· Web viewConference on Leadership Challenges in a Global World . Radboud University, Nijmegen,...

The Accountable Leader: An Assessment of Ethos in Workplace Theft

1


by Dr. Ronni L. Samassa, DPA

Conference on Leadership Challenges in a Global World

Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

7-8 April 2016

Relevant theme as noted on the “Call for Papers” list: “Processes and outcomes of leadership at societal, organizational, team and/or individual levels on key organizational outcomes such as public value(s) creation and public service delivery, creativity and innovation, PSM and/or public service ethos, ethical climate and organizational commitment etc”.

Contact Information:

Email: [email protected]

Phone #: 404-926-6357


2

Abstract

In an everyday sense, ethics is not regarded as a hot topic issue that makes its way to the top of the agenda for the Monday morning stand-up meeting. Ideally, managers are focused on agency priorities and driving numbers. It is only when the unthinkable or unimaginable occurs in situations involving ethical behavior that we began to examine the way we conduct ourselves. Thus some questions that develop with regards to ethics in a public setting are as follows: how can managers get people to concern themselves with ethical behavior, does ethical training begin with the organization, How do organizations address ethos with employees that may not have been reared with an understanding of appropriate ethical behavior? The task of examining ethics can be challenging in the public sector. Care should be taken to assess the presumably ethical or immoral behavior to insure that the dilemma is framed in the best manner in order to yield the most appropriate solutions. In this paper, the author examines the ethical dilemma of workplace theft and the role of leadership in dealing with this issue. Furthermore, the author contends, that when there is an increased risk of employee dissatisfaction then there is also an increased risk for workplace theft. Delving further into this problem, there is often not a standard procedure that is in place when ethical issues such as these occur. Thus, the author also suggests that there should be protocol established to deal with ethical violations as well as training that supports this growing problem. Consequentialism is also discussed at some length as it relates to ethical behavior.

Keywords: ethical behavior, leadership, workplace theft, consequentialism, accountability


3

Introduction

In an everyday sense, ethics is not regarded as a hot topic issue that makes its

way to the top of the agenda for the Monday morning stand-up meeting. Ideally,

managers are focused on agency priorities and driving numbers. It is only when the

unthinkable or unimaginable occurs in situations involving ethical behavior that we

began to examine the way we conduct ourselves. Thus some questions that develop

with regards to ethics in a public setting are as follows: how can managers get people to

concern themselves with ethical behavior, does ethical training begin with the

organization, How do organizations address ethos with employees that may not have

been reared with an understanding of appropriate ethical behavior? The task of

examining ethics can be challenging in the public sector. Thiroux & Krasemann (2012)

define ethics as the following: “the values by which human beings live in relation to

other human beings, nature, God, and/or themselves” (p.446). Additionally, they define

good or right as “that which has pleasure or happiness in it, involves excellence, creates

harmony, and encourages creativity. A person can be said to be good, whereas an

action can be said to be right” (p.447). Finally, moral is defined as “that which is good or

right, such as a good person or a right action “(p.448). In this paper we will attempt to

examine the role of leadership as it relates to the ethical dilemma of workplace theft.


4

Workplace Theft: Why is it a Dilemma?

According to Gross-Schaefer, Trigilio, Negus, & Ceng-Si (2000), theft in the

workplace should not be ignored. They further suggest that employee theft costs

companies more money in the long run (Gross-Schaefer et al, 2000). Next, Gross-

Schaefer et al (2000) divulge some reasons why employees steal and they are as

follows: “employees see stealing as a form of additional compensation – a vehicle to

lessen the gap of social inequity, employees feel pressured to violate company polices,

and a shift in American ethics education both in and out of the classroom” (p.92).

Moreover, this means that employees feel that the system set in place is not fair.

Additionally, when the employee is compelled to violate policies there may already be

others doing the same thing. Oftentimes the employees were taught in their rearing to

maximize and advance their own self interests. Kinwell & Kochanowski (2005) convey in

their case study, deviant behaviors exhibited [in the workplace] go against the company

policy and normal behavior.

