others as well. This enabled rapid early expansion for the chain, since it both helped finance new openings and gave managers a huge incentive to make restaurants prosper. But as the chain grew, people all over the hierarchy had individual financial interests that conflicted with their loyalty to the chain as a whole. People responsible for getting food to a whole region were able to favor specific restaurants, for instance.
On the other hand, executives have a lot of societal pressures focused on them that's supposed to limit this sort of behavior. In the U.S., Sarbanes-Oxley was passed precisely for this purpose. And the inherent restraints of their roles prevent most of them from being brazen about it. But there are exceptions, and some of those are what we read about in the newspapers.
We've mentioned organizations as individual actors in societal dilemmas, and we've talked about individuals in societal dilemmas inside organizations. Now let's put them together.
Think back to the overfishing societal dilemma from Chapter 5, but instead of Fisherman Bob deciding whether to cooperate and limit his catch or defect and overfish, it's the Robert Fish Corporation. Fisherman Bob and the Robert Fish Corporation face the same societal dilemma, but a corporation isn't actually a person; it's an organization of people in a hierarchy. Let's go through it step by step.
The Robert Fish Corporation has to decide whether or not to overfish. The scale is certainly different than the simpler example—the Robert Fish Corporation might have dozens of large fishing boats all over the world—but the idea is the same. The corporation will collect whatever information it needs via its employees, and some person or group within that corporation will decide whether to cooperate or defect. That trade-off will be made based on the corporation's competing interests and whatever societal pressures are in place.
For the moment, let's assume that the corporation decides to defect. For whatever reason, it is official policy of the Robert Fish Corporation to follow its short-term self-interest at the expense of the group interest of society as a whole. In this case, that means catching as much fish as possible, whenever possible, regardless of whether that depletes the stock.
Alice is the Vice President of Operations of the Robert Fish Corporation. Her job is to implement that corporate policy. Alice is in charge of overfishing. As an employee, Alice has a societal dilemma to address. She can either cooperate and implement corporate policy to overfish, or defect and undermine her employer's goals. But in addition to her role as a Robert Fish Corporation employee, Alice is a member of society as a whole. And as a member of society, she has a second societal dilemma: she can either cooperate and ensure that her company fishes responsibly, or defect and allow it to overfish.
Those two societal dilemmas conflict, just like O'Callaghan's two societal dilemmas. Cooperating in one means defecting in the other. So when Alice decides whether or not her company is going to overfish, she is caught between two societal dilemmas. A whole gamut of corporate rules will pressure her to implement corporate policy, and laws against overfishing will pressure in the opposite direction.
Societal Dilemma: Overfishing
Society: The Robert Fish Corporation.
Competing society: Society as a whole. (Other competing interests not listed.)
Group interest: Follow the corporate norms.
Competing group interest: Ensure long-term viability of fishing stocks.
Group norm: Overfish.
Corresponding group norm: Don't overfish.
To encourage people to act in the group interest, the society implements a variety of societal pressures.
Moral: It feels good to put the best interests of the organization ahead of personal interests.
Reputational: The rest of the organization will react badly to someone who doesn't act in the organizational interest.
Institutional: Specific corporate
On the other hand, executives have a lot of societal pressures focused on them that's supposed to limit this sort of behavior. In the U.S., Sarbanes-Oxley was passed precisely for this purpose. And the inherent restraints of their roles prevent most of them from being brazen about it. But there are exceptions, and some of those are what we read about in the newspapers.
We've mentioned organizations as individual actors in societal dilemmas, and we've talked about individuals in societal dilemmas inside organizations. Now let's put them together.
Think back to the overfishing societal dilemma from Chapter 5, but instead of Fisherman Bob deciding whether to cooperate and limit his catch or defect and overfish, it's the Robert Fish Corporation. Fisherman Bob and the Robert Fish Corporation face the same societal dilemma, but a corporation isn't actually a person; it's an organization of people in a hierarchy. Let's go through it step by step.
The Robert Fish Corporation has to decide whether or not to overfish. The scale is certainly different than the simpler example—the Robert Fish Corporation might have dozens of large fishing boats all over the world—but the idea is the same. The corporation will collect whatever information it needs via its employees, and some person or group within that corporation will decide whether to cooperate or defect. That trade-off will be made based on the corporation's competing interests and whatever societal pressures are in place.
For the moment, let's assume that the corporation decides to defect. For whatever reason, it is official policy of the Robert Fish Corporation to follow its short-term self-interest at the expense of the group interest of society as a whole. In this case, that means catching as much fish as possible, whenever possible, regardless of whether that depletes the stock.
Alice is the Vice President of Operations of the Robert Fish Corporation. Her job is to implement that corporate policy. Alice is in charge of overfishing. As an employee, Alice has a societal dilemma to address. She can either cooperate and implement corporate policy to overfish, or defect and undermine her employer's goals. But in addition to her role as a Robert Fish Corporation employee, Alice is a member of society as a whole. And as a member of society, she has a second societal dilemma: she can either cooperate and ensure that her company fishes responsibly, or defect and allow it to overfish.
Those two societal dilemmas conflict, just like O'Callaghan's two societal dilemmas. Cooperating in one means defecting in the other. So when Alice decides whether or not her company is going to overfish, she is caught between two societal dilemmas. A whole gamut of corporate rules will pressure her to implement corporate policy, and laws against overfishing will pressure in the opposite direction.
Societal Dilemma: Overfishing
Society: The Robert Fish Corporation.
Competing society: Society as a whole. (Other competing interests not listed.)
Group interest: Follow the corporate norms.
Competing group interest: Ensure long-term viability of fishing stocks.
Group norm: Overfish.
Corresponding group norm: Don't overfish.
To encourage people to act in the group interest, the society implements a variety of societal pressures.
Moral: It feels good to put the best interests of the organization ahead of personal interests.
Reputational: The rest of the organization will react badly to someone who doesn't act in the organizational interest.
Institutional: Specific corporate
Similar Books
