Responsibilities

The OECD Recommendation of the Council on Public Integrity calls on adherents to “clarify institutional responsibilities across the public sector to strengthen the effectiveness of the public integrity system, in particular through:

a) Establishing clear responsibilities at the relevant levels (organisational, subnational or national) for designing, leading and implementing the elements of the integrity system for the public sector;

b) Ensuring that all public officials, units or bodies (including autonomous and/or independent ones) with a central responsibility for the development, implementation, enforcement and/or monitoring of elements of the public integrity system within their jurisdiction have the appropriate mandate and capacity to fulfil their responsibilities;

c) Promoting mechanisms for horizontal and vertical co-operation between such public officials, units or bodies and where possible, with and between subnational levels of government, through formal or informal means to support coherence and avoid overlap and gaps, and to share and build on lessons learned from good practices.”

Questions for self-assessment:

1. Are clear responsibilities for designing, leading and implementing the integrity system established?

Responsibilities for designing, leading and implementing the public integrity system are neither clear nor established.

Some core responsibilities for designing, leading and implementing the public integrity system are established and clear, but there are overlaps and implementation gaps. Complementary responsibilities for integrity are neither established nor clear.

The core responsibilities for designing, leading and implementing the public integrity system are established and clear, with some complementary responsibilities for integrity established and clear. In some cases, there is an overlap of responsibilities, with different actors carrying out the same roles but not co-ordinating with each other.

The core and complementary responsibilities for designing, leading and implementing the integrity system are established and clear. Implementation gaps and overlapping mandates between responsibilities are prevented through the use of formal and informal networks.

2. Are the functions of the integrity system adequately resourced to implement their responsibilities?

Human, technical and financial resources are not assigned to implement the integrity functions.

Limited human, technical and financial resources are assigned to support implementation of the integrity functions. No resources are in place to support co-operation or collaboration across functions.

All integrity functions have the adequate human, technical and financial resources to support implementation. Some resources are assigned to support co-operation or collaboration across formal and informal networks.

All integrity functions have the adequate human, technical and financial resources to support implementation. Co-operation and collaboration across formal and informal networks is well-resourced.

3. Are mechanisms established to ensure horizontal co-operation across integrity functions?

Formal or informal horizontal co-operation mechanisms are not in place.

A central body, co-ordination committee or informal network is assigned responsibility for ensuring co-operation, but does not have the influence or authority to ensure cooperation across integrity functions. Silos are the main mode of operation.

A central body, co-ordination committee or informal network enjoys some influence and authority across the different integrity functions, but its added-value is not recognised by leadership.

A central body, co-ordination committee or informal network has clear influence and authority to ensure co-operation across the different integrity functions. The added-value of such a mechanism is clear for public officials and leadership.

4. Are vertical co-operation mechanisms with and between different levels of government or the organisation in place and tailored to the governance framework?

Mechanisms for formal or informal vertical co-operation with and between different levels of government or the organisation are not in place.

Mechanisms for formal or informal vertical co-operation with and between other levels are limited, if any.

Mechanisms for formal or informal vertical co-operation with and between the different levels of government or organisation are in place, but they tend to be formalistic. The added-value of the co-operation mechanism(s) is not recognised by leadership or the integrity functions.

Mechanisms for formal or informal vertical co-operation with and between the different levels of government or organisation are in place when legally possible. The added-value of the co-operation mechanism(s) is recognised by leadership and the integrity functions.