POLICE ETHICS AND INTEGRITY

Milan Pagon
Professor and Dean
College of Police and Security Studies
University of Maribor, Slovenia
ABSTRACT
The paper deals with the importance of police ethics and integrity in
contemporary policing. It first describes the field of applied ethics in general.
It explains the basis for the structure of professional moral obligations, briefly
depicts the core imperatives of applied ethics and describes the process of
moral reasoning. It then defines police ethics, discusses the reasons for its
relative underdevelopment, and delineates its future development in three
interrelated directions: (a) applying the principles of applied ethics to police
profession; (b) establishing standards of ethical conduct in policing; and (c)
defining the means and content of education and training in police ethics.
Next, it discusses the organisational environment that is conductive to police
ethics and elaborates on the concept of integrity. The paper concludes that
police ethics and integrity are of critical importance in the professionalisation
of policing and the best antidotes to police corruption, brutality, neglect of
human rights, and other forms of police deviance.
Date: September 2003
Attribution: No prior publication
Language of origin: English
Filename: pg011mpa.pdf

INTRODUCTION
For all of us in the field of police and security studies, it has become obvious
that we are witnessing a paradigm shift. While we cannot expect this shift to
result in a uniform approach to policing everywhere in the world, we can
assume that all the various approaches will be based on the same set of
assumptions of modern policing, namely the community involvement, a
proactive approach that emphasizes prevention, professionalism, innovation,
and problem-solving, and an integrated view of criminal justice (Pagon, 1998).
In this process, policing is getting closer to professionalisation , a change long
advocated by police scholars. As several authors (e.g., Hahn, 1998;
Vicchio, 1997; Murphy, 1996; Fry & Berkes, 1983) point out, aspirations by the
police to become professionalized either create or at least re-emphasize
several requirements, such as wide latitude of discretion, higher educational
requirements, higher standards of professional conduct, and self-regulation.
At the same time, however, we have witnessed countless accounts of police
brutality and abuse of authority, some of them making the headlines, and
others taking place outside the public eye. In some countries, police corruption
has already reached epidemic proportions. It is obvious that corruption,
brutality, and other forms of police deviance go against the above-mentioned
efforts for police professionalisation and community involvement. The
community cannot trust nor attribute a professional status to deviant police
officers. No wonder then, that modern police organisations all over the world
are fighting police deviance, trying to achieve proper conduct of their
members. However, according to Sykes (1993), a brief history of these efforts
to enhance police accountability reveals that they relied on rules and
punishment. Although each of these reform efforts had an impact, the sum
total fell short of providing assurances that they were adequate and serious
incidents continued In short, the various rule-based systems of accountability
seem insufficient if officers hold different values or there is a subculture which

nurture values different from the ideals of democratic policing (p.2). The
author believes the answer lies in approaches based on ethics, where
accountability rests more on individual responsibility than it does on external
controls and threatened punishment.
It has become obvious that only the properly educated and trained police
officers are able to respond adequately to moral and ethical dilemmas of their
profession. Only a police officer who is able to solve these dilemmas
appropriately can perform his duties professionally and to the benefit of the
community. In doing so, he cannot rely solely on his intuition and experience.
Not only he has to be well acquainted with the principles of police ethics and
trained in moral reasoning and ethical decision-making, he also needs clear
standards of ethical conduct in his profession.
In this article, I will try to show that a proper development of police ethics and
integrity is one of the most important steps toward professionalisation of
policing, and one of the most powerful antidotes to police deviance and
neglect of human rights by the police. To introduce the field of police ethics,
however, I first have to describe the field of applied ethics in general.
APPLIED ETHICS
Police ethics is a branch of applied normative, ethics. The most well known
branches of applied ethics are medical and business ethics. The link between
theory and practice is what makes applied ethics different from
philosophical ethics. Applied ethics is the field that holds ethical theory
accountable to practice and professional practice accountable to theory.
Therefore, the philosophers should not dictate to professionals the norms that
are supposed to govern their professional practice, without a very thorough
knowledge of that practice. On the other hand, the professionals have to
understand that their experience and intuition are insufficient for defensible

judgment, and that all their constraints do not exempt their decisions from
ethical scrutiny (Newton, Internet).
Newton (Internet) believes that if ethics is about human beings, we should be
able to determine the structure of our moral obligations from three basic,
simple, readily observable facts about human beings:
-

People are embodied. They exist in time and space and are subject to
physical laws.

