Women are far less involved in corporate crime than men says this study. Criminality aside, men tend to take bigger risks more often and cut more corners than their female counterparts. No surprise that “London Whales” and “Masters of the Universe” attend “Predators Balls” in the testoterone-fueled, frat house culture so consistently described by any number of insider books about the world of high finance. A recent post here noted Harvard Business School’s attempt to get women to adopt in-your-face posturing that vault men to the top of the business world. This we need more of?
So this long-term Seattle Public Utilities employee stole a million by depositing checks intended for the city into his personal account. Read closely to count how controls failed–the city allowed the employee to issue invoices and accept payments directly, developers/property owners didn’t realize their checks were going to a “City of Sea” account set up by the employee in a bank whose own controls seem to have been lax. One thing fraud investigators should look for is spoofing nomenclature, bogus accounts and phantom vendors indicating that individuals may be redirecting organizational resources to themselves.
This one is for readers involved in criminal justice research, including related areas such as domestic violence. The message here for women in relationships gone south is pretty stark, and the data in this report could also be looked at in other ways or built upon to explore differences in region, state by state gun-ownership and so on. This post initiates a new category in this blog–public policy issues–that those in policy and administration fields may find particularly interesting.