Case Study 3.3 – The Story of the Christmas Ham

Philosopher Jonathan Glover described incrementalism as how “we slide into participation by imperceptible degrees so that there is never the sense of a frontier being crossed.”[i]  George Lefcoe, former LA County Regional Planning Commissioner, and law professor at the University of Southern California, demonstrated this thought process and subtle changes behind sliding down the slippery slope.  Upon the occasion of his retirement from public office, he made these comments about the perks and seduction of public life, when he talked about “the Christmas Ham.”[ii]

My first Christmas as commissioner, I tried to return (the ham). My guess is that not one of the many public servants who received the ham ever had tried to return it.

(Righteous Indignation)

When I received another ham the next Christmas, I gave it to a worthy charity.

(Small Justification)

The next year, some worthy friends were having a party, so I gave it to them.

(Defensible Explanation)

The next year I had a party, and we enjoyed the ham.

(Full Rationalization)

 In the fifth year, about the tenth of December, I began wondering, where is my ham?

(Outright Entitlement)

Not many people start out at the “ham as a birthright” phase, and most don’t jump from mild disgust, directly to an expected perk of pork.  Some proceed down the path, one baby step at a time, until they end at place they never expected to reach.   Its death by a thousand spiral cuts, to both the ham, and the conscience.

What goes through an employee’s mind during this downward decent?  Accepting a small gift by a businessperson, or even a public official, might seem legal, but needs to be disclosed, reported properly and not accepted in anticipation of returning a favor (no quid pro quo – this for that).   In many cultures it might appear rude to refuse a small token of friendship and could end up costing the deal or the contribution.  In Commissioner Lefcoe’s first year of the “hamgate” incident, he wasn’t sure whether accepting it was proper, but it seemed to bother him.  What was the funeral home trying to do?  Befriend him? Influence him? Buy him? For the cost of a ham?  He could defend his initial action by giving the pesky porker away.  It may have been inconvenient, requiring additional effort, but at least some needy people could benefit, and he’d keep his integrity intact.  

Another year. Another ham. Another explanation.  This time perhaps with some indigestion, but without the side order of indignation.  The smoked swine that initially left such a bad taste in his mouth, was getting more and more palatable.  Savory even.  After just a few years, he started salivating in anticipation, right after Thanksgiving.  Slippery slope successfully slid. Now where’s that carving knife?

RECOMMENDATION:   Values-Based Leaders should caution their staff about starting down the slippery slope. Employees might struggle with their original decision, but after significant soul searching, reluctantly acquiesce to the “one time” request.  To quote Cat Stevens, Rod Stewart, and Sheryl Crow – “the first cut is the deepest” and can lead to future sliding by pointing employees in the wrong direction. Unfortunately, once they’ve done that deed, it becomes increasingly difficult to refuse, and easier to accept, the second, fifth and tenth request.  They no longer have the moral high ground, and it becomes tougher to reverse course.

[i] “Incrementalism,” Ethics Unwrapped  https://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/glossary/incrementalism. 

[ii]  Notable & Quotable, “George Lefcoe,” Wall Street Journal, Eastern Edition, December 18, 1998: A14. This case can also be found in, Marianne Jennings, “The Moving Line,” Business Ethics: Case Studies and Selected Readings, 9^th ed. (Boston: Cengage, 2018), 192.