Where Do We Get Off Thinking We Are Entitled?

As I read about the ever unfolding saga of Palm Beach County’s crooks and other crooks in our nation, I am struck by the sense of entitlement that seems to start people down the “slippery slope.” I mean, ethical decision making can be a complex process, and those at the lower levels of capacity might be led astray by bad characters. But as I read, it seems to me that those who break the rules for money seem to believe that they are entitled to the money and benefits. Those who bribe seem to believe that doing whatever you have to do to get people’s business is okay, including giving gifts of money, jewels, tickets to sporting events, and vacations at posh resorts. And, of course, most of us have had the experience of sales people who will say anything they have to say to get our business, who will seem to be our best friends in order to get us to say “yes” to whatever they are selling. We don’t typically consider this a problem – it can be interpreted as friendliness and just loving to get to know people -- or it can be outright lying that we have come to expect.

But where do we draw the line? Is it at “whatever we (or they) can get away with”? Are we willing to behave that way ourselves, have our children led astray by those who behave that way, have our elderly parents deceived by people who veer far away from the truth? How many laws or regulations need to be passed before we decide that such manipulation or entitlement isn’t okay? How many people does an Ethics Commission or Inspector General’s office need investigate before people get the message?

We could easily stop the trust-destroying entitlement behavior if we refused to participate on the receiving end. But therein lies the rest of the problem – those of us who believe that we deserve the perks. After all, we might say to ourselves, we work hard and are sometimes underappreciated. And perhaps we don’t have the ability to pay for such perks ourselves – but envy those who do. In the case of government workers, perhaps we are not paid what we think we are worth, and we figure the perks will make up for it. Perhaps we are lower level workers, and rather than investing in an education or learning English, we figure there is a quicker way to benefits. Perhaps we are mid-level workers at odds with the higher ups, and feel we deserve what they have – so we are willing to take short cuts to get there. Perhaps we are out with the gang, and our friends are being treated, and our choice is to leave – leaving our friends to worry about whether we will “tell” – or to join in so we don’t lose our friends.

Whatever the reason, it becomes difficult not to take the first step. And after one step, the pressure is on, internally and externally, to take another and another. That’s why they call it a “slippery slope” – once we start down, it is more difficult to get off. Internally, it just doesn’t seem that much further to take the next step – we develop calluses on our conscience. Externally, there is the pressure of being found out or having our initial faux pas revealed if we don’t continue “going along.”

But what about stopping the greed in the first place? What about getting beyond the “I want what I want when I want it” mentality. I can understand such a mentality in children who haven’t learn to follow the rules and to control their impulses. I am forever asking my daughter, “Do you really need that?” or reminding her that “more stuff doesn’t make you happy -- it just gives you more to take care of and worry about. And no amount is ever going to help you to match up with your friends. Someone will always have more than you will.” Have some of us adults simply not learned these childhood lessons yet? What will it take? When will we stop to weigh the values that we stand for and actualize values that matter and that don’t hurt us, our families, or other people? When will we realize that all the goodies in the world just feed an empty void that can never be truly filled – no matter how many we grab for; no matter how much of our integrity we give up to get them? Ethics commissions, hearings, and jail won’t teach these lessons – it has to come from within or from Higher Up.

Send Back Those Gifts!

Are we all so greedy that we want what we want when we want it? So greedy that we are tempted by material possessions to give up our integrity? So greedy that we damage the public trust by creating obligations that hamper the public good?

What am I talking about here? I am talking about public officials accepting gifts. I am talking about corporate leaders who accept pay offs, large pensions, and other bonuses beyond a reasonable salary. I am talking about any of us who accept gifts from those we don’t know, or have a passing acquaintance with, people who want something from us and are, in essence, “paying” us to look with favor on their products or services.

Gifts, at their best, are expressions of caring or gratitude. We give gifts at holidays or on birthdays or other special occasions to people we care about and to people that we have nice relationships with at work. We give gifts to those who have contributed to our lives or our success when we are celebrating our success and recognizing the team that helped us to get there. We give gifts to those that we have meaningful relationships with as expressions of appreciation for the richness that they bring to our lives. These are not the gifts that threaten our integrity.

The gifts that threaten our integrity are really “loss-leaders,” not gifts. That is, someone wants something from us, and they are willing to pay some money to give us a little taste of doing business with them. For instance, a restaurant hands out “free” samples. An office supply store hands out sticky note pads with their name on it. A vacation packages company offers an overnight stay at a resort if we will come and listen to their sales pitch. And we often accept these “gifts.” And companies know that the gifts are effective marketing strategies, reminding the “gift” recipient of the company’s name and services, because companies keep on using loss-leaders.

Loss-leaders are not really free gifts. They are small payments ahead of time to entice us to use the services or buy the products. Perhaps if we are aiming for ethical optimums, we should not accept these loss-leaders if we don’t intend to do frequent their business or store. But when we do accept the loss leader, we end up with a warm fuzzy feeling about the company. That is, the company gains name recognition and a reputation for doing nice things for people, which is exactly their aim.

The fact that loss-leaders work should alert us to other “purchases” of favor. I recently spoke with a businessman about offering him some consultation on ethics. When I entered his office, he had several gift cards in his hand, and after we spoke, he handed me a $50 gift card as a gift, saying he likes giving gifts. Initially, I took the gift card. But the more I thought about it, the more I thought that I might hedge in challenging his unethical behavior if I accepted the gift card. You see, the gift, if I accepted it, created an obligation to look favorably on him and on his behavior. But if my job is to challenge unethical behavior, then my job would be hampered by holding a favorable opinion that wasn’t earned by ethical behavior.

And so goes the behavior of public officials and business and other community leaders who have been in the news lately. You see, ministers who accept personal gifts from wealthy church members may be tempted to look the other way if that member behaves illegally or unethically, thus failing to fulfill their ministerial role in counseling more godly choices. Board members who receive an unreasonably hefty payment for serving on the board ($100,000 for a once a year meeting is not uncommon) may be tempted to look the other way if the company president proposes actions that border on unethical. CEOs whose bonuses and other payouts depend on the profitability of the company may be tempted to “fudge,” if they think they can get away with it, if fudging will increase their bonuses or other payouts. And, of course, government officials who accept free hotel rooms, golf games, luncheons, or charity ball tickets may be tempted to play favorites with the gift givers despite requirements to equitably consider all views and all bids.

So what’s the point here? If we are shooting for optimal ethical behavior and refusing to start down a slippery slope, if we want to invest in a better society, if we want to prevent our own or others’ boundary crossing or inappropriate obligations, then we need to face the facts: loss-leaders are not gifts. Loss- leaders ask us for favors. Loss-leaders hope that we will have a more favorable relationship with the giver than with their competitors. Loss-leaders are given so that we will pay the giver back. And we need to return loss-leaders if they will tempt us to let down our guard, to play favorites, to sacrifice quality, or to simply not perform our jobs or roles to their best. We need to return loss-leaders if we have no intention of purchasing the product or service, if it would be illegal to do accept the item or service, or if it would harm our families, our companies, or the public trust to accept it. So, let’s put raw greed aside and think of the bigger picture. Let’s send back the loss-leaders!