the social rewards for acting
ethically.

In addition to the aspirational value-based ethical codes, public organizations also use disciplinary
compliance-based codes of conduct. These codes contain rules which public servants are obliged
to comply with, and the formal sanctions for rule breaching. The disciplinary codes are meant as
instruments for extrinsic motivation. A key difference between a rule-based instrument, such as a code
of conduct, and a value-based code of ethics is that the former contains enforceable provisions. The
need for such codes is emphasised in article 8 of UNCAC, which urges States to take “disciplinary or
other measures against public officials who violate the codes or standards established in accordance
with this article”. It should be clarified, however, that in many cases the distinction between aspirational
codes (of ethics) and disciplinary codes (of conduct) will not be so clear cut. Thus, for example, codes
can be aspirational in part and also provide for sanctions in the case of serious misconduct. In these
codes, only serious violations will entail sanctions.

Whether in the context of a code of conduct or another type of regulation, most public organizations
adopt rules regarding conflicts of interest and post-employment restrictions. The issue of conflicts of
interest is a fundamental problem in the context of ethical conduct in the public sector. A conflict of
interest arises when public servants are in a position to personally benefit from actions or decisions
made in their official capacity. For example, a public servant who must take a recruitment decision
regarding a spouse, or a judge who has a financial relationship with one of the parties in a case, have a
conflict of interest. In these situations, the public servant must disclose his or her conflict of interest,
and recuse themselves from deciding on the matter. More examples of conflicts of interest can be
found in this short article. Post-employment restrictions are meant to prevent conflicts of interest. For
example, former public servants who worked in public procurement are prohibited from working for a
company that was contracted by the organization for a certain period after leaving the public sector.
Otherwise, there is a risk that the public servant would influence a public procurement decision that
favours a company which he or she intends to work for in the future, and the company may be tempted
to bribe the public servant by offering a lucrative job in return for a government contract. Further
explanations about public service codes can be found in OECD (2009). It is noted that, in addition to
codes of conduct, public servants are also guided by relevant laws and regulations pertaining to their
work, including financial, health and safety aspects.

14
Public Integrity and Ethics

Module 13
As noted previously, the tone from the top is one of the most important requirements for public integrity
in any organization. It is highly unlikely that public servants at a ministry, hospital, or any other public
organization will conduct themselves in an ethical manner if the leadership does not serve as an
ethical role-model. This raises the question of whether ethical codes should apply to politicians (who
head certain public organizations for a limited time during their term) and not only to public servants
(who work at the organization permanently). Asset and interest declarations are often required of
politicians but ethical codes are not always in place3.

Another critical issue is that of enforcement and accountability for integrity breaches. After all, the
problems mainly arise when the ethical values are not lived. While intrinsic motivation for ethical
behavioural is important, the manner in which an organization handles reports of integrity breaches
is also crucial for deterring and rectifying such breaches. In this context, reporting structures and
protections are important, as are disciplinary regimes and control mechanisms such as internal audits
and internal investigations. As discussed in further depth in Integrity and Ethics Module 7 (Strategies
for Ethical Action), promoting a culture of integrity entails encouraging staff and organizations to
learn from their mistakes rather than blaming and punishing. However, in certain cases, ensuring
compliance requires taking action against staff who violate the rules. So there is a fine balance
between accountability and ‘softer’ learning processes.

Module 7 also discusses the importance of a safe environment for strengthening integrity in an
organization. Part of this is supporting staff in dealing with dilemma situations and concerns. As noted
earlier, public decisions must reflect all public values. In principle, the role of integrity management
is to create decision-making processes that integrate reflections regarding the different values,
and control mechanisms to check bias (Graaf-Huberts 2014). At the same time, there are dilemma
situations in which public servants need to make difficult decisions. It is an important role of integrity
management systems to create support for such decision making (including, for example, supporting
potential whistleblowers before they decide to report formally). Safe organizational climate and ethical
sensitivity of leaders and managers are key to ensure that dilemmas are discussed and concerns
raised. Some organizations employ ethics counsellors or provide access to external legal counsel who
can support individual decision-making or a structured process of dilemma discussion. Their role is
to provide confidential advice in an effort to help individuals ascertain which course of action to take.
Organizations can also facilitate discussions of recurring dilemma types in order to prepare staff for
adequately responding in such situations.

