|
THE CASE OF JESSE JACKSON, JR.
WASHINGTON
- Jesse L. Jackson Jr., the former Democratic representative
from Illinois, pleaded guilty on February 21 to one felony fraud
count in connection with his use of $750,000 in campaign money to
pay for living expenses and buy items like stuffed animals, elk
heads and fur capes.
As
part of a plea agreement, prosecutors recommended that Mr. Jackson
receive a sentence of 46 to 57 months in prison. The federal judge
overseeing the case, Robert L. Wilkins, is scheduled to sentence Mr.
Jackson on June 28.
"For
years I lived off my campaign," Mr.
Jackson, 47, said in response to questions from the judge about the
plea. "I
used money I shouldn't have used for personal purposes."
At
one point during the hearing, the judge stopped his questioning of
Mr. Jackson, who was crying, so that he could be given a tissue.
"Guilty,
Your Honor - I misled the American people,"
Mr. Jackson said when asked whether he would accept the plea deal.
Mr. Jackson's father, the Rev. Jesse L. Jackson, his mother and
several brothers and sisters accompanied him to the hearing.
Mr.
Jackson's wife, Sandi, also accompanied him, and later in the day
she pleaded guilty to a charge that she filed false income tax
statements during the time that Mr. Jackson was dipping into his
campaign treasury. Prosecutors said they would seek to have her
sentenced to 18 to 24 months.
Mr.
Jackson's plea was yet another chapter in the downward spiral of his
career. Elected to Congress in 1995 at the age of 30 from a district
that includes part of the South Side of Chicago, Mr. Jackson was
once one of the most prominent young black politicians in the
country, working on issues related to health care and education for
the poor.
But
as the federal authorities investigated Gov. Rod R.
Blagojevich of Illinois over his efforts to sell the Senate
seat that President Obama vacated in 2008, they uncovered evidence
that one of Mr. Jackson's friends had offered to make a contribution
to Mr. Blagojevich's campaign in exchange for the seat. Since then,
Mr. Jackson, who has said he had no knowledge of the offer, has been
dogged by questions about his ethics.
Last
summer, Mr. Jackson took a medical leave from Congress and was later
treated for bipolar disorder. After winning re-election in November,
he resigned, citing his health and the federal investigation into
his use of campaign money.
After
the hearing, Mr. Jackson's lawyer, Reid H. Weingarten, said his
client had "come to terms with his misconduct."
Mr.
Weingarten said that Mr. Jackson had serious health issues that
"directly related" to his conduct.
"That's
not an excuse, it's just a fact," Mr. Weingarten said.
Court
papers released by federal prosecutors on Wednesday provided new
details about how Mr. Jackson and his wife used the $750,000 in
campaign money to finance their lavish lifestyle.
From
2007 to 2011, Mr. Jackson bought $10,977.74 worth of televisions,
DVD players and DVDs at Best Buy, according to the documents. In
2008, Mr. Jackson used the money for things like a $466.30 dinner at
CityZen in the Mandarin Oriental in Washington and a $5,587.75
vacation at the Martha's Vineyard Holistic Retreat, the document
said.
On
at least two instances, Mr. Jackson and his wife used campaign money
at Build-A-Bear Workshop, a store where patrons can create stuffed
animals. From December 2007 through December 2008, the Jacksons
spent $313.89 on "stuffed animals and accessories for stuffed
animals" from Build-A-Bear, according to the documents.
One
of the more exotic items they bought was an elk head from a
taxidermist in Montana. According to the documents, Mr. Jackson
arranged in March 2011 to have $7,000 paid to the taxidermist, with
much of the money coming from a campaign account, and it was shipped
a month later to Mr. Jackson's Congressional office.
A
year later, Mr. Jackson's wife, knowing that the elk head had been
bought with campaign money, had it moved from Washington to Chicago,
and she asked a Congressional staff member to sell it, the documents
say.
