Wednesday, September 30, 2009

Further follow up email to conference speakers

From: RDShatt
To: _______________
Sent: 9/30/2009 ______ A.M. Central Daylight Time

Subj: The ECOA presentations and my previous email

Dear _________,

Prior to the ECOA conference last week, I sent some conference speakers (but not you) emails asking questions and making comments in reference to their respective presentations (based on the descriptions of the presentations in the program brochure).

All the emails I sent to conference speakers had a commonality of being derived from my contention that the United States civil law liability system (i) undermines business ethics, (ii) results in a waste of limited corporate resources that could be better deployed in other ways to promote ethical corporate behavior, and (iii) improperly distorts risk assessment and results in the adoption of costly and uneconomic "defensive" corporate practices (like the practice of "defensive" medicine which is currently in the national spotlight as a driver of escalating health care costs that the United States is trying to control).

My emails to those conference speakers are reproduced here (reproduced in the order the presentation descriptions appear in the program brochure).

After I sent those emails to those conference speakers, I sent emails to my address list of ECOA members (or possible members), in the form of this, and I sent other conference speakers (including you) an email in the form of this.

I would like to send a follow up email to my list of ECOA members (or possible members) that will include reference to any responses of conference speakers to my emails to you and them. I did not receive a response from you last week during the holding of the ECOA conference. Perhaps you did not have time to respond or wanted time to reflect further about my email.

I am very much interested in learning what you think and would like to hear from you, both for my own benefit and to be able to let ECOA members know about your thoughts.

I hope I hear from you in response to my previous email and this email.

I hope your conference presentation was successful, and that the entire conference was a great success.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck

Sunday, September 27, 2009

Form of follow up email to conference speakers

From: RDShatt
To:
Sent: 9/26/2009 ________A.M. Central Daylight Time

Subj: Your ECOA presentation and my previous email

Dear ____________,

Prior to the ECOA conference this past week, I sent you and other conference speakers emails asking questions and making comments in reference to your respective presentations (based on the descriptions of the presentations in the program brochure).

All the emails I sent to conference speakers (including to you) had a commonality of being derived from my contention that the United States civil law liability system (i) undermines business ethics, (ii) results in a waste of limited corporate resources that could be better deployed in other ways to promote ethical corporate behavior, and (iii) improperly distorts risk assessment and results in the adoption of costly and uneconomic "defensive" corporate practices (like the practice of "defensive" medicine which is currently in the national spotlight as a driver of escalating health care costs that the United States is trying to control).

My emails to you and the other speakers are reproduced here (reproduced in the order the presentation descriptions appear in the program brochure).

After I sent my emails to you and the other conference speakers, I sent emails to my address list of ECOA members (or possible members), in the form of this.

I would like to send a follow up email to my list of ECOA members (or possible members) that will include reference to any responses from you and other conference speakers to my emails to you and them. I did not receive a response from you during the past week of the holding of the ECOA conference. Perhaps you did not have time to respond or wanted time to reflect further about my email.

I am very much interested in learning what you think and would like to hear from you, both for my own benefit and to be able to let ECOA members know about your thoughts.

I hope I hear from you in response to my previous email and this email.

I hope your conference presentation was successful, and that the entire conference was a great success.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck

Form of email sent to other conference speakers

From: RDShatt
To:
Sent: 9/21/2009 _______ P.M. Central Daylight Time

Subj: ECOA conference presentations and civil law liability system

Dear _________,

I contend that the United States civil law liability system (i) undermines business ethics, (ii) results in a waste of limited corporate resources that could be better deployed in other ways to promote ethical corporate behavior, and (iii) improperly distorts risk assessment and results in the adoption of costly and uneconomic "defensive" corporate practices (like the practice of "defensive" medicine which is currently in the national spotlight as a driver of escalating health care costs that the United States is trying to control).Argumentation in support of my contentions is set forth in this online article of mine: Does the Civil Liability System Undermine Business Ethics?

The program brochure indicates that many of the keynote addresses, sessions and presentations scheduled for the 17th Annual Business Ethics and Compliance Conference of the Ethics & Compliance Officer Association being held next week in Chicago will cover topics, discuss issues and raise questions regarding which my contentions, if true, have significant relevance.

I have sent emails to a number of the program speakers (not including yourself) in which I make comments and ask questions connected to my contentions. The emails I have sent are reproduced in my blog here (reproduced in the order the presentations by the conference speakers appear in the program brochure).

I did not send an email to you concerning your presentation because my contentions about the civil law liability system seem of less relevance to your presentation.

Given your prominence in the business ethics field that is indicated by your making a presentation at this week's ECOA conference, I hope you will read my emails to the conference speakers regarding whose presentations my contentions are most relevant. (Again, you can find those emails here (reproduced in the order the presentations by those conference speakers appear in the program brochure)).

Thank you.
Robert Shattuck

Tuesday, September 22, 2009

Form of email sent to exhibitors

From: RDShatt
To:
Sent: 9/22/2009 ______A.M. Central Daylight Time

Subj: ECOA, ethics, compliance, risk management, your company's own business

Dear _________,

Your company offers services related to ethics, compliance and risk management and is an exhibitor at the ECOA conference this week.

I contend that the United States civil law liability system (i) undermines business ethics, (ii) results in a waste of limited corporate resources that could be better deployed in other ways to promote ethical corporate behavior, and (iii) improperly distorts risk assessment and results in the adoption of costly and uneconomic "defensive" corporate practices (like the practice of "defensive" medicine which is currently in the national spotlight as a driver of escalating health care costs that the United States is trying to control).

I have written emails to ECOA conference speakers about my contentions (which emails you may find reproduced here).Given that your company offers services related to ethics, compliance and risk management, my contentions, if true, have a bearing on the content of your services. I hope, if my contentions are true, your company explicitly addresses the same with your clients for their benefit.

Further, as your company's contact representative at the ECOA conference, you are "on the job" for your company and carrying out its business practices. In that capacity, and given your company's business, you should be appreciative of how the courts allow business practices, which may be completely legitimate, to be successfully attacked to the detriment of innocent persons and without requiring any person who is responsible, if the practices are not legitimate, to be held to account. (This could include your company, if it is large enough, and its business practices). (If you would like some examples of this, please find upwards of ten legal cases discussed at links on the left hand side at this webpage under J (particularly this and this), J3 through J6, and J8-J9.)

I hope your company has a profitable exhibition at the ECOA conference.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck

Form of email sent to ECOA conference attendees

From: RDShatt
To:
Sent: 9/18/2009 _____A.M. Central Daylight Time

Subj: To ECOA Chicago conference attendees


To ECOA Chicago conference attendees

I contend that the United States civil law liability system (i) undermines business ethics, (ii) results in a waste of limited corporate resources that could be better deployed in other ways to promote ethical corporate behavior, and (iii) improperly distorts risk assessment and results in the adoption of costly and uneconomic "defensive" corporate practices (like the practice of "defensive" medicine which is currently in the national spotlight as a driver of escalating health care costs that the United States is trying to control).Argumentation in support of my contentions is set forth in this online article of mine: Does the Civil Liability System Undermine Business Ethics?The program brochure indicates that many of the keynote addresses, sessions and presentations scheduled for the 17th Annual Business Ethics and Compliance Conference of the Ethics & Compliance Officer Association being held next week in Chicago will cover topics, discuss issues and raise questions regarding which my contentions, if true, have significant relevance.

I have sent emails to a number of the program speakers in which I make comments and ask questions connected to my contentions. I think conference attendees should be interested in the same. The emails I have sent are reproduced in my blog here (reproduced in the order the presentations by the conference speakers appear in the program brochure). Any responses from the speakers will be reproduced following the email sent to the speaker.

I hope you will read my emails to the conference speakers.

Thank you.
Robert Shattuck

Thursday, September 17, 2009

For ECOA Chicago conference attendees

I contend that the United States civil law liability system (i) undermines business ethics, (ii) results in a waste of limited corporate resources that could be better deployed in other ways to promote ethical corporate behavior, and (iii) improperly distorts risk assessment and results in the adoption of costly and uneconomic "defensive" corporate practices (like the practice of "defensive" medicine which is currently in the national spotlight as a driver of escalating health care costs that the United States is trying to control).

Argumentation in support of my contentions is set forth in this article of mine in this blog: Does the Civil Liability System Undermine Business Ethics?