They have needs that must be satisfied if they are to

survive. They must control the physical environment to satisfy those needs.
Failure to do so leads to pain and suffering. The implication for ethics is
that the relief of that suffering and the satisfaction of those needs should
be out first concern, giving rise to duties of compassion, non-maleficence,
and beneficence.
-

People are social. Whatever problems they have with their physical
environment, they have to solve them in groups, which creates a new set of
problems. They must cope with a social environment as well as the physical
one. The social environment produces two further needs: for a social
structure to coordinate social efforts, and for means of communication. The
implication for ethics is that we must take account of each other in all our
actions. We have obligations to the group in general and to other members
of the group of particular.

People are rational. People are able to consider abstract concepts, use
language, and think in terms of categories, classes and rules. Because
people are rational, they can make rational choices, they are autonomous
moral agents. They can also realize that they could have done it differently,
so they can feel guilty and remorse and assume responsibility for their
choices. Rationalitys implication for ethics is that we have a duty to
respect this freedom of choice.

From these facts about human nature, the author derives three fundamental
premises or imperatives of applied ethics (Newton, Internet):
-

Beneficence. This imperative, central to any profession, holds that the

professionals must take care of, or look out for the interest of, the client.
Beneficence has several sub-imperatives conjoined in it: first, to do no
harm, second, to prevent harm or protect from harm, and third, to serve
the interests or happiness of the client.

Respect for persons. The command to respect the autonomy and dignity of
the individuals with whom we deal, to attend to their reasons and honour
their self-regarding choices, is the command underlying all of our
interpersonal dealings. In professional relationships, however, it also limits
the boundaries of professional beneficence. The professionals expertise
may tell him that the clients best interests will be served by certain
services that the professional is able to provide; it may even tell him that
the client needs, on pain of loss of life or liberty, certain of his services.
But if the client chooses not to avail himself of them, and only his own
interests are concerned, the professional may not impose those services on
the client.

Justice. This imperative demands that the professional look past both art
and client, and take responsibility for the effect of professional practice in
the society as a whole. In every profession or practice, we can find
examples of injustice. For example, in medicine, the rich get immediate
and adequate care and the poor get late and inadequate care. The demand
of justice upon the professionals is that they work within their professional
associations, and in their individual practices, to blunt the effects of
injustice in their fields. The professional who ignores this demand fails to
fulfil all the duties of professional status.

Because these imperatives are logically independent, they can be (and often
are) in conflict. Yet, as Newton says, we may not abolish one or another; we

cannot even prioritize them, which leads her to conclude that applied ethics is
not the science of easy answers. As professionals are struggling to solve moral
and ethical dilemmas, the engage in the process of moral reasoning. There are
different forms of moral reasoning (Newton, Internet): the first is
consequentialist (or utilitarian or teleological) reasoning, in which ends are
identified as good (i.e. values) and means are selected that will lead to those
ends; the second is non-consequentialist (or deontological) reasoning, in which
rules are accepted as good and acts are judged right or otherwise according to
their conformity to those rules; finally. The third is virtue-based (or
ontological) reasoning, in which the type of person one is (i.e., his character),
and the type of moral community one belongs to, determines the obligations to
act.
The described core of applied ethics does not specify, for each profession, how
the imperatives should reflect in the professional practice, and what are the
values and virtues of that particular profession. These should differ depending
on the function of the profession in the community. That is why we need
branches of applied ethics, tailored to individual professions. So, let us take a
look at police ethics.
POLICE ETHICS
Police ethics applies the above-described principles to the field of policing.
Compared to medical or business ethics, police ethics is relatively
underdeveloped. There are several reasons for this, the major ones being the
paramilitary philosophy of policing and misunderstanding of the need for police
ethics (Paragon, 2000).
First, within the paramilitary philosophy of policing, police officers are
assigned the role of executors of orders from their supervisors. They are not
supposed to question those orders, so there is not much need for moral

