I was reading an extremely thought-provoking text entitled Snakes In Suits: When Psychopaths Go To Work by Messrs. Paul Babiak, Ph.D. and Robert D. Hare, Ph.D., when I came to the conclusion that: The financial crisis, that the world has been enduring since 2007, was caused by psychopaths.
In my humble opinion, the book subtly implies, and this is just an inference I'm making, that Finance-oriented environments attract psychopaths, and that they also richly reward psychopathic behaviors. Hence the title of this post. (Note: If you're an insider, you'll instinctively understand what I mean. If you are an outsider, please read Michael Lewis' biographical text entitled Liar's Poker, after which, you should peruse through the bullet points in this script to fully understand the point that I am raising.)
Therefore, it would be prudent for the Obama administration to impose a statute that requires all people in Finance-oriented fields to undergo mandatory psychological tests that are specifically designed to weed-out psychopaths. Those who exhibit psychopathic tendencies, the psychos, should be required to undergo regular therapy sessions, and they should also be monitored closely. For the process to be transparent, the tests could be conducted through industry bodies like FINRA, or through regulatory bodies like the SEC. Surely, if this were to be done, Madoff-esque epic frauds would be fewer, and market dislocations would be rarer.
While I do acknowledge that this is an unorthodox and impractical proposal, that violates the civil liberties of people, I seriously believe that it would yield better results than the current regulatory regime.
In the book the following points are raised, and substantiated with empirical evidence and hypothetical case studies:
- The typical 'corporate' psychopath exhibits, through his/her actions, a personality disorder that is rooted in; lying, manipulation, deceit, egocentricity, callousness, and other potentially destructive traits.
- Psychopaths allow the responsibilities of leadership and the perks of power to override their moral sense.
- In an organizational setting, psychopaths generally can be identified by their; grandiosity, sense of entitlement, and lack of personal insight that usually leads to conflict and rivalry with bosses and coworkers, and by their impulsiveness and “live in the moment” philosophy that leads them to keep repeating these and other dysfunctional, antisocial behaviors, despite performance appraisals and training programs.
- Usually, in certain extremely risky high return environments (especially certain sales-oriented environments), some core psychopathic personality traits—call them talents, e.g. taking charge and social engineering prowess—may seem attractive in job applicants, and may actually contribute towards upward mobility in their careers.
- The modern trend towards bureaucracy-free organizational structures, makes most organizations a fecund breeding ground for psychopaths.
In my humble opinion, the book subtly implies, and this is just an inference I'm making, that Finance-oriented environments attract psychopaths, and that they also richly reward psychopathic behaviors. Hence the title of this post. (Note: If you're an insider, you'll instinctively understand what I mean. If you are an outsider, please read Michael Lewis' biographical text entitled Liar's Poker, after which, you should peruse through the bullet points in this script to fully understand the point that I am raising.)
Therefore, it would be prudent for the Obama administration to impose a statute that requires all people in Finance-oriented fields to undergo mandatory psychological tests that are specifically designed to weed-out psychopaths. Those who exhibit psychopathic tendencies, the psychos, should be required to undergo regular therapy sessions, and they should also be monitored closely. For the process to be transparent, the tests could be conducted through industry bodies like FINRA, or through regulatory bodies like the SEC. Surely, if this were to be done, Madoff-esque epic frauds would be fewer, and market dislocations would be rarer.
While I do acknowledge that this is an unorthodox and impractical proposal, that violates the civil liberties of people, I seriously believe that it would yield better results than the current regulatory regime.
