Examining the ethical dilemmas of political impartiality in records administration: a phronetic approach

IF 0.8 Q3 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Records Management Journal Pub Date : 2023-08-23 DOI:10.1108/rmj-02-2023-0008
Adebowale Jeremy Adetayo
{"title":"Examining the ethical dilemmas of political impartiality in records administration: a phronetic approach","authors":"Adebowale Jeremy Adetayo","doi":"10.1108/rmj-02-2023-0008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis paper aims to explore the ethical dilemmas faced by records administrators concerning political impartiality by examining the case of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) in the USA, which has faced reputational challenges due to perceived political bias.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThis paper proposes a phronetic approach to resolve the ethical dilemmas associated with political impartiality in records administration. This approach emphasizes practical wisdom and ethical decision-making, offering a unique and effective way to address the challenges faced by presidential record archivists.\n\n\nFindings\nThe proposed phronetic approach provides a means to resolve the ethical challenges posed by political impartiality in records administration, with a particular focus on NARA. By taking a transparent and impartial approach, agencies can minimize criticism and ensure their continued ability to equitably serve the public.\n\n\nPractical implications\nThe phronetic approach offers a framework for addressing ethical dilemmas related to political impartiality in records administration, with potential implications for other independent agencies facing similar challenges.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThis paper offers a unique perspective on the ethical dilemmas of political impartiality in records administration and proposes a practical and effective approach to resolving these challenges. It contributes to the broader discussion on the intersection of ethics and public administration.\n","PeriodicalId":20923,"journal":{"name":"Records Management Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Records Management Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/rmj-02-2023-0008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to explore the ethical dilemmas faced by records administrators concerning political impartiality by examining the case of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) in the USA, which has faced reputational challenges due to perceived political bias. Design/methodology/approach This paper proposes a phronetic approach to resolve the ethical dilemmas associated with political impartiality in records administration. This approach emphasizes practical wisdom and ethical decision-making, offering a unique and effective way to address the challenges faced by presidential record archivists. Findings The proposed phronetic approach provides a means to resolve the ethical challenges posed by political impartiality in records administration, with a particular focus on NARA. By taking a transparent and impartial approach, agencies can minimize criticism and ensure their continued ability to equitably serve the public. Practical implications The phronetic approach offers a framework for addressing ethical dilemmas related to political impartiality in records administration, with potential implications for other independent agencies facing similar challenges. Originality/value This paper offers a unique perspective on the ethical dilemmas of political impartiality in records administration and proposes a practical and effective approach to resolving these challenges. It contributes to the broader discussion on the intersection of ethics and public administration.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
考察档案管理中政治公正的伦理困境:一种语音学方法
本文以美国国家档案和记录管理局(NARA)为例,探讨档案管理人员在政治公正方面面临的伦理困境,NARA因政治偏见而面临声誉挑战。设计/方法/方法本文提出了一种解决档案管理中与政治公正有关的伦理困境的方法。这种方法强调实践智慧和道德决策,为解决总统档案保管员面临的挑战提供了一种独特而有效的方法。研究结果提出的音质学方法提供了一种解决档案管理中政治公正性所带来的道德挑战的方法,特别是NARA。通过采取透明和公正的方法,各机构可以最大限度地减少批评,并确保它们继续有能力公平地为公众服务。实际意义:音律学方法为解决档案管理中与政治公正性有关的道德困境提供了一个框架,对面临类似挑战的其他独立机构也有潜在的影响。原创性/价值本文对档案管理中政治公正的伦理困境提供了独特的视角,并提出了解决这些挑战的实际有效方法。它有助于更广泛地讨论道德与公共行政的交集。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Records Management Journal
Records Management Journal INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
7.10%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: ■Electronic records management ■Effect of government policies on record management ■Strategic developments in both the public and private sectors ■Systems design and implementation ■Models for records management ■Best practice, standards and guidelines ■Risk management and business continuity ■Performance measurement ■Continuing professional development ■Consortia and co-operation ■Marketing ■Preservation ■Legal and ethical issues
期刊最新文献
Records management compliance: a case study of Kuwait’s College of Basic Education Strategy for auditing investigation records and information: a case study of records and information management in the Royal Malaysian Police Electronic records management amidst the seismic shift in the dynamic infosphere Insights into the current state of electronic health records adoption and utilisation in Tanzanian public primary healthcare facilities: a survey study Conceptual framework to explore artificial intelligence technology (AIT) readiness and adoption intention in records and information management (RIM) practices: a proposal
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1