The philosophy of Orea

It’s possible for somebody with the best intentions and highest morals to do a regrettable thing. It’s also possible for somebody with selfish intentions and low moral development to do something commendable. The reason is the same in both cases: situational factors overcame the impact of personal ones.

Take this observation by Robin, Reidenbach, and Forrest (1996):

“[E]thical decisions occur within an environment that is often shaped by frantic competition, technological change, company deadlines, inaccurate and incomplete information, and immediate demands from customers and fellow employees. The ethics of the issue must compete for attention within this fog of high personal pressure and activity. Further, even when the ethical issue is recognized, it must compete for priority within these same conditions.” 

This goes a long way to explain the sad fact that overall the biggest threat to organisations of people committing fraud comes within (Kroll, 2015). According to a 2013 study by the UK Centre for the Protection of National Infrastructure, 94 percent of people convicted of committing serious fraud or sabotage on the job harming their organisation made the decision to do so after they were hired. 

It is therefore likely that the workplace itself contributed to wrongdoing. The good news is that an organisation can affect the pro-social behaviour of its members (and prevent the opposite), by changing the circumstances.