6 Things you might like to know about the rich

6 Things you might like to know about the rich
Opinion + AnalysisBusiness + Leadership
BY The Ethics Centre ethics 29 NOV 2018
In Australia, where we like to cut our tall poppies down, wealthy people come with an unenviable reputation.
Unless you happen to be reading the business pages, money and power will attract sneering. Otherwise, the lionising coverage of those with outrageous success seems ample reward for their riches.
A multitude of psychological studies conclude rich people are more unethical and selfish than those who are less fortunate. However, one question remains mostly unanswered; what came first; the bad character or the money?
Here, we take a quick look at what research tells us about the collision of money and ethics:
1. Fancy car, poor driving
People driving expensive cars are four times more likely to ignore right of way laws on the road than those who drive cheap cars.
Dacher Keltner, a psychologist at the University of California at Berkeley
and his then-graduate student, Paul Piff, tracked the model of every car that cut off others.
“It told us that there’s something about wealth and privilege that makes you feel like you’re above the law, which allows you to treat others like they don’t exist,” Keltner told the Washington Post.
In another experiment, half of the luxury car drivers ignored a pedestrian on a crossing – many even after making eye contact. However, all the cheapest cars stopped.
2. They cheat more on their taxes
Taxpayers whose true income was between $US500,000 and $1 million a year understated their adjusted gross incomes by 21 per cent in 2001, compared to an eight percent underreporting rate for those earning $50,000 to $100,000 and even lower rates for those earning less than that.
According to research, wealthier people were more likely to cheat because it was easier for them to hide sources of income from self-employment, rents, capital gains and partnerships.
3. Less empathetic
Observations that rich people tend to be less generous than the poor may be influenced by the amount of time we spend looking at each other.
By analysing what people look at as they walk down a street (wearing Google Glasses), psychologists at the University of California, Berkeley,
Pia Dietze and Eric Knowles, discovered that social class did not affect how many times people looked at another person – but it did determine how much time they spend looking.
Participants self-nominating as higher in social class spent less time looking at other people.
Dacher Keltner says people in lower socioeconomic classes tend to be more vigilant because they “live lives defined by threat”.
4. Less generous
Middle-class Americans give a far bigger share of their discretionary income to charities than the rich. If the rich live in wealthy neighbourhoods, they give an even smaller share of their income than wealthy people in economically-diverse neighbourhoods.
“Wealth seems to buffer people from attending to the needs of others,” Paul Piff told the New York Times.
5. Cashed-up and sad = bad
People most likely to approve of unethical behaviour are those with a low level of happiness, but a high level of income, according to a survey of 27,672 professionals.
Conversely, the most disapproving of unethical behaviour were those with high income and life satisfaction, according to professor of management and organisations at the Kellogg School, the late Keith Murnighan, and Long Wang of the City University of Hong Kong.
“People who are exuberant and upbeat about life, and happen to have high income, are likely to be more trustworthy,” Murnighan told his university’s Kellogg Insight publication.
“An unhappy rich person might feel bad because of their own unethical behaviour, but it might be that very behaviour that got them rich in the first place.
“Having a comfortable amount of money might allow enough psychological ‘room’ to ethically consider the needs and perspectives of other people, which may then lead to feelings of well-being.”
6. Stereotypes are self-fulfilling
Negative stereotypes of rich people are all-pervasive. According to Adam Waytz, an Associate Professor of Management and Organisations at Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management, studies show that the more profitable a company, the more people linked it to social harm.
“People come to confirm the behaviours that are expected of them (we live up to and down to others’ stereotypes of us), and if rich people and business folks are assumed to behave with the same scruples as Bernie Madoff, these views will likely elicit unethical behaviour from them,” warns Waytz in a blog in the Scientific American.

This article was originally written for The Ethics Alliance. Find out more about this corporate membership program. Already a member? Log in to the membership portal for more content and tools here.
Ethics in your inbox.
Get the latest inspiration, intelligence, events & more.
By signing up you agree to our privacy policy
You might be interested in…
Opinion + Analysis
Business + Leadership, Health + Wellbeing, Society + Culture
Corruption in sport: From the playing field to the field of ethics
Opinion + Analysis
Business + Leadership, Health + Wellbeing
Tips on how to find meaningful work
Opinion + Analysis
Business + Leadership
Moral injury is a new test for employers
Opinion + Analysis
Business + Leadership, Relationships, Society + Culture
Extending the education pathway

BY The Ethics Centre
The Ethics Centre is a not-for-profit organisation developing innovative programs, services and experiences, designed to bring ethics to the centre of professional and personal life.
BY ethics
Leaders, be the change you want to see.

