Harold Johnson: Public servants and misdirected loyalty - TribLIVE

kajasada.blogspot.com

About a minute ago

When is it acceptable for people engaged in “public trust” to place loyalty to each other over loyalty to those they serve? The correct answer is never, because it breeds corruption and undermines trust.

The fact is clear: No matter the endeavor of public trust ventured, all realize that, because we are human, there will be people placed in public trust that will fail miserably and disgrace themselves, their position and the organization they represent. The general populous accepts this; but they also expect an acceptable, reasonable and immediate response to such failure. The people served should be the determining body in evaluating appropriate action against those found in violation. Additionally, if administrators do less then expected, it is a real morale buster within that irresponsible agency.

In order to address sound and acceptable “true loyalty,” through right actions, not meaningless words, people in public trust must have a public accepted (judged by the people) understanding of justice, truthfulness and true loyalty. This is accomplished by evaluating all actions of those placed in public trust, with ethical and moral emphasis both in their public and private affairs.

Genuine ethical accountability cannot thrive in an agency using mere words. A genuine ethics officer charged with successfully implementing ethical understanding must develop a living, breathing process that requires constant evaluation to determine what works and doesn’t work.

After an honest audit and evaluation, the process will require tweaking and making ethical adjustments within the process in order to achieve maximum results and progress in the direction of those most in need. That genuine response to addressing internal corruption will send a clear message outside the agency, to the people they serve, that the agency is not only stating their ethical position about improving the image of the agency but they are acting accordingly. Additionally, within the agency, employees will experience a genuine effort to curb corruption; and, realize a zero tolerance for violators.

In order to demonstrate true loyalty, public servants are required to have a sound moral compass, be virtuous and deminstrate true loyalty. Misconduct flourishes when people placed in public trust place loyalty to self and organization, over those they are sworn, promised, or have taken an oath to serve.

This is most apparent when those placed in public trust choose poorly by adhering to an agency, and self-defined, “code of silence.” Only when a zero tolerance approach to being untruthful is embraced by the people and agency administrators, will the code of silence be reduced.

Untruthfulness and lack of courage to address the wrong should be viewed as incompatible with the role of people in public trust. Untruthfulness is cowardly and should be dealt with harshly. By passing out light discipline for sustained cases of untruthfulness and unethical behavior, executives are condoning lying which undermines true loyalty, supports the code of silence, and breads cancerous corruption.

Misdirected loyalty serves to undermine the code of conduct and oath of office. When a person in “public trust” is untruthful, acts timidly in response, is not courageous; he/she betrays public trust; and, that person is truly corrupt.

True loyalty is important in shaping our self-image. When people are truly loyal, they feel a strong sense of healthy righteousness. One example: parents coaching their children’s sports team, in spite of a hectic schedule and sometimes jeers from the stands of fans. Improving their self-image through sacrifice of self in the interest of true loyalty (family); not misdirected loyalty in the interest of self or organization.

As is evident, a person with conscience recognizes that the opposite effect becomes apparent when they do something contrary to true loyalty. They feel acute pain. They think less of themselves because they acted in contrast with true loyalty; the dad who quits coaching because he is too busy with self-interest comes to mind.

People in public trust, having been loyal to others in the same profession, all throughout a career, can suddenly find themselves in a position where testimony can result in another being disciplined, fired or sent to prison. An internal conflict takes place. Should that person respond honestly, virtuously, or should that person disrespect self and service for personal interest?

The role true loyalty plays, the true meaning; in both organizational and individual behavior is paramount. For the organization, it allows the mission to be accomplished in a predictable and public-supportive manner; and, in the best interest of service. The individual should feel an improved sense of self-worth, not regret or be punished for their bravery.

When a person in public trust lies to protect another, they are placing loyalty to one another superior to loyalty to the people they serve. Although courage is most often thought of in the physical sense, it is equally important in making courageous and virtuous decisions concerning true loyalty.

Find courage to step up and step in and stop the madness. Or get out of public service because you are failing miserably.

Greensburg resident Harold Johnson is a retired special agent in the Criminal Law Division of the Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General.

Categories: Featured Commentary | Opinion