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...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
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 |