Stopping the Rot of Disloyalty
| Published date | 01 May 1989 |
| Pages | 19-22 |
| Date | 01 May 1989 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/02635578910132855 |
| Author | David Benn |
| Subject Matter | Economics,Information & knowledge management,Management science & operations |
STOPPING THE ROT OF DISLOYALTY
by David
Benn
Lorraine Electronics, London
Every company large enough to employ people is under attack from within. As if it weren't
enough to have to fight off competitors on the open market, and to deal with bureaucratic
red tape at home and abroad, all companies have to cope with some sort of dishonesty from
their own people.
It might be something as small as the fiddling of expense accounts, or the private use of
office stationery and telephones. Often it is much larger, involving deliberate conspiracy to
defraud and steal. It might even involve insider dealing or attempts by competitors to bring
a company down by subverting its employees.
The most common scenario in an established
company is for middle managers, who have
worked their way up and learned all they know
from their employer, to prepare themselves to start
on their own by stealing information on products
or customer bases. In many cases this sort of
practice is considered acceptable or at least
unavoidable.
Stealing is often seen as a perk of the job. "We
all know about old Joe in the canteen taking home
a few steaks each week", or "everyone knows that
Fred's expense sheets are the most imaginative
in the business".
But what if the company is not doing too
well,
and
can't afford to carry this sort of extra expense?
What if there are several people taking more than
twice their official salary out of the company in
"perks"? What if the defection of
a
senior executive
with certain vital information will ruin the business?
Every chief executive has to decide where he draws
the line on what is acceptable and what is not and
often it helps in the decision if he knows exactly
the extent of what is going on. If the thieves are
clever, they may be getting away with far more than
he realises, and only once he has looked into the
matter will he find out how much he is losing.
One way to see what is going on is to hire a private
detective. The drawbacks are that good ones can
cost up to £600 a day, with no guarantee that they
will come up with anything. There is also the risk
that people will find out what your are doing and
an atmosphere of mistrust will develop amongst
the honest members of staff. The other way is to
use electronic audio surveillance equipment in
order to listen in on what is happening, and gather
evidence which can be used later at the discretion
of the management.
Lorraine Electronics supply a complete range of
these products, from briefcases, pens and
calculators containing microphones and tape
recorders, to sophisticated radio transmitting
devices. The prices can range from £50 to £5,000
and the degree of sophistication is so great that
the equipment can be used by any layperson
capable of working an on/off switch.
There has been the most enormous increase in
interest in this sector. The London office is now
receiving around 200 enquiries, and selling up to
50 pieces of equipment a day to customers, the
majority of whom represent the business
community.
One customer, for instance, owns a chain of shops
around the south of England, selling expensive
merchandise. He regularly has to dismiss staff for
dishonesty but he had one manageress who he
knew was systematically stealing £200 to £300
a week from him. He had hired a private detective,
but the woman was too clever and the investigation
resulted in nothing more than a large
bill.
By getting
up early and listening to everything that went on
in the shop for a few days, the owner was able
to gather enough material to dismiss her without
a fight. He was also able to keep the equipment
to use the next time he thought something was
going wrong.
Another private company could not understand
why their figures were so bad, but they suspected
it was due to unfair competition from a couple of
rival public companies. With the use of surveillance
equipment they were able to discover that two of
their employees had been bribed to conspire
against the company by the competitors. Armed
with tapes, they were able to confront the two
competitive companies with the evidence, and
IMDS
Number 5
1989
19
To continue reading
Request your trial