Addis Ababa University

School of Graduate Studies

College of Business and Economics
Department of Public Administration and Development
Management

Exploring the implementation of ethical code of conduct in Addis

Ababa University
(A case of FB College)

By: Theodros Amanuel

A Research Paper Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies,
Addis Ababa University, Faculty of Business and Economics,
Department of Public Administration and Development
Management in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for BA
Degree in Public Administration and Development Management

Advisor: Abayneh Degaga ()

January 2014
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First and at most, my special thanks goes to the almighty God who did everything for me to
complete this piece of work in success.
Secondly, I wish to extend my deepest gratitude to my advisor Ato Abayneh Degaga for his price
less advisory shore up and guidance in accomplishing the entire charge of this paper.
Thirdly, my deep heartfelt thank goes to all who helped me in accomplishing this paper.

ABSTRACT

2
Table of Contents
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT..................................................................................................................................2
ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................................................3
LIST OF TABLES.............................................................................................................................................5
ACRONYMS..................................................................................................................................................6
3
CHAPTER ONE..............................................................................................................................................7
INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................................7
1.1 Background to the Study....................................................................................................................7
1.2. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM.........................................................................................................8
1.3. Objectives of the study.....................................................................................................................9
1.3.1. General Objectives.....................................................................................................................9
1.3.2 Specific Objectives......................................................................................................................9
1.4. Significance of the study...................................................................................................................9
1.5. Delimitation of the Study..................................................................................................................9
1.6. Limitations of the Study..................................................................................................................10
1.7. Chapter organization.......................................................................................................................10
CHAPTER TWO...........................................................................................................................................11
LITERATURE REVIEW..................................................................................................................................11
2.1. INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................................11
2.2. Meaning and definition of terms....................................................................................................11
CHAPTER THREE.........................................................................................................................................22
RESEARCH METHODS.................................................................................................................................22
3.1. Study Area.......................................................................................................................................22
3.2. Research Design..............................................................................................................................23
3.3. Sampling Procedure........................................................................................................................23
3.4. Sample size determination..............................................................................................................23
3.5. Methods of Data Collection............................................................................................................24
3.6. Method of data collection...............................................................................................................24
3.7. Ethical Considerations.....................................................................................................................24
CHAPTER FOUR..........................................................................................................................................25
DATA PRESENTATION ANALYSIS AND PRESENTATION...............................................................................25
4.1 SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF RESPONDENTS.........................................................25
4.2 KNOWLEDGE AND ATTITUDES OF RESPONDENTS............................................................................26
CHAPTER FIVE............................................................................................................................................31
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................................................31
Conclusions............................................................................................................................................31
Recommendations.................................................................................................................................32
REFERENCES...............................................................................................................................................33
APPENDICES...............................................................................................................................................36
Appendix 1 Time Schedule.....................................................................................................................36
Appendix 2 Financial Budget..................................................................................................................36
Appendix 3: Questionnaire for respondents..........................................................................................37

4
LIST OF TABLES
Table 4:1:1 Age of Respondents
Table 4.1.2. Sex of Respondents
Table 4.2.1 below presents the knowledge base of respondents on the Guiding Principles
underlying the Code of Conduct
Table 4.2.2 Perceptions of Respondents on the Implementation of the principles of the Code of
Ethics.
Table 4.2.3 Respondents’ Satisfaction with Staff Compliance to the code of Ethics
Table 4.2.4. Respondents’ View on the Extent to which they are providing the Best Ethical
conduct their Organizations as Ethical Role Models.
Table 4.3.1. Respondents’ Prioritized Key Sources of Ethical Challenges/Dilemmas
Table 4.3.3 Respondent’ Performance in Handling Ethical Issues
Table 4.3.3 Respondent’ Performance in Handling Ethical Issues

ACRONYMS
AAU = Addis Ababa University
FB = Faculty of Business
UNODC = United Nations: Office of Drugs and Crime
5
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the Study
Rossouw et al (2006:9) explains that people are influenced by their environments. If unethical
behavior is condoned, even individuals with good ethical values can become corrupt.
When ethical behavior is rewarded, corrupt or unethical people can change for the better. It is,
therefore, imperative that an organization has a mechanism in place to manage behavior. The

6
mechanism used by most organizations in managing behavior, which has become compulsory in
some countries, is the code of conduct. Schwartz (2004:323–324) comments that, in terms of the
Sarbanes Oxley Act (2002), public companies in the United States, are expected to report
whether it has a code for certain senior and top managers and if not, to provide reasons why
this is the case. Similarly, the New York Stock Exchange and the Nasdaq Stock Market
require such disclosure.
There is a perception that having an ethical code of conduct legitimizes an organization
(Messikomer & Cirka, 2010:57). Companies or institutes that do not have a code of conduct are
pressured by their stakeholders or even compelled by law, to have one even if it costs time and
money (Kaptein & Schwartz, 2008:111).
Ethics and values are fundamentals in establishing integrity of an organization (Rossouw et
al., 2006:3–5). The public service has common values which contribute to the formulation of
codes (Magahy & Pyman, 2010:61). Standards of conduct emanate from values. Codes can
therefore be aspirational or directional or both. This however, can result in confusion between
codes of ethics and codes of conduct. Often these terms are used interchangeably (Wood &
Rimmer, 2003:183; Schwartz, 2004:324; Skubik & Stening, 2008:516). Kaptein and Schwartz
(2008:118–120) describe many factors that contribute to the overall effectiveness in the
creation, development and implementation process of codes. The desired effect (to assist in the
fight against corruption) will be lost if certain elements in the development and implementation
process of such codes are lacking and will render codes “toothless tigers” (Petersen & Krings,
2009:501).
It is also important to understand the purpose and orientation of a code. The focus may be to
manage relations with stakeholders or employees (Malan & Smit, 2001:175; Brooks, 2007:157).
Codes may cover a wide range of circumstances for which standards of conduct may be
prescribed. These include conflicts of interest, gifts, procurement, political activity, post-
employment activities, confidential information and disclosure of assets. It also provides
guidance on implementation and enforcement mechanisms such as communication, training of
officials, penalties, hotlines and protection of whistle blowers (UNODC, Compendium of
legal instruments, 2005:114; UNODC, Technical Guide, 2009:20–26).
Codes have many advantages. They improve the organization’s brand image and reputation,
whilst illustrating to shareholders the organization’s commitment to having and/or promoting
ethical behavior (Stevens, 2008:601). In some countries like the USA, it is used as a
mitigating factor against severe penalties for noncompliance with laws (Garcia-Sanchez et
al., 2011:190).
This study therefore explores the implementation of ethical codes of conduct in AAU FB
College.
1.2. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
The study focuses on the process of implementing a code instead of the outcomes of this process.
A consequence of this is that it does not specify what the contents of a code of conduct should be.
After an organization has developed a code, the method can be used to assess the degree to which
a code of conduct is embedded in the organization.
Universities are academic institutions whose functions include; the discovery, propagation and
perpetuation of ideas, knowledge and dissemination of truth. Truth however, can be elusive and
subjective depending on other intervening factors like culture, gender and ethical commitments

7
of the person disseminating it. This is why Universities have organizational vision statements
based on and consistent with the institution’s core values.
Ethics is a branch philosophy because it is concerned with the critical examination of all
that may be involved in moral behavior and moral experience. Some of its central questions
include: Does the end justify the means? Is it the intention that matters most, or the consequences
of the action? How do we know what is good or bad, right or wrong? We cannot therefore
adequately underscore the need for workplace code of ethics at the institutions of higher learning
like the universities. (Ongong’a, 2013)
It is such workplace ethics which define how university staff have to behave in the course of
performing their day-to-day duties and in relating to students and other people who have interest
in the running of a university as public institution. There can hardly be mutual understanding and
adequate cooperation without individual and collective application of the codes of workplace
ethics. It is, in fact, difficult to accuse the management of an institution against misconduct or
manipulation of resources where there are no clear workplace ethics in place to underpin
such real or managerial misconduct. The consequences of unethical behavior and the need for
social workplace ethics for a university as pointed out above are therefore too essential to be
ignored. This is especially so, since the introduction of self-supporting programs in public
universities to enhance their financial base. The management now realizes and acknowledges the
significance of ethical issues and decisions in the daily operations of their institutions. They now
know how unethical behavior can create legal risks for their entrepreneurial enterprises
leading to questionable financial problems which may eventually lead to imprisonment.
(Ongong’a, 2013)
It is of essence therefore that universities be ethically managed to attract loyalty, trust and
commitment for the benefit of the institutions. This will require honest and ethical conduct of
handling actual or apparent conflicts of interest between personal and professional relationships
(Desjardins, 2006:4).
A university community comprises the management, lecturers; students stake holders and tax
payers who are in one way or another affected by decisions made within the institution. This is
why everyone has good reason for being concerned with ethical meaning of those decisions. In
post-modern turn in sociological and philosophical thinking, the questioning of universal
values, especially those based on the roles of professional practitioners in relation to the
service users, is now a common concern in all business oriented institutions. Individual
professionals irrespective of their institutions and positions are today influenced by ethical
discourses of the organizations where they work and the policy framework within which
they practice (cf Banks Sarah 2008:14). Code of ethics is in fact continuing to broaden its scope
beyond traditional professional ethics which tended to focus on codes and difficult cases.
Professional work ethics includes values, relationships of care and the critical moral competence
for everyday and transform practice.
Ethics are the guidelines or rules of conduct by which we aim to live on. Organizations like
individuals have ethical standards and frequently ethical codes (Peter and Bailey 2005). The
ethical standards of an organization are judged by its actions and the actions of its employees, not
by pious statements of intent put out in its name.
This paper sets out to make inquiry into the implementation of code of conduct in AAU
FB College. The study is organized around the following two related questions:

8
What are the factors impeding the effective implementation of code of conduct in the
study area; and,
What needs to be done to enhance the practice of ethical behavior among the university?
What is the rationale for and key elements of the code of ethics in the study area?
What is the relevance of the Code of Conduct to the knowledge, attitudes and
perceptions of the implementers?
1.3. Objectives of the study
1.3.1. General Objectives
The general objective of the study is to provide empirical basis for understanding how the code
of ethics has been implemented in AAU College of FB, how far the goals have been achieved
and the challenges.
1.3.2 Specific Objectives
 To examine the rationale for and key elements of the code of ethics in the study
area.
 To assess the relevance of the Code of Conduct to the knowledge, attitudes and
perceptions of the implementers;
 To examine the adequacy of the strategy for the successful implementation of the Code of
conduct
 To find out the challenges and make policy recommendations.
1.4. Significance of the study
The study is significant in that it draws attention to key responsibilities of top leadership of the
university management.
It has revealed how certain underlying factors contribute to gaps in policy implementation
and that in a work environment.
The study has provided some in-depth understanding of why the Code of Conduct has not
successfully transformed the conduct and behavior of most students and other stakeholders
in the area.
Finally this work has made some recommendations for improving implementation and using the
Code of Conduct as the viable standard for conducting the teaching and learning process,
enhancing professionalism and achievement of the goals of the university.
1.5. Delimitation of the Study
The study aimed to explore the implementation of ethical codes of conduct in AAU College of
FB. Hence it is delimited to the implementation of codes of conduct. It also geographically
delimited to AAU College of FB.
1.6. Limitations of the Study
It is evident that research work is not free from mitigating or limiting factors. In the same token,
there were various limitation factors witnessed in this study. Firstly, as the researcher is not a
full time sponsor, he was obliged to follow up his class assignments as desired, which imposed
additional duties and consumed the researcher’s time.

