HomeMy WebLinkAboutC4. Ethics ReportCity Commission Memorandum
REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission
FROM: Stacy Ulmen, City Clerk
Approved by: Chris Carraway, Melissa Frost and Mary Jane
McGarity, Board of Ethics
SUBJECT: 2014-2015 Annual Report from the Board of Ethics
MEETING DATE: March 23, 2015
MEETING TYPE: Consent
RECOMMENDATION: Acknowledge the receipt of the 2014-2015 Annual Report of the
Board of Ethics.
BACKGROUND: The Annual Report of the Board of Ethics is a way to inform the
public, officials and city staff of the accomplishments, decisions and opinions the board has
made throughout the year.
The Bozeman Municipal Code Sec. 2.03.600 specifically states that the board shall:
4. No later than December of each year, submit an annual report to the city commission
concerning its action in the preceding year. The report shall contain:
a. A summary of its decisions and opinions, both open and confidential; the board
shall make any alterations in the summaries necessary to prevent disclosure of
any confidential information pertaining to any individual or to any organization
if the disclosure could lead to the disclosure of the identity of a person who is
entitled to confidentiality; and
b. Recommend any legislative or administrative actions regarding the city’s policies
and practices which the board believes would or could enhance the ethical
environment in which public servants work.
Due to staffing changes in the Clerk’s office at the end of 2014, whom the staff support
responsibility was charged to for this Board, this report is being submitted after the December
deadline as indicated. Also, survey results and final formulization and approval of the training
platform by the Ethics Board needed to occur in order to present a final complete report.
The Board of Ethics would be happy to come before the Commission if the Commission would
like more detail on this report. The Board met and took formal action approving the 2014-2015
44
training curriculum and logistics. Year 2014 was used to collect pertinent data in order to
produce a solid based platform for the Ethics Training Module. Into the future, it will be the goal
of the City to embed ethics trainings into each Department as part of regular business practices.
This is occurring on a regular basis with the on-boarding of new City Employees and new
Citizen Advisory Board Member appointees’ currently. The Ethics Board and Staff will discuss
this into the future.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES: None identified at this time.
ALTERNATIVES: As recommended by the Commission.
FISCAL EFFECTS: None identified at this time.
Attachment: Board of Ethics 2014-2015 Annual Report
Report Compiled on: March 12, 2015
45
City of Bozeman
Board of Ethics
Report
2014-2015
www.bozeman.net/bozeman/Residents/Ethics
March 2015
46
Board of Ethics Report, 2014-2015
Page 2 of 9
Table of Contents
Board of Ethics Summary ………………………………………………………………. Page 3
Members…..……………………………………………………………………… Page 3
Support Staff………………………………………………………………...…… Page 3
Membership Details………………………………………… ………………….. Page 3
Creation…………………………………………………………………………… Page 4
Duties and Responsibilities………………………………………………………Page 4
Bozeman Municipal Code of Ethics……………………………………. Page 4
Requirement of Annual Report …………………………………………Page 5
2014-2015 Report……….……………………………………………………..……Page 7
Summary of the Board’s Decisions and Opinions ……….….……………….. Page 8
Upcoming Goals………………………………………………………………..... Page 8
Upcoming Recommendations……..…………………………………………….Page 9
47
Board of Ethics Report, 2014-2015
Page 3 of 9
Board of Ethics Summary
Current Board Members:
Chris Carraway –Chair Appointed July 28, 2014 Term expires July, 2016
ccarraway@bozeman.net
Melissa Frost - past Chair Appointed June, 2009 Term expires July, 2015
mfrost@bozeman.net
Mary Jane McGarity Appointed January, 2011 Term expires July, 2015
mmcgarity@bozeman.net
Past Board Members:
Rodger McCormick Appointed August, 2008 Term expired July, 2010
Stephen Schultz Appointed August, 2008 Term expired July, 2010
Support Staff:
Stacy Ulmen– City Clerk Administrative and Recording Services
sulmen@bozeman.net
Greg Sullivan – City Attorney Legal and Procedural Recommendations
gsullivan@bozeman.net
Membership Details
The Board of Ethics is made up of three members appointed by the City Commission to
two year terms. Members cannot be city elected officials, city employees, or currently
serving on any other city board or commission.
48
Board of Ethics Report, 2014-2015
Page 4 of 9
Creation of the Board of Ethics
2008 Bozeman City Charter
The Bozeman City Charter (the “Charter”) was proposed by the City of Bozeman’s
2004-2006 Local Government Study Commission and was approved by the voters at the
November 7, 2006 general election. The Charter became effective on January 1, 2008.
The Charter confers certain powers and restrictions, prescribing procedures and
governmental structure. The Charter was created …to secure the benefits of local self-
government and to provide for an honest and accountable commission-manager government.
(Preamble, City of Bozeman Charter)
Section 7.01 (b) of the Charter called for the establishment of an independent Board of
Ethics as well as the requirement for annual training and education of city officials, city
board members and employees regarding the state and city ethics codes.
Ordinance No. 1726, Creation of the Board of Ethics
To establish a Board of Ethics (the “Board”) as required in the voter approved Charter,
the City Commission adopted Ordinance No. 1726 which provides guidelines for the
creation of the board and other ethics related content required in the Charter. These
provisions are codified in the Bozeman Municipal Code at Chapter 2, Article 3, Division
4 (Sect. 2.03.460 et seq., BMC). Duties and powers of the Board, who may request board
action and the limitations of the board’s power, are included. In May of 2009, the City
Commission adopted Ordinance No. 1759 which amended the original Ordinance.
