MISCONDUCT AS A BEHAVIOURAL DRIVER OF PUBLIC SERVICE INEFFICIENCY: EVIDENCE FROM MALDIVIAN CIVIL SERVICE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55197/qjssh.v7i5.1429Keywords:
public service misconduct, behavioural governance, civil service, Maldives, organisational justice, Small Island Developing States (SIDS)Abstract
Public service inefficiency remains a persistent governance challenge despite extensive administrative reforms aimed at improving accountability, performance, and service delivery. While inefficiency has traditionally been explained through structural and managerial deficiencies, growing scholarship suggests that behavioural factors play an equally important role in shaping organisational performance. This study examines how misconduct functions as a behavioural determinant of public service inefficiency within the Maldivian Civil Service. The findings reveal that misconduct translates into inefficiency through multiple interconnected pathways, including workflow disruption, administrative bottlenecks, resource leakage, supervisory overload, organisational fragmentation, employee disengagement, weak accountability, and erosion of institutional trust. The study further demonstrates that misconduct is sustained by relational governance, politicisation, inconsistent disciplinary enforcement, and perceived organisational injustice, which collectively weaken organisational performance and service delivery. Theoretically, the study contributes to public administration scholarship by conceptualising misconduct not merely as an ethical or legal problem but as a behavioural governance mechanism that systematically produces inefficiency. Empirically, it provides evidence from a Small Island Developing State, a context that remains underrepresented in governance research. The study concludes that efforts to improve public service efficiency must extend beyond structural reforms and address the behavioural, institutional, and cultural conditions that sustain misconduct within public administration.
References
[1] Andrews, M. (2013): The limits of institutional reform in development: Changing rules for realistic solutions. – Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 268p.
[2] Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) (2025): Annual report 2024. – Anti-Corruption Commission, Republic of Maldives 100p.
[3] Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) (2024): Annual report 2023. – Anti-Corruption Commission, Republic of Maldives 100p.
[4] Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) (2023): Annual report 2022. – Anti-Corruption Commission, Republic of Maldives 100p.
[5] Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE) (2026): Occupational fraud 2026: A report to the nations. – Association of Certified Fraud Examiners 108p.
[6] Auditor General’s Office (2020): Maldives Marketing and Public Relations Corporation, Report No. FIN-2020-36(E). – Auditor General’s Office, Republic of Maldives 50p.
[7] Auditor General’s Office (2021): Annual financial audit report 2017: Ministry of Education, Report No. FIN-2020-75(D). – Auditor General’s Office, Republic of Maldives 50p.
[8] Auditor General’s Office (2026): Strengthening gender inclusive initiatives project. – Auditor General’s Office, Republic of Maldives 50p.
[9] Baldacchino, G. (Ed.) (2018): The Routledge international handbook of island studies: A world of islands. – Routledge 500p.
[10] Baldacchino, G., Wivel, A. (Eds.) (2020): Handbook on the politics of small states. – Edward Elgar Publishing 448p.
[11] Braun, V., Clarke, V. (2022): Thematic analysis: A practical guide. – SAGE Publications 376p.
[12] Brezzi, M., González, S., Nguyen, D., Prats, M. (2021): An updated OECD framework on drivers of trust in public institutions to meet current and future challenges. – OECD Working Papers on Public Governance 48: 60p.
[13] Civil Service Commission (CSC) (2023a): Compliance audit of education sector employees migration to pay framework. – Civil Service Commission, Republic of Maldives 50p.
[14] Civil Service Commission (CSC) (2023b): Compliance audit report: Ministry of Higher Education. – Civil Service Commission, Republic of Maldives 50p.
[15] Coleman, J.S. (1988): Social capital in the creation of human capital. – American Journal of Sociology 94: S95-S120.
[16] Colquitt, J.A., Conlon, D.E., Wesson, M.J., Porter, C.O.L.H., Ng, K.Y. (2001): Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. – Journal of Applied Psychology 86(3): 425-445.
[17] Creswell, J.W., Poth, C.N. (2018): Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. – SAGE Publications 488p.
[18] Gauld, R. (2007): Principal-agent theory and organisational change: Lessons from New Zealand health information management. – Policy Studies 28(1): 17-34.
[19] Greenberg, J. (1990): Organizational justice: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. – Journal of Management 16(2): 399-432.
[20] Hood, C. (1991): A public management for all seasons? – Public Administration 69(1): 3-19.
[21] Huberts, L.W.J.C. (2018): Integrity: What it is and why it is important. – Public Integrity 20(Sup1): S18-S32.
[22] Huberts, L.W.J.C., Hoekstra, A. (Eds.) (2016): Integrity management in the public sector: The Dutch approach. – BIOS, The Hague 220p.
[23] Jensen, M.C., Meckling, W.H. (1976): Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. – Journal of Financial Economics 3(4): 305-360.
[24] Kaptein, M. (2019): The moral entrepreneur: A new component of ethical leadership. – Journal of Business Ethics 156(4): 1135-1150.
[25] Lincoln, Y.S., Guba, E.G. (1985): Naturalistic inquiry. – SAGE Publications 416p.
[26] Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2024): OECD survey on drivers of trust in public institutions – 2024 results: Building trust in a complex policy environment. – OECD Publishing, Paris 158p.
[27] Pollitt, C., Bouckaert, G. (2017): Public management reform: A comparative analysis – Into the age of austerity. – Oxford University Press 409p.
[28] Porto, J.B., Zagheto, J.Â.V., José, A. (2024): Unethical behavior in organizations and ethics programs: The mediation role of trust in top management. – Trends in Psychology 20p.
[29] Putnam, R.D. (2000): Bowling alone. – Proceedings of the 2000 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work 2p.
[30] Putnam, R.D. (1993): What makes democracy work? – National Civic Review 82(2): 101-107.
[31] Schein, E.H., Schein, P.A. (2017): Organizational culture and leadership. – Jossey-Bass/Wiley 416p.
[32] Constitution of the Republic of Maldives (2008): The Constitution of the Republic of Maldives. – Republic of Maldives 100p.
[33] Transparency International (2025): Corruption perceptions index 2024. – Transparency International 50p.
[34] Transparency Maldives (2023): Annual report 2023. – Transparency Maldives 50p.
[35] Treviño, L.K., den Nieuwenboer, N.A., Kish-Gephart, J.J. (2014): (Un)ethical behavior in organizations. – Annual Review of Psychology 65: 635-660.
[36] Vaughan, D. (1999): The dark side of organizations: Mistake, misconduct, and disaster. – Annual Review of Sociology 25: 271-305.
[37] Weber, M. (1946): From Max Weber: Essays in sociology (H.H. Gerth, C.W. Mills, Eds. and Trans.). – Oxford University Press, New York 490p.
[38] Yin, R.K. (2018): Case study research and applications: Design and methods. – SAGE Publications 352p.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 ABDUL AZEEZ YOOSUF, ISMAIL NIZAM, NOOR ROSLY HANIF
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