The program brochure indicates that many of the keynote addresses, sessions and presentations scheduled for the 17th Annual Business Ethics and Compliance Conference of the Ethics & Compliance Officer Association being held next week in Chicago will cover topics, discuss issues and raise questions regarding which my contentions, if true, have significant relevance. I have sent emails to a number of the program speakers in which I make comments and ask questions connected to my contentions. I think conference attendees should be interested in the same. The emails I have sent are reproduced below in the order the presentations by the conference speakers appear in the program brochure. Any responses from the speakers will be reproduced below following the email sent to the speaker.



From: RDShatt
To: ezimiles@daylightforensic.com
Sent: 9/15/2009 7:43:35 A.M. Central Daylight Time

Subj: Ethics and Compliance in the New Economy: How to Do More with Less

Dear Ms. Zimiles,

Relative to your above keynote address at the ECOA conference next week, I would make the contention that the United States civil law liability system undermines business ethics and results in a substantial diversion and waste of corporate resources that could be deployed much more beneficially in other ways to try to accomplish the objective of improving corporate behavior. My argumentation in support of this contention is set forth at length in this online article of mine: Does the Civil Liability System Undermine Business Ethics?

If you read my article, I would be very interested to hear what you think.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck


From: RDShatt
To: gbrown@bakerdonelson.com
Sent: 9/15/2009 9:16:17 A.M. Central Daylight Time

Subj: The Great Debate: Is the Current Global Financial Crisis Primarily the Result of

Dear Messrs. Brown and Gnazzo,

I will not be at the ECOA conference next week and I will miss your respective presentations of the "heart of the problem" and "solutions" in "The Great Debate: Is the Current Global Financial Crisis Primarily the Result of a Series of Bad Business Decisions or a Systemic Decline in Business Integrity?"

I thought the rating agency scandal last fall would be a Katrina wake up call for business ethics professionals, and I tried to get a reaction from the ECOA on the matter. See this posting in my blog.

I hope I can get transcripts of your presentations to see the diagnoses and prescriptions that the two of you have developed.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck

cc. Mr. James D. Berg


From: RDShatt
To: dboehme@cslg.com, wswenson@CSLG.com
Sent: 9/15/2009 10:49:50 A.M. Central Daylight Time

Subj: Agony Chat Room: Tough Times & What Matters Most

Dear Ms. Boehme, Mr. Swenson, Ms. van Beek and Mr. Grubb

The brochure description of your above interactive discussion scheduled for the ECOA conference next week refers to "cost-cutting, pressures to deliver results, and a distracted management" contributing to "an environment in dire need of a strong compliance and ethics program" and raises the question of "how tomanage pressures to downsize compliance costs at exactly the time when bad judgments are most likely to occur".

I contend that the United States civil law liability system undermines business ethics, is an unjustifiable distraction of manangement, and results in a substantial diversion and waste of corporate resources that could be deployed much more beneficially in other ways to try to accomplish the objective of improving corporate behavior. My argumentation in support of this contention is set forth at length in this online article of mine: Does the Civil Liability System Undermine Business Ethics?

You might want to read my article and consider whether some help for today's "dire need" and tomorrow's hopefully improved environment might be obtained through advocacy of change in the civil law liability realm.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck



From: RDShatt
To: James.OToole@du.edu
Sent: 9/15/2009 12:57:23 P.M. Central Daylight Time

Subj: How Leaders Create a Culture of Candor

Dear Professor O'Toole,

I have a couple of candor oriented questions I would like to ask you, which are prompted by my seeing that you are delivering a keynote address at the ECOA conference next week entitled "How Leaders Create a Culture of Candor."

First, how can there be candor about what is ethical and what is not unethical when judges, in cases of alleged corporate wrongdoing, all too readily and frequently stand back and allow management, on behalf of itself and involved employees, to settle the cases by using funds belonging to parties innocent of the alleged wrongdoing (such as shareholders), with the result there is no determination or guidance from the law about what is right or wrong, ethical or unethical? (If you would like some examples of what I am talking about, see upwards of ten or more legal cases discussed at links on the left hand side at this webpage under J and J1 through J9.)

Second, how can there be candor if management has an unacknowledged personal motivation that the law stand back from making such determinations and from providing such guidance?

Third, how can there be candor if corporate ethics officers are unable to speak up about the foregoing?

If the above questions sound as if they are extreme in their implication and not credible and legitimate, I would suggest they should be further explored to determine their validity. If you are interested, I would be very pleased to engage in such further exploration with you.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck

From: RDShatt
To: abonimeblanc@daylightforensic.com, Jacqueline_Brevard@merck.com
Sent: 9/15/2009 2:51:23 P.M. Central Daylight Time

Subj: Ethics and the Board: Integrating Integrity into Business Strategy

Dear Ms. Bonime-Blanc and Ms. Brevard,

I have comments that are prompted by my seeing the session that you be conducting at the ECOA conference next week entitled "Ethics and the Board: Integrating Integrity into Business Strategy."

It seems to me that boards of directors have abdicated their ethics related responsibilities in the way they settle class actions lawsuits alleging corporate wrongdoing that avoids legal determinations and guidance about what is right and wrong, ethical and unethical. Their willingness to do this is understandable, particularly because the settlement uses funds belonging to parties innocent of the alleged wrongdoing (such as shareholders), which is at no cost to management and involved employees, whereas legal determinations could result in a cost to them. (If you would like some examples of what I am talking about, see upwards of ten or more legal cases discussed at links on the left hand side at this webpage under J and J1 through J9.)

The description of your session states, "It is paramount for the governing body of a business to take the full measure of its responsibility and comprehend and appreciate all of the ways in which business integrity and governance intersect with business strategy." I think this should include comprehending and appreciating how management has a personal motivation in how it settles class action lawsuits.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck


From: RDShatt
To: info@ethadv.com
Sent: 9/17/2009 5:16:09 A.M. Central Daylight Time

Subj: For Mr. Blass: re The Moral Complexities of Ethical Decision-making

Dear Mr. Blass,

The brochure description of your above session scheduled for next week's ECOA conference asks the below questions:



• Why are employees susceptible to unethical actions?• How do they rationalize
taking the wrong path?• Why are ethics and compliance policies not enough?• What
can ethics and compliance practitioners do to improve their organizations?• How
can they influence executive management and key leadership?

There are many situational factors that bear on the answers to these questions. Have you considered the situational factor of the civil law liability system, and how it promotes or undermines ethical corporate behavior and how perceptions about it affect employee psychology and decision making?

If you have not considered it and are interested in delving into the civil law liability situational factor, you might read this online article of mine: Does the Civil Liability System Undermine Business Ethics?.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck



From: RDShatt
To: ed@ethicalleadershipgroup.com
Sent: 9/17/2009 5:22:11 A.M. Central Daylight Time

Subj: Codes of Conduct - A New Best Practice Model

Dear Mr. Petry,

The ECOA brochure description for your session ("Codes of Conduct - A New Best Practice Model") at next week's conference refers to employee dissatisfaction with company ethics codes being too long, and also the codes sometimes not aligning with the company's risk profile or what employees see as their most common ethics issues.

Ethics codes need to interface with and be responsive to, various situational factors that bear on employee conduct. These include, for example, the criminal law. Another situational factor I think is the civil law liability system, which I think undermines business ethics. (See my online article on this subject Does the Civil Liability System Undermine Business Ethics?.)

In your designing and developing ethics codes, and field testing them with employees, have you given any consideration about how the codes should interface and be responsive to the situational factor of the civil law liability system as it bears or should bear on employee conduct?

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck



From: RDShatt
To: steve@ethicsone.com, bolson@theecoa.org
Sent: 9/17/2009 8:33:03 A.M. Central Daylight Time

Subj: Tell Me a Story: Using Anecdote and Illustration, etc.

Dear Messrs. Cohen, Olson and Gnazzo,

Hopefully, in your ECOA presentation next week ("Tell Me a Story: Using Anecdote andIllustration as an Educational Tool in Ethics and Compliance"), you will relate numerous anecdotal and illustrative stories that E&C practitioners have advantageously used as educational tools.

Such stories are sorely needed to counteract widespread confusion and uncertainty for employees in thousands of companies that are sown by the United States civil law liability system, a matter that is explicated in this online article of mine Does the Civil Liability System Undermine Business Ethics?.