deliberations. The basic virtue of police officers within this framework is

obedience. Police leadership, on the other hand, is either not accountable to
anyone (since they are setting their own goals and can always tailor the
statistics to fit their needs) or they are accountable only to the party in power,
with which they are in a symbiotic relationship. It is not surprising that police
ethics does not thrive in such a context.
Second, some practitioners are mislead by a belief that as far as police officers
perform their work strictly by the law, they need no police ethics. Proponents
of this view also deny police officers the right of discretion. Unfortunately,
when one is faced with a moral or ethical dilemma, the laws prove themselves
to b of little use. As Newton (Internet) puts it, our first jobin all fields of
practice, is to distinguish, in every context, between the demands of law and
the demands of ethics - between the danger the danger of being sued,
prosecuted, jailed or defrocked, and the much subtler, but more pervasive
danger of being systematically and cruelly wrong. One of our first lessons was
that we must think beyond the law and teach nervous professionals to do the
same.
With the rise of the new philosophy of policing (i.e. community policing and
problem-oriented policing) and with the acceptance of police discretion as a
necessary part of police work, the importance of police ethics is gaining
acceptance. Nowadays it is hard to find a curriculum at a police academy or a
program in police studies at a university that does not include a subject of
police ethics. At the same time, the number of police agencies with a
department, task force, or a committee on police ethics is rapidly increasing.
The majority of police agencies also have adopted a code of police ethics, in a
more or less articulated form.
But, as I have already mentioned, police ethics is still at the beginning of its
development. A lot of courses on police ethics are mainly dealing with

philosophical ethics, while the word police in the name simply means that
police officers or studies of police studies are the target group of the course.
Therefore, I will outline the direction of the future development of police
ethics.
Following the postulates of applied ethics, the described development should
be achieved by the joint efforts of police scholars (i.e., theoretians) and police
practitioners. This development should take place in three interrelated
directions (Pagon, 2000): (a) applying the principles of applied ethics to police
profession; (b) establishing standards of ethical conduct in policing; and (c)
defining the means and content of education and training in police ethics. This
development, of course, has to parallel other efforts for implementing
contemporary philosophy and forms of policing and for professionalisation of
police work, including the increased educational requirements for the police.
Let us now take a brief look at the proposed directions for the development of
police ethics.
a) Applying the principles of applied ethics to police profession
The above-described principles of applied ethics have to be tailored to the
needs of police profession, based on the nature of police work and the function
of the police in society. There are three main tasks to be achieved in this
context.
First, the basic imperatives (i.e., beneficence, respect for persons, justice)
have to be translated to police language and specified. What does
beneficence mean in dealing with people who committed crimes or
misdemeanours? What does it mean in dealing with victims and other persons
who suffered a loss? Who is the client of police work? Individuals? The
community? The state? What exactly does respect for persons mean in carrying
out the police duties? How does the imperative of justice reflect in applying

police discretion? Also, the most common conflicts among basic imperatives in
policing have to be identified, so we could discuss them and prepare some
guidelines.
Second, the core values of policing need to be specified. Policing, as any other
rational activity, is directed toward achievement of a certain state or goals.
These desired states and goals represent values. Not only every society has a
somewhat different system of values, they may also differ for each individual.
Police ethics has to specify and rank the impost important values of policing,
which will then guide the police officers teleological moral reasoning. Such
ranking would not imply that other values are not important; it would just add
clarity in ethical decision-making in policing. For example, let us say that a
police officer, using teleological reasoning, determines that one particular
course of action would lead to increased wealth of a certain individual, while
the different course of action would lead to increased equality of the people
involved. Although both the wealth and equality are values, a hierarchy of
values would enable the police officer to opt for equality. While the choice is
obvious in this example, how about a choice between freedom and safety?
Respect for human rights and health?
Third, police ethics need to specify the core virtues of policing. While there are
commonly accepted virtues such as temperance, courage, prudence, justice,
charity, kindness, patience, forgiveness, modesty, etc. we have to - just like in
every other profession - decide which are the virtues most important for police
officers, based on the function of the police in society. In doing so, we have to
accommodate the above-described changes in philosophy of policing, which
caused some traditional police virtues (such as obedience, uncritical loyalty,
authoritativeness) to become obsolete. In police literature, we can find some
descriptions of police virtues, which can serve as a good starting point.
Vicchio (1997) believes that if the goals of police organisation are to be met,
the following virtues must be required of police officers: prudence, trust,