In
August 2012, the staff member sold the elk head for $5,300 to an
interior designer and had the money wired to one of Mr. Jackson's
accounts. What the staff member did not know was that the interior
designer was actually an undercover F.B.I. employee who was
investigating the Jacksons, the documents say.
ROBBING
PETER TO PAY PAUL?
The
Detroit Free Press ran an article on April 28, 2011: "When All
Feel Cheated, Who'll Play Fair?" written by Brian Dickerson.
The article begins: "
Social
scientists who study dishonesty have observed that people who cheat
often harbor a deep-seated conviction that they themselves have been
cheated. Dr. Anjan Chatterjee, a neurologist at the University of
Pennsylvania who has conducted research into the use of prescription
drugs to boost intellectual performance, says 'cheating is easier to
justify when you cast yourself as the victim of some kind of
unfairness. Then it becomes a matter of evening the score,' he
explained. 'You're not cheating; you're restoring fairness.'"
Similarly,
Richard Hollinger, Professor of Criminology at University of Florida
recently wrote: "Based
upon numerous research studies, an economic downturn is precisely
the time that loss prevention managers need to be most vigilant for
dishonesty. These declining conditions foster an atmosphere in which
even those employees still working can be easily tempted into
dishonesty. The reason is based upon the social-psychological
principles found in 'equity theory.' This theory posits that when
inequitable situations arise, individuals take immediate action to
restore equity in their lives. When retail sales associates feel
unfairly treated and poorly compensated, they will take action to
rectify the situation by working less productively, quitting or
stealing from the workplace."
It
may be hard for most company owners and managers to fathom how
employees who steal think of themselves as the victims but, in my 15
years of specialized counseling with theft offenders, this is often
how they think and feel. For most, their grievances weren't so much
with their employers as with their families of origin, significant
others, or early perpetrators or abusers and, in a
passive-aggressive manner, they'd take their "revenge" at
work. This displaced anger and stress happens regularly in life--how
many times do we yell at our spouses or kids after a tough day on
the job?
More
and more, however, our feelings of unfairness, victimization and
insecurity have global roots. I sounded the alarm about this in 2005
in my book "Biting The Hand That Feeds: The Employee Theft
Epidemic" by noting these workplace trends: layoffs,
downsizing, outsourcing, decreases in salary/benefits, and dramatic
increases in executive compensation. Nowadays, many employees don't
even see theft as theft and, if they do, they simply feel:
"they owe me!"
What's
really making people cynical now is the latest corporate bailout of
the banks and investment firms. If this wasn't grand-scale theft and
fraud, what is? And who was punished or held accountable? Nobody; if
anything, the culprits continue to reap bonuses. Such widespread
fraud poisons the psyche of the workforce. By comparison, the Enron
era frauds at least resulted in hundreds of prosecutions and prison
terms.
The
U.S. Senate Banking & Finance Committee, led by recently-elected
"consumer watchdog" Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass), recently
held hearings (albeit belatedly) into the the 2008 financial
meltdown. Frustrated that not one high ranking principal from any
bank or financial institution has been prosecuted, Senator Warren
was quoted as saying that "too big too fail seems to mean to
big to got to trial." By contrast, Wells Fargo Bank recently
fired two long-time employees after discovering that each had minor
"shoplifting" charges on their records from decades ago
when they were just youngsters.
Several
years ago, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce estimated that 75% of
employees steal in their workplaces and that most do so repeatedly.
A more recent study estimated that employee theft has increased 50%
since the start of the recent recession. This is partly due to
perceived financial need and survival but a lot of it is purely a
deteriorating loss of faith in the essential fairness of the system.
The Jack Hayes annual theft surveys report a "general decrease
in honesty in general" as a key factor for shoplifting/employee
theft. Yet another study from a decade ago reports that over half of
employee theft is committed by company owners, managers, and
supervisors--the higher-ups.
