AndrewFastow may be going to learning institutions to teach about his crimeand embracing ethics based on remorse, guilt, and penance. He mayalso have good intentions of reinventing himself as a good citizen.Nevertheless, it is hard to know his real intents since he might usethe opportunity before him to gain fame.
Aconvicted felon that committed deplorable acts of fraud is the leastfavorable person to advise an impressionable university crowd.Everyone in a leadership position should uphold ethical behaviors asmaintained by virtue ethics. The theory requires leaders to perform aregular survey of employees to know their views about supervision andpolicies recognize performing employees treat all employees welland equally and uphold business morals (Pojman and Fieser, 2009).Unfortunately, Fastow lacked these qualities making him unfit as amotivating speaker.
BringingFastow to talk to a university crowd creates a contagious affect.Students may perceive his punishment as minor and derive his actionsas “no big deal” or “I could get away with it.” A six-yearprison term is not enough for an individual convicted for bankruptinga once successful company. He required a severe sentence that wouldprevent other unethical including future leaders to avoiddisreputable activities.
AllowingFastow to speak on ethics shows that our society tolerates corruptionrather than discouraging it. It is wrong to give corrupt people aplatform to talk about their ordeals especially to the futuregenerations. Some of them may view the idea as a good one since noserious punishment is involved.
Fastowparallels with other criminals who committed crimes, did time, andbecame lecturers. They all lacked ethics in the jobs trusted to themby others. However, they are the only ones who can decide whether tochange and live by example or not.
Pojman,L. P., & Fieser, J. (2009). Virtue theory. Ethics:Discovering right and wrong,146-169.