effacement of self-interest, courage, intellectual honesty, justice and being

cognizant of other alternatives that might be taken. Delattre (1996) describes
the importance of the following virtues for police officers: honesty,
trustworthiness, justice, fairness, compassion, temperance, courage, wisdom
and integrity.
b)Establishing standards of ethical conduct in policing
Expectations regarding ethical conduct have the greatest impact upon actual
behaviour if they are not simply assumed, but clearly and unambiguously
communicated. Based on the imperatives, values, and virtues of policy
profession, police ethics has to establish clear and unambiguous standards of
ethical conduct in policing. A code of police ethics is very important within this
context. It contains a set of clear, specific statements, expressing in
unambiguous terms the moral principles and the kind of conduct that police
profession demands of its members. The code has to be a product of
interaction between police ethicists and practitioners, based on agreed-upon
definitions of police imperatives, values and virtues. While the research shows
that the mere existence of the code of ethics positively influences employees
ethical behaviour (Ruch & Crawford, 1991), the police management has to
devote a lot of attention to the implementation of this code.
c) Defining the means and content of education and training in police
ethics
Defining the means and content of education and training in police ethics is
also a task that has to be accomplished by a joint effort of police ethicists and
practitioners. We have to keep in mind that listening to one lecture on police
ethics or skimming through some literature on the topic will not make police
officers moral nor their behaviour ethical. A lot of time and effort need to be
put into education and training in police ethics, before police officers when

faced with a moral problem, ethical or moral dilemma will automatically

consider all the alternatives available to them; will not make decisions based
on prejudice or impulsively; will submit their decisions to reason and change
them, if such a change seems reasonable; and will give equal consideration to
the rights, interests, and choices of all parties to the situation in question.
Furthermore, as Delattre(1996) points out, even the mastery of the process of
moral reasoning and decision-making does not, by itself, guarantee ethical
conduct, nor do all of the situations require moral reasoning and deliberation.
An individual has to have good character (i.e., appropriate virtues) to be
motivated for ethical behaviour. This realization makes two additional
requirements for police ethics training. First, in addition to teaching moral
reasoning and decision-making, training has to emphasize and develop virtues
characteristic of police profession. Second, the task of ethical training should
also be the development of moral habits, so the police officers would behave
ethically out of habit in all those situations, which do not present a moral
problem, ethical or moral dilemma, so they do not require moral deliberation
and reasoning.
So, the task of police ethics education is to teach the principles of applied
ethics in general and police ethics in particular. It has to cover the
imperatives, values and virtues of policing, the process of moral reasoning and
decision-making, moral problems, and in policing, the code of police ethics,
and the process of code implementation. Vital topics are also strategies for
managing ethical behaviour in police organisation and ethics training and
education.
The tasks of police ethics training are: (a) enable the students to recognize
moral problems and moral or ethical dilemmas; (b)train the students for the
process of moral reasoning and decision-making; (c) emphasize and develop the

virtues necessary for police profession, hence developing the students moral
character; (d) develop moral habits of the students.
The development of police ethics, including education and training, will not
achieve its purpose, unless all organisational processes, especially the
behaviour of police managers and the top management of the organisation,
support and encourage ethical conduct of all the members.
ORGANISATIONAL ENVIRONMENT CONDUCTIVE TO POLICE ETHICS
If police officers experience inconsistent behaviour from their supervisors,
preferential treatment of some officers and/or citizens, solidarity with, and
cover-ups for, the officers who violate standards of their profession, they will
sooner or later become cynical regarding the value and appropriateness of
ethical conduct in their organisation. One cannot expect a cynical police
officer to be motivated to adhere to the rules of ethical behaviour (Pagon,
1993).
The research showed the importance of moral climate in organisation for the
behaviour of individual members. Experiments revealed, in schools and prisons,
that changing organisational processes, such as policies and procedures, could
create a positive moral atmosphere that then contributed to improvements in
individual moral development and moral judgment, as well as to reduction in
cheating, stealing and similar anti-social acts (Kohlberg, 1984). Investigations
of organisational effects on moral conduct in business firms appear to support
these observations. Firms demonstrating exemplary business practice attest to
the value of creating a positive moral atmosphere for encouraging ethical
behaviour and maintaining the firms reputation. Conversely, the organisational
environment can also promote unethical and criminal conduct in business firms
(Cohen, 1995). Researchers have also demonstrated that organisational factors,
such as reward systems, norms and culture, and codes of conduct can

