How many folks have been asked to falsify or has been faced with dilemma of falsifying inspection results? How did you deal with it? Is this a normal thing QA folks have to deal with?

I am not having an issue with my current company, but I have ran into the problems in the past. I worked at a company in So Cal, and one Monday 15 FBI agent stormed the place and took 50 boxes of documents. My boss got busted for falsifying records. I also worked in the aerospace fastener industry, and one of the competitors got busted for having an "Inspector 13" that didn't really exist. I was also interviewing for a job and passed a couple cuts of the process. When I got to interview with the president of the company, I asked point blank what my expectations where when it come to handling nonconforming material, I might have well just walked at that point because the interview was definitely over.

I've never been asked to falsify a record by someone who actually mattered in the scheme of things.

How many folks have been asked to falsify or has been faced with dilemma of falsifying inspection results? How did you deal with it? Is this a normal thing QA folks have to deal with?


Some casual requests - backdating docs at the most - always answered with a "NO". It becomes a slippery slope - "Well you did it for that, why not this?"

Not worth the potential hassles.

If one loses their integrity, they can't get it back. There is no dilemma for me. The answer is "no". Period.

I have the greatest job in the world, with some of the best people. Best of all, I can sleep well every night.

As I muse over margaritas or just plain scotch if I'm too lazy to mix, I try to connect seemingly disparate items about various aspects of business, quality, ethics, human resources, etc. into one "grand unified theory of everything" and then discover Deming was way ahead of me with his deceptively simple "System of Profound Knowledge" (SoPK)

The point, of course, is that when ALL the members of an organization have deep knowledge about the organization, its customers, suppliers, regulators, employees, etc., they also have a pretty good understanding of the ramifications of their actions and there are no longer any gray areas about what's right or wrong.

The direct answer to the original post:
In over 40 years of experience in a variety of industries, I have never known of any business to remain in business (without a drastic change of personnel) for very long once the boss or bosses conspire to lie to and cheat their customers or regulators. The truth will always be found. With this in mind, it is time to revisit this thread:
Ethics - Moral law vs. Criminal law (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=9939&highlight=ethics)

If one loses their integrity, they can't get it back. There is no dilemma for me. The answer is "no". Period.

I have the greatest job in the world, with some of the best people. Best of all, I can sleep well every night.



:applause:
I worked in Quality for almost thirty years, I just told an Engineer last week
that I'd quit before I'd knowing let defective product leave the plant with my stamp on it, no matter who said it was okay.
If they can't respect what you do, find another company that will.

Wes is, as usual, right on the spot. It is short sighted and stupid to tamper with documentation, and it will put you out of business in the end......

I have worked for a company where the Plant Manager thought it was the way to go - thinking only of the bottom line for the current month. Needless to say the plant has been shut down now, and 350 persons lost their job.:( :( :(

He really was an incompetent and pathetic manager :bonk:

I've never been asked to falsify records but, in my 3rd party auditing days, I came across quite a few instances where records were clearly falsified and, in one case, caught a manager in the act of creating them.
It's actually quite an embarrasing situation for the auditor and a lot of care has to be taken writing the non-conformity and ensuring the facts are known and can be proven because the consequences for the guilty party can be severe.

I have never been asked to falsify any type of record. If that ever did happen, I would decline, based upon ethics.

I have been asked to change actual dimensions to meet the specification on first article submissions pacakges. I told the engineer in charge that I would do what ever they asked, as long as they signed the the complete submission package.
They declined. The numbers were submitted as found.

Phil

If one loses their integrity, they can't get it back. There is no dilemma for me. The answer is "no". Period.

A lot of what we QA folks provide in an organization is leadership. When we lose people's trust, we lose our ability to lead. I once heard a story that a man was asked to lie to a customer, the man responded to his boss "If I could lie to them I could lie to you, and I won't do that." When we lie,cheat, talk badly about someone else in front of someone else, we lose credibility with the person we are talking to.

I told the engineer in charge that I would do what ever they asked, as long as they signed the the complete submission package. They declined. Yes... I recognize that. It is what usually happens when the culprit is asked to sign his own twisted truth.

In that situation I will also add that lying is a part of neither my work description, nor my salary.

/Claes

:applause:
I worked in Quality for almost thirty years, I just told an Engineer last week
that I'd quit before I'd knowing let defective product leave the plant with my stamp on it, no matter who said it was okay.
If they can't respect what you do, find another company that will.