9
Secondly, some of the samples of the study were so busy that they were not available unable to
fill the questionnaires by giving adequate time as planned.
1.7. Chapter organization
The study has been presented in five (5) chapters.
Chapter One: the general introduction presents the problem, the objectives of the study, and the
key concepts and concludes with the limitation of the study. Chapter Two: is the outline of
relevant literature which was reviewed in order to provide insight for the study, Chapter Three
outlines the research method involving the field work and outlining the analytical tools for the
research work and some field problems and how they were handled. The field data has been
presented, analyzed and the discussion of findings in Chapter Four. Finally, concluding the report
is Chapter Five, which carries the summary and conclusions drawn, policy
recommendations and future research.

CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. INTRODUCTION
In the review of literature, a number of works on business ethics and organizational culture in
both public administration and private businesses are discussed with the view to providing

10
lessons for the present research. According to available empirical studies modern business
organizations are showing growing interest in Codes of Conduct as the appropriate
mechanisms for modernizing their organization.
As various authors have written, it is an enduring experience or belief that, of all the spheres of
human life, perhaps the hardest in which to play one’s role with true moral dignity is the sphere
of public action (Parrish 2007:1). There are a variety of reasons why human beings find it
difficult to be moral – one may not know what action is morally best and, even when one does
know, one may lack the power or the will to do what one ought. But there is also another, more
intriguing, set of circumstances – those where there seems to be no right thing to do, where
anything one might do seems to be wrong in some important respect. The last set of
circumstances constitutes what philosophers refer to as “moral dilemmas”, that is: ethical
conflicts in which, in order to do the right thing, one has to do the wrong thing; in which, in order
to be or do good, one must also be or do evil (Parrish 2007:1–2).
2.2. Meaning and definition of terms
2.2.1. Code of conduct
A written document defining ethical standards of an organization. These standards include rules
of how to interact with colleagues and clients, leadership principles, rules on compliance
with the law and workplace security (Petersen & Krings, 2009:501–2). They are usually
directional as they are rule-based but they may also be a combination of aspirational and
directional approaches (Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD),
Unclassified, 2009:34).
2.2.2. Code of ethics
A formal statement of an organization’s values and standards of behavior on certain
ethical and social issues. A code of ethics is usually aspirational in that it describes core ethical
values that should guide employees in their behavior and ethical decision-making. These are
value based and shorter than directional codes which are rule-based codes of ethics which are
usually detailed and lengthy and prescribe how employees should behave in certain specific
situations (Rossouw, Prozesky, Burger, du Plessis & van Zyl, 2006:232–233).
For the purpose of this research, if a code of ethics includes rules governing employees’
behavior, it is used interchangeably with the term “code of conduct”.
2.2.3. Ethics
Refers to the character and manners of a person in his/her interaction with others
(Rossouw et al., 2006:3). Gildenhuys (2004:13) defines ethics as “principles or standards of
human conduct” which is sometimes referred to as morals and it essentially deals with what is
right and wrong, good and bad and acceptable and unacceptable. Hence ethical behavior is
behavior which is not only good for one-self but also good for others (Rossouw et al.,
2006:4).

2.2.4. Values and norms

Values are beliefs of what is right or wrong (Brooks, 2007:137). There is a widely recognized and
rapidly growing body of empirical research on organizational core values for public sector
11
organizations and employees (see, for example, Schmidt & Posner 1986; Kernaghan 1994, 2003;
Goss 2003; Vrangbak 2006; Beck Jorgensen 2006; Beck Jorgensen & Bozeman 2007).
Values are general standards by which people live, views about what is desirable. Values refer to
ethical standards, and entail deep emotional dedication to certain cognitive views of the value of
objects normally relating to human activity (Hilliard & Ferreira 2001:93). Individuals’ views of
public managers within local government have an important influence on the formulation of
organizational goals. Values and ethics play a role in determining organizational goals and what
the organization is willing to devote to social responsibility and the development of employees.
Managerial values influence and set the culture of the organization (Smit & Cronje 2001:103).
Values are enduring beliefs that influence the choices people make from among available means
and ends. Clearly, not all values are ethical values, that is, not all values relate to questions of
right and wrong, good or evil. It is helpful, therefore, to distinguish ethical values from other
types of values. Canada (1996) has classified public service values in various ways. This chapter
utilizes a three-fold classification in which ethical values (for example integrity and fairness)
constitute a separate category; the other two categories are democratic values (for example
impartiality and rule of law), and professional values (for example effectiveness and service).
This classification provides a basis for taking account of the enduring importance of democratic
and ethical values in public administration and of the emergence of new professional values.
Accountability, ethical and democratic values and excellence as both ethical and professional
value, fall into more than one category of ethical values. A broad classification of public service
values that cuts across all other classifications is a division into traditional or ‘old’ values and
‘new’ or ‘emerging’ values. For example, values such as integrity, efficiency, effectiveness,
neutrality, responsiveness and accountability have in many countries been traditionally
associated with the notion of public service (Gilbert, 1959; Kernaghan, 1978; Kernaghan
2003:712).
2.2.5. Morality

Morality in its various forms is a dominant influence on the conduct and evaluation of day-to-day
life. The pervasiveness of the moral domain can be detected in every aspect of life. Appeals to
rights and responsibilities are found in the discourse occurring in every sphere of social life
where moral commitments shape the goals and aspirations that give direction to individuals’
lives, and moral judgements are constituent elements in the determination of appropriate courses
of action (Killen & Hart 1995:1). The word morality is derived from the Latin word mores and
like the Greek work ethos refers to customary behavior (De Beer 1998:292). Morality has to do
with personal conduct (Mbatha 2005:38). Morality can therefore refer to human behavior and to
what happens in practice. Morals are described as right or wrong, good or bad human behavior
and therefore have to do with the personal conduct of the individual.
Morals refer to habits and behavior, the correctness or wrongness of actions (Hilliard & Ferreira
2001:93 in Holtzhausen 2007:95).
2.2.6. Ethical conduct

Good governance rests on ethical considerations (Robson 1999:157). Thus, the morality and
ethics of the government rest on the morality and ethics of universities who do not put self-

12
interest first, and who are true to their work and fulfil their duties in accordance with all the
necessary resources, as the public has the right to expect.
2.2.7. Ethical dilemma

Ethical decision-making refers to complex and difficult ethical dilemma situations where people
usually perceive it to be very difficult to judge what ethical behavior is. The second sub-variable,
‘unethical behavior’, refers to behavior that most people would reasonably judge to be unethical.
Obviously, ‘unethical behavior’ is a very ambiguous term that leaves much scope for bias
(Maesschalck 2004:474).
2.2.8. Accountability

All governments must provide inter alia effective, transparent, accountable and coherent
government.
The notion of accountability has ascribed many and varied forms of interpretations and meaning,
most with specific context, to suit the area under consideration (Romzek & Dubnick, 1987;
Dwivedi & Jabbra, 1988; Kearns, 1996; Caiden, 1988). Accountability is an important yet
elusive concept whose meaning and characteristics differ, depending upon the context, a notion
that Kearns (1996) describes as a moving target, a notion that has become a catch-all term
referring to everything from cost control to professional ethics.
According to Dwivedi and Jabbra (1988), accountability has traditionally been taken to mean
answerability for one’s action or behavior, which came to mean that the actions of university
stakeholders had to be justified, their reasons explained and their deeds and misdeeds accounted
for before the court of public opinion.
Caiden (1988) further contends that accountability requires that public officials should take
responsibility for all that is done in the public’s name and be accountable to external bodies and,
more so, be held morally and legally liable. The World Bank Institute (no date: on-line)
maintains that accountability is one of those terms that has emerged as a universal attribute of
good governance. As commonly understood, the word carries a simple meaning: those with
power must answer to those they serve – the people (Diale, Maserumule & Mello 2007:638). So
defined, accountability is a fundamental concept in ethics, rule of law and democracy. This view
is further expressed by Behn (2001:6-10) that the accountability environment is a castellation of
forces – legal, political, socio-cultural and economic, is complex and comprises accountability
for finances, fairness, use or abuse of power, and performance.
Accountability cannot exist if responsibility is not included in the discussion. Responsibility,
according to Vyas-Doorgapersad and Ababio (2006:391), means the manner in which an
individual performs his or her task, the value a person attributes to the task and the manner in
which this person attaches value to other people with whom he/she comes into contact in order to
perform a task. It is therefore conspicuous in some officials that this aspect of adding value
(respect) is lacking in their everyday functioning and the execution of their tasks.

