Search results

This paper aims to assess the effect of different leadership types, the client's identity and auditors' self-confidence on auditors' impartiality.

This paper is a descriptive-survey type, and the collected data are based on a predesigned questionnaire distributed in January 2020. The PLS software is used for data analysis, and the statistical population of this paper includes employed auditors in enlisted audit firms on the Official Association of Auditors. When the parameters were insignificant, the obtained probability from the model fitting was used for hypothesis testing, and the appropriateness of the model was assessed via the structural equations.

The results show a significant relationship between charismatic, transformational, participatory, delegating and bureaucratic leadership and auditors' impartiality. There is also an association between the client's identity and the auditor's impartiality. The client's identity mediates the relationship between transformational leadership and the auditor's impartiality. Moreover, there is a significant relationship between self-confidence and auditor's impartiality.

This paper enjoys an innovative method in the field of behavioural auditing. The effect of transformational leadership on auditor's impartiality with the mediatory role of the client's identity shows the in-depth client–auditor relationship has been taken for granted and not examined previously, so the results of this paper can lend a helping hand to audit firms to enhance the organisational performance.

Mediators' impartiality and empathy are two classical factors in the parties' trust in mediators. However, mediators are often torn between being impartial and being empathetic. The aim of this paper is to explore this empirically.

This study empirically tests the strategic use of caucus to improve the interaction between impartiality and empathy by splitting them into two phases: impartiality in joint sessions and empathy in caucus.

The strategy did create significant synergy between impartiality and empathy with the main impact of reducing the time needed to reach an agreement.

All research data come from workplace mediation and from the same organization. Although it can be reasonably postulated that the results can be generalized to other mediation settings, this remains to be proven.

When mediators use the trust caucus strategy, impartiality and empathy work better together and parties put more weight on empathy than on impartiality. While the use of the trust caucus does not increase the likelihood of reaching agreement, it does significantly decrease the time needed to conclude an agreement.

The study uses a quasi‐experimental design to test its hypothesis. Furthermore, the study uses real mediation cases.

This paper aims to explore the ethical dilemmas faced by records administrators concerning political impartiality by examining the case of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) in the USA, which has faced reputational challenges due to perceived political bias.

This paper proposes a phronetic approach to resolve the ethical dilemmas associated with political impartiality in records administration. This approach emphasizes practical wisdom and ethical decision-making, offering a unique and effective way to address the challenges faced by presidential record archivists.

The proposed phronetic approach provides a means to resolve the ethical challenges posed by political impartiality in records administration, with a particular focus on NARA. By taking a transparent and impartial approach, agencies can minimize criticism and ensure their continued ability to equitably serve the public.

The phronetic approach offers a framework for addressing ethical dilemmas related to political impartiality in records administration, with potential implications for other independent agencies facing similar challenges.

This paper offers a unique perspective on the ethical dilemmas of political impartiality in records administration and proposes a practical and effective approach to resolving these challenges. It contributes to the broader discussion on the intersection of ethics and public administration.

Nearly twenty years ago, Kelly (1986) forcefully argued that teachers had a responsibility to disclose their positions on controversial issues during discussion. Yet, while thoroughly grounded in theory, Kelly did not include classroom teachers’ responses in his call for teacher disclosure. This paper reports the responses to Kelly’s call for teacher disclosure from twelve secondary (grades 7-12) social studies teachers in a rural county located in a northeastern state. Analysis of interview transcripts revealed that teachers generally rejected disclosure of their position in favor of the role of an impartial facilitator for two primary reasons. First, teachers felt there was no guarantee that the tolerant environment they were trying to create in their classrooms would be present in the larger community. As a result, nine of the twelve teachers, in fear of a community backlash, rejected disclosure. Second, teachers preferred to disclose their commitment to a set of transcendent values such as tolerance, justice, and equality rather than disclose a point of view on a controversial issue. Fostering such values was seen by the teachers in this study to be more important than disclosure and could better be done by assuming the stance of neutral impartiality despite the acknowledgment that the stance was problematic. Implications and suggestions for future research are considered.

