Cargando…

Harming by Deceit: Epistemic Malevolence and Organizational Wrongdoing

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 literat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Meyer, Marco, Choo, Chun Wei
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Netherlands 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9951153/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36855528
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-023-05370-8
_version_ 1784893327523446784
author Meyer, Marco
Choo, Chun Wei
author_facet Meyer, Marco
Choo, Chun Wei
author_sort Meyer, Marco
collection PubMed
description 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’.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9951153
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Springer Netherlands
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99511532023-02-24 Harming by Deceit: Epistemic Malevolence and Organizational Wrongdoing Meyer, Marco Choo, Chun Wei J Bus Ethics Original Paper 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’. Springer Netherlands 2023-02-24 /pmc/articles/PMC9951153/ /pubmed/36855528 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-023-05370-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Paper
Meyer, Marco
Choo, Chun Wei
Harming by Deceit: Epistemic Malevolence and Organizational Wrongdoing
title Harming by Deceit: Epistemic Malevolence and Organizational Wrongdoing
title_full Harming by Deceit: Epistemic Malevolence and Organizational Wrongdoing
title_fullStr Harming by Deceit: Epistemic Malevolence and Organizational Wrongdoing
title_full_unstemmed Harming by Deceit: Epistemic Malevolence and Organizational Wrongdoing
title_short Harming by Deceit: Epistemic Malevolence and Organizational Wrongdoing
title_sort harming by deceit: epistemic malevolence and organizational wrongdoing
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9951153/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36855528
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-023-05370-8
work_keys_str_mv AT meyermarco harmingbydeceitepistemicmalevolenceandorganizationalwrongdoing
AT choochunwei harmingbydeceitepistemicmalevolenceandorganizationalwrongdoing