The problem is our moral code

For the last 40 years, the Philippines has been an economic laggard, and we perpetually blame it on our leaders. We were led by people who stole our money, we are told, and so there were Marcos, Estrada, GMA, and now, our Chief Justice, Corona.

I am inclined to go for the conclusion expressed in a series of studies by Professor Dan Ariely of MIT, that the root of the problem is not that simple. Dan was studying the Enron case, in which a top 10 corporation, Enron, blew up in a series of massive fraud and irregularity. The problem of many societies is not only that a few people steal a lot, he concluded. The real problem, rather, is more likely that many people steal and cheat a little.

All these are manifested in many ways. There are board exam test leaks.  There are fake diplomas, and fake titles. There are recalibrated taxi and electric meters. There are 45-kilogram sacks that when properly weighed is only 44 kilograms. There are seven/eight-inch plywoods sold that, when properly measured, is only three fourths of an inch. There are jeepney drivers who shortchange their passengers. Fake goods and pirated products abound. People don’t follow traffic rules, pedestrians cross wherever they want, elections results are always wanting, and tax evasion a perpetual issue. The yearly corruption index has consistently placed the Philippines as belonging in the top quartile.

In order to understand better, I refer back to a series of experiments Dan conducted on his students. In his test, he asked students to answer 20 simple math questions. For every question, the group would be given a dollar for every correct answer. There was just a twist—the time given was only five minutes, in which there was not even enough time to answer a quarter of the questions.

On a second group, he also did the same, except with a controlled factor.  The second group’s ability was similar to the first, but in the second group, they were allowed afterwards to grade themselves, and then bring the answer sheet home or shred it. Thus, they would be claiming the reward based on their honor, and there would be no way to check it. The result was that the claimed test scores and reward for the second group was much higher, in most cases, even up to 50 to 70 percent higher.  Clearly, the majority of them claimed more rewards than they actually answered. In short, they cheated, but yes, by a little.

Why do people cheat, and why only a little? There are twpo reasons for this—first, all of us want to look at ourselves in the mirror and feel good about ourselves. Second, we also want to get the rewards and advantage of cheating. So we cheat a little to the extent that we see ourselves as still good, but not exactly a crook.

How can we do that? Of course, we rationalize. The Filipino people have always been told that they have been consistently cheated the last few hundred years—first, by the Spaniards, the friars, the landlords, and the politicians. So it is OK to cheat a little too, as you have been cheated a lot. This also explains why, for instance, most helpers and employees may not steal money, and in fact may even honestly return it, but there is no problem to bring ballpens home, take some food from the refrigerator, or use the phone to call friends, or use the office computer to Facebook, even at office hours. Apparently, most don’t see much wrong in being late or remiss in their payments, too.

This may be something we need to look into. We rationalize a lot of these lapses in our moral code, but it does convey a very loose interpretation of our professionalism, which do tend, for instance, to make foreigners, especially those not attuned to our culture, quite uncomfortable. Such little cheating, while garnering slight advantages, could cost us much more in terms of lost opportunity and bad reputation.

This could be influenced also by our leaders. In another test by Dan, he planted a student who even before the five minutes elapsed, announced in a large voice that he has gotten all answers right, and therefore was claiming the full reward. The students know he could not have gotten all correctly, and since they saw him claim so much more money, the result was that everybody’s average number of answers and claims also shoot up.  So evidently, we can also be swayed into cheating more, and hopefully with more honest leaders, we could also be swayed to being more honest.

We elected into office a president on the platform of “If there is no corruption, there is no poverty.” It seems like a collective desire to have as our leaders, thoroughly honest and competent people. However, are we ready to be honest ourselves? Are we willing also to rewrite our goofy moral code?

(The article reflects the personal opinion of the author and does not reflect the official stand of the Management Association of the Philippines. The author manages Ng Khai Development Cor., a leading ICT systems integrator in Southern Philippines. He was a recipient of the EOY Entrepreneur of the Year for Small Business for 2004, and Pride of Cebu Awardee for 2006. Feedback at [email protected]. For previous articles, visit <map.org.ph>.)