Take the Merck Vioxx story as an example. I recently read a book by one Tom Nesi about Vioxx entitled Poison Pills: The Untold Story of the Vioxx Scandal." The book depicts many different actors who contributed to whatever wrongdoing, if any, Merck perpetrated. These included top level corporate management who have a job to produce profits for shareholders, the Merck product development department and its employees who had the job of conceiving and carrying out product development including Vioxx, Merck’s marketing department that designed and implemented the marketing plan for Vioxx, the Merck sales force whose job was to be an enthusiastic “boots on the ground” component of the marketing effort, physicians who were recruited to promote Vioxx in medical association meetings and seminars, Merck researchers who had an economic bias in favor of Vioxx, and outside researchers who questioned Vioxx.

I ask you, and you might ask your colleague Ms. Brevard, what have the Merck employees who were involved with Vioxx learned about what is right and wrong, ethical and unethical, in the respective activities they conducted related to Vioxx? Is the Merck sales force supposed to reduce its enthusiasm in promoting Merck drugs now? How is the Merck marketing department supposed to change its ways? What are employees at other drug companies to take away from the Vioxx story?

To me it seems Merck employees are left with uncertainty, speculation and confusion about how they should carry out their jobs, subject possibly to "defensive" corporate practices Merck may adopt in confronting the in terrorum response that the civil law liability system engenders (just like the "defensive" medicine that is being practiced that is a driver of escalating health care costs currently in the national spotlight in the health care reform debate).

The Merck Vioxx story was a huge one, but is only one of thousands of stories in which the civil law liability system sows uncertainty and confusion throughout the business world concerning what is right and wrong, ethical and unethical. For a few of these stories I have taken a personal interest in, see upwards of ten or more discussed at links on the left hand side at this webpage under J and J1 through J9.

What do you think?

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck


From: RDShatt
To: info@icca-corporateaccountability.org
Sent: 9/17/2009 5:12:58 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: For Dr. Sethi: Re Emerging Trends in Corporate Social Responsibility

Dear Dr. Sethi,

I would like to make a comment concerning your presentation ("Emerging Trends in Corporate Social Responsibility – A Paradigm Shift from Corporate Social Responsibility to Corporate Accountability") that is scheduled for next week's ECOA conference.

I contend that the civil law liability system greatly muddies what corporations are supposed to be accountable for.

This is because, in too many cases of alleged corporate wrongdoing, judges stand back and allow management, on behalf of itself and involved employees, to settle the cases (by using funds belonging to parties innocent of the alleged wrongdoing, such as shareholders), with the result there is no determination or guidance from the law about what is right or wrong, ethical or unethical. (If you would like some examples of what I am talking about, see upwards of ten or more legal cases discussed at links on the left hand side at this webpage under J and J1 through J9. For more elaboration about why this phenomenon occurs, see this online article of mine Does the Civil Liability System Undermine Business Ethics? )

Do you think the civil law liability system muddies, if not makes opaque, what corporations are accountable for or are supposed to be accountable for?

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck



From: RDShatt
To: courtney.mcburney@alston.com, paul.monnin@dlapiper.com
Sent: 9/17/2009 8:57:05 A.M. Central Daylight Time

Subj: Separating the Need-to-Know from the Noise: Critical Legislative and Judicial De

Dear Ms. McBurney and Mr. Monnin,

The ECOA brochure description for your presentation next week ("Separating the Need-to-Know from the Noise: Critical Legislative and Judicial Developments Impacting Ethics and Compliance") states:





A new administration and an uncertain economic climate have led to calls for
increased oversight, heralding legislation and regulations that will not only
affect individual industries but also impact the world of ethics and compliance
as a whole. At the same time, courts have weighed in on critical issues
concerning investigations, issuing rulings with broad repercussions.
I hope these developments that you will report on have been and will be beneficial for corporate ethics and compliance goals.

If there have been good developments, I believe there is a broad and persistent swath of failure in the US civil liability law system that operates in way that undermines business ethics, and I think that judges and lawmakers are failing ethics officers and their corporations in the latter's efforts to try to improve corporate behavior. See my online article Does the Civil Liability System Undermine Business Ethics?.

What do you think?

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck


From: RDShatt
To: weberj@duq.edu
Sent: 9/17/2009 6:19:48 A.M. Central Daylight Time

Subj: Building a Bridge between Recent Discoveries in E&C Research and Their Practical

Dear Mr. Cash and Dr. Weber,

The ECOA brochure description of your presentation next week ("Building a Bridge between Recent Discoveries in E&C Research and Their Practical Implications") says, "There is ongoing research exploring ethics and compliance programs and the effectiveness of these programs on employee behavior and avoidance of litigation."

I think the United States civil law liability system undermines business ethics (see my online article Does the Civil Liability System Undermine Business Ethics?).

I would like to ask whether you know of any research or scholarship on the suggestions raised in my article.

I would further like to know whether you have a view about the matter yourselves, including whether the civil law liability system results in the adoption of costly "defensive" corporate practices (like the practice of "defensive" medicine which is currently in the national spotlight as a driver of escalating health care costs that the United States is trying to get under control), and results in the diversion and waste of limited corporate resources that could be better deployed in other ways to achieve ethical corporate behavior.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck


From: weberj@duq.edu
To: RDShatt@aol.comCC: craig.cash@lmco.com
Sent: 9/17/2009 9:54:08 A.M. Central Daylight Time

Subj: RE: Building a Bridge between Recent Discoveries in E&C Research and Their Practical

Dear Mr. Shattuck –

Thank you for your inquiry regarding the focus of the Weber-Cash presentation forthcoming at the ECOA annual meeting. While your point is interesting, our presentation does not address this issue. We take a more managerial, rather than legal, analysis when attempting to provide academic research to ethics and compliance officers who will be attending the meeting.

Sincerely,

Jim Weber, Ph.D.
Professor of Business Ethics and Management



From: RDShatt
To: weberj@duq.edu
CC: craig.cash@lmco.com
Sent: 9/17/2009 5:43:23 P.M. Central Daylight Time

Subj: Re: Building a Bridge between Recent Discoveries in E&C Research and Their Pr...

Dear Dr. Weber,

Thank you very much for replying.

I am not sure I see that a corporation and its employees interfacing with the law, be it criminal or civil, calls for less managerial analysis than other ethics and compliance issues.

For example, in this 2006 research article by Professors Smith, Simpson and Huang, entitled "Why Managers Fail To Do The Right Thing: An Empirical Study Of Unethical & Illegal Conduct," the authors investigated and concluded that, "t]he threat of formal sanctions appears to operate indirectly, influencing ethical evaluations and outcome expectancies." The authors elaborate:



To the extent that such knowledge [of opinions of others] will carry with it
negative evaluations by others (reinforced by the educative effect of formal
law) or, conversely, positive assessments by others who may hold negative views
of the law (it is intrusive, unfair, or irrelevant to business), the existence
of formal sanctions (and the anticipated reaction of others to the law) guides
his or her sense of likely social disapproval or opprobrium.

I am interested in how those observations might be extended to civil law liabilities,

I have written an article that I am trying to get published urging business ethicists to investigate more how the civil law liability system promotes or does not promote business ethics. I have not found any scholarship or research on the subject and wanted to know whether you knew of any.

For your information, I have written emails to numerous of the speakers for next week's conference. I am reproducing these emails in a blog I have (see this webpage) and plan to copy any responses I receive from speakers into my blog as well. (If you prefer that I not copy your responding email there, please let me know, and I will not do so.)

I hope your presentation goes well next week.

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck


From: RDShatt
To: julie.dimauro@complinet.com
Sent: 9/17/2009 6:06:50 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Please forward this to Mr. Scott McClesky; Managing Editor, North America

[Please forward this email to Mr. Scott McClesky; Managing Editor, North America, Complinet. Thank you.]

Subj: Following the Money: How and Why Incentives Get Organizations in Trouble

Dear Mr. McCleskey,

The brochure description for your ECOA conference presentation next week ("Following the Money: How and Why Incentives Get Organizations in Trouble") states:



Oftentimes, “irrational” behavior, while contrary to the long-term interests of
the organization, may be perfectly rational interms of the incentives which
operate on the individual making decisions.. . ..Regulators and internal
compliance office have often failed to examine the role of these incentives, or
have limited themselves to superficial transparency requirements regarding
senior management compensation levels.


This past year's financial debacle has revealed how senior management, in order to gain current income for themselves, subjected shareholder value (as well as value belonging to third parties outside the corporation) to unjustifiable risk that resulted in very large financial losses for those shareholders and third parties.