Changes made relating to the board itself were minor.
Board Duties and Responsibilities
Bozeman Municipal Code, Chapter 2, Article 3, Division 4 – Code of Ethics
The Code of Ethics is an important piece of City law. As the declaration of policy
section 2.03.460 states, The purpose of this code of ethics is to set forth standards of ethical
conduct, to assist public officials and employees in establishing guidelines for their conduct, to
foster the development and maintenance of a tradition of responsible, accountable and effective
public service, and to prohibit conflict between public duty and private interest.
The following sections within the Code of Ethics directly relate to the Board. Other
sections within the Code of Ethics provide additional direction to the Board and the
public in addressing ethical issues and violations.
49
Board of Ethics Report, 2014-2015
Page 5 of 9
Sec. 2.03.580 - Board of Ethics.
This section defines the composition and terms of the Board, requirements for
membership, and lists the support City staff will provide.
Sec. 2.03.600 - Duties and powers of the board.
This section provides details about Board procedures related to meetings, conducting
hearings, and reporting and establishing procedures for administration and
implementation of the Code of Ethics. These duties include:
• Evaluating all aspects of the Code of Ethics to ensure the public and all public
servants have a reasonable opportunity and are encouraged to participate;
• Developing a plan to educate public servants about their rights, duties and
responsibilities;
• Submit an annual report of summary decisions, opinions and recommended
actions regarding ethical practices or policies;
• Arrange for an annual workshop or training program for all employees, elected
officials and board and committee members; and
• Conduct hearings as needed.
Sec. 2.03.610 - Who may request board action.
This section outlines that any person may file a complaint with the Board and further
explains who may request of the Board an ethics opinion.
Sec. 2.03.620 – Limitations on board’s power.
This section explains in detail what limitations are placed on the Board and that the
Board may refer a matter to the city attorney for review.
In addition to the City’s Code of Ethics, the Board has jurisdiction over State of
Montana Ethics laws. These provisions are codified in Title 2, Chapter 2, Part 1, MCA
(Sect. 2-2-101, et seq., MCA).
Requirement of Annual Report
The annual report of the Board is a way to inform the public, officials and city
employees of what the Board has accomplished in the past year and report any
decisions or opinions.
50
Board of Ethics Report, 2014-2015
Page 6 of 9
The Bozeman Municipal Code Sec. 2.03.600 specifically states that the board shall:
4. No later than December of each year, submit an annual report to the city commission
concerning its action in the preceding year. The report shall contain:
a. A summary of its decisions and opinions, both open and confidential; the board
shall make any alterations in the summaries necessary to prevent disclosure of
any confidential information pertaining to any individual or to any organization
if the disclosure could lead to the disclosure of the identity of a person who is
entitled to confidentiality; and
b. Recommend any legislative or administrative actions regarding the city’s policies
and practices which the board believes would or could enhance the ethical
environment in which public servants work.
51
Board of Ethics Report, 2014-2015
Page 7 of 9
2014-2015 Year-End Report
The City once again has contracted with the Montana State University Local
Government Center to assist in the Ethics Training requirement as written in the City
Charter. It was decided to offer the ethics training online this year utilizing the MSU
portal we have in place for new employees and board members. The text and questions
were developed by MSU and based upon the weak areas as found in Betsey Webb’s
Dissertation/Study of Comprehensive Ethics Program (CEP) within a municipal
government 5 years after implementation in which the City of Bozeman was
highlighted. The entire dissertation was titled: What is Good and what is Right: An
Investigation of the Outcome of a Comprehensive Ethics Program in Municipal Government.
Portions of Chapter Five: Conclusions pertaining to the City of Bozeman have been
incorporated into this report as Exhibit A. 215 City Employees responded to the call for
taking part in Ms. Webb’s research in 2014.
The overall research question and each of four research sub-questions as identified in
Exhibit A. were answered. Recommendations were provided to the City of Bozeman
for future research. Reporting of misconduct was lower in the City of Bozeman
compared to national survey results for local governments and the sources of low
reporting should be further explored. The most effective components of the ethics
program identified by employees were role modeling by peers and supervisors, talking
about ethics on the job, ethics training, the code of ethics, and the ethics handbook.
The City continues to ask new employees and board members to take the online ethics
training shortly after hiring/appointment to help familiarize them with the Code and to
meet the yearly training requirement even when joining the organization after the
yearly training. In 2014 roughly 27 new hires along with board members took the
online training that has been embedded as part of the City’s on-boarding and new
board member appointment process.
The cost for development and execution of the employee trainings through Montana
State University Local Government Center, who contracted with Elizabeth Webb will be
approximately $3, 200 for the 2014-2015 training as shown in Exhibit B. Additional
internal personnel costs have not been calculated at this time.
The Board of Ethics met, discussed and approved this annual report as well as the
launch of the training to begin April 1, 2015. Certificates of completion for each
employee and board member will be sent to the HR Office and Clerk’s office. The email
with the Certificate of Completion will only contain the name of the individual whom
52
Board of Ethics Report, 2014-2015
Page 8 of 9
has completed the training and not the individual responses as those will remain
anonymous. The anonymous responses will be grouped and written into a final report
so that the City can utilize the data and results to assist in creating a platform for
programming of future ethics trainings.
