GREY MATTERS Ray tells Dan that Christine had said


that the bonus was personal. Despite Christine’s warning, he shows Dan the letter. Dan reads it and says that he is very surprised, and it looks as though Christine has given Ray the money out of her own pocket. He says this is rather unusual and he hopes that Ray has not been asked to do anything unusual by Christine. Dan says that the payment might also


be against the bank’s policy as it could imply all sorts of things but, even so, he is enjoying his drink bought with the proceeds of Ray’s bonus. Ray says that he is sure that he has done nothing wrong and suggests that they talk about something else, and the conversation turns to less controversial matters. At the end of the evening, they go their


separate ways, not having said any more about Ray’s bonus, but Ray awakes in the early hours and has difficulty going back to sleep. He wonders if he has done anything wrong in accepting the money or if anything he has done at work might have led to him getting the bonus, but he cannot think of anything. Ray wonders if he should raise the


matter with anyone in the branch, and if so, whom? He also wonders whether he should perhaps phone the helpline number that he was given on his induction, but he is unsure to whom he will be talking and if it will get back to Christine that he has called. That seems to be worse than doing nothing. In the end, Ray falls asleep with the matter unresolved.


What should Ray do?


A. Approach Christine directly to clarify the situation and return the bonus.


B. Notwithstanding that he has been told not to discuss it with anyone, Ray should report it to whoever is responsible for HR matters in the branch.


C. Call a staff helpline and raise the matter. D. Do nothing. He was very fortunate to have received a bonus in these difficult times.


Test or release: The verdict This Grey Matter, published in the September 2022 edition of


The Review magazine, explores the pressures of a manager, Meena, dealing with a new starter, Hiromi, who is not performing to par and has recently disclosed that he may have ADHD.


After speaking with an external HR adviser, Meena offers Hiromi a formal assessment to better understand his needs, but he declines and the pressure on her to deliver is increasing.


What should Meena do next?


This dilemma was seen at the 2022 Annual Integrity Event, attended by around 1,200 in total (over 1,000 virtually and 160 in person) and the results are as follows:


1. Wait to find out if she gets the new job and then quit her current one and not worry about Hiromi. The culture of the company is not great, her line manager hasn’t been very helpful, so maybe she should be the one to pick up the pieces. (4%)


2. Ask Hiromi for evidence of ADHD or insist that he is formally assessed and speak with HR again about what this could mean for his employment. She might have to keep him and recruit another person to support with the role or find him another role internally. This will upset her line manager and might affect her perception of her performance. (27%)


3. Raise the issue with a senior stakeholder at her organisation in the hope that they will provide better guidance than her line manager. She doesn’t want to be seen as a weak leader, but her line manager was not helpful and her advice conflicts with HR’s recommendations. (67%)


4. Take matters in her own hands and be as impartial as possible, not letting Hiromi’s potential ADHD get in the way of the company’s performance. This means transferring him to another department or terminating his employment, but this might have a detrimental impact on Hiromi’s mental health. (2%)


Responses received: 601


The CISI verdict The dilemma incorporates many themes from the CISI Code of Conduct, including professional development, awareness of capabilities, respecting others and the environment, and speaking up and listening up.


It also raises several concerns about the firm: poor company culture, poor internal processes, and insufficient management training.


Better internal processes may have made it easier for Meena to speak to her manager about the difficulties she was facing in her team and to receive the advice and support that would help her through the situation. And better managerial training would have helped Meena to speak with Hiromi and raise concerns about the quality of his work.


WHAT WOULD YOU DO? Visit cisi.org/transfer-authorised to share your views. We will share the survey results and CISI’s opinion at cisi.org/verdict-transfer-authorised


CISI.ORG/REVIEW


Our recommended solution is option 3: receiving a second opinion and getting better guidance on next steps would be helpful to Meena as she seems conflicted with the advice already received.


Should you wish to suggest a dilemma or topic to be featured in a future Grey Matter, please email ethics@cisi.org.


47


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72