I can relate to that, I actually quit a job once because the President asked me to change SPC data on a product to make the CPK better before our customer came in that week, well I turned my resignation in later that same day while he was out playing golf.

"whoever wants to reach a distant goal must take many small steps" Helmut Scmidt.

In my chart-making over the years I have never been overtly asked to falsify data. I will say a few years back it was common to hear "Can't you make this look a little better?". But no, I did not succumb to those pressures.

Regarding my initial post regarding the interview that went bad after I asked about handling nonconforming material, if I would have kept my mouth shut, I could of voted "Way above" on that ASQ Salary Survey. :notme::lmao: :notme: :lmao: :notme:

Also, that boss that got busted for falsifying the records: last thing I heard he did jail time... the company also closed its door 6 months later.

Wes is, as usual, right on the spot. It is short sighted and stupid to tamper with documentation, and it will put you out of business in the end......

I have worked for a company where the Plant Manager thought it was the way to go - thinking only of the bottom line for the current month. Needless to say the plant has been shut down now, and 350 persons lost their job.:( :( :(

He really was an incompetent and pathetic manager :bonk:


I think your comment is so correct. Can we all say "Enron?"

It would be interesting if we could make a list of companies, who used to be successful) but who cheated and are now out of business...it would be an impressive list.

How many folks have been asked to falsify or has been faced with dilemma of falsifying inspection results? How did you deal with it? I've been asked to falsify dimensional results of inspections for PPAP / PSW. When asked to do so I responded that they could be changed if the requestor was willing to sign off on the PSW warrant. I found no takers as most of them recognized the risk was far greater than the reward. Is this a normal thing QA folks have to deal with? In some respects I think it is, althoough I don't think it as prevalant today in Mfg. as 10 to 15 years ago.
I've also been asked to steal, by the theft of another companies intellectual property which had been given to us for making a part, and to coverup a violation of environmental regulations, both of which I refused to do and ended up looking for other employment.

I am not having an issue with my current company, but I have ran into the problems in the past. I worked at a company in So Cal, and one Monday 15 FBI agent stormed the place and took 50 boxes of documents. My boss got busted for falsifying records. I also worked in the aerospace fastener industry, and one of the competitors got busted for having an "Inspector 13" that didn't really exist. I was also interviewing for a job and passed a couple cuts of the process. When I got to interview with the president of the company, I asked point blank what my expectations where when it come to handling nonconforming material, I might have well just walked at that point because the interview was definitely over.

Having read through the posts in this thread and the Ethics - Moral law vs. Criminal law thread WES has given the best advice to anyone who feel's that they have been asked to do something criminal or illegal is to seek the advice of a competent attorney

How many folks have been asked to falsify or has been faced with dilemma of falsifying inspection results? How did you deal with it? Is this a normal thing QA folks have to deal with?

I am not having an issue with my current company, but I have ran into the problems in the past. I worked at a company in So Cal, and one Monday 15 FBI agent stormed the place and took 50 boxes of documents. My boss got busted for falsifying records. I also worked in the aerospace fastener industry, and one of the competitors got busted for having an "Inspector 13" that didn't really exist. I was also interviewing for a job and passed a couple cuts of the process. When I got to interview with the president of the company, I asked point blank what my expectations where when it come to handling nonconforming material, I might have well just walked at that point because the interview was definitely over.

As much as we would all like to believe that the subject of ethics in business is circumscribed by bright lines, the truth is otherwise, I'm afraid. We all have to make decisions in difficult situations sometimes, and it's not always helpful to believe that telling the truth is always the best policy, or that businesses that have institutionalized prevarication are doomed because of it. While it's very true that any edifice built on a foundation of dishonesty is probably not going to survive when the going gets tough, it's also true that in some businesses lying is a way of life, and always has been. Most manufacturing job shops will tell lies in order to get your business, and then when they have it, will lie in order keep it. If you know this, you can deal with it. Lenny Bruce suggested that the key is consistency and said that no one was ever eaten by a cannibal who had claimed to be a vegetarian.

If you feel that being untruthful has the potential to hurt someone, or otherwise result in undesireable consequences, either for you or someone else, then the decision might be easy. But if you're dealing with a customer whose representative is a robotic dolt and believes that you must supply a corrective action report for a nonconformance that most reasonably intelligent dogs would recognize as an insignificant outlier, giving the customer what he wants might reasonably involve making stuff up.

