Ethical Bankruptcy in a Financial Meltdown

Economic pressures, fear of an uncertain economic future, keeping up with the Joneses, entitlement attitudes, and pure unadulterated greed are some of the excuses that have made the workplace more vulnerable to theft. As a result of the worsening American economy, The Wall Street Journal recently reported a surge in employee embezzlement and theft. Paper clips, copiers, office furniture, and billions of dollars taken are samples of the many and varied items employees feel compelled to take for personal use or resale. My niece, an accountant, recently embezzled $160,000 from a Mississippi furniture company. When asked why, she was quoted as having said, “to give my children and husband what they wanted.” An Austell, GA municipal court worker took $121,000 over about a six-year period “to pay bills.”

The mind’s power to rationalize convinces us to believe what we want overriding our moral conscience. To tell oneself often enough and long enough that we need, deserve, have been cheated out of, victimized, are owed, each marginalizes our emotional and moral intelligence. Moral decisions should not be made in a vacuum. In other words, moral dilemmas ought to be made with critical thought and reflection. We are tempted to shut out the voice of conscience when our desires for gratification appeal. When faced with strong temptations of unethical behavior, I’ve heard the voices of my dad and uncle say, “Tommy, you be a good boy now, you hear.” Long deceased, their voices are still clear in the moral conscience of this Baby Boomer.

Within any business, governmental, and non-profit organizations, there ought be a voice to remind people of their moral responsibility. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act (for public companies) and Federal Sentencing Guidelines (for ALL other organizations) call for an ethical culture. This places an imperative for ethics education and training for all in organizations. Obviously, organizational leadership has to first to step up to the plate to make this happen. Being reminded of the consequences of ethical misconduct affirms expectations and multiple costs. What are some ways to increase moral awareness?

1. Compliment associates on good character traits exemplified in their work.
2. Openly discuss ethical dilemmas.
3. Develop and conduct regular training on ethics.
4. Have associates to take turns teaching the ethics learning session.
5. Openly discuss ethical misconduct incidents. This alleviates the much of the gossip and rumor mill, which prolongs disruption.
6. Create an atmosphere of transparency.

No one is one 100% ethical 100% percent of the time. However, it is prudent to be cognizant of behavioral patterns of ethical misconduct. As Deputy Barney Fife stated to Sheriff Andy Taylor, in The Andy Griffith Show,” “Andy, you better nip it the bud right now.” These recommendations and other measures help to mitigate the costs of ethical misconduct for organizations, associates, and families, which can be substantial. The costs of ongoing ethics education are an investment in the ethical culture of your organization.

Doubt: Perception or Reality

The arts are often laden with moral values that reflect life. Paintings depict historical events, music records the spirit of the times, and cinema films the stories of human dilemmas. These mediums of art express the ethos of the human condition.

The movie Doubt challenges our mental and emotional presets of moral values. Our preset values and appearances can lead to a conclusion that might be right or wrong. Perhaps, there’s something in between in moral decision-making. Doubt definitely sets forth a situation in which critical thinking is required rather than jumping to conclusions.

The setting for Doubt is in 1964 at a Catholic school in New York. Sister Aloysius Beauvier, played by Meryl Streep, suspects that Father Brendan Flynn, played by Philip Seymour Hoffman, has an unnatural interest in the school’s first young black student, Donald Miller. Sister Aloysius, as principal, rules sternly by fear, while Father Flynn, St. Nicolas’s parish priest, demonstrates a caring and light-hearted nature. The young rookie teacher, Sister James, played by Jamie Adams, tells Sister Aloysius of her perception of Father Flynn’s personal attention to Donald. Sister Aloysius sets her sights on ousting Father Flynn from St. Nicholas without an ounce of proof before getting to the truth of the matter. Amid allegations, Father Flynn stands his ground as the leader and moral voice of the parish. Both appear to seek the moral highground. Doubt stimulates much discussion and debate about moral values and how we make moral decisions.

As the movie progresses the dialogue increases your doubt as to who is right. The protagonists do verbal battle to the end. An example follows:
Father Brendan Flynn: You haven't the slightest proof of anything!
Sister Aloysius Beauvier: But I have my certainty! And armed with that, I will go to your last parish, and the one before that if necessary. I'll find a parent.

Is Sister Aloysius being over protective? Has her perception of Father Flynn’s behavior warranted of allegations? Is Father Flynn simply trying to make the first black student feel included, accepted, and successful? Was Father Flynn innocent with Donald, but guilty with other students? How much influence has Sister James on Sister Aloysius? Do our lenses of life experiences and presets color our perception against fact or evidence? Does perception determine moral reality?