This seems obvious, given the fact that quantitative measurement refer to the evaluation of hard facts and data, generally of benchmarks that everybody within the company has to reach. For all employees, as such, it seems only natural to go to all length to achieve those benchmarks, even if some of these methods may comprise an unethical part. According to Darley, it is often the case that the persons cheat when performing the evaluation or they somehow manipulate the system accordingly.

             If we take the Enron example, everybody, including the CEO had reasons to go to any length in order to achieve their benchmarks, because they had a duty towards the persons situated in the upper levels of their managerial pyramid. For the CEO and the board of directors, one can account for pressures from the shareholders, aiming for the company to have higher performances.

             On the other hand, we should mention that the economic principle according to which the main goal of a company is to maximize its profits gives way to a very obvious question: are we to assume that all companies have unethical behaviors in order to meet their goals? In my opinion, this is not the case and the fact that Enron went consistently over the line and passed from the ethical to the legal spectrum is what brought its downfall.

             We need to trace a definite boundary between the ethical and the legal. An unethical issue is something which is not really nice, but the reverberations are also in the same spectrum. In the case of illegal things, you go to jail and you answer for your deeds in the legal spectrum.

             2. The Basic Motivational Model is, first of all, the best explanation for enhancing a leader"s RQ because it relates to the needs, objectives and motives of the employee. In order for a certain employee to perform well and for the leader to be able to motivate him in that sense, the leader needs to find both what the employee is motivated by and the appropriate ways to thus perform.