significantly decrease the prevalence of unethical behaviour in organisational

contexts (Brass, Butterfield, & Skaggs, 1998).
Cohen (1995) defines moral climate as shared perceptions of prevailing
organisational norms for addressing issues with a moral component. These
issues include (a) identifying moral problems, (b) choosing criteria for resolving
moral conflicts, and (c) evaluating the moral correctness of outcomes that
ensue from organisational decisions. Since climate is a function of how
employees collectively perceive and interpret these and other elements of the
work setting, climate can be thought of as an intervening variable. As such it
provides the necessary perceptual link between organisational processes and
employee behaviour. According to the author, there are five dimensions that
interact to determine the moral climate in the organisation: goal emphasis
(prevailing norms for selecting organisation goals), means emphasis (prevailing
norms for determining how organisational goals should be attained), reward
orientation (prevailing norms regarding how performance is rewarded), task
support (prevailing norms regarding how resources are located to perform
specific tasks). And socio-emotional support (prevailing norms regarding the
type of relationships expected in the firm).
It becomes obvious that police supervisors and top management are responsible
creating a positive moral climate within the police. The literature on corporate
strategy, organisational transformation, business ethics and corporate social
contract provides support for a claim that moral climate in the organisation
emerges mainly from the way in which key organisational processes transmit
managerial expectations about moral behaviour the way employees should
handle issues such as responsibility, equity, or serving the interests of
stakeholders (Cohen, 1995). Therefore, police managers expectations about
moral behaviour of their subordinates will significantly influence moral climate
of a particular police organisation or agency.

In the context of discussing ethical behaviour in police organisation, we should

also stress the importance of social relationships within the organisation.
Organisational actors are embedded within a network of relationships. These
ongoing social relationships provide the constraints and opportunities that in
combination with characteristics of individuals, issues, and organisations, may
help explain ethical or unethical behaviour in organisations (Brass, Butterfield
& Skaggs, 1998).
Social network researchers bring to our attention several factors that might
influence ethical or unethical behaviour of organisational members, such as
strength of relationships (in terms of frequency, reciprocity, emotional
intensity, and intimacy); negative relationships; multiplicity of relationships;
asymmetric relationships; status inequality; structure of relationships;
structural holes; centrality; density; cliques social contagion; and conspiracies.
The constraints and opportunities provided by relationships may be most
predictive of unethical behaviour when personal characteristics, issues, and
organisational factors present moderate or weak constraints or unethical
behaviour (Brass, Butterfield, & Skaggs, 1998).
Another important issue that influences ethical behaviour is trust among
organisational members. McAllister (1955) distinguishes two main dimensions of
trust:
(a) cognition-based trust, which relies on appraisals of others professional
competence and reliability; (b) affect or emotion-based trust, which is present
when people feel save to share their private feelings and personal difficulties,
knowing that the other party would respond constructively and caringly.
Emotion-based trust has been found to be more essential to effective
coordination efforts in organisations. This emotion-based trust incorporates the
virtue of benevolence, which refers to an altruistic concern for the welfare of
others and is devoid of egocentric motives (Mayer, Davis, & Schoorman, (1995).

In police settings, we could extend this notion of trust to include trust between
the police and the community.
It is important to note that all of the above-described factors interact with
each other in predicting ethical or unethical behaviours. Let us take trust as an
example. In an organisation with strong moral climate, composed of individuals
of good character, and with dense social networks, it is safe to assume that
high level of trust will promote ethical behaviour. In such organisations, people
who trust others (both cognitively and emotionally) and feel trusted by them
will be reluctant to violate this trust by engaging in unethical behaviour. On
the other hand, if the moral climate is low, social networks are loose, with a
lot of structural holes and many cliques, it is very likely that high level of trust
within a deviant clique will promote unethical behaviour. In this case, people
who trust other clique members and feel trusted by them will be reluctant to
violate this trust by giving up their own unethical behaviour or even by
reporting on other members unethical behaviour.
Therefore, to set a climate conductive to ethical behaviour in police
organisation, police managers have to consider all of the above factors. To
summarize, they have to foster character development and moral habits of
police officers by educating and training them in police ethics; establish high
moral climate through appropriate use of goals, means, rewards, and support,
facilitate development of strong and dense social networks, extending into the
community; prevent cliques and conspiracies; and establish both cognitivebased and affect-based trust among all organisational members and between
the police and the public.
In doing so, the managers will not only facilitate ethical behaviour of their
officers; they will also prevent or at least lessen the strength of the infamous
police subculture, so typical of paramilitary policing. In trying to achieve the
above goals, police managers will soon discover that, first, setting their own