Since the infancy of the Ethics Board, the Clerk’s Office offered secretarial support. In
the past, the Deputy City Clerk was very instrumental in editing and assisting with the
trainings, however the Deputy City Clerk position became vacant in October of 2014. It
was decided by the City Manager that the Ethics Board support will now reside in the
Administration Department. The City Clerk’s Office will continue to assist in the
regular duties associated with board appointments and posting of meetings and
agendas. This change will occur in the middle of 2015.
Summary of the Board’s Decisions and Opinions
At their March 4, 2015 Meeting, the Board of Ethics discussed the outcomes of Ms.
Webb’s dissertation and felt that there was a need to focus on the concerns of retaliation
and reporting within the City of Bozeman. Also, the Board discussed the need of
clarification as to who Top Leaders are defined as and also the need for a board member
scenario. These components have been written into the training module for 2014-2015.
The Board took the online training and feedback was used in formalizing the final
product. They approved the training module as well as the annual report as amended
during the meeting. The Board agreed that they would do their best to attend the
scheduled April 21, 2015 HPO Meeting where Ms. Webb’s results from the dissertation
will be discussed with the group. The Board will meet again in the fall to look at the
results from the training.
The City Attorney continues to offer informal advice throughout the year and directs
employees and board members to several formal ethics opinions. In addition the City
Attorney continues to assist board members regarding post-employment matters and
have filed post-employment disclosures which are also available to the public online. A
link to these documents can be found from the city of Bozeman ethics webpage.
Upcoming Goals
Planning for the required 2014-2015 ethics training began during the February 19, 2014
Board of Ethics meeting and the module was finalized at the March 4, 2015 Meeting.
Initial discussions have focused on ways to continue to strengthen the culture of ethics
within the organization.
53
Board of Ethics Report, 2014-2015
Page 9 of 9
Upcoming Recommendations
Until late 2013, the board met quarterly. At that time, the need for more frequent
meetings decreased as legislative changes were finalized. The board plans to meet bi-
annually beginning in 2015, and as the need arises will meet more frequently.
Respectfully submitted by the Board of Ethics Members;
Chris Carraway –Chair
Melissa Frost - past Chair
Mary Jane McGarity
CC/MF/MJG: su
March 4, 2015
54
WHAT IS GOOD AND WHAT IS RIGHT: AN INVESTIGATION OF THE
OUTCOMES OF A COMPREHENSIVE ETHICS PROGRAM
IN MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT
Chapter Five: Conclusions
by Elizabeth Johnston Webb
MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY Bozeman, Montana
November 2014
55
ii
ABSTRACT
To build public trust in government through ethical management of citizen resources,
leaders of agencies should be intentional in their adoption of a Comprehensive Ethics
Program (CEP) and in measuring the impact the program has on the ethical climate, observations of misconduct and reporting of misconduct. The purpose of this study was to investigate the outcomes of a CEP within a municipal government, five years after
implementation. This was a mixed methods study where an electronic survey first
measured perceptions of ethical climate followed by interviews with ethics administrators
and anonymous employees. After five years, the municipal employees rated their environment as somewhat ethical through two measures; an overall ethics score (an average of 35 items from an ethical climate assessment), and a single item rating of the
ethical climate by employees. Both measures can be used as a benchmark of
organizational ethics health. Observations of misconduct were low in comparison to
national statistics and reporting of misconduct was low in comparison to national statistics. Binary logistic regression was conducted on the overall ethics score and observations of misconduct and was statistically significant in distinguishing between
employees who observe misconduct from those who do not. One ethics factor, ethical
leadership, was also statistically significant in distinguishing between employees who
observe misconduct and those who do not. Ethics factors that were not reliable predictors of observations of misconduct included the code of ethics, ethics resources, independent ethics commission, ethical decision-making, and informal ethical norms. Employees also
rated the most effective components of the ethics program. Role modeling by peers, role
modeling by supervisors, talking about ethics on the job, annual ethics training, the code
of ethics, and the ethics handbook were rated as the most effective components. Six interviews with employees deepened the understanding of the quantitative data. Key themes of leadership and concerns about reporting and retaliation emerged through the
interviews. CEP outcomes identified in the interviews included enhanced awareness and
talking about ethics, seeking advice for ethical dilemmas, cross-departmental
conversations, ethics code revisions, ethics resources for employees, and learning from training examples and interactive discussions.
56
1
CONCLUSIONS
Introduction
At their core, ethics programs constitute an organizational attempt through people,
processes, and systems to prevent misconduct that may cause harm to an organization as
well as to the stakeholders (Ethics Resource Center, 2008). Ethics programs are about
proactive efforts to prevent unethical behavior and to react swiftly, decisively, and
transparently in case an ethics issue should arise (Liautaud, 2013). In the public agency,
this extends to the citizens and the trust they place in government agencies to serve the
public. According to the 2007 National Government Ethics Survey (Ethics Resource
Center, 2008), the most important asset of government is public trust. When present,
citizens believe that elected officials, appointees, and public servants are acting in their
best interest. When public trust erodes, government effectiveness is hindered. Public
trust is shaken when misconduct takes place in governmental organizations (Ethics
Resource Center, 2008).