In
related news, Time Magazine's recent 36-page cover story was
entitled "Bitter Pill" and examined out-of-control health
care costs in the U.S., noting incredibly padded fees for both
simple medical items and procedures that rival the mark-ups revealed
by Pentagon contractors a decade ago. Is is any wonder people are
upset and feel the decks are stacked against them?
Why
do people commit fraud? One reason is because there are poor
controls and people don't think they're going to get caught. It's the
same exact reason most people speed when they drive their car. It's
the same exact psychology: they don't think they're going to get
caught. So, that's one reason. However, most people won't steal just
because there are poor controls-in other words, just because they
don't think they're going to get caught. There usually has to be a
trigger, stressor, or event that puts them over the edge; the
economy and the pattern of unfair practices outlined here provide
this spark.
It's
also getting harder for company owners, managers, and supervisors to
catch employees who will steal, lie or cheat in pre-employment
screenings as well as post-hire as time is pressed and human
resources and loss prevention measures are pinched. Studies suggest
only 15% of applicants may have criminal records which turn up on
background checks. And it's often the star employee who is led out
in handcuffs!
Certainly
some portion of employee theft may be attributable to plain greed as
well as employees at all levels chasing an increasingly high
lifestyle which puts pressure on them to "rob Peter to pay
Paul"--Peter being their employers, Paul being the credit card
companies to whom many become indebted.
So,
what can a company or business owner or manager do in the face of
this increasingly stressful and ethically-challenged world?
Jack
Hayes, the founder former head of Jack Hayes International, a loss
prevention research and consulting firm, outlines 7 easy steps to
protect your business in his recent book Business Fraud: From Trust
to Betrayal. These steps are in following areas:
- Risk Assessment/Identification of
Improvement Needs
- Leadership Philosophy
- Recruiting Principles
- Management Awareness
- Fraud Vigilance Strategies
- Internal Controls
- Proactive
Oversight/Monitoring
Gary
Zeune, an Ohio State University professor and corporate consultant,
of www.theprosandthecons.com,
asserts: "There's
no such thing as 100% prevention because you have humans involved in
every business, every transaction, and every environment. But the most
important strategy is 'unpredictability' (keeping oversight
schedules and techniques fresh and not patterned). The second most
important strategy-probably on a par with unpredictability-is called
'tone at the top.' It's that people will behave the way the top
level people act. Seeing business owners use their business as their
personal piggy bank-even if it's just a small amount-gives everybody
else permission to do it, too. The third most important fraud
deterrence strategy-and almost nobody understands this-is the
compensation structure. What are people being paid to do? This is
different than what they are being told to do. Don't just pay people
to do a job, pay them or give them commissions based on
results!".
Zeune
also suggests company owners publicize their salary/compensation so
employees at least see transparency.
Some
other management strategies include putting these words on the top
of any job application: "By filling out this application, you
are giving us permission to do both a criminal background check and
a credit check or whether you are involved in any civil
lawsuits." Zeune believes that about 80% of employees who see
this on an application won't turn in their application. It's called
"self-selection"-they just take themselves out of the
running. This can eliminate a lot of problems from the get-go.
A
couple other simple changes include having more than one person
oversee finances, accounts payable and accounts receivable and
having bank and financial statements sent to the boss's home rather
than to the workplace where they can be intercepted or altered. Yet,
Zeune frequently encounters resistance from companies-especially
smaller businesses-who commonly state they don't have the money to
invest in good shrink control systems. But he's not buying it. He
says it's not about money, it's about fear: many company or business
owners or managers would rather take the risk of a long-time
employee stealing them blind than making changes that might hurt the
employee's feelings or make him/her feel not fully trusted.
Like
the 12-Step group Serenity prayer asserts: We may not be able to
control the culture of honesty in the world around us or what hidden
attitudes our employees have adopted; we can, however, control the
culture of our company by modeling honesty, integrity and treating
people with dignity by "trusting and verifying" and doing
our best to walk that fine line between micromanaging and
carelessness.