Other key instruments for fostering an ethical culture in the organization are the requirement to take an
oath, induction training, dilemma discussions, conversations about new rules, internal policy workshops,
and continuing education. UNCAC article 7(1)(d), for example, encourages States to promote education
and training programmes for public officials “to enable them to meet the requirements for the correct,
honourable and proper performance of public functions”. For strengthening and maintaining an
ethical environment, it is important that staff members have a safe space and a structured process
for discussing ethical issues, that they are encouraged to share diverse interpretations, listen to and
understand others’ arguments for applying certain values and rules, discuss potential consequences
of decisions, feel included and heard, experience emerging consensus (or at least understanding the
others’ positions and concerns), and have a sense that more responsible decisions emerge at the end

3A guide on ethical codes for parliament members is available at www.gopacnetwork.org/Docs/PEC_Guide_EN.pdf.

15
Public Integrity and Ethics

Module 13
of the process. What might appear as an issue in this respect is the authority to carry out the training
programmes, dilemma discussions and conversations. Training programmes may be a responsibility
of the internal structures of the public organizations or there may be a separate, external entity
responsible for training all public servants. In Lithuania, for example, most governmental ministries
(Chlivickas, 2010, p. 4) have their own training centres and thus the public servants can continuously
increase their knowledge and be reminded of the core values of the public service. Other States,
in contrast, such as Denmark (Danish School of Public Administration), Czechia (Institute of State
Administration), France (l’Institut de la gestion publique et du développement économique et le Centre
des études européennes de Strasbourg), Germany (Federal Academy of Public Administration), Ireland
(Institute of Public Administration in Ireland), Italy (Scuola Superiore Della Pubblica Amministrazione),
have separate public institutions responsible for providing training to public servants. Regardless,
the crucial point is that during the continuous trainings the public servants can not only deepen their
knowledge but also discuss day-to-day challenges and obstacles which also lead to deviant and
unethical conduct.

16
Public Integrity and Ethics

Module 13
References
Chlivickas, Eugenijus, (2010). Civil Service Training System: Human Resource Development Strategy.
» Available from http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/NISPAcee/
UNPAN018427.pdf

de Graaf, Gjalt, Leo Huberts and Remco Smulders (2014). Coping with public value conflicts.
Administration and Society, vol. 48, No. 9 (April).

Eagleman, David (2016). The Brain: The Story of You. Edinburgh: Canongate Books.

Huberts, Leo and Alain Hoekstra, eds. (2016). Integrity Management in the Public Sector: The Dutch
Approach. The Hague: The Dutch National Integrity Office.

Huberts, Leo (2014). The Integrity of Governance. What It Is, What We Know, What Is Done, and Where
to Go. Baskingstoke: Plagrave Macmillan.

Jørgensen, Torben Beck and Ditte-Lene Sørensen (2013). Codes of good governance: national or
global public values? Public Integrity, vol. 15, No. 1 (Winter), pp. 71–95.
» Available from www.researchgate.net/publication/273340108_Codes_of_Good_Governance.

Lewis, Carol W. and Stuart C. Gilman (2012). The Ethics Challenge in Public Service: A Problem-Solving
Guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

OECD (1996). Ethics in Public Service: Current Issues and Practices.

» Available from www.oecd.org/dataoecd/59/24/1898992.pdf.

OECD (2005). Performance Related Pay for Government Employees.

» Available from www.oecd.org/gov/pem/performancerelatedpayforgovernmentemployees.htm.

OECD (2017). OECD Recommendation on Public Integrity.

» Available from www.oecd.org/gov/ethics/recommendation-public-integrity/.

Sampford, Charles, Rodnes Smith and A.J. Brown (2005). From Greek temple to bird’s nest: towards
a theory of coherence and mutual accountability for national integrity systems. Australian Journal of
Public Administration, vol. 64, No. 2 (June), pp.96-108.

Sandel, Michael, J. (2009). Justice: What’s the Right Thing to Do? New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

17
Public Integrity and Ethics

Module 13
Exercises and case studies
This section contains suggestions for in-class and pre-class educational exercises, while a post-class
assignment for assessing student understanding of the Module is suggested in a separate section.

