????20世紀(jì)80年代中期華爾街內(nèi)幕交易丑聞的主角丹尼斯?利文多年前被判提供社區(qū)服務(wù)的時(shí)候，曾經(jīng)給紐約大學(xué)（NYU）MBA學(xué)生講授過倫理課。他形容促使自己進(jìn)行內(nèi)幕交易的是一種“下一把必須要翻本”的心態(tài)，這時(shí)候人都是在跟自己較勁，努力爭(zhēng)取下一場(chǎng)的勝利，永不滿足。

????除了個(gè)人心態(tài)，他的解釋也適用于整體公司文化，比如被指有意向公眾隱瞞虧損的明富環(huán)球（MF Global）和奧林巴斯（Olympus）。

????但利文并未說明人為什么永遠(yuǎn)不會(huì)滿足。隱瞞經(jīng)濟(jì)損失的動(dòng)機(jī)背后是什么？為什么個(gè)人（或公司）總是不撞南墻不回頭？

????奧林巴斯發(fā)生的一切被歸咎于順從文化、“爛到心”的管理團(tuán)隊(duì)以及由“好好先生”構(gòu)成的董事會(huì)。明富環(huán)球破產(chǎn)的原因則被解釋為掌門人喬恩?科爾津的狂妄自大。但如果我們仔細(xì)分析科爾津、奧林巴斯董事和高管們的動(dòng)機(jī)，我們會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)自己身上也有這些人的影子。

????幾乎任何一個(gè)負(fù)責(zé)任的董事會(huì)成員都會(huì)告訴你，企業(yè)文化的責(zé)任感或通常被稱為“高層的基調(diào)”始于董事會(huì)。負(fù)責(zé)任的董事會(huì)成員會(huì)監(jiān)督首席執(zhí)行官和公司文化；他們會(huì)通過社交場(chǎng)合、實(shí)地考察、單獨(dú)會(huì)談以及定期的董事會(huì)和委員會(huì)會(huì)議，與首席執(zhí)行官及管理團(tuán)隊(duì)其他成員交流。他們不僅僅只是聽聽高管們演講時(shí)的高談闊論就了事，他們還會(huì)解讀肢體語言、觀察互動(dòng)和評(píng)判能力。他們會(huì)查看舉報(bào)信息、客戶熱線接入記錄、員工調(diào)查、表現(xiàn)評(píng)估和薪酬決定。他們會(huì)仔細(xì)而系統(tǒng)地衡量公司對(duì)正常意見分歧的容忍程度，以及在探討嚴(yán)峻的現(xiàn)實(shí)和不完美解決方案時(shí)所表現(xiàn)的開放性。

????這項(xiàng)工作不僅對(duì)公司最高層意義重大，對(duì)于公司上上下下也同樣如此。為什么？因?yàn)橐患夜緝?nèi)部也可能有多種文化，考慮過調(diào)換部門的員工肯定對(duì)此都深有體會(huì)。

????不管處于哪一層級(jí)，只要身為管理層的一員，都應(yīng)當(dāng)運(yùn)用優(yōu)秀的董事會(huì)所采用的方法來對(duì)管轄的部門文化進(jìn)行監(jiān)督。而且，對(duì)人性（包括自己）的洞察也能幫助你決定該關(guān)注什么。

????Dennis Levine, who lectured an NYU MBA ethics class as part of his community service many years ago, described the mentality that led to his insider trading conviction as a mentality of having to win the next game, competing with oneself for the next victory, where enough was never enough.

????His explanation is applicable to both individuals and entire corporate cultures, such as MF Global (MFGLQ) and Olympus, where losses were allegedly buried from public view on purpose.

????But Levine's explanation doesn't address why enough is never enough. What underlies the motivations to hide losses? And why does it often take a very rude awakening for a person (or a company) to change?

????What has befallen Olympus has been chalked up to an obedience culture, a management team that was "rotten at the core," and a board "of yes men." MF Global's case has been explained away by Jon Corzine's hubris. But if we examine, rather than impugn, Corzine's motives and those of the board and executives at Olympus, we will realize how these individuals' actions relate to you and me.

????As almost any good board member will tell you, the responsibility for corporate culture, or what is commonly referred to as "tone at the top," begins with the board. Good board members monitor the CEO and corporate culture by meeting not only with the CEO but also with other members of a company's management team in social settings, on site visits, in executive sessions without other members of management present, and in regular board and committee meetings. They don't just listen to management speeches: they read body language, observe interactions, and view facilities. They look at the contents of whistle-blower and customer hotline call-in logs, employee surveys, performance evaluations, and compensation decisions. They carefully and systematically gauge the level of healthy dissent and openness to discuss troubling situations and imperfect solutions.

????This is critical work at the top of a company but necessary throughout it as well. Why? Because there can be many cultures inside one company, a fact that anyone who has considered transferring from one department to another well recognizes.

????No matter where in the hierarchy you sit, if you are a member of management, you too should be monitoring the culture of the groups that report to you using the techniques that great boards use. And some insights into individual human personality, including your own, can help you decide what to look for.