With increasing scrutiny and demand for transparency in all government
transactions by citizens, every employee’s commitment to ethical behavior matters. To
manage ethical risks, expanding the knowledge of effective means to achieve ethical
behavior is critical. In an effort to ensure public trust in government through ethical
management of citizen resources, leaders of agencies should be intentional in their
adoption of a Comprehensive Ethics Program (CEP) and in measuring the impact the
program has on the ethical climate, observations of misconduct and reporting of observed
57
2
misconduct. The purpose of this study was to investigate the outcomes of a CEP within a
municipal government, five years after implementation.
In this concluding chapter, the results of each research sub-question are discussed
in greater detail and conclusions for this investigation are drawn. The limitations and one
delimitation of the study are noted. Recommendations to the City of Bozeman and for
further study are made.
Discussion of Research Results
The principal research question addressed in this study was: What are the
outcomes of a CEP in municipal government, five years after implementation? The
responses to the four sub-questions addressed in this study are detailed below.
Research Question 1
What are the perceptions of the ethical climate of municipal government
employees after an ethics program has been implemented?
As a whole, the City of Bozeman employees regard their ethical climate leaning
towards ethical. An overall ethics score of 4.81 was calculated from an average of
responses to 35 items in the Perceptions of Ethical Climate assessment instrument
(Pelletier & Bligh, 2006). A mean of 4.81 indicates a higher score than neutral, but lower
than somewhat agree. A single-item survey question about the employee’s own view of
the ethical climate in the City of Bozeman was rated at 5.28. This rating suggests that on
average the City of Bozeman employees consider the climate to be between somewhat
58
3
ethical and ethical. Roughly 80% of the 215 employees who responded to this item rated
the City as ethical (somewhat ethical, ethical or highly ethical). About 14% of the
employees rated the City as unethical (somewhat unethical, unethical or highly
unethical).
Any unethical rating by an employee was a concern to one administrator. In his
interview, he noted,
“The reason why we’re having this conversation is because we really want
to understand and correct what (employees) are seeing as unethical
behavior. Because if there really is something unethical going on, it needs
to be resolved and people need to stop doing that. If it’s your perception that something’s going on, perception becomes reality. It’s destructive to our productivity and delivering services to our citizens” (Administrator 1,
personal interview, March 18, 2014).
The results of the qualitative findings are mixed. The findings ranged from those
individuals who perceive the City climate to be ethical to those individuals who think the
top leaders are less ethical. Employee interviews revealed that most think their co-
workers are ethical and that employees will do the right thing, however, a perception
about a gap between the City’s top leaders and the rest of the employees was
demonstrated in the interviews and in survey responses.
The findings from this study can be used by City leaders to educate employees,
communicate ethical standards, and assess the ethical climate of the City of Bozeman
municipality. While the employees rate their perceptions of the City’s climate leaning
towards ethical, there are opportunities to strengthen the climate through addressing the
perception of the gap between top leaders and the rest of the employees, and
understanding the informal ethical norms that may contribute to lower ethical
59
4
perceptions. The overall ethics score and single-item rating of the ethical climate may be
used as a benchmark measure in the future.
Research Question 2
Can observations and reporting of misconduct be reliably predicted from
municipal employees’ perceptions of ethical climate?
Binary logistic regression was conducted and demonstrated that observations of
misconduct could be reliably predicted from municipal employees’ perceptions of ethical
climate. The overall ethics score significantly distinguished between employees who
observed misconduct from those employees who did not observe misconduct. For every
one unit increase in the overall ethics score, City of Bozeman employees were over 4
times more likely to have not observed misconduct on the job in the last six months.
Bozeman employees observed misconduct at a low rate of 33.5% when compared with a
national research survey that showed local government employees observing misconduct
at a rate of 63% (Ethics Resource Center, 2008). It should be noted here that the
variables in the regression may impact each other. The concept map for this study
(Figure 1) is one-directional, however the rating of the perceptions of ethical climate and
observations of misconduct may be circular. An employee who observed misconduct
may have rated their perceptions of the ethical climate lower. In this study, the CEP and
ethical environment were measured via an overall ethics score to determine if the
perception of ethical climate rating could distinguish between whether an employee had
observed misconduct or not.
60
5
The logic regression calculations for the reporting of observed misconduct were
not statistically significant. The reporting of observed misconduct could not be reliably
predicted from the overall ethics score in this study.
Reporting misconduct appears to be an area for further study within the City of
Bozeman. The interviews with the City employees revealed concerns about retaliation.
An interviewee shared that one City administrator “definitely holds a grudge,” and if an
employee reports misconduct “you will be punished” (Employee 1, personal interview,
March 10, 2014). A second interview reflected a similar sentiment stating that “reporting
that goes right back to my ‘cover your butt’ attitude because we've seen people who
report and they're the ones who got in trouble” (Employee 2, personal interview, March
10, 2014). The same employee reflected that the culture modeled by top management is
that “when you hear something you’re not supposed to hear, you walk away.” One item
in the electronic survey was worded, “If I reported a colleague for an ethical violation,
there would be retaliation against me.” Greater than half of the employees (54.4%)
agreed with this statement. This is higher than national statistics where almost 28% of
non-reporters in local governments feared retaliation (ERC, 2008). Another survey item
read, “If I were to have an ethical concern, I know I would be supported by the City.”
