10 Comments Add your own

• 1. Eric Cole  |  April 29th, 2007 at 9:35 pm

  I am not sure how strongly the first article relates to academic dishonesty (what we think of as plagiarism and cheating on tests) as it does to corruption in the workplace. In “One Billion Customers,” there were a number of stories whose themes were rooted in corruption and bribery and how they are critical components of a functional Chinese economy. With this in mind, I do not feel that academic dishonesty is proof that China is becoming more capitalistic, but that the rest of the world is becoming more aware of the nuances that are essential to many aspects of Chinese business.

  Concerning the articles that Professor Carr posted, if you are smart enough to be doing a masters degree in mechanical engineering, it is of my opinion that you should also be smart enough to take the time and learn how to correctly document and publish your work, regardless of your background.

• 2. Chris Carr  |  April 30th, 2007 at 8:36 am

  Eric,

  Good comment. Here is a question I have for you and your classmates … what happens when the school (or business firm) does not clearly signal what the line is and where it is?

  Here is what I am getting at … in my 10 years at Cal Poly, cheating was an issue that came up twice (both incidents involved students from wealthy, well educated families in Orange County).

  Both times, the response I received from the students (and calls from Daddy Warbucks, in one case) was the good ol’ Cal Poly, “gosh, I did not know that was not allowed, and your syllabus does not say anything about it.” I thought, in my own mind, that the no-no they did was obvious.

  Do I got to trial in the Cal Poly system on those two cases and pursue expulsion, or not? Are they winnable cases? What would you recommend, recognizing that such disputes are a huge resource drain for the prosecutor and/it his/her institution?

  In my own mind, their arguments were total smokescreens to evade responsibility.

  Yet, I can see how in other instances it would be much less clear — for example, in parts of Asia emulating another (copying) is seen as a form of flattery.

  And if/when the institution or organization does not have a 10,000 page civil law document that defines any/all forms of cheating, as opposed to our common law type system where we only write up general principles for what is a no-no and what is not, how should the organization (educational or other) proceed?

  Specific example: how would/should an architecture firm (you are a partner there) handle a situation where your employee manual does not clearly define what expenses the firm should cover on a business trip, and you have an employee submit expenses for reimbursement that you feel are over the line? And, let’s make the situation even dicier. The employee who did this is from China or India, and your firm has worked very hard to recruit minority employees — if you lose him/her, you have to go back to the drawing board and replace him/her. How would you handle this?

• 3. Joe Callinan  |  April 30th, 2007 at 10:05 am

  In the example posted above I would review the submitted expenses with the employee and possibly come to a mutually acceptable reibursement amount. I would also intoduce a new policy, which is more detailed and includes a person that employees could contact with reimbursement questions before they occur. It would be way to costly for the company to find and hire a new employee over a few reimbursment dollars.

  Companies need to realize that with world wide operations there is going to be miscommunications and misunderstandings. The only way to mitigate these instances is to implement detailed policies and share them with all employees of the company. And if a company intends to pursue legal action, it should implement the “10,000 page document” indentifying all forms of cheating and/or reimbursable expenses.

• 4. Chris Carr  |  April 30th, 2007 at 12:28 pm

  Joe,

  Good comment.

  I can be relentless ….

  If you go the “adopt the 10,000 page document that lays this all out” avenue, who drafts it and/or who pays? Chances are your firm, if it’s like most, won’t want to pay or take the time to get there and if so, you will have to continue to deal with the cheaters on the fly.

• 5. Erik  |  April 30th, 2007 at 6:36 pm

  I think this scenario would be the case of an employer who is missing the point. As an employer, if you are trying to nickel and dime your traveling employees, you are probably also skimping on health insurance benefits, retirement benefits, salaries, bonuses, etc. In addition, you probably overcharge your employees at the soda machine (my own personal benchmark).

  As an employer, you can micromanage your employees to death OR you can let little stuff slide and focus on the more important things like maximizing your billable hours and realization. If an employee gets too crazy running expenses through, as an employer you let them know they are out of line.

  Additionally, you can set policies that are good for everybody - such as allowing a certain per diem for food/hotels/etc and if an employee chooses to stay on the cheap, they get to pocket the difference. If they want to be extravagant, they pick up the extra out of their own pocket. This is a win-win because as the employer your costs are fixed and the employee can choose their own outcome.

  As a rational business person, you need to evaluate the cost-benefit of all decisions. What is the cost of reprimanding your employee for “going over the line”. What is the benefit? What is the cost of drafting an all-encompassing overly detailed policy manual? What is the benefit? Evaluating cost-benefit is something we all do everyday, all day long. What is the cost of going to class? What is the benefit? What is the cost of procrastinating on drawing my value-stream map? What is the benefit?

