INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue XI November 2025

Political Values, Professionalism, and Work Ethics as Determinants

of Public Employee Accountability: A Structural Equation Modeling

Approach

Renz Joseph L. Casilac¹, Glenne B. Lagura²

Professional Schools, University of Mindanao

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.51244/IJRSI.2025.12110018

Received: 18 November 2025; Accepted: 27 November 2025; Published: 03 December 2025

ABSTRACT

This study examined the key factors that influence public employee accountability, explicitly focusing on the

roles of political values, professionalism, and work ethics. Employing a quantitative, descriptive-correlational

research design, data were gathered from 400 permanent employees of the Department of Public Works and

Highways Region XI through validated survey instruments. Data were analyzed using multiple regression and

structural equation modeling (SEM) to identify the best-fit model explaining the drivers of employee

accountability. Findings revealed that employees exhibited high levels of political values, very high

professionalism, very high work ethics, and high accountability. All three variables—political values,

professionalism, and work ethics—showed significant positive relationships with accountability.

Professionalism emerged as the strongest predictor, followed by work ethics and political values. However,

Model 3 indicated that political values exert the most significant direct influence, while professionalism and

work ethics have indirect effects. The result emphasized that civic-mindedness, justice, and moral governance,

anchored in political values, guide accountable public service. This highlights the importance of promoting

integrity, excellence, transparency, and accountability within government institutions. Public officers and leaders

are encouraged to promote global awareness, strengthen communication, enrich task design, and institutionalize

value-based leadership to sustain professionalism, ethical conduct, and accountability among public employees.

Keywords− Political Values, Professionalism, Work Ethics, Public Employee Accountability, Structural

Equation Model, Public Administration, Philippines

INTRODUCTION

Accountability to the public makes the government less effective and unreliable. Corruption and immoral public

employees continue to make service delivery difficult for the public, despite improvements made. Recent studies

show that accountability in governance has been insufficient in various sectors of government. According to Van

der Voet, Van de Walle, and Groeneveld (2023), changes in governance and stakeholder expectations influence

accountability. Kim and Cho (2023) also demonstrate how accountability issues have placed an unprecedented

strain on public organizations, with evident defects in monitoring and compliance. These repeated occurrences

underscore the need for rigorous standards of ethics and accountability among public workers, as well as flexible

mechanisms for addressing them.

Public workers' accountability ensures an open democracy. Therefore, governments should be honest,

responsive, and accountable to maintain public confidence in complex and changing political and institutional

environments. Moral and institutional accountability ensure that public officials adhere to rules, laws, and ethical

standards. Accountability can facilitate effective government, prevent corruption, and enforce the rule of law

(Van der Voet et.al., 2023). Accountability-based governance necessitates robust compliance systems, active

citizen participation, and ongoing oversight to ensure that authority is exercised responsibly and public duties

are fulfilled (Kim & Cho, 2023). Ethics and transparency influence greater trustworthiness, legitimacy, and

efficiency of individuals (Amalia, 2023). According to the UN (2023), governance may only become sustainable

and equitable when public officials are honest, transparent, and answerable. Accountability must be established

to achieve administrative change, democratic stability, social justice, and integrity in the public sector. Abanto

Page 188

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue XI November 2025

and Acero (2025) reported findings indicating that good governance and organizational culture significantly

influence how employees serve, with the latter mediating this influence.

Political ideals form the basis of government ethics, as well as the accountability and transparency of public

institutions. Accountability relates to political ideals such as honesty, openness, and the public good (UN, 2023).

It is these ideals that make the government democratic and responsible to the people. Legal and institutional

systems uphold political ideals in democracies by making public officials and leaders accountable for their

actions. By upholding the ideals, it legitimizes government and fosters public trust in politics. Professionalism

embodies the ideals of public service. Republic Act No. 6713, the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for

Public Officials and Employees, states that public servants must be professional. To be a successful public

servant, one must possess expertise, a commitment to the public interest, and a commitment to fairness.

Professional public servants are efficient and satisfy the demands of the institution and the public. It makes

government better because the bureaucracies are more effective, and the morale of public organizations

improves.

Public servants are required to possess work ethics, comprising beliefs, values, and sets of behaviors that impact

their performance in their jobs. To enhance business culture and service performance, foster respect, equity, and

integrity in public dealings. According to Figliola (2023), Government ethics foster trust in government and

ensure that government acts openly and transparently. Political ideals, professionalism, and work ethics promote

accountability, democratic governance, and honest, quality public service. Service leadership, ethics, and

workplace spirituality enhance PSM among personnel (Tersona & Lagura, 2025).

Even though there is an increasing amount of writing about the accountability of the public sector, we still lack

a clear understanding of how political beliefs and professionalism influence the work ethics and duties of public

workers. Numerous studies have investigated ethical governance and professional conduct; however, the

interconnection between these two areas remains largely unexamined. The lack of integration complicates the

understanding of how political and professional perspectives influence public service ethics and accountability.

This research addressed this gap by utilizing Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) to analyze how political

beliefs, professionalism, and work ethics impacted responsibility. Analyzing value-driven and professional

governance together provides evidence of how they might improve public sector accountability and institutional

integrity.

This study aimed to identify the optimal structural model for public employee accountability, considering the

influence of political ideology, professionalism, and work ethics. The research investigated conservation,

globalism, and equal rights to understand the political ideals of public employees. Honesty, accountability,

confidentiality, respect, compassion, responsibility, effective communication, maturity, and self-directed

learning will be evaluated to assess professionalism. The study also examined the work morale and intrinsic

ethical motivation of public employees. The suggested study would measure the attributability, observability,

evaluability, answerability, and consequentiality of public employees.

The study examined politics, professionalism, work ethics, and the responsibilities of public employees.

Ultimately, it identified the most effective structural model to explain responsibility in terms of these drivers.

This research evaluated the null hypothesis at p < .05: there was no significant association between political

views, professionalism, and work ethics and public employee responsibility, and no optimal structural model

exists. This research examined how Political Values, Professionalism, and Work Ethics affect Public Employee

Accountability. The framework showed how these factors affect public servant accountability.

Political Values, the first independent variable, measures employees' ideological convictions and public service

practices. Conservation is motivated by conformity, security, and tradition. Globalism celebrates the concept of

globalism and its associated policies, including free trade, immigration, and military interventionism. Equitable

Rights explores universalist ideas related to kindness, promotes caring for others, and advocates for fair and

equitable treatment of all individuals.