I would like to point out an additional way that senior management exploits corporate asests for its own benefit and to the detriment of shareholder interests of the organization, which is that management is willing to "double up" losses on shareholders. This has happened when, not only has management committed shareholder equity to excessively risky activities (so management can get current income for itself), such risky activities have further entailed corporate wrongdoing (again, gaining management current income) and the corporation gets sued by third parties resulting in shareholder losses getting "doubled up." As a good example, read this analysis I wrote about Enron's smartest guys, crooks, victims and other saps.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck



From: RDShatt
To: info@pcaobus.org
Sent: 9/17/2009 7:38:40 A.M. Central Daylight Time

Subj: Please forward to Barbara Hannigan, Ethics Officer and Senior Compliance Counsel

[Please forward this email to Ms. Barbara Hannigan, Ethics Officer and Senior Compliance Counsel, Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. Thank you.]


Subj: The PCAOB: A Case Study onEvolving Regulatory Oversight in the New Economic World

Dear Ms. Hannigan and Ms. Boykin,

The evolving realm of regulatory oversight exemplified by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board( “PCAOB”) is an important topic for ECOA members at next week's conference.
Such regulatory oversight by the PCAOB in carrying out its purpose to protect investors and the public interest by promoting informative, fair, and independent audit reports, hopefully is and will be rational and reasonable.

In contrast, some of the judicial oversight practiced by judges in this country concerning alleged accounting fraud is absurd, and it results in an outrageous abuse of investors that regularly goes on, at least in certain cookie cutter class action litigation. As examples of this cookie cutter lawsuit abuse, here are links to two cases that involved me personally and letters I wrote in which I tried to complain vociferously to the judge and others, but to no avail: class action against Xerox; class action against Monster Worldwide,Inc. A further humdinger that did not involve me is this one against Tyco.

If nothing else, those working in ethics and compliance need to be award of the failures and sometimes absurdity of how some judges purport to go about protecting investors in matters involving alleged accounting fraud, among other things.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck



From: RDShatt
To: jkaplan@kaplanwalker.com
Sent: 9/17/2009 4:57:44 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Behavioral Ethics & Compliance

Dear Messrs. Kaplan, Broughton and Mumford,

The ECOA brochure description indicates that your session next week ("Behavioral Ethics & Compliance") will be about "developing innovative program techniques and in enhancing high-level support from within their companies" and will "explore ways in which a behavioral ethics and compliance approach can be used to secure stronger governmental support of the work of ethics and compliance officers, and will initiate the development of an agenda for ECOA taking a leadership role in this effort."

I believe that judges, in administering the civil law liability system, do not support the work of ethics and compliance officers, and there is not high level support in corporations to get judges to support that work of ethics and compliance officers. For explication of said belief, see this online article of mine Does the Civil Liability System Undermine Business Ethics? I think the ECOA should take a leadership role in trying to get judges to support better the work of ethics and compliance officers.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck


From: RDShatt
To: info@business-ethics.org
Sent: 9/17/2009 5:46:38 A.M. Central Daylight Time

Subj: Please forward to Ms. Lori Tansey Martens, President

Please forward this email to Lori Tansey Martens, President, International Business Ethics Institute. Thank you.

Subj: ECO presentation "Don’t Leave ‘em Speechless: How to Create and Sustain a Speak-Up Culture"

Dear Ms. Martens and Mr. Benjamin,

Related to your presentation ("Don’t Leave ‘em Speechless: How to Create and Sustain a Speak-Up Culture") scheduled for the ECOA conference next week, I would like to suggest something that ethics officers ought to speak up to senior executives about.

It seems to me that senior managements have abdicated their ethics related responsibilities in the way they settle class actions lawsuits alleging corporate wrongdoing that avoids legal determinations and guidance about what is right and wrong, ethical and unethical. Their willingness to do this is understandable, particularly because the settlement uses funds belonging to parties innocent of the alleged wrongdoing (such as shareholders), which is at no cost to management and involved employees, whereas legal determinations could result in a cost to them. (If you would like some analysis and examples of what I am talking about, see this online article of mine Does the Civil Liability System Undermine Business Ethics? and also take a look at upwards of ten or more legal cases discussed at links on the left hand side at this webpage under J and J1 through J9.)

Second, I believe that senior management has an unacknowledged personal motivation that the law stand back from making such determinations and from providing such guidance, because that aids management in not being held accountable.

Third, given the foregoing, corporate ethics officers may be unable to speak up and tell management that the civil law liability system undermines business ethics.

Do you agree with the foregoing, or any part of the foregoing?

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck



From: RDShatt
To: twhite@ethicsandbusiness.org
Sent: 9/17/2009 5:09:03 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Ethics’ Glass Ceiling: Why the U.S. Business Ethics Movement Hasn’t Been

Dear Professor White,

Thank you for your below reply to my email of Monday.

I noticed you will be giving a presentation at next week's ECOA conference that is entitled "Ethics’ Glass Ceiling: Why the U.S. Business Ethics Movement Hasn’t Been More Successful."

While the civil law liability system may be outside your area of expertise for purposes of making a submission to a court as I inquired about, I think, relative to your ECOA talk, you might give further consideration to whether it could be a contributing factor to why the U.S. business ethics movement has not been more successful. You may even be able to discern in this subject matter an example of "a weak allegiance to ethics at the top of corporations" that the ECOA brochure description of your presentation mentions.

I hope you have a successful presentation next week.

Again thanks for replying.

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck



In a message dated 9/14/2009 7:17:12 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
twhite@ethicsandbusiness.org writes:
Mr. Shattuck,
Thanks for your note.
Unfortunately, I am overcommitted these days and unable to take on new projects.
Also, this is a good bit outside my area of expertise.
Best,
T White
From: RDShatt@aol.com [mailto:RDShatt@aol.com] Sent: Monday, September 14, 2009 4:03 AMTo: twhite@lmu.eduSubject: Seeking business ethics expert in Los
Angeles
Dear Professor White,
I am writing this email to you in your
capacity as Director, Center for Ethics and Business, and as the Hilton
Professor of Business Ethics, at the LMU/LA College of Business Administration.
This email concerns a class action lawsuit that is pending in the United States
District Court for the Central District of California, Western Division, against
AmericaOnLine, and that is described at http://legal.web.aol.com/Footersettlement.pdf/
.
I believe that class action litigation such as that pending against AOL
undermines business ethics. My argumentation in support of this contention is
set forth at length in this online article of mine: Does
the Civil Liability System Undermine Business Ethics?

I am trying to
find a business ethics expert in Los Angeles who would be interested in joining
with me in making a submission to the district court judge that would argue how
the class action lawsuit against AOL the judge is overseeing undermines business
ethics and is counterproductive to promoting ethical corporate behavior.
Would you be interested?
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck




From: RDShatt
To: dhennelly@callces.com
Sent: 9/17/2009 9:02:38 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Using Ethics and Compliance Risk Assessment as a Strategic Driver

Dear Ms. Hennelly,

The ECOA brochure description of your session ("Using Ethics and Compliance Risk Assessment as a Strategic Driver") at next week's conference says:


A proactive approach to ethics and compliance risk assessment and and management can help avoid costly, reactive approaches to risk mitigation, and help protect
a business’ reputation and brand. Ongoing assessment and management of
enterprise-wide risks are also critical to prioritizing the commitment of
limited resources, by helping ensure that mitigation activities are focused on
the most significant risks first.



I contend that the United States civil law liability system improperly distorts risk assessment, results in the adoption of costly "defensive" corporate practices (like the practice of "defensive" medicine which is currently in the national spotlight as a driver of escalating health care costs that the United States is trying to get under control), and results in the diversion and waste of limited corporate resources that could be better deployed in other ways to promote ethical corporate behavior.

For further explanation of my contention, see this online article of mine Does the Civil Liability System Undermine Business Ethics?.

What do you think?

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck

Sunday, September 13, 2009

I am attempting a scholarly article

I have written another article in a more scholarly approach and form that I have entitled "WHITHER THE QUEST OF BUSINESS ETHICISTS? Criminal law has received much attention; civil law liability should too".

