Running head: COMPLIANCE AND ETHICS PROGRAMS 1

Group 5 – Compliance and Ethics Programs

John Glaser, Monica Haskins, Donald Jacobs, and Kristina Taylor

Southern New Hampshire University

COMPLIANCE AND ETHICS PROGRAMS 2

As expected, all five of the generations found in the workplace today maintain a high

standard for ethics in the office. A survey of employees in global corporations revealed an

average expectation of their organizations of “6.44 on a scale of 1 to 7” [ CITATION Pai11 \l

1033 ]. That same survey showed that the perceived ethics of their organizations was a little

lower than they wanted though, with “just 5.68 on the same seven-point scale” [ CITATION

Pai11 \l 1033 ]. Information like this can be very useful for both the ethically driven and the

ethically challenged organization. The socially high achieving organization can further

customize its plan(s). The late-adopting organization can use relevant data to development its

first plan and code of conduct. “By adopting its own code, a company can clarify for all parties,

internal and external, the standards that govern its conduct and can thereby convey its

commitment to responsible practice wherever it operates” (Paine, Deshpandé, Margolis, &

Bettcher, Up to Code: Does Your Company’s Conduct Meet World-Class Standards?, 2005).

Leveraging survey topics and results from the above study and others, organizations can

create both vertical and stratified internal surveys to determine the expectations and perceptions

of their employees and management, respectively. Using the external study(s) as a benchmark

will help an organization determine critical areas to correct in a Pareto approach. For example,

data demonstrates that “a significant amount of misconduct involves continuous, ongoing

behavior rather than one-time incidents” [CITATION Eth17 \l 1033 ]. As pointed out by Paine,

et. al. (2011), many organizations are ignorant – or even guilty of sweeping misconduct under

the carpet – while a recruiter points to a shiny new code of conduct that means nothing in

practice. It must also be recognized that studies such as Paine, et al. (2011) have proven that the

view from the top of the organizational pyramid is of a cleaner, better company, than it is from

the bottom up. (In other words, the giraffe looks down and sees green grass, while the mouse
COMPLIANCE AND ETHICS PROGRAMS 3

looks up and sees the giraffe’s bottom.) By digging in and understanding the meaning of the data

and the extent of the impact, leaders can determine how their corporate culture and CSR plans

measure out across their target stakeholders, and craft plans accordingly.

Using AARP as an example, their leadership may have a short-term interest in appealing

to the Baby-Boomers, but that cannot be their sole target audience. Therefore, an overall strategy

and CSR with an expressed plan to evolve more towards aspects of interest to Gen-X’ers and the

Millennials would be very important to have in place in the near future. If AARP were to tell

perspective (Boomer) members that they are actively coaxing employers of post-retirement

(possibly part-time) employees into creating workplaces with fewer boundaries, it might not

attract much immediate membership. If they were to put that in the literature in a few years,

however, the Millennials may take a positive notice, because “members of this generation

observe fewer boundaries than previous generations” [CITATION Wei14 \l 1033 ]. That is

relevant data, which can be put to good use. Conversely, organizations seeking to acquire the

newly minted college graduate will not do well by advertising “a career for life”. That would be

another acquisition and use of relevant data that people outside of the same age-range likely

would not know without valid external inputs.

The input data and results of these global, national, and even internal studies are vital to

the perpetual course-correction of any forward-looking, healthy organization. “Leaders need an

approach that is guided by global standards, informed by systematic data, grounded in the

business context, and focused on positive goals” (Paine, Deshpandé, & Margolis, A Global

Leader’s Guide to Managing Business Conduct, 2011).

COMPLIANCE AND ETHICS PROGRAMS 4

References

Ethics Research Center. (2013). 2013 National Business Ethics Survey: Key Findings. Retrieved

May 24, 2017, from Ethics.org: https://www.ethics.org/research/nbes/nbes-reports/nbes-

2013

Paine, L. S., Deshpandé, R., & Margolis, J. D. (2011, September). A Global Leader’s Guide to

Managing Business Conduct. Harvard Business Review, 89(9). Retrieved May 20, 2017

Paine, L. S., Deshpandé, R., Margolis, J. D., & Bettcher, K. E. (2005, December). Up to Code:

Does Your Company’s Conduct Meet World-Class Standards? Harvard Business

Review, 83(12). Retrieved May 21, 2017

Weiss, J. W. (2014). Business Ethics: A Stakeholder and Issues Management Approach (6th ed.).

San Francisco, CA, USA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc. Retrieved May 23, 2017