Professionalism, the second independent variable, relates to the ethical standards and conduct of public-facing

personnel. Be honest and truthful in all actions and conversations. Accountability is taking responsibility for

Page 189

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue XI November 2025

workplace activities and understanding their effects. Employee confidentiality means respecting private

information. Respectfulness means treating coworkers and the public with courtesy and dignity. Responsibility

means doing what is expected. An employee's empathy and care for coworkers is referred to as compassion.

Communication involves the transfer of verbal and written information. Maturity is making decisions with

excellent judgment and emotional stability. Self-directed learning is the capacity and desire to study and grow

autonomously. Work Ethics, the third independent variable, concerns workplace behavior and morality. Work

signifies the importance of our careers in our lives, allowing us to express ourselves and find satisfaction.

Morality shows a person will work honestly and fulfill their duties. Working helps one improve professionally,

and overcoming hurdles is a fulfilling experience.

Public accountability metrics show worker responsibility. Responsibility for decisions and actions. Viewing

employee conduct. We evaluated employees' job performance and effectiveness. Explaining and defending

choices is accountability. Consequences are how employees help a firm achieve its objectives and build trust.

The political, professional, and ethical aspects of public employee accountability are examined. This research

aimed to enhance awareness of how these attributes impacted public organization performance and promote

public accountability and trust through the observation of staff behavior. We evaluated employees' job

performance and effectiveness. Explaining and defending choices is accountability. Consequences are how

employees contribute to a firm achieving its objectives and building trust. Public employee accountability's

political, professional, and work ethics are examined. This study aims to enhance public organization

performance, understanding, accountability, and trust, as well as the definitions and methods associated with

these concepts.

This study examines how individuals respond to accountability limitations in companies and institutions,

drawing on Tetlock's Accountability Theory (1985, 1992). According to this idea, individuals act as expected by

their superiors, peers, and the public, emphasizing the role of psychological decision-making and personal

responsibility for their actions and their consequences. Accountability theory was employed to examine how

DPWH Region XI public workers perceive and respond to their ethical, professional, and political obligations.

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework

Hypothesized Model Showing the Direct Causal Relationship of Political Values, Work Ethics, and

Professionalism: A Structural Equation Model on Public Employee Accountability

Legend:

Public Employee Accountability

AT - Attributability

Professionalism

HN - Honesty

OB - Observability

AC - Accountability

CF - Confidentiality

RF - Respectful

EV - Evaluability

AN - Answerability

CQ - Consequentiality

RS - Responsibility

CP - Compassion

CM - Communication

MT - Maturity

SDL - Self-directed Learning

Work Ethics

Political Values

CON - Conservation

GLO - Globalism

ER - Equal rights

WI - Work Itself

MATW - Moral Attitude Toward Work

IM - Intrinsic Motivation

Page 190

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue XI November 2025

Vandenabeele and Schott's (2020) Public Service Motivation (PSM) theory examines self-directedness that

prioritizes the public's benefit and interest. PSM analysis explains how professionalism and politics undermine

public sector accountability, which is concerning. This motivational perspective will explain how self-generated

'do good' incentives may promote corporate accountability (Vandenabeele & Schott, 2020).

Icek Ajzen's (1985) Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) is a widely used model for assessing and predicting

behavioral outcomes in organizational and public administration settings. Behavioral responsibility explains how

work intentions are regulated, adjusted, and directed, and the TPB will investigate it. This hypothesis posits that

purpose influences conduct. In this study, public employees who regard accountability as essential to ethical

governance are more inclined to behave ethically. Victor and Cullen (1988) suggest that an organization's ethical

standards determine its ability to resolve ethical problems effectively. ECT believes that the moral environment

influences the ethical and responsible decisions that workers make.

Public servants perceive governance, ethics, and obligations through political lenses. Public institutions make

decisions based on fairness, justice, and accountability. Internalizing political ideals encourages public service

transparency (Mamokhere, Musitha, & Netshidzivhani, 2021). Professionalism demonstrates that you are

knowledgeable, fair, and committed to the public good. Professionalism ensures that public workers perform

their duties effectively and adhere to regulations, which fosters confidence in the government. Discipline,

progress, and obedience to institutional norms are encouraged (De Zoysa, 2022).

Work ethics include doing the right thing and being responsible in your daily work. Employees with strong work

ethics will do the right thing and provide excellent public service even when no one is watching. A trustworthy

public sector is based on political values, professionalism, and work ethics (Benedicto & Caelian, 2020). This

study may improve public administration by increasing employees' knowledge of their responsibilities. It

considers political views, professionalism, and work ethics in holding individuals accountable in the public

sector. The paper presents the most effective structural model for accountability, utilizing these dynamics, which

provides empirical insights into both scholarly research and administrative practice. Future studies, as well as

politicians, may apply the results to make public institutions more effective, efficient, and honest.

This work combines theoretical insights with practical applications to further the UN Sustainable Development

Goals and sustainable governance. It encourages accountability, professionalism, and ethical governance to

reach SDG 16 through transparent, responsible, and inclusive institutions. Public sector ethics contribute to

attaining SDG 8 by increasing trust, productivity, and sustainability in decent work and economic growth.

METHOD

The research included 400 DPWH Region XI staff from 11 District Engineering Offices and 1 Regional Office.

Only permanent employees with at least three years of service replied after stratified random selection assured

equity. This sample approach utilized a University of Mindanao Ethics Review Center-approved five-point

Likert scale to gather diverse views on political ideals, professionalism, and work ethics within the DPWH

regional structure. In pilot testing with fifty respondents, Cronbach's Alpha scores varied from 0.764 to 0.956,

confirming the instrument's consistency in evaluating the study's main components. From March to May 2025,

quantitative causal-comparative self-administered questionnaire data were collected. Analysis focused on SEM,

descriptive statistics, correlation, and regression. UMERC protocol no. UMERC-2025-076 protected privacy

and Data Privacy Act compliance.

Research Respondents

Yuan and Chan (2016) recommend a sample size of 400 for Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). The sample

met that need—stratified random sampling offered all qualifying DPWH employees an equal chance of selection.

Salkind (2007) states that stratified random sampling groups the population in a similar manner. The DPWH

regional workers' perspectives on accountability, professionalism, and work ethics were best conveyed in this

manner.

