Great Deal! Get Instant $10 FREE in Account on First Order + 10% Cashback on Every Order Order Now

Assignment 3: Evaluation of Agency’s Ethics, Cooperation, Leadership, and Legal Decisions As a consultant, you need to develop an in-depth analysis and evaluation of the selected Agency’s Ethics,...

1 answer below »
Assignment 3: Evaluation of Agency’s Ethics, Cooperation, Leadership, and Legal Decisions
As a consultant, you need to develop an in-depth analysis and evaluation of the selected Agency’s Ethics, Cooperation, Leadership, and Legal Decisions and then provide recommendations for improvement. Therefore, you will conduct interviews with agency representatives and research-related academic sources and government Websites. The analysis will be read by the VP of Accounts and Client Support as well as by the leaders of the agency for whom you are working.
Write a five to six (5-6) page paper in which you:
  1. Analyze two to three (2-3) current events from the past two (2) years (using the e-Activity in Week 4*) focusing on the administrative responsibility and ethical implications to the stakeholders, organization, and public regarding the issues in described in the current event. (Title this section Administrative Ethics.) (*Go to The Center for Public Integrity iWatch, located at http://www.iwatchnews.org/icij/about. Scroll to the bottom of the page to “What We Investigate.” Select a topic and review three (3) of the latest news items about it.)
  2. Assess the leadership of this agency (in light of leadership models) and of the political context in which the agency operates, highlighting at least three (3) ways internal agency leaders and political leaders have influenced the success and / or failure of the agency. (Title this section Leadership Influences.)
  3. Analyze the power the agency has in enforcing the regulations they are asked to uphold (using the e-Activity in Week 5). Discuss two to three (2-3) challenges to enforce the agency’s regulations. (Title this section Legal Decisions.)
  4. Analyze three to four (3-4) strategies for the agency’s future plans for administrative ethics, leadership, and legal to improve the agency’s operation and its primary recipients. (Title this section Strategies for Consideration to Administrative Processes.)
  5. Recommend two (2) strategies that will provide immediate improvement based on models that influence public policy and the three to four (3-4) strategies presented in criteria four (4) above with a reason each recommendation would bring about improvement. (Title this Recommendations for Improvements to Administrative Processes.)
  6. Provide proof of one to two (1-2) interviews by submitting the completed interview form with a list of questions for and responses from each interviewee. (Put this in the Appendix under Interview Forms.)
  7. Provide four to five (4-5) relevant and credible outside resources that support the content of this assignment. (Include no more than one (1) non-government Website.)

The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are:
  • Analyze leadership models, theories, characteristics, and skills.
  • Examine ethical issues and legal statues related to the various elements of public administration.
  • Recommend ways to improve specific areas of public administration.
  • Analyze past and present political and legal issues, strategies, trends, and models that influence public policy and public administration.
  • Use technology and information resources to research issues in public administration.
  • Write clearly and concisely about public administration using proper writing mechanics.

1. Analyze two to three (2-3) current events from the past two years (using the e-Activity* in Week 4) focusing on the administrative responsibility and ethical implications to the stakeholders, organization, and public regarding the issues in described in the current event.
PAD599-A3-2
2. Assess the leadership of this agency (in light of leadership models) and of the political context in which the agency operates, highlighting at least three (3) ways internal agency leaders and political leaders have influenced the success and / or failure of the agency.
PAD599-A3-3
3. Analyze the power the agency has in enforcing the regulations they are asked to uphold (using the e-Activity in Week 5). Discuss two to three (2-3) challenges to enforce the agency’s regulations.
PAD599-A3-4
4. Analyze three to four (3-4) strategies for the agency’s future plans for administrative ethics, leadership, and legal to improve the agency’s operation and its primary recipients.
PAD599-A3-5
5. Recommend two (2) strategies that will provide immediate improvement based on models that influence public policy and the three to four (3-4) strategies presented in criteria 4 above with a reason each recommendation would bring about improvement.
PAD599-A3-6
6. Provide proof of one to two (1-2) interviews by submitting the completed interview form with a list of questions for and responses from each interviewee.
PAD599-A3-7
7. Provide four to five (4-5) relevant and credible outside resources that support the content of this assignment. (Include no more than one (1) non-government Website.)

Answered Same Day Dec 21, 2021

Solution

Robert answered on Dec 21 2021
122 Votes
Title
Student Name
Course/Number
Date
Instructor Name
1
Administrative Ethics.
The issue this paper will address is covered in the “Whistleblowers Warfare” and
“Great Mortgage Cover-Up” section of the Center for Public Integrity pages. They essentially
tell a sorty of a group of economic agents who have, through particular legal subversions of
the system and intimidation, managed to win exceptions both to the rule of law as it is
oadly applied and the spirit of the law, despite always being legally covered by settlement
agreements and powerful legal representation. There are clear
eaches of public sector ethics
in several places, such as the well-documented „revolving door‟ between Goldman Sachs, the
Federal Reserve, and the Treasury.
In essence, large corporations – particularly banks, and including state-owned lenders
– have systematically escaped protection for fraud on such a large scale that they caused the
cu
ent global economic crisis. This was done in collusion with successive governments,
pushing a neoliberal model that saw removal of necessary legislation controlling the scale
and possible risk of activities, and including coming to settlement agreements with the
Department of Justice. To date, no major bank or representative has been found guilty of a
criminal charge, with the recent Federal Settlement of Foreclosure Misconduct Claim
amounting to a fine and a waiver of the admission of guilt (as is true of all settlements)
(Lehman, 2012). This is the highest such award since the Tobacco Settlement in 1998, in
which the tobacco industry managed to avoid admission of guilt for hiding and denying the
knowledge that smoking causes a wide variety of health disorders, such as cancer.
More recently, it has become clear that despite the incentives instituted in the Dodd-
Frank Act (2010), the major banks are supressing whistleblowing severely, punishing staff
simply for questions visibly fraudulent practices. There are several stories detailed of
Countrywide in particular firing staff for pursuing internal investigations or questioning
illegal behaviour, and yet despite this whistleblowing cases of fraud are yet to materialise.
2
Again, this is a situation that is likely to increase over time, since the threat of ensure and
advantages of fraud remain high and low, respectively.
The pattern of government acquiescence to the desire for such settlements is reducing,
however, with judges increasingly refusing to allow a settlement to occur. On the other hand,
it has become clear that The Troubled Asset Relief Programme (Frank et al., 2008) and
equivalent relief programmes were actively undermined by the banks that were meant to be
enacting them. The results have been poor for all stakeholders except for the corporations and
persons involved; and even there it actually does harm, since they continue with the same
practices having suffered no meaningful censure as a result of their fraudulent actions. The
Department of Justice, and government in general, are steadily losing public support and trust
as the economic crisis continues and these most directly responsible are seen to be in
positions of power still, rather than under trial. This is critical, since it indicates a
deterioration of the...
SOLUTION.PDF

Answer To This Question Is Available To Download

Related Questions & Answers

More Questions »

Submit New Assignment

Copy and Paste Your Assignment Here