This Module is built on a student-centred, experiential teaching method. The aim is to involve students
in reflection and discussion of difficult public problems and dilemmas, and make them experience how
shared understanding and responsible responses may emerge from dialogue. The reflected experience
opens doors to understanding the instruments and process of ethics and integrity management. The
ideal group size for this method is 15-20 students. With this size of group, it is still possible to keep
even plenary discussions alive and involve everybody in the dialogue. Although it is possible to teach
this Module for large classes, it is more challenging to secure active involvement of students. Doing
the same exercises with large groups may also take more time, and the lecturer might need to use
different types of facilitation techniques. Each exercise is presented as an activity for a group of 15-
20 students but at the end of the description of each exercise, we include suggestions for how to
facilitate the exercise with large groups.

All exercises in this section are appropriate for both graduate and undergraduate students. However,
some of the cases and discussion points used in the exercises may not be appropriate in the given
social context. For the possibly sensitive exercises we offer alternatives or lecturers could find their
own suitable alternatives.

Exercise 1: Reception on values

After a short brain-storming on important values, distribute cards to the students and ask them each
to write on the card one value that is the most important value in their life. Ask them to imagine that
they are at an opening reception of a new programme, and must introduce themselves to the other
students by referring to the value on their card. Their card is their business card. They must go to
others and present themselves by explaining their guiding value. After short mutual introductions, they
should walk to others, to make new contacts.

Lecturer guidelines

Give the students ten minutes to mix and talk, and then collect the cards and post them on a board or
flipchart. Acknowledge variety and similarity of values and ask ‘How did it feel to introduce yourself
with your guiding value?’ Students will probably share the fact that we rarely speak about values.
The lecturer can emphasize the importance of speaking about values for creating shared values and
mutual trust among people.

18
Public Integrity and Ethics

Module 13
Exercise 2: Ethics codes for public servants
Distributes the list of core values and action principles of the national public service code in your
country or another national code for public service (see, for example, the public sector codes available
on the OECD website. Divide students into five groups. Ask each group to work with one core value
from Table 1: Public Service Core Values and Action Principles (see Key Issues section of the Module).
The groups should identify the values and principles from the code with the corresponding core value
they were assigned from Table 1. Finally, the group representatives explain their groups’ choices
before the larger class.

Lecturer guidelines

The lecturer should explain that many different but equally appropriate groupings and formulations
of values and principles are possible. In each specific context, traditions and political culture impact
such formulations. When the process of formulation is participatory, this can foster understanding
and ownership among stakeholders and thus lead to the best outcomes.

Exercise 3: Integrity breaching practices

Ask students to give examples of integrity breaching practices. Show them the video Just Do Your
Job!4 and ask the students to react to the situation presented in the video. Lead the discussion towards
the understanding that public servants may not be able to act ethically when their organizations have
weak internal controls and low levels of compliance. Capture on a board or flipchart the integrity
breaching actions shown in the video. Explain that the aim of public integrity and ethics management
is to minimize the risk of such practices.

Lecturer guidelines

The “Just Do Your Job!” video features an obvious corruption case. However, it is important to note that
the term “integrity breaching practices” encompasses corrupt practices and other forms of improper
use of authority, such as harassment or other indecent treatment of colleagues. These breaches can
result from organizational and personal incompetence, and weak internal controls and compliance.

4 Available at www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzEMmSfNxw4

19
Public Integrity and Ethics

Module 13
Exercise 4: Case studies and structured ethical reflection
Select a case study that presents ethical dilemmas and facilitate a discussion in a manner that allows
students to experience effective dialogue and understand how the dialogue shapes interpretations
and opinions. For example, have students sit in a horseshoe shape, and place two chairs at the open
end of the horseshoe. On each of the two chairs at the open end place a sign with one of the possible
solutions to the dilemma discussed. Ask students who wish to speak to move from their own chair
to the chair reflecting their selected solution, and from there argue in favour of their solution. They
should then move back to their own chair and listen to other students’ arguments. Students can speak
repeatedly if they have new thoughts, and they can also change their minds and arguments. They
should, however, always speak from the chair representing their position. In a large-group setting
the discussion could be facilitated in an “aquarium” setting. For example, approximately 15 students
perform the exercise described above, and the others sit around as observers.

The lecturer can use for this exercise one of the two case studies presented below, or any other
study that present ethical dilemmas. Relevant case studies can be found on websites such as http://
ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/case-studies.

