My analysis explains three reasons why good people remain obedient and may even succumb to immoral behavior: to feel recognized as part of a bigger whole, under influence of manipulative leaders, and through fear of an authority figure.
Often times, it is difficult for an employee to be recognized as one with a positive impact on a company and to feel appreciated for the work he has done. In reality, the hierarchy of power implies that not everyone can become the “corn of the crop.” For a company like Deloitte which spans across the globe, it typically takes about twenty years to become a partner, and less than twenty percent of Deloitte employees actually become one. Despite this mediocre statistic, when faced with an unethical situation where …show more content…
Leaders of an organization or any establishment are deemed as “good role models.” The actions and behaviors of leaders are often looked upon as ideal and used as judgment protocols by the average human in daily life. For example, Milgram’s experiment revealed that 65% of the volunteers obeyed the experimenter’s orders by administering the max shock levels which is quite “shocking.” However, the experimenter is perceived as a knowledgeable and trustworthy professional who justified the treatment of shock as a science method that would help people improve their memory. Despite the aching pains and screams the volunteer hears from the subject, he is inclined to continue because this experiment will “better” science, the experimenter will take full responsibility for the health of the subject, and the experimenter reassures the volunteer that administering higher shock levels is the right thing to do. Besides, who would not want to trust the experimenter? He plays the role of scientist, an expert, and uses his role to abuse his power over the volunteer and the subject. Similarly, in the workplace, leaders may take advantage of their employees due to having a higher role within the company. In the case of the Enron scandal, one of the key players, Andrew Fastow, took advantage of his role in order to manipulate the Enron team and create a façade of …show more content…
Engaging in ISIS behaviors may have allowed the couple to feel a sense of belonging within the terrorist group and to make an impact on future attacks. ISIS leaders may have manipulated the couple by making a terrorist attack seem ordinary and as a way of “wiping out” unwanted people in the world. Also, the couple may have been threatened if they not comply with the San Bernando shooting whether it was risking death of a loved one or fear of an authority ISIS figure. We do not know exactly why the couple decided to take the lives of innocent people as well as their own, but the influence of ISIS outweighed their capability of moral decision
Often times, it is difficult for an employee to be recognized as one with a positive impact on a company and to feel appreciated for the work he has done. In reality, the hierarchy of power implies that not everyone can become the “corn of the crop.” For a company like Deloitte which spans across the globe, it typically takes about twenty years to become a partner, and less than twenty percent of Deloitte employees actually become one. Despite this mediocre statistic, when faced with an unethical situation where …show more content…
Leaders of an organization or any establishment are deemed as “good role models.” The actions and behaviors of leaders are often looked upon as ideal and used as judgment protocols by the average human in daily life. For example, Milgram’s experiment revealed that 65% of the volunteers obeyed the experimenter’s orders by administering the max shock levels which is quite “shocking.” However, the experimenter is perceived as a knowledgeable and trustworthy professional who justified the treatment of shock as a science method that would help people improve their memory. Despite the aching pains and screams the volunteer hears from the subject, he is inclined to continue because this experiment will “better” science, the experimenter will take full responsibility for the health of the subject, and the experimenter reassures the volunteer that administering higher shock levels is the right thing to do. Besides, who would not want to trust the experimenter? He plays the role of scientist, an expert, and uses his role to abuse his power over the volunteer and the subject. Similarly, in the workplace, leaders may take advantage of their employees due to having a higher role within the company. In the case of the Enron scandal, one of the key players, Andrew Fastow, took advantage of his role in order to manipulate the Enron team and create a façade of …show more content…
Engaging in ISIS behaviors may have allowed the couple to feel a sense of belonging within the terrorist group and to make an impact on future attacks. ISIS leaders may have manipulated the couple by making a terrorist attack seem ordinary and as a way of “wiping out” unwanted people in the world. Also, the couple may have been threatened if they not comply with the San Bernando shooting whether it was risking death of a loved one or fear of an authority ISIS figure. We do not know exactly why the couple decided to take the lives of innocent people as well as their own, but the influence of ISIS outweighed their capability of moral decision