Examining the Moral Reasoning of the Ethics Adviser and Counselor: The Case of the Federal Designated Agency Ethics Official

Abstract

This research reports on an exploratory study of the moral reasoning of federal designated agency ethics officials, the public administrators responsible for providing annual ethics training and year-round consultation to the federal workforce. As a group, these instructors used conventional reasoning more than post-conventional reasoning, in keeping with the findings of other public administration research on ethics. It is argued that conventional reasoning mirrors and supports the legalistic practice of public administration expected at the national level. The discussion suggests that consideration be given to instructor selection, for these officials have the potential to promote values and principles that can guide the decision-making of administrators in serving the public interest. Implications of this and other results are examined.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 6 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.