Lecturer guidelines

The lecturer captures the main arguments on a board or flip-chart, and may group the arguments
according to the three main ethical theories: utilitarian, deontology and virtue ethics (these are
discussed in Integrity and Ethics Module 1 (Introduction and Conceptual Framework).

The lecturer should wait as long as it takes for most ethical considerations to be articulated. If some
important points are missing, the lecturer may take part in the exercise, adding the point and provoking
further discussion among the students. The lecturer could make a quick summary of the arguments.

When arguments are exhausted, the lecturer asks students to reflect on their experience of the
discussion and the process (debriefing). The lecturer could record their reflections on a board or
flipchart. If positions changed during the discussion, this could be noted during the debriefing.

The debriefing should focus on the format and process. The first debriefing question is: How did you
feel in this debate? After students have shared their feelings they should discuss what happened
during the exercise. It is important to state that arguments have impacted others’ opinions. At the end
of the debriefing the students should discuss how the format influenced the discussion.

In summing up, the lecturer reinforces those ideas that are important for understanding the process
of ethical management, such as: safe space; structured process; sharing diverse interpretations;
understanding others’ arguments; discussing potential consequences of decisions; understanding
arguments for applying certain values and rules; feeling of inclusion and voice; experiencing emerging
consensus, or at least understanding other’s standpoint and concerns; more responsible decisions
emerging at the end of the process.

20
Public Integrity and Ethics

Module 13
The case studies below include additional case specific lecturer guidelines.

CASE STUDY 1: Disease Control Centre

Imagine that you work in a public health clinic that offers free and anonymous testing as well as
confidential counselling and advice for HIV patients. During a counselling session, you find out from
a patient who was diagnosed with HIV a year earlier that he does not inform his sex partners that he
has HIV and does not use any protection. From the discussion, it seems obvious to you that he does
not intend to change this practice.

What would you do? Would you feel you cannot do anything because your role is to provide confidential
counselling and advice? Or would you report to your boss or to the police?

Lecturer guidelines

Make sure that students focus on arguments for choosing alternatives and avoid stereotyping and
judging the patient. Let students discuss the options for as long as it takes them to understand
the dilemma between the trust in the confidentiality of the service provides and the need to protect
victims. Follow the general guidelines of Exercise 4. During the discussion, the lecturer may wish to
mention that the patient’s behaviour could amount to a serious crime in some countries, and explore
the relevance of this point to ethical issues. A similar scenario with additional guidance for lecturers is
provided in Role Morality Case Study 2 in Integrity and Ethics Module 14 (Professional Ethics).

21
Public Integrity and Ethics

Module 13
CASE STUDY 2: Spraying against ticks
Imagine that there are ticks in your region which transmit serious (and potentially fatal) diseases
such as Lyme disease and encephalitis. Spraying a certain chemical substance on plants and grass
kills the ticks thereby considerably decreasing the risk of ticks infecting humans, but needs to be
repeated periodically to be effective. Until recently, this chemical substance was available on the
market and could be legally sprayed on plants and grass in gardens and public spaces. Last year an
intergovernmental international organization introduced a ban on spraying the chemical in gardens
and public spaces. The reason for the ban was a study which found that the environmental costs
are higher than the benefit from spraying. It is possible that the study was carried out in countries
where ticks do not carry such fatal diseases or where there are lower numbers of ticks compared to
your country. Nevertheless, your country introduced a law that banned the use of the chemical for
spraying plants. The chemical was still available and legally permitted for use in grain storages. The
only protection against ticks is another spray that many refuse to use because it needs to be applied
on the clothes and on the skin of people.

In the garden where your children play there is a danger of ticks. You always used the banned product
and it worked. Would you spray it out this year as well, when you know that it has been banned for use
in gardens and parks?

What if you were the head of social services in the local government, and the director of the local public
kindergarten comes to your office explaining that there are many ticks in the yard of the kindergarten
and parents want her to spray the plants to protect the children. She asks for your permission to spray
the banned chemical substance that kills the ticks. Would you allow her to use the banned material?

