Suprised by Wirecard? Enablers of Corporate Wrongdoing in Europe

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theo Nyreröd ◽  
Giancarlo Spagnolo
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Wrongdoing

Compliance, Compensation and Corporate Wrongdoing

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karl Hofstetter ◽  
Reinier H. Kraakman ◽  
Eugene F. Soltes
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Wrongdoing

Shared Responsibility for Corporate Wrongdoing

2020 ◽  
pp. 401-417
Author(s):  
Amy J. Sepinwall
Keyword(s):  
Shared Responsibility ◽  
Corporate Wrongdoing

Rage against the machine: moral anger in whistleblowing

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 337-355 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris Mason ◽  
John Simmons
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Anger Expression ◽  
Theoretical Framework ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Extant Literature ◽  
Moral Anger ◽  
Board Level ◽  
Corporate Wrongdoing

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to offer a theoretical framework of whistleblowing that gives due recognition to the emotional and reflexive processes that underpin it. Modes of anger are integrated into the model based on a reading of Geddes and Callister (2007), and developed by Lindebaum and Geddes (2016) work on moral anger. Design/methodology/approach The model is derived by interrogation of the extant literature on whistleblowing with due recognition accorded to emotional and reflexive dimensions that have been underrepresented in previous research. The model was tested by a qualitative study that uses memoir analysis to interrogate a board level whistle-blower’s account of the complex, traumatic and like-changing nature of his experience. Findings The paper identifies key stages in whistle-blower thinking before, during and subsequent to a decision to expose corporate wrongdoing. It demonstrates how emotional and reflexive processes influence a whistle-blower’s mode of anger expression, and how different perspectives by the whistle-blower and the focal organisation may view this expression as moral or deviant anger. Research limitations/implications The complexity of the whistleblowing process, together with possible alternative perspectives of it, makes identifying every influencing variable extremely challenging. Also, reliance on a whistle-blower’s own account of his experience means that recall may be partial or self-serving. The model can be used to analyse other whistle-blower accounts of their experience, and further confirm its applicability. Originality/value This is the first application of memoir analysis to a whistle-blower’s account of his experience that relates modes of anger expression to stages in the whistleblowing episode. It addresses a significant imbalance in whistleblowing research that hitherto has emphasised rationality in whistle-blower decision making and downplayed the influence of reflexivity and emotion.

Legal and Political Reponses to White-Collar Crime

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomomi Kawasaki
Keyword(s):  
White Collar Crime ◽  
Strict Liability ◽  
White Collar ◽  
Sentencing Guidelines ◽  
Sarbanes Oxley ◽  
Compliance Programs ◽  
Willful Blindness ◽  
New Policies ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Corporate Wrongdoing

American responses to white-collar crime, especially corporate wrongdoing, passed a turning point in 1991 with the enactment of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines for Organizations, which adopted a “carrot and stick” approach to sentencing corporate offenders, including big incentives for companies introducing compliance programs. In the 2000s, this approach was enhanced by the enactment of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002 and the Thompson memo of 2003. In addition to the effects of the Thompson memo, federal prosecutors, learning from the fate of Arthur Andersen, came increasingly to rely on deferred prosecution agreements (DPAs) and non-prosecution agreements (NPAs) after 2005. However, the Yates memo issued in September 2015 may change Department of Justice policy on corporate wrongdoing dramatically, particularly regarding investigation and prosecution of individuals. In thinking about and conceptualizing legal and political responses to white-collar crime, two main actors are meaningful: the corporation and the individual. Today, a corporation is criminally liable under the respondeat superior doctrine in federal criminal law, and corporate offenders are sentenced under the Organizational Sentencing Guidelines, which provide for fines, restitution, and probation as possible criminal penalties. In recent years, around 150–200 organizations have been sentenced under the Sentencing Guidelines annually. An individual white-collar criminal may be personally liable for their unlawful acts even if the corporation itself is convicted too. Individuals may be convicted absent any showing of mens rea in rare cases (strict liability crime and “willful blindness”). In the last decade, more than 8,000 individuals were prosecuted and convicted, for around a 90% conviction rate. One effect of the Yates memo may be to shift the main target of legal and political response to white-collar crime from the corporation to the individual. New policies under the Yates memo also come with new problems, for instance, that companies may lose incentive to introduce a compliance program or may look for scapegoats to escape prosecution themselves.

How bad is your company? Measuring corporate wrongdoing beyond the magic of ESG metrics

2020 ◽  
Vol 63 (3) ◽  
pp. 287-299 ◽  
Author(s):  
Davide Fiaschi ◽  
Elisa Giuliani ◽  
Federica Nieri ◽  
Nicola Salvati
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Wrongdoing

After the scandal – Recovery options for damaged organizations

2010 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 66-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
William De Maria
Keyword(s):  
Management Strategies ◽  
Recent Case ◽  
Specific Focus ◽  
Public Exposure ◽  
Corporate Wrongdoing ◽  
General Thrust

AbstractThe paper advances into a new field of multi-disciplinary inquiry called scandal scholarship. The general thrust of this scholarship should be to understand what factors are determinative to the management of scandals in organizations. The specific focus of this paper is to address the question: what options do organizations have in the immediate period following public exposure? First, a typology gleaned from relevant literatures, attempts to classify the variable ways troubled organizations attempt to extricate themselves from scandal. The typology, in its naïve form, was then applied to a recent case of corporate wrongdoing of international significance. As a result the framework was refined to achieve stronger congruence between case realities and classification. With more development this typology may be able to forecast the scandal management strategies of troubled organizations through an identification of the remedial responses they deploy. This would be great assistance to those who must engage with the troubled organization such as regulators and stakeholders.

Does acceptance of corporate wrongdoing begin on the “training ground” of professional managers?

2006 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 185-194 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olivia Yu ◽  
Lening Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Professional Managers ◽  
Corporate Wrongdoing

The Class Action as an Antitrust Enforcement Device: The Chicago Experience (I)

1976 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 1021-1106 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin S. DuVal
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Federal Court ◽  
Class Action ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
Antitrust Enforcement ◽  
Class Actions ◽  
The Common ◽  
Corporate Wrongdoing

The common question class action has been a source of division and controversy in the legal community. Hailed by its proponents as both a means for small claimants to obtain redress and a deterrent to corporate wrongdoing, the class action has been attacked by others as tantamount to “legalized blackmail” and as threatening to swamp the already overburdened judicial system with proceedings of extraordinary complexity. Two empirical studies of the class action have also reached diametrically opposed conclusions. A study by the American College of Trial Lawyers found that the common question class action suit “has mandated heavy expenditures of judicial time, effort and expense” and has sacrificed “procedural and substantive fairness to the party opposing the class,” while a study commissioned by the Senate Commerce Committee found that most class actions “proceed with reasonable smoothness in the Federal court.” Proposals to restrict the use of class actions have been advanced. While these proposals have not been adopted, the courts have increasingly limited the circumstances under which class actions may be maintained.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document