As much as we would all like to believe that the subject of ethics in business is circumscribed by bright lines, the truth is otherwise, I'm afraid. We all have to make decisions in difficult situations sometimes, and it's not always helpful to believe that telling the truth is always the best policy, or that businesses that have institutionalized prevarication are doomed because of it. While it's very true that any edifice built on a foundation of dishonesty is probably not going to survive when the going gets tough, it's also true that in some businesses lying is a way of life, and always has been. Most manufacturing job shops will tell lies in order to get your business, and then when they have it, will lie in order keep it. If you know this, you can deal with it. Lenny Bruce suggested that the key is consistency and said that no one was ever eaten by a cannibal who had claimed to be a vegetarian.

If you feel that being untruthful has the potential to hurt someone, or otherwise result in undesireable consequences, either for you or someone else, then the decision might be easy. But if you're dealing with a customer whose representative is a robotic dolt and believes that you must supply a corrective action report for a nonconformance that most reasonably intelligent dogs would recognize as an insignificant outlier, giving the customer what he wants might reasonably involve making stuff up.

I have to agree with Jim's posting. I learned this in my early years as a tier 1QM (70's) and some of the dolts that made much ado about nothing. Easier to placate and let them show they "straightened out that supplier" instead to fight a battle you might win, but lose the war. Also a visit with little entertaining of golf, dinner, and cigars helped get them on your side. Nobody hurt and no problems created.

If you feel that being untruthful has the potential to hurt someone, or otherwise result in undesireable consequences, either for you or someone else, then the decision might be easy. But if you're dealing with a customer whose representative is a robotic dolt and believes that you must supply a corrective action report for a nonconformance that most reasonably intelligent dogs would recognize as an insignificant outlier, giving the customer what he wants might reasonably involve making stuff up.
Or if you've got kids to feed and clothe you might do whatever you have to to keep your job until you can find a new job.

I was asked once to "doctor" a collective bargaining agreement between my company and the bricklayers union in Frackville PA. I was terminated because I wouldn't have any part of it (of course that wasn't what they put on my termination papers). The GM followed through and signed his name to it. About 6 months later, him and everyone at that company involved in the negotiations was indicted. He went to prison because he was the only one who had the nerve to put his name on the paperwork.

By the way, I was an Internal Financial Auditor for Enron back when they were still HNG Internorth and believe me there was a lot of stuff .....:cool:


Qualitygal

I know for me I will never be a Quality Manager in the aerospace industry. All the examples I sited were aerospace companies. The liability, and the guilt, that would come back on me if a plane fell out of the sky would be more than I could handle.

As much as we would all like to believe that the subject of ethics in business is circumscribed by bright lines, the truth is otherwise, I'm afraid. We all have to make decisions in difficult situations sometimes, and it's not always helpful to believe that telling the truth is always the best policy, or that businesses that have institutionalized prevarication are doomed because of it. While it's very true that any edifice built on a foundation of dishonesty is probably not going to survive when the going gets tough, it's also true that in some businesses lying is a way of life, and always has been. Most manufacturing job shops will tell lies in order to get your business, and then when they have it, will lie in order keep it. If you know this, you can deal with it. Lenny Bruce suggested that the key is consistency and said that no one was ever eaten by a cannibal who had claimed to be a vegetarian.

If you feel that being untruthful has the potential to hurt someone, or otherwise result in undesireable consequences, either for you or someone else, then the decision might be easy. But if you're dealing with a customer whose representative is a robotic dolt and believes that you must supply a corrective action report for a nonconformance that most reasonably intelligent dogs would recognize as an insignificant outlier, giving the customer what he wants might reasonably involve making stuff up.
I don't quite agree on the pervasiveness of outright lying by job shops as much as I agree there are a lot of ignorant folks running and working in job shops who have no clue as to the shop's REAL capability or capacity. For the most part, these are well meaning folks who are deluding themselves even more than their customers about what they can or cannot perform adequately.

I have listened to "old timers" brag how they could hold plus or minus one ten thousandth of a inch tolerance on their B&S lathe. The reality is that NO Brownie could have achieved that tolerance except by pure fluke on one or two pieces.

Maybe some of what Jim labels as "lies" is just "wishful thinking!";)

I have to agree with Jim's posting. I learned this in my early years as a tier 1QM (70's) and some of the dolts that made much ado about nothing. Easier to placate and let them show they "straightened out that supplier" instead to fight a battle you might win, but lose the war. Also a visit with little entertaining of golf, dinner, and cigars helped get them on your side. Nobody hurt and no problems created.

My situation was admittedly different, but in the chart-making world I had many "dolts" who insisted that they wanted pie charts, or moving averages, or "remove those control limits". My response was I'll show you how to make a pie chart or whatever in Excel, but YOU will make said chart, not me.