Lecturer guidelines

Present the case study first as the dilemma of a private individual who has ticks in the garden where
his children play. Students work on the dilemma for a short time (approximately 5 minutes) and in most
cases rapidly agree to spray. Subsequently, present the second scenario, asking students to imagine
that they are public servants who are asked to authorize the use of the spray to kill the infected ticks
in the yard of the local public kindergarten. The discussion will probably last longer as the students
explore the specific responsibilities connected to public roles. Ask students to reflect on the difference
between the two scenarios and the consequences of the decision

Students usually agree to using the banned substance at home but have a long debate about whether
the public servant should sign the contract. The lecturer should recall that public service decisions
must be legal, effective and ethical. In this case, the three conditions cannot be simultaneously fulfilled.
The lecturer should stress that making decisions in ethical dilemma situations is part of the role of
public servants and entails taking responsibility. The lecturer could follow the general guidelines of
Exercise 4.

22
Public Integrity and Ethics

Module 13
Possible class structure
This section contains recommendations for a teaching sequence and timing intended to achieve
learning outcomes through a three-hour class. The lecturer may wish to disregard or shorten some of
the segments below in order to give more time to other elements, including introduction, icebreakers,
conclusion or short breaks. The structure could also be adapted for shorter or longer classes, given
that the class durations vary across countries.

The time slots below indicate the time needed for 20 person classes. If the class size is considerably
larger and the lecturer decides to use the large-group techniques described at the end of the sections,
more time is necessary for those parts.

Ice-breaker: opening reception on values (10 minutes)

• Introduce students to the topics addressed it the Key Issues section of the Module and explain
the interactive teaching method.
• Conduct Exercise 1.

Civil servant as a temporary steward (10 minutes)

• Present the five core values from Table 1: Public Service Core Values and Action Principles (see
Key Issues section of the Module). The lecturer can distribute a handout with the table or show it
on a PowerPoint slide.
• Explain the concept of the “Temporary Steward”.
• Ask students whether an important public value or principle is missing from the table.
• Facilitate a discussion around the students’ responses.

Ethics Codes for Public Servants (30 minutes)

• Explain the role and content of ethic codes and conduct Exercise 2.

Public integrity (40 minutes)

• Conduct Exercise 3: screen the video and lead a discussion.
• Building on the discussion of the video scenario, explain that public integrity requires more than
having ethical staff members. The operation system of public organizations, as well as their
integrity management system also matters.

Structured ethical reflection of case study (20 minutes)

• Prepare chairs according to the description of Exercise 4.
• Explain the rules of the process before presenting the case study.
• Present Case Study 1 or another case dilemma, such as those available from http://
ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/case-studies.
• Discuss the students’ positions on the ethical dilemma.
• Discuss the students’ views on the process and record their reflections on a board or flip chart
(call your notes “Dialogue”).

23
Public Integrity and Ethics

Module 13
Strengthening public ethics and integrity (40 minutes)
• Discuss the instruments for building an ethical environment drawing on the relevant discussion
in the Key Issues section of the Module (e.g. oath, induction training, code of ethics, dilemma
discussion, discussion of new rules, internal policy workshops).
• Show your “Dialogue” notes from the previous discussion, and ask the group which of the listed
ideas are relevant for building an ethical culture in organizations (e.g. creating safe space; sharing
and understanding diverse interpretations; discussing consequences of decisions; experiencing
emerging consensus).
• Divide the students into small groups and assign each group one instrument for building an
ethical environment. Ask students to discuss two issues: (1) How can you use this instrument in a
public organization? (2) What is the impact of the instrument on the integrity of the organization?
• After 15 minutes the group representatives present the results to the larger class.

Obligations of public servants (30 minutes)

• Using the format in Exercise 4, facilitate a discussion around Case Study 2.

Optional closing exercise if time allows: reception on public values

• Repeat Exercise 1 but this time ask the students to write on the card the public value they feel
most strongly about, instead of their chosen personal value.
• Have students discuss with their peers the reasons for their selected public value.
• After 10 minutes, hand out to the students the cards from Exercise 1, and ask them to quietly
compare their ‘Public Values’ card with their ‘Personal Values’ card from Exercise 1.
• Allow them time to reflect, but do not make any comments. At this point it is better to leave the
students to share the last words and only thank them for their active participation.

24
Public Integrity and Ethics

Module 13
Core reading
This section provides a list of (mostly) open access materials that the lecturer could ask the students
to read before taking a class based on this Module.