My synopsis says:


The quest of business ethicists to promote ethical corporate behavior expands,
seemingly endlessly. Disagreements about what is ethical and about how
best to engender ethical behavior abound. Much attention has been paid to
how the criminal law should be applied to improve corporate behavior. In
the 1990’s the federal government initiated new approaches; business ethicists
have done extensive critical review of these; and important questions are
unresolved about how to apply the criminal law. Civil law liability also
affects corporate behavior and is a potential tool for promoting good behavior,
but ethicists have not devoted much attention to it. Ostensibly the
criminal law and civil law liability raise common questions about how they can
be employed most effectively to improve corporate behavior. There is a
significant difference that civil law liability has a compensatory objective as
well as a deterrence objective. Given the quest of business ethicists, it
is submitted that civil law liability is deserving of much more investigation
about how effective it is in improving corporate behavior, and whether it can or
should be changed to be more effective.

I submitted my manuscript to Business Ethics Quarterly, which declined. BEQ wrote me as follows:


Dear Mr. Shattuck:
Thank you for your submission to Business Ethics Quarterly, titled “Whither
thequest of business ethicists.” Your manuscript raises an interesting
questionabout the relationship of civil liability to business ethics practices
and programs.Moreover, as you note, attention to civil law has not been as
widespread withinthe field of business ethics as has been attention to criminal
law. However,despite those merits, I am very sorry to report that we are not
willing to publishyour manuscript, and that we also will not consider a revision
of it. Essentially,even though the questions you raise are interesting and
potentially important, themanuscript does not proceed at the level of detailed
argument and theorydevelopment that we look for at Business Ethics
Quarterly.Specifically, at BEQ we look for manuscripts that make substantial and
newcontributions to philosophical or social scientific theory and research in
waysrelevant to business ethics. Your manuscript, by contrast, raises an
interestingquestion, but does not engage in the kind of extensive theory
developmentneeded to make the kind of contribution in answering that question
that we lookfor at BEQ. Note, for example, how your main focus—the argument
thatbusiness ethics research needs to pay more careful attention to civil
law—doesnot begin until page 5, and the substance of the manuscript is over by
the top ofpage 9. As a result, complex issues end up being treated in rather
hasty form—for example, the issues of corporate moral agency and attributions
ofresponsibility have involved much attention by many scholars over
severaldecades, yet your consideration of those arguments involves rather
briefsummaries of a small selection of works. More important, perhaps, is the
factthat there is considerable literature in legal studies on the role of civil
liability asa behavioral corrective for corporations. One should assume that an
effort toaddress the relationship between civil liability and business ethics
theory wouldmake good use of that extensive legal literature, because doing so
would be away to make a substantial contribution to the business ethics
literature (see, for astarting example, Sally Simpson’s work, as in her
Corporate Crime, Law andSocial Contro, plus empirical studies by Simpson and
others on the ways civilliability does, and does not, influence corporate
behavior).
I realize that this negative decision is not the one for which you
were hoping.But I hope that you understand the reason for this decision. Thank
you again forconsidering Business Ethics Quarterly as an outlet for your
work.

I replied to BEQ with this email:



From: RDShatt
To: BEQ@udel.edu
Sent: 9/5/2009 7:47:48 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Re: BEQ decision letter MS 432

Dear ProfessorWeaver,
Thank you for the reply. I am disappointed, but I will
continue to prosecute my efforts on the various fronts I am working on, as I am
sure you would urge me to do. I will offer my manuscript to other scholars
in the field and see whether they can find a way to run with it.

Given the large amount of time and effort that has been dedicated
to the criminal law, I knew I could only try to make an initiation argument
that business ethicists should turn their attention to the civil law liability
front as well, with a starting point being the common questions that the civil
law liability system has with the criminal law and evaluating the application of
the learning and theorizing from the criminal law front to the civil law
liability front, and then proceeding to take account of the
differences. That and more, I think, will be grist for many
scholarly articles, plus a book or two. We will see where this all
goes.

Needless to say, if you could recommend my article to
another publication with whom you have contacts and that uses different criteria
for publication decisions, I would be most appreciative.

Again, thank you for BEQ's consideration.

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck

From: RDShatt
To: hasnasj@georgetown.edu
Sent: 9/5/2009 11:56:47 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: WHITHER THE QUEST OF BUSINESS ETHICISTS?

Dear Professor Hasnas,

I wrote and submitted to Business Ethics Quarterly an article I entitled "WHITHER THE QUEST OF BUSINESS ETHICISTS?: Criminal law has received much attention; civil law liability should too."

In the article I cited you several times.

My article synopsis was this: [see above]

BEQ declined my article with this accompanying letter: [see above]

I replied to BEQ with this email: [see above]

I am attaching hereto my article, a Word document.

I would like to find another scholar who is interested in taking my article and "running with it" (i.e., revising, rewriting, and/or expanding it, and getting it published, with or without my name attached).

Would you be interested?

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck

From: RDShatt
To: jboatri@luc.edu
Sent: 9/5/2009 11:58:46 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: WHITHER THE QUEST OF BUSINESS ETHICISTS?

Dear Professor Boatright,

[same as above email to Professor Hasnas]

From: JBOATRI@luc.edu
To: RDShatt@aol.com
Sent: 9/9/2009 3:44:35 P.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Re: WHITHER THE QUEST OF BUSINESS ETHICISTS?

I am sorry to hear that your article was rejected by BEQ. The acceptance rate of this journal is around 12%, so please do not take the news personally. Moreover, the review process at BEQ is very thorough, and it appears that your article received the usual careful consideration. As for your request, my own publication schedule and other demands on my time prevent me from collaborating in any way. But I encourage you to keep working this topic and perhaps exploring other publication outlets.

John Boatright

From: RDShatt
To: JBOATRI@luc.edu
Sent: 9/10/2009 6:53:37 P.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Re: WHITHER THE QUEST OF BUSINESS ETHICISTS?

Thank you very much, Professor Boatright. I am already doing as you suggest. I noted that you are on the editorial board of one journal I am looking at.

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck

From: RDShatt
To: lauferw@wharton.upenn.edu
Sent: 9/5/2009 12:00:55 P.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: WHITHER THE QUEST OF BUSINESS ETHICISTS?

Dear Professor Laufer,

[same as above email to Professor Hasnas]

From: RDShatt
To: Ssimpson@crim.umd.edu
Sent: 9/6/2009 7:30:52 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Why Managers Fail To Do The Right Thing

Dear Professor Simpson,

Professor Gary Weaver has cited your work to me and, as a result, I have read your co-authored article "Why Managers Fail To Do The Right Thing: An Empirical Study Of Unethical & Illegal Conduct."

The genesis of the reference to you that Professor Weaver made is that I wrote and submitted to Business Ethics Quarterly an article I entitled "WHITHER THE QUEST OF BUSINESS ETHICISTS?: Criminal law has received much attention; civil law liability should too."

My article synopsis was this: [see above]

BEQ declined my article with this accompanying letter in which Professor Weaver cited your work: [see above]

I replied to BEQ with this email: [see above]

In the abstract of your article, you summarize as follows:

Despite demands for increased sanctioning of corporate offenders, we find that
the threat of legal action does not directly affect the likelihood of
misconduct. Managers’ evaluations of the ethics of the act, measured using a
multidimensional ethics scale, have a significant effect, as do outcome
expectancies that result from being associated with the misconduct but not
facing formal sanctions. The threat of formal sanctions appears to operate
indirectly, influencing ethical evaluations and outcome expectancies. Obedience
to authority also affects illegal intentions, with managers reporting higher
prospective offending when they are ordered to engage in misconduct by a
supervisor.
I would like to pose three questions to you connected to your article in juxtaposition to my article (Word file attached) and to this related, self-published online article of mine Does the Civil Liability System Undermine Business Ethics? (I don't know how familiar you are with the class action litigation that I am addressing. If you would like some examples, you may find upwards of ten of them set out at the links on the left hand side here under J and J1 through J8.) My questions are:

First, would you say that the wrongdoing (if there is wrongdoing) in much class action litigation is generally less clear cut than the wrongdoing you have under consideration in your article?

Second, derived from your knowledge and understanding about how to achieve deterrence (or not) of the types of wrongdoing under consideration in your article, do you have a view about the deterrent effect of the class action litigation I am addressing?

Third, derived from your surveying and other studying of employee psychology, motivation and decision making, do you believe that such psychology, motivation and decision making are affected by any perceptions or views that employees have concerning class action litigation in general and particularly if their corporation has been sued and/or if they had personal involvement with the corporate acts that have been the subject of the class action lawsuit and/or they personally know other employees who have had such involvement?