Page 191

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue XI November 2025

Materials and Instruments

This study used four validated instruments: Public Employee Accountability: Development of a Five-

Dimensional Scale (Han & Perry, 2019) and Professionalism perspective among medical students of a novel

Malaysian medical graduate school. Filipino Political Values: An Etic Approach - Bernardo (2017) & A Work

Ethics Instrument Development Study - Sharma and Rai (2015). Experts examined and reviewed the

questionnaire's consistency and reliability. The University's Ethical Review Center approved the research for

ethical compliance. Turnitin is used to check for plagiarism and ensure academic integrity. The questionnaire

was completed on a five-point Likert scale from 5 (strongly agree) to 1 (strongly disagree). Questionnaire scores

were interpreted as:

The descriptive interpretation of Political Values, Professionalism, Work Ethics, and Public Employee

Accountability measures is divided into five levels by range. Very High scores, ranging from 4.20 to 5.00,

indicate that these measurements are consistently present. The High level, 3.40–4.19, indicates frequent

measurements. Moderate means measurements are sometimes reported on scores between 2.60 and 3.39. Low

scores (1.80–2.59) indicate rare measurements. A Very Low score between 1.00 and 1.79 indicates inconsistent

political ideals, professionalism, and work ethics.

Design and Procedure

This is a causal-comparative quantitative study that investigated the levels of political values, professionalism,

and work ethics that influence accountability among public employees. The analytical tool used to measure the

best-fit relationships was SEM (Byrne, 2013). The descriptive-correlational and structural approach in this

research analyzed the direction and strength of the relationships among these variables based on works by

Christensen, Johnson, and Turner (2011). This approach demonstrated how these factors impact accountability

in public organizations.

The SEM model was designed, data were collected, and estimates and changes were made accordingly, as

suggested by Lacobucci (2010). When the initial fits were not satisfactory, the model was further refined to

ensure accuracy and reliability, adhering to the guidelines established by Henseler and Ketchen (2012). This

advanced statistical approach, SEM, was utilized to explore latent components and measurement errors, thereby

providing a comprehensive understanding of the theoretical linkages. SEM enhanced accountability mechanisms

within the public sector through an improvement of estimation accuracy and increased empirical validity as

suggested by Ullman and Bentler (2003).

Data collection was done through self-administered questionnaires distributed within DPWH Region XI. Data

encoding and analysis were conducted through correlation, regression, and descriptive statistics. It would provide

an overview of the relationships between variables and how important factors would influence the accountability

results.

The study followed ethical considerations. All data were protected in accordance with the Data Privacy Act of

2012, and participants were informed of their rights and the purpose of the study. Emphasis was placed on the

importance of volunteering and obtaining informed consent. Lastly, the researcher adhered to the code of ethics

as prescribed by the University of Mindanao Ethics Review Committee, including the plagiarism policy and

avoidance of incorrect citation styles, as stated in the UMERC Protocol No. UMERC-2025-076. The researcher

also remained open and transparent and did not allow personal interest to override professionalism.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Political Values of Public Employees

Table 1 presents the views of government employees on globalism, equality, and conservation. The mean was

3.52, and the standard deviation was 0.47. In addition, political values were a part of the work in which the public

servants engage as civil servants; the level of descriptive depth indicated that political ideals informed their

professional conduct and decisions to a great extent.

Page 192

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue XI November 2025

The best indicator of political value is equality, which has a mean of 4.16 and a standard deviation of 0.62. This

reflects that workers who go to work want to see fairness, justice, and equality in both the public and private

sectors. There is also high conservation with a mean of 3.42 and a standard deviation of 0.67. Workers want

things to be in order, follow the rules, and have a stable work environment. Globalism has an average score of

2.97 with a standard deviation of 0.75, indicating that employees do not prioritize global knowledge and

connections as much as they do other political ideas, such as equality.

Table 1 Level of Political Values of Public Employees

Indicators

SD

Mean

3.42

2.97

4.16

3.52

Descriptive Level

High

Conservation 0.67

Globalism

Equality

Overall

0.75

0.62

0.47

Moderate

High

Responsible and fair public servants are the best. This political loyalty demonstrates that their professional

behavior and decisions are based on well-established values, which makes the government work better, and the

people trust it more. Fairness, justice, and impartiality are essential to public authority. Respecting equality is a

sign of justice and fairness, which fosters greater trust in the government. Conservationists stress the importance

of order, ethics, and tradition in the workplace. They demonstrate a high level of honesty in their work for the

government and within their institutions. Moderate globalism suggests that governments support global

awareness, understanding of other cultures, and flexibility, but not completely. Knowledge-sharing, policy

innovation, and international exposure must broaden their outlook. Enhancing this component would help public

workers adapt, react, and anticipate issues in a more interconnected and dynamic public sector.

Professionalism of Public Employees

Table 2 shows that being professional in public service means being honest, accountable, secretive, respectful,

responsible, compassionate, able to communicate effectively, mature, and able to learn independently. The mean

is 4.42, and the standard deviation is 0.46, so the data is very descriptive. The idea is that public servants are

always good, honest, and moral. The results show that workers give meaning to honesty and efficiency in

government work, making public organizations more trustworthy.

The highest mean and standard deviation are from respect, 4.58 and 0.50, respectively, which is an excellent

indication. Being friendly and helpful to coworkers, bosses, and customers makes work more fun. The next one

is responsibility, with a mean of 4.56 and a standard deviation of 0.49; this shows that the staff can be trusted

and are responsible. With a mean of 4.44 and a standard deviation of 0.57, it is demonstrated that workers value

the privacy of their information, which is a crucial aspect of public trust.

The means for responsibility, honesty, and maturity were 4.41 points, with a standard deviation ranging between

0.54 and 0.57. Our research indicates that employees are honest, open, and smart. The mean compassion

exhibited was 4.47 with a standard deviation of 0.56. On the contrary, self-directed learning and standard

deviation were 4.36 and 0.60, respectively, which is very high, indicating that workers are compassionate enough

and willing to do a better job.