Eagleman, David (2016). How I decide? In The Brain: The Story of You. Edinburgh: Canongate Books,
pp. 107-144.
» The book presents new findings of neuroscience on how our brain works. The chapter “How
do I decide?” provides an explanation of the both the rational and emotional nature of decisions. It
discusses some ethical decisions in that context. It helps understand why process is key to ethical
education and to developing public ethics and integrity. The book is not freely available on the Internet
but the BBC film version is freely available from www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07030n9.

Gilman, Stuart C. (2005). Ethics Codes and Codes of Conduct as Tools for Promoting an Ethical and
Professional Public Service: Comparative Successes and Lessons. World Bank.
» The document offers a concise introduction to public values and its first part explains the connection
between the democratic system, its values and public ethics codes. Its style is simple and accessible
even for students from disciplines far from the subject because it was written for development
practitioners. The document is available from www.oecd.org/mena/governance/35521418.pdf.

Lewis, Carol W. and Stuart C.Gilman (2012). The Ethics Challenge in Public Service: A Problem-Solving
Guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, pp. 1-44 and 115-138.
» An authoritative book about public ethics that helps to understand the ethics challenge in public
service and offers practical guidance to deal with ethical issues. The Introduction and Chapter 1 offer
a comprehensive introduction to public ethics regimes and public integrity and into core public ethics
values and principles. Chapter 5 gives detailed explanation and guidance to acting in ethical dilemma
situations.

OECD (2017): Recommendations on Public Integrity. Paris.

» A summary that reflects state-of-the-art concepts of public integrity. It captures the systemic
approach of public integrity management, the necessary activities and their linkages to society.
The document is short, concise, written in a style accessible for all, nicely illustrated and available
in multiple languages. The document is available from www.oecd.org/gov/ethics/Recommendation-
Public-Integrity.pdf.

25
Public Integrity and Ethics

Module 13
Advanced reading
The following readings are recommended for students interested in exploring the topics of this Module
in more detail, and for lecturers teaching the Module.

de Graaf, Gjalt, Leo Huberts and Remco Smulders (2014). Coping with public value conflicts.
Administration and Society, vol. 48, No. 9 (April).
» A scholarly article that explains everyday value conflicts in public organizations and the
mechanisms used in the public sector for dealing with these conflicts. The article is available from
www.researchgate.net/publication/274983312Coping_With_Public_Value_Conflicts.

Huberts, Leo (2014). The Integrity of Governance. What It Is, What We Know, What Is Done, and Where
to Go. Baskingstoke: Plagrave Macmillan.
» The book offers an overview of the integrity approach, its instruments and their implementation
practices. It offers a comprehensive discussion of integrity management strategies.

Huberts, Leo and Alain Hoekstra, eds. (2016). Integrity Management in the Public Sector: The Dutch
Approach. The Hague: Dutch National Integrity Office.
» This book is an overview of the history and actual condition of the Dutch integrity approach,
one of the best practices of the field of integrity management. Especially useful are the case studies
on integrity management systems in Chapters 8-12. The book is vailable from www.government.nl/
documents/reports/2016/01/18/integrity-management-in-the-public-sector-the-dutch-approach.

Jørgensen, Torben Beck and Ditte-Lene Sørensen (2013). Codes of good governance: national or
global public values? Public Integrity, vol. 15, No. 1 (Winter), pp. 71–95. The publication analyses the
text of national codes from different countries and public service domains. It illustrates the nature and
extent of diversity among national codes.
» This article offers a comparative analysis of codes of ethics. It is available from www.researchgate.
net/publication/273340108_Codes_of_Good_Governance.

Integrity Action (2015). Live and Work with Integrity: You Can Do It!. London: Integrity Action.
» Integrity Action is an international NGO that focuses on initiating social processes to curb
corruption. The publication addresses the role of integrity in mitigating corruption in the public sector
and the role of different stakeholders in the process. It has a good balance of cases from different
regions. Available from https://integrityaction.org/sites/default/files/publication/files/IAC_017_
Integrity_Textbook_r5_WEB.pdf.

