Although one may argue that the students could simply be lying about their dishonest, the statistics are consistent and significant across the board that there is some correlation between honor codes and cheating. In light of these statistics, these events in Virginia would seem to be contradictory. No surprise there though, as the same conundrum is found in the business world. Enron had an both a corporate ethics code and a conflicts-of-interest policy. Conveniently, however, Enron's board waived both of these to clear the way for creation of off-balance-sheet partnerships that destroyed the company. Beyond even documentation, many companies even have compliance officers that explicitly oversee ethical matters. That made no difference though to Tyco International's chief compliance officer, former general counsel Mark Belnick, as he and two other company executives were indicted on charges of falsifying business records to hide more than $14 million personal loans. More ironic yet is Arthur Andersen LLP, a company which sold ethics-consulting services to other corporations for years. Andersen was convicted this past summer of obstructing justice by destroying documents about its audits of Enron.
If all of these precautions aren't working, then how can the situation be rectified? Perhaps legal steps can be taken. President Bush signed the Sarbanes-Oxley Act this summer to set the law of the land for ethics programs. The legislation contained several ethics initiatives for public companies, like reducing penalties for convictions when the company had a working ethics program in place. Then on August 1, the New York Stock Exchange issued a new set of rules for listed companies. Among other changes, listed companies must now adopt a code of business conduct and ethics. Even further, they must also make appropriate compliance standards and procedures to assure their code's effective operation.
