Rationalization and Initiative in the Ethics Sphere
When it really comes down to it (and it usually does), what is the
greatest enemy of trust in government, or anywhere else for that
matter? Greed, power, ego, loyalty? I'd put my money on (or against)
rationalization, the ability of people to justify what they do and fail
to do.<br>
<br>
Here's what got me thinking about this, from <a href="http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/01/29/business/ethics.4-418426.php" target="”_blank”">a
Reuters Business article yesterday</a> written by Claudia Parsons:<ul>
<p>Kerry Francis, head of corporate
investigations at Deloitte Financial Advisory Services, this month
co-wrote a survey whose findings showed that 63 percent of executives
expected accounting fraud to increase during the next two years because
of the recession.</p>
<p>"I do believe that fraud is always going
to happen," Francis said. "The human mind has this ability to
rationalize away bad acts. It's a sad commentary on the human being.
That's why there have to be controls put in place."<br>
</p>
<p>Rationalization after the fact seems to be the flavor of the week.
Financial leaders are finding many ways to justify their actions and
their inaction. Everyone else just shakes their head and tries to
figure out whom they can trust with their hard-earned bucks.<br>
</p>
<p>"I don't think seeing dead bodies in the
street always wakes people up," said Roy Snell, chief executive of the
Society of Corporate Compliance and Ethics .... "I've watched this for
13 years. There are always people rationalizing it, saying 'Our people
wouldn't do that.'"</p></ul>
Rationalization looks ugly in its extreme forms, such as banking
executives or Rod Blagojevich. But it takes so many forms, it's often
hard to see. One reason is that it so often is involved with inaction,
not taking initiative, just doing one's job. This is just as true for
people who are on the side of good, who have nothing to gain through
the use of their positions, such as members of ethics commissions,
ethics officers, and ethics and compliance staff.<br>
<br>
This is especially true when one's job is passive. This is a serious
problem with government ethics programs across the country. When
nothing is happening, nothing happens.<br>
<br>
The most common rationalization for not improving ethics programs is
that no one uses the ones we have, no complaints are filed, few
advisory opinions are sought. Therefore, there must not be any ethical
problems, everything's good, nothing needs to be improved, nothing
needs to happen.<br>
<br>
This inaction in the ethics sphere usually has two causes. One, the
ethics program is passive. Its rules and structure are such that its people sit and wait for someone to come to them, rather than taking the initiative, getting involved where there
appear to be ethical problems, doing investigations without complaints
being filed, starting training programs, recommending improvements to
the ethics program, promoting their work to the news media and on the
internet, etc. Initiative is difficult, it often runs into opposition,
but without it an ethics program will be relatively ineffective.<br>
<br>
The second reason is that ethics programs themselves have a trust
problem. The members of an ethics commission have been selected by the
very people they're supposed to be keeping an eye on. The ethics
commission has no teeth, and is completely dependent on the good will
of the very people they're supposed to be keeping an eye on. In short,
without trust and independence, who in their right mind would make use
of an ethics commission? So the few complaints filed are political,
which further undermines trust in the ethics program.<br>
<br>
Ethics commission members can stop being passive. But this rarely
happens without ethical leadership from the top. There's no guidance,
the commission members are not part of an ethics community, and they
have better things to do with their time.<br>
<br>
The Reuters article gives one example of good ethical leadership,
involving GE's former head, Jack Welch, who "publicly praised a manager
who had failed to reach his sales targets because he refused to pay a
bribe to win a contract to build engines for a foreign airline."
How often does a press release like this come from a mayor's or city
manager's office? And how often does one come from an ethics commission
or ethics officer?<br>
<br>
It's easy to rationalize doing nothing when your ethics code or job
description does not require action. But that won't get the job done.<br>
<br>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
---</p>