We had an unfortunate situation not long ago that underscores how decisions made in one’s personal life can have serious ramifications on your career when you bring those decisions with you to the workplace:
- A newly hired Senior Manager-level Best Buy employee is applying for a car loan. To qualify for the loan, the employee must prove she has been working at least one year for her current employer.
- The new Best Buy Senior Manager asks her peer – as well as a subordinate – to lie on the loan application for her by stating that she has been with Best Buy for more than a year.
- The subordinate obliges but the Senior Manager-level peer is uncomfortable with the request and brings it to our attention.
- Upon investigation, the employee denies that she asked her co-workers to lie on the loan application. Later, she admits to doing so but states that the car dealer was pressuring her to make the purchase, leading her to “cave in” to the dealership.
- After considering the facts, Best Buy terminates the new Senior Manager for inappropriate conduct.
My questions for you:
1) Is it any of Best Buy’s concern what our employees choose to do in their personal financial dealings? If not, where did this particular employee go wrong?
2) Is there any difference between asking a peer to lie for you versus asking a direct subordinate to do so? If so, why?
3) Which was worse? Asking co-workers to lie on the loan application or denying it after the fact?
4) What if this new Best Buy employee was in an entry-level role? Is the fact that she was a Senior Manager-level leader relevant in any way?
5) What about the employee’s claim that she was “pressured” by the car dealer? In your opinion, does that mitigate her actions? Why or why not?
Hi Eric,
Love your comment about high pressure sales. I never thought of it in those terms before. Thanks ke
I think this one is pretty straightforward as well.
Best Buy has a compelling interest that its brand and employees are perceived as ethical and honest. If an employee of Best Buy uses the company in a lie for personal gain then that lie that damages the perception. The company’s (and other employees) inclusion in that lie can damage the reputation of the company irreparably and, therefore, the company has an interest in protecting their reputation in the marketplace.
An employee engaging in a simple decption completely seperate from the company may well not amount to reasonable grounds for termination. But, when you actively include your employer and co-workers in the deception then you put our reputation at threat.
Ms. Edmond,
I am writing you in your capacity as Chief Ethics officer to bring to your attention my deep dis-satisfaction at the recent round of best Buy ads on TV featuring women with smug looks on their faces catching Santa Claus and essentially disrespecting him by implying he is not needed because the woman shopped at Best Buy.
I think its a horrible idea to suggest that Best Buy can replace the concept of Santa Claus. And implying that Santa Claus is an out-dated notion that has no place in today’s society simply because Best Buy is “on the job” sends the wrong message to children who still believe in the magic of Christmas and Santa.
Best Buy should be ashamed for approving this ad concept.
And I would send this message directly to Mr. Dunn, but conveniently for him the comment section of his blog is closed and the link on his page to send a comment to him doesn’t work, so please feel free to forward my comments to him and Mr. Judge, whose competence as Chief Marketing Officer should be questioned now.
Regards,
Jim Moore
1) I don’t believe it’s Best Buy’s concern unless the associate is identifying themselves as a representative of Best Buy for that transaction. Where this associate went wrong is that she brought it to Best Buy by asking a co-worker and a subordinate to vouch for it. At that point, it is a concern for Best Buy as it has become a part of the workplace.
2) Both are wrong, but asking a subordinate to do it is more unethical. As someone’s boss, you have a certain influence over them that others do not have. They may feel compeled to do as you ask even if they see an ethical issue with what you are asking as they don’t want to hurt their own career.
3) Both are wrong. However, lieing about what you did shows that you understand that your initial reaction was unethical to begin with. If you honestly felt pressured or had any compelling reason to make the first mistake, it would have been to explain that up front with the lies. There will still be accountability, but it would at least give a framework for why the bad decision was made. So, I’d say that lieing about it was worse than initially making a bad decision.
4) I think the fact that she brought a subordinate into the deception is more significant than her actual title. If it was the CEO asking a vice-president or a store manager asking an hourly associate, the nature of the influence on the subordinate is more important than the position of the person.
5) Honestly speaking, there is no such thing as “High Pressure” sales. Sales people can work your individual personality so that you want to buy from them or get the experience that they are telling you that you would have. However, short of extortion or blackmail, the only other pressure is against someone’s own ego. To that end, it is not a good excuse for making a bad decision.
You have a lot of work to do at Best Buy. On Black Friday BB sold us a laptop and charged my AMEX. After days and days of run around, hours waiting on hold, multiple disconnects, and contradictory emails, your ‘customer service’ just informed us we would not be getting our laptop (present for kids). So we missed other Black Friday deals and took your offer for a computer that didn’t exist, and almost a week later the charge is still on my AMEX.
The most basic ethical principles of ‘balance’ require BB to provide some compensation or offer an upgrade to offset the aggravation – and real financial cost of missing other deals and charging my AMEX. You don’t just say ‘oops, sorry.’ That isn’t fair or balanced or ethical. Best Buy screwed up and needs to make it right.
This blog is just blowing smoke if Best Buy cannot fulfil its most basic commercial obligations to customers.
Really?, handle it internally, not on the internet.
I am more concerned with how the company treats its customers. I am not impressed and cannot be counted as a future customer after getting tossed around on the customer service line for an hour this morning only to be dead ended.
Which was worse? Asking co-workers to lie on the loan application or denying it after the fact?
Lying about if this manager lied to Best buy you have to wonder how many other times she/he has lied. both are worse Asking the Co-worker to lie and then denying it.
1 – Yes, if the employee has personal financial problems, that is a fraud red flag. The employee was wrong to request either and both others to lie on the employment verification form. This is both unethical and illegal.
2 – There is NO difference – both are wrong and unethical.
3 – Neither is “worse” – they are equally illegal and unethical AND UNACCEPTABLE. Lies of this magnitude are fraud red flags and should not be excused.
4 – Rank does not make the unethical and illegal behavior more or less serious. Although such an incorrectly justified “little white lie” may not rise to the level beyond a misdemeanor, lies in the course of performing duties on behalf of the employer by any pay level person cannot be tolerated by an employer. Such lies by the Senior Manager are a serious “red flag” because she is in a position to wrongly influence others later on and sets an absolutely bad “tone at the top”. If such behavior is overlooked or forgiven by top management then that reinforces the bad “tone at the top” message to other employees.
5 – The fact that she (presumably) lied about the pressure (or in fact gave into pressure) indicates that this person is not a trustworthy employee (or indicates that she is susceptible to pressure by others) indicating she uses bad judgement and may commit unethical and illegal behavior.