危險(xiǎn)的道德優(yōu)越感

Many of us think we are harder working, more intelligent and better drivers than the average person. We also think we are morally superior. A 2014 study found that even convicted prisoners thought they were morally better — not just than the average prisoner but than the average person outside.

我們當(dāng)中有很多人認(rèn)為自己比一般人更努力、更聰明而且駕駛技術(shù)更嫻熟。我們還認(rèn)為，自己在道德上更勝一籌。2014年的一項(xiàng)研究發(fā)現(xiàn)，就連被判有罪的囚犯都認(rèn)為自己在道德上更優(yōu)秀，不僅好于一般的囚犯，還超過(guò)監(jiān)獄外的一般人。

The study, at a prison in the south of England, asked inmates to rate themselves against the average prisoner and the average member of the community for traits such as morality, kindness, honesty, self-control and being law-abiding.

這項(xiàng)研究是在英格蘭南部的一所監(jiān)獄展開(kāi)的，它請(qǐng)囚犯?jìng)冊(cè)诘赖?、善良、誠(chéng)實(shí)、自控和遵紀(jì)守法等特質(zhì)方面，把自己與普通囚犯和普通社區(qū)成員進(jìn)行比較。

Although the convicts were serving sentences for violence, robbery, drug offences and burglary, they rated themselves as virtuous. Only on one trait did they think they were not superior to the average non-prisoner: being law-abiding. They felt they and people outside were equally law-abiding.

盡管這些罪犯正因暴力、搶劫、吸毒和盜竊服刑，但他們認(rèn)為自己是品行端正的。他們只在一種特質(zhì)上不認(rèn)為自己優(yōu)于那些沒(méi)有犯法的普通人：遵紀(jì)守法。他們認(rèn)為，自己和監(jiān)獄外的人一樣守法。

Now a new study in the Social Psychological and Personality Science journal has shown that people, this time in the non-prison population, think they are more just and virtuous than average. But it goes on to pose an interesting question: can people’s sense of moral superiority lead them to behave dishonestly?

現(xiàn)在，《社會(huì)心理和人格科學(xué)》(Social Psychological and Personality Science)期刊發(fā)表的一項(xiàng)新研究顯示，人們(這次是監(jiān)獄外的人群)認(rèn)為，他們比一般人更公正和品德高尚。但這篇論文接著提出了一個(gè)有趣的問(wèn)題：人們的道德優(yōu)越感會(huì)不會(huì)導(dǎo)致他們做出不誠(chéng)實(shí)的行為?

The researchers, Ben Tappin and Ryan McKay of Royal Holloway, University of London, say previous studies provide competing answers on this issue. Some research has found that the illusion of moral superiority can lead people to behave badly because, like the prisoners in the first study, they think they really are, deep down, good people. Other research shows that “to the extent that people value belief-behaviour consistency”, people who think they are honest behave honestly.

倫敦大學(xué)(University of London)皇家霍洛威學(xué)院(Royal Holloway)的研究員本•塔平(Ben Tappin)和瑞恩•麥凱(Ryan McKay)表示，之前的研究就這個(gè)問(wèn)題給出了相互對(duì)立的答案。一些研究發(fā)現(xiàn)，道德優(yōu)越感的幻覺(jué)可能導(dǎo)致人們做出糟糕的行為，因?yàn)榕c第一項(xiàng)研究中的囚犯一樣，他們認(rèn)為，自己在內(nèi)心深處真的是好人。還有一些研究表明，“從人們重視言行一致的角度來(lái)說(shuō)”，那些認(rèn)為自己誠(chéng)實(shí)的人會(huì)做出誠(chéng)實(shí)的行為。

“We defer to future research to test these hypotheses,” the Royal Holloway study says. I was, however, struck by the first hypothesis because I thought it might explain a puzzle: why do companies that believe themselves to be ethically virtuous find themselves doing unvirtuous things?

皇家霍洛威學(xué)院的研究稱：“我們交給未來(lái)的研究來(lái)測(cè)試這些假說(shuō)。”然而，第一種假說(shuō)讓我印象深刻，因?yàn)槲艺J(rèn)為，它或許可以解釋一個(gè)謎題：為什么認(rèn)為自己注重道德的企業(yè)，會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)自己做著不高尚的事情?

Two examples are the banks HSBC and Wells Fargo, which have both found themselves in trouble. Last year, HSBC confessed that the tax evasion scandal at its Swiss private banking arm was a “source of shame”. The scandal was all the more striking because Stephen Green, HSBC’s previous boss, had written a book called Good Value: Reflections on Money, Morality and an Uncertain World.

兩個(gè)例子是匯豐銀行(HSBC)和富國(guó)銀行(Wells Fargo)，它們都發(fā)現(xiàn)自己陷入了麻煩。去年，匯豐坦承，其瑞士私人銀行的逃稅丑聞是“羞恥之源”。這樁丑聞更加引人關(guān)注的原因是匯豐前任首席執(zhí)行官葛霖(Stephen Green，見(jiàn)上圖)曾寫過(guò)一本名為《優(yōu)秀價(jià)值觀：反思金錢、道德和不確定世界》(Good Value: Reflections on Money, Morality and an Uncertain World)的著作。

Wells Fargo admitted this year that its staff had tried to meet their sales targets by setting up accounts for customers without their consent. Warren Buffett, head of Berkshire Hathaway, Wells Fargo’s biggest shareholder, described it as “a great bank that made a terrible mistake”.