It was rather humorous - I had one group that absolutely did not want control limits on their charts, but couldn't figure out how to click on the control limit and hit the delete key. They would print out the charts, "white out" the control limits, and post them on the wall. It wasn't like you couldn't tell where the control limit was by the big blob of whiteout . . .:bonk:

But, I believe those days were important to go through. I truly believe that if I had acquiesed, and made the pie charts and what not, we never would have progressed to where we are today.

Also, that boss that got busted for falsifying the records: last thing I heard he did jail time... the company also closed its door 6 months later.Which would affect his salary survey input in a rather abysmal way... Good call on your part.

/Claes

Which would affect his salary survey input in a rather abysmal way... Good call on your part.

/Claes

:lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

Nice one, Claes!

By the way, I was an Internal Financial Auditor for Enron back when they were still HNG Internorth and believe me there was a lot of stuff .....:cool:

Qualitygal

Now therein lies a story ... any more?

As much as we would all like to believe that the subject of ethics in business is circumscribed by bright lines, the truth is otherwise, I'm afraid. We all have to make decisions in difficult situations sometimes, and it's not always helpful to believe that telling the truth is always the best policy, or that businesses that have institutionalized prevarication are doomed because of it. While it's very true that any edifice built on a foundation of dishonesty is probably not going to survive when the going gets tough, it's also true that in some businesses lying is a way of life, and always has been. Most manufacturing job shops will tell lies in order to get your business, and then when they have it, will lie in order keep it. If you know this, you can deal with it. As ever an interesting take on the thread, Jim. :applause:
IMHO it takes the thread from the simple "would you falsify a record?" that Covers have responded with a unanimous "No!" to on to the general topic of business ethics and the "little white lie" that we all know takes place in most companies on a daily basis. (Well, those that advertise, anyway! :lol: )

I have to confess to the little white lie on occasions for expediency but I don't feel good about it and recognize that, although nobody dies, it doesn't do any favours in the long term. The analogy is with Phil Crosby's ZD philosophy - if I allow a concession that becomes the de facto standard and next thing you know the slide downhill starts.

If you feel that being untruthful has the potential to hurt someone, or otherwise result in undesireable consequences, either for you or someone else, then the decision might be easy. But if you're dealing with a customer whose representative is a robotic dolt and believes that you must supply a corrective action report for a nonconformance that most reasonably intelligent dogs would recognize as an insignificant outlier, giving the customer what he wants might reasonably involve making stuff up.

Good point. That is the problem with customers - who would have them! :lmao:

:topic:
Same goes for certification - what about this .... if, as a 3rd party auditor, I raise a non compliance not based around a requirement in the standard - is that a lie?

Or if you've got kids to feed and clothe you might do whatever you have to to keep your job until you can find a new job.

Yes--"baby needs new shoes" can be a powerful motivator.

I don't quite agree on the pervasiveness of outright lying by job shops as much as I agree there are a lot of ignorant folks running and working in job shops who have no clue as to the shop's REAL capability or capacity. For the most part, these are well meaning folks who are deluding themselves even more than their customers about what they can or cannot perform adequately.

You raise an interesting point. It seems to me that the sort of thing you're referring to--"well meaning" dishonesty--is still dishonesty, and the ones who commit it are almost always aware that it's dishonest. I could go on at some length on this subject, but suffice it to say that in job shops, there's a different set of ethics, and although I've come to hate the word, a different sort of paradigm that regulates discourse with the outside world. The percentage of lies being told that are maliciously motivated is tiny enough to be considered almost nonexistent, but the simple fact is that when you enter a job shop, you're just not in Kansas anymore.

Maybe some of what Jim labels as "lies" is just "wishful thinking!"
Delusions, in other words. Maybe some of it is. An interesting and apropos story:

I was hired as quality manager for a machining job shop which had as a customer a former employer of mine. As such, I was well aware of this shop's capabilities before I got there. To be polite, they were not a finesse kind of house--everything was brute force. One day the owner came to me with an RFQ for a part I was well familiar with from my former employer, and it was the very definition of a finesse part. I knew immediately that if the job was accepted, it would be screwed up--nothing good could come of it. I told the owner as much, unambigously. He shrugged it off, saying, "Ah, it doesn't look that hard to do. If we're careful with it, we can do it."