I know this is a lengthy email and I thank you if you have read through to the end here. If you further send me a reply, I will be extremely grateful.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck

From: SSIMPSON@crim.umd.edu
To: RDShatt@aol.com
Sent: 9/10/2009 10:43:44 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Re: Why Managers Fail To Do The Right Thing

I think I know what you are asking, but if my answers seem offpoint let me know and I'll try again. I've replied to each question separately.

First, would you say that the wrongdoing (if there is wrongdoing) inmuch class action litigation is generally less clear cut than the wrongdoing you have under consideration in your article?
AS YOU KNOW, IN OUR ARTICLE WE HAVE THREE TYPES OF ILLEGAL BEHAVIORS(PRICE-FIXING,EPA EMISSIONS VIOLATIONS, AND BRIBERY). CLASS ACTION SUITS CONCEIVABLY COULD STEM FROM ALL OF THESE TYPES OF BEHAVIORS, BUT SO COULD CRIMINAL, TRADITIONAL CIVIL, AND ADMINISTRATIVE (REGULATORY) ACTIONS. IT WAS BECAUSE THE LEGAL STANDARDS VARY CONSIDERABLY, WE WANTED TO BE IN A POSITION TO ASSESS HOW LIKELY AND CONSEQUENTIAL RESPONDENTS THOUGHT THESE DIFFERENT LEGAL INTERVENTIONS WOULD BE GIVEN THE OFFENSE TYPES AND SCENARIO CONDITIONS. WE ASSUMED THAT CIVIL RESPONSES MIGHT INCLUDE CLASS ACTIONS, BUT DID NOT DISTINGUISH THIS OUTCOME FROM OTHER CIVIL MECHANISMS.BECAUSE CIVIL LITIGATION DOES NOT HAVE THE SAME LEVEL OF RIGOROUS LEGAL STANDARDS AND CORPORATE CRIME CASES ARE NOTORIOUSLY POOR IN THE EVIDENCE AREA (ESPECIALLY STABLISHING INTENT), IT IS OFTEN THE PREFERRED LEGAL STRATEGY EMPLOYED BY THE STATE. SO, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION,THERE MAY BE EXAMPLES OF WRONGDOING THAT ARE LESS CLEAR IN THE CIVIL REALM BUT THERE ARE ALSO CASES THAT ARE PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD EXAMPLES OF WRONGDOING BUT THE EVIDENCE FALLS SHORT OF A CRIMINAL PROSECUTION.

Second, derived from your knowledge and understanding about how to achieve deterrence (or not) of the types of wrongdoing under consideration in your article, do you have a view about the deterrent effect of the classaction litigation I am addressing?
I BELIEVE (SEE SIMPSON, CORPORATE CRIME, LAW, AND SOCIAL CONTROL) THAT CIVIL LAW, BECAUSE OF THE POTENTIAL FOR CLASS ACTION SUITS AND PUNITIVE DAMAGES, HAS THE POTENTIAL TO BE AN IMPORTANT DETERRENT--ESPECIALLY FOR THE CORPORATION. MY RESEARCH HAS SHOWN THAT MANAGERSBELIEVE THAT DISCOVERY RISKS ARE HIGHER FOR CIVIL LAW THAN CRIMINAL (FOR BOTH THE INDIVIDUAL AND THECOMPANY) AND, ALTHOUGH THE CONSEQUENCES OFDISCOVERY ARE PERCEIVED TO BE MORE SEVERE FOR INDIVIDUALS THAN FIRMSAND FOR CRIMINAL THAN CIVIL LAW, DETERRENCERESEARCH TYPICALLY PRIVILEGES CERTAINTY OF SANCTION OVER SEVERITY INTERMS OF CRIME INHIBITION. SO, IF THE RISKS OFDISCOVERY ARE THOUGHT TO BE GREATER UNDER CIVIL (THAN CRIMINAL) LAW,ONE COULD ARGUE THAT CIVIL LAW MAY BEA BETTER DETERRENT THAN CRIMINAL LAW. JUST TO REITERATE, HOWEVER, IHAVE NOT EXAMINED CLASS ACTIONS AND DETERRENCE DIRECTLY.

Third, derived from your surveying and other studying of employee psychology, motivation and decision making, do you believe that such psychology, motivation and decision making are affected by any perceptions orviews that employees have concerning class action litigation in general and particularly if their corporation has been sued and/or if they hadpersonal involvement with the corporate acts that have been the subject of the class action lawsuit and/or they personally know other employees who have had suchinvolvement?
NOTHING THAT I CAN SAY DIRECTLY ABOUT CLASS ACTION LAWSUITS. I CONDUCTED INTERVIEWS WITH SOME CORPORATE EXECUTIVES AT A TIRE COMPANY WHO HAD BEEN THROUGH AN UNSAFE PRODUCT CASE. THEY SUGGESTED THAT THE EXPERIENCE OF JUST GETTING CALLED BEFORE THE GRAND JURY WAS A DETERRENT ("DON'T WANT TO EVER GO THROUGHSOMETHING LIKE THAT AGAIN" BUT I DON'T KNOW IF IT AFFECTED THEIR FUTUREBEHAVIOR). THE CRIMINOLOGY LITERATURE SUGGESTS THAT PRIOR EXPERIENCE WITH ILLEGAL BEHAVIOR AND SANCTIONS (PERSONAL AND THOSE AROUND YOU) AFFECTS ONE'S PERCEPTIONS OF SANCTION RISK WHICH THEN AFFECTS BEHAVIOR. I MAY BE BETTER ABLE TO ANSWER THIS QUESTION WHEN I ANALYZE A NEW DATA SET THAT ASKED ABOUT PERSONAL EXPERIENCE WITH THE SPECIFIC TYPES OF ILLEGAL BEHAVIORS DESCRIBED IN THE VIGNETTES.

Sally S. Simpson
Professor and Chair
Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice

From: RDShatt
To: SSIMPSON@crim.umd.edu
Sent: 9/10/2009 7:07:08 P.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Re: Why Managers Fail To Do The Right Thing

Thank you very much for answering my questions, Professor Simpson. I will try to assimilate your answers into my thinking. Ultimately, I would like to dialogue with (survey?) corporate ethics officers, employees, and senior management relative to my questions, but I don't think that opportunity will be afforded me anytime soon. I will just keep plugging away on various fronts I am trying to push on.

Sincerely.
Robert Shattuck

From: RDShatt
To: SSIMPSON@crim.umd.edu
Sent: 9/12/2009 9:28:15 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Re: Why Managers Fail To Do The Right Thing

Thank you very much for replying again, Professor Simpson.

I have reread your article.

I would like to react to your four categories of formal sanctions, outcome expectancies, moral evaluation and obedience to authority.

I consider formal sanctions as a subset of outcome expectancies (which I think you do too), but I understand your interest in treating it separately to try to measure its strength (directly or indirectly) as an outcome expectancy. Obedience to authority seems to be part a moral evaluation factor (i.e., may result in diminution of moral evaluation) and part an outcome expectancy factor (i.e., doing what your superior wants will help your position in the corporation), but I can understand your interest in treating that one separately too.

In my view, outcome expectancies should be analyzed by reference to the individual employees only, and outcome expectancies for the corporation should be considered only as and to the extent the employee considers himself affected in assessing outcome expectancies for the employee personally. To the extent an individual employee takes into account the interests of others in outcome expectancies for the corporation (such as consideration that committing a corporate crime may adversely affect the jobs of other employees), I would put that off into the moral evaluation category. In short, in the context of business wrongdoing, I would inject the terminology "calculated self-interest" (outcome expectancies for the employee personally) and "altruism" (which is the taking into account the interests of others independently of your own interest, perhaps equivalent to moral evaluation), and I would consider the determinants of employee decisions to be a mix of calculated self-interest and altruism.

The foregoing would lead me to want to try to measure separately the effect of criminal and financial sanctions against the corporation as compared to the effect of criminal and financial sanctions against the individual employee. In this regard, I think corporate crime results from actions of individual employees to commit the crime, it is the employees that must be deterred, and deterrence of them by criminal and financial sanctions will be differentially achieved (I believe) depending on whether the sanctions are imposed against the corporation or against the individual employee.

If you have not read my articles, I play up greatly in my analysis of class actions the difference between costs and penalties imposed on the corporation versus on individual employees.