For this item, less than half (47.4%) of the employees agreed, and 23.7% disagreed.
Support for reporting misconduct appears to be an area to strengthen in future ethics
program components.
An ethics administrator shared thoughts about the reporting process within the
City,
61
6
“I have heard that people have reported and then there has been no follow up with that person. I do think there needs to be some kind of follow up to say ‘thank you for reporting, we did take care of the matter, we can’t share
details with you, but I do want you to know that it’s been dealt with,’ and
from what I’ve heard, that doesn’t happen as much as it should. And I
think that’s where people then go, ‘well, great, why did I bother, nothing happened.’ Whether or not something did happen is a totally different story, but they don’t think anything happened… It wouldn’t have to be
throughout the whole organization. You could just go back to that one
person that reported and say thank you and have some follow up”
(Administrator 3, personal interview, March 12, 2014). From the quantitative results of the survey, observations of misconduct could be
reliably predicted from the overall ethics score from the ethical climate assessment and
from a single ethics factor, ethical leadership. The reporting of misconduct could not be
reliably predicted. Low reporting and concerns about retaliation for reporting should be
studied and addressed.
Research Question 3
Which factors most impact observations and reporting of misconduct?
One ethics factor, ethical leadership, significantly distinguished between
employees who observed misconduct from employees who did not observe misconduct.
For every one unit increase in ethical leadership, City employees were about 2.5 times
more likely to have not observed misconduct. The other factors of code of ethics, ethics
resources, independent ethics commission, ethical decision-making, and informal ethical
norms were not reliably significant predictors of membership in either category. The
binary logistic regression calculations were not significant for any of the 6 ethics factors
62
7
and the reporting of observed misconduct. No predictions regarding the reporting of
misconduct could be made.
This study revealed a perception of a gap between top leaders and other
employees with the City. It is unknown if this was a factor in the low rates of reporting
in Bozeman. Supervisors are the most popular first choice for reporting (LRN, 2007b)
and immediate supervisors were rated highly in the electronic survey by the municipal
employees.
Research Question 4
How do municipal government employees rate the effectiveness of the components
of the ethics program?
One electronic survey item listed a menu of 14 ethics program components and
asked employees to rate the effectiveness of each component on a seven-point Likert
scale. Six ethics components were rated higher than 5.0 on a 7.0 point scale (where 5.0 =
somewhat effective). The highest rated components were role modeling by peers, role
modeling by supervisors, talking about ethics on the job, annual ethics training, the City
of Bozeman code of ethics, and the City of Bozeman ethics handbook. None of the 14
components listed in the menu of ethics program components were rated lower than 4.5.
Bozeman employees identified role modeling by their peers and supervisors and
talking about ethics on the job as the most effective components of the ethics program.
In the open comment box of the electronic survey, one Bozeman employee wrote,
“Actions speak louder than words… talking means nothing” (Appendix C). The
63
8
Bozeman employees noted the effectiveness of talking about ethics on the job. Employee
interviews all noted an increase in awareness and talking about ethics as a result of the
implementation of the CEP. Ethics administrator interviews highlighted how cross-
departmental conversations are taking place and serving as an internal control mechanism
(Administrator 2, personal interview, March 6, 2014).
The Bozeman employees rated training as one of the most effective ethics
program components. There were no individual items in the electronic survey that
addressed the effectiveness of ethics training, but the interviews and open comment box
responses suggested that employees are learning from ethics training and view it as
helpful. A veteran of the Bozeman municipal employee base added, “Please know when
I was hired 25 years ago there was no ethics training upon hire” (Appendix C).
The City of Bozeman, in partnership with the Montana State University Local
Government Center, produced an ethics handbook (Lachapelle, 2010). The handbook is
written in non-technical language as a resource for employees when they have an ethical
dilemma and don’t know where to go for assistance. There were no questions about this
type of resource in the electronic survey; however one survey item asked if there are
ethics resources available to employees if they wanted to ask questions about ethics.
There was 88.8% agreement on this item. One employee in an interview stated, “I would
say that there is a modicum of effectiveness because there is a handbook” (Employee 2,
personal interview, March 10, 2014).
One component that was rated neutrally should be noted here. The independent
ethics commission (Board of Ethics) is part of a CEP, and in the case of the City of
64
9
Bozeman, was created by mandate for citizens to have a non-governmental avenue to
voice ethics complaints. The three volunteers appointed by the City Commission are
independent of the City of Bozeman and are not employees. Items from the survey that
ask about the independent board demonstrated largely neutral responses. It is not
surprising to see neutral employee responses to the Board of Ethics, since it was
primarily created for citizen complaints (employees have internal avenues to report ethics
violations). Sixty percent of employees were neutral about whether the Board of Ethics
handles concerns and inquiries in a confidential manner and forty percent of employees
were neutral about whether the creation of the Board of Ethics increased their trust in the
City.
One of the employees interviewed added, “I have no idea who's on the ethics committee. I have no idea. I've actually looked on the website, and if it's there it's hidden, and I'm not the only one who makes that comment.