He accepted the job, and there ensued a good three or four months of holy particular he11 in trying to make the part before the owner threw up his hands and gave up, complaining bitterly about how unreasonable the customer was. Wishful thinking? I don't think so, in this case. It was part hubris--not wanting to admit the job was too much for him--and part greed--being constitutionally unable to refuse a new revenue source.

I know for me I will never be a Quality Manager in the aerospace industry. All the examples I sited were aerospace companies. The liability, and the guilt, that would come back on me if a plane fell out of the sky would be more than I could handle.
I've only worked where I work now that handled aerospace products and they would never fake inspection results or anything like that. Even if I have reasons to try to keep my job until I can find another, I would still draw the line at end user safety whether it's a plane or a car. If that problem were ever presented then I would probably consult a lawyer.

I had worked in the automotive industry prior to working here - both production and prototype - where I've fabricated entire SPC charts, Machine Maintenance Logs, Internal Audits and Management Review meetings, for example. Happy about it? No. The two places that made me do this were very short employment periods - I was at one job for 3 months (I found a new job and quit) and the other for 5 months (I ended up being fired from this one because I finally said "no" and got into an argument with one of the owners).

ASIDE: In my present situation, I have never had any situation even close to a dilemma. However, many bridges were crossed before this one.

When I owned my own company doing calibrations, there were all kinds of situations that came up. NOTE: There is a significant, clear difference between ignorance and deception. I had to calibrate things that did not need to be calibrated, simply because people did not understand their process. OK, no problem. I was asked to.. put earlier dates.. and, leave some uncompleted stickers laying around. Too, I was asked to pass things that failed, and strangely enough, failed things that passed (where they could justify buying a new one). The answer every single time was NO!

As I understand it, SOX was implemented to clean up the game, and add a signature from the treasurer on things. Pretend that's true, even if it's not. How will little white lies, however well-intended, dilute the purpose of the legislation?

I'm by no means perfect, and I pass no judgement on anybody. You do what you have to do when you do it. I have NEVER (OK, maybe once or twice when my wife asked if she looked fat in a dress):D came across the situation where it was necessary to compromise my ethics. Have I said lies and such? Sure, I'm not perfect. My point is that there was no need; and usually created more problems than if I had just been truthful.

I would rather work three jobs making lousy money to support my family, than sell my integrity. I could not take my family to church or talk to my kids about right/wrong with a clear conscience knowing that I could not even walk the line.

OJ Simpson, truly/honestly believes he's innocent, and he's going to find the real killer. You tell yourself a lie long enough, you'll begin to believe it.

So, it would be safe to say that falsifying is a dilemma we "can" face. With this I mean more than "creative authoring" done for corrective action responses, but blantant, crossing the line falsification. We all will have our limits of how far we will go before we draw the line.

So how can we prevent ourselves from getting into those companies where falsification will be expected? As I mentioned, I point blank ask during the interview process. But is there a right/wrong way to approach this during an interview? Is it appropriate to make it part of the hiring contract/agreement?

So how can we prevent ourselves from getting into those companies where falsification will be expected? As I mentioned, I point blank ask during the interview process. But is there a right/wrong way to approach this during an interview? Is it appropriate to make it part of the hiring contract/agreement?
Speaking frankly, if I were interviewing someone who asked me if he would be expected to be dishonest I would (A) take offense, and (B) respond by saying that I would expect the interviewee to be able to use sound judgement and common sense in the inevitable situations that present ethical dilemmas.

If you expect bright lines, you face a lifetime of confusion and disappointment.

So how can we prevent ourselves from getting into those companies where falsification will be expected? As I mentioned, I point blank ask during the interview process. But is there a right/wrong way to approach this during an interview? Is it appropriate to make it part of the hiring contract/agreement?

I don't think it appropriate to ask point blank in a hiring interview. Besides, maybe "they" are currently doing it, but if you refuse, it will stop.

My story is this - I was originally hired by Westinghouse as a maintenance supervisor. I got diverted into making SPC charts about 6 months into the job. Two months after this diversion, I got transfered from the maintenance department to the deputy of the VP of the project. My predecessor warned me coming it that the manager had repeatedly directed him to falsify data on charts, and he was pretty well sick of the job. Now, according to some, they would have run away. I stuck with the new position. I will say that although on occasion I got "can't you make this look a little better", I never once was asked to falsify the data. I always stood behind the product (charts) and was able to provide interpretations and what could be done to improve the situation.

Years later, after he was no longer my manager, he did admit he faced some negative repurcussions when he carried forth my charts to the VP.

