Washington, Oct 14 (ANI): A new study by Canadian researchers has listed twelve steps to white-collar crime.

The report will appear in the International Journal of Business Governance and Ethics.

Ruth McKay of the Sprott School of Business, at Carleton University, Carey Stevens of Carey Stevens and Associates, in Ottawa, and Jae Fratzl of Artworks Counselling and Psychotherapy, in Ontario, Canada, examined leader behaviour and the development of organizational culture to find how people get caught in the web of white-collar criminality.

McKay clarifies: “Illegal activities at a corporation may appear to be the act of one person, such as with the collapse of the 233-year-old Barings Bank.”

Barings Bank had collapsed in 1995 due to unauthorised trading by Nick Leeson, however, the Bank executives had known that Leeson had a conflict of interest because he was both trading and settling deals.The researchers have divided the progress of white-collar crime into 12 steps.

Steps one to four explain how the “players” meet and draw each other’s support while waiting for opportunity for illegal activity.

The first four steps are: The architect of the white-collar crime makes an entry into a corporation and is given an authoritative position.

In the second step, personality and circumstances affect the “player” in a way that they realize their authority.

The third step is the time when “drivers” emerge and either ignore or condone certain actions that have been taken.

Participants who have been inactive so far now recognize a prospect in the fourth step.

In step 5, the “leader” draws some unwilling participants into the “crime”.

In step 6, distrust develops between other people involved.

In step 7, the perpetrator sees the co-conspirator in a weak position and begins to take advantage of the position.

In step 8 bullying and pressurising becomes rampant as illegal goals are aimed for.

In step 9, the perpetrator takes bigger risks looking forward to gain more.

In step 10, the values of the participants and their actions come into obvious conflict.

In step 11, a whistleblower steps up and marks the leader’s fall.

Finally, in step 12, the leader is blamed for the crime, following which he either accepts the crime and seeks forgiveness by disclosing everything or denies everything. (ANI)