"Honesty
is its own reward" is an old saying and many of us were brought
up believing this. Then something went awry. If honesty was so
great, how come there were lies and secrets? The good guys didn't
always finish first. At some point most of us learn not to be so
naive about life. We learn things aren't always one or two dimensional.
Rules, laws, commandments, and guidelines are meant to give us some
direction and assistance. But giving up on honesty is a dangerous
decision. Honesty promotes: trust, self-esteem, being given
responsibilities, good relationships, admiration and respect,
spiritual connectedness, serenity, and others being honest with you!
Read
article below for another perspective on loss prevention:
LULULEMON ATHLETIC-WEAR EMBRACES
NOVEL APPROACH TO LOSS PREVENTION
Excerpted
from an article in March 2013 Loss Prevention magazine, written by
lululemon loss prevention heads Erik Newcomb and Rich Groner.
lululemon
athletica is a yoga-inspired athletic
apparel company headquartered in Vancouver, British Columbia. We
operate two brands, 226 stores, and forty-four showrooms in Canada,
the U.S., Hong Kong, Australia, New Zealand, and the U.K. Through
these retail outlets we aim to create components for people to live
long, healthy, and fun lives, and by doing so, keep people active
and stress-free. Our product focuses on technical fabrics and
functional designs, and we work with yogis and athletes in local
communities for continuous research and product feedback.
As
a culture, we are a group of people who seek to elevate the world
from a place of mediocrity to greatness. We do this through
conscious effort and clear purpose, understanding that people in the
world reach a place of greatness through creating their ideal lives
in living a life they love. Our aim is to provide tools for people
to achieve that life. We also believe in the inherent goodness of
people, and that great people attract other great people through the
law of attraction. We celebrate gratitude. We believe in yoga.
Our
loss prevention philosophy is founded in the roots of Yoga, in the
Sanskrit word "Asteya" (pronounced ah-STAY-ya), which
translates from Sanskrit to "non-stealing." While this
concept can apply directly to merchandise in our stores, its broader
and more powerful meaning deals with the way you relate to other
people in your life. It is a daily practice. It is a way to being.
It is a guiding alignment that all our decisions refer back to. But
before getting into the details of how this works in a practical
way, let's take a step back and look at how we got here.
Where
We Started
The
asset protection department within lululemon began in a form that
mirrored some of the basic approaches that many loss prevention
departments use-theft prevention and shrink reduction through a
combination of inventory result analysis, audits, internal and
external theft deterrents, and a heavy policy and procedures
framework. This approach was originally established and deployed at
the corporate level with limited field resources and headcount. At
the time we lacked budget, we were not fully plugged into the
business strategy and decision-making process, and people had a
misunderstanding of what we did.
The
intent and tone of our original program contained a list of what to
do, how to do it, and what would happen to you if you did something
you weren't supposed to do. But as we thought about this structure,
the questions arose-what message does this send to the employee
being trained? Are we trying to scare people? Does this message
really speak to the majority of our people? To this newly hired
employee, what is her initial impression of how the AP department
feels about her? Are we assuming from the first day that she will
steal if given the right opportunity? If so, what does that cost
us...the AP department and the company...in our relationship with
her? Do we build rapport or create alienation?
In
reflection, we had a message that was geared toward the dishonest
actions of a very small minority of our people, yet was being
broadcast to all of our people company wide. It was a message that
wasn't always relevant. In our culture of entrepreneurial store
managers, it was often ignored or quickly dismissed.
Our
first attempts at creating a new loss prevention awareness program
at lululemon were met with varying degrees of success. We tried to
tie the new program more closely to our corporate culture by simply
masking and reformatting our existing program and giving it a new
name that literally included the word culture-the "Asset
Protection Culture and Resource Guide."
We
also partnered with a third-party solution provider to handle all
investigations and audits. Our new approach was still heavily based
on audit, policy and procedure, and it failed. It was still a
message that was directed at those who might steal and, because this
message was sent to everyone through our training, it treated
everyone as that potential thief. At the end of the day we saw the
traditional loss prevention norms, both philosophical and practical,
were having an oil-and-water relationship within our organization.
