Page 22 - Journal of Management Inquiry, July 2018

Wright et al. 321

In this regard, it is important to consider a class of indi- Thoughts on Better Solving the “Folly”:
viduals (particularly managerial employees) for whom a The Role of Strength of Character
false display of moral integrity is a defining characteristic—
the psychopathic or sociopathic manager. Psychopaths or As Kerr noted in his interview, early on in his career he
sociopaths (the two labels are here considered as synony- noticed more and more “odd” phenomena that over time
mous) must meet three or more criteria. These criteria became the basis for his “Folly” concept. Frustratingly, the
include a persistent lack of conformity to social norms, “Folly” remains as prevalent (some might say even more so)
deceitfulness, impulsivity, aggressiveness, disregard for the today as it was more than 40 years ago. Building on Kerr’s
safety of others, consistent irresponsibility, and lack of premise that it is valuable to measure what is important to
remorse. In brief, such individuals lack conscience or per- measure, not just what is easy to measure, we followed his
sonal moral sensibility but are adept at manipulating others suggestion and combined the original four causes to two.
(American Psychiatric Association, 2013). They are Revised Cause No. 1 now reads the overemphasis on objec-
extremely predatory and may thrive in changing environ- tive, highly visible criteria or behaviors. However, although
ments, particularly ones that provide them with the freedom now easier to understand, we must be careful that this more
to act on manipulative impulses while appearing to conform parsimonious revised cause does not create new or further
and occasionally even excel. exasperate current “blind spots” in our patterns of thinking
Their behavior is not simply instrumental, focused on and behavior (cf. Bazerman & Tenbrunsel, 2011). To that
making money, or accruing power. Rather, psychopathic/ end, we next examine the possible positive role of strengths
of character in fostering moral motivation.
sociopathic traits likely have a strong genetic component
Since the beginning of recorded history, philosophers and
(cf. Larsson, Andershed, & Lichtenstein, 2006) and per- practitioners alike have recognized the existence and impor-
vade every aspect of their lives (Babiak & Hare, 2007; tance of character (Hunter, 2000). Nowhere is this impor-
Hare, 1993). As one example of this highly intriguing line tance more evident than when we consider the framework of
of research, consider the work by Yang et al. (2005) on our revised second cause of the “Folly”: moral motivation.
pathological liars, which found the basis for a neurobio- For an alarming number of individuals today, the decision of
logical explanation to lying. In particular, Yang et al. whether to lie, cheat, or steal has merely become a matter of
(2005) found that, on average, a pathological liar group personal choice, one that simply depends on the “context” in
had a 22.3% increase in prefrontal cortex white matter which the individual currently finds himself or herself
coupled with a 41.7% decrease in gray/white ratio com- (Wright, 2015). The key question has become a transactional
pared with a normal control group of nonliars. Considered cost-benefit calculation of the probability of whether he or
from an evolutionary perspective, this increased prefron- she will get caught (Becker, 1974), not on the moral conse-
tal cortex white matter may very well provide a potential quences of the immoral behavior and future blights to his or
liar with the increased cognitive capacity to “success- her reputation (Wright & Lauer, 2013). Consider the fact that
fully” lie (and not get caught). many job applicants are increasingly willing to misrepresent
The psychopathic pretense of moral integrity may be accomplishments on their resume. Callahan (2004) reported
epidemic. Population base rates for psychopathy/sociopa- the results of a preemployment screening study in which
thy are estimated at about 3%, but one well-known esti- 95% of millennial-age respondents stated they would be
mate suggests that the incidence in business of the willing to lie to get a job; 41% admitted to having already
behaviors that fit such a profile may be several times lied. The statistics coming from our college campuses are
higher than the general population norm (Sutton, 2007). If equally distressing. Wright (2004, 2011) reported that
such estimates are even approximately accurate, one of upward of 88% of undergraduate business students admitted
our most “successful” management development practices to cheating, with the modal response of 100+ for how many
has been to encourage personality-disordered “alpha” times they have cheated! Sadly, moral hypocrisy and over-
moral hypocrites who persistently behave at variance with powered integrity have reached pandemic proportions.
social, interpersonal, and business norms. While superfi- Wright (2015) has offered the development of character
cially appearing to conform, they instead manipulate strengths as one possible remedy.
peers, subordinates, clients, or customers, and even senior Adopting the framework of Wright and his colleagues
managers. Furthermore, in another manifestation of the (Wright, Emich, & Klotz, 2017; Wright & Goodstein, 2007;
“Folly,” organizations may actually reward them for dis- Wright & Huang, 2012; Wright & Quick, 2011; Wright et al.,
playing psychopathic traits, which at first glance seem to 2017), we consider character as those interpenetrable and
indicate strong business potential (Babiak & Hare, 2007). habitual qualities, within individuals, and applicable to teams
Flawed reward systems can perpetuate the damage they and organizations that both constrain and lead them to desire
cause, as severe as any of the “Folly” examples that Kerr and pursue personal, team, and societal good. For more than
(1995) provided. 10 years, Wright (2015) has used Peterson and Seligman’s