Table 2 Level of Professionalism of Public Employees

Indicators

Honesty

SD

Mean

4.41

Descriptive Level

Very High

0.57

0.54

Accountability

4.41

Very High

Page 193

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue XI November 2025

Confidentiality

Respectful

0.57

0.50

0.49

0.56

0.57

0.54

4.44

4.58

4.56

4.47

4.24

4.41

4.36

4.42

Very High

Responsibility

Compassion

Communication

Maturity

Self-directed Learning 0.60

Overall 0.46

The mean for communication was the lowest, 4.24, with a standard deviation of 0.57. It means that personnel

communicate effectively with each other; however, it is necessary to make certain aspects more transparent,

provide more constructive feedback, and share information more openly. These findings suggest that public

servants are highly ethical, respectful, responsible, and eager to learn. Honesty, openness, and appreciation in

service enable better teamwork, higher productivity, and improved public service.

Work Ethics of Public Employees

As can be seen from Table 3, work ethics among public workers revolve around their jobs, morals, and personal

drive. The mean of 4.41 and the standard deviation of 0.47 indicate that, as a description, this is very good. This

result depicts that the workers are honest and industrious. Good service, honesty, and enthusiasm about their

jobs are all vital ingredients of public sector ethics that workers hold in high regard.

Table 3 Level of Work Ethics

Indicators

SD

Mean

4.23

4.52

4.48

4.41

Descriptive Level

Very High

Work Itself

0.62

0.51

0.54

0.47

Moral Attitude Toward Work

Intrinsic Motivation

Overall

Very High

The mean moral attitude to work was 4.52, and the standard deviation was 0.51. So, the personnel are not

deceitful, try very hard, and do not discriminate against anyone. Another strength was that high morals were

found among the employees. For intrinsic motivation, the mean was 4.48, and the standard deviation of 0.54 is

very high. It means that individuals love their job and find it meaningful without expecting any rewards or

appreciation from others. The minimum mean, which was 4.23, and the standard deviation, which was 0.62,

were those of a job. However, it was strong enough to demonstrate that a person cares about their job and is also

interested in the company's success. The results indicated that public workers possess a strong work ethos,

intrinsic motivation, and a commitment to service ethics. It follows that respect was being shed on the job, and

the moral values of ensuring honesty, dependability, and responsibility were therefore compromised, making

public institutions less effective and damaging their reputation.

Public Employee Accountability

Table 4 presents accountability, observability, evaluability, and answerability of public employees. A high

descriptive level was reached, with a mean of 4.05 and a standard deviation of 0.55; this would mean that workers

take their jobs seriously. Public employees are aware that they must perform their jobs correctly, explain their

actions, and be accountable for their decisions. These build trust and openness within public service.

Page 194

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue XI November 2025

Table 4 Level of Public Employee Accountability

Indicators

SD

Mean Descriptive Level

Attributability

Observability

Evaluability

Answerability

0.74

0.65

0.76

0.60

4.06

4.19

4.04

4.12

3.85

4.05

High

Consequentiality 0.75

Overall 0.55

The mean was 4.19, while the standard deviation was 0.65, suggesting quality because people can easily see and

check what employees are doing and how well they are doing their jobs. High answerability, with a mean of 4.12

and a standard deviation of 0.60, implies that the workers are willing to explain and defend their behavior. A

mean of 4.06 and a standard deviation of 0.74 for attributability indicate that employees understand their roles

and their impact on the organization's success. A mean of 4.04 and a standard deviation of 0.76 indicate that

standards can accurately measure how well workers perform their jobs and make informed decisions.

Last, consequentiality had the lowest mean of 3.85 and a standard deviation of 0.75, which is still high. This

result suggests that workers understand the consequences of their actions; however, effective accountability

mechanisms are necessary to achieve actual outcomes and solutions. These results imply that public servants are

responsible, accountable, and transparent. Such characteristics ensure that government employees are honest and

perform well, hence being responsible and ensuring good governance.

Significance of the Relationship between Political Values and Public Employee Accountability

Table 5 illustrates how political beliefs influence public employee accountability, examining the attributes of

attributability, observability, evaluability, answerability, and consequentiality. The null hypothesis was rejected

at the 0.05 significance level, as all p-values were less than 0.05. Political principles and public employee

accountability are moderately to substantially positively associated (r = 0.441). Workers' job duty grows with

their political beliefs.

A high correlation (r = 0.403, p < 0.05) suggests that workers who value tradition, stability, and moral order are

more accountable and responsible at work. Equality (r = 0.338, p < 0.05) shows that workers who value fairness,

justice, and equal treatment are more open and responsible. There is a weak correlation between globalism and

accountability (r = 0.199, p < 0.05), indicating that employees who are open to global ideas and collaborative

work are less likely to be held accountable than those who adhere to other political ideologies.

These results suggest that political ideologies—globalism, egalitarianism, and conservation—are influential in

determining accountability among public employees. The more we can refine these rules, the more open, honest,

and accountable public service can be. Public employees who are politically active will tend to be more honest,

responsible, and rule-abiding employees of their employer.

Table 5 Significance of the Relationship between Political Values and Public Employee Accountability

Public Employee Accountability

Political

Attribu-

tability

Values

Obser-vability Evalua-bility Anwe-rability Consequen-tiality Overall

.411^**

.197^**

.000

.379^**

.000

.273^**

.000

.286^**

.000

.403^**

.000

Conservation

.000

Page 195

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue XI November 2025

.162^**

.001

.125^*

.012

.125^*

.012

.134^**

.007

.219^**

.000

.199^**

.000

Globalism

Equality

Overall

.247^**

.372^**

.231^**

.288^**

.198^**

.338^**

.000

.386^**

.000

.321^**

.000

.345^**

.000

.325^**

.000

.336^**

.000

.441^**

.000

It consolidates the findings of Spenkuch (2023), who established a strong association between employees'

congeniality with colleagues and their job performance. This explains why politically like-minded people are

more conscientious and observe civic duty. Overman (2022) argues that political ideals influence the ethical

decisions of public servants by aligning political and professional duties. Schnell, Kim, Munno, and Nabatchi

(2024) established that shared philosophies of public values create openness and accountability. On the other

hand, Cooper and Reggie (2025) established that institutional norms and dominant political ideologies have a

profound impact on the perception of responsibility among public servants. Studies have shown that political

ideologies influence the integrity, transparency, and accountability of public servants. Anchoring these values in

corporate culture and governance structures engenders accountability in governments and builds public trust.

