Money is a powerful signpost in our society, gaining influence steadily. Having money creates power like nothing else. Money talks, but somehow its mother tongue seems to be lies and deception. Thus, white-collar crimes become more and more compelling as money appears to trump morality. Responsibilities have become secondary. But is money really worth compromising integrity?
This is not just a dry theoretical question; people in real life were confronted with it, and let me spoil it for you, many chose money. Elizabeth Holmes and Jan Marsalek, for instance, might argue in this trade-off’s favour. Both of them have major roles in white-collar crimes during the past decade. While the scandals these crimes entailed are of different intensity, outcome, and impact, they all have multiple things in common. Deception, lies, fraud, and a desire for success.
Elizabeth Holmes, 30 years of age, was in 2014 the youngest woman to ever acquire a self-made net worth of $4.5 billion. After quitting Stanford, Holmes founded the supposedly revolutionary blood testing company Theranos, raising hundreds of millions of dollars. Little did the investors know how legit Theranos’ product really was. In 2015, the tests were discovered to be merely an illusion, incorrectly diagnosing cancer and diabetes. A few years later, Holmes was sentenced to eleven years of jail time.
While Holmes faced justice, Jan Marsalek is still on the run after executing one of the biggest financial frauds in German history. As the COO of Wirecard, Jan Marsalek was one of those responsible for the scandal unfolding in 2020 in Germany. Till that point, Wirecard was a listed payment service and financial services provider. After the reveal of balance sheet falsification of €1.9 billion, insolvency was not an option but a necessity. CEO Markus Braun was imprisoned, while Marsalek is still on the run from German authorities and Interpol, presumably hiding in Russia. While investors and creditors suffered, Marsalek got away with a surplus.
The question of valuing success above morality is not only encountered regarding financial fraud; sometimes, it is far more serious. In the Boeing 737 MAX case, leading figures within Boeing did not endanger people’s funds, but their lives, in an effort to maintain their profits. Boeing covered up their faulty flight control software, leading to 346 deaths inflicted by two crashes in 2018 and 2019, valuing their personal gain over people’s lives. Their CEO, Dennis Muilenburg, was let go in the aftermath of the crashes, receiving millions worth of compensation. Leaked internal emails later revealed existing awareness about the faults before the crashes. Simply, a fine had to be paid as well as a deposit into a crash victims’ fund, a rather mild penalty for putting people’s lives at stake.
The consequences of these missteps differ, and so do the intentions. Holmes deliberately scammed people in medical need, knowing her product did not suffice. Marsalek’s forging of funds was calculated as well. Meanwhile, Boeing did not intend to harm people, but by refusing to intervene when recognizing safety risks, they gambled with people’s lives. Nevertheless, these actions share the same motives. Whether it was success, appreciation, status, or money, they were after. The pathogen is the same.
Greed. A phenomenon as ancient as humankind.
The deceivers’ goals were never achievable within the realms of morality. They thought they ‘had’ to overstep this line. Prioritising their own interest, they did.
Not just the individual character is at fault for such behaviour. Their environment makes it easy or even encourages it.
Discrepancy in the stigmatisation of white-collar and blue-collar crimes plays its part as well. They have not murdered or physically assaulted someone – how bad could it be? The public judges street crimes and white-collar crimes differently, rarely finding excuses for street criminals but being easier on white-collar criminals. Most of them are well-respected individuals in society, no ruthless outlaws. Their connection within the business world benefits these criminals as their missteps get swept under the rug or are ignored until it is widely discovered by the public. Could you imagine overlooking your colleague robbing a bank? While both types of crime still violate society’s rules, white-collar criminals get away with it more easily. Not only are their crimes often far more difficult to understand due to their complexity and niche nature – a robbed bank is easier to comprehend than strategic embezzlement – unharmed people might even extol the cleverness of white-collar criminals, while this is seldom the case for blue-collar crimes.
With profit as a priority, morality just seems to be bad for business. But don’t worry, nothing a good rebrand can’t fix.