As an already small department within the company, we risked being
further perceived as irrelevant to key business partners if we
didn't drastically adjust.
Our
revised goal was to bridge the gap between what was the AP culture
and what is the company culture. There needed to be shift, a
complete disruption of what we held as "true facts" about
how AP should work in a retail environment. We asked ourselves if we
could create a message that spoke to all of our people. Instead of
directing our AP training at the relatively small population that is
likely to steal, what
if we created a message that engaged all of our employees and came
from a place of encouragement? What if we tapped into the inherent
goodness that is already in our people and our corporate culture?
More importantly, do we have the confidence to give up seeking more
control over our stores and people through policy and procedure? And
what if we looked to lower shrink through analyzing and elevating
the behavior of our people?
Through
this reexamination, we rejected the idea that the best way to lower
shrink was through control; the idea that enforcement was key. We
rejected the idea that we were inevitably surrounded by people
stealing from us. Instead, we embraced the fact that we work with
incredible people and love our business partners. We believe that
people are inherently good, and we treat them as such.
There
is tremendous power in the idea that you're in a relationship with
people who live in honesty and are in the business of elevating the
world around them. What all this comes down to is a focus on the
behaviors that are driving individual action, both good and bad,
rather than on the actions themselves. What if we can identify,
coach, develop, and support situations that arise in the behavioral
stage, rather than letting poor behavior progress to fruition and
result in a potentially negative or dishonest action?
These
questions and realizations were at the forefront of our minds as we
developed the current AP strategy at lululemon. In order to drive
this message, to bring our company culture and our ideas around
behavior together, our AP department searched through the roots of
our business and the roots of yoga. We found a message in which we
could believe. We found "Asteya" and adopted is as our
company philosophy and theme for a culture of honesty and integrity.
What
Is Asteya?
Within
the practice of yoga, there is the concept of the "Eight
Limbs," or paths, to pursue a happy and balanced life. The
Limbs give a framework for people to follow a tested structure for
living a life you can love. One of those Limbs is known as the
"Yamas," or the moral restraints. Asteya is one of the
five Yamas; again the literal translation from the Sanskrit language
is "non-stealing" or "non-coveting."
The
connection from the concept of non-stealing to loss prevention seems
simple and straight forward. We talk about Asteya because we don't
want our people to steal, thus causing shrink. But this is only a
narrow interpretation of the concept, and it goes much farther than
simply "don't steal from the company." Asteya is a way of
being. It is a daily practice, and we always want to elevate
ourselves and those around us and show people how to powerfully
impact their lives.
We
teach our stores that Asteya is a concept to find alignment with,
not prescriptive rules or regulations on your actions. You want to
set the idea of Asteya as an intention and then recognize when
you're out of character or out of integrity with that original
intention and how it potentially impacts your behavior and decision
making.
Thousands
of years ago, the idea of non-stealing encompassed both tangible and
non-tangible objects; all still things people have rights around.
This concept could include someone's time, someone's joy, an idea
that someone has, or something as simple as the space in a
conversation for someone else to speak up. Asteya talks about refraining
from taking something that was not freely given to us, and
emphasizes manifesting material things through honest and respectful
means (through the law of attraction). We learn through Asteya that
everything we need in life is already within us. When we govern
ourselves through the practice of Asteya, we will enhance our
culture of honesty and integrity; thus naturally achieving our asset
protection goals.
Examples
of Non-stealing
Let's
examine some possible applications of Asteya beyond non-stealing of
money and merchandise.
Consider
this example of respecting people's non-tangible objects. If you're
working on a project with a coworker, and you later claim an idea
from that project as your idea, when it was actually the other
person's, we would say that your actions are out of integrity and
alignment with Asteya. By "stealing" the credit the other
person is due, you are failing to recognize what they have earned,
and you are taking more than you have earned out of that
relationship.
