|
Eye on Ethics: A Historical Overview
By Gordon Ryan, CMCA, AMS, PCAM
There is a scene in My Fair Lady, the movie version, where Professor Higgins (Rex Harrison) tells his housekeeper to write to someone in America who has asked him to come and lecture. He advises them that he is unavailable, but that he knows of someone whom he considers “…the foremost moralist in England.” The poor chap is Alfred, a dustman and Eliza Doolittle’s father. The crusty fellow has displayed an unusual brand of cheekiness mingled with modesty in Higgins’ presence, launching a temporary speaking career as a result.
When NBC-CAM contacted me about writing an ethics column for this publication, I felt much the same. What qualifies me? I haven’t a clue, but, as an inveterate writer who owes much to this industry, I accepted. This first column is rather philosophical in nature. It will focus on the elected bodies within our Associations.
Future columns will be more practical, dealing with the appointed management side of the house. In some cases, I hope to respond to questions and comments involving ethical concerns. So, without much further adieu, let’s “get me to the church on time.”
Putting Ethics in Context
The hierarchy of human action ranges from legal, to ethical to moral. Each increasing level of restriction on behavior imposes stricter regulations, usually reliant on personal acceptance. Simply stated, legal defines what must be done, while ethical defines what should be done. Hence an action may be quite legal . . . and quite unethical . . . at the same time. And this complexity is further exacerbated when you include a moral implication and question the religious or spiritual context. An action may be considered legal; it may even be accepted as ethical; but great deviation occurs when we try to define the morality of an action.
That may be a surprising or complex statement to open an article on the subject, but disagreement on ethics in governance is nothing new. We have found ways around it for centuries. The Code of Hammurabi was created in the eighteenth century B.C., long before the mass media decided to impose their own brand of ethical oversight. But let’s talk about democracy for a moment and put public ethics in context.
In the evolution of societal governance, the relatively new entrant onto the world scene, democracy, is particularly reliant on public confidence to maintain its legitimacy. The most basic tenet of democracy is voluntary compliance by its citizens. The most basic tenet of public confidence is recognition of ethical behavior. If people do not believe in their leaders, compliance is less likely. As a result, public trust in the integrity of public institutions and officials is essential to the success of democratic representation.
Much of the thought contained herein is directly applicable to local, state and national government structures. But if we analyze our actions, a case could be made that community associations, large and small, with elected boards of directors, fall in the same category. Indeed, the elected board, various committees, and appointed management are often viewed as if they were a local government body. I therefore submit that an application of ethical principles applies equally to both local government and community associations. And both are subject to the public determination of legal or ethical behavior. This concept is confirmed within our industry by the existence of the CMCA Code of Ethics (www.nbccam.org/program/standards.cfm) that holds us each accountable to a higher professional standard.
Demanding Ethical Accountability
Over the intervening centuries, politicians at all levels have, to some degree, discouraged a closer look at individual character in order to minimize the importance of personal and public behavior. Refusal to be held accountable is, at best, self-serving. Fortunately, throughout the last quarter of the twentieth century, public calls for more transparency in government have led the way for the development of ethical standards to which those who deign to lead us must subject themselves. The resultant “sunshine laws” have shed new light on an old problem.
Throughout western democracies, enforcement of ethical standards has relied on public disclosure and an informed electorate. Informing the electorate is not as easy as stated, however, since most associations do well to turn out 20-40 percent of their membership for a vote. It is, at best, an imperfect arrangement, fraught with legal loopholes and myriad variations of acceptable behavior. Most attempts to make ethics laws more definitive are resisted. There are even community associations where the board has refused to sign a Code of Conduct document.
The variable interpretations of the terms ethical, moral, and legal, indeed the often self-serving application of the overall concept, leave room for everyone to claim the moral high ground and to proclaim total integrity in actions enacted solely “for the betterment of the community.” It is, at best, a rationalization of the underlying principles.
The most effective codes are directed at prevention, providing general guidelines for ethical behavior and, as much as possible, eliminating opportunities for unethical practices. However, it should be noted that the most successful application of these values can only be accomplished when the persons involved practice their own ethical standards during their public service.
You could therefore postulate that the Judeo-Christian concept of control over self is the strongest component of ethical behavior. It is a concept the human race has yet to master, hence the need for established criteria by which the public may be confident of open government with a reasonable assurance of high integrity in their elected officials.
Perhaps this has been more than we need to know about the relationship between democracy and ethics, but I would submit that more than one of us has seen these exact situations in some of the communities we have managed. Next time, let’s hold management’s feet to the fire.
Gordon Ryan has served as City Manager in Alaska and Washington, in municipal executive staff positions in California and Utah, and as Ombudsman (Investigations Commissioner) for the City Council in Christchurch, New Zealand, where he wrote the Code of Conduct for the Council. He has held three appointments as a large-scale General Manager. He is also a former Marine who served in Vietnam and a published novelist, with seven books on the shelves.
If you have a good question about ethical issues, he might have the answer. Send questions c/o Upward Directions Editor Terry White, who will maintain your confidentiality.
[ return
to top ] |