Theories Related to Workplace Theft

Workplace theft is most applicable to the concept of consequentialism and its

sub-concepts. Thiroux and Krasemann (2012) define consequentialism in two parts

ethical egoism and utilitarianism. Moreover, ethical egoist operate in their own self-

interests. They further convey that ethical egoism can take on three possible forms

described with the following:

(1) Individual ethical egoism, which states that everyone ought to act in my

own best self-interest.


5

(2) Personal ethical egoism, which states that I ought to act in my

own self-interest, but make no claims about what anyone else ought to do.

(3) Universal ethical egoism, which states as its basic principle

that everyone should always act in his or her own best self-interest,

regardless of the interests of others, unless their interests also serve his or

hers (p.32).

Verbeek (2001) contends that rationality is the main principle of

consequentialism. Additionally, the author suggests that the outcomes of actions affects

the impact it has on rationality. Verbeek (2001) also contends that “consequentialism is

a minimum requirement of instrumental rationality. Therefore, any theory that tries to

spell out the implications of instrumental rationality, in particular expected utility theory,

should subscribe to the principle of consequentialism” (p.181).

The principle architects of utilitarianism were Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) and

John Stuart Mill (1806-1873). According to Thiroux and Krasemann (2012), utilitarianism

is derived from utility which means usefulness. Moreover, this perspective contends

that an act is moral or beneficial if it brings about a desirable change. Additionally, act

utilitarianism is described as individuals performing an act that brings more good than

bad for all who could possibly be affected by the act itself (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2012).

The advocates for act utilitarianism do not desire rules for these actions because each

person or situation is different (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2012). Rule utilitarianism conveys

that the rules that bring the greatest good should be adhered to. Lastly, Thiroux and

Krasemann (2012) convey the following regarding rule utilitarianism: “Rule utilitarians


6

try, from experience and careful reasoning, to set up a series of rules that, when

followed, will yield the greatest good for all humanity” (p.38).

According to Cox (2005), “Direct act-utilitarianism is a theory of both right action

and right moral deliberation. Act-utilitarianism offers a famously straightforward account

of right action and direct act-utilitarianism adds an interpretation of the practical nature

of this account” (p.61). According to direct utlitarians, an account of right action

furnishes moral agents with a correct procedure for deliberating over moral matters. In

particular, the direct act-utilitarian assumes a responsibility to explicitly reflect on the

best available consequences in every morally significant situation and act accordingly”

(p.61).

Immanuel Kant’s (1724-1844) Duty Ethics is also applicable to the ethical

dilemma of workplace theft. Kant believed that individuals could also set up moral rules

based on reason by itself. Moreover, in that, the logic was indisputable with truths

(Thiroux & Krasemann, 2012). Thus if we were to apply Kant’s Duty Ethics to workplace

theft we see that there is a lack of emphasis on duties and more on actions that are

based on inclinations. Rice, Trafimow, Hunt and Sandy (2010) describe a perfect duty

act as “duties that should never be violated and that such violations compromise the

moral status of the violators (p.20). Additionally, “perfect duty violations induce more

negative effects than imperfect duty violations, and it is the difference in negative affect

that is largely responsible for endowing violations of perfect duties with their superior

attributional weight” (Rice et al., p.21).


7

Ethical Decision-Making Components and Strategies

Callanan, Rotenberry, Perri, and Oehlers (2010) suggest that the context of the

dilemma will influence or actually determine the decision that will be made.

Furthermore, the authors test three factors that influence ethical decision-making and

they are as follows: “perceived opportunity to commit unethical act, degree of the

perceived benefit to the individual if the unethical act is committed, and the perceived

chance of getting caught or found out once the unethical act has been made” (p.52).

Next, Gaudine and Thorne (2001) developed a model regarding ethical decision-

making. Moreover, according to the authors “the model demonstrates that certain

emotional states influence the individual's propensity to identify ethical dilemmas,

facilitate the formation of the individual's prescriptive judgments at sophisticated levels

of moral development, lead to ethical decision choices that are consistent with the

individual's compliance with his or her ethical decision choices” (p.175). Finally,

Robertson and Fadil (1999) suggest that culture has an influence on ethical decision-

making. Furthermore, they suggest that being knowledgeable about cultural differences

will enhance cross-cultural communication efforts and also give individuals good

guidelines in regards to ethical behavior (Robertson and Fadil, 1999).