2.3. Values and Workplace Ethics

13
Business oriented institutions qua institutions can hardly survive without placing great emphasis
on some particular core values which distinguish them from their competitors. Values are basic
and fundamental beliefs in human society. They guide management and workers in making
personal or financial decisions and in judging what is right and acceptable. For example, one may
choose to buy food instead of expensive clothes. That is, he or she chooses to spend his or her
money on food rather than on clothes because they value food more than being smartly dressed.
Values are moral, ethical and professional attributes of character which are concerned with how a
person behaves in any given situation. They motivate a sense of moral duty or virtue.
In an institutional level, ethical values serve the ends of human well-being. Hence, acts and
choices that aim to promote human well-being are acts and choices based on ethical values
(Desjardins 2006:6). But as indicated above, the well being promoted by ethical values is not
only a personal and selfish well- being but, it puts into consideration others’ well-being. Such
values include: integrity, honesty, professionalism, caring, truthfulness and justice to mention but
a few. These values are important for every lecturer if they have to be ethically counted for
teaching. It is a question of individual character. And, character is not something we simply turn
on and off whenever we want to by choice. No. It is much of who we are, our own personal
identity that we cannot act outside of its perimeters. This is because everyone is formed by years
of role modeling and training. It should not be something we deliberately choose to have and
then methodically practice, rather our character formation begins early in life under the tutelage
of our parents, peers and teachers (vide David B. Ingram and Jennifer Parks, 2002). Lecturers are
therefore more than mere teachers, they can help to inculcate good character in their students;
such as integrity which will help them act to ethical principles and place those principles above
expedience of self –interest even when such action imposes bad reputation (Maisarah Mohamed
Saat et. al. 2004).
2.3.1. Honesty
Honesty is an important value especially for University Lecturers who as academic leaders are
believed to be role models to both students and the wider community. As such, they are expected
to adhere to the highest standard of honesty, not only in their professional practice, but also in
scholarship. For example, a supervisor of a postgraduate student who notices through research of
unearthed information hitherto not common knowledge to academic world and instead of
encouraging such a young academician to develop the area, the lecturer decides to take the given
information for their own publication or coerces the student that they both be co-authors of the
same publication. This is an unethical academic procedure to be avoided.
2.3.2. Trustworthiness
Trustworthiness, on the other hand inspires confidence for those who rely on the good intentions
of others to perform services competently and in their best interest. This is underscored by the
Public Officer Ethics Act of the Laws of Kenya 2003, Cap. 183part III, 8, 9 (I) which says: A
public officer shall, to the best of his/her ability carry out his/her duties and ensures that the
services that s/he provides are catered for efficiently and honestly. And part 9(I) adds: A public
officer shall carry out his/her duties in a way that maintains public confidence in the integrity of
his office; treat the public and his/her fellow public officers with respect...” Academicians are
therefore expected to act according to the moral point of view in order to fulfill their expected
responsibilities to society. They cannot afford to be unreliable, selfish and inward looking!
Some of our respondents complained and pointed out that more often; some University lecturers
do not seem to adhere to this value of trustworthiness. They (lecturers) may not be in their offices

14
even after promising the students to be there. Some even misplace students’ marks from
assignments and after promising that they would be obtained, the complainants rarely obtain
positive results. It must be pointed out that a lecturer associated with such unfulfilled promises
does not seem to exhibit a trait of loyalty. Because, his action goes contrary to utilitarian theory
which as we have pointed out encourages people to create as much happiness as possible. A
student whose marks are missing cannot be happy with the said lecturer.
2.3.3. Loyalty
Loyalty as a moral responsibility expected of lecturers is necessary in social workplace ethics
because it promotes and protects the interest of others, vis a vis students. This is because even
though every lecturer is expected to be loyal to the institutions in which they are engaged
ultimately, they should owe their allegiance to students. Trustworthiness and loyalty indeed
underscore the fulfillment of the Kenyan Code of Conduct and Ethics for Public Universities
2003, Cap 193, Part II, 6:1-2 which states: “An officer who is a member of the academic staff of
a University shall organize his/ her instruction, assessment and examination in a manner that
complies with all institutional requirements and expectation. And, an officer who is a member of
the academic staff of a university shall ensure that the examinations are delivered to the students
as scheduled and that the result thereof is processed without undue delay”. It is our belief that not
all public university lecturers are familiar with this code of conduct.

2.3.4. Code of conduct for members of staff

It is not very clear as we have hinted above whether all the University lecturers are aware of this
Code of Conduct and Ethics for Public Universities. This is because; it is rarely referred to by
lecturers. And, even when recruitment for the staff is being conducted, the panel in question
hardly makes reference to this code’s requirements. Such background therefore, makes it
necessary that this paper discusses the issue of social workplace ethics at the institutions of
higher learning. Once more, professional or social workplace ethics is primarily concerned with
the goals of educators to provide knowledge, develop skills and nurture many aspects of
students’ personality in order to facilitate their development, help them fulfill their potential, and
assist them in becoming both involved citizens and contributors to society. And as humans,
through such exercises expand and form their personality (vide Maisarah Mohamed Saat, et. al.
2004).
To contextualize our discussion and underscore such responsibility of educators or lecturers, we
need to ask and attempt to answer the following questions: What qualifications and habits are
necessary for University lecturers? What motivates or causes unethical behavior among
lecturers? What attributes and ethical responses are essential for a University lecturer?
2.3.5. Qualifications and Habits Necessary for a Lecturer
In Kenya, the term teacher is generally used to refer to all those who impart knowledge to
learners, right from the nursery schools to the Universities. The term lecturer on the other hand,
is specifically used in reference to all educators at the Kenya’s Universities, apart from those who
impart knowledge in tertiary institutions. Lecturers at the Universities are however, knowledge
workers who have fulfilled two basic requirements. First, one must have excelled in his or her
formal education to enable them to be recruited at the institutions of higher learning. And, the
process of this recruitment may take two forms: some can be hired to the Universities soon after
acquiring their academic Doctorate (PhD), while others may be recruited as Tutorial Fellows

15
after completing the second degree (Masters). A Tutorial Fellowship position is a training level
entry point which enables an individual to teach some unit(s) in the respective Department under
the supervision of a full lecturer or professor who has obtained his/her academic degree (PhD),
even as the said Tutorial Fellow is working on his/her PhD.
The second level of requirement for lecturers as knowledge workers is the readiness to believe in
continuing education throughout their working lives and to keep their knowledge up to date
(Drucker, 2002). Hence, lecturers must constantly read, study, upgrade and renew their notes to
prevent the use of what is commonly known as yellow notes! However, not all potential
academic staff are hired because of their pedagogical qualifications. Some may be recruited
because of their expertise in a needed area of research or merely on the basis of course content
knowledge. The majority are expected to learn on the job. At the moment of recruitment,
emphasis is laid on teaching, student consultation, research, supervision of postgraduate students,
attendance of conferences and publications. Rarely does the management of Universities
seriously remind potential academic staff about the need for job improvement especially the
significance of social workplace ethics and virtues associated with good relationships between
students and educators at the Universities.
In fact, most lecturers in Kenyan Universities have not been adequately prepared for the upsurge
of contemporary massification of university education alongside its challenges of various digital
information systems and the multiplicity of program intended to accommodate continuing
education students. It is amidst such plurality of program and challenges that emphasize the
significance of social workplace ethics. The need for particular qualifications and habits for
lecturers rests on the assumption that their primary concern as pointed out above is to encourage
students to pursue education and to uphold ethical standards of their disciplines.
Lecturers are professionals with social standing. Their responsibility can be traced back in history
to the Hippocratic Oath of the Greek physician: “Primum non nocere-above all not knowing to
do harm” (Drucker, 2001:65). This implies that University lecturers as professionals should not
deliberately intend to or do harm to their students. The students too, as clients of their lecturers
must trust their teachers and not knowingly harm them. This mutual understanding is important
because ethical acts and choices are expected to be acceptable and reasonable from all relevant
points of view (cf Desjardins 2006:6). Without such reciprocal understanding, students may not
trust their lecturers at all. It is further necessary that a lecturer has autonomy so as not to be
controlled, supervised or directed by students. Lack of autonomy could create a disconnect
between students and their teachers in that there would be no recognition or appreciation of
authority and decisions made by the lecturers.
The recognition and reciprocal understanding between students and lecturers however, does not
minimize the importance of professional or social workplace ethics as a necessary quality for
lecturers. Both lecturers and students should know their limits and desist from unethical
disruptive and intimidating behaviors which eventually may interfere with academic work or
performance. This is because; a University is a public institution which houses not only students
and lecturers, but also the support and administrative staff. A peaceful co-existence and
achievement of University’s objectives would require that both students and staff should uphold
respect and fair treatment from one another. Such is expected outcome of social workplace ethics
because codes deal with individuals and individual behavior. Since ethical behavior is a
particular type of compliance with social rules, it should be a compliance based not on coercion,
regulation, or calculation, but on free adherence to certain general principles that presumably are