If I have an ethical problem, I want a little anonymity because these
departments are small; it doesn't take much to figure out” (Employee 2,
personal interview, March 10, 2014). Another employee noted, “I think we are on the right track with our ethics program and, especially the ethics board. The fact that they have not had to hear a case is evidence we have
an ethical culture (for the most part)” (Appendix C).
To the present date, no citizen has filed an ethics case with the Board of Ethics,
although the Board conducted a process to hear a mock complaint in 2011.
The City of Bozeman employees rated all ethics program components in the menu
of 14 components with a mean higher than 4.5 (where 4.0 = neutral). Six components
were rated higher than 5.0 (somewhat effective). The qualitative interviews added
meaning to the quantitative results.
65
15
Figure 3. Concept map with summary results.
66
22
The Perceptions of Ethical Climate assessment instrument (Pelletier & Bligh,
2006) embedded in the electronic survey did not address evaluation or effectiveness of
ethics education and training efforts, one of the components of a CEP. Any development
of future assessments should include this component.
A delimitation of this study is the single municipal government studied that makes
up the sample.
Recommendations
1. Benchmark Organizational Ethics. Benchmarking perceptions of ethical climate
is a way to monitor organizational ethics health (Raile, 2012). The Perceptions of
Ethical Climate assessment (Pelletier & Bligh, 2006) and collecting data
regarding observations and reporting of misconduct should be repeated at various
time intervals.
2. Focus on the tone at the top. Supervisors and top leaders are “culture carriers”
and key to establishing a culture of ethics and integrity (Bennett & Fredeen,
2014). The electronic survey, open comment box, and employee interviews
demonstrated a perception of a gap between the top City leaders and other
employees. City leaders need to be communicating ethical expectations, modeling
ethics, making ethics a priority, supporting whistleblowers and following reports
with action (Ethics Resource Center, 2010b).
3. Investigate low reporting by Bozeman employees. To reduce workplace
misconduct, employees must be protected against retaliation when they report
67
23
(Harned, 2014). Although the City of Bozeman has an established whistleblower
policy that prohibits retaliation, the employees in this study expressed concerns
about retaliation.
a. An anonymous reporting avenue should be researched. Ethics literature
suggests that employees most often report misconduct to an immediate
supervisor (Ethics Resource Center, 2013b), but an anonymous venue for
reporting was suggested by employees in interviews and the open
comment box of the survey. A hotline could be a resource to citizens,
officials, administrators, and employees as a reliable source of advice or to
report allegations of misconduct (Manske & Frederickson, 2004;
Thompson et al., 2007).
b. Trainings should be developed to prepare supervisors to act on reports of
misconduct. Unless top leaders train supervisors to address and document
reports, reporting may not be handled properly and the appropriate
measures may not be taken to prevent future incidents (Ethics Resource
Center, 2008). Everyone who is likely to receive reports should be trained
on their responsibilities as leaders in receiving reports, handling
complaints, and how to follow up with reporters (Bennett & Fredeen,
2014; Ethics Resource Center, 2010d).
4. Research results should guide the design of future City of Bozeman ethics
trainings. Employees noted that the most effective components of the ethics
program focused on the ethical environment. Role modeling by peers and
68
24
supervisors can be incorporated into education and trainings. Employees rated
annual training as effective and noted that they learn best from scenarios,
interactive discussion, and realistic examples. Areas of weakness identified in the
survey and though employee interviews can be addressed through annual training.
5. Share research results with employees. The abstract, conclusions, and a link to
this investigation should be shared with the City of Bozeman employees. Sharing
the research results was specifically asked for in training sessions, in comment
boxes, and in the employee interviews. One employee who was interviewed
asked that the results be shared, “’Hey this was brought to our attention. It hasn't
gone unnoticed.’ You'd be amazed what that would do” (Employee 2, personal
interview, March 10, 2014).
Further Research
1. Citizen survey. A survey of the citizens of Bozeman should be conducted. This
was noted in the interviews of both the City Attorney and the City Manager. To
date, all the ethics research related to the City has been conducted with
employees. While the views of employees are critical, Vigoda-Gadot (2007)
asserts that the perceptions of the public should also be investigated, as a powerful
tool in understanding the organizational environment in which ethical or unethical
behavior occurs. Organizational ethics are a good predictor of citizens’
satisfaction with governmental services and trust in governance (Vigoda-Gadot,
2007). The City of Bozeman charter revision in 2008 created the Board of Ethics
69
25
and mandated annual ethics training for elected and appointed officials and all
municipal employees. The charter was written and voted in by citizens. Any
changes made to the charter will have to come from a citizen vote. An
understanding of current citizen perceptions of municipal ethics will be useful to
the City and its citizens.
2. Experimental study. An experimental study on this topic will add to the
usefulness of available research in the public sector. This would involve
identifying a municipality at the beginning of the implementation of a CEP,
measuring outcomes prior to and after implementation, along with a control group
of a comparable municipality that is not implementing a CEP.
Chapter Five Summary
This chapter contained the conclusion and discussion of the investigation. The
overall research question and each of four research sub-questions were answered.
Recommendations were provided to the City of Bozeman and for future research. This
concluding chapter discussed the limitations and a delimitation of this investigation.