Leaders, be the change you want to see.
Opinion + AnalysisBusiness + Leadership
BY Gordon Cairns ethics 29 NOV 2018
Chairman of Woolworths and Origin Energy, Gordon Cairns, says he cannot remember a time in his career when business leaders were less respected.
“The theme coming out of the [Banking] Royal Commission – and I am on the board of [Macquarie] bank – is one of dishonesty, where driving profit is actually seen as the polar opposite to serving the customer … and where more regulation now is seen as the antidote to poor leadership,” Cairns told a recent Sydney gathering.
“It is worse than the political arena. I’ve worked in three continents – the UK, America and in Australia –and I actually fear for all of them.”
He said the situation had reached a nadir when the excuse for imposing a tax on the banks is because “everyone hates them” and the reason for pricing regulation in the energy sector is because “the retailers are gouging their customers”.
Cairns has a reputation as a plain-speaking Scotsman, frequently sharing his own leadership story to illustrate how authentic, self-aware leaders can transform whole organisations.
He was appointed CEO of the beverage company Lion Nathan in 1996 and engaged leadership consultancy Human Synergistics to conduct 360-degree reviews of staff. These reviews laid out how individuals were viewed by those they reported to, worked alongside and led.
His own results were abysmal – flooded with aggressive and defensive character traits (coded red in the results, as opposed to the more productive and affiliative blue).
Speaking in November at a Sydney event, hosted by coaching company Stephenson Mansell Group, Cairns spoke about what he has learned about leadership.
First, he says, the best organisations recognise that they are a social community of people who join voluntarily for a shared moral purpose. “They are neither an army, nor a machine. And our job as leaders is to inspire them with that noble purpose.”
Second, leaders get results and the “how” you get there is as important as the “what” you achieve.
“And to this point, leadership is mathematical. I remember having a conversation with Kevin Rudd and he said ‘What is the most important ingredient in leadership?’ And I said ‘Prime Minister, you have to have followers’. He said: ‘What do you mean?’
“If you are not getting results, people will not follow you. And, if you have no followers, then you have no-one to lead.”
Cairns said his third lesson was that leaders are prepared to undergo a profound change in themselves. He saw the necessity for that when he received his own 360-degree review at Lion Nathan, which he left in 2004.
“So this is what is known as an ‘Aha moment’. I would actually describe it as an ‘Oh shit moment’.
“So, I go into the office the next day and I go to the HR director [Bob Barbour] and say, ‘Well you are going to have to be my coach. When I do something well, can you praise me in public? When I do something bad, could you take me aside and quietly just tell me. And we are going to have that trusting relationship’.
“The next thing I did was publish my 360-degree [report] to the 7,000 people in the organisation. This was somewhat foolhardy because, as I go around the organisation to talk to people, they would always have their 360-degree on their credenza and I would say ‘Oh, is that your 360-degree? That looks very good’ and they would say ‘Nowhere as bad as yours’.”
Cairns then asked around for an executive coach and was recommended, Tony Grant,
Professor of Coaching Psychology at the University of Sydney.
“So I called Tony up and said ‘Tony, I am a basket case and I need help’,” explains Cairns.
Grant told him to come at 5.30 on Wednesday.
“I said, ‘Tony, you don’t understand. I am very important. My diary is full, I cannot possibly get there on Wednesday’.
“He said, ‘That’s okay. Don’t come’.
“I said, ‘Okay, let’s negotiate. Instead of 5.30 in the evening, let’s make it 6 o’clock’.
“He said ‘It is not in the evening, it is the morning’.
“I said ‘Tony, you don’t understand. I like to get up in the morning. I like to meditate. It is good for my soul. I like to go to the gym’.
“He said, ‘We have had this conversation. Don’t come’.”
Cairns says the point of that conversation was that if becoming a better leader was not the most important thing in Cairns’ life, why should Grant – a renowned expert – waste his time?
Every week for five years, Cairns visited Grant and the results were spectacular. By the time Cairns left Lion Nathan, the formerly underperforming company had an employee engagement score in the 90 percent range, which indicates a very high level of buy-in from motivated staff.
“Human Synergistics had never seen a transformation of a company, so fast and so dramatic ever. The total return for shareholders was in the top quartile in the world – 22 per cent over a five-year period. I can honestly say, I became a better father, a better husband, and a better leader,” says Cairns.

This article was originally written for The Ethics Alliance. Find out more about this corporate membership program. Already a member? Log in to the membership portal for more content and tools here.
Ethics in your inbox.
Get the latest inspiration, intelligence, events & more.
By signing up you agree to our privacy policy
You might be interested in…
Reports
Business + Leadership
Thought Leadership: Ethics at Work, a 2018 Survey of Employees
Opinion + Analysis
Business + Leadership
The dark side of the Australian workplace
Opinion + Analysis
Business + Leadership
How BlueRock uses culture to attract top talent
Big thinker
Business + Leadership
Big Thinker: Karl Marx
