Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Accountability as a Mediator between Deontological Ethical Orientations and Public Interest in Ugandan Public Primary Schools

  • Published:
Public Organization Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The study explains the mediating role of accountability in the relationship between deontological ethical orientations and public interest using the stewardship theory. Data were collected from a sample of 361 UPE schools in Central and Western Uganda. Data were analyzed using SPSS and SEM. Existing studies focused on the direct relationship between deontological ethical orientations and public interest. Therefore, this study examines the mediating role of accountability in the relationship between deontological ethical orientations and public interest using data from government primary schools. The findings reveal that accountability partially mediates the relationship between deontological ethical orientations and public interest.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adjei, A.B, (2010). Message from the Chief Executive, Ghana Public Procurement Board. Retrieved from: http://www.ppbghana.org.

  • Amin, M. E. (2005). Social science research: Conception, methodology and analysis. Kampala: Makerere University Printery.

  • Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1998). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aupperle, K. E. (2008). Moral decision making: Searching for the highest expected moral value. International Journal of Organization Theory & Behavior.

  • Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beauchamp, T. L., & Bowie, N. E. (1983). Ethical theory and business 4th. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

  • Becker, G. S. (1968). Crime and punishment: An economic approach. Journal of Political Economy, 76(2), 169–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B. (2007). Value for money and public interest: Counterbalancing economic individualism. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, J. M., & Tullock, G. (1962). The Calculus of consent: The logical foundations of constitutional democracy. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

  • Campbell, H. (2002). Utilitarianism’s bad breath? A re-evaluation of the public interest justification for planning. Planning Theory Journal. https://doi.org/10.1177/147309520200100205.

  • Carmen, T., Douglas, L. M., & Rumen, I. (2007). Influence of deontological versus consequentialist orientations on act choices and framing effects: When principles are more important than consequences. European Journal of Social Psychology. Department of Psychology, University of Zurich, Switzerland.

  • Chamberlain, J. M. (2016). Risk-based regulation and reforms to fitness to practise tribunals in the United Kingdom: Serving the public interest? Routledge. Taylor & Francis., 18(5–6), 318–334.

  • Constitution of the United States of America (1788).

  • Cronbach, L. J. (1987). Statistical tests for moderator variables: Flaws in analyses recently proposed. Psychological Bulletin, 102(3), 414–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). CONSTRUCTING 21st-CENTURY TEACHER EDUCATION Stanford University. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(3), 300–314. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487105285962.

  • Davis, J., Schoorman, F., & Donaldson, L. (1997). Reply: The distinctiveness of agency theory and stewardship theory. Academy of Management Review, 22, 611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denhardt, J. V., & Denhardt, R. B. (2007). The new public service. Expanded edition serving, not steering. Public Administration Review, 60(6), 549–559. https://doi.org/10.1111/0033-3352.00117.

  • Donaldson, L., & Davis, J. H. (1991). Stewardship theory or agency theory: CEO governance and shareholder returns. Australian Journal of Management, 16, 49–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/031289629101600103.

  • Donaldson, L., & Davis, J. H. (1993). Stewardship Theory or Agency Theory: CEO Governance and Shareholder Returns. Australian Journal of Management, 16, 49–65.

  • Evenett, S. (2005). International Cooperation and the Reform of Public Procurement Policies. Policy Research Working Paper, No. 3720. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/8268.

  • Farazmand, A. (2002). Administrative ethics and professional competence: Accountability and performance under globalization. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 68(1), 127–143. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852302681007.

  • Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39–50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312.

  • Global Fund Audit (2016). Audit of Global Fund Grants in Uganda by the Office of the Inspectorate of Government of the Republic Uganda.

  • Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. Maxwell Macmillan International Editions.

  • Hansson, L., & Longva, F. (2014). Contracting accountability in network governance structures. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 11(2), 92–110. https://doi.org/10.1108/qra.

  • Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herman, J. L. (2007), Accountability and Assessment: Is public interest in K – 12 Education being served? National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing Graduate School of Education & Information Studies UCLA | University of California, Los Angeles.

