Public interest in business ethics rose in the wake of the bankruptcies of Enron and WorldCom and has become even more pronounced since the financial crisis of 2008. RAND takes an active role in improving public understanding of corporate governance and ethics issues, with research evaluating the effects of regulations like Sarbanes-Oxley on U.S. businesses, liability risk in the auditing industry, and the relationship between individual investors and the financial services industry.
Research conducted by:
RAND Justice, Infrastructure, and Environment;
RAND Institute for Civil Justice;
Center for Corporate Ethics and Governance
Featured at RAND
The RAND Center for Corporate Ethics and Governance, or CCEG, is committed to improving public understanding of corporate ethics, law, and governance, and to identifying specific ways that businesses can operate ethically, legally, and profitably at the same time.
Journal Articles (9)
Proactive involvement by corporate boards in compliance and ethics oversight is fundamental in generating a meaningful ethical culture within organizations, and in leading firms to regard Corporate Ethics and Governance as more than just a paper tiger.
There is a strong expectation by the U.S. Sentencing Commission (USSC) for boards to be directly involved in compliance and ethics (C&E) oversight, and the reporting relationship between the board and the manager of the compliance and ethics function, the Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer (CECO) is viewed as central to that responsibility.
Evaluates managerial perception of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, a stringent rules-based system widely considered the most comprehensive economic regulation since the New Deal.
Directors face newly heightened expectations to recognize and fulfill their responsibilities to oversee the company's management of compliance, ethics, and reputation risks.
Discusses a study conducted for the Local Better Regulation Office (LBRO) that evaluated the contribution of local authority regulatory services.
This study examines the development of trust and cooperation in computer-mediated and face-to-face teams.
Pradhan established that institutions and governance make a difference that is quantifiable; this difference makes sense in qualitative economic terms
The authors argue that basic assumptions built into the governance of higher education obstruct an effective response. After presenting the assumptions, the authors make a case for redesigning the structure of higher education governance.
The author of this article examines the future of the World Health Organization (WHO) and applies organizational theory to try to understand how the organization can be made more effective.