Also, your article makes reference to how the law can be supportive of social condemnations of an act, and also possibly not supportive, if others have negative views of the law (such as because it is intrusive, unfair, or irrelevant to business). A large part of my argumentation that the civil law liability system undermines business ethics is because I believe it has engendered disrespect and contempt growing out if its exploitation by lawyers to benefit themselves financially to the detriment of the social interests that are supposed to be served by the law.

I believe the civil law liability system is deserving of much greater attention by business ethicists than it has received (which seems to me to be virtually nil). I am, however, having a hard time making headway in persuading other business ethicists of that.

Again thank you for your replies.

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck

From: RDShatt
To: weaverg@lerner.udel.edu
CC: LTrevino@psu.eduSent: 9/6/2009 8:34:13 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Managing ethics in business organizations.

Dear Professor Weaver,

Your citation of the works of Professor Simpson prompted me to read her co-authored article "Why Managers Fail To Do The Right Thing: An Empirical Study Of Unethical & Illegal Conduct," and I found in her list of sources this: Trevino, L.K. & Weaver, G.R., 2003. Managing ethics in business organizations. Stanford, CA: Stanford Business Books.

I sent Professor Simpson a long email (appended below) in which I asked three questions as follows:


In the abstract of your [Professor Simpson's] article, you summarize as
follows:
"Despite demands for increased sanctioning of corporate offenders, we
find that the threat of legal action does not directly affect the likelihood of
misconduct. Managers’ evaluations of the ethics of the act, measured using a
multidimensional ethics scale, have a significant effect, as do outcome
expectancies that result from being associated with the misconduct but not
facing formal sanctions. The threat of formal sanctions appears to operate
indirectly, influencing ethical evaluations and outcome expectancies. Obedience
to authority also affects illegal intentions, with managers reporting higher
prospective offending when they are ordered to engage in misconduct by a
supervisor."

I would like to pose three questions to you connected
to your article in juxtaposition to my article (Word file attached) and to this
related, self-published online article of mine Does
the Civil Liability System Undermine Business Ethics?
(I don't
know how familiar you are with the class action litigation that I am
addressing. If you would like some examples, you may find upwards of
ten of them set out at the links on the left hand side here under J and J1 through
J8.) My questions are:

First, would you say that the wrongdoing (if there is wrongdoing) in much class action litigation is generally less clear cut than the wrongdoing you have under
consideration in your article?

Second, derived from your knowledge and understanding about how to achieve deterrence (or not) of the types of wrongdoing under consideration in your article, do you have a view about the deterrent effect of the class action litigation I am
addressing?

Third, derived from your surveying and other studying of employee psychology, motivation and decision making, do you believe that such psychology, motivation and decision making are affected by any perceptions or views that employees have concerning class action litigation in general and particularly if their corporation has been sued and/or if they had personal involvement with the corporate acts that have been the subject of the class action lawsuit and/or they personally know other employees who have had such involvement?

I don't know whether your book Managing ethics in business organizations has any discussion of the topic I am interested in. I obviously think my topic warrants some mention in your book. If Professor Trevino and you put out another edition of your book, I hope my writings on my topic will influence you in what you put in a further edition of your book.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck

Chambers of commerce

From: RDShatt
To: garyc@awb.org
Sent: 9/2/2009 7:13:01 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: I want to contact WA state legislators and attorney general

Dear Mr. Chandler,

I am a citizens' class action objector.

The most recent class action of which I have received notice is against Expedia, Inc. (headquartered in the state of Washington) that is pending in King County Superior Court and that is further described here: Expedia Litigation Settlement Website. I have sent emails to the judge in the case, which you may read here.

In addition to the judge, I also wish to contact appropriate Washington state legislators and the attorney general's office in order to advance some of my contentions to those officials and to urge them to adopt positions and possibly take actions that incorporate my contentions.

I am not a resident of Washington State, and it can be very difficult, if not impossible, to get a state official to read a letter or an email from a non-resident, non-Washington State voter.

I am writing this email to you to inquire whether there is any way the Chamber could give me a reference to one or more Washington state legislators (or legislative assistants) or to a staff member or members in the Washington attorney general's office, to whom I could direct communications that I desire to make to those officials.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck

From: GaryC@AWB.ORG
To: RDShatt@aol.com
Sent: 9/3/2009 1:36:06 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: RE: I want to contact WA state legislators and attorney general

If you go onto the web and go to access Washington, you can get the information of contacts in the Attorney General’s Office..

From: RDShatt
To: GaryC@AWB.ORG
Sent: 9/3/2009 6:13:23 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Re: I want to contact WA state legislators and attorney general

Dear Mr. Chandler,

Thank you very much for replying. I think I will continue looking for an organization or person who is local to Washington State and who has sufficient interest in the subject matter and the advocacy that I wish to make to Washington legislators and the Attorney General that they are willing to provide me a reference. Without such a reference, I am sure I, not being a resident of Washington, will be entirely disregarded in trying to communicate to Washington legislators and the attorney general.

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck

Local law students

From: RDShatt
To: sulawrev@seattleu.edu
Sent: 9/3/2009 5:25:37 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: In re Expedia Hotel Taxes and Fees Litigation

Dear Mr. Prince,

I doubt this is ripe for a law review article or note, but I thought I would pass it on for your consideration.

I am a citizens' class action objector. The most recent class action of which I have received notice is against Expedia, Inc. (headquartered in the state of Washington) that is pending in King County Superior Court and that is further described here: Expedia Litigation Settlement Website.

There are many critics and much criticism of class action lawsuits, and thousands of plaintiff class members, including myself, file objections in class actions about proposed settlements and attorney fees.

I am currently trying to advance two contentions that I think are deserving of more attention than they have heretofore received. The two contentions have a connection to each other I believe.First, I contend that class action litigation such as the Expedia lawsuit does not promote an objective of the law to lessen corporate wrongdoing, and such litigation is in fact counterproductive to that end and it undermines the fostering and inculcation of ethical business conduct. My argumentation to this effect is set out at length in this article of mine: Does the Law Undermine Business Ethics?Second, I contend that this litigation such as the Expedia case is very questionable in serving the social utility of "doing justice." The main reason it is questionable is that I believe insufficient attention is paid to the extent to which this litigation at bottom is only about making transfers of amounts by and among parties in interest who are not culpable of any wrongdoing. It is possible there has been wrongdoing by corporate officers and employees or other individuals, and as a result some innocent parties have received a benefit from the wrongdoing and other innocent parties have had a loss or cost imposed on them. Whether or not there has been such wrongdoing, the case against the corporation should be considered as an unjust enrichment case, and nothing more. The facts and circumstances of all the persons who have been unjustly enriched and at whose expense they have been unjustly enriched are likely highly variable and somewhat indeterminate, and it is likely there has not been adequate investigation, or opportunity for argument, as to persons who are contended to have been unjustly enriched, the particular facts about whether or not he was unjustly enriched or, if he was unjustly enriched, about whether more is being taken from him in the litigation than the amount by which he was unjustly enriched.The reason I believe insufficient attention is paid to viewing the case as being nothing more than an unjust enrichment case is a certain blindness that has arisen in the law because the plaintiffs' lawyers get their riches by and large out of the pockets of parties in interest who are innocent of wrongdoing. In order to do that, they want to bang the drum of corporate wrongdoing and do not want any reasonable and thoughtful consideration of factors such as who the wrongdoing individuals are, how much those individuals benefited from their wrongdoing, how much they are being called on or not called on to compensate harmed parties, and to what extent is it fair and just in the situation to have innocent parties in interest pay for an alleged loss.Having stated the foregoing reason of the explanation for my second contention, I think you will readily discern its connection to my first contention.

I have sent emails to the presiding judge in the Expedia lawsuit, which may be found here.

To repeat, I doubt this is ripe for a law review article or note, but I thought I would pass it on for your consideration. If you see any Seattle University Law Review potential here, I would be very interested in hearing from you.

Thanks.

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck

From: RDShatt
To: dhancock@washlrev.org
Sent: 9/3/2009 5:37:49 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: In re Expedia Hotel Taxes and Fees Litigation

Dear Mr. Hancock,

I doubt this is ripe for a law review article or note, but I thought I would pass it on for your consideration.

I am a citizens' class action objector. The most recent class action of which I have received notice is against Expedia, Inc. (headquartered in the state of Washington) that is pending in King County Superior Court and that is further described here: Expedia Litigation Settlement Website.

There are many critics and much criticism of class action lawsuits, and thousands of plaintiff class members, including myself, file objections in class actions about proposed settlements and attorney fees.

I am currently trying to advance two contentions that I think are deserving of more attention than they have heretofore received. The two contentions have a connection to each other I believe.First, I contend that class action litigation such as the Expedia lawsuit does not promote an objective of the law to lessen corporate wrongdoing, and such litigation is in fact counterproductive to that end and it undermines the fostering and inculcation of ethical business conduct. My argumentation to this effect is set out at length in this article of mine: Does the Law Undermine Business Ethics?Second, I contend that this litigation such as the Expedia case is very questionable in serving the social utility of "doing justice." The main reason it is questionable is that I believe insufficient attention is paid to the extent to which this litigation at bottom is only about making transfers of amounts by and among parties in interest who are not culpable of any wrongdoing. It is possible there has been wrongdoing by corporate officers and employees or other individuals, and as a result some innocent parties have received a benefit from the wrongdoing and other innocent parties have had a loss or cost imposed on them. Whether or not there has been such wrongdoing, the case against the corporation should be considered as an unjust enrichment case, and nothing more. The facts and circumstances of all the persons who have been unjustly enriched and at whose expense they have been unjustly enriched are likely highly variable and somewhat indeterminate, and it is likely there has not been adequate investigation, or opportunity for argument, as to persons who are contended to have been unjustly enriched, the particular facts about whether or not he was unjustly enriched or, if he was unjustly enriched, about whether more is being taken from him in the litigation than the amount by which he was unjustly enriched.The reason I believe insufficient attention is paid to viewing the case as being nothing more than an unjust enrichment case is a certain blindness that has arisen in the law because the plaintiffs' lawyers get their riches by and large out of the pockets of parties in interest who are innocent of wrongdoing. In order to do that, they want to bang the drum of corporate wrongdoing and do not want any reasonable and thoughtful consideration of factors such as who the wrongdoing individuals are, how much those individuals benefited from their wrongdoing, how much they are being called on or not called on to compensate harmed parties, and to what extent is it fair and just in the situation to have innocent parties in interest pay for an alleged loss.Having stated the foregoing reason of the explanation for my second contention, I think you will readily discern its connection to my first contention.

I have sent emails to the presiding judge in the Expedia lawsuit, which may be found here.

To repeat, I doubt this is ripe for a law review article or note, but I thought I would pass it on for your consideration. If you see any Washington Law Review potential here, I would be very interested in hearing from you.

Thanks.

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck

From: RDShatt
To: bingisse@u.washington.edu
Sent: 9/3/2009 5:48:18 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Federalist Society: In re Expedia Hotel Taxes and Fees Litigation

Dear Mr. Bingisser,

I am sending you this email to inform you about the above matter and issues I am raising about it, because I think they fall with the domain of interest of The Federalist Society and they may be grist for consideration and debate by the Society.

I am a citizens' class action objector. The most recent class action of which I have received notice is against Expedia, Inc. (headquartered in the state of Washington) that is pending in King County Superior Court and that is further described here: Expedia Litigation Settlement Website.

There are many critics and much criticism of class action lawsuits, and thousands of plaintiff class members, including myself, file objections in class actions about proposed settlements and attorney fees.

I am currently trying to advance two contentions that I think are deserving of more attention than they have heretofore received. The two contentions have a connection to each other I believe.First, I contend that class action litigation such as the Expedia lawsuit does not promote an objective of the law to lessen corporate wrongdoing, and such litigation is in fact counterproductive to that end and it undermines the fostering and inculcation of ethical business conduct. My argumentation to this effect is set out at length in this article of mine: Does the Law Undermine Business Ethics?Second, I contend that this litigation such as the Expedia case is very questionable in serving the social utility of "doing justice." The main reason it is questionable is that I believe insufficient attention is paid to the extent to which this litigation at bottom is only about making transfers of amounts by and among parties in interest who are not culpable of any wrongdoing. It is possible there has been wrongdoing by corporate officers and employees or other individuals, and as a result some innocent parties have received a benefit from the wrongdoing and other innocent parties have had a loss or cost imposed on them. Whether or not there has been such wrongdoing, the case against the corporation should be considered as an unjust enrichment case, and nothing more. The facts and circumstances of all the persons who have been unjustly enriched and at whose expense they have been unjustly enriched are likely highly variable and somewhat indeterminate, and it is likely there has not been adequate investigation, or opportunity for argument, as to persons who are contended to have been unjustly enriched, the particular facts about whether or not he was unjustly enriched or, if he was unjustly enriched, about whether more is being taken from him in the litigation than the amount by which he was unjustly enriched.The reason I believe insufficient attention is paid to viewing the case as being nothing more than an unjust enrichment case is a certain blindness that has arisen in the law because the plaintiffs' lawyers get their riches by and large out of the pockets of parties in interest who are innocent of wrongdoing. In order to do that, they want to bang the drum of corporate wrongdoing and do not want any reasonable and thoughtful consideration of factors such as who the wrongdoing individuals are, how much those individuals benefited from their wrongdoing, how much they are being called on or not called on to compensate harmed parties, and to what extent is it fair and just in the situation to have innocent parties in interest pay for an alleged loss.Having stated the foregoing reason of the explanation for my second contention, I think you will readily discern its connection to my first contention.

I have sent emails to the presiding judge in the Expedia lawsuit, which may be found here.

I hope this email has provided you something of interest for The Federalist Society.

Thanks.

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck


From: RDShatt
To: mwa2010@u.washington.edu
Sent: 9/3/2009 5:58:15 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: FLP: In re Expedia Hotel Taxes and Fees Litigation

Dear Mr. Anderson,

I am sending you this email to inform you about the above matter and issues I am raising about it, because I think they could provide a very interesting topic for The Forum on Law and Policy..

I am a citizens' class action objector. The most recent class action of which I have received notice is against Expedia, Inc. (headquartered in the state of Washington) that is pending in King County Superior Court and that is further described here: Expedia Litigation Settlement Website.

There are many critics and much criticism of class action lawsuits, and thousands of plaintiff class members, including myself, file objections in class actions about proposed settlements and attorney fees.

I am currently trying to advance two contentions that I think are deserving of more attention than they have heretofore received. The two contentions have a connection to each other I believe.First, I contend that class action litigation such as the Expedia lawsuit does not promote an objective of the law to lessen corporate wrongdoing, and such litigation is in fact counterproductive to that end and it undermines the fostering and inculcation of ethical business conduct. My argumentation to this effect is set out at length in this article of mine: Does the Law Undermine Business Ethics?Second, I contend that this litigation such as the Expedia case is very questionable in serving the social utility of "doing justice." The main reason it is questionable is that I believe insufficient attention is paid to the extent to which this litigation at bottom is only about making transfers of amounts by and among parties in interest who are not culpable of any wrongdoing. It is possible there has been wrongdoing by corporate officers and employees or other individuals, and as a result some innocent parties have received a benefit from the wrongdoing and other innocent parties have had a loss or cost imposed on them. Whether or not there has been such wrongdoing, the case against the corporation should be considered as an unjust enrichment case, and nothing more. The facts and circumstances of all the persons who have been unjustly enriched and at whose expense they have been unjustly enriched are likely highly variable and somewhat indeterminate, and it is likely there has not been adequate investigation, or opportunity for argument, as to persons who are contended to have been unjustly enriched, the particular facts about whether or not he was unjustly enriched or, if he was unjustly enriched, about whether more is being taken from him in the litigation than the amount by which he was unjustly enriched.The reason I believe insufficient attention is paid to viewing the case as being nothing more than an unjust enrichment case is a certain blindness that has arisen in the law because the plaintiffs' lawyers get their riches by and large out of the pockets of parties in interest who are innocent of wrongdoing. In order to do that, they want to bang the drum of corporate wrongdoing and do not want any reasonable and thoughtful consideration of factors such as who the wrongdoing individuals are, how much those individuals benefited from their wrongdoing, how much they are being called on or not called on to compensate harmed parties, and to what extent is it fair and just in the situation to have innocent parties in interest pay for an alleged loss.Having stated the foregoing reason of the explanation for my second contention, I think you will readily discern its connection to my first contention.

I have sent emails to the presiding judge in the Expedia lawsuit, which may be found here.

I hope this email has provided you something that you will consider as a topic for The Forum on Law and Policy..

Thanks.

Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck