Wells Fargo
The bank that said 'customer-first' while paying employees to commit fraud - and learned that chemical signals always trump verbal signals.
The bank that said 'customer-first' while paying employees to commit fraud - and learned that chemical signals always trump verbal signals.
Wells Fargo marketed itself as customer-centric while operating an incentive system that paid branch employees for new account openings regardless of customer need or consent. The chemical signal (compensation structure, promotion criteria, management pressure) directly contradicted the verbal signal (customer-first marketing). Between 2002-2016, employees opened 3.5 million unauthorized accounts to hit targets and keep their jobs. The fraud wasn't a few bad actors - it was the inevitable result of incentive architecture.
When the scandal broke in 2016, Wells Fargo's response amplified the damage. The company fired 5,300 low-level employees while leaving leadership unchanged. The public perceived this as scapegoating rather than authentic accountability - blame the soldiers, protect the generals. Multiple CEO resignations eventually followed, but the initial inauthenticity poisoned reconciliation. Regulatory restrictions persisted. Reputation remained damaged 7+ years later.
The dual lesson: organisms pay attention to chemical signals (incentives, structures, actions) not verbal signals (marketing, statements, intentions). And inauthentic reconciliation is worse than no reconciliation - it proves you haven't learned the lesson. Real accountability requires costly actions at the top, not cheap punishment at the bottom.
Cautionary Notes on Wells Fargo
- Incentive structure contradicted stated customer-first values
- Scapegoated 5,300 low-level employees rather than accepting leadership accountability
- Initial deflection poisoned later reconciliation attempts
- Ongoing regulatory restrictions 7+ years later
Wells Fargo Appears in 2 Chapters
Marketed 'customer-first' while incentive structure signaled 'open accounts at any cost.' Result: 3.5 million fake accounts (2002-2016), $3B fine, brand damage. Chemical signals (incentives) contradicted verbal signals (marketing).
Read about chemical signaling →Failed reconciliation during 2016 fake account scandal: fired 5,300 low-level employees while leaving leadership unchanged, perceived as scapegoating. Multiple CEO resignations followed, but initial inauthenticity caused lasting damage.
Read about reconciliation →