26
Public Integrity and Ethics

Module 13
OECD (2009). Towards a Sound Integrity Framework: Instruments, Processes, Structures and Conditions
for Implementation. Paris: OECD.
» The publication offers a comprehensive framework for integrity management in public organizations.
It argues for a systemic approach and the alignment of rule- and value-based instruments in public
organizations. It was written with a corruption prevention focus. The content goes much beyond the
need of an introductory course but the publication can be a useful resource for lecturers who wish
to have a deeper understanding of public integrity management. The publication is available from
www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?doclanguage=en&cote=GOV/PGC/
GF(2009)1.

Sampford, Charles, Rodnes Smith and A.J. Brown (2005). From Greek temple to bird’s nest: towards
a theory of coherence and mutual accountability for national integrity systems. Australian Journal of
Public Administration, vol. 64, No. 2 (June), pp.96-108.
» Besides explaining integrity systems, the article presents metaphors for integrity management.
These metaphors can help lecturers explain how the different components of integrity systems can
interrelate with positive effect and, in most cases, make lasting imprints in students. The publication is
available from www.researchgate.net/publication/230317133_From_Greek_Temple_to_Bird’s_Nest_
Towards_A_Theory_of_Coherence_and_Mutual_Accountability_for_National_Integrity_Systems.

Sandel, Michael, J. (2009). Justice: What’s the Right Thing to Do?. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
» The book introduces readers into thinking about public morality and moral reflection through the
analysis of contested public issues and ethical dilemma situations. It shows what sophisticated moral
reflection and reasoned debate could bring to public life.

27
Public Integrity and Ethics

Module 13
Student assessment
This section provides a suggestion for a post-class assignment for the purpose of assessing student
understanding of the Module. Suggestions for pre-class or in-class assignments are provided in the
Exercises section.

To assess the students’ understanding of the Module, the following two post-class assignments
are proposed. The first assignment is specific to public service ethics. However, it can be relevant
for students who are not public administration specialists, as it can assess their knowledge and
understanding of the Module. The second assignment asks students to think about what they could do
to strengthen ethics in their own environment, creating strategies for action based on the discussion
in Modules. This is not related specifically to public service ethics but encourages critical reflection,
analysis and creative design, skills that are relevant to issues explored in the Module.

Assignment 1: Essay on a public service value

Students should select one public service value and write an essay on it.

• They should explain the value, review a national public service ethics code and identify the action
principles connected to the value, or research different codes on the Internet and compare the
different formulation of the value and action principles.

• They should also discuss what implications this value has on public services and public life if it
is properly implemented.

• They should explain why this value is important for their life.

Assignment 2: What can I do for a more ethical environment?

Students should select one integrity breaching practice from their own environment (school, sport
club, group of peers, family). Integrity breaching practice is a behaviour repeated by someone that
breaches the formal or informal ethical rules or norms pertinent for the group/environment.
Students should write an essay covering the following questions:
• Why has the practice evolved and why is it repeated?
• In what conditions, if at all, would you do something to change the practice?
• How would you attempt to change the practice?

In their reflection, students should apply some of the concepts they learned in the Module.

28
Public Integrity and Ethics

Module 13
Additional teaching tools
This section includes links to relevant teaching aides such as PowerPoint slides, video material and
case studies, that could help the lecturer teach the issues covered by the Module. Lecturers can adapt
the slides and other resources to their needs.

Case studies
Integrity Management in the Public Sector: the Dutch Approach.
» Chapters 8-12 of this publication are suggested for lecturers of a three-hour module who are
not public sector specialists because they present organizational integrity systems in different public
sector organizations. These cases show how integrity management processes can be implemented
in practice. In the case of longer courses, the presentation of the approach and the discussion of
some of the cases is also included in the suggested class sequence. The publication is available from
www.government.nl/documents/reports/2016/01/18/integrity-management-in-the-public-sector-the-
dutch-approach.

Resources about Integrity Pacts.

» These publications describe how governments can establish contracts with civil society
stakeholders to assure integrity of project implementation. It can be used in the longer stand-alone-
course together with the previous publication. The publications are available from www.transparency.
org/whatwedo/tools/resources_about_integrity_pacts/5.

Ethics Unwrapped: Cases.

» On this site, many short cases can be found that can be used instead of the cases included in the
Module. The site is also an excellent source for short and clear explanations of key terms and good
short videos. Available from http://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/case-studies.

Video material

Eagleman: How do I decide?