Appropriate Leadership Theories

It is important to mention the role of leadership as it relates to ethical dilemmas

and accountability. Denhardt and Denhardt (2011) convey that the role of leadership is

changing in the New Public Management (NPM) Paradigm. They also convey that the

role of public leaders will be (1) to help the community and its citizens to understand

their needs and their potential, (2) to integrate and articulate the community’s vision and


8

that of the various organizations active in any particular area, and (3) to act as a trigger

or stimulus for action. The leaders have to be flexible to new ideas and processes for

the sake of its continued existence.

According to Shafritz, Borick, and Russell (2009), “A transformational leader is

one with the ability to change an embedded organizational culture by creating a new

vision for the organization and marshalling the appropriate support to make that vision

the new reality” (p.394). Denhardt and Denhardt (2011) convey that the public faces

various types of problems that takes more than one administrator to resolve. They

further convey that the administrators can come from other agencies that utilize other

tools and resources. This concept can be applied when it comes to leaders dealing with

ethics in the workplace. Moreover, there may be another leader that is designated to

handle ethical issues especially given the extent of the circumstance. They further

convey that leaders in the new public service model should be an example to others,

persuasive, encouraging and empower those around them.

Analysis of Leadership Decision Making and Workplace Theft

In regards to applying decision-making steps to workplace theft, Callanan et al.

(2010) present a possible solution. Furthermore, as mentioned earlier, they contend that

the context of the dilemma will actually influence or determine the action that would be

taken. With this in mind, depending on the type of organization, key decision makers

must devise rules that target one of the primary factors mentioned by Callanan et al.

(2010) which mentioned the apparent opportunity to commit the ethical act.

Additionally, the decision makers have the power to adjust the way in which the

employee perceives the potential unethical act. Figure 1.1 illustrates these concepts.


9

Furthermore, we can hypothesize that the more satisfied an employee is with his or her

job then the perceived opportunity to commit an unethical act lessens. Additionally, we

can hypothesize that the less satisfied an employee is with his or her job the perceived

opportunity to commit an unethical act increases. For example, if an employee, who is

dissatisfied with his or her jobs, is given a gas card to use to fill up a rental car to use for

company business, the perceived opportunity to commit an unethical act increases

because this can be viewed as “additional compensation” for his or her work. Next,

Figure 1.2 illustrates a generic decision tree that can be applied at the managerial level

regarding workplace theft. Moreover, the figure illustrates two scenarios in which

workplace theft can occur. In Example 1, if the employee has stolen an item(s) that is

under $50, the immediate supervisor issues a written warning and the employee must

sign acknowledging the theft. The alternative to this scenario could be that the

supervisor or the employee may turn the matter over to the Human Resource (HR)

manager. The discretion is given to the employee and or the immediate supervisor after

the theft has occurred. Next, in Example 2, if the employee has stolen item(s) totaling

$51 or more, the Human Resource manager is notified, personnel action is completed

so that the payroll department can deduct the loss from the employee’s check. The HR

manager has the discretion to terminate the employee or add the misconduct to the

employee’s personnel file. Finally, the HR manger can also determine if criminal

charges needs to be filed against the employee. The emphasis on the aforementioned

decision tree is the importance of structure and accurate protocol regarding the ethical

dilemma. Therefore the decision makers must adhere to the guidelines outlined by the

organization in order for this type of structure and protocol to be effective. Furthermore,


10

based upon the roles and duties of the individuals within the organization, the structure

and codes of conduct have to be uniquely strategized to fit the organization otherwise

the protocols would be ineffective.


11

Figure 1.1

Hypothesis 1

Hypothesis 2

Employee

Dissatisfaction

Greater the perceived

opportunity to commit unethical

act

Employee

Job Satisfaction

Less the perceived

opportunity to commit

unethical act


12

Figure 1.2

Example 1 Example 2

OROR HR Manager can use discretion to

terminate employee or place disciplinary action into employee’s

file.