16
socially generated and sustained as we hinted in the description of values above (vide Andrew
Abbot 1983:865).
All concerned people must play their part in avoiding behavior which may be perceived as
harassing, overbearing, bullying or emotionally threatening. Lecturers, because of their publicity
and recognized social status must be trustworthy, honest as we have pointed out. In their
evaluation of students’ work they should avoid suspicious situations which may give rise to
conflict of interest. Lecturers are indeed, called upon to be examples of courtesy, fairness and
equity in handling students in order to exhibit and underscore their professionalism.
Such special ways of operation should also be seen to include moral perspectives as emphasized
above. This is necessary because during our fieldwork, some of our respondents pointed out in
confidence that it is not uncommon for some lecturers to seek sexual and economic favors in the
process of managing examinations or even during teaching practice. This may sound a very
remote accusation, but it may not be totally unfounded. Only that it remains a pretty difficult
observation to verify. But because it was included in our discussion as a way of warning against
those who may be culpable, we felt obliged to include it here! It also undermines the role of a
lecturer as a leader and mentor of those s/he teaches. As mentioned already, ethical compliance
and social status do coincide because it is social group which generates both rules to be followed
and the admiration conferred. It is therefore necessary to base any account of social workplace
ethics on the relation between ethics and status. This explains why each institution of higher
learning should prepare and distribute a code of conduct to both its staff and students to clarify
challenges in their relationships. This background leads to the question- What motivates or
causes unethical behavior among university lecturers?
2.3.6. Common Motivation for Unethical Practices among Lecturers
The Kenyan Public Officers Ethics Cap 183(2003) is a professional etiquette meant to spell out
the ethical behaviors necessary for the running of various Corporations and Public Institutions in
Kenya. It points out to professionals who are involved in these corporations and institutions on
what to do and what not to do if they have to achieve their goals. Public Universities are part and
parcel of these institutions, where ethical behaviors are essential for the realization of the
Universities’ goals or objectives. This is because; universities are mainly founded for teaching
purposes and any element or organizations within the university revolve around this primary
purpose. Such reasons for the establishment of a university is not merely for the benefit of the
learner, but also includes the society and humanity in general (vide Sadiq Isah Rada, 2009).
The significance of ethical behavior at the university cannot be adequately stated. A university as
a communal institution is the cornerstone in building ethical organizations and accordingly has a
vital role in laying the foundation on how to make tough and necessary choices to live and
behave ethically (cf. Maisarah Mohd Saat et al, 2004). In this regard, the objectives for which a
university is established should include not only to teach ethics but also to be an ethical
institution. “An unethical university or a university without ethics in the way it operates as a
moral community or business would be a contradiction of terms” (Maisarah Mohd Saat et al,
2004:15). We cannot emphasize more enough that ethical behavior should play a central role in
any university worth the description. After all, the universities are founded to pay respect to
human values and to be run on those beliefs and traditions that the society holds most sacred;
“the founders of universities believed that it should be a symbol of the spirit of its community,
the guardian of its morals and formulator of its hope” (Sadiq Isah Radda 2009:4).

17
Unfortunately, from the malpractices that are frequently reported about Kenyan Public
Universities, it seems challenging to generalize that our institutions of higher learning are
bedrocks of ethical behavior. The motivations for immoral behavior may be several, but here we
shall confine ourselves to those that explain the problem from the university lecturers’
perspectives. These can be categorized into two main parts: conflict of interest and influence of
parochial variables or obligations. Conflict of interest is a conflict between advancing the public
interest which an individual is charged to do and advancing one’s self interest. The expectation is
that the public interest should supersede personal interest. In fact, such is the ultimate moral
principle of utilitarian ethics known as principle of utility! That is, in a situation where one is to
make a choice between alternative actions, he or she should do what results in the best overall
consequences for everyone concerned (vide David Ingram et. al, p. 10). Unfortunately, this is not
the case. The challenge may come in many forms such as sexual relationship between a lecturer
or an official of the university with a student or students.
Our investigation established that some lecturers solicit sexual favors from some female students
to gain diverse favors. These may include; leaking examination questions to potential female
students, giving them higher grades to improve their degree classifications or even allocating
marks to female students who have not actually sat for the said paper. Sadiq Isah Radda (2009)
adds that, “these kinds of female students and lecturers could be considered willing parties and
partners in progress”. But we were also informed that sexualization of examinations can take a
different dimension when an intellectually able female student turns down the advances of a
lecturer for sexual favors. The lecturer could frustrate such an intelligent student by failing her in
the unit(s) unless the student gives in and offers herself for sex. The frustration explains what the
Kenyan media has in the past called “sex grades!” The interpretation is that a student who is
promoted to the next level of study through sexual favors may obtain a certificate whose contents
they cannot measure up to; if not the practice qualifies to be regarded as the highest level of
sexual harassment in the institutions of higher learning! Whatever interpretation we give to this
sort of arrangement, it certainly goes contrary to consequentialism ethical theory upon which
utilitarianism is grounded. Namely that an act that results in the greatest amount of good or the
least amount of harm for the greatest number of people is a moral act (David Ingram et. al, p. 10).
Our preceding example can hardly qualify to reconcile with this theory.
Conflict of interest however, can also be a challenging factor where a lecturer is dealing with
students who are either related to him or are children of friends. Here too, a lecturer may award
marks which are not merited and thereby give advantage to undeserving candidates. If not,
unethical behavior among lecturers can be realized due to the desire for economic gains. This is
where a lecturer may leak examination questions to a student(s) who are willing to respond to
his/ her economic needs. This form of conflict of interest is more common among those
university officials who are in charge of printing examination papers. It is nevertheless unfair and
immoral to sell examination questions to any potential candidate. This is why it is important that
all university staff be inducted into the social workplace ethical code of conduct that governs a
University.
The second category of factors responsible for unethical behavior at the university is commonly
referred to as primordial influence or parochial variables (vide Sadiq Isah Radda, 2009). This is a
very challenging work phenomenon among Africans. It is in fact, an extension of conflict where
a lecturer is called upon by the prevailing circumstances to give undue advantage to some
students simply because of who they are, where they come from and to whom they are associated
with. Here, is one of those moments when the Kenyan ethnic obligation manifests itself. Just
because this student is from my clan, village or location s/he must be promoted by being awarded
18
marks which they do not deserve. This may also be extended to include students who belong to
the same church, worshipping with the lecturer or whose parents are in particular government
position and who can influence some promotions or potential appointments. They too may
prompt a lecturer to give them undue advantage so that in the end, the lecturer too can receive a
favor in turn. A lecturer in this kind or situation is actually finding an easier option to compete
for the scarce resources or opportunity.
Apart from conflicting loyalties, complexity of strategic issues may prevent an individual from
applying ethical principles in making decisions. It is not unknown that sometimes, a political
authority may be used to coerce a lecturer to behave unethically to save a situation. An ethical
behavior as a value is influenced by parental upbringing. An individual whose parents failed to
instill morals upon him or her while growing may be more inclined to ignore ethical obligations.
Once more, the institutions of higher learning should not assume the presence of social
workplace ethics among their staff without enforcing it.
2.3.7. Ethical attributes and responses necessary for a Lecturer
Social workplace ethics is a necessary requirement set of values based on hard work and
diligence. It is assumed that those who recruit and hire workers are looking for people with a
strong work ethic. Even at the university, such need for people who are dependable, efficient and
aware of time keeping is a normal expectation. But, social workplace ethics at the University
being a moral value does not only ameliorate the relationship between the workers and
management or students, it also helps an individual to get and keep a job apart from making him
or her a good person. It also helps employers to determine the value of their employees to an
organization or institution. At the university, the social workplace ethics of a lecturer is key in
helping students on how to judge, evaluate and to relate to him or her.
Often, students are quick and sensitive to note and judge for themselves those lecturers who are
keen in doing their very best as good teachers in the Department. They often get to know that
such lecturers not only perform their work efficiently, but are able to give assignments, correct
and return them on time. These lecturers easily make the initiative to get to know their students
and encourage those who seem to be shy and reluctant to be courageous so as to participate in
class discussions. But they are also dependable. This is because dependability is a virtue
associated with honesty, reliability and therefore punctuality. A dependable lecturer can be
trusted both by the students and the administration. Such lecturers tend to honor the promises
made with others and so foster excellent social workplace ethics in themselves apart from setting
good examples to those around them. A good work ethic facilitates and makes work to be
efficiently accomplished to ensure positive results.
Reliability requires that lecturers cultivate positive attitudes with all the students, and prepares
them to get things done. For example, when a Department in a given university requests that all
lecturers hand in examination results, arrange the scripts well, irrespective of the number of the
candidates, a lecturer will have to spend more hours than expected in order to keep the estimated
schedule. Often, some students may miss a graduation because particular lecturer(s) did not mark
their assignments or scripts on time, if not lost some of their marks. Such incidents negate
responsibility that is part and parcel of work ethics. A good social workplace ethics demands that
a lecturer fosters teamwork among students and encourages them to perform well in their studies.
Dependability however, goes along with trustworthiness. This is not only being ready to do what
one says they will do, but also to have courage in doing the right thing. The good reputation of a
lecturer among students is an added virtue for his/ her relationship with them in the campus and