Another
example may be illustrative of respecting what you have earned in
your own life. Imagine that you're in a yoga class, and in front of
you there is someone performing a difficult inverted posture,
balancing on one arm, no sweat, and she looks calm and serene. You
have been practicing this same pose for weeks, yet you know that you
can't do that yourself, even after all of your effort. There are two
ways you can react, internally, to what you're experiencing. First,
many people would approach it with a sense of frustration or
entitlement. As in, "I'm so jealous right now. It's not fair.
I've been going to this class longer and have worked harder. That
person just started and can already achieve that pose." What
if, instead, you approach it through a lens of Asteya and gratitude?
You say to yourself, "I haven't earned that pose yet. I need to
accomplish X,Y, and Z in my own practice before I can properly
achieve that pose, and when I do I will feel even more fulfilled
because I have earned it on my own and through my effort." In
this second approach, you recognize that the reward is not the pose
itself, but the effort and dedication that it took to get there.
The
concept is first outlined for our employees in their orientation
period. Then, when our AP personnel visit stores, we emphasize this
message in training sessions on the floor through small examples, or
though experiments that help our people examine their actions and
behaviors. By showing people how Asteya actively fits into the
framework of their personal experience, we can encourage people to
begin to use it as a guiding principle in their lives.
Once
people are enrolled in what we're trying to achieve, and see the
benefits it brings to their life, you can expand the depth of their
knowledge and curiosity by challenging them to think critically
about applications of concepts in the work setting, rather than
asking them to repeat procedural dogma.
Working
with the Inherent Goodness of People
We
believe in the inherent goodness of people, and this guides our
behavior toward people. So, let's look at two ways to alter
undesirable behavior in others-(one) punishing undesired behavior
versus (two) celebrating a behavior that pulls in an opposite
direction of the undesired behavior.
With
the first approach, you are creating a fear of an action and an
associated punishment. And while this can correct behavior in an
individual instant, does it have a long-term effect? Also, consider
the cost to the department when AP is issuing the punishment or
correction. The department is associated with that punishment, which
can create an adversarial relationship between the store operators
and field AP team.
Consider
the second alternative approach. What if we can remove negative
behavior...everything from missing signatures on bank bags to
internal theft...by simply recognizing great behavior and
encouraging more of it? What kind of atmosphere does that create?
We
know that it's possible, and in addition to aligning with Asteya, we
teach the "Attitude of Gratitude" to accomplish it.
The
Attitude of Gratitude vs. Entitlement
In
addition to our culture of Asetya, we examine at a behavioral level
the impact of the positive emotion of gratitude versus the negative
emotion of entitlement, and their respective impacts on the age-old
industry challenge of stopping theft. Can reinforcing positive
behavior replace "control" over employees or scare tactics?
How can we talk to employees about theft in a way that excites them?
To
stop theft through behavior you have to examine what is the core
behavior inherent in the act of stealing and negate it. If you think
about any sort of stealing-a kid stealing candy, a teenager stealing
a DVD, an adult committing insurance fraud-all of these actions have
entitlement at their core. In some way, each of these scenarios has
a person who feels they deserve something they have not earned.
Entitlement is at the core of theft behavior, and the
acknowledgement of this is central to our training philosophy.
To
reduce entitlement we can't simply go around and yell at people to
stop being entitled; that only serves to put people in a defensive
mindset and builds animosity. If you want to get rid of entitlement,
you need to establish a culture that holds an opposite emotion as a
core value. That's where gratitude comes in.
Gratitude
is a celebration of what you have, not what you want. Gratitude is
thankfulness for what is in your life and is a focus inward toward
that which is present. Gratitude is abundance, wholeness. Gratitude
is recognition of the fact that everything you currently have is
exactly what you need to accomplish whatever it is you're after.
Gratitude is the absence of expectation.
You
can only hold on to one emotion at a time. If you set your intention
toward gratitude, it will pull you away from entitlement. It is
impossible to live in the entitled mindset if you truly have decided
that gratitude is a core value for yourself.
