Why Milgram Is Wrong

In the last 40 years or so, the business world has earned a bad reputation. Companies like Enron and individuals like Bernie Madoff, who perpetuated the stigma that profitable businesses must operate based on the shareholder strategy, have ruined public perception of an entire industry. What is often forgotten is that these companies and individuals are the minority. Every individual can stomp his feet and stand on his soap box and say how he would’ve acted differently if he was placed in the aforementioned individuals’ shoes, but that cannot be determined. Conversely, the Milgram experiment, however controversial, proves that a vast majority of people, in the right circumstances, will physically harm another person based on the orders of a superior. It is hard to refute scientific evidence and statistics. To further this, outside observers constantly iterate that regardless of how morally superior one feels outside of the experiment, you, too would succumb under the pressure. To that I’d say: I probably would. However, in the midst of
Take for example college entrance exams. If you ask someone how they scored, before they tell you their score they will give you an entire back story. It usually details a long list of things that detracted from their score that clearly were out of the individual’s control. The same principle rang true in the Milgram experiment. The individuals in were more obliged to continue to administer shocks to the ‘learners’ if the experimenter seemed to take responsibility for their suffering. This is a concept that the business world struggles with because how does one hold a single individual accountable for the actions of an entire corporation? On the contrary, what actions can be taken to hold a corporation accountable rather than just its agents? In order to restore the credibility and reputation of businesses, these choices need to be made