Assignment task:
Responding to a classmate's thread requires both the addition of new ideas and analysis. A particular point made by the classmate must be addressed and built upon by your analysis in order to move the conversation forward. Thus, the reply is a rigorous assignment that requires you to build upon the thread to develop deeper and more thorough discussion of the ideas introduced. As such, replies that merely affirm, restate, or unprofessionally quarrel with the previous thread(s) and fail to make a valuable, substantive contribution to the discussion will receive appropriate point deductions. 250 WORDS Each reply
REPLY #1:
If you look at the Book of Esther, this is when the King Xerxes wanted his queen to display her beauty during a public celebration that was going on and Queen Vashti refused, and disobeyed, to displayed in public. The king was anger and disappointed and consulted his wise men, and they told the king that Vashti's behavior was a bad example to the women throughout the realm.
Vashti was in the people of the land disobedient to the King. for when he had summoned for her to come unto him she should have rendered herself to him as he had wished for during those times that was what a wife, a woman suppose to do toward her husband. The people of the land which was the wise men of the king's court didn't like that behavior in the kings court.
Viewing the progression of the Eras of Evolution, which has truly changed in the world today. In the Progressive Era there were scholars and practitioners that had main concerns on how to improve organizational performance and wanted to the government more like we would run a business and some of the strategies that was widely adopted was scientific management principles based.
By the 1930's to the 1950's public administration was institutionalized by Administrative Reorganization Act of 1939, this act was to centralizing the executive powers in the hand of the Presidency. to seek the control of the federal administration.
Implications of theory was one of the serious implications of the Great Depressions and of WWII and the practice of public administration. The Great Depression was impossible to rationalize governments processes which was applying business principles. The government could not be ran like business, with different decision - making having to be made by an administrative judgement which was something that scholars started those problems of morality which was hard to the individual public, which was administrators, emphasizing the rudimentary awareness of those administrators of their public responsibilities. ( Appleby, Citation 1959/2007); Bailey, Citation 1964).
During the Civil Rights Era which was the 1960's to the early 1970's the change of the society was drastically for America and complicated. There was expanded of the federal government accordingly in expenditures and size. The liberals felt necessary, that this was a much needed for the expansion that would be able to meet the demands of the changes in society. But to the conservatives regard the growth was not necessary. There was great aftermath of the Civil Rights Movement brought democratic principles to the which contradict, conflict was brought to the for front of the scene there was the rationalization of public administration. In the 1960's and 1970's bureaucracy was being denounce, and de-bureaucratization was being proposed by advocated of New Public Administration (NPA) the was not to may a was to rationalize government, which means to make the government "More Equitable and more responsive." to the increasing and diverse demands of society.
(Cooper, Citation 2004; G. Frederickson, Citation 1971/2007; H. G. Frederickson, Citation 1990, Citation 1993; Citation 1997; Menzel, Citation 2003)
REPLY #2
Discussion Thread: Ethics in Public Administration - Case Study
Mokhtari's firm was hired to provide construction management for a major downtown project, a contract awarded without a Request for Proposals. The business owner's name is Parviz Mokhtari, a public work director and city engineer. His strong selling points were his vast experience, and willingness to provide the service for a percentage of the total construction cost. Only one of the council member, Matt Grocott voted no, citing what he saw as a significant conflict of interest. he also objected to the lack of an Request for Proposal. Although the city attorney advised there was no problem with the process or the arrangement, the following year the city issued an Request for Proposal for another major project. One of the unsuccessful bidders, a local businessman, complained privately to Grocott, who was increasingly concerned about both the appearance of a conflict of interest, as well as the apparent lack of concern about it on the part of the staff and his council colleagues. Word of controversy prompted a front-page newspaper story, which questioned the ethics of the arrangement.
Most elected public officials and top appointed managers in governments follow an ethical approach to their government service. They seek to serve the public interest and do so in ways that are fair, consistent with government integrity, protect individual rights and advance the common good of society. Conflicts of interests are circumstances in which public officials have a conflict between their private or financial interests and their duty to serve the public interest. Both elected and appointed officials have a fiduciary responsibility to see that budgets in the most effective and efficient fashion. Neither budgets nor jobs should be ever used to benefit a public official's private interest. Another common conflict of interest is a situation in which a public official will benefit financially from a transaction with the government. Public officials generally have a disqualifying conflict of interest if a government decision will have a financial impact on their personal, family or business financial interest.
In this case, Parviz Mokhtari, a public official, intentionally tried to get the government grant without Request for Proposal, and tried to benefit his own company - Mokhtari's firm, which is against conflict of interest. If public officials participate in government decisions that impact or appear to impact their financial interests, they have an ethical obligation to abstrain, refuse or delegate such decisions. In this case, Parviz Mokhtari violated policies on disqualifying financial interests in getting government grants for his own firm. This is unethical because it is unfair, deceptive or s misuse of public authority.
If I were Parviz Mokhtari, I would give this government grant up, or if I wanted to participate in the bidding process, I would submit request for Proposal. I would follow the rules of getting the government grant, instead of using the title of government official and tried to advance the benefit of the government project.