Five years after the implementation of a CEP, the perceptions of ethical climate
by the City of Bozeman employees was somewhat favorable. Opinions about the ethical
climate existed on the full continuum from highly ethical to highly unethical, however,
the overall perceptions reflected leaning towards an ethical climate. Observations of
misconduct were low in comparison to national survey results for local governments. An
increase in the overall ethics score does distinguish between employees who observe
70
26
misconduct on the job from those who do not observe misconduct. Every one unit
increase in the overall ethics score predicts that is more than 4 times more likely that
employees will not have observed misconduct. A significant factor in the observations of
misconduct was ethical leadership and for every one unit increase in the ethical
leadership factor, it was 2.5 times more likely that employees would not have observed
misconduct. The overall ethics score and 6 ethics factors were not statistically significant
predictors of the reporting of misconduct. Reporting of misconduct was low in this
municipality compared to national survey results for local governments and the sources
of low reporting should be further explored. The most effective components of the ethics
program identified by employees were role modeling by peers and supervisors, talking
about ethics on the job, ethics training, the code of ethics, and the ethics handbook.
71
APPENDIX E. Electronic Survey – Complete Category Responses
Stongly
Agree Agree Somewhat
Agree
Neither
Agree nor
Disagree
Somewhat
Disagree Disagree Strongly
Disagree Sparkline*n Mean
3.5 When a decision has ethical
implications, the City's ethics policy
guides me in my decision-making
process
15.3% 41.0% 20.5% 14.9% 4.6% 3.7% 0.0%215 5.36
3.6 I have read the City's ethics code 39.1% 46.0% 8.0% 2.3% 2.3% 2.0% 0.3%215 6.10
3.7 I understand what the City expects of
me in terms of ethical behavior 35.3% 53.5% 8.4% 2.3% 0.0% 0.5% 0.0%215 6.20
3.8 I understand the content of the ethics
code 31.6% 54.0% 10.2% 2.8% 0.0% 1.4% 0.0%215 6.10
3.9 When I was hired, the ethical
expectations of the City were
communicated to me
20.0% 32.1% 11.1% 11.5% 6.0% 10.1% 9.2%215 4.81
3.10 Policies exist that describe how the
City expects its employees to make
ethical decisions
26.0% 54.9% 11.2% 6.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4%215 5.96
3.11 When faced with an ethical conflict at
work, I seek guidance to determine
possible consequences of my decision 15.8% 40.9% 22.3% 11.1% 2.3% 5.6% 2.0%215 5.32
3.12 When faced with making a decision
that has an ethical implication, I feel I
can discuss the matter with my
immediate supervisor
34.0% 35.3% 12.6% 5.1% 5.1% 4.2% 3.7%215 5.60
3.13 There are ethics resources available to
me if I want to ask questions about
ethics
31.2% 49.2% 8.4% 7.9% 1.9% 1.4% 0.0%215 5.96
3.14 It is easy to get help from the ethics
resources that exist 22.3% 35.3% 16.7% 18.6% 3.7% 1.5% 1.9%215 5.42
3.15 The staff identified for ethics assistance
is available when I need help 17.7% 33.0% 14.0% 27.0% 3.2% 3.2% 1.9%215 5.18
Choose the response that most
accurately reflects your thoughts about
the following
193 72
APPENDIX E. Electronic Survey – Complete Category Responses, Continued
Stongly
Agree Agree Somewhat
Agree
Neither
Agree nor
Disagree
Somewhat
Disagree Disagree Strongly
Disagree Sparkline*n Mean
4.16 In the course of my workday, I have
not felt time pressures that have led to
unethical decision-making 20.5% 41.4% 7.9% 14.8% 9.3% 4.7% 1.4%215 5.29
4.17 In the City, there are not many
instances where ethical decision-
making is sacrificed due to time
constraints
12.6% 37.7% 13.5% 19.5% 7.9% 6.5% 2.3%215 4.99
4.18 Time pressures do not affect my ability
to thoroughly evaluate ethical
dilemmas 14.0% 39.5% 16.7% 12.6% 10.2% 5.1% 1.9%215 5.12
4.19 The City makes ethical decisions even
in times of budgetary constraints 8.8% 33.0% 10.8% 25.2% 8.8% 6.0% 7.4%215 4.60
4.20 The City is willing to do the right thing
no matter the financial costs 7.9% 20.5% 13.5% 22.3% 12.4% 10.1% 12.8%215 4.06
4.21 The City rewards employees who
exhibit ethical behavior 2.0% 6.5% 9.3% 36.3% 11.1% 16.7% 18.1%215 3.29
4.22 Personnel decisions (hiring and
promotion) in the City reflect ethical
principles 7.4% 21.4% 15.3% 25.7% 7.9% 11.6% 10.7%215 4.17
4.23 In my opinion, employee concerns
about ethical issues are “heard” in my
department
12.1% 27.9% 14.4% 20.5% 7.9% 10.2% 7.0%215 4.57
4.24 If I reported a colleague for an ethical
violation, there would not be retaliation
against me 8.3% 8.3% 12.6% 16.3% 13.5% 31.2% 9.8%215 3.49
4.25 If I were to have an ethical concern, I
know I would be supported by the
City 7.0% 24.7% 15.3% 29.3% 9.8% 5.1% 8.8%215 4.39
Choose the response that most
accurately reflects your thoughts about
the following
194 73
APPENDIX E. Electronic Survey – Complete Category Responses, Continued
Stongly
Agree Agree Somewhat
Agree
Neither
Agree nor
Disagree
Somewhat
Disagree Disagree Strongly
Disagree Sparkline*n Mean
5.26 The top leadership of the City is
concerned with ethical practice 10.2% 35.3% 17.2% 17.8% 7.4% 4.2% 7.9%215 4.79
5.27 I feel comfortable consulting with my
immediate supervisor when I have to
make a tough ethical decision
22.3% 44.7% 14.4% 6.5% 3.7% 3.3% 5.1%215 5.45
5.28 Top leadership places an equal value
on productivity, quality, and ethical
practice
8.8% 35.8% 12.6% 20.0% 6.5% 7.0% 9.3%215 4.62
5.29 Moral concerns are given top priority
by the City's top leaders 6.0% 19.1% 20.9% 29.9% 9.3% 6.0% 8.8%215 4.29
5.30 My immediate supervisor sets a good
example of ethical behavior 23.7% 38.6% 13.5% 7.9% 4.7% 5.1% 6.5%215 5.27
5.31 Top leadership works quickly to
resolve ethical issues 7.4% 22.8% 16.3% 33.9% 5.6% 5.6% 8.4%215 4.43
5.32 My immediate supervisor does not
look the other way when employees
make unethical decisions
24.2% 34.9% 8.8% 13.0% 8.8% 7.0% 3.3%215 5.19
5.33 Top leadership provides employees
with ethical guidance when it is needed 9.8% 30.2% 19.1% 23.7% 6.0% 6.5% 4.7%215 4.76
5.34 The organization's top leadership
routinely strives to make decisions that
are ethical 11.2% 30.7% 16.7% 21.4% 7.4% 4.7% 7.9%215 4.71
5.35 If I reported one of my fellow
employees for an ethics violation, my
immediate supervisor would support
me
13.5% 41.9% 19.1% 13.8% 4.2% 2.8% 4.7%215 5.20
Choose the response that most
accurately reflects your thoughts about
the following
195 74
APPENDIX E. Electronic Survey – Complete Category Responses, Continued
Stongly
Agree Agree Somewhat
Agree
Neither
Agree nor
Disagree
Somewhat
Disagree Disagree Strongly
Disagree Sparkline*n Mean
6.36 The Board of Ethics handles
complaints and inquiries in a
confidential manner 5.6% 25.1% 7.9% 60.0% 0.9% 0.5% 0.0%215 4.73
6.37 The creation of the Board of Ethics
has increased my trust in the City 4.2% 20.9% 13.5% 40.5% 7.4% 8.8% 4.7%215 4.29
6.38 The City instituted the Board of Ethics
because it is truly concerned about
ethical standards 6.5% 29.3% 15.8% 28.9% 8.8% 6.5% 4.2%215 4.59
6.39 The ethics program is effective 6.5% 30.2% 18.6% 28.4% 7.9% 3.7% 4.7%215 4.69
Choose the response that most
accurately reflects your thoughts about
the following
196 75
December 15, 2014
To: City of Bozeman
Chris Kukulski, Ashley Flynn
From: MSU Local Government Center
Betsy Webb, Professional Development & Training Manager, MSU
Dan Clark, Director, MSU Local Government Center
RE: 2014-2015 Ethics Training Proposal
Scope of Work
The MSU Local Government Center proposes the following scope of work to meet the 2014-2015 ethics
training requirements for the City of Bozeman:
Ethics Training
What Fee
2014-2015 Online Training
Module
December 2014/January 2015
Development of Online Training Module
MSU Extension Service
Estimated 20 hours X $35/hour
$700
Development of Content for Online Training
Module
Betsy Webb , 15 hours X $50/hour = $750
Graduate Student, 10 hours X $25/hour = $250
$1000
Other Training
Spring 2015
as scheduled by City of Bozeman
Session with City of Bozeman Directors Team
Two hours to go over research results and develop
action plan
$500
Session with City of Bozeman HPO Team
Two hours to go over research results and develop
action plan
$500
Session with City of Bozeman employees
Two hours to go over research results and discuss
action plan and additional steps
Betsy Webb will write an executive summary of the
research to simplify sharing results from her
dissertation
$500
Total fees: $3200
76
Chris Kukulski, Ashley Flynn, Betsy Webb, and Katie Yaw (MSU graduate student in MPA program) met
on Tuesday, December 8, 2014 to discuss the development of the next round of City of Bozeman ethics
training. It was agreed that the next training would be delivered on-line for employees, elected and
appointed officials. MSU Extension will develop the online training platform and Betsy Webb and Katie
Yaw will develop the content, as reviewed and approved by the City of Bozeman. The content will be
based on the research results from Dr. Webb’s dissertation that studied the comprehensive ethics
program implemented by the City of Bozeman over the past five years.
The online training content will be drafted for approval by December 31, 2014. The online platform is
scheduled to be developed by January 15, 2015 (estimated date due to other jobs in the queue for
Extension before this one). Employees and officials should be able to complete the online training by
the end of January 2015. Chris Kukulski and Ashley Flynn are the leaders of this project within the City
of Bozeman. Stacy Ulmen (City Clerk) will track volunteer board members and Becky Wilbert (HR) will
track employee completion.
Not included in the above table are ethics scenarios and discussion prompts that may be utilized by City
of Bozeman managers within their departments.
77