The concept of white collar crime was introduced by Edwin Sutherland, describing white collar crime as “crime committed by a person of respectability and high status in the course of his occupation (potter, 2002).” Sutherland shed light on this issue in 1939. Prior to which time, the focus regarding crime was on that of street criminals. The definition of white collar crime is one of great debate and stretches and shrinks to fit a wide range of opinions regarding which crimes do or do not fit under the term. The Social Work Dictionary states that white collar crimes are “Nonviolent illegal acts typically committed by corporations or individuals usually in the course of the offender’s occupation. Such offenses include embezzlement, fraud, forgery, tax evasion, fraudulent use of credit cards, stock manipulation, bribery, and computer crime (Barker, 2003).” The U.S. Department of justice explains that although this vast opinion on classification exists, there appears to be three points of reference. Some describe/or study white collar crime in terms of type of offender, type of offense, or the organizational culture. There are inclusions for other forms of crime, such as those against criminal and safety law, as well as exclusions of anything other than crimes of economics. The Federal Bureau of Investigation defines white collar crime by type of offense and defines it as “those illegal acts which are characterized by deceit, concealment, or violation of trust and which are not dependent upon the application or threat of physical force or violence. Individuals and organizations commit these acts to obtain money, property, or services; to avoid the payment or loss of money or services; or to secure personal or business advantage (Barnett, 2002).” Despite the vast choice of defining white collar crime, there is a clear increase in the reporting and awareness of it. This could be due to the fact that the concept has only been under scrutiny since 1939 and prior to that date was either acceptable behavior or ignored. Regardless to the reason it is important to determine what factors cause this corrupt behavior. There are many theories offered in explaining criminal activity. Three that best explain white collar crime are the Differential-Association Theory, Anomie-Strain Theory, and the Rational Choice Theory.
Sutherland’s theory of differential association was the most popular for some time. Sutherland posited that criminal behavior is learned in association with others and that it takes place when what has been learned inclines one more toward crime than away from it (Potter, 2002).” Elaborated upon Sutherland’s theory of differential association offers nine points of process in which an individual comes to partake in criminal activity. He expresses that regardless to inherent traits a person, under select influences of society, becomes a criminal. An individual suffering “psychopathic” tendency not exposed to that same environment or group may never become a criminal. Potter expresses that this theory may be a little too simple a theory to capture all the components of white collar crime. It does however explain what happens inside an organization that creates individuals capable or willing to participate. This theory attempts “to account for variations in rates of crime between or within social organizations (Quinney, 1964).” Individuals immersed in a social organization that rationalizes criminal behavior or re-defines the level of right and wrong or just and unjust, could learn this behavior. The sense that the acts contain any wrongdoing may even be absent from the consciousness. In companies where lawbreaking is the norm individuals involved may be isolated from other companies where crime is not normal. These incumbents “learn attitudes, values, motives, rationalizations, and techniques favorable to this type of crime (Newman, 1958).” Potter himself found in his own studies that often individuals did not hold their behavior in regards to criminal activity. “Notable, for instance, was the plaint of one offender that while he knew that price-fixing was illegal, he was stunned that it also was criminal (Potter, 2002).”
Another possible theory explaining white collar crime is Robert Merton’s anomie-strain theory. According to Merton among various elements of social and cultural structures, there are two that are very important. One is that goals considered appropriate to strive for are established by the culture. The second is that the means appropriate for obtaining or reaching these goals are also defined by that same culture. In Merton’s theory if the importance of the latter is overpowered by that of the first then the imbalance can cause an increase level in criminal activity. It is then more important that individuals receive their status in the community then that they do so utilizing proper and moral means. This type of social structure “produces a strain toward anomie and deviant behavior. The pressure of such a social order is upon outdoing one’s competitors (Thio, 2006).” Anomie is a good but difficult theory to implement. It offers “a way of constraining crime by improving the legitimate life chances of those who may otherwise make the choice to innovate defiantly (McLaughlin, 2001).” The question is, what can society actually offer and how do they determine who is most vulnerable? Finally, will the level of vulnerability increase with the ability to reach success? Potter suggests the reader consider what actually will satisfy this individual? “And if they achieve that goal. Will they remain content to stop there (Potter, 2005)?”
The final theory observed here is the rational choice theory. The rational choice theory assumes that crime is the outcome of weighing two decisions and choosing the best in regards to the individual making the decision. This theory explains situations where the individual does know that the behavior or act is criminal, and prior to committing it, compares the act to the alternative, finally deciding that the effects of committing it outweigh those of not. As described in the Sage Dictionary of Criminology, “the offenders seek advantage to themselves by their criminal behaviour. This entails making decisions among alternatives. These decisions are rational within the constraints of time, ability and availability of relevant information (McLaughlin, 2001).” It is possible, however, that the outcome being considered is that of an immediate one. The possibility of reaching success financially eliminates the struggle of not having that success. Not having that success, feeling inadequate socially, among peers, and in ones family makes taking the chances of getting caught worth it. Though this is not to say that the getting caught is the outcome being considered, it is possible that a harsher consequence could deter the up rise of such criminal behavior. This theory supports that if the consequence of committing the crime is harsher than the reality of not committing it then individuals would less likely choose criminal activity. The truth is, focus on white collar crime is not an old one. Most companies are charged with fines rather than imprisonment. There is imbalance of responsibility placed on criminal activity between street criminals and white collar criminals. The white collar criminals pay fines and street criminals “do time.” Socially street crimes have a larger stigma. Street criminals are shamed whereas there is not the same sense of this happening to white collar criminals. This leads to the ongoing rise of criminal activity in the upper Echlin for the simple fact that they can.
The range in which white collar crime is determined is vast and varies. That being said it is hard to use one simple theory to explain why white collar crime happens or what draws a person to participate in it. It is quite possibly a combination of all the best theories that makes a perfect fit. White collar crime then is something that is learned, fulfils a need based on social pressure to obtain power, and is made as a sound decision when compared to not obtaining such status. There is one common thread that runs through all of the theories. Without acknowledging this theme by the bulk of society, there will be very little change. The truth exists that this is a social class issue. It can not be resolved because the class with the most power to sway the outcome and the defining of such crimes is the same class that commits them. These crimes feed their power and their ability to continue to commit them. It is a difficult chain to break.
References
Barker, L. Robert (2003) the Social Work Dictionary 5th Edition. NASW Press, USA
Barnett, Cynthia The Measurement of White-Collar Crime Using Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Data. Retrieved February 23, 2007, from http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/whitecollarforweb.pdf
McLaughlin, Eugene, Muncie, John (2001) Sage Dictionary of Criminology. Sage Publications, Inc., London
Newman, J. Donald (1958) White-Collar Crime: Law and Contemporary Problems, vol.23, No. 4, pp. 735-753. Retrieved on February 23, 2007, from http://www.jstor.org/
Potter, W. Gary (2002) Controversies in White-Collar Crime. Anderson Publishing Co., Cincinnati, OH
Thio, Alex, Calhoun, C. Thomas readings In Deviant Behavior 4th Edition.
Quinney, R. Earl (1964) the Study of White Collar Crime: Toward a Reorientation in Theory and Research: Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science, vol. 55, no.2 pp. 208-214. Retrieved February 23, 2007, from http://www.jstor.org/
