Suchergebnisse

Surveys are a commonly used means of measuring transparency levels, but they are potentially vulnerable to perceptual biases. This study sought to examine perceptual differences by the respondents' identities as general citizens or public employees, and the possible negative perceptions that one group may have of the other concerning responses to a survey-based measure of transparency. The survey was designed on the basis of existing literature, suggesting that transparency has up to six facets. Two samples were taken: from citizens who visited district offices to file civil applications during the survey period; and from public employees involved in processing these applications. A total of 472 surveys were used for analysis: 233 citizens and 239 public employees. The results indicated that the two groups had different understandings of transparency. Data from public employees produced a three-factor solution, which was labeled as Efficiency, Reliability, and Access. For citizens, a two-factor solution was a better fit, with the factors being described as Accessibility (a wider notion than Access) and Utility. The findings suggest that public employees adopt a somewhat technical view of transparency, whereas citizens have more practical concerns about it. Only citizens' unfavorable perception of public employees had a negative influence on the level of transparency. This study contributes to the understanding of how public employees and citizens have qualitatively different perceptions of transparency. Points for practitioners To assess progress in governmental transparency, we must measure it, and surveys offer an accessible and potentially cost-effective approach. However, the survey responses of citizens and public employees show that they understand transparency in qualitatively different ways, with citizens' perceptions of transparency also influenced by their perceptions of public employees. If governments are to increase public trust in policymaking and administration, they must focus on improving transparency as it is understood by the public rather than how it is understood by public servants.

© 2016, © The Author(s) 2016. Surveys are a commonly used means of measuring transparency levels, but they are potentially vulnerable to perceptual biases. This study sought to examine perceptual differences by the respondents' identities as general citizens or public employees, and the possible negative perceptions that one group may have of the other concerning responses to a survey-based measure of transparency. The survey was designed on the basis of existing literature, suggesting that transparency has up to six facets. Two samples were taken: from citizens who visited district offices to file civil applications during the survey period; and from public employees involved in processing these applications. A total of 472 surveys were used for analysis: 233 citizens and 239 public employees. The results indicated that the two groups had different understandings of transparency. Data from public employees produced a three-factor solution, which was labeled as Efficiency, Reliability, and Access. For citizens, a two-factor solution was a better fit, with the factors being described as Accessibility (a wider notion than Access) and Utility. The findings suggest that public employees adopt a somewhat technical view of transparency, whereas citizens have more practical concerns about it. Only citizens' unfavorable perception of public employees had a negative influence on the level of transparency. This study contributes to the understanding of how public employees and citizens have qualitatively different perceptions of transparency. Points for practitioners: To assess progress in governmental transparency, we must measure it, and surveys offer an accessible and potentially cost-effective approach. However, the survey responses of citizens and public employees show that they understand transparency in qualitatively different ways, with citizens' perceptions of transparency also influenced by their perceptions of public employees. If governments are to increase public trust in policymaking and administration, they must focus on improving transparency as it is understood by the public rather than how it is understood by public servants.

Purpose
– This paper aims to examine the relationship between ethics programmes and ethical culture, and their impact on misconduct.


Design/methodology/approach
– A theoretical model which posits ethical culture to be a mediating variable in the relationship between ethics programmes and misconduct was tested using data from a national ethics survey of Korean public service organizations.


Findings
– The data indicates the relationship between ethics programmes and misconduct is fully mediated by ethical culture. Only two of the six elements of an ethics programme had a significant effect on misconduct before ethical culture was controlled for, and when ethical culture was controlled for, none of the elements had a significant impact on misconduct. The ethics programme did however appear to strengthen ethical culture, suggesting such programmes make an important contribution to reducing unethical behaviour in organizations.


Research limitations/implications
– Future research should examine the interaction of ethics programmes and ethical culture using longitudinal research designs, to obtain a better understanding of how programmes serve to strengthen ethical culture.


Practical implications
– The findings provide insights into the role of ethics programmes in improving ethical behaviour, suggesting resources should be deployed to those aspects of these programmes which serve to strengthen ethical culture.


Originality/value
– The paper provides clarification of the relationship between ethics programmes, ethical culture and misconduct, an important finding given the significant resources deployed by public service organizations to initiatives aimed at improving ethical behaviour.

Résumé La réduction de la corruption et l'amélioration de la satisfaction des citoyens sont des objectifs importants pour l'État, mais le lien entre ces deux objectifs stratégiques n'a que rarement été étudié. Le présent article présente une étude sur le rôle joué par la transparence et la confiance dans la relation entre la corruption gouvernementale et la satisfaction des citoyens à l'égard des services publics. Cette étude se fondait sur des données recueillies en Corée du Sud afin d'évaluer une initiative bien précise qui visait à réduire la corruption et à améliorer la satisfaction des citoyens à l'égard des programmes de travaux publics. Ces données indiquaient que la relation entre corruption et satisfaction était modérée par la transparence et partiellement facilitée par la confiance. Remarques à l'intention des praticiens La présente étude permet de mieux comprendre l'influence de la transparence et de la confiance dans la relation entre corruption et satisfaction des citoyens à l'égard des services publics et donne dès lors une idée des moyens de formuler des politiques visant à réduire la corruption et à améliorer la satisfaction.

Reducing corruption and improving citizen satisfaction are important aims of government, yet the link between these two policy aims has rarely been explored. This article reports a study into the roles played by transparency and trust in the relationship between governmental corruption and citizen satisfaction with public services. The study was based on data gathered in South Korea to evaluate a specific initiative that had sought to reduce corruption and increase citizen satisfaction with public works programmes. The data indicated that the relationship between corruption and satisfaction was moderated by transparency and partially mediated by trust. Points for practitioners The study sheds light on the roles of transparency and trust in the relationship between corruption and citizen satisfaction with public services, and thus provides insights for developing policy aimed at curtailing corruption and improving satisfaction.

Reducing corruption and improving citizen satisfaction are important aims of government, yet the link between these two policy aims has rarely been explored. This article reports a study into the roles played by transparency and trust in the relationship between governmental corruption and citizen satisfaction with public services. The study was based on data gathered in South Korea to evaluate a specific initiative that had sought to reduce corruption and increase citizen satisfaction with public works programmes. The data indicated that the relationship between corruption and satisfaction was moderated by transparency and partially mediated by trust. Points for practitioners The study sheds light on the roles of transparency and trust in the relationship between corruption and citizen satisfaction with public services, and thus provides insights for developing policy aimed at curtailing corruption and improving satisfaction.

The purpose of this study was to investigate external whistleblowers' experiences of workplace bullying by superiors and colleagues, and to analyze how the bullying was influenced by factors such as the support they received from government or NGOs, and whether colleagues understood the reasons for the whistleblower's actions. For bullying by colleagues we also examined to what extent this was influenced by superiors' behavior towards the whistleblower. We reviewed the relevant literature on workplace bullying and whistleblowers' experiences of negative or retaliatory actions and developed three hypotheses, which we tested using data gathered from Korean external whistleblowers. Results revealed that external whistleblowers experienced work-related bullying by superiors and social relation-related and person-related bullying by colleagues more frequently, and found it more distressing, than other types of workplace bullying. Superiors' bullying was a dominant factor affecting bullying by colleagues. Colleagues' understanding of the reason for the whistleblower's actions was significant in reducing bullying frequency while support from government and NGOs was not significant in reducing it. Based on these findings, practical implications are discussed.