Harming by Deceit: Epistemic Malevolence and Organizational Wrongdoing

被引:7
|
作者
Meyer, Marco [1 ]
Choo, Chun Wei [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Hamburg, Fac Philosophy, Uberseering 35,Postfach 4, D-22297 Hamburg, Germany
[2] Univ Toronto, Fac Informat, 140 St George St, Toronto, ON M5S 3G6, Canada
关键词
Epistemic vice; Organizational wrongdoing; Epistemic malevolence; Deception; Organizational behavior; ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING; INTERPERSONAL DECEPTION; INFORMATION; ENVIRONMENT; BEHAVIOR; VIRTUE; CHARACTER; CONTEXT; HEALTH; MODEL;
D O I
10.1007/s10551-023-05370-8
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Research on organizational epistemic vice alleges that some organizations are epistemically malevolent, i.e. they habitually harm others by deceiving them. Yet, there is a lack of empirical research on epistemic malevolence. We connect the discussion of epistemic malevolence to the empirical literature on organizational deception. The existing empirical literature does not pay sufficient attention to the impact of an organization's ability to control compromising information on its deception strategy. We address this gap by studying eighty high-penalty corporate misconduct cases between 2000 and 2020 in the United States. We find that organizations use two different strategies to deceive: Organizations 'sow doubt' when they contest information about them or their impacts that others have access to. By contrast, organizations 'exploit trust' when they deceive others by obfuscating, concealing, or falsifying information that they themselves control. While previous research has focused on cases of 'sowing doubt', we find that organizations 'exploit trust' in the majority of cases that we studied. This has important policy implications because the strategy of 'exploiting trust' calls for a different response from regulators and organizations than the strategy of 'sowing doubt'.
引用
收藏
页码:439 / 452
页数:14
相关论文
共 20 条
  • [1] Harming by Deceit: Epistemic Malevolence and Organizational Wrongdoing
    Marco Meyer
    Chun Wei Choo
    Journal of Business Ethics, 2024, 189 : 439 - 452
  • [2] EPISTEMIC MALEVOLENCE
    Baehr, Jason
    METAPHILOSOPHY, 2010, 41 (1-2) : 189 - 213
  • [3] Organizational wrongdoing in courts of accounts
    Lino, Andre Feliciano
    Busanelli de Aquino, Andre Carlos
    REVISTA DE ADMINISTRACAO PUBLICA, 2020, 54 (02): : 220 - 242
  • [4] The Effects of Contextual and Wrongdoing Attributes on Organizational Employees' Whistleblowing Intentions Following Fraud
    Robinson, Shani N.
    Robertson, Jesse C.
    Curtis, Mary B.
    JOURNAL OF BUSINESS ETHICS, 2012, 106 (02) : 213 - 227
  • [5] On the Possibility of a Paratelic Initiation of Organizational Wrongdoing
    Vesa, Mikko
    den Hond, Frank
    Harviainen, J. Tuomas
    JOURNAL OF BUSINESS ETHICS, 2019, 160 (01) : 1 - 15
  • [6] The Impact of Emotions on Stakeholder Reactions to Organizational Wrongdoing
    Dufour, Lucas
    Andiappan, Meena
    Banoun, Arnaud
    EUROPEAN MANAGEMENT REVIEW, 2019, 16 (03) : 761 - 779
  • [7] Organizational Wrongdoing within the Context of the UN Sustainable Development Goals: An Integrative Review
    Heim, Irina
    Mergaliyeva, Lilya
    JOURNAL OF BUSINESS ETHICS, 2024, : 615 - 635
  • [8] Using Whistleblowers' Metaphors to Understand why Organizational Wrongdoing Endures
    Richardson, Brian K.
    Tran, Jacinta
    James, Eric
    MANAGEMENT COMMUNICATION QUARTERLY, 2025,
  • [9] The Banality of Organizational Wrongdoing: A Reading on Arendt's Thoughtlessness Thesis
    Hernandez, Javier
    Araos, Consuelo
    JOURNAL OF BUSINESS ETHICS, 2024, 195 (04) : 713 - 727
  • [10] Predicting employee reactions to perceived organizational wrongdoing: Demoralization, justice, proactive personality, and whistle-blowing
    Miceli, Marcia P.
    Near, Janet P.
    Rehg, Michael T.
    Van Scotter, James R.
    HUMAN RELATIONS, 2012, 65 (08) : 923 - 954