富國(guó)銀行今年承認(rèn)，其員工曾試圖在客戶不知情的情況下為客戶開(kāi)立賬戶，以達(dá)到自己的銷售目標(biāo)。富國(guó)銀行最大股東伯克希爾哈撒韋公司(Berkshire Hathaway)掌門人沃倫•巴菲特(Warren Buffett)稱其為“一家犯下嚴(yán)重錯(cuò)誤的偉大銀行”。

There are possible explanations for these falls from grace. HSBC had acquired its Swiss bank and said it had not integrated it properly. Wells Fargo appeared to be a classic case of financial incentives distorting employees’ behaviour.

這些墮落故事可能有一些合乎情理的解釋。匯豐收購(gòu)了其瑞士銀行，但該行表示沒(méi)有整合好。富國(guó)銀行似乎是金錢激勵(lì)扭曲員工行為的典型案例。

But I wondered about the “better than average” research cited above. Could the illusion of moral superiority apply to organisations as well as individuals? And could companies believe they were so superior morally that the occasional lapse into immorality did not matter much? The Royal Holloway researchers said they had recently conducted experiments examining just these issues and were preparing to publish the results. They had found that political groups with a sense of moral superiority felt justified in behaving aggressively towards opponents. In experiments, this meant denying them a monetary benefit.

但上面提到的“好于一般人”的研究讓我感到好奇。道德優(yōu)越感的幻覺(jué)是否既適用于個(gè)人也適用于公司?公司是否有可能認(rèn)為，自己在道德上優(yōu)于其他企業(yè)，因此偶爾的故態(tài)復(fù)萌并不重要?皇家霍洛威學(xué)院的研究人員表示，他們最近做了一些實(shí)驗(yàn)，考察了這些問(wèn)題，并準(zhǔn)備發(fā)表結(jié)果。他們發(fā)現(xiàn)，具有道德優(yōu)越感的政治集團(tuán)認(rèn)為自己有理由對(duì)對(duì)手做出咄咄逼人的行為。在實(shí)驗(yàn)中，這意味著不讓對(duì)手獲得金錢利益。

“It isn’t difficult to imagine a similar scenario arising in a competitive organisational context. To the extent that employees may perceive their organisation to be morally superior to other organisations, they might feel licensed to ‘cut corners’ or behave somewhat unethically — for example, to give their organisation a competitive edge.

“在競(jìng)爭(zhēng)性的組織背景下想象一副類似的場(chǎng)景并不困難。就員工可能認(rèn)為自己所在公司在道德上優(yōu)于其他公司而言，他們可能認(rèn)為自己有權(quán)‘走捷徑’或做出某種不道德行為，例如，為了讓自己的公司獲得一種競(jìng)爭(zhēng)優(yōu)勢(shì)。”

“These behaviours may be perceived as justified . . . or even ethical, insofar as they promote the goals of their morally superior organisation,” they told me.

這些研究人員告訴我：“這些行為可能被視為合情合理……甚至合乎道德，因?yàn)檫@些行為有利于實(shí)現(xiàn)他們所在的道德優(yōu)越公司的目標(biāo)。”

In explaining its behaviour, HSBC suggested that inquiring too closely into its customers’ tax affairs might have led to them taking their business elsewhere. The Wells Fargo incentives were originally put in place to drive the opening of new accounts, which would have given the bank an advantage over its competitors.

匯豐在解釋其行為時(shí)暗示，過(guò)多地詢問(wèn)其客戶的稅收事宜可能會(huì)讓客戶把業(yè)務(wù)轉(zhuǎn)往其他銀行。富國(guó)銀行的激勵(lì)舉措最初是為了推動(dòng)開(kāi)設(shè)新賬戶，這原本會(huì)賦予該行相對(duì)于競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手的優(yōu)勢(shì)。

What both cases show is that the illusion of moral superiority can be dangerous. A company that believes it embodies ethical virtue can develop blindness to its lapses. It can begin to think that, as it is a force for good in the world, anything that it does to advance itself must be good, too.

這兩個(gè)案例表明，道德優(yōu)越感的幻覺(jué)可能是危險(xiǎn)的。認(rèn)為自己體現(xiàn)高尚道德的公司，可能會(huì)無(wú)視其過(guò)失。它可能會(huì)開(kāi)始認(rèn)為，既然自己是世界上的仁義力量，任何增進(jìn)自己利益的行為都必定是善舉。

When it emerges that outsiders, or regulators, do not see it that way, the institutions and their supporters often conclude that this is a rare deviation from goodness. It may be, but the damage can be far-reaching and long-lasting. Maintaining a corporate reputation is a daily task, however virtuous you think you are.

當(dāng)外部人士或監(jiān)管者不這么認(rèn)為時(shí)，這些公司及其支持者往往會(huì)總結(jié)稱，那是罕見(jiàn)的偏離善舉的行為。或許是這樣，但其損害可能是深遠(yuǎn)和長(zhǎng)久的。維護(hù)公司的聲譽(yù)是一項(xiàng)日常任務(wù)，不管你認(rèn)為它的品德有多么高尚。