����������

Integrity education commonly occurs through online and face-to-face training. While these are effective ways to communicate the authority’s policy position and expectations, they should not be the only methods used.

The authority should ensure those who are new to the authority, or government sector, have a good understanding of its ethical codes, policies and procedures. Induction and on-boarding are ideal times.

Training programs should include:

• relevant case studies to illustrate key points
• scenarios requiring participants to think about how they would respond in a way that is consistent with ethical codes and policy requirements
• ‘red flags’ that officers should look out for.

Information for public officers is a short resource that authorities can customise to assist education efforts. 

Targeted training should be delivered for high risk positions, functions and activities. This training should include information and advice to help officers:

• recognise ‘red flags’ displayed by clients, suppliers and stakeholders such as repeated offers, high pressure sales and relationship building techniques, and situations where invitations that were accepted in good faith become a ‘sales pitch’
• recognise ‘red flags’ displayed by colleagues such as officers who rationalise and make excuses for accepting offers; and officers who have unusually familiar relationships or regularly meet clients, suppliers and stakeholders outside the office environment such as regular lunches and dinners
• make effective decisions by using decision-making tools, such as the GIFT and HOST tests
• develop language to politely decline gifts, for example it is often best to say, “It’s all in a day’s work”.

The authority should consider when and how often training is undertaken. For example, an annual refresher, before periods of heightened risk like Christmas and Easter, and when changes are made to the authority’s ethical codes and policies.

The authority should consider how to communicate its policy position and expectations to its officers, clients, suppliers and stakeholders, and how these stakeholders report conduct that is not consistent.

The authority is likely to have established channels and forums which can be used to communicate and reinforce key messages such as:

• the intranet
• staff newsletters
• team and leadership meetings where one team member works through the policy or where a topical integrity matter is discussed
• providing copies of the authority’s ethical code as part of recruitment
• during performance management and development meetings.

To minimise risks, it is beneficial to communicate and reinforce the authority’s policy position to clients, suppliers and stakeholders, for example by providing a copy of the authority’s ethical code and relevant policies, or a statement of business ethics that describes the way the authority does business. This may help to make it clear that no favours are given in return for gifts, benefits and hospitality.

The authority should consider testing how well its ethical codes and policy expectations are understood and practiced by its officers such as through surveys, team meetings and audits.

Given the nature of their roles, those in leadership positions may have greater contact with external stakeholders, and may be more likely to be offered gifts, benefits and hospitality. Recognising that officers are influenced by the behaviours of their leaders, officers in leadership roles need to ensure they model expected behaviours at all times. They should also promote the importance and value of speaking up when something does not seem right.

• Sample gifts, benefits and hospitality declaration form
• Sample gifts, benefits and hospitality register
• Gifts, benefits and hospitality template text: Information for public officers
• Accountability for managing tickets and hospitality checklist
• Decision-making tool: GIFT test
• Decision-making tool: HOST test