This purpose of this paper is to discuss the relationship between political independence and operational impartiality in regard to the effectiveness of anti-corruption agencies (ACAs). Against this background of western orthodoxy, it asks whether a non-western country with high levels of corruption (Vietnam being an example) can find another pathway in its efforts to effectively combat corruption.

An exercise in qualitative conceptual clarification and theoretical speculation, drawing upon practical examples.

It is argued that it is important to distinguish between de jure and de facto political independence, and that neither can be fully understood unless they are considered in relationship to other key values, particularly operational impartiality, public accountability, and systemic legitimacy, and in the context of bureaucratic politics. There is little coherent theoretical knowledge available about the relationships among these variables. Such values are central to western notions of “good government” but are much less institutionalised in non-western jurisdictions with high levels of corruption. The question is raised: can such countries, Vietnam being one example, develop effective anti-corruption strategies which because of the nature of their own political system, cannot depend on political independence for its ACAs?

Attention is drawn to some conceptual and putatively theoretical issues relating to the effectiveness of ACAs, and which have received little explicit attention in the relevant academic literature.

As social media has become an ingrained aspect of our lives—including our political relationships with other citizens and the state—various governments have warned public servants that being politically active online might threaten the reputed impartiality of themselves and the public service. This study examines whether public servants are less likely to be politically active on social media than other citizens, and seeks to understand public servants’ varying disposition to be politically active online by investigating the role of employees’ underlying Big 5 personality traits.

Multivariate regression, along with marginal effects and predicted probabilities, are used to investigate public servants’ online political activity with survey data from Canada, a country where impartiality is a core public service value, and where governments, public service commissions and even public sector unions have voiced cautious messages about the threat online political activity presents to the reputed impartiality of public servants, and the public service at large.

Analysis of the direct effects of being a public servant and each Big 5 personality trait finds that being a public servant significantly, and substantively, reduces the probability of engaging in online political activity, meanwhile, Extraversion and Conscientiousness have consistent, significant and substantive relationships with being politically active online. Subsequent analysis investigating the dynamic between the Big 5 and being a public servant, uncovers a more complex story. Among public servants, Openness and Neuroticism, rather than Extraversion and Conscientiousness, are associated with significant and substantive changes in the probability of engaging in some online politically activities. This is consistent with research investigating the relationship between the Big 5 and risk aversion, given that public servants in Canada work in an environment with a highly cautious discourse portraying social media as a serious risk to impartiality.

The findings also speak to best practices for public service human resource managers by shedding light how public servants’ behavior can be better understood and managed by paying attention to their underlying personality traits.

This study moves beyond analyzing trends between public and private sector employees, to instead examine public servants’ online political activity. This study offers theoretical and empirical insight into how public servants’ disposition to be politically active online is, in part, influenced by their underlying Big 5 personality traits, specifically, Neuroticism and Openness.

For many, the claim that a new approach to bureaucracy—new political governance (NPG)—is underway reads as if it was written by Stephen King: Frightening fiction. While the thought of promiscuously partisan senior public servants publicly defending and promoting the government’s reputation to the demise of impartiality is disturbing, the evidentiary record has led most to dismiss the idea as empirically false. This article questions, and empirically investigates, whether dismissing the idea of promiscuous partisanship has been premature.

A case study of the loyalty displayed by Canada’s most senior public servant during a highly publicized parliamentary committee is analysed with a novel theoretical and empirical approach in three steps. First, the Clerk of the Privy Council (Clerk)’s committee testimony is analysed against analytical constructs of impartial and promiscuous partisan loyalty that focuses on the testimony’s direction and substance. Second, the objectivity and truthfulness of the testimony is analysed by comparing what was publicly claimed to have occurred against evidence submitted to the committee that provids an independent record of events. Third, the perception the Clerk’s testimony had on some committee members, political journalists and members of the public is analysed through print media and committee Hansard.