But my point is - there was a belief by my predecessor that he needed to falsify the charts. And once Pandora's box was opened, he couldn't close it. I never opened the box, and still survived quite well.

Speaking frankly, if I were interviewing someone who asked me if he would be expected to be dishonest I would (A) take offense, and (B) respond by saying that I would expect the interviewee to be able to use sound judgement and common sense in the inevitable situations that present ethical dilemmas.

Jim, I know what you said is the harsh reality. What Steve has said can also be true, when you put your foot down, the expectation can disappear, but this is not always a guarantee. For me though, there are certain things I will not cross the line on. I will not do jail time for anyone or put anyone's life in jeopardy, despite the negative effects on family. I figure that asking during the interview will prevent the "inevitable" unemployment that definitely will arise if I am asked to cross the line. How's this for preventive action? :D I figure this course of action is appropriate to the affects of the potential problems.:D

So, it would be safe to say that falsifying is a dilemma we "can" face. With this I mean more than "creative authoring" done for corrective action responses, but blantant, crossing the line falsification. We all will have our limits of how far we will go before we draw the line.

So how can we prevent ourselves from getting into those companies where falsification will be expected? As I mentioned, I point blank ask during the interview process. But is there a right/wrong way to approach this during an interview? Is it appropriate to make it part of the hiring contract/agreement?

How about this? Ask how the specifications were set in the first place. If you get a "seat of the pants" answer, run like the seat of your pants are on fire. If they talk about statistical tolerancing and such, well...

To follow Craig's post:Sometimes the tolerances have been set by the company making the product, not the customer. It may be that the tolerances were unrealistic in the frist place. I have been involved in situations where we established the tolerances. Specifications were written by the technicial department. I initiated capability studies and we found that the specified tolerances were not realistic in some cases, and could be changed with out affecting product or customer expectations. It could also be that the "rule makers are the rule breakers". If top management wants to change the specifications based upon data and market conditions, then it may seem like an issue to a newbe QC person. When I first started, I thought everything was either black or white. Found out soon there is a lot of gray. I have had Executive Vice Presidents sign a waiver to realease parts I had rejected, several times.
Guess what.. to my surprise the customer did not complain about those "defective" parts. But each case has to be decided on it's own circumstances and the risks involved.

Good points, Ralph. To me, though, there is nothing unethical in your scenarios. If management has a system that allows them to ship products that were defective and documented defective, no problem in my book. Just don't ask me to mark that they are fine. Remember the thread on ISO preparation?

http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=18720&highlight=BradM

How many of you auditors, given the scenario given, think the lead auditor did the right thing? Did he best serve the organization by NOT citing non-conformances that should have been cited?

As far as tolerances, if they are unrealistic, failing them is the best/ quickest way to address that they will not work. Otherwise, everyone thinks things are good to go.

Systems have to have some flexibility. Making decisions that contribute to a less-than-ideal system, ignorance, etc. is a part of life, and something we all have to deal with. But at no time should anyone do something that sells out their integrity. It is not that hard to know to do the right thing. I don't know; I'm beginning to think I live in the surreal world of Myst or something.


If anyone keeps up with House, the current dilemmas faced by the characters bring this close to home.

Interesting thread! I think people reflect, maybe subconsciously, the values of management.
If management is unambiguous about behaviors like harassment and bigotry it doesn't happen as much.
Many years ago when I was a young reliability engineer, precomputer programs, I was working on classified project for a mission critical system for the next generation of fighter planes.
At the kickoff meeting the project manager, a 2 war Marine Corp Officer, WWII and Korea, told us some horror stories about field failures of weapons and equipment that the cost lives of the troops who were depending on them. It had a career long impact on me.
Many times we are the ethical line in the sand. Your reputation is the only thing no one can take away from you by force. You have to give it away.
I remember a very large company was caught using a cheaper fluid to fill gyroscopes for aircraft. They were not rated for the proper operating temperatures. It was a big company decision but it was little guys who took the fall.
I also remember the day the Challenger exploded. The company I worked for at the time had developed and built many of the components on the shuttles.
I remember us all sitting in a room staring at the TV with a sick feeling in our stomachs awaiting each public information release in agony. We did not contribute to the failure but trust me we all felt the pain. Jobs come and go, you only have one conscience and one good name.
Regards,
Mary ( frequently wrong but never in doubt!)

I'm sure by now many of you think my halo is so tight because my head is so swollen.

From an early age I learned there is a difference between a "social courtesy" and an outrght lie. Mostly the social niceties came from mom or fussy aunts who constanty intoned the mantra, "If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all."