  • Hernandez, M. (2007). Promoting stewardship behavior in organizations: A leadership model. Journal of Business Ethics, 80(1), 121.

  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (2009). Cutoff criteria for fit indices in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling. A Multi-Disciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IG Report (2018). Bi-Annual Inspectorate of Government Performance Report to the Parliament of the Republic of Uganda, July to December 2018.

  • Inayet, A. and Karaman-Kepenekci, Y. (2007), Principals’ opinions of organisational justice in elementary schools in Turkey. Journal of Educational Administration Vol. 46 No. 4, 2008 pp. 497–513. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Faculty of Educational Sciences, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey.

  • Isaac, M. (2009), Is an ethical society possible? Society and Business Review Vol. 4 No. 3, 2009 pp. 246–264 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 1746–5680. https://doi.org/10.1108/17465680910994236.

  • James, A., Wood, & Bruce, E. W. (2007). Development of three scales to measure leader accountability. Virginia Beach: Regent University, School of Global Leadership and Entrepreneurship.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior. Agency Costs and Ownership Structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3, 305–360.

  • Kakabadse, N. K. (2009). A dynamic theory of leadership development. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 30(6), 563–576. https://doi.org/10.1108/01437730910981935.

  • Kee, & Forre. (2008). Measures of ensuring value for money in public procurement: A case of selected polytechnics in Ghana. Journal of Logistics Management 2016, 5(1), 22–31. https://doi.org/10.5923/j.logistics.20160501.04.

  • Kraemer, H. C. (2001). How do risk factors work together? Mediators, moderators, and independent, overlapping, and proxy risk factors. American Journal of Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.158.6.848.

  • Kraines, G. A. (2001). Accountability leadership: How to strengthen productivity through sound managerial leadership. Franklin Lakes: Career Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krejicie, R., & Morgan, D. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30, 607–610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kwemarira, G., Ntayi, J. M., & Munene, J. C. (2019). Accountability and public interest in government institutions. International Journal of Public Administration. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2019.1672187.

  • Lechner, L., Bolman, C., & Van Dijke, M. (2006). Factors related to misperception of physical activity in the Netherlands and implications for health promotion programmes. Health Promotion International, 21(2), 104–112. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/dal011.

  • Leif, L. (1991). Self-interest and public interest in Western politics, Comparative European Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, C. W. (2006). Pursuit of the public interest. Public Administration Review, 66(5).

  • Macdonald, J. E., & Beck-Dudley, C. L. (1994). Are deontology and teleology mutually exclusive? Journal of Business Ethics, 13, 615–623.

  • MacKinnon, D. P., & Fairchild, A. J. (2007). Introduction to statistical mediation analysis. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

  • Mihai, D. C., Opreana, A., & Pompiliu, M. C. (2010). Efficiency, effectiveness and performance of the public sector. Journal for Economic Forecasting, 4, 132–147.

  • MoE. (2017). Ministry of Education and Sports Report, Background to the Budget 2017–2018 Fiscal year. Kampala, Uganda.

  • Mostovicz, E.I., Kakabadse, N.K. and Kakabadse, A.P. (2009) The role of leadership in driving ethical outcomes, Corporate Governance. The international journal of business in society, Special issue.

  • Moyers, B. (2007), For America’s sake. The Nation.

  • Nikolay, A., & Bulgaria, H. (2014). The role of governments in the business and society debate. Business & Society Journal. https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650315586179.

  • Nolte, K. B., Healy, C., Rees, C. M. and Sklar, D. (2016). Motorcycle Policy and the Public Interest: A Recommendation for a New Type of Partial Motorcycle Helmet Law. National Library of Medicine. Law Med Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073110517703324.

  • Nsiah-Asare et al. (2016) https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/70051/.

  • Ntayi, J. M., Ngoboka, P., & Kakooza, C. S. (2012). Moral schemas and corruption in Uganda public procurement. Journal of Business Ethics, 112(3), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1269-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Okafor, F. U., & Osuagwu, C. (2006). From praxis to theory: A discourse on the philosophy of african law. The Cambrian Law Review, 37, 37–48.

