An organisation consistently detects insider policy violations and applies penalties immediately, but the consequences are minor (e.g., simple warnings), leading employees to disregard the rules. Which component of Deterrence Theory is most lacking?

Question

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

Punishment severity refers to the magnitude or harshness of the penalty imposed for a violation (fines, dismissal, major sanctions versus minor warnings). Deterrence Theory in criminal and organizational contexts rests on three core components: certainty (how likely a violation will be detected/punished), celerity (how quickly punishment follows the violation), and severity (how strong the punishment is). A distractor here is “punishment normalcy,” which is not a standard component.

Step-by-step reasoning:
1) Identify what the scenario states:
   - The organisation “consistently detects insider policy violations” → high likelihood of detection → high punishment certainty.
   - It “applies penalties immediately” → prompt response → high punishment celerity.
   - The consequences are “minor (e.g., simple warnings)” → low punishment magnitude → low punishment severity.

2) Apply the deterrence logic: expected cost of misbehavior ≈ probability of punishment × severity of punishment (E = P × S). If P is high and celerity is high, but S is low, E stays low enough that employees still find violations worthwhile.

3) Illustrative calculation: assume P = 0.9 (consistent detection) and assign S = 0.2 on a 0–1 scale for a mere warning. Expected cost E = 0.9 × 0.2 = 0.18 (low). If severity were higher, say S = 0.8 (loss of job), E = 0.9 × 0.8 = 0.72, which would better deter behavior.

Why the correct answer is correct:
Because the organization already has high certainty and high celerity, the missing deterrent quality that allows disregard of rules is the low magnitude of penalties — i.e., punishment severity.

Why other options are incorrect:
- Punishment normalcy: not a standard deterrence component and not implied by the scenario.
- Punishment celerity: explicitly present (penalties applied immediately).
- Punishment certainty: explicitly present (consistently detects violations).

Conclusion: The most lacking component is a. Punishment severity. This matches the provided answer.

An organisation consistently detects insider policy violations and applies penalties immediately, but the consequences are minor (e.g., simple warnings), leading employees to disregard the rules. Which component of Deterrence Theory is most lacking?单项选择题

类似问题

A cybersecurity policy includes termination as a penalty for insider threats, yet incidents persist because employees believe violations are unlikely to be detected.Which component of Deterrence Theory is most lacking?

What was the world's first widely adopted biodiversity policy?

The aim of the Paris Agreement is to ensure that the earth’s preindustrial temperature is not exceeded by more than º Celsius.

The IPCC's mission is to Blank ______.

Why have most international agreements for environmental protection been based on the honor system?

As was exhibited with the Montreal Protocol and the encouragement of reduced CFC production, trade can be an effective tool to compel compliance with international treaties.

The Stockholm Declaration and UNEP were the result of the Blank ______ first conference on the Human Environment in 1972.

In addition to the direct mission of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), why was CITES so important?

更多留学生实用工具

智能学习助手

风格化写作助手

论文查重助手

文献引用助手

课堂转译助手

课堂笔记助手

Quiz搜索助手

学校历年真题

智能刷题助手

智能匹配练习

希望你的学习变得更简单