Carrying that thought a little further. In an interview situation when applying for a job, both sides are testing each other for a "fit." The candidate wouldn't be there if his resume didn't show promise nor would he come if the organization had a lousy reputation. The interview is the opportunity for both sides to make a good estimate of a long term relationship. Think of it as "first date."

Now, Ive been married so long I've almost fogotten about dating, but I do remember you don't say stuff like, "I hope you are not a gold digger, because I'll drop you in a New York minute." The girl doesn't say, "If you don't make at least $100,000 net after taxes, hit the road."

Ultimatums are so FINAL and they sure do kill a conversational flow. Clever people are more subtle and learn a lot more as a result.

Instead of saying, "You better not ask me to lie or I'll blow the whistle on you." The clever guy might say, "Let me ask you a hypothetical: What would or has happened here at this company when a batch of product ready to ship to a customer is suddenly discovered to be nonconforming according to the specs the customer expected to receive?"

Surprisingly, the answer to such an open ended question will be much more helpful in determning whether this is fated to be a long term or short term relationship. Most liars can give a quick short lie, but often contradict themselves or don't make sense when trying to weave a whole story that hasn't been rehearsed.

For example, I would start edging for the door if the guy begins, "Well, it all depends . . ." and the guy would need some pretty fancy footwork to keep me.

Some guys are clueless idiots. That's different from being a venal liar, but either one can be impossible to work for or with.

Instead of saying, "You better not ask me to lie or I'll blow the whistle on you." The clever guy might say, "Let me ask you a hypothetical: What would or has happened here at this company when a batch of product ready to ship to a customer is suddenly discovered to be nonconforming according to the specs the customer expected to receive?"

Good word! I realize discussing this stuff during an interview is a senstive and volatile issue, but for some of us it is a career limiting problem.

Last year the small company I was proud to work for was taken over by a global corporate entity. During a management meeting we were told by our new General Manager that we are too honest in regrads to costing and quality. I have a real hard time trying to understand this.

In quality all we have is our integrity once breached our word, signature and judgement mean little. I refuse to back date or change data. It should be used only as evidence to prove or disprove an issue. It is usually when people tie emotions into results that problems occur.

If we have chosen this profession then it is out obligation to bring to light problems not hide them. If we are fired for that which we voice then we were not where we needed to be.

I also remember the day the Challenger exploded. The company I worked for at the time had developed and built many of the components on the shuttles.
I remember us all sitting in a room staring at the TV with a sick feeling in our stomachs awaiting each public information release in agony. We did not contribute to the failure but trust me we all felt the pain.

As one old Quality Gal to another, I remember that day too. We were all gathered around a radio listening to the coverage. We also sold components into that Shuttle and we were in agony also. It wasn't us then, and I work every day to be sure it won't be us in the future too.

I have never been asked to falsify records. However I did work (briefly) for a company whose General Manager falsified legal documents several times during my tenure. When I became aware of this, I consulted our family lawyer as to how to deal with this and what, if any, my legal culpability might be. He urged me to address the issue in writing to the GM and to copy my boss. In the letter he said I should clearly point out the questionable legality of what he'd done and what the repurcussions might be. I did this, and never got a reply. I set about finding a new job as soon as the email was sent. I still have the email in my files at home, because "Time wounds all heels" and someday, this GM will be caught and if he is, I want to be covered.

It's very hard to just quit a job on principle when you're the primary wage earner in the family. You need to weigh what you know is happening against the needs of your family. I didn't do anything wrong, but I knew the comapny was doing wrong. It's easy to say that you'd rather work 3 jobs than compromise your integrity, but first you have to FIND 3 jobs, and in the meantime, do you ask your kid to drop out of college? Do you tell your elderly mother that you can't afford to pay for her elder apartment? It took me a year to find a better job. And I appreciate where I am now everyday.

IMHO it takes the thread from the simple "would you falsify a record?" that Covers have responded with a unanimous "No!" to on to the general topic of business ethics and the "little white lie" that we all know takes place in most companies on a daily basis.


Sifting through this thread........did anybody expect somebody to say here "Yeah, I falsify records! I'd do it in a minute if I was asked or told. What's the big deal anyway?"?

There are a lot of companies run that way out there and despite what we want to believe, many of them are still in business. It seems the easy way and the right way are often two different roads.

Sorry for those bummer thoughts. I'll go to my happy place now and think happy thoughts.....

Sifting through this thread........did anybody expect somebody to say here "Yeah, I falsify records! I'd do it in a minute if I was asked or told. What's the big deal anyway?"?

