2
 FRAMEWORK OF GOVERNANCE POLITICAL LEGAL ADMINISTRATIVE CORPORATE SOCIAL Exercise of franchise Rule of Law Efficient, Effective and Economical Corporate Governance Social Equity & Unity Conduct of political representatives  Access to  justice Citizen interface & participation Profit + Welfare Civic sense & Participation Functioning of legislature Judicial  Appointments Quality of Service delivery Fair trade practices Role of Media Political Decentralisation Judicial  Activism Responsiveness CSR Forums for Public Opinion ANSWERABILITY V/S RESPONSIBILITY  Answerabili ty refers to the obligation created upon an individual or institution t o provide justification f or its actions or decisions. Such an obligation is based upon external criteria, such as orders, rules, commitments, charters etc. This makes it easy to identify deviations and, if required, impose material or professional penalties. This implies that answerability is capable of being highly objective and easy to enforce. However, its scope is limited by its dependence on the presence of adequate authority, knowledge or time. Therefore if governance is limited to answerabil ity, some individuals may escape the consequences of their actions. Thus, an indispensable component of ethical governance is a sense of responsibility. Responsibility also involves an obligation but such an obligation is now self-imposed. This makes it more dynamic and wider in scope than answerability, as the individual can assess changing situations and select the most suitable course of action. The problem with responsibility is that it is self-determined and hence subjective. This makes it difficult to arrive at a standardised evaluation of what would constitute responsible conduct or to impose penalties that would af fect an individual’s material position.  The only penalties that can be imposed are feelings of shame, guilt or regret and even these cannot be imposed without self-realisation. Thus, enforcing responsibili ty becomes extremely difficult and necessitates the establishme nt of accountabi lity.

shauriya

  • Upload
    jhankar

  • View
    218

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

7/23/2019 shauriya

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/shauriya 1/1

 

FRAMEWORK OF GOVERNANCE

POLITICAL LEGAL ADMINISTRATIVE CORPORATE SOCIAL

Exercise offranchise

Rule of Law Efficient, Effectiveand Economical

CorporateGovernance

Social Equity& Unity

Conduct ofpolitical

representatives

 Access to justice

Citizen interface &participation

Profit +Welfare

Civic sense &Participation

Functioning oflegislature

Judicial Appointments

Quality ofService delivery

Fair tradepractices

Role of Media

PoliticalDecentralisation

Judicial Activism

Responsiveness CSRForums for

Public Opinion

ANSWERABILITY V/S RESPONSIBILITY

 Answerability refers to the obligation created upon an individual or institution to provide justification for

its actions or decisions. Such an obligation is based upon external criteria, such as orders, rules,

commitments, charters etc. This makes it easy to identify deviations and, if required, impose material or

professional penalties. This implies that answerability is capable of being highly objective and easy to

enforce. However, its scope is limited by its dependence on the presence of adequate authority,

knowledge or time. Therefore if governance is limited to answerability, some individuals may escape the

consequences of their actions.

Thus, an indispensable component of ethical governance is a sense of responsibility. Responsibility also

involves an obligation but such an obligation is now self-imposed. This makes it more dynamic and

wider in scope than answerability, as the individual can assess changing situations and select the most

suitable course of action.

The problem with responsibility is that it is self-determined and hence subjective. This makes it difficult

to arrive at a standardised evaluation of what would constitute responsible conduct or to impose

penalties that would af fect an individual’s material position. The only penalties that can be imposed are

feelings of shame, guilt or regret and even these cannot be imposed without self-realisation. Thus,

enforcing responsibility becomes extremely difficult and necessitates the establishment of accountability.