Skip to content
Client area
EN
Request a demo
CSR · Corporate Social Responsibility · programme 08

Strengthen ethics

Co-create or take ownership of the company's ethics charter.

Why this programme

An ethics charter is upheld when people have understood it and, better still, when they have written it. The programme confronts teams with realistic dilemmas from your sector and leads them to put into their own words the principles that guide them.

Compliance starts at the top. It will be most effective in a corporate culture that emphasises standards of honesty and integrity and in which the board of directors and senior management lead by example.

Basel Committee on Banking SupervisionCompliance and the compliance function in banks (BCBS 113), 2005

What your teams experience

  1. The dilemma: faced with an ambiguous situation, the team makes a choice and justifies it.
  2. The charter in practice: work out which principle applies to which case.
  3. Our words: rewrite an article of the charter together, on screen.
  4. The vote: the room adopts the most accurate wording.

Each activity opens and closes with a projected cinematic sequence, personalised for your teams. The facilitator sets the pace: nothing moves forward without them.

What the company gains

An ethics charter that is understood and owned, enriched by the teams' own wording.

43 %

Tips were the most common detection method, accounting for 43% of cases; more than half of tips came from employees.

Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE)Occupational Fraud 2026: A Report to the Nations, 2026

How we tailor it to you

Your wording, departments, figures and photos are built into the challenges and cinematic sequences, to the letter. The look follows your brand guidelines. Teams are formed on the spot or based on your organisation chart. The session report is delivered to you after the event.

The sources of this programme

Every game, measure and reminder in this programme builds on published research. The facilitator cites it in the debriefs, and you can check every reference.

  1. Guiso, L., Sapienza, P., & Zingales, L. (2015). The value of corporate culture. Journal of Financial Economics, 117(1), 60-76. 10.1016/j.jfineco.2014.05.010
  2. Maio, G. R., Olson, J. M., Allen, L., & Bernard, M. M. (2001). Addressing discrepancies between values and behavior: The motivating effect of reasons. JESP, 37(2), 104-117. 10.1006/jesp.2000.1436
  3. Pronin, E., Lin, D. Y., & Ross, L. (2002). The bias blind spot. PSPB, 28(3), 369-381. 10.1177/0146167202286008
  4. Milliken, F. J., Morrison, E. W., & Hewlin, P. F. (2003). An exploratory study of employee silence. Journal of Management Studies, 40(6), 1453-1476. 10.1111/1467-6486.00387
  5. Detert, J. R., & Burris, E. R. (2007). Leadership behavior and employee voice: Is the door really open? AMJ, 50(4), 869-884. 10.5465/amj.2007.26279183
  6. Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. ASQ, 44(2), 350-383. 10.2307/2666999
  7. Martin, J., Feldman, M. S., Hatch, M. J., & Sitkin, S. B. (1983). The uniqueness paradox in organizational stories. ASQ, 28(3), 438-453. 10.2307/2392251
  8. Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (2024). Occupational Fraud 2024: A Report to the Nations (rapport). legacy.acfe.com/report-to-the-nations/2024/
  9. Treviño, L. K., Weaver, G. R., & Reynolds, S. J. (2006). Behavioral ethics in organizations: A review. Journal of Management, 32(6), 951-990. 10.1177/0149206306294258
  10. Kish-Gephart, J. J., Harrison, D. A., & Treviño, L. K. (2010). Bad apples, bad cases, and bad barrels: Meta-analytic evidence about sources of unethical decisions at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(1), 1-31. 10.1037/a0017103
  11. Mayer, D. M., Kuenzi, M., Greenbaum, R., Bardes, M., & Salvador, R. (2009). How low does ethical leadership flow? Test of a trickle-down model. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108(1), 1-13. 10.1016/j.obhdp.2008.04.002
The foundations shared by all our programmes (19 references)

The mechanics of our sessions: team play, the debrief, the before-and-after measure, spaced reminders.

