According to the text, making the statement that a code of ethics exists is not sufficient. Why is this so according to the text? 
    In the US, just having codes of ethics and provision of training is not enough because of the passings of with the passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Just stating codes of ethics is no longer enough as today organizations must be able to show that employees have received training in those codes. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 was enacted in a response of significant firms like Enron and WorldCom violating ethics in business. Sarbanes mandates codes of conduct regarding financial practices, accounting controls, and corporate governance and that their provisions are enforced because enforcement is a means of communicating high ethical standards and calls for the implementation of criminal penalties against violators. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act consists of 11 sections and with subsections.

Now, explain how your company or a company you know well demonstrates that the employees are trained in the code of ethics. How can the training be measured?
    The only ethical training I can think of is the Mandatory Reporter Training that I have to take every year as a teacher.  This training covers just about every kind of child abuse listed and teaches how to recognize signs in children of such abuse. The training is measured in the form of a test that must be passed every year at the beginning of the school year. 

Dr. Diana Echols
Upvote Post  0 LIKES
 Thank you Jeffrey for your response to this prompt. The SOX Act of 2002 did change many things that address the ethics of a company. You correctly identified an important component that has driven how organizations deal with ethical training. You have addressed each aspect of this prompt sufficiently and demonstrated understanding of the concepts covered in the text. As a result, I will affirm this post.