????加拿大皇家銀行的員工們?cè)跄茉趧?chuàng)造強(qiáng)烈誠信氛圍的同時(shí)，涉嫌從事此類不法行為,？莫納漢認(rèn)為,，一個(gè)組織機(jī)構(gòu)的文化的確能夠設(shè)立標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，規(guī)范行為,，但它并不是一個(gè)完美無缺的系統(tǒng),。他說：“文化往往無法阻止流氓員工的違規(guī)意圖?！奔幽么蠡始毅y行拒絕對(duì)此事置評(píng),。

????紐約大學(xué)（NYU）斯特恩商學(xué)院（Stern School of Business）教授羅伊?史密斯曾在1966-1987年擔(dān)任高盛（Goldman Sachs）的一般合伙人，他指出,，丑聞大多集中在從事高風(fēng)險(xiǎn)交易的大型金融公司,，而不是回避衍生品等新奇金融產(chǎn)品的地區(qū)性銀行。交易的本質(zhì)就包括冒險(xiǎn)和用金融工具押注,，并不適用于簡單的道德準(zhǔn)則,。雖然大多數(shù)交易是合法的,，有一部分交易員還是會(huì)尋找捷徑，試圖在交易中占據(jù)上風(fēng),，由此可能導(dǎo)致逾越道德界限,。

????當(dāng)一家金融公司的合規(guī)人員警告交易員不要走得太遠(yuǎn)，不要挑戰(zhàn)法律底線時(shí),，交易員往往答以“別告訴我這不能做,，那不能做。告訴我怎么才能做到,，”史密斯說,。交易員肩負(fù)客戶重托，但他們總是希望能在交易中占據(jù)優(yōu)勢,，從而可能涉及違規(guī),。

????如果希望所有交易都能正當(dāng)執(zhí)行,，史密斯說：“需要做到的是一群人（也就是交易員）在踩油門的同時(shí),，法務(wù)合規(guī)部負(fù)責(zé)踩剎車?！弊裾彰恳粭l道德準(zhǔn)則和細(xì)微之處,，可能導(dǎo)致很多公司取消、減少和限制交易員,，而這種情況不太可能出現(xiàn),。

????史密斯說，他的倫理課程重點(diǎn)不是道德說教,，因?yàn)檫@不會(huì)奏效,，他是從領(lǐng)導(dǎo)力角度來看倫理問題。他說：“如果在一家公司工作,，卻不給員工設(shè)立標(biāo)準(zhǔn),，公司就會(huì)毫無標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，陷入一片混亂,，”

????既然金錢總是比倫理培訓(xùn)更強(qiáng)大,，不妨將其納入薪酬?；蛟S應(yīng)該給予檢舉者以獎(jiǎng)勵(lì),。“獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)那些為公司盈利清除了風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的人,，”莫納漢指出,。畢竟檢舉違規(guī)行為從長遠(yuǎn)來看有利于公司的盈利。

????譯者：早稻米

????How could RBC staff have allegedly committed these acts despite creating an atmosphere of strong integrity? Monahan says an organization's culture can establish norms and regulate behavior, but it's not a perfect system. "Culture often fails to drive the behaviors of rogue employees' intent on breaking the rules," he says. RBC declined to offer comment for this story.

????Roy Smith, who teaches ethics at NYU's Stern School of Business and was a former general partner at Goldman Sachs (GS) from 1966 to 1987, says that most of the scandals have taken place at the major financial services firms that do risky trading, not at regional banks that generally avoid exotic financial products like derivatives. The nature of trading, which involves the assumption of risk and betting on financial instruments, doesn't fit easily into a simple ethical code. While most trades are legal, a certain percentage of traders will take shortcuts and try to get an edge on a deal and may overstep ethical boundaries

????When a financial firm's compliance staff warns traders about going too far or skirting the edge of what's legal, a trader's typical response is, "'Don't tell me what I can't do. Tell me how to do it,'" Smith says. Traders have a fiduciary responsibility to their customers, but they are always looking to gain the upper hand on their trading partners, and that can turn into evading the rules.

????For all trades to be vetted properly, Smith says, "You'd need one group of people [traders] using the accelerator and legal and compliance using the brake." Following every ethical rule and nuance would lead to firms cancelling, limiting, and restricting traders, and that's not likely to happen.

????Smith says his ethics class doesn't focus on teaching morals, which he says wouldn't be effective, but instead concentrates on looking at ethics as a leadership issue. "If you work at a company and don't impose standards on those who work there, you'll have anarchy and no standards," he says.

????Since money often talks louder than ethics training, making it a part of compensation makes sense. Perhaps people have to be rewarded for citing wrongdoing. "Companies reward people for risk adjusted profit," Monahan notes. After all, he says, speaking up against wrongdoing helps the bottom-line in the long run.

????Editor's note: A previous version of this story incorrectly stated Thomas Monahan's title. He is the chairman and CEO of Corporate Executive Board. A previous version of this story also incorrectly stated that the Royal Bank of Canada received the top score in a recent integrity ranking by the Corporate Executive Board. RBC scored in the top quartile instead.