When a
former client’s secretary was arrested for embezzlement years before his own
crimes were uncovered, Bernie Madoff commented to his own secretary, “Well, you
know what happens is, it starts out with you taking a little bit, maybe a few
hundred, a few thousand. You get comfortable with that, and before you know it,
it snowballs into something big.”
We now
know that Madoff’s Ponzi scheme started when he engaged in misreporting to
cover relatively small financial losses. Over a 15-year period, the scam
grew steadily, eventually ballooning to $65 billion, even as regulators and
investors failed to notice the warning signs.
Many
of the biggest business scandals of recent years — including the News of the
World phone hacking scandal, billions in rogue trading losses at UBS, and the
collapse of Enron — have followed a similar pattern: The ethical behavior of
those involved eroded over time.
Few of
us will ever descend as deeply into crime as Bernard Madoff, yet we all are
vulnerable to the same slippery slope. We are likely to begin with small
indiscretions such as taking home office supplies, exaggerating mileage
statements, or miscategorizing a personal meal in a restaurant as
business-related. Nearly three-quarter of the employees who responded to one
survey reported that they had observed unethical
or illegal behavior by coworkers in the past year.
“The
safest road to Hell is the gradual one — the gentle slope, soft underfoot,
without sudden turnings, without milestones, without signposts,” wrote C. S.
Lewis. Our research backs up both Lewis’s intuition and the anecdotal evidence:
People often start their misconduct with small transgressions and then slide
down a slippery slope.
Two of
us (Dave, Lisa, and our team) found that people who are faced with growing
opportunities to behave unethically are much more likely to rationalize this
conduct than those who are presented with an abrupt change. We predicted that
if we could get people to cheat a little in one round, they might be willing to
cheat a bit more in another round, and finally cheat “big” in a third round.
This
is precisely what we found: When given a series of problem-solving tasks, 50%
of our subjects cheated to earn $.25 per problem in the first round, and 60%
cheated to earn $2.50 per problem in the final round. However, the people in
the abrupt change group who could not cheat during the first two rounds were
much less willing to cheat big for $2.50 per problem during the final round
(only about 30% did).
This
suggests that employees might look at their slightly exaggerated mileage
statements as “rounding up.” But rationalizing minor indiscretions inevitably
influences how they view progressively worse behaviors and may lead them to
commit bigger offenses (e.g., billing their employers for personal travel
expenses) that they initially would not have considered.
To
make matters worse, people are more likely to overlook the unethical behavior
of others when it deteriorates gradually over time. For example, one of us
(Francesca) found, with colleague Max Bazerman, that people who played the role
of auditors in a simulated auditing task were much less likely to report those
who gradually inflated their numbers over time than those who made more abrupt
changes all at once, even though the level of inflation was eventually the
same.
Unfortunately,
the assumption that unethical workplace behavior is the product of a few bad
apples has blinded many organizations to the fact that we all can be negatively
influenced by situational forces, even when we care a great deal about honesty.
Yet approaches to warding off the slippery-slope problem need not to be
drastic. In their book Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and
Happiness, Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein illustrate how a small and
unobtrusive nudge in the right direction can lead people to eat better, save
more for retirement, and conserve energy.
Our
research similarly indicates that ethical nudges can help people avoid the
types of indiscretions that might start them down the slippery slope. For
example, in a study conducted with a major U.S. insurance company, Francesca
and colleagues found that customers who signed the statement “I promise that
the information I am providing is true” prior to reporting their annual mileage
— that is, at the top of the page — were significantly more honest in their
reporting compared to those who reported first and signed at the bottom of the
page.
No comments:
Post a Comment