example is of the utmost importance, and second, that ethics does not only
apply to police officers dealings with the community, but also to their own
dealings with their subordinates. Police officers human rights are as important
as those of the other citizens.
I agree with Sykes (1993) that the quality of policing in a democratic society
relies on the quality of the people doing the work. This is why I believe that in
policing we should strive to achieve a virtue of integrity of all police officers
and supervisors, including top management.
INTEGRITY
Leadership theorists and researchers have found that integrity is a central trait
of effective business leaders, while interpersonal and group relationship
theorists have identified integrity as a central determinant of trust in
organisations (Becker, 1998). Delattre (1996) and Vecchio (1997) agree that
integrity is also central to the mission of policing. To Delattre, integrity is not
only the highest achievement there can be in a human life, but also the most
difficult. So what exactly is integrity?
Delattre (1996) defines as the settled disposition, the resolve and
determination, the established habit of doing right where there is no one to
make you do it but yourself (p.325). He believes that integrity is
irreplaceable as the foundation of good friendship, good marriages, good
parenthood, good sportsmanship, good citizenship, and good public service
(ibid).
Vecchio (1997) defines a person of integrity as somebody who has reasonably
coherent and relatively stable set of core moral values and virtues, to which he
is freely and genuinely committed, and which reflect in his act and speech. So,
the persons words and actions should be of one piece.

Becker (1998) subscribes to the objectivist view of integrity, namely that

integrity is loyalty, in action, to rational principles (general truths) and values.
That is, integrity is the principle of being principled, practicing what one
preaches regardless of emotional or social pressure, and not allowing any
irrational consideration to overwhelm ones rational convictions (p.158).
Integrity in policing, then, means that a police officer genuinely accepts values
and moral standards of policing and possesses the virtues of his profession, and
that he consistently acts, out of his own will, in accordance with those values,
standards, and virtues, even in the face of external pressures.
Of course, not all police officers have integrity. Benjamin (1990) describes five
psychological types lacking in integrity. The first is the moral chameleon, a
person who is anxious to accommodate others, while not being resistant to
social pressure, thus willing to quickly abandon or modify previously avowed
principles. The second is the moral opportunist, whose values are also ever
changing, based on his own short-term self-interest. The third type is the moral
hypocrite, a person who has one set of virtues for public consumption and
another set for actual use as a moral code. The fourth is the morally weakwilled who has a reasonably coherent set of core virtues, but he usually lacks
the courage to act on them. The final type is the moral self-deceiver, a person
who thinks of himself as acting on a set of core principles, while, in fact, he
does not.
Of course, it is not a breach of integrity, but a moral obligation, to change
ones views if one finds that some idea he holds is wrong. It is a breach of
integrity to know that one is right and then proceed (usually with the help of
some rationalization) to defy the right in practice. (Peikoff, 1991): cited in
Becker, 1998).

Why do some people lack integrity? Why is it so hard to achieve it? Based on a
review of objectivist literature, Backer (1998) offers the three most common
reasons. First, not everyone is rational. Integrity requires the discipline of
purpose and a long-range course of action, selecting corresponding goals and
pursuing them fervently, carefully choosing the means to ones ends, and
making full use of ones knowledge. Second, a person may lack integrity
because of desires that are inconsistent with moral values. If a person, when
under temptation, fails to call upon his rational mind, acting upon a whim of
the moment instead, he will indeed lack integrity. The same is true when an
irrational fear drives behaviour. Similarly, an individuals integrity will be
called into question if he does not put rational principles into practice simply
out of inertia. Third, probably the most common reason a person may lack
integrity is that he succumbs to social pressure. Social pressure may come from
numerous sources (e.g., co-workers, bosses, or clients) and take many forms
(e.g., physical intimidation or verbal and nonverbal disapproval). A person with
high integrity will not allow popularity to take priority over rational
convictions.
CONCLUSION
From the above discussion, it should be obvious that integrity can only be
achieved if a person strives to achieve it. Appropriate education and training in
police ethics, good moral climate in police organisation, appropriate social
networks (both within the organisation and within the community), trust and
support, can all both motivate police officers to strive for integrity and help
them achieve it. I believe that, once achieved, integrity of police officers is
one of the most important steps toward professionalisation of policing, and one
of the most powerful antidotes to police corruption, brutality, neglect of
human rights, and other forms of police deviance.