  1. Steg, L., & Vlek, C. (2009). Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(3), 309-317. 10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.10.004
  2. Abrahamse, W., Steg, L., Vlek, C., & Rothengatter, T. (2005). A review of intervention studies aimed at household energy conservation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25(3), 273-291. www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S027249440500054X
  3. Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environmental Education Research, 8(3), 239-260. 10.1080/13504620220145401
  4. Sheeran, P., & Webb, T. L. (2016). The intention–behavior gap. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 10(9), 503-518. 10.1111/spc3.12265
  5. Bamberg, S., & Möser, G. (2007). Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: A new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27(1), 14-25. www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0272494406000909
  6. Cialdini, R. B., Reno, R. R., & Kallgren, C. A. (1990). A focus theory of normative conduct: Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(6), 1015-1026. 10.1037/0022-3514.58.6.1015
  7. Truelove, H. B., Carrico, A. R., Weber, E. U., Raimi, K. T., & Vandenbergh, M. P. (2014). Positive and negative spillover of pro-environmental behavior: An integrative review and theoretical framework. Global Environmental Change, 29, 127-138. 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.09.004
  8. Clayton, S., & Karazsia, B. T. (2020). Development and validation of a measure of climate change anxiety. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 69, 101434. www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0272494419307145
  9. Hickman, C., Marks, E., Pihkala, P., Clayton, S., Lewandowski, R. E., Mayall, E. E., et al. (2021). Climate anxiety in children and young people and their beliefs about government responses to climate change: A global survey. The Lancet Planetary Health, 5(12), e863-e873. www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(21)00278-3/fulltext
  10. Aguinis, H., & Glavas, A. (2012). What we know and don't know about corporate social responsibility: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 38(4), 932-968. 10.1177/0149206311436079
  11. Glavas, A. (2016). Corporate social responsibility and organizational psychology: An integrative review. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 144. 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00144
  12. République tunisienne (2018). Loi n° 2018-35 du 11 juin 2018, relative à la responsabilité sociétale des entreprises. Journal officiel de la République tunisienne, n° 2018-049 (texte légal). www.legislation.tn/fr/detailtexte/Loi-num-2018-35-du-11-06-2018-jort-2018-049__2018049000351
  13. République tunisienne (2025). Contribution déterminée au niveau national (CDN 3.0), soumise à la CCNUCC (rapport). unfccc.int/sites/default/files/2026-04/Document%20CDN3.0%20-version%20Finale.pdf
  14. Commission européenne (2011). Responsabilité sociale des entreprises : une nouvelle stratégie de l'UE pour la période 2011-2014, COM(2011) 681 (rapport). www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/com/com_com(2011)0681_/com_com(2011)0681_en.pdf
  15. Gollwitzer, P. M., & Sheeran, P. (2006). Implementation intentions and goal achievement: A meta-analysis. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 69-119. 10.1016/S0065-2601(06)38002-1
  16. Tannenbaum, S. I., & Cerasoli, C. P. (2013). Do team and individual debriefs enhance performance? A meta-analysis. Human Factors, 55(1), 231-245. 10.1177/0018720812448394
  17. Prentice, D. A., & Miller, D. T. (1993). Pluralistic ignorance and alcohol use on campus. JPSP, 64(2), 243-256. 10.1037/0022-3514.64.2.243
  18. Galton, F. (1907). Vox populi. Nature, 75, 450-451. 10.1038/075450a0
  19. Sitzmann, T. (2011). A meta-analytic examination of the instructional effectiveness of computer-based simulation games. Personnel Psychology, 64(2), 489-528. 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2011.01190.x

Before you book

What is digital team building?

A team building session in which teams play challenges on participants' phones while a big screen shows the running order, the scores and the cinematic sequences. A facilitator runs the room from start to finish. Everything happens in person.

Do we need to install an app?

No. Participants scan a QR code and play in their phone's browser. No account, no password, no installation. It works on iPhone and Android.

Is there a limit on the number of participants?

No. The platform adapts to your headcount, from a small team to the whole company, in one or several rooms.

Demo

See “Strengthen ethics” in action.

Thirty minutes on your premises. You play a challenge and see the report at the end.

Request a demo