  Sorry Adib…this post has nothing to do with your original topic, but I was just going with the flow.

  -Erik

• 6. Chris Carr  |  April 30th, 2007 at 7:09 pm

  Good comment, Eric.

  Ah, were it that clean and clear to evaluate …

  How would you handle an employee who ordered a $200 bottle of wine with dinner, and, had his college buddy he had not seen in years join him for dinner (and that guy’s girlfriend) join at a nice restaurant while on a business trip in Denver (by the way the employee promised your firm finance person that they discussed “business” during the meal and other “client development issues” when he was questioned about the bill he had submitted for reimbursement)?

  Don’t discount this example too much — I have seen this exact example 3 times in my own career. Once the bottle of wiine was over $300 (at least the employee was from Napa so he thankfully selected a good one).

  Would you forgive and forget here, or, call him/her on it and say “you are fired” or “next time this happens you are fired?”

  I only seek to present you/your classmates with real world examples of how this gets less than clear … and fast. Don’t assume your standards are their standards. Each time the employee at issue in the cases I speak of felt they had been “working so hard lately” that they had “earned the right to splurge a little” by ordering such a bottle of wine with dinner while away on a business trip (on the company’s tab, of course, not theirs). I was shocked. What left me scratching my head was that they all came from good familes and lives where I thought they “surely” new better than to take advantage like that.

• 7. Erik  |  May 1st, 2007 at 4:50 am

  Thanks for the good discussion.

  I covered your revised scenario in the 3rd paragraph of my original post. A policy that states any expenses over a predefined per diem are on the shoulders of the employee sets the expectation ahead of time and is easy to understand.

• 8. Steve Feng  |  May 2nd, 2007 at 10:42 pm

  Considering the discussion above, I scratched my head when people drink $200 bottles of wine. But then again, someday I want to own a porche. Whether it be school, business, or personal decisions, I feel that if you cheat or over compensate on something adventually it will come back to haunt you. Was that $200 bottle of wine worth it? so maybe it wont come back to haunt you, esp if your client is paying for it?!?! We could explain situations on both sides all day long, but I think the core of the issue is loss of moral judgement. A lot of these decisions have fallen into a grey area, because the moral framework has disappeared and we think the law is responsible for setting standards.

• 9. Eric Cole  |  June 14th, 2007 at 1:43 pm

  In those two cases I feel prosecution is the only viable alternative, otherwise one begins the slippery downward slope of when to draw the line. Ignorance of the law is not an excuse for breaking the law. I’ve often broken rules that I did not know existed, but, when faced with that reality, bit the bullet and realized that I was in the wrong. Time to move on. Same thing here. If Daddy Warbucks never taught you about the implications of cheating and their associated repercussions, it’s not the school from whom you should be asking for your money back.

  In my own firm, the manual should be able to clearly define what is and what is not covered on expense accounts. If it does not, that is my fault. Going forward, I would have to sit down with the employee and look over exactly what the expenses were. I feel that it would be pretty easy to discern which expenses are egregiously over the line from those that are not, as well as those that sit right on the line. If they are on the far side of the line and it is easy to see that the employee was just trying to have as much fun as possible on the company dime, then it would be time for them to part ways with the company. If it is right on the line, then I would provide a clearer definition for the future but allow it to pass for the time being. The onus is on both of us. While 10,000 page civil law documents are overboard for most situations, the time and effort to add a few extra details in abridged versions of these documents is usually worth it. I also hope that my firm will hire the best employees possible, regardless of their background/race/gender/culture. It is a non-issue.

• 10. Eric Cole  |  June 14th, 2007 at 1:57 pm

  A nice thing about a small to medium size architecture firm is that you are able to avoid the bureaucracy that exists in larger corporations. At the end of the day, you want your company to be full of good people. In my previous post, when I refer to “the best employees possible,” that definition extends beyond talent alone. It includes the intangibles such as the person’s character - their moral integrity. It is similar to how Bill Belichick built up the New England Patriots where he would sacrifice a superior athlete for one whose talents are slightly inferior but who fits into the cohesive unit of the team. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Similar to what Erik said, you do not want to be an employer who is trying to nickel and dime everything. At the same time, you do not want employees who are trying to squeeze as much out of you as possible. Good people make good decisions, and if you do your job right in the hiring process, you can trust both of them.

Leave a Comment

Name Required

Email Required, hidden

Url

Comment

Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed

The posts, comments and/or views expressed on this trip blog, whether by a Cal Poly student or faculty or an outside guest to the blog, do not necessarily reflect the policies or views of Cal Poly, the Orfalea College of Business (OCOB), any of the OCOB's graduate programs and/or other students who participate in the trip.