Significance of the Relationship between Professionalism and Public Employee Accountability

Table 6 presents the results of the professionalism-public employee accountability significance test. According

to the hypothesis, the relationship was tested at a significance level of 0.05. Professionalism and public employee

accountability are positively correlated (r = 0.620, p-value < 0.05). Public servants become more responsible as

they advance in their profession. Statistically, all professionalism criteria positively correlate with accountability

(p-values < 0.05).

A strong correlation (r = 0.603, p < 0.05) suggests that effective communication skills among practical staff

enhance their responsibility, as clear communication, constructive criticism, and information sharing increase

workplace transparency. Maturity (r = 0.570, p < 0.05) and compassion (r = 0.548, p < 0.05) indicate ethical and

trustworthy conduct in individuals with emotional stability, empathy, and excellent judgment. A correlation of r

= 0.547 (p < 0.05) indicates that taking responsibility for actions enhances corporate accountability.

Employees are more diligent about their jobs when they engage in self-directed learning (r = 0.516, p < 0.05)

and confidentiality (r = 0.482, p < Accountability, respect, ethical responsibility, and interpersonal esteem are

linked to trust and transparency (r = 0.490, p < 0.05). A strong link exists (r = 0.410, p < 0.05) between honesty

and integrity. This illustrates the importance of accountability in the public sector for individuals who value

ethics. Many recent studies support this. Simorangkir, Bukit, and Hayati (2020) found that public officials who

are honest, ethical, and responsible are more accountable. Montano, Dasal, Artificio, Opeña, and Mosca (2023)

assert that capable and transparent public officials are more inclined to meet ethical and performance standards.

Yulianto, Sholihah, Baswara, and Yustitia (2020) found that professional behavior facilitates adherence to rules.

Table 6 Significance of the Relationship between Professionalism and Public Employee Accountability

Public Employee Accountability

Professionalism

Attribu-

tability

Obser-

vability

Evalua-

bility

Anwe-

rability

Consequentiality Overall

.269^**

.474^**

.257^**

.400^**

.237^**

.000

.410^**

.000

Honesty

.000

.345^**

.000

.551^**

.000

.324^**

.000

.456^**

.000

.273^**

.490^**

Accountability

.000

Page 196

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue XI November 2025

.345^**

.000

.520^**

.000

.317^**

.000

.453^**

.000

.280^**

.000

.482^**

.000

Confidentiality

Respectful

.361^**

.476^**

.361^**

.477^**

.254^**

.486^**

.000

.376^**

.000

.552^**

.000

.401^**

.000

.522^**

.000

.317^**

.000

.547^**

.000

Responsibility

Compassion

.378^**

.540^**

.409^**

.507^**

.334^**

.548^**

.000

.405^**

.000

.618^**

.000

.383^**

.000

.551^**

.000

.431^**

.000

.603^**

.000

Communication

Maturity

.374^**

.559^**

.395^**

.557^**

.377^**

.570^**

.000

.349^**

.000

.492^**

.000

.350^**

.000

.503^**

.000

.352^**

.000

.516^**

.000

Self-directed Learning

Overall

.425^**

.000

.633^**

.000

.424^**

.000

.591^**

.000

.386^**

.000

.620^**

.000

Han and Robertson (2020) assert that professional responsibility influences the obligations and ownership of

public employees. Generally, research indicates that accountability in the public sector requires specialized

expertise. Being honest, responsible, polite, caring, able to communicate effectively, mature, and able to grow

independently are all qualities that make workers ethical and open. Trustworthiness, honesty, and reliability

make the public sector more credible and valuable. The results demonstrate that being professional makes public

workers more responsible. Encouraging ethics, communication, and learning may help public organizations hire

people who are honest and ethical.

Significance of the Relationship between Work Ethics and Public Employee Accountability

Table 7 displays significance tests for work ethics and public employee accountability. The correlation

coefficient is 0.624, indicating that the null hypothesis is rejected at the 0.05 significance level. So, there is a

connection between work ethics and public employee responsibility. Work ethics—encompassing the nature of

work, moral disposition towards work, and intrinsic motivation—exhibit a significant correlation with public

employee accountability, as seen by all p-values being below 0.05.

Intrinsic motivation showed the highest correlation with r = 0.567, p < 0.05; thus, individuals who are motivated

by personal fulfillment, self-enhancement, and professional integrity tend to be responsible and honest.

Individuals who value honesty, thoroughness, and fairness in practice had a correlation coefficient of r = 0.529,

p < 0.05, indicating a larger measure of responsibility. A correlation coefficient of r = 0.505 (p < 0.05) suggests

that workers who derive meaning and pleasure from their jobs are more likely to be ethical and responsible.

Table 7 Significance of the Relationship between Work Ethics and Public Employee Accountability

Public Employee Accountability

Work Ethics

Consequen

-tiability

Attribu-tability

Obser-vability Evalua-bility Anwe-rability

.482^**.330^**.494^**

Overall

Work Itself

.334^**

.361^**

.505^**

Page 197

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue XI November 2025

.000

.356^**

.000

.530^**

.000

.381^**

.000

.529^**

.000

.307^**

.000

.529^**

.000

Moral Attitude Toward

Work

.423^**

.000

.589^**

.000

.414^**

.000

.535^**

.000

.288^**

.000

.567^**

.000

Intrinsic Motivation

.433^**

.000

.623^**

.000

.437^**

.000

.607^**

.000

.376^**

.000

.624^**

.000

Overall

The results imply that work ethics promote public employee accountability. Public service employees who view

their employment as a meaningful vocation, based on honesty, hard work, integrity, and accountability, are more

likely to take responsibility and be truthful. A strong work ethic fosters trust in organizations and the public.

Promoting professionalism, ethics, and self-improvement may help public organizations build a responsible and

ethical workforce. Simorangkir, Bukit, and Hayati (2020) suggest that honesty, responsibility, and commitment

enhance public service. Disciplined, fair, and devoted public personnel meet institutional standards more

effectively, according to reports (Montano, Dasal, Artificio, Opeña, & Mosca, 2023).

According to Han and Robertson (2020), strong moral and professional principles significantly influence how

public sector professionals perceive and perform their roles, making employee responsibility closely tied to

ethical work values. The results suggest that labor ethics have an impact on public sector accountability. Ethics-

driven public personnel are more accountable and trustworthy.

Significance of the Influence of Political Values, Professionalism, and Work Ethics on Public Employee

Accountability

Table 8 illustrates how political principles, professionalism, and work ethics influence the responsibilities of

Region XI DPWH public employees. The regression analysis rejected the null hypothesis with an F-value of

118.525 and a p-value of 0.000. Political values, professionalism, or work ethics strongly predict public

employee responsibilities.

The coefficient of determination (R² = 0.688) indicates that the three predictor variables explain 68.8% of the

variation in public employee accountability, while non-model factors account for the remaining 31.2%. All three

factors substantially affect public employee responsibility, with professionalism being the best predictor (β =

0.307, p < 0.05), followed by work ethics (β = 0.299, p < 0.05) and political ideals (β = 0.217, p < This indicates

that professionalism has the greatest impact on DPWH workers' accountability in Region XI.

The current study stresses professionalism in public accountability. According to Mantzaris, Pillay, and

Jarbandhan (2022), South African municipalities that adhered to ethical and professional standards were more

transparent and less prone to corruption, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. Corruption may

undermine the professionalism of public service in Ukraine; therefore, Zhovnirchyk and Tymofieiev (2022)

recommend merit-based recruitment and institutional integrity to enhance accountability.

Table 8 Significance of the Influence of Political Values, Professionalism, and Work Ethics on Public

Employee Accountability

Public Employee Accountability

(Variables)

Constant

B

β

t

Sig.

.859

.000

.038

.250

.178

5.462

Political Values

.217

Page 198

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue XI November 2025

Professionalism

.364

.345

.307

.299

5.185

4.995

.000

Work Ethics

R

.688

R²

∆R

F

.473

.469

118.525

.000

ρ

Work ethics improve public service reputation and performance. Benedicto and Caelian (2021) found that ethical

Philippine government workers performed well, suggesting that ethics promote accountability. Nicolas (2023)

found that Laguna local government personnel with high responsibility, patriotism, and responsiveness

performed better, correlating ethics to public service accountability. Paudel and Gupta (2022) concluded that

institutionalizing integrity and impartiality in Nepal's public sector promotes accountability and government

trustworthiness. Profession, work ethics, and politics all affect public employee obligations, but professionalism

has the most significant impact. Professional expertise, ethics, and political neutrality are needed for transparent,

accountable, and trustworthy public service.

Best Fit Model of Public Employee Accountability

Table 9 presents the goodness-of-fit indices for the three structural models' data matching. Indicators include P-

value, CMIN/DF, GFI, CFI, NFI, Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI), RMSEA, and P-close. According to statistical

criteria, these indices assess model adequacy and acceptance. The table shows Model 1's P-value of 0.000 and

CMIN/DF of 7.488, which exceeds the lower limit of 2. GFI (0.764), CFI (0.799), NFI (.776), and TLI (.772)

all dropped below 0.95, and the RMSEA value was 0.128, with a P-value of.000 indicated poor model fit. Model

1 fails to capture dynamic relationships, making it inappropriate.

Model 2 exhibited improved fit indices, but a P-value of 0.000 and CMIN/DF of 4.738, which exceeded the

intended range. TLI (0.868), GFI (0.819), CFI (0.886), and NFI (0.861) were near but not at the acceptable level.

RMSEA is.097, P-close is .000, suggesting an inadequate fit. Model 2 did not provide a good fit to the data.

However, Model 3 improved across all indices, indicating a strong model fit. The P-value is. One hundred

twenty-six models met the 0.05 significance criterion, indicating they are statistically equivalent to the data. GFI

(0.978), CFI (0.996), NFI (0.980), and TLI (.994) meet acceptable fit standards. The CMIN/DF of 1.232 was

acceptable (less than 2)—p-close of and RMSEA of 0.024, less than 0.05. The Model 3's strong fit was confirmed

by a p-value of 0.993, which is greater than 0.05. This indicated that Model 3 fit best of the three models. Political

values, professionalism, work ethics, and public employee responsibilities are reflected, and it meets goodness-

of-fit standards. The best structural model for DPWH Region XI public employee accountability was Model 3.

Table 9 Summary of Goodness of Fit Measures of the Three Generated Models

Model P-value CMIN / DF GFI

(>0.05) (0<value<2) (>0.95)

CFI

NFI

TLI

RMSEA

(<0.05)

.128

P-close

(>0.05)

.000

(>0.95)

.799

(>0.95)

.776

(>0.95)

.772

1

2

3

.000

.126

7.488

4.738

1.232

.764

.819

.978

.886

.861

.868

.097

.000

.996

.980

.994

.024

.993

Legend:

Page 199

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue XI November 2025

CMIN/DF – Chi-Square/Degrees of Freedom

NFI –Normed Fit Index

GFI– Goodness of Fit Index

TLI -Tucker-Lewis Index

RMSEA – Root Mean Square of Error Approximation

CFI – Comparative Fit Index

Regression Weights of the 3 Generated Models

Table 10 presents the regression weights of the three models, illustrating how Political Values, Professionalism,

and Work Ethics directly impact Public Employee Accountability. The regression weights (β-values) indicate

how each external variable affects the dependent construct. The table shows statistical significance levels (p <

0.05, p < 0.01, and p = 0.000), with "NS" denoting non-significant relationships.

Three exogenous variables—Political Values (β =.311*), Professionalism (β =.454***), and Work Ethics (β

=.508***)—significantly improved public employee responsibility (p = 0.000) in Model 1. In the original model,

all three factors explained discrepancies in public employee accountability. Table 7 shows statistically significant

associations; however, the model did not fit well, suggesting predictor redundancy or overlap.

Table 10 Regression Weights of the 3 Generated Models

Exogenous Variables to Endogenous Variables

Model

Political Values

.311***

Professionalism

.454***

Work Ethics

.508***

.402^NS

1

2

3

.795*

.190^NS

.463***

.230^NS

.457^NS

P*<0.0 P**<0.01 P***=0.000

In Model 2, Political Values (β =.795*) remained significant (p < 0.05) after model fit improvements, whereas

Professionalism (β =.190NS) and Work Ethics (β =.402NS) were insignificant. After correcting for interrelations

and error correlations, only Political Values predicted public employee accountability. The significant regression

weight of.795 reveals that workers' political orientations—justice, respect for authority, and civic duty—

dominate responsible behavior. Model 2 needed further adjustments despite fitting well.