19
outside the institution. In addition, a lecturer who expects others to respect him or her must also
cultivate respect as a virtue. This is akin to the synoptic golden rule, “do to others as you would
have them do to you” (Luke 6:31) and to Immanuel Kant’s categorical imperative that we treat
others as ends in themselves and not as means to an end. Lecturers therefore have to be ready to
treat students and fellow colleagues with respect by being considerate to their feelings without
undue anger or insults.
Another attribute for ethical decision is fairness. This is the ability to listen to others without
blaming them unnecessarily and carelessly. Some of our respondents pointed out that some
lecturers tend to be careless in their remarks, attitude and language before their students. For
example, here in Kenya, public universities admit and register students from all ethnic
affiliations. A lecturer must be courteous against remarks that may be conceived to be
ethnocentric. An educator at the university must also exhibit some level of caring, compassion,
forgiving and helping those in need. In this way, education is a method of persuasion where the
learners are being dissuaded from their ignorance to see life and societal values differently from
their youthful preconceived methods of evaluation. Such an exercise requires genuine
interpersonal relationships, positive attitudes, patience and sensitivity. In other words, a lecturer
as a university educator may not only be assessed from an academic standpoint, but also from an
ethical dimension.
These ethical decisions assume that the lecturer appreciates personal value, to facilitate his or her
choices. Values and morals are necessary attributes which determine our character and how we
view and deal with others. They are also the embodiments that an institution stands for. If
members of an institution do not internalize them then there would be a disconnect between them
and the institution. This would create problems not only for the running of the institution but
among the members themselves. Values therefore determine what is right and what is wrong.
But, doing what is right or wrong is what moralists refer to as Ethics. That is, to behave ethically
in a manner consistent with what is right or moral. But how does one know what to be right
means?
Right or wrong are not mere individually initiated principles. They are responsible to what a
society has defined and regulated to be ethical or unethical behavior. For those who are
influenced by Judeo-Christian heritage, the Ten Commandments may define what is ethically
right or wrong. Every society however, be it secular or theistic often defines what is right and
wrong for its members. It is important therefore for every lecturer to be aware of how to
recognize such values issues. Because, lack of identification of values is an impediment to ethical
operation and harmonious co-existence in any institution.
Ethical decisions are not made in vacuum; they have immediate consequences on other members
of society and or organization. They are contagious as it were in that each moral decision has
three dimensions of consequences. First, the responsibility of a decision fully lies with the one
who makes it. Second, is the reaction of the recipient of the decision and or action. Third, the
consequences and impact of the reaction upon the relationship between the subject and the
recipient of the decision made. It is such ethical triangulation that challenges an individual in the
midst of several choices. That is, every society has a major impact on the behavior of its
members which can either have a positive or negative influence on the subjects.
In making an ethical decision therefore, a university lecturer must be aware of where there is no
clear cut rule to choose the - alternative that would be approved by the university community.
Morally, it is laudable to decide and choose that seems a harder right instead of the easier wrong
which is subject to criticism. This can only be possible when we internalize the value of what is
20
right. Because, to deal with an ambiguous situation can be very challenging and indeed calls for
personal conviction of what is intrinsically a moral value. Personal conviction is important
because more academicians may realize that their own values may concur with the institution.
Owing to lack of universal legislation, it pays to compromise rather than hold firmly on one
single ethical principle. Such a stand would lead to a discord and conflict and eventually to
disintegration rather than integration of the institution. The inclination to compromise often leads
to the expression, “each case has to be considered on its own merit”.
Experience in fact tends to show that all societies have developed beliefs to help distinguish
between which values are necessary for the common good. A lecturer therefore making an ethical
decision where there are no clear cut rules to guide the choice should take an alternative action
that has the institution’s approval. For example, the idea that one good deed deserves another or
the principle of reciprocity is found in all human societies. If therefore, a lecturer makes a
decision in an ambiguous situation, and if that choice or decision is informed by social ethics, it
will definitely serve as an appropriate moral decision. Our earlier reference to Hippocratic
principle- primum non nocere- “above all not knowing to do harm” is applicable in an ambiguous
situation.
After all, as we are reminded by the synoptic Gospels, moral culpability takes place in the mind,
and not necessarily in the actual execution of the thought. If for example, a university lecturer
unknowingly adds the marks of a student which in the end affects the total degree grade of that
student, he or she can hardly be held morally responsible for the eventual outcome of the results;
because s/he had not deliberately planned to be malicious. For the greater the potential risk, the
more important the ethical practice becomes. Institutions of higher learning should therefore
define what is right and what is wrong for the members of the institutions. An internalization of
such ethical obligation may help a lecturer to make an appropriate decision in an ambiguous
situation. Since, what is considered to be right is the ability of the lecturer to look at the positive
values of a given society and the institution in question.
The foregoing discussion has attempted to answer our original two central questions- What is the
significance of social workplace ethics? And, what makes a good lecturer? We readily admit that
we have not adequately answered these questions. Since a University lecturer is hired to manage
a wide range of functions, it may be difficult to find a simple answer to the question: what makes
a good lecturer? Granted however, his or her main function is teaching, developing the
curriculum, assessing and supervising students apart from counselling as may be appropriate.
Such a complex responsibility definitely needs a good deal of discipline. The answers to our two
questions remain complex except that the lecturer should be aware of ethical decision and its
impact. With such admittance, we can now turn to the last part of discussion-data presentation.

21
 CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODS
In discussing the methods used for this research we examine the research design, sampling
procedure, the methods of data collection and data handling. The section ends by considering a
number of ethical and other issues associated with the field work.
3.1. Study Area
Addis Ababa University (AAU), which was established in 1950 as the University College of
Addis Ababa (UCAA), is the oldest and the largest higher learning and research institution in
Ethiopia. Since its inception, the University has been the leading center in teaching-learning,
research and community services.

Beginning with enrollment capacity of 33 students in 1950, AAU now has 48,673 students
(33,940 undergraduate, 13,000 Master’s and 1733 PhD students) and 6043 staff (2,408 academics
and 3,635 support staff). In its 14 campuses, the University runs 70 undergraduate and 293
graduate programs (72 PhD and 221 Masters), and various specializations in Health Sciences.

Over 222,000 students have graduated from AAU since its establishment.

The University is led by a President who is assisted by four Vice Presidents and one Executive
Director: Academic Vice President, Vice President for Research and Technology Transfer, Vice
President for Administration and Student Services, Vice President for Institutional Development
and the Executive Director of the College of Health Sciences (with the rank of Vice President).

In recent years, the University has been undertaking various reform schemes in order to cope
with and respond to the fast-changing national and international educational dynamics. At
present the University has 10 colleges, 4 institutes that run both teaching and research, and 6
research institutes that predominantly conduct research. Within these academic units, there are 55
departments, 12 centers, 12 schools, and 2 teaching hospitals. The University has the following
academic units:

Colleges
1. College of Social Sciences
2. College of Humanities, Language Studies, Journalism and communication
3. College of Development Studies
4. College of Business and Economics
5. College of Law and Governance Studies
6. College of Education and Behavioral Studies
7. College of Natural and Computational Sciences
8. Skunder Boghossian College of Performing and Visual Arts
9. College of Veterinary Medicine and Agriculture
22
10. College of Health Sciences

Research and Teaching Institutes 

1. Academy of Ethiopian Languages and Cultures
2. Addis Ababa Institute of Technology
3. Aklilu Lemma Institute of Pathobiology
4. Ethiopian Institute of Architecture, Building Construction and City Development
5. Ethiopian Institute of Water Resources
6. Institute of Biotechnology
7. Institute of Educational Research

3.2. Research Design

The study was a descriptive study. It was conducted among students and teachers of AAU. In
view of the objectives of the study and the type of information required which is to collect and
analyze data that would enable us draw valid conclusions, I chose to speak to two categories of
the FB College. These are the teachers including FB managers and the students of FB.
The study used a quantitative data which was obtained from both primary and secondary sources.
3.3. Sampling Procedure
A. Sampling Frame
Having in mind the objective of the study and the type of information required, two categories of
respondents were identified teachers and FB Managers in one category and FB students on the
other.
B. Target Population
The target population of the research comprises of all AAU FB College teachers and students
from which 150 study population was identified.
3.4. Sample size determination
As a first step in the process of selecting the respondents for the study, the simple random
method was used in selecting the sample of teachers from a list of departments, the lottery
method (a component of probability sampling process) was used. The same random sampling
method was used for selecting the respondents who include the students. At the end of the
sampling process, out of a study population of 150 teachers (managers) and students 47 were
selected as follows.
n = Z2pqN
2 2
e (N-1) Z + p q where

n= = sample size
Z2 = from table of using confidence level (1.64 using 10% confidence)
P = probability to be selected
q = probability not to be selected
N= Total population
e = error of confidence level

23
Therefore the sample size of the study is
n= (1.64)2 (0.5x0.5) 150
(0.1)2 (150-1) +1.642 (0.5 x0.5)
= 100.86 = 46.6 = 47 (Kotari, 2004)
2.1624
3.5. Methods of Data Collection
The research made use of primary and secondary sources and combines both qualitative and
quantitative data. Quantitative data was collected using the questionnaires administered by the
investigator to the respondents. While qualitative data was also collected to complement
quantitative data.
3.6. Method of data collection
The primary data was collected through questionnaires with some respondent of AAU FB
College. The secondary data was collected from journals, books, internet and etc.
To make sure and analyze the data collected was accurate and relevant; the researcher used
mostly descriptive statistical method. To describe the data that was collected, the descriptive
statistics like percentage is better than the hypothetical statistical (inferential statistical) testing.
In additions tables were used in generating the data and analyzing the result. (Source: Publication
Manual of the American Psychological Association, Sixth Edition (2010))
3.7. Ethical Considerations
Gathering data among university lecturers who are the primary respondents on the subject comes
with some ethical challenges for the study. By the nature of their work, they are a very busy
group of officials working around the clock on tight work schedules. The researcher tried to
minimize the number of possible research biases arising from respondents and obtain a level of
objectivity, consistency and validity of data.

24
CHAPTER FOUR
DATA PRESENTATION ANALYSIS AND PRESENTATION
In this chapter, primary data gathered from the field work, comprising quantitative and
qualitative data are presented. At the end of the data gathering period, 45 (96%) responses were
obtained out of 47 questionnaires administered. First the information obtained from 45
respondents has been summarized. The respondents were selected from among the lecturers (FB
managers) and students of FB at AAU. Data from this source are from the two categories of
respondents, namely, 8 teachers and managers and 37 students. In the data presentation, the
qualitative data obtained is presented alongside the quantitative data to enrich the discussions and
findings.
SECTION A
4.1 SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF RESPONDENTS
4.1.1 Age of Respondents
The correlation between the age of respondents and their place within the university is relevant.
Age generally tends to reflect a trend that usually corresponds with the system of career
progression being operated in the university. This research is dealing with lecturers and students
as the respondents. The age variable is relevant sociologically since it will help us appreciate its
relationship with the place variable of these homogeneous groups. As a group they have not gone
through similar career experiences in the university.
Table 4:1:1 Age of Respondents
Age of Category of Respondent Total
Respondent
(years) Lectures Students
18-30 - - 3 6.7% 3 6.7%
31-40 34 75.5% 34 75.5%
41-50 5 11.11% 5 11.11%
51-60 3 6.66% 3 6.66%
Over 60 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total 8 17.8% 37 82.2% 45 100.0%

Table 4.1:1 above represents of the age profile of the 45 respondents. According to the Table,
there are 8 lectures and 37 students selected from the FB College for the study. According to the
table, all the 8 teachers fall within the ages of 41 and 60 years. On other hand an overwhelming
majority of 34 (75.6%) out of 37 students are between the ages of 31 and 40, whilst only 3
(6.7%) fall below age 30.

25
Consequently, it is rational to expect that the longer the service the richer the knowledge base
and logically the more competent the teacher must be in a positive correlation with the length of
service. The same is true for the majority of the students.

