Abstracts
Abstract
Inspired by the theory of planned behaviour (Ajzen 1991), this study examines the relationship between the perceived level of autonomy among civil servants and their perceived behavioural control over the resolution process of work-related ethical dilemmas. To this end, we used a subset of the data from the 2008 Statistics Canada Public Service Employee Survey (PSES). This cross-sectional survey was conducted between November 3 and December 12, 2008. Approximately 170,000 employees responded to the survey, representing 66 percent of the 258,000 employees invited to participate. In summary, the perceived level of autonomy index is positively associated with the perceived behavioural control over the resolution of ethical dilemmas, as was theoretically expected.
Résumé
En s’appuyant sur la théorie du comportement planifié (Ajzen 1991), cet article analyse la relation qui existe entre le degré d’autonomie que perçoivent les fonctionnaires et leur perception de contrôle lors de la résolution de dilemmes éthiques qui surgissent dans leur travail. Pour cette étude, nous avons utilisé des données du sondage réalisé, en 2008, par Statistique Canada auprès des fonctionnaires fédéraux (SAFF). Cette enquête a été administrée entre le 3 novembre et le 12 décembre 2008. Environ 170 000 employés du gouvernement fédéral ont répondu au sondage, ce qui représente 66 pour cent des 258 000 employés invités à participer. En résumé, comme nous nous y attendions sur la base de la théorie, l’indice d’autonomie perçue est corrélé positivement avec le sentiment de contrôle dans les processus de résolution de dilemmes éthiques.
Download the article in PDF to read it.
Download
Appendices
Bibliography
- Adam, A.M. and D. Rachman-Moore. 2004. “The Methods Used to Implement an Ethical Code of Conduct and Employee Attitudes,” Journal of Business Ethics, 54(3): 223-242.
- Ajzen, I. 1991. “The theory of planned behavior,” Org. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process, 50: 179-211.
- Alford, J.R. 2001. “We’re All in This Together: The Decline of Trust in Government, 1958-1996” in What Is it About Government that Americans Dislike? J. Hibbing and E. Theiss-Morse (eds.). New York: Cambridge University Press, p. 28-46.
- Anderson, R.E. 1992. “ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct,” Communications of the ACM, 35(5): 94-99.
- Balfour, D.L. and B. Wechsler. 1990. “Organizational commitment: a reconceptualization and empirical test of public-private differences,” Review of Public Personnel Administration, 10(3): 23-40.
- Benson, G.C.S. 1989. “Codes of Ethics,” Journal of Business, 8, 305-319.
- Boisvert, Y. (ed.). 2009. “Scandales politiques,” Le regard de l'éthique appliquée. Montreal, QC: Liber.
- Boisvert, Y., M. Jutras, G.A. Legault and A. Marchildon. 2003. Petit manuel d’éthique appliquée à la gestion publique. Montreal, QC: Liber.
- Brower, H.H., S. Lester, A. Korsgaard and B. Dineen. 2009. “A Closer Look at Trust Between Managers and Subordinates: Understanding the Effects of Both Trusting and Being Trusted on Subordinate Outcomes,” Journal of Management, 35(2): 327-347.
- Christensen, T. 1991. “Bureaucratic Roles: Political Loyalty and Professional Autonomy,” Scandinavian Political Studies, 14(4): 303-320.
- Colquitt, J., S. Brent, A. LePine and A. Jeffery. 2007. “Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity: A meta-analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4): 909-927.
- Cook, T.E. and P. Gronke. 2005. “The Skeptical American: Revisiting the Meanings of Trust in Government and Confidence,” Institutions, Journal of Politics, 67(3): 784-803.
- Cox, R.W., M.L. Hill and S. Pyakuryal. 2008. “Tacit knowledge and discretionary judgment,” Public Integrity, 10(2): 151-64.
- Dirks, K.T. and D.L. Ferrin. 2002. “Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4): 611-628.
- Ford, R.C. and W.D. Richardson. 1994. “Ethical Decision Making: A Review of the Empirical Literature,” Journal of Business Ethics, 13, 205-221.
- Genard, J-L, and S. Jacob. 2004. “Une nouvelle donne pour l’éthique administrative,” Les politiques sociales, 64(1-2): 91-107.
- Godin, G., A. Bélanger-Gravel, M. Eccles and J. Grimshaw. 2008. “Healthcare professionals’ intentions and behaviours: A systematic review of studies based on social cognitive theories,” Implementation Science, 3, 36.
- Gow, J.I. 2008. “Between ideals and obedience: a practical basis for public service ethics” in D. Siegel and K. Rasmussen (eds.). Essays in honour of Kenneth Kernaghan. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press.
- Holly, H.B., S.W. Lester, M.A. Korsgaard and B.R. Dineen. 2009. “Closer Look at Trust between Managers and Subordinates: Understanding the Effects of Both Trusting and Being Trusted on Subordinate Outcomes,” Journal of Management, 35, 327-347.
- Hoy, W.K. and D.A. Sousa. 1984. “Delegation: the neglected aspect of participation in decision making,” Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 30(4): 320-331.
- Jacob, S., L.M. Imbeau and J.F. Bélanger. 2011. “La nouvelle gestion publique et l’accroissement des marges de manoeuvre. Un terreau propice au développement de l’éthique? ” Administration publique du Canada, 54(2): 189-215.
- Kernaghan, K. and J.W. Langford. 1990. The Responsible Public Servant. Halifax, NS: The Institute for Research on Public Policy.
- King, G., M. Tomz and J. Wittenberg. 2000. “Making the Most of Statistical Analyses: Improving Interpretation and Presentation,” American Journal of Political Science, 44(2): 347-361.
- Lemire, L. and C. Rouillard. 2005. “An empirical exploration of psychological contract violation and individual behaviour: The case of Canadian federal civil servants in Quebec,” Journal of Managerial Psychology, 20(2): 150-163.
- Newton, K. and P. Norris. 2000. “Confidence in Public Institutions: Faith, Culture, or Performance?” in Disaffected Democracies: What’s Troubling the Trilateral Countries? S.J. Pharr and R.D. Putnam (eds.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, p. 52-73.
- Schwartz, M.S. 2004. “Effective corporate codes of ethics: Perceptions of code users,” Journal of Business Ethics, 55 (4): 323-343.
- Secrétariat du Conseil du Trésor. 2003. Raisonnement éthique dans un contexte de marge de manoeuvre accrue. Clarification conceptuelle et aide à la décision. Ottawa, ON: Secrétariat du Conseil du Trésor (SCT).
- Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat. 2003. Values and Ethics Code for the Public Service. Ottawa, ON: Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat (TBS).
- United Nations. 2000. Professionalism and Ethics in the Public Service: Issues and Practices in Selected Regions. New York, NY: United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs Division for Public Economics and Public Administration (ST/ESA/PAD/SER.E/5).
- Van Wart, M. 1996. “The Sources of Ethical Decision Making for Individuals in the Public Sector,” Public Administration Review, 56(6): 525-533.