Managing Ethics in the European Commission Services

Abstract

This article adds to research on the regulation of standards of conduct in public administration. Specifically, it analyses attempts made during Siim Kallas’ mandate (2004–2009), to change the European Commission's approach to managing ethics, from a focus on control (inherited from the Kinnock reforms) to a ‘modern’ style based on guidance and shared values. Findings suggest that administrative practice fell short of delivering the change suggested by official discourse. The case of the Commission illustrates the practical challenges of operating shifts in organizational ethics management, and draws attention to the influence of the historical and political context of the reforms. The article uses a qualitative methodology, combining document analysis and in-depth interviews with ethics experts in the European Commission.

Key words:

• Ethics
• European Commission
• administrative reform
• public service

Acknowledgement

The author acknowledges a grant from the Central European University for doing fieldwork for this article.

Notes

Out of the 17 DGs, 14 were ‘operational’ (i.e. active in policy making and implementation, in the areas of both internal market, and external relations), and 3 ‘administrative’ (i.e. with predominantly managerial tasks). Thus, the collected information can be considered representative for a wide range of activities and functions performed in the Commission.

This distinction, far from being originated by the OECD, is a fundamental one in the literature on ethics management (see for example Lewis, 1991; Paine, 1994; Rohr, 1978).

For example, point 9 in OECD's Recommendation on Principles for Managing Ethics in the Public Service (1998: 4) states: ‘government policy should not only delineate the minimal standards below which a government official's actions will not be tolerated, but also clearly articulate a set of public service values that employees should aspire to’.

Basically, the Appointing Authority (AA) designates the employer. It exercises a wide range of attributions related to the officials' career, rights and obligations, disciplinary action etc. It is up to each institution of the European Communities to decide which unit(s) within it will serve as AA. In the European Commission, DG HR serves as AA in some cases, but for most officials the AA is their Director General.

The Directorate General for Competition.

The specialized literature makes a conceptual distinction between ‘codes of ethics’ (which are relatively abstract, use aspirational language, and aim at encouraging exemplary behaviour), and ‘codes of conduct’ (which spell out more concretely behavioural expectations, and aim at maintaining lawful, acceptable behaviour). For a detailed discussion see Van Wart (2003).