4.1.2. Sex of Respondents

The sex of respondents presents two main issues of concern to this research. These are the
concerns about gender balance at the teachers and the related issue of what is sometimes referred
to as the glass ceiling in gender analysis. (ICASG, 2009:27-28) Secondly, the relevance of the
sex variable of respondents brings to mind the issue of sexual harassment/office romance. Table
4.1:2 Sex of Respondents
Table 4.1.2. Sex of Respondents
Sex of Respondent Grade/Position of Respondent Total
Lectures Students
Male 8 17.8% 25 55.5% 33 73.3%

Female 0 0.0% 12 26.7% 12 26.7%

Total 8 17.8% 37 82.2% 45 100.0%

In Table 4.1:2 above the sex composition of respondents is presented. The table shows that out of
a total of 45 respondents, only 12 (26.7%) are females and a dominant 33 (73.3%) are males. It
may also be observed that whereas all the 12 (32.4%) female respondents are Students and as
many 25 (67.6%) are men. The statistics therefore shows that among Lectures and Students in the
organization is gender imbalance is a mirage. From Table 4.1.3 above and the related analysis on
the sex composition of respondents, we can safely say that the lectures position of the university
is mostly male dominated.
SECTION B
4.2 KNOWLEDGE AND ATTITUDES OF RESPONDENTS
4.2 1 Respondents’ Knowledge of the Guiding Principles of the Code of Conduct.
Table 4.2.1 below presents the knowledge base of respondents on the Guiding Principles
underlying the Code of Conduct
Ethical Value Well Understood Total
Understood
1 Selflessness 77.80 % 22.20 %
2 Integrity 80.00 % 20.0 %
3 Justice and Fairness 68.90 % 31.10 %
4 Accountability 42.20 % 57.80 %

26
 5 Transparency 57.80 % 42.20 %
6 Leadership 84.40 % 15.60 %

Table 4.2:1 above represents the respondents’ level of understanding of (i.e., knowledge base.) of
the six key Guiding Principles of the Code of Conduct. The Table further shows that out of the
six Guiding Principles the respondents have very good understanding of the leadership principle,
this is followed by Integrity 80.0% and Selflessness 77.8% in that order. However, only 42.2% of
respondents understood the Accountability principle, Transparency 57.8% whilst 68.9% of the
respondents are for Fairness‘. Thus we can fairly conclude that teachers well understood (highly
knowledgeable) only half (3) of the guiding principles of the Code and the other half (3) is
understood (mediocre knowledge).
The significance of this observation is not far-fetched. When put into context, the age/grade are
closely linked to these guiding principles and there is no gain saying the fact that Lectures and
Students ought to be highly knowledgeable about all the guiding principles of the Code. It
therefore quite inexcusable to find such low percentage of respondents with middle-of-the-road
understanding (i.e. understood‘) Indeed, within contemporary Public Administration, the most
heard of the most abused principles of the Code are perhaps the principles of accountability and
transparency. Hence top level officials who have been charged with the responsibility of the
successful implementation of the policy, must inexorably exhibit a high level of understanding of
the concepts of accountability and transparency. This is not only desirable but also obligatory but
also indispensable for enhancing professional competency, and mediocre ones cannot help
achieve the goals envisaged by the code.
Table 4.2.2 Perceptions of Respondents on the Implementation of the principles of the Code
of Ethics.
DESCRIPTION OF WORK ETHIC IN THE GHANA CIVIL “Yes” “No,” Not
SERVICE Being Being
Applied Applied
1 Reporting for duty punctually and in good time before work 17.80% 82.20%
. begins.
2. Guarding against absenting themselves from work 55.60% 44.40%
without permission or reasonable excuse.
3. Following and obeying lawful, legitimate or reasonable definite 62.20% 37.80%
instructions, and complying with laid down procedures relating to
work.
4. Taking pride and joy in doing more than is required by duty. 42.20% 57.80%
5. Responding to legitimate requests and demands of members of 68.90% 31.10%
the college with urgency, promptness and timeliness.
6. Seeing a task through and having a sense of pride in 42.20% 57.80%
accomplishing assignments every time.
7. Undertaking tasks in ways that contribute effectively to achieving 80% 20%
the goals of his or her organization

The Table 4.2.2 above illustrates whether respondents agree (or do not agree) to the assertion that
management personnel of their organizations in general are observing and complying with these
seven (7) principal tenets of the Work Ethics. From the Table 4.2.2 above, it is shown that
27
whereas as high as 37 or 82.2% of respondents perceive punctuality’ as the greatest challenge,
only 8 (17.8%) agree that the personnel is reporting for duty punctually. This perception suggests
that habitual lateness to work and corporate meetings, irregular attendance to official functions as
well as leaving the job, meetings and functions before closing hours appears to be the normal
practice or the predominant conduct among the teachers as well as the students missing class.
Next on the scale of non-compliance by respondents are the tenets of ―timely performance of
tasks and taking pride and joy in doing more than is required. Only 42.2% of respondents believe
that management complies with both tenets of the Work Ethics, whilst as much as 57.8% of think
management does not comply. This suggests that management personnel of the college do not
meet time-lines in the performance of their jobs nor do they take joy and pride in their
performing their assignments. The latter also implies that they are in the habit of setting personal
limits to their commitments and not willing to provide good quality services nor strive for
excellence in the service.
On the positive side of the compliance space however, as many as 36 (80.0%) of the respondents
view management personnel to be working to contribute effectively to achieving the goals of
their organizations, as against 9 (20.0%) of the respondents who think otherwise. We understand
this to mean that management displays an attitude of a sense of urgency to duty, gaining the
reputation of being counted by the organization and the tendency to rise to the occasion and not
neglecting their duties.
Furthermore the 68.9% of respondents perceive that management responds to legitimate requests
and demands from the public with urgency, promptness and timeliness whilst 31.1% do not
support the idea. The preponderance of 68.9% yes respondents over no is an indication of the
state of mind of a leadership struggling with mediocrity in work attitude. The statistics from the
Chart 4.2.2 showing that 62.2% of the respondents further perceive that on the issue of obeying
lawful, legitimate and reasonable instructions using the laid down procedures, management
personnel have a mediocre mental attitude. Finally the Table 4.2.2 shows that 26 (57.8%) of the
respondents think that management personnel fails to comply with the tenets of the Ethics
requirement, whilst 18 (42.2%) of the respondents think that the top level management usually
comply.
4.2.3 Respondents Satisfaction in Staff Compliance with the Work Ethics.
Table 4.2.3 Respondents’ Satisfaction with Staff Compliance to the code of Ethics
Level of Satisfaction Frequency Percentage
Somewhat dissatisfied 11 24.4
Somewhat satisfied 34 75.6
Total 45 100.0

Table 4.2.3 above shows the degree to which respondents’ feel satisfied with staff compliance to
Work Ethics. To measure the degree of satisfaction‘, a ten-point scale was again fixed as follows:
Extremely Dissatisfied = 0 point; Very Dissatisfied = 2 points; Somewhat Dissatisfied’ = 4
points; Neutral = 6 points; Somewhat Satisfied’ = 8 points and Extremely Satisfied = 10 points.
The responses recorded in Table 4.2:3 above show that whereas out of the 45 respondents 34
(75.6%) were Somewhat Satisfied’ (8 out of 10 points), only 11 (24.4%) were Somewhat
Dissatisfied, (4 out of 10-points).

28
In sum we can say that respondents perceive the stakeholders as primarily complying with the
Work Ethics of the university. But the compliance is to what extent? The task of management in
every organization is to help the individuals achieve their own set goals by directing their efforts
towards the attainment of the goals of the organization. (Fulton and Hanks, 1990:258). Indeed a
basic presumption of the Code of Conduct is that workers have personal responsibility and
commitment to comply with the Work Ethics. (OHCS, 1999) If 75.6% of respondents agree to be
somewhat satisfied’ that they are complying with the code of ethics, this is not surprising.
Table 4.2.4. Respondents’ View on the Extent to which they are Providing the Best Ethical
conduct their Organizations as Ethical Role Models.
Degree of Agreement Frequency Percentage (%)
Strongly Agree 28 62.2
Agree Completely 17 37.8
Total 45 100.0
As shown by the Table 4.2.4 above, 28 (62.2%) of the respondents Strongly Agree’ (8/10 point
level) that they provide the best ethical leadership for staff of their organizations whilst 17
(37.8%) ‘Agree Completely.‘ (10/10 point level). Interestingly, none of the respondents felt
he/she was performing at Average (6/10 point level) or below Disagree’ with the assertion of the
question. This shows a high level perception of the respondents because as they see themselves
as key players and indispensable in the provision of excellent ethical.
SECTION C
4.3. PRACTICES AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ETHICS POLICY
4.3.2. Situations Which Pose Greatest Challenges in Ethics Decision-Making and Work Ethics
Management.
Table 4.3.1. Respondents’ Prioritized Key Sources of Ethical Challenges/Dilemmas

No. Main Source of Ethical Prioritized No. of Percentage

Dilemma or Challenge Source Respondents
1 Political Pressures 1 22 48.9
2 Favors by Friends and Peers 2 8 17.8
3 Pressures from Family and 3 7 15.5
Relations
4 Subordinates out-of-turn 4 5 11.1
demands
5 Work Place/Office 5 3 6.7
Romance
TOTAL 45 100.0
From the Table 4.3.2 above, it may be observed that 22 (48.9%) respondents have ranked ‘the
Political factor’ first as the key challenge affecting them in ethical decision making situations;
The challenge which was ranked second is ‘favors from friends and peers’ with 8 (17.8%) of
respondents. The challenge ranked third is ‘pressure from family and relations’ with 7 (15.5%)
respondents; The next challenge ranked fourth is ‘subordinates making out-of-turn demands’
with 5 (11.1%) respondents, and finally, the fifth in the ranking of challenges is ‘Work
Place/Office Romance’ where there are only 3 (6.7%) respondents.
4.3.3 Respondent’ Performance in Handling Ethical Issues
Table 4.3.3 Respondent’ Performance in Handling Ethical Issues

29
 Completely Very SomewhatD Neutr Somewhat Very Completely
Dissatisfied Dissatisfied issatisfied al Satisfied Satisfied Satisfied
20 44.4 21 46.7% 4 8.9%
%

The Table 4.3.3 above shows that whilst only 4 (8.9%) were completely satisfied with their level
of ethical performance in the university, 21 (46.7%) were very satisfied,‘ whilst 20 (44.4%) of
respondents felt somewhat satisfied. The trend in the responses suggest that a lot more
commitment to the goals of the code is required by managers of the FB College to become ethics
‘High Fliers’ or ‘Champions’ in order to manage Work Ethics more effectively in the AAU.
4.3.4. Issues of Primary Consideration for respondents
Table 4.3.4. Issues of Primary Consideration for respondents
No. Key Concerns Response in no Response in %
1 Financial or monetary gain 7 15.6
2 Career progression 20 44.4
3 Possibilities for future career progression 12 26.7
4 Retirement plan 6 13.3

The table shows that for 20 (44.4%) respondents concerns for Career progression in the Service
usually determines their ethical decisions and choices, 12 (26.7%) of them consider the
possibilities for advancement of their career in the future as their primary concern, 7 (15.6%)
consider financial and monetary gains, whilst only 6 (13.3%) are influenced by the plans they
have for retirement from active service.
In conclusion we can say that rather than making ethical decisions based on objective,
transparent, independent and fair professional judgment as required, their decisions are
predominantly determined by issues that are more likely to affect either their current progression
in the Service career or the future.

