Attached are my assignments for this week. Please follow instructions all the way through and give the best work you can. If there are any questions or you cannot open links or pdf. please let me know through email or chat once the bid is accepted. The coursebook in pdf. format will be one of the attachments. Please ensure you use the coursebook as your primary reference along with any others you may choose. Thank you! Please provide plagiarism reports with all assignments.
· Cooper, T. L. (2012). The responsible administrator: An approach to ethics for the administrative role (6th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
· Chapter 3: Public Administration in Modern and Postmodern Society: The Context of Administrative Ethics
· Chapter 4: Administrative Responsibility: The Key to Administrative Ethics
· Module notes
· Online videos:
· Films Media Group. (Producer). (2013). Disaster investigation (Links to an external site.) [Films On Demand video file] [4 min 12 sec]. In The space shuttle: A horizon guide. Retrieved from http://vlib.excelsior.edu/login?url=http://digital.films. com.vlib.excelsior.edu/PortalPlaylists.aspx?aid=8496&xtid=52582&loid=197605
· Columbia Shuttle Clip. Triumph and Tragedy (Links to an external site.). 2009. British Broadcasting Corporation. 40:09-52:02 Retrieved from: https://vlib.excelsior.edu/login?url=https://search.alexanderstreet.com/view/work/2305510/clip/144075 (Links to an external site.)
· ThinkTank. (2013). Case study: NASA Columbia accident investigation board (Links to an external site.) [Video file] [4 min 13 sec]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X15n6DuP8qU
Module 2: Module Notes: Administrative Context in a Postmodern World
Cooper (2012) emphasizes the importance of understanding one’s role in public administration within the social, cultural, and political context in which the administrator functions. This understanding aids the administrator in identifying ethical dilemmas and developing realistic responses to these dilemmas within that administrative context.
In this scenario, we will examine the social, cultural, and political factors in which The Pedestrian Advocates of Excelsiorville (PAE) operates. Also, we will consider the impact on PAE of operating in a postmodern world.
Cooper, T. L. (2012). The responsible administrator: An approach to ethics for the administrative role (6th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Considering Excelsiorville’s size (approximately 50,000 in population), PAE must account for the culture of the town as well as its social strata. PAE’s key focus is on advocating for pedestrians and cyclists; hence, it must have detailed knowledge of the town’s governance structure as well as the relevant ordinances and proposals that could impact its constituents. Knowing the political leanings and key policy concerns of the city council members could aid PAEin achieving its advocacy goals, or at least make the organization more nimble in trying to navigate the politics involved. When determining where to most effectively channel its limited resources, PAE should consider what policy initiatives and activities will most likely receive buy-in from the citizens of Excelsiorville, from the city council members, and from the City Manager.
These, and other, social, cultural, and political aspects make up the administrative context for PAE. It is within this context that PAE must compete for resources and make decisions; for instance, about how it can fulfill its mission. As the Executive Director, Amber should consider that it is quite difficult for a public administrator in a postmodern society to escape the politics involved both inside and outside of a public organization. Further, she should consider how difficult it can be to separate her public administrator role from her role as a citizen, particularly in a community the size of Excelsiorville.
It is within this administrative context and postmodern society that ethical dilemmas arise. These might be due to conflicts of interest, conflicting administrative responsibilities, or the complexity involved when operating in a political environment. In resolving these dilemmas, public administrators refine their own ethical codes and develop their personal leadership style.
Module 2: Module Notes: Identifying Responsibilities
Now that we have considered PAE’s administrative context, it is instructive to identify Amber’s subjective and objective responsibilities in her role as PAE’s Executive Director. We will also consider how conflicts can generally arise within these responsibilities.
Cooper (2012) defines objective responsibilities as “expectations imposed from outside ourselves” and these include responsibility to supervisors, subordinates, the law, elected officials, and the citizenry. Cooper (2012) defines subjective responsibilities as internal feelings of responsibility, which are expressions of one’s beliefs and character traits.
We can identify Amber’s objective and subjective responsibilities as follows.
· The PAE Board of Directors (although she is the top administrator for PAE, she still answers to the Board and they have the power to remove her)
· Her subordinates
· The law (this would include state statutes governing non-profit organizations, local ordinances that impact her organization, its employees, and its constituents, and any case law interpreting these statutes and ordinances)
· Elected officials
· The citizens of Excelsiorville
Amber has subjective responsibility to:
· Her general attitude toward her constituents and employees
· Her beliefs about the role of non-profit organizations
· Her beliefs about following the law
· Her loyalty to the organization
· Her role in maintaining good morale and team spirit for her staff
· Her own sense of morality
Cooper (2012) indicates that conflicting responsibilities can arise when we experience competing expectations, especially when the situation makes the administrator feel “damned if I do, damned if I don’t.” We will explore these conflicts in greater depth in Module 3 when we look at the material from Chapter 5. Also, in Module 3, we will specifically examine the conflicts Amber faces.
M2D1: Context of Administrative Ethics
This discussion provides an opportunity to examine a real-world example of an administrative context and its impact on a leader’s personal ethic and response to ethical dilemmas. In this discussion, you will also reflect on how the administrator could maintain responsibility to the public and other stakeholders in the given context.
Respond to the following:
· Select a public organization with which you are familiar. Briefly describe that organization, identifying the administrative context in which its leadership operates.
· How could or does the organization’s administrative context impact the way its leaders design responses to ethical dilemmas that arise in the organization?
· How can administrators effectively maintain their responsibility to the public and other stakeholders in the context you have described?
Post your primary response (approximately 500 words)
M2D2: Subjective & Objective Responsibility
Public administrators cannot separate themselves from the political role they play, and they have been given more discretion and more policymaking power than ever before. They face accountability in terms of their objective and subjective responsibilities. In this discussion, you will reflect on these responsibilities and decide how to make ethical decisions when these responsibilities are in conflict.
Respond to the following:
· Describe what objective and subjective responsibilities exist for your current or desired administrator role.
· Describe an incident where you faced, or could face, a conflict in meeting these responsibilities.
· Analyze how you did or could make ethical decisions in the face of these conflicting responsibilities, weighing your personal beliefs, attitudes, and values against your objective responsibilities.
M2A1: Case Study#1—NASA & Columbia
On February 1, 2003, the space shuttle Columbia disintegrated over Texas as it was re-entering the Earth’s atmosphere. The seven astronauts on board were killed and NASA faced intense scrutiny in the wake of this tragedy. The day after the launch, NASA officials discovered that a piece of foam had broken off the external fuel tank, potentially impacting the shuttle’s left wing and damaging some of the heat-shield tiles. The ethical dilemma created by the foam strike incident meant NASA had several options it could take regarding the possibility that Columbia might not survive re-entry. These included:
1. Not finding out if the foam strike had damaged any tiles and not telling the Columbia crew.
2. Finding out if the foam had damaged tiles, but not telling the crew.
3. Finding out if the foam had damaged tiles, and telling the crew.
4. Not finding out whether tiles were damaged, but warning the crew it could be possible.
In the paper for this case study, you will put yourself in the shoes of the NASA administrator making the final decision on this ethical dilemma. This should include consideration of the relevant administrative context and of your objective and subjective responsibilities in your role. Note that you should maintain your focus on yourself as the individual administrator, not on the organization as a whole. This case study will be used to examine ethics at the organizational level in a later module.
For this assignment, review this week’s materials on NASA and the Space Shuttle Columbia disaster and conduct your own research. In a 3-4 page paper:
· Describe the administrative context within which you as a NASA administrator would have been operating when making your decision about Columbia. Describe how this context impacted your decision.
· Comment on the objective and subjective responsibilities you would have had as that NASA administrator.
· Defend your decision using one of the ethical theories studied in Module 1.