Exit surveys as assessments of organizational ethicality.

The importance of clearly articulated and understood ethical standards in the business of public administration is undisputable. (1) Moreover, an understanding of how ethics operates in the day-to-day functioning of the public sector is crucial in improving ethical decision-making generally. (2) Many of the models created to further our understanding of ethics in the workplace focus upon process issues: cognitive processes, like cognitive moral development; (3) procedural processes, like procedural justice; (4) and legitimizing processes, like codifying organizational values into codes of ethics. (5) In contrast, an emphasis on measurement in organizational ethics is less readily apparent, most likely because of the difficulty in doing so. (6) Indeed, many organizations employ a very simple four-step metric to measure the morality of an action: Is it legal? Is it balanced? How will it make me feel? How will I feel when others are aware of the action? (7)

The need for effective measurement in organizational ethics is pervasive. For example, from a decision-making perspective, utilitarianism requires one metric indicating the greatest good and another indicating the greatest number in order to evaluate the consequences of an action. Distributive justice requires a measure of intangible outcomes in order to determine whether resources are fairly allocated. (8) Similarly, research has shown that employees may engage in unethical behaviors that are both costly and dangerous and could have been prevented if appropriate data had been available. (9)

In order to measure ethically relevant variables, it is essential to determine the focus of measurement. For example, some have sought to focus on specific instances of unethical behaviors in organizations. A number of typologies of unethical behavior exist that list common problems, such as lying, falsifying records and theft. (10) Many organizations have institutionalized these lists in ethical codes, though relatively few organizations have devices for monitoring the incidence of these problematic behaviors. (11) One suggested measure is an organizational ethics audit, which documents incidents of unethical behaviors and assesses perceptions of ethical climate toward the end of creating action plans for addressing these problems. (12)

Conversely, others have focused on measurement of organizational ethical climate. Ethical climate consists of the shared perceptions of organizational members regarding ethical procedures and policies. Its dimensions include caring, rules, codifying ethics, the degree of independence of members and the instrumentality of organizational practices for creating an organizational morality. (13) The need for measuring the perceptions of members has heretofore been met by ethical climate questionnaires, such as that of Cullen, Victor and Stephens. (14) While such attempts may be fruitful, a more succinct and reliable alternative measure is clearly needed.

The Exit Interview and Survey

One technique that shows promise in many areas of organizational evaluation including ethics assessment is the exit interview and survey. (15) An ethics exit survey provides a means of gathering ethics-relevant information within an already established means of gathering data, and as such would appear to be a convenient means of assessing organizational ethics. A recent study demonstrated that organizational members were willing to discuss five areas in an ethics exit survey: illegal organizational activities, unfair administrative actions, illegal human resource activities, dishonesty and mistreatment of organizational constituencies. (16)

Exit interviewing and surveying (EIS) is already a widely used tool for gathering information from separating employees. Traditionally, the EIS process covers issues such as benefits, working conditions, opportunities for career advancement, the quality and quantity of the workload and relationships with co-workers and supervisors. (17) Its effectiveness and the utility of the information gleaned in this manner have been well supported. (18) The justification for adapting EIS to use in ethical assessment is simple and direct: at a time when employees generally feel free from retribution in answering revelatory questions, more complete and accurate data can be collected about the organization and its ethics. Data gathered in this manner can be used for ethics training programs, policy evaluation and assessing ethical climate. Additionally, it is an excellent opportunity to gather specific data regarding individual instances of ethical (and possibly legal) transgressions.

A major study done by the Department of Defense demonstrated that exit surveys could be used to effectively diagnose both the locations and items that were most susceptible to theft, as well as the procedures that left the organization susceptible to theft. The study also showed that responses were not subject to biases that might invalidate resulting. (19)

The utility of information collected during exit interviews is a function of the caliber of the data gatherer (the interviewer or survey instrument), the technology used (paper and pencil or computerized), the respondents' willingness to provide information, the level of trust the respondent has that such data will remain confidential and the sample from which extrapolations are made. (20) Equally important are the issues of methodological soundness, responsiveness to an organization's diagnostic and developmental needs and the direct relation between data collection and employee development.

For organizations seeking to use an EIS in assessing organizational ethicality, there must be a clear identification of purpose, problems and opportunities in the ethics exit survey (EES) development and administration. It is to these issues that we now turn.

Identifying Purpose

Reconsideration of the structure of an EIS toward the development of an EES must begin fundamentally with a clear identification of the reasons for its existence. What goal is to be achieved by developing and administering the EES? Its content should be clearly predicated on needs that warrant its use. In identifying the reasons for an EES, organizational ethicists must discern the extent to which their particular EES addresses, or seeks to address, two purposes: overall and specific.

Overall Purpose. Previous researchers (21) have noted the value of exit surveys in providing information for one or more of three distinct purposes: diagnosis and strategy, employee perceptions, and personal catharsis. As assessments of ethical performance as well as organizational effectiveness, the information gathered in these three areas is invaluable in advancing an efficient and effective workplace.

When EESs are used to gather diagnostic and strategic information, the goal is to ascertain the reasons for ethical problems, the source of ethical conflicts and the extent to which ethical dilemmas can be resolved in the workplace. This information can serve as a basis for training and developmental assessments, formation of ethics committees, ethical code enforcement and examining current policies and the extent to which they may contribute to or exacerbate the problems. Aligning measures of effectiveness and accountability with ethical concerns encourages holistic, integrative thinking and policy development. Such information, objectively measured and assessed, should become a key element of the strategic planning process.

When the EES functions as an assessment of employee perceptions, or how employees view the organization and its policies, the primary purpose is to allow information to flow freely from those who were most likely in a front-line position in interacting with the public. Who better to know or assess the ethical judgments clients or fellow employees hold regarding the organization, its ethical climate, (22) than those directly involved in service provision? Such information can affect the ability of the organization to maximize efficiency and quality in service delivery.

When the EES is used for personal reasons, its purpose is to benefit the exiting employee, not necessarily the organization. Asking the exiting employee their perceptions of the ethical image of their organization can mitigate an otherwise disgruntled expert voice, as a former employee with presumably inside knowledge about the company's workings is often viewed by their peers and the external environment. By providing an outlet to legitimately voice these issues, with confidence that the opinions provided will be given serious consideration, the individual is less likely to seek an outlet for voicing their opinions out in the community (usually in the form of whistle blowing), where it can be potentially harmful to the organization.

Although these purposes are not counter indicative, from a practical stance, it is important for organizations to determine what is their primary goal.

Developing an EES

A body of literature and common practice have firmly established the need for and utility of the information gathered by the EIS, and the validity of the methods used to gather the data. In developing an EES, it is essential that the developers identify a specific purpose and sponsor as well as anticipate the common, potential problems of such an instrument.