» The video is a lecture of David Eagleman about decision making. It can be assigned to students to
watch before the class. Watching this video can be very important in the academic environment where
the education is focused on rational theories and approaches because it calls students’ attention to
the psychological nature of human reactions and decisions. It can help students to understand value-
building strategies, especially the so-called soft components of integrity management. Available from
www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07030n9

29
Public Integrity and Ethics

Module 13
Integrity Action: Just Do your Job!
» The video presents a dilemma situation in public service. The video has two different endings
but both show that in organizations that lack integrity of operation staff members are defenceless
and can get into situations where they have no good choices. It is also excellent material for asking
students to identify elements breaching the integrity of persons or the integrity of the organization.
The long list assembled by participants can be clustered into thematic groups. Available from www.
youtube.com/watch?v=pzEMmSfNxw4

Ethics Unwrapped.
» On the site, many short videos can be found that provide clear explanation of key terms. They are
excellent for classes where students speak good English or if resources are available for translation.
Other pages of this site provide short cases that can be used in the Module if the lecturer aims to
substitute the cases offered. Available from https://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/videos

Robin Williams - Conformity - Dead Poets’ Society.

» A short scene from the famous film Dead Poets’ Society that can be used after a break to focus
participants’ attention on the class and introduce the discussion of ethics management. Available
from www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNjdi4Q0yTo

30
Public Integrity and Ethics

Module 13
Guidelines to develop a stand-alone course

This Module provides an outline for a three-hour class, but there is potential to develop its topics
further into a stand-alone course. The scope and structure of such a course will be determined by the
specific needs of each context, but a possible structure is presented here as a suggestion.

Session Topic Brief description

1 Personal values and ethical Students discuss their personal values, reflect on
dilemmas ethical dilemma situations and learn the three major
ethical theories (i.e. utilitarianism, deontology, virtue
ethics). This can be taught based on or together with
Integrity and Ethics Module 1.

2 Ethical decisions Students learn that decisions are the result of both
rational cognitive and emotional processes. They
watch the Eagleman video “How do I decide?” and
discuss its relation to their own experiences.

3 The power of the context Students watch a short film about Zimbardo’s prison
experiment and discuss how context can condition
behaviour. They simulate some of the ethical
experiments of Ariely and Mazar and discuss how
framing and reminders change decision situations.
This can be taught based on or together with Integrity
and Ethics Module 6.

4 Ethical climate Building on the films and experiments during the

previous sessions, students explore how a positive
climate and ethical reminders can be used to build an
ethical climate.

5 The democratic system and its Building on their own positive collective experiences,
values students explore the systemic connections among
democratic values and the implementation of values
and public trust.

6 The role of public administration Students explore the role of the public administration
and public servants in the democratic system, the democratic value
universe, the diverse relations among the components
of the system and the specific values pertinent to
these relations.

31
Public Integrity and Ethics

Module 13
Session Topic Brief description

7 Public ethics codes Like the exercise in the Module but in an extended
format, students explore the values and principles
in the public ethics code of their own country and
attempt to apply them in a particular case.

8 Clashing values in public service Drawing on the Graaf-Huberts-Smulders (2014) article,

students explore typical value clashes in the public
sector and the standard mechanism for dealing with
them. They also discuss strengths and weaknesses
of these mechanisms, and what alternatives could be
introduced for decision processes.

9 Public integrity management Students learn about the aim, process and instruments
of public integrity management. They also learn to
distinguish rule-based and value-based processes
and instruments.

10 Organizational integrity Some organizational integrity management systems

management are presented to students and they discuss how these
systems apply the instruments and implement the
objectives of public integrity management.

11 Working with civil society to Students learn about the community projects
strengthen integrity in public implemented by Integrity Action and the “Fix-Rate”
service delivery methodology and the “Integrity Pact” method
of Transparency International. They discuss the
potential role of civil society stakeholders in assuring
public integrity and potential projects in their own
environment.

Strengthening integrity and ethics Students reflect in a structured process on how to

12
of my own environment initiate an integrity and ethics process or management
system in their universities, while applying what
they learned in the course. They identify existing
instruments and evaluate them, and design additional
instruments. If time and competences allow, they may
even develop an integrity strategy for their university.

32
Vienna International Centre, P.O. Box 500, 1400 Vienna, Austria
Tel.: (+43-1) 26060-0, Fax: (+43-1) 26060-5866, www.unodc.org