Sự sụp đổ của ngân hàng Farrow năm 1920

THE 1920 FARROW’S BANK FAILURE
1

The 1920 Farrow’s Bank Failure
Name student
Columbia Southern University


The 1920 Farrow’s Bank Failure
2
The 1920 Farrow’s Bank Failure
Introduction
The article about the failure of Farrow bank highlights the cause of this failure. According to
experts, Thomas Farrow with his arrogance, led to the bank's collapse in 1920. To clarify the
problem, I will address the following questions: How did corporate culture, leadership, power
and motivation affect Thomas' level of managerial hubris? Relate managerial hubris to ethical
decision-making and the overall impact on the business environment; explain the pressures
associated with ethical decision-making at Farrows Bank; Evaluate whether the level of
managerial hubris would have decrease if Farrow Bank had a truly ethical business culture.
Could this have affected the outcome of Farrow Bank?
The way to corporate culture, leadership, power and motivation affect Thomas' level of
managerial hubris
Corporate culture has given Thomas all the power. He is both the owner and chairman of
Farrow Bank. He has enough authority to change the organizational structure without any outside
meddle or control. Thomas was a poor financial manager when he falsified documents and
mishandled bank related information.
Thomas Farrow ruled Farrow’s Bank like a tyrant (Hollow, 2014). Therefore, he did not need
any advice from others. And in fact, he never received anyone's advice for his poor leadership.
Besides, with arrogance has led to an absolute greed - one of the deadly sins (Hollow, 2014).
This has led to the complete collapse of Farrow Bank.
Pressure of ethical decision-making

At that time, Thomas was too arrogant to receive the assistance of any force involved in his
decision-making at Farrow Bank, both government and private. Therefore, he has no pressure in


The 1920 Farrow’s Bank Failure
3
making ethical decisions. He has no moral protection for himself. Greed came to the throne and
led the error for all his decisions.
The level of managerial hubris and ethical business culture
Psychologically, when a falcon lives with a flock of chickens, it will think that it cannot fly
and behaves like a chicken. So is the moral. When a person lives in a moral culture, they will
certainly behave in a moral manner. That is the trend. Rarely will it be broken. And once Farrow
Bank is run by an ethical leader, ethical corporate culture, it is very likely that the end result of
Farrow Bank will be changed. Perhaps it will survive today rather than die prematurely like the
time of Thomas Farrow. In fact, President Barack Obama (Collins, 2015) has saved many banks.
However, for Farrow Bank, there was so much scandal and criticism of the banker’s arrogance
that it canceled out its chance to revive. On the other hand, if Farrow was truly managed by an
ethical person who directed the bank towards an ethical corporate culture, the bank would not
have had to suffer from losses and failures.
Conclusion
After reading The 1920 Farrow's Bank failure: a case of managerial hubris?, I got a better
look at the expert judgment of Thomas Farrow's arrogance that led to the Farrow bank crash.
Pride arises from a conservative corporate culture, acquiring power over a relationship without
the advice or control of functional departments. In addition to the leadership is weak of Thomas
Farrow and his insatiable greed. These things brought Farrow Bank to the brink and could not
turn back or get help from anyone. In my opinion, if Farrow Bank was led with ethical corporate
culture then the negative issues that led to Thomas Farrow's arrogance would not have happened.
Moreover, most likely the bank is still in operation today.

The 1920 Farrow’s Bank Failure
4
References
Collins, M. (2015, 7 14). The Big Bank Bailout. Retrieved 1 5, 2020, from
: />Hollow, M. (2014). The 1920 Farrow's Bank failure: a case of managerial hubris? Journal of
Management History (1751-1348), p164-178.