  • Olson, M. (1971). The logic of collective action (Rev. ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

  • Potter, M. R., Olejarski, A. M., & Pfister, S. (2014). Capture theory and the public interest: Balancing competing values to ensure regulatory effectiveness. International Journal of Public Administration, 37(10). https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2014.903266.

  • Preacher, K. J., Curran, P. J., & Bauer, D. J. (2007). Computational tools for probing interactions in multiple linear regression, multilevel modelling, and latent curve analysis. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 31(4), 437–448.

  • Rasmussen, A. Brendan, J. C. and Lowery, D. (2014). Representatives of the public? Public Opinion and Interest group activity.

  • Reich, R. (1988). The power of public ideas. Cambridge: Ballinger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reidenbach, R. E., & Robin, D. P. (1988). Some initial steps toward improving the measurement of ethical evaluations of marketing activities. Journal of Business Ethics, 7(11), 871–891.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, J. S. and Jonathan, F. (2012). The consequential list scale: Elucidating the Rule of Deontological and Utilitarian Beliefs in Moral Judgments’ Master of Arts, Department of Psychology, University of Toronto. https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-11-11-0999-PDN.

  • Rubin, E. V. (2015). Holding employees accountable for the accomplishment of organizational goals: The case of the u.s. federal government. International Journal of Organization Theory & Behavior, 18(1), 75–104.

  • Saeed, M., Bashir, M. G., & Bushra. (2005). Assessing achievement of primary grader students and factors affecting achievement in Pakistan. International Journal of Educational Management, 19(6), 486–499. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513540510617436.

  • Sarantokos, S. (2005). Social research (3rd ed.). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

  • Schattschneider, E. E. (1960). TheSemisovereign people. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

  • Sekaran, U. (2000). Research methods for business: A skill-buildingApproach (4th Edn). New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc.

  • Soroka, S. N., & Wlezien, C. (2005). Opinion policy dynamics: Public preferences and public expenditure in the United Kingdom. British Journal of Political Science, 35(4), 665–689.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uganda National Examinations Board (UNEB). (2017). National symposium on assessment and examinations: Present and future prospects. Kampala: UNEB.

  • UNEB (2015). Uganda National Examinations Board. Report on work candidates in primary leaving examinations.

  • UNEB (2016). Uganda National Examinations Board. PLE Results Report.

  • UNESCO (2018), United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation Annual Report on Education 2014–2015.

  • Van Slyke, M. (2006). Agents or stewards: Using theory to understand the government – Non-profit social service contracting relationships. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 17(2), 157–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vigoda, E. (2002). From responsiveness to collaboration: Governance, citizens, and the next generation of public administration. Public Administration Review, 62(5), 527–540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vladislav, V. (2011). Accountability and the public interest in the nonprofit sector: a conceptual framework. Financial Accountability & Management. 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA, MA 02148, USA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

  • World Bank. (2018). Development Report 2018. NewYork, NY: Oxford University Press, Inc.

  • Zrinjka, P. (2009). Public Interest and Television Performance in Croatia. UDK: 316.77(497.5):7.097.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Management Sciences, Busitema University, Pallisa Campus, Pallisa, Uganda

    Godwin Kwemarira

  2. School of Management Sciences, Uganda Management Institute, Kampala, Uganda

    Godwin Kwemarira

  3. Faculty of Graduate Studies & Research, Makerere University Business School, Kampala, Uganda

    Munene J. C. Kigozi

  4. Faculty of Economics, Energy and Management Science, Makerere University Business School, Kampala, Uganda

    Joseph Mpeera Ntayi

  5. Faculty of Business Administration, Makerere University Business School, Kampala, Uganda

    Isaac Wazinge Magoola

Authors
  1. Godwin Kwemarira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Munene J. C. Kigozi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Joseph Mpeera Ntayi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Isaac Wazinge Magoola
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Godwin Kwemarira.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kwemarira, G., Kigozi, M.J.C., Ntayi, J.M. et al. Accountability as a Mediator between Deontological Ethical Orientations and Public Interest in Ugandan Public Primary Schools. Public Organiz Rev 21, 491–509 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-020-00501-5

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-020-00501-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation