Class Notes (834,819)
Canada (508,737)
Psychology (2,075)
PSYCH 232 (13)
Lecture

Psych 232 Corporate Evil

2 Pages
114 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Psychology
Course
PSYCH 232
Professor
Chris Burris
Semester
Winter

Description
Corporate Evil (Evil at the Organizational setting)  An extended Case study (from Darley, 1996)  What Organizations do harms? o “Social Control” (e.g. military, government, peace makers or the authority) versus “Civilian” (e.g.: corporations, community organizations, not part of the official governmental framework) o Between social and civilian are educational and religious organizations o All have the capacity for evil behaviors or harm regardless of the type of organizations  How do Organizations do harm? 1. Deliberate harm  Screwing over the employee. “I really don’t care about employee working conditions”; To what degree are they interested in employee safety? Or are they more interested in maximizing profit?  Screwing over the manufacturers. (Unfair to manufacturers) 2. Neglectful  “That information didn’t cross my desk”  Innocent effect 3. Unanticipated  no one could have necessary known the bad doings of the organizations (either intentional or unintentional)  deceitful through products  DDT example  The use of cellphone example – unknown long term effects that will not be evident after 10 or 15 years in which we do not know How do Individuals Get Sucked in? 0) Self-selection/recruitment – Enron; e.g. the recruitment of psychopath  Diffusion of information- many cases could result to neglectful harm; who receives the information?  Diffusion and fragmentation of responsibility – how you perceive your own role in relation on how you perceive others’ roles in the organization; not clear who should be doing what or who is supposed to be blamed o Passive diffusion - you assumed that somebody else in the organization is taking care of the problem; you assume that it is being taken cared elsewhere (e.g.: bystander effect) o Active diffusion of responsibility  Scapegoating – you set things up so your subordinates will take the fall or wrong doing (e.g. plausible deniability; sounds like PECS evil personality)  Redefinition –
More Less

Related notes for PSYCH 232

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit