HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP1. EthicsEthics Report to the
Bozeman City Commission
July 2015
Betsy J. Webb, Ed.D., SPHR
Professional Development & Training Manager
Montana State University
31
Bozeman Ethics Research – 2014 Study
•Mixed methods – 1 quantitative survey, 6
qualitative interviews
•Voluntary participation
•Population at time of survey – 355 employees
•Complete data responses for 215 – 60.6%
participation rate
•95% confidence interval, +/- 4.2% margin of
error
2 32
Observations of Misconduct
Reporting of Misconduct
Concerns regarding Retaliation
Bozeman
2014 Research
•Observations: 33.5%
•Reporting: 44.4%
•Fear of Retaliation: >50%
Local Governments
Ethics Resource Center National Survey
•Observations: 63%
•Reporting: 67%
•Fear of Retaliation: 28%
3 33
Rating of Ethical Climate
Overall Ethics Score
(35 items)
•4.81
Scale – higher score, higher agreement
1 = strongly disagree
2= disagree
3= somewhat disagree
4= neutral
5= somewhat agree
6= agree
7= strongly agree
Single Rating of
Ethical Climate
•5.28
Scale
1 = highly unethical (5)
2 = unethical (10)
3= somewhat unethical (14)
4= neutral (13)
5= somewhat ethical (43)
6= ethical (108)
7= highly ethical (22)
4 34
Effectiveness Rating by Employees –
City’s Ethics Program Components
1.Ethical Role-Modeling
by my peers (5.38)
2.Ethical Role-Modeling
by my supervisor
(5.22)
3.Talking About Ethics
on the Job (5.21)
4.Annual Ethics Training
(5.18)
5.City of Bozeman Code
of Ethics (5.11)
6.Ethics Handbook
(5.07)
5
14 menu items – all rated over 4.5 in effectiveness (1 = highly ineffective to 7 = highly
effective, where 4= neutral
35
Role of Leadership in Ethical Climate
•ONLY significant factor in predicting which
employees have observed misconduct from
those who have not
•Immediate supervisors rated higher in survey
than “top leaders”
•Interviews and open comment box responses
revealed a perceived gap between “top
leaders” and employees
6 36
7
Concept Map for
Research Study
37
8
Final Concept Map
For Research Study
With Results
38
April 2015 HPO Meeting
•Review the research results in small groups
•Identify the positive results – what is the
good news?
•Identify opportunities to strengthen ethics
within the City
•What questions does the data raise for you?
•For the research results you just reviewed:
–Strategize 1-3 action steps HPO can take to
address the areas of opportunity
9 39
July 2015 HPO meeting
•Large group discussion based on dissertation
results and other studies since 2009
•Preliminary 2015 online ethics training feedback
data presented to help guide discussion
•HPO to form a subcommittee to address
opportunities and concerns and future ethics
training content and delivery
10 40
Betsy’s recommendations from the study
1.Repeat survey as a benchmark of organizational health
2.Focus on the tone at the top
3.Investigate low reporting by BZ employees
–Anonymous reporting avenue?
–Train supervisors to act on reports
4.Research results should guide the design of future ethics trainings
5.Share results with employees
6.Citizen survey
11 41
This Year’s Ethics Training
•Online, 421 completions to date
•Focuses on Research Results – Four Modules
–Ethics Resources & Reporting
–Retaliation
–Top Leaders
–Board of Ethics
•Has both scenarios and input back to City
•30-45 min to complete
12 42
Questions?
13
Thank you!
43
Comprehensive
Ethics Program
Code of
Ethics
Ethics Education
& Training
Ethics
Resources
Independent Ethics
Commission
Strong Ethical
Environment
OUTCOMES
Reduced
Pressure for
Misconduct
Decreased
Observations of
Misconduct
Increased
Reporting of
Misconduct
Reduced
Retaliation for
Reporting
GOAL
Reduced Ethics Risk:
Ethical Organization
80% Ethical rating by employees
14% Unethical
Overall Ethics Score 4.81
Ethical Climate Rating 5.28
Not measured
in survey
33.5% BZ employees
63% Local governments
44.4% BZ employees
67% local governments
> 50% BZ employees
concerned about
retaliation; 28% local
governments
Mean 5.76
1 of 6 most effective
components
Mean 5.08
Handbook, 1 of 6 most
effective components
Mean 4.57
Rated neutrally
1 of 6 most effective
components
Role modeling by peers and
supervisors and talking about ethics:
3 of 6 most effective components
Ethical Leadership: Mean 4.87
Gap between top leaders and
employees
Ethical Decision-Making: Mean 5.46
Informal Ethical Norms:
Mean 3.98 – lowest rated
44