Does an Organisations 'culture' make you cheat?

I read an interesting piece in 'Pulse', the new LinkedIn app on my phone this morning and found it justifying the actions of a company who someone would identify as a cheat and betrayer!. The article titled "How Volkswagens company culture could have led employees to cheat" does make some interesting points. My take on this:

Culture of an organization is unique. It is like a community which develops its 'Code', some call it religion. They have their own rules, which define and what they believe shapes the future for the better for them. Some of them do openly defy common laws or beliefs with a clear conviction that is better for them! And that paves the way for breakthrough in any domain.

As a company is set up, its founders frame the 'Code' and set about doing their main business. As it grows and scales up, it inducts varied talent, which bring in different perspectives and beliefs. The marketplace is another high influencer. The governing guidelines imposed by regulators, who are entrusted with the supervision of these organisations, their practices and the civil & criminal laws, which organisations are to complaint with again dictate how the organisations shape up across geographies and emerge successful.

When the experiences of so many individual talents combined with rules and regulations around the globe, shape the policies and day to day actions of the company, 'Culture' emerges.

So ‘Culture’ is not something which is dictated upon by one or a group of individuals to a community. It is, I believe, a way of living, developed over a period of time. To lay the blame on an individual or a small group is therefore not appropriate.

Given the employment opportunities available in the market or fields to choose from and the diversity of beliefs, a culture cannot be sustained for long in a global enterprise across geographies, as in VW case for decades, if employees do not coopt. They are responsible for their actions as my much as employers. It is therefore incumbent on the employee to understand the culture of the organization when he or she reaches the middle management level, or enter laterally and make a choice. I believe that an organization which can openly be aggressive to deliver on certain key elements would always believe that certain inappropriate actions - inappropriate as in the general world - can be done time and again as long as their primary objectives and goals are achieved. 

Once the situation deteriorates and an unacceptable culture permeates a global enterprise, it is time for a sweeping change. Two sets of people can change this culture - incumbent Employees (if supported by other key stakeholders) and a Proactive Independent Regulator.

Solutions on offer can be many for a case if Employees were to decide to do something. For this they must work to overcome the 'moral muteness'.

But solution from the regulator point of view is only one - Merge with a more ethical organization.

If this is not done you can be prepared for another disaster, from the affected company or someone from similar.