A
dedication to a grateful life doesn't mean you'll never find
yourself in a place of entitlement, and it is important to realize
this. You don't need to be afraid of entitlement; you simply need to
be able to recognize when you are in that state. For example, is my
anger with traffic because I feel entitled to having my own lane
when everyone else has to get to work, too? The great thing about
recognizing the state of entitlement is that through that
recognition you pull yourself out from it. Part of the definition of
entitlement is that you do not realize you're acting entitled. If
you recognize it, you're out of it and can move back to your
dedication to a grateful life.
Here's
the great thing about focusing an asset protection department around
training gratitude-related concepts-it's fun, it's inspirational.
People genuinely enjoy setting aspirational personal goals and
living a life that is full of gratitude. Need convincing? Imagine
you're working in a store or office with thirty other people. What
does that environment look like if everyone is living in
entitlement? Do you want to be there? Now, what does that same place
look like if everyone is committed to gratitude? What else is now
possible that wasn't when everyone was living in entitlement?
We
know entitlement and difficulties will naturally arise in people's
lives. Knowing that, our goal is to create a culture of gratitude
(which starts with the law of attraction and attracting inherently
good people to the brand in the first place), so that when those
negative feelings arise, we leverage the inherent goodness within
our people and naturally offset the behavior before it turns into
action. Think of a teeter-totter where entitlement is never strong
enough to offset the gratitude, or a glass ceiling where as
entitlement climbs, it bumps into the glass ceiling of gratitude and
can no longer proceed, thus not transforming into negative or
dishonest actions.
Behavior
Is Proactive Theft Prevention
People
who steal have to come up with an internal rationalization for why
it is okay for them to steal. This rationalization is based in
entitlement. Entitlement will show up as a behavior, or as an
emotion in someone who is going to steal, long before they commit
the crime. You can't flip on an entitled mindset, steal something,
and then turn it off. It is an emotion that lives deep inside and
seeps out in small, but noticeable ways.
If
you talk with a manager who has had an employee steal from them, one
would bet that manager will be able to pinpoint where the dishonest
employee acted from a place of entitlement long before the theft was
discovered. Was it frustration? Was it anger? Was it a sense of
deserving that manifested itself into many noticeable behavioral
traits in the workplace?
Teaching
our store managers to look for entitled behavior is an incredible
tool in reducing internal theft, but you can't do this because you
want to prevent internal theft. To be effective, the training has to
come from a place of authentic interest in gratitude and what it can
accomplish for people. From this place people will happily adopt it
as a life stance, and when someone is in that grateful stance of
life, entitled behavior in others becomes unacceptable and
immediately apparent.
When
these behaviors become apparent, ideally we can identify, support,
and fix things in a behavioral place before they turn into action
that has repercussion to both the individual and the company. Let's
say someone is consistently late to work. Many organizations might
issue a written warning saying "don't be late again or else
[blank]."
Within
the context of Asteya and the attitude of gratitude, we ask the
question, "What is the behavioral reason why this person is
arriving late?" Somewhere in their own rationalization they are
making the internal decision that it is okay to be late over and
over again. Do they have a sense of entitlement that says,
"It's only retail, so I can be late." Or maybe "I
stayed late yesterday and worked overtime when I wasn't supposed to,
so I'm going to come in late today." Maybe its the frustration
of "I didn't get that promotion, so I'm going to show them and
just come in when I feel like it."
In
any of these scenarios, the employee has created a real
rationalization in their mind that says it's okay to be late. At
this behavioral point of inception, it is neither right nor wrong;
it is real in the moment for that employee. Our goal is for managers
to identify when someone is out of their normal character. To
identify when the behavior is off, and then seek to understand why.
Why do they think this way? What can we do to help, support, and
develop this situation to a better outcome, rather than have it
potentially turn into a negative situation?
The
same can be applied to external theft (shoplifting). The challenge
in which we enroll our managers includes how do we spread gratitude
to all of our guests? How do we create such a fun kitchen-party type
feel in each store where it creates such positive individual
attention and personal connection to the brand that guests would
never want to steal from lululemon in the first place? Can we create
this sense of gratitude for the brand in the majority of the guests
and our communities because of what it offers to them in their personal
lives, which is far more reaching than simply the clothes we sell?
A
Consistent Way of Being
In
the end the only way this training will work is if it is consistent
with what people are already inclined to believe, what they support
in the lives of others, and something they are interested in
learning more about. As trainers, we have to realize this, and act
accordingly.
For
us at lululemon, this whole process starts with what we call the
"Law of Attraction." The law of attraction isn't a loss
prevention concept, but a core belief of the company. It operates at
every level of hiring, training, identifying business partners, and
community involvement. With the law of attraction, we believe that
great people attract other great people, and it is imperative that
you actively pursue the goal of surrounding yourself with amazing
people who inspire you to better yourself. Consider this-what does
it look like if you don't hire someone because she fits a position
or a list of qualifications, but hire someone with an inherent
characteristic that inspires you to greatness? This chain of
practice is core to our business and creates the environment that
allows our culture to thrive.
The
development of ethical behavior as a business model starts with this
law of attraction and flows through all subsequent training and goal
setting. It is a model of setting an intention in a positive
direction and letting that intention guide all future actions. This
allows the inherent goodness of our people to spill forth, and this
is displayed every day through their thoughts and actions.
Asteya
is a channel for this thought and action, reinforcement to an
original intention. Asteya is a framework placed over the behavior
our people already recognize as the proper course of action. Through
the practice of Asteya, through its framework, we can naturally
achieve our asset protection goals.
See: www.lululemon.com
NEW CHANGES
IN DSM-V (OUT NOW!)
On
December 1, 2012, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) board
of trustees approved the final diagnostic criteria for the fifth
edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Disorders, commonly referred to as the DSM-V. Set to be released in
the spring of 2013, the DSM-V includes some significant and
impactful changes.
New
Diagnoses
Binge
Eating Disorder: Characterized by
recurrent binge eating without "inappropriate compensatory
behaviors and/or extreme dietary restraint" as common in
bulimia nervosa.
Disruptive
Mood Dysregulation Disorder: Describes
children with severe outbursts or tantrums and a prolonged irritable
mood. The diagnosis was included to capture children misdiagnosed
with Bipolar Disorder and ADHD.
Excoriation
Disorder: Compulsive skin picking of
various parts of the body with no apparent cause or underlying
condition. The disorder often escalates into neurotic excoriation in
which the urge to scratch or pick becomes unbearable.
Hoarding
Disorder: Previously classified as a
subtype of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, hoarding now has its own
independent diagnosis due to its unique symptoms and effects.
Changes
Autism
Spectrum Disorder: Likely the largest
overhaul of a single diagnosis, Autism Spectrum Disorder has been
changed to include Asperger's Syndrome (now referred to as a form of
high functioning autism).
Childhood
Disintegrative Disorder (characterized by
normal development until age 3 or 4 and then the sudden onset of
symptoms, including the loss of language, motor, and social skills).
Pervasive
Developmental Disorder (a broad term
pertaining to delays in basic functions). Further classification
will be made for each individual diagnosed under the Autism Spectrum
Disorder with regards to severity and the amount of support needed.
Rejections
Anxiety
Depressive-Syndrome, Attenuated
Psychosis, Hypersexual Disorder (Sex Addiction), Parental
Alienation Syndrome and Sensory Processing Disorder were
among the proposed and subsequently rejected diagnoses.
Other
Notable Changes
Removal
of multiaxial system: The overall
structure of the DSM will be altered with the removal of the 5 axes
system. The new DSM-V will instead present a simplified list of 20
chapters by grouping related disorders.
Honesty
is its own reward.--Anonymous
Walk
in peace.
|
