1. Does Julie’s case differ from other well know corporate frauds (e.g. Bernie Madoff, Enron, etc.)? If so, what can this case teach us about ethical decision-making behaviours that the other cases do not?

2. Did the workplace environment or corporate culture contribute to Julie’s ability to rationalize her fraudulent activities? Did these factors contribute to her decision to stop committing fraud? Based on your understanding of how work attitudes develop, explain how organizational factors may have contributed to her activities and subsequent decisions.

3. What can employers do to create an environment that encourages ethical behaviour?

This case is about decision-making, ethics, values, and attitudes. How do these issues play a role in one employee’s progress from a valued employee to a criminal with a fraud charge?

Julie Smith, an accounts payable clerk for an insurance company, had been lucky to get hired to the position with only high-school education. Her salary was quite small, yet her tasks and responsibilities were fairly responsible. She was responsible for processing insurance claims for more than 500 corporate policies. Although her work was repetitive and tedious, and she did not have the authority to make her  own decisions, she enjoyed her job and felt that the company treated her well.

The company was fairly traditional, everything was done “by the book’ with strict procedures that had to be followed. The policies that directly related to clients seemed to be somewhat lax as there were no reports about claims made against their accounts, and since they paid a flat fee, they had little incentive to actively monitor claims activities. In fact, even the company’s own internal audit process examined corporate commercial accounts only every six years