While the Clerk’s testimony displays an awareness of upholding impartiality, it also comprises promiscuous partisanship. Throughout his testimony, the Clerk redirects from the line of questioning to defend and promote the sitting government’s reputation. Moreover, to defend and promote the government’s reputation the Clerk’s testimony moved away from objectivity and engaged in truth-obfuscating tactics. Finally, the nature of the Clerk’s testimony was perceived by some committee members and the public—including former senior public servants—as having abandoned impartiality to have become a public “cheerleader” of the government.

Employing an in-depth case study limits the extent to which the findings concerning the presence of promiscuously partisan loyalty can be generalized beyond the present case to the larger cadre of senior public servants.

Empirically, while most research has dismissed claims of promiscuous partisanship as empirically unfounded, this article provides what is possibly the strongest empirical case to date of a public incident of promiscuous partisanship at the apex of the bureaucracy. As such, scholars can no longer dismiss NPG as an interesting idea without much empirical leverage. Theoretically, this article adds further caution to Aucoin’s original narrative of NPG by suggesting that promiscuous partisanship might not only involve senior public servants defending and promoting the government, but that doing so may push them to engage in truth-obfuscating tactics, and therein, weaken the public’s confidence in political institutions. The novel theoretical and empirical approach to studying senior public servants’ parliamentary testimony can be used by scholars in other settings to expand the empirical study of bureaucratic loyalty.

This Chapter is written in an era in which the United Nations (UN) routinely deploys Missions to environments that satisfy the armed conflict threshold. Such Missions often require personnel to employ significant levels of force, whether to safeguard mission and humanitarian personnel, to protect civilians, to neutralise violent armed groups or, in pure self-defence. But use as well as non-use of force can readily frustrate the very objectives these troops are deployed to uphold, in turn creating gaps between the Promises they make and the Outcomes they actually secure. On the other hand, current Missions such as MINUSMA in Mali have proven to be amongst the deadliest for UN troops in the entire history of UN Peacekeeping. The thin line between use and non-use of force must therefore be trodden with utmost care. This Chapter tries to find answers to this dilemma from a moral perspective and considers how the peculiar nature of the morality of resort to force by the UN influences that of its use of force. It assesses why the latter should be calibrated or adjusted to comply with the former, and how this can consequently channel UN troop conduct towards the objectives pursued through deployment. It is only where these realities are understood and addressed, the Chapter submits, that the aforementioned Gaps between Promises and Outcomes can be redressed and closed.

Denmark’s apparent success at controlling corruption is likely both real and more complex than it may appear. This chapter reviews a series of hypotheses about the extent and sources of corruption control in Denmark, emphasizing both domestic and international factors. Some possible vulnerabilities are discussed, including whether Greenland – which is usually excluded from Danish governance ratings – might introduce corruption via its mining industries, and whether the growing wind-power industry (in some senses, another extractive enterprise) might also encourage corruption. A simple data analysis, using the Gothenburg University Quality of Government Impartiality Index, suggests that small social scale, a homogeneous population, competitive politics, and extensive international connectedness might well help check Danish corruption, but relationships among the variables are complex and marked by considerable simultaneity. Denmark illustrates two subtleties often overlooked: the importance of “soft controls” – social values, a working consensus, an emphasis on fairness, and common goals – for corruption control, and the question of whether advanced market societies really control corruption or merely reduce incentives to engage in it, as a result of business-friendly policies and institutions. A final issue involves dependent variables: better indirect measures of corruption might well be obtained by gathering and benchmarking indicators of government performance.

What does the Supreme Court talk about when it talks about itself? In addition to the debates over interpretive method and doctrine that fill their opinions, Supreme Court justices often discuss what it means to be “a Court” and how such an institution must function. Our chapter explores this specific form of judicial self-representation, examining the ways in which members of the Court define their own “Court-ness” in their decisions. We argue that the Court’s acts of autobiography simultaneously generate images of impartiality and partiality. The result is the public projection of a contradictory judicial persona.