30
CHAPTER FIVE
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Conclusions
The outcome of discussions show that the rationale for implementing the Code of Conduct in
AAU FB College is ensuring that it becomes the primary guide of rules, standards and norms of
behavior and attitudes of the AAU; to become the acceptable yardstick for governing the conduct
and work habits of all the stake holders in AAU. It is to provide a new sense of professional
direction for normal interactions between the students, teachers and the staff in a responsible,
accountable, efficient and effective results oriented performance psyche and work output.
Finally, where the conduct of any student or teacher was found to be inconsistent with the Code,
appropriate administrative sanctions should be applied.
With respect to the key elements or the Guiding Principles’ of the Code of Conduct, six (6) were
identified as the study has shown. They include Selflessness, Integrity, Justice and Fairness,
Accountability, Transparency and Leadership. The Basic Tenets or key elements of the Work
Ethics however were found to be seven (7). These include reporting for duty punctually, guarding
against absenteeism, obeying lawful, legitimate and reasonable instructions and complying with
laid down procedures relating to one‘s work. The rest are, taking pride and joy in doing more
than is required by duty, responding to legitimate requests and demands of members of the public
with urgency, promptness and timeliness, seeing tasks through timely performance of and
accomplishing tasks and assignments every time and, finally, undertaking tasks in ways that
contribute effectively to achieving the goals of the University.
In assessing the relevance of the Code of Conduct to the knowledge, attitudes and perceptions of
the implementers, the overall assessment is considered mediocre and relatively unsatisfactory.
The line of evidence that only three (half) of the six guiding principles of the Code were well
understood’ (high) whilst the other three (half) were understood’ (mediocre); make the low levels
of the outcomes of the respondents about these issues unacceptable.
The study found the key challenges to the successful implementation of the Code of Conduct to
include the following:
i) Lack of implementers‘ in-depth understanding of the six guiding principles of the
Code of Conduct and basic tenets of the Work Ethics;
ii) Manifestation of mediocre leadership by the implementers of the code and poor
understanding of the seven key elements of the Work Ethics;
iii) Leadership‘s lack of commitment to enforcing compliance when conduct tends to be
inconsistent with the norms and standards of the Code of Conduct;
iv) Finally when placed in ethical choice situations respondents have allowed largely
informal, subjective and emotive principles (such as political influence, concerns for
career progression and job security, friends and family and to an extent work place
romance) to determine their ethical choice, rather than allowing rational,

31
 professionalism, transparency, accountability, merit and fair judgment to guide them
to influence their ethical conduct and objectivity.

Recommendations
Based on the conclusions stated above the following recommendations are being made:
The teachers and students must redouble their efforts to understand, accept and commit
themselves fully to the guiding principles of the Code of Conduct. which include Selflessness,
Integrity, Justice and Fairness, Accountability, Transparency and Leadership; As well as the key
elements of the Work Ethics which, are punctuality, devotion to duty, guarding against
absenteeism, obedience to lawful instructions, taking pride in and joy of duty, customer
satisfaction with urgency, timely performance of duty and achieving goals of the university must
translate into visible and sustainable conduct throughout the entire organization. There is also the
need to commit themselves fully to acquiring these professional ethics as the bedrock for
efficiency, effectiveness, loyalty to the university;
Secondly, that there is the need for systematic training and capacity building program regarding
the code of conduct. The objective is to clarifying not only key conceptual and theoretical issues
about ethics management, ethics benchmarking, ethics performance monitoring, funding ethics
program, managing ethics committees, but also on how to resolve ethical dilemmas and ethical
mazes and enhance the growth of ethical culture of the university. The choice of a sound and
vigorous ethics management program must be made and implemented by the organizations, with
effective monitoring and evaluation systems that can make the stake holders acquire ethically
sensitive work culture through continuous training and capacity-building.
Thirdly, that the teachers should eschew mediocrity and strive to excel in their careers as guiders
of the students, play their role effectively as ethical models to others so as to inspire their
students to follow their exemplary footsteps; Accountability of the respective Lectures and
Students who have the responsibility to ensure successful implementation of the Code of
Conduct must be enforced.
Fourthly the mechanisms for discipline must be strengthened and enforced at all levels of the
hierarchy especially at the top management level, without favor. We also saw that the Code of
Ethics prescribes that each person in the university must accept personal responsibility for
developing and exhibiting a strong work ethic and affirms his or her commitment to combating
negative work habits in university. Consequently, the mechanisms for reinforcing the Code of
conduct and sanctioning conduct found to be inconsistent with the Work Ethics should be
strengthened and the message that mediocrity and non-conformance would not be tolerated must
radiate clearly and unambiguously throughout the entire organization.
Finally, that AAU should develop and enforce a work-place gender/sexual harassment policy.
This is needed because according to evidence from our analysis, the attitudes towards gender
issues and sexual harassment within the university appear to be taken very casually. For this
reason as a matter of policy institutional best practices for the protection of gender and women
rights require the vigorous promotion of workplace gender sensitive culture in AAU. Eliminating
gender-biased decisions would greatly enhance and likely to help achieve adequately the human
rights of the worker and reflect the local and international labor regulations.

32
REFERENCES
Andrew Abbot (1983). “Professional Ethics” in the American Journal of Sociology Vol. 88,
No.5.
Banks Sarah (2008). Critical Commentary: Social Work ethics, British Journal of Social Work
38 (6) pp 1238-1239.
Beck Jorgensen, T.B. 2006. Public values, their nature, stability and change: the case of
Denmark. Public Administration Quarterly, 30(4): 365 –398.
Beck Jorgensen, T.B. & Bozeman, B. 2007. The public values universe: an inventory.
Administration and Society, 39(3): 354 – 381.
Catherine Rainbow (2002). “ Description of Ethical Theories and Principles”, Biology 372,
Department of Biology , Davidson College, Davidson, NC 28035.
Canada, Deputy Ministers’ Task Force on Public Service Values and Ethics (1996). A Strong
Foundation: Discussion Paper on Values and Ethics in the Public Service. Ottawa: Privy Council
Office. Available at http://www.ccmd-ccg.gc.ca/ publications.html.
Caiden, G.E. 1988. The problem of ensuring the public accountability of public officials. In
Public service accountability: a comparative perspective [no city of publication]: Kumarian
Press.
David B. Ingram and Jennifer A. Parks (2002). The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Understanding
Ethics, London: Penguin.
De Beer, A.S. 1998. Mass media: towards the millennium, (2nd ed). Pretoria: J.L van Schaik
Publishers.
Desjardins Joseph (2006). An Introduction to Business Ethics, New York: Mc Graw Hill
Company.
Dwivedi, O.P. & Jabbara, J.C. 1988. Public service accountability: a comparative perspective.
West Hartford: Kumarian Press.
Elias Baumgarten (1982). “Ethics in the Academic Profession” in the Journal of Higher
Education, Vol. 23 No. 3.
Gilbert, C. E. 1959. The framework of administrative responsibility. Journal of Politics, (21):
373–407.
Government of Kenya (2003). The Code of Conduct Ethics for Public Universities, in Laws of
Kenya, The Pubic Officer Ethics Act Chapter 183 part III:8,(I) Nairobi: National Council
of Law Reporting.
Goss ,R.P. 2003 . What ethical conduct expectations do legislators have for the career
bureaucracy? Public Integrity, 5 (2): 93–112.

33
Garcia-Sanchez, I.M., Roderiques-Dominguez, L. & Gallego-Alvarez, I. 2011. Effectiveness
of ethics codes in the public sphere: Are they useful in controlling corruption?.
International Journal of Public Administration,34(3), 190-195.
Hilliard, V.G. and Ferreira, I.W. 2001. Honing a set of global ethics for South Africa. Journal of
Public Administration, 36(2):87-110.
Holtzhausen, N. 2007. Whistle blowing and whistle blower protection in the South Africa
Public Sector. Published D.Admin Thesis. Pretoria: University of South Africa.
Iqbal Khan and Muhammad Jahanzeb Khan (2011). “Socio-economic Status of Students and
Malpractices used in Examination in Urban Areas of District Peshawar”, in European
Journal of Scientific Research, Vol. 49 No. 4 (2011), Euro Journals Publishing Inc.,
pp.601-609.
John Clark (2004). “The Ethics of Teaching and the Teaching of Ethics” in The New Zealand
Journal of Teachers’’ Work, Vol.1, Issue 2, pp. 80-84.
Kearns, K.P. 1996. Managing for accountability: preserving the public trust in public and non-
profit organisations. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Kernaghan, K. 1978. Changing concepts of power and responsibility in the Canadian
public service. Canadian Public Administration, 21(3): 389–406.
Kernaghan, K. 2003. Integrating values into the public service: The values statement as
centrepiece. Public Administration Review, 63 (6), 711-719.
Kaptein, M. & Schwartz, M.S. 2008. The effectiveness of business codes: A critical examination
of existing studies and the development of an integrated research model. Journal of
Business Ethics, 77, 111-127.
Killen, M. & Hart, D. 1995. Morality in everyday life. New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Maisarah Mohamed Saat et al. (2004). Lecturers and Student’ Perceptions on Ethics in
Academia and Lecturers- Students Interaction, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
Mbatha, J.S. 2005. The ethical dilemmas of whistle-blowing and corruption in the South African
Public Sector. Published D.Admin Thesis. Empangeni: University of Zululand.
Maesschalck, J. 2004. The impact of new public management reforms on public servants’ ethics:
towards a theory. Public Administration, 82(2): 465-489.
Maesschalck, J. 2004. The impact of new public management reforms on public servants’ ethics:
towards a theory. Public Administration, 82(2): 465-489.
Magahy, B. & Pyman, M. 2010. Ethics and business conduct in defence establishments:
An international review. Journal of Military Ethics,9(1), 57-76.
Sadiq Isah Radda(2009). Unethical Practices in the Nigeria’s University System: Pattern,
Causes and Solutions- Annual BEN-Africa Conference, 3-5 August, Accra.