In Model 3 (Table 10), Political Values (β =.463*) significantly affect public employee responsibility (p = 0.000),

but Professionalism (β =.230NS) and Work Ethics (β =.457NS) do not. This implies that Political Values

primarily affect structural responsibility. Although excellent, Professionalism and Work Ethics did not predict

accountability in relation to political values. These data suggest that political orientations, such as social

responsibility, national loyalty, democratic principles, and ethical governance, have a greater impact on

accountable behavior than professionalism and work ethics. Corporate culture, leadership, and intrinsic

motivation are not examined in this model; however, professionalism and work ethics may indirectly impact

responsibility.

Page 200

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue XI November 2025

Figure 4. Best Fit Model in Standard Solution

This graphic shows the SEM-standardized Best

Fit Model (Model 3). Important latent variable routes and interactions are illustrated in the model. Globalism

(GLO), Conservation (CON), and Self-Directed Learning (SDL) substantially and statistically predicted Public

Employee Accountability (ATT) and Consequentiality (CNS). The correlation β = 0.463 indicates that workers'

responsibility increases with political knowledge, civic-mindedness, and commitment to democratic and moral

values.

Work ethics and professionalism (Honesty, Confidentiality, Compassion, and Responsibility) favorably but non-

significantly influenced accountability. Political values may integrate corporate discipline and integrity into

quantifiable accountability behaviors, while professional conduct and ethical work values support them. The

model suggests that political values influence public employee accountability in DPWH Region XI. This

supports civic responsibility, openness, and morality in public sector accountability.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

The best-fit model indicated that, in holding public employees to account, political beliefs were more significant

than professionalism, work ethics, or politics. The high descriptive values in all areas indicate that public

employees are adhering to ethical and professional standards; however, we require more detailed information.

With respect to the political ideal mean, globalism was the lowest, indicating that stability and equity mean more

to the workers than new ideas and worldwide perspectives. For professionalism in communication, the mean

was the lowest, indicating a need to improve how information is conveyed and received. The average for work

ethics was the lowest, indicating that people still need to engage in meaningful work and have tasks that are more

interesting, even when they find meaning in their jobs. The results show that political ideals have a significant

impact on responsibility, while professionalism and work ethics have a lesser effect.

Model 3 accurately depicted responsible conduct, thus passing all statistical goodness-of-fit assessments. The

regression results reveal that workers' political values—justice, civic duty, and moral governance—best predict

public service accountability and responsibility. The Model 3 best explains what public employees should be

responsible for by placing political principles, such as conservation, equality, and civic-mindedness, at the center

of what it means to be a responsible and open public servant.

These results demonstrate that employees' civic duty, equity, and morality are crucial to public accountability.

The findings also further support the UN SDGs 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions, which calls for open

and accountable government, and SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth, which emphasizes the

importance of ethical and productive work. Accountability based on values fosters trust in government and

institutions, leading to a government that is fair, effective, and sustainable. Utilize training and global

Page 201

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue XI November 2025

benchmarking to encourage people to think outside the box and generate new ideas, which will help workers

become accustomed to the rules of global governance and feel responsible. To enable people to work with and

be honest with each other, train them in how to give and receive feedback, as well as how to resolve disputes.

Recognition and participative management should be used by public companies to ensure that their workers are

working hard and growing. Finally, incorporating value-based leadership, fairness, justice, and civic duty into

the system will ensure that all levels of public service are professional and responsible in their actions.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

1. The researcher would like to express sincerest gratitude to the individuals who, in one way or another,

contributed to the success of this study.

2. First, the researcher extends heartfelt appreciation to all the respondents, participants, and guests for their

invaluable contributions and for providing essential information that shaped this study.

3. The researcher would like to thank the panel members for their insights, suggestions, recommendations,

and invaluable inputs.

4. To the research statistician and grammarian, for their guidance, support, and patience in giving their

substantive contribution to the final compilation of the paper.

5. Special thanks to the researcher’s family for their unwavering moral and emotional support that sustained

completing this study, and especially to his parents, now in the hands of God, whose memory has been a

constant source of strength.

6. Above all, to the Almighty Father, who never gets tired of pouring His greatness and answering

researchers’ prayers during the days of discouragement and doubt.

REFERENCES

1. Abanto, R. R. II, & Acero, J.P. (2025). Human Resource Management, Organizational Culture, and

Good Governance Practices: A Structural Equation Model on Service Orientation among Government-

Owned and Controlled Corporations in Davao Region. International Journal of Research and Scientific

Innovation (IJRSI), 12(9), https://doi.org/10.51244/IJRSI.2025.120800390.

2. Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl & J. Beckmann

(Eds.), Action control: From cognition to behavior (pp. 11–39). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-

3-642-69746-3_2

3. Amalia, M. M. (2023). Enhancing accountability and transparency in the public sector: A

Comprehensive review of Public sector accounting practices. The ES Accounting and Finance, 1(03),

160–168. https://doi.org/10.58812/esaf.v1i03.105

4. Benedicto, H. R., & Caelian, M. V. (2020). Work ethics and job performance of government employees

in

a

component

city.

Philippine

Social

Science

Journal,

3(2),

151–152.

https://doi.org/10.52006/main.v3i2.226

5. Bernardo, A. (2017). Exploring the political values of Filipinos using an Etic approach. Philippine

Journal of Psychology, 50(2), 7-38.

6. Byrne, B. M. (2013). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and

programming (2nd ed.). Routledge.

7. Christensen, L. B., Johnson, B., Turner, L. A., & Christensen, L. B. (2011). Research methods, design,

and analysis.

8. Cooper, C. A., & Reggie, J. (2025). Public sector employees’ political activity across administrative

traditions: tensions between democratic participation and bureaucratic impartiality in an era of populism

anddemocraticbacksliding. PublicAdministration

Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1177/07349149241310404

Page 202

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue XI November 2025

9. De Zoysa, A. H. N. (2022). Inculcating Professional Ethics among Employees in the Workplace: A

Systematic Literature Review. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies, 9(1),

21. https://doi.org/10.4038/ijms.v9i1.155

10. Figliola, A. (2023). Government ethics and accountability: Legal frameworks and public expectations.

Public Integrity, 25(2), 113–128.

11. Han, Y., & Perry, J. L. (2019). Public Employee Accountability: Development of a Five-Dimensional

Scale. In Academy of Management Proceedings (Vol. 2019, No. 1, p. 14043). Briarcliff Manor, NY

10510: Academy of Management.