HR Manager gives employee form to

sign acknowledging total of items stolen will be

deducted from employee’s payroll

check if applicable.

HR Manager informs

employee that criminal charges will be filed and employee is terminated.

Incident of workplace

theft $51 or more

Human Resource Manager

Matter is turned over

to HR Manager at

the discretion of employee or immediate

supervisor

Employee acknowledges with signature

Incident of workplace theft under

$50Immediate supervisor

gives warning to employee

Immediate Supervisor


13

Conclusion

In sum, we can surmise that since the ethical dilemma of workplace theft falls

within the realms of consequentialism, then there should be codes of conduct to target

this behavior within organizations. Furthermore, with regards to workplace theft, strong

leadership is key to enforcing codes of conduct within the organization. Gross-Schaefer,

Trigilio, Negus, and Ceng-Si (2000) suggest that “employers need to address the

reasons behind disenfranchisement of employees and address the lack of personal

ethics” (p.97). The task of examining ethics can be challenging in a public setting.

Furthermore, these kinds of employees have various ‘rights’ such as tenure and certain

types of job protected statuses. Extreme due diligence should be taken to assess the

presumably ethical or immoral behavior to insure that the dilemma is framed in the best

manner in order to yield the most appropriate solutions.


14

REFERENCES

Callanan, G. A., Rotenberry, P. F.; Perri, D. F.; & Oehlers, P. (1999). Contextual factors as moderators of the effect of employee ethical ideology on ethical decision-making. Gadjah Mada International Journal of Business, 13(2), 107–123. Available from http://jurnal.ugm.ac.id/gamaijb/article/view/5486

Cox, D. (2005). Integrity, commitment, and indirect consequentialism. Journal of Value Inquiry, 39(1), 61–73. doi:10.1007/s10790-006-1571-7

Crosby, B. C., & Bryson, J. M. (2005). Leadership for the common good: Tackling public problems in a shared-power world. Hoboken: NJ: Jossey-Bass.

Denhardt, J. V., & Denhardt, R. B. (2011). The new public service: Serving, not steering (3rd ed.). Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.

Gaudine, A., & Thorne, L. (2001). Emotion and ethical decision-making in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 31(2), 175–187. Retrieved from Business Source Complete database.

Gross-Schaefer, A., Trigilio, J., Negus, J., & Ceng-Si Ro. (2000). Ethics education in the workplace: An effective tool to combat employee theft. Journal of Business Ethics, 26(2), 89–100. doi:10.1023/A:1006038310865

Kidwell, R. E., Jr., & Kochanowski, S. M. (2005). The morality of employee theft: Teaching about ethics and deviant behavior in the workplace. Journal of Management Education, 29(1), 135–152. doi:10.1177/1052562903261180

Rice, S., Trafimow, D., Hunt, G., & Sandry, J. (2010). Generalizing Kant’s distinction between perfect and imperfect duties to trust in different situations. The Journal of General Psychology, 137(1), 20–36. doi:10.1080/00221300903293048

Robertson, C., & Fadil, P. A. (1999). Ethical decision making in multinational organizations: A culture-based model. Journal of Business Ethics, 19(4), 385–392. doi:10.1023/A:1005742016867

Shafritz, J. M., Russell, E. W., & Borick, C. P. (2009). Introducing public administration (6th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson Longman.

Sowell, T. (2007). A conflict of visions: Ideological origins of political struggles. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Thiroux, J., & Krasemann, K. (2012). Ethics: Theory and practice. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.


15

Verbeek, B. (2001). Consequentialism, rationality and the relevant description of outcomes. Economics and Philosophy, 17(2), 181–205. doi:10.1017/s0266267101000220

· Web viewConference on Leadership Challenges in a Global World . Radboud University, Nijmegen,...

Documents

Transcript of · Web viewConference on Leadership Challenges in a Global World . Radboud University, Nijmegen,...