34
Robson, I.H. 1999. Professional ethics from day to day: a practitioner’s reflection. In Wessels,
J.S. & Pauw, J.C. (eds). Reflective Public Administration: Views from the South. Cape Town:
Oxford University Press.
Rossouw, D. Prozesky, M., Burger, M., du Plessis, C. & van Zyl, M. 2006. Ethics for
accountants and auditors. Revised edition. Cape Town, South Africa: Oxford University Press.
Smit, P.J. & Cronje, G.J. 2001. Management Principles: a contemporary edition for Africa, (2nd
ed). South Africa: Juta & Co, Ltd.
Schmidt, W.H. and B.Z. Posner. 1986. ‘Values and expectations of federal service executives’,
Public Administration Review, 46(4): 447–454.
Petersen, L.E. & Krings, F. 2009. Are ethical codes of conduct toothless tigers for dealing with
employment discrimination?. Journal of Business Ethics,85, 501-514
Petersen, L.E. & Krings, F. 2009. Are ethical codes of conduct toothless tigers for dealing with
employment discrimination?. Journal of Business Ethics,85, 501-514.
Peter F. Drucker (2002). Managing in the Next Society, Oxford:
Butterworth, Heinemann.
Peter F. Drucker (2001). The Essential of Drucker, Selections from the Management Works of
Peter F. Drucker, Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Schwartz, M.S. 2004. Effective corporate codes of ethics: perceptions of code users. Journal of
Business Ethics,55, 323-343.
Skubik, D.W. & Stening, B.W. 2009. What’s in a code? A critique of the academy of
management’s code of ethical conduct and code of ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 85,
515-525.
United Nations: Office of Drugs and Crime. 2005. Compendium of international legal
instruments on corruption.
United Nations: Office of Drugs and Crime. 2005.Compendium of international legal instruments
on corruption.
Vrangbak, K. 2006. Public sector values in Denmark. Results from a survey of public managers.
Paper presented at the Annual EGPA Conference, 6 – 9 September. Italy: Bocconi University.
www.aau.edu.et

35
APPENDICES

Appendix 1 Time Schedule

No Activity Dec Jan. Feb. Mar. April May June

1 Topic Selection x
2 Preparation of proposal x
3 Collection of useful x
material
4 Data Collection x
5 Data Analysis and writing x
of final research
6 Submission of research x
7 Presentation of final x
research

Appendix 2 Financial Budget

Item Quantity Per unit (Birr) Total Cost (Birr)

Equipment

Paper Pack 1 500.00 500.00

stationary

Pens 6 5.00 30.00

and

Pencil 1 1.50 1.50

Binder 1 50.00 50.00
Total Cost - - 581.50
Transportation - - -
Personal cost

Internet - - -
Typist 1 500.00 500.00
Print 3 150 450
Total cost - - 1531.50
Contingency - - 500
Overall total cost - - 2031.50

36
Appendix 3: Questionnaire for respondents

ADDIS ABABA UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES
FACULTY OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND DEVELOPMENT
MANAGEMENT
Dear respondents,
I am graduate student in Addis Ababa University; School of Graduate Studies; Faculty of
Business and Economics; Department of Public Administration and Management; BA Degree
Program in Public Administration and Management .
The purpose of this questionnaire is to collect data on exploring the implementation of ethical
course of conduct in Addis Ababa University (A case of FB College) for the partial fulfillment of
BA degree in Public Administration and Development Management. Dear respondents, the
information you will provide is very important for successful accomplishment of this research.
Furthermore, the information you give will be used for only the academic research. Therefore,
you are kindly requested to read all the questions and fill honestly without any hesitation and all
the data gathered will be held confidential.
Thank you in advance!
Tewodros Amanuel
QUESTIONNAIRE FOR RESPONDENTS
A. PART ONE:
B. SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF RESPONDENT
1. SEX:
i. Male
ii. Female
2. In which age bracket do you fall?
18-30 yrs
31-40 yrs
37
41-50 yrs
51-60 yrs
Over60 yrs
3. Current place in your Workplace………………………………………

B. PART TWO: KNOWLEDGE BASE OF RESPONDENTS

TOPIC: RELEVANCE OF CODE OF ETHICS TO THE AAU
1. How well do you understand the AAU code of conduct?
Ethical Value Meaning Well Understood Not Well
Understood Understood

1 Selflessness Decisions taken solely in terms

of public interest
2 Integrity Conduct not influenced by
personal gains or benefits
3 Justice and Conducting public business
Fairness based solely on merit
4 Accountability Being individually responsible
for actions and decisions
5 Transparency Openness about decisions and
submitting to public scrutiny
6 Leadership Striving to excel in conduct to
encourage followers to imitate
the conduct

2. Do you think that the Code of conduct is being observed generally by Management (NOT
STAFF) of the university? Tick “Yes” if management observes work ethics, and “No” if
management does not.
DESCRIPTION OF WORK ETHIC IN THE GHANA CIVIL “Yes” “No,” Not
SERVICE Being Being
Applied Applied
1 Reporting for duty punctually and in good time before work
. begins.
2. Guarding against absenting themselves from work
without permission or reasonable excuse.
3. Following and obeying lawful, legitimate or reasonable definite
instructions, and complying with laid down procedures relating to
work.
4. Taking pride and joy in doing more than is required by duty.
38
 5. Responding to legitimate requests and demands of members of
the college with urgency, promptness and timeliness.
6. Seeing a task through and having a sense of pride in
accomplishing assignments every time.
7. Undertaking tasks in ways that contribute effectively to achieving
the goals of his or her organization

3. Overall, How Satisfied Are You With the Manner Staff of Your University? Are Observing
the Code of Ethics in the workplace practiced?
i Extremely Dissatisfied
ii Very Dissatisfied
iii Somewhat Dissatisfied
iv Neutral
v Somewhat Satisfied
vi Extremely Satisfied

3. To What Extent Would You Agree That You Provide The Best Ethical conduct (As Role
Model)
i Disagree Completely
ii Strongly Disagree
iii Somewhat Disagree
iv Somewhat Agree
v Strongly Agree
vi Agree Completely

5. Each person in the Civil Service accepts personal responsibility for developing and exhibiting
strong work ethics and combating negative work habits. In your opinion do you see this to be
happening among your staff?
i. Yes
ii. No.
iii. Cannot Tell
C. PART THREE:
PRACTICES OF ETHICAL CODE of PRINCIPLES BY RESPONDENT
6. A State Three (3) Ethical Values in Question 1 you have worked to sustain for which you are
best noted by staff of the Organization/Students you are heading.
i.………………………………………
39
ii…………………………….…………
iii……………………..………………

B State Two (2) Ethical Values in Question 1 you would like to vigorously enforce in your
Organization to provide better ethical environment.
i..………………………… ii…………………………
Please mark the extent to which you agree with the following statements:
Strongly Strongly Some Neither Somewhat Agree Completely
Disagree Disagree how Agree Agree Agree
Completely Disagree Nor
Disagree
a. The Code of
Conduct have
been clearly
conveyed to all
stakeholders
b. The Core
Values of my
organization have
been clearly
conveyed to all
our clients
c. The Core Values
Drive/Guide the
Conduct of
stakeholders in
AAU
d. I understand
that my ethical
conduct/behavior
affects staff I am
working with.
e. Communication
My subordinates
feel free to
discuss with or
report ethical
issues to me
f. I am able to
Communicate
ethical issues to
my subordinates
freely
g. problem: I
ensure my
organization’s
40
 Mission, Vision,
and Core Values
are
communicated in
all official policy
documents

8. How satisfied are you with your own performance in Ethical Issues: (Select item which fits
your opinion)
Completely Very Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Very Completely
Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Satisfied Satisfied Satisfied
Dissatisfied

9. When asked to prioritize, which situations pose the greatest ethical dilemmas/ challenges
to you. Arrange hierarchical from greatest pressure to the least.
Source of Pressure Priority Resource
i. Political Pressures i………….…………………………………..
ii. Work Place Romance ii……….…...………………………………..
iii. Favors by Friends/Peers iii…….………...………………………
iv. Pressures from Family Relations iv…….……………..………………………..
v. Subordinates Out-of-Turn Demands v…….............................................................
vi. Others
(Specify) …….
………………………………………………………………..
10. Which of these truly represent the current code of ethics management program in place to
accomplish the appropriate ethical conduct by staff of the university? Please Select OR
Tick ethics deliverables applicable to or being pursued by your organization currently:
i. Ethics Policy- E.g. Goals, , Ethics Benchmarked, Structures, Programme Content,
Methodology, Rewards and Sanctions, Financing, Monitoring and Evaluation system etc.
ii. Ethics Management Plan and Resources- Ethics Committee, Activities, Timelines,
Personnel, Budget, etc.
iii. Other Ethics Management plan:
Please Explain……………………………………………………………………….
11. Which of these issues is of primary consideration to you when you have to make an
ethical choice/decision.
(a) Financial or Monetary gain – i.e., due to my Salary and Allowances.
41
(b) My Career Progression in the Service thus far
(c) Possibilities for future Career Progression in the Service
(d) My Retirement
(e) Other
(Specify)…………………………………………………………………….
12. What recommendations would you offer to make the implementation of the Code of
Ethics Program by top level management of your organization successful? Please Offer 3
Recommendations: i..
………………………………………………………………………………..…… ii.
…………………………………………………………………………..…………
iii……………………………………………………………………………………..

42