Police ethics provides a compass to both police officers and police managers,
by specifying the core imperatives, values, and virtues of policing, by
delineating the process of moral reasoning and decision-making, by setting the
standards of ethical conduct, and by defining the means and the content of
police ethics education and training. Police scholars and practitioners have to
cooperate in developing police ethics. This is not an easy task for either of
them. Developing and implementing police ethics invokes changes in police
organisation. Police organisations and police officers, as we know, are very
resistant to change. Those police scholars and practitioners entrusted with
developing police ethics must, therefore, themselves be persons of high
integrity. We should not forget the Newtons (Internet) caution of flattery. The
flatterer is a person who tells people what they want to hear, instead of what
they should hear. Flattery, in Newtons words, is the major corruption
available to the ethicistthe only defence against flattery is personal
integrity. In developing and implementing police ethics, a lot of people will
have to be told the things they most definitely do not want to hear.

Milan Pagon
Biography
Milan Pagon got his doctorate (Sc.D.) in Organizational Sciences in 1990 at the University of Maribor, Slovenia. In the
period between 1990 and 1994, he was a Fulbright Scholar to the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, where he both
studied and taught at the College of Business Administration. In 1994, he was awarded a Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.)
degree in Management.
During his police career, Dr. Pagon was an Educator at the Police High School, a Detective, a Deputy Commander and a
Commander of Police Station, a Police Inspector, and a State Undersecretary at the Ministry of the Interior. Outside
the police, he was an Assistant Director of the Personnel Agency of Slovenia, a Human Resource Manager at a chemical
company, a Teaching Assistant, an Assistant Professor, and an Associate Professor. In 1995, he was elected as the Dean
of the College of Police and Security Studies, a duty that he initially performed for three years. In 2001, he was again
elected as the Dean, the position that he is currently holding. In 2003, Dr. Pagon was elected to the rank of a Full
Professor. In addition to his administrative and teaching duties at the College of Police and Security Studies, he is also
a Professor of Organizational Behavior at the Faculty of Organizational Sciences, University of Maribor.
Dr. Pagon was invited in the summers of 1996, 1997, 1998, and 1999 to serve as a Visiting Professor at the University
of Arkansas, Fayetteville, where he taught Concepts of Management and Organizational Behavior and Human Resource
Management at the Sam M. Walton College of Business.

Dr. Pagon is a member of the following professional and scientific associations: Academy of Management, Honorary
Management Fraternity Sigma Iota Epsilon, International Society for Human Resource Management, Society of
International Scholars Phi Beta Delta, American Psychological Society, American Society for Criminology, Academy of
Criminal Justice Sciences, American Association of University Professors, International Police Association, and
Association of Professors of the University of Maribor.
He was a founding father and the Chairman of the Program Committee of the International Biennial Conference
Policing in Central and Eastern Europe, which was already organized four times, with the following subtitles:
Comparing Firsthand Knowledge with Experience from the West (1996), Organizational, Managerial, and Human
Resource Aspects (1998), Ethics, Integrity, and Human Rights (2000) and Deviance, Violence, and Victimization (2002).
In his research, Dr. Pagon has collaborated with some of the top international researchers in the fields of
management and police work: Dr. Daniel C. Ganster, Dr. Paul E. Spector and Dr. Carl B. Klockars from the USA and Dr.
Cary L. Cooper from the UK. These cooperation efforts have already produced papers at scientific conferences and
publications in the best international journals.
Dr. Pagon was also appointed to the editorial board of two international and one domestic journal, namely the Stress
& Health, the International Journal of Police Science and Management, and Varstvoslovje - Journal of Security Theory
and Praxeology.
He also serves as a reviewer for one international and two domestic journals, namely the Stress & Health,
Varstvoslovje, and the Organization Journal of Management, Informatics, and Human Resources.