12. Han, Y., & Robertson, P. J. (2020). Public employee accountability: An empirical examination of a

nomological network. Public Performance

https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2020.1803092

&

Management Review, 44(3), 494–522.

13. Haque, M., Zulkifli, Z., Haque, S. Z., Kamal, Z. M., Salam, A., Bhagat, V., ... & Rahman, N. I. A.

(2016). Professionalism perspectives among medical students of a novel medical graduate school in

Malaysia. Advances in medical education and practice, 407-422.

14. Henseler, J., & Ketchen, D. J. (2012). Partial least squares path modeling: Basic concepts,

methodological issues, and applications. Long Range Planning, 45(5–6), 320–330.

15. Kim, J., & Cho, H. (2023). Accountability Gaps and Public Institutional Stress: Implications for Policy

Reform. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 33(1), 45–60.

https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muad012

16. Lacobucci, D. (2010). Structural equations modeling: Fit indices, sample size, and advanced topics.

Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20(1), 90–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2009.09.003

17. Mamokhere, J., Musitha, M. E., & Netshidzivhani, V. M. (2021). The implementation of the basic

values and principles governing public administration and service delivery in South Africa. Journal of

Public Affairs, 22(4). https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.2627

18. Mantzaris, E., Pillay, P., & Jarbandhan, V. (2022). Ethics and professionalism in South African

municipalities: COVID-19 procurement as a case in point. African Journal of Public Affairs, 13(1).

https://journals.co.za/doi/10.10520/ejc-ajpa_v13_n1_a7

19. Montano, M. R., Dasal, A. M., Artificio, R. A. Jr., Opeña, A. R. C., & Mosca, M. G. (2023). Optimizing

administrative professionalism: A strategic approach to elevate clientele satisfaction in service-oriented

environments. People and Behavior Analysis, 2(2). https://doi.org/10.31098/pba.v2i2.2673

researchgate.net+4scribd.com+4journalfeb.unla.ac.id+4journals.researchsynergypress.com

20. Nicolas, P. R. (2023). Patriotism, responsibility, and job performance among LGU employees in

Laguna. Local Governance Review, 10(2), 78–95.

21. Overman, S. (2022). Toward a public administration theory of felt accountability. Public

Administration Review, 82(2), 682–698. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13417

22. Paudel, D., & Gupta, A. (2022). Institutionalizing integrity: Impartiality and accountability in Nepal’s

civil service. South Asian Journal of Governance, 4(1), 54–70.

23. Republic Act No. 6713. (1989). Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and

Employees.

Official

Gazette

of

the

Republic

of

the

Philippines.

https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/1989/02/20/republic-act-no-6713/

24. Salkind, N. J., & Shaw, L. A. (2019). Statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics using R. Sage

publications.

25. Schnell, S., Kim, J., Munno, G., & Nabatchi, T. (2024). How citizens want to “see” the state: Exploring

the relationship between transparency and public values. Public Administration Review, 84(1).

https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13769

26. Sharma, S., & Rai, A. (2015). A study to develop an instrument to measure work ethics. Indian Journal

of Industrial Relations, 50(3), 451–460.

27. Simorangkir, S. M., Bukit, J. D., & Hayati, K. (2020). The Influence of Accountability, Work

Experience, and Professionalism on the Quality of The Work of Auditors. JASa (Jurnal Akuntansi,

Audit dan Sistem Informasi Akuntansi), 4(3), 449-459.

28. Spenkuch, J. L., Teso, E., & Xu, G. (2023). Ideology and performance in public organizations.

Econometrica, 91(4), 1171–1203. https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA20355

29. Tersona, R. C., & Lagura, G. B. (2025, January). Servant leadership of unit heads, workplace spirituality

and ethical climate: A structural equation model on public service motivation. The International Journal

of Business Management and Technology, 9(1),

Page 203

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue XI November 2025

https://www.theijbmt.com/archive/0961/1434848158.pdf

30. Tetlock, P. E. (1985). Accountability: The neglected social context of judgment and choice. Research

in Organizational Behavior, 7, 297–332.

31. Ullman, J. B., & Bentler, P. M. (2003). Structural equation modeling. In J. A. Schinka & W. F. Velicer

(Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Research methods in psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 607–634). John Wiley

& Sons.

32. United Nations. (n.d.). Goal 8: Decent work and economic growth. United Nations Sustainable

Development Goals. https://sdgs.un.org/goals/goal8

33. United Nations. (n.d.). Goal 16: Peace, justice, and strong institutions. United Nations Sustainable

Development Goals. https://sdgs.un.org/goals/goal16

34. United Nations Joint Inspection Unit. (2023). Review of accountability frameworks in the United

Nations system (JIU/REP/2023/3). United Nations.

https://www.unjiu.org/sites/www.unjiu.org/files/jiu_rep_2023_3_english.pdf

35. Van der Voet, J., Van de Walle, S., & Groeneveld, S. (2023). Accountability in the modern public

sector: Navigating complexity and stakeholder demands. Public Administration, 101(1), 25–41.

36. Vandenabeele, W.ꢀV., & Schott, C. (2020). Public service motivation in public administrations. In

Oxford

Research

Encyclopedia

of

Politics.

Oxford

University

Press.

https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.1401

37. Victor, B., & Cullen, J. B. (1988). The organizational bases of ethical work climates. Administrative

Science Quarterly, 33(1), 101–125. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392857

38. Yuan, K.-H., & Chan, W. (2016). Structural equation modeling with small samples: Issues and

remedies. In K. H. Yuan & W. Chan (Eds.), Advances in methods and practices in psychological science

(pp. 173–182). Sage Publications.

39. Yulianto, A., Sholihah, B., Baswara, S. Y., & Yustitia, N. L. (2020). The effects of village apparatus

competence, leadership, and accessibility of village fund reports on accountability of village fund

management, with internal control systems as moderating variables. Journal of Advanced Research in

Dynamical and Control Systems, 12(3), 713–719.

40. Zhovnirchyk, Y., & Tymofieiev, S. (2022). Corruption is one of the obstacles to forming the

professional culture of public servants. Public Administration and Regional Development, (16), Article

09. https://doi.org/10.34132/pard2022.16.09

Page 204

www.rsisinternational.org