There are a lot of companies run that way out there and despite what we want to believe, many of them are still in business. It seems the easy way and the right way are often two different roads.

Sorry for those bummer thoughts. I'll go to my happy place now and think happy thoughts.....

I think anyone willing to falsify records would be unwilling to state so in such a public forum. More likely they would remain silent and hope the topic dies a quiet death. :ko:

I have worked jobs where the specifications were little more than guidelines, and as long as the mating parts would go together the product shipped. Fortunately, no lives were at risk. I always made sure that the person that vetoed my findings signed off on it in a prominant way.

Sifting through this thread........did anybody expect somebody to say here "Yeah, I falsify records! I'd do it in a minute if I was asked or told. What's the big deal anyway?"?

I personally did not expect anyone to respond that was currently involved or willing to falsify. I do feel that this thread has offered a lot of insight and maybe there are folks that are in this situation and need a little counsel on how to handle it.

I do feel that this thread has offered a lot of insight and maybe there are folks that are in this situation and need a little counsel on how to handle it.

I'd definitely agree to that one. :agree1:

I remember once that people were sent on a mission to inspect a country for weapons of mass destruction. Matter of fact a country went to War (I believe) based on those results.
Those results (I believe) were manipulated to a positive, then back to a negative! How does that set a precedent for integrity in the big scheme of things!

I have never falsified a record, deleting upon command is another story...

I agree it takes extraordinary strength of character to be a martyr when someone who wields power over you says, "Do what I say or else . . ."

Each of us looks at life through a different lens. Some of us find ourselves the victim of a bully at an early age. How that affects us varies from those who look for every opportunity to get revenge to those who are mentally disturbed to the point of suicide.

I heard one recovering addict tell a tale of failed suicide at age eight after a bully forced her to eat a worm in front of her third grade class. She claimed her entire life felt worthless from that moment on. On the other hand, I had a kid in my second grade class who ate worms to get attention. Last I heard of him about 15 or 20 years ago, he ran his own multi-million dollar plumbing contracting business.

My point, I think, is not whether you succumb to the pressure of a bully to perform a wrongful act, but how you deal wth the rest of your life after that.

If it was criminal, consult an attorney - wrongful acts committed under duress may be excused.

If it was just humiliating, not criminal, decide HOW to avoid the situation again. (Think about sexual harrassment - many folks would rather put up with rude remarks by a jerk than quit a good paying job, but draw the line at being touched or assaulted.) Only you can decide what you value most. Avoidance may range from just ignoring a remark to filing a complaint. We really do cover a lot of this in the thread
Ethics - Moral law vs. Criminal law (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=9939&highlight=ethics)

If you think there's more to say about the topic, add it to that thread (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=9939&highlight=ethics).

I remember once that people were sent on a mission to inspect a country for weapons of mass destruction. Matter of fact a country went to War (I believe) based on those results.
Those results (I believe) were manipulated to a positive, then back to a negative! How does that set a precedent for integrity in the big scheme of things!

I think the morale of that story played out in the last elections :D

I work in the pharmaceutical industry if I falsify data someone could potentially die. I have older parents who are alot of medication I would not want something to happen to them if another company falsified data.
I have actually left jobs because I refused to sign false data. But I am the only one who I have to justify my actions to and I sleep good everynight.

There have been more than a few instances where I was asked to fill out equipment inspection records, daily, monthly, etc...that are typically filled out by the operator, mechanic, etc. My boss requested this on many occassions prior to audits. I simply took the records and tracked down the operators, some forgot to fill out the documentation sheet, others simply didn't do the inspections...either way I didn't falsify the records, nor did I refuse to do what was requested, instead I recorded who was responsible for completing the documentation on the date in question, filed an NCR to my manager and put a referral comment on the documentation to that NCR.

Our quality manager at the time found this to be a headache but really didn't have any argument for doing it "the easy way" and just falsifying records. If you compromise your integrity for ease, well then, what does that say about your version of "quality".

In the world we live in however, I am certain that falsification of records, fraud is quite abundant, I have seen gross accounts of this by colleagues and business entities I have worked with or around...At times I think it stems from a lack of pride in ones work and work ethics, other times I think it's simply pure laziness.

I think the practice of records falsification is rather like being on a sinking ship, knowing it's sinking, and ignoring that fact. If only one person would scream "*&#! the ships sinking" maybe some others would take action to help save the ship. A rather silly analogy I suppose but it works for my purposes.

Good conversation topic :agree1: