One way of subduing the effect on the trend of variations in individual years is to estimate the trend as a mean value of the period's actual growth. This procedure gives a trend growth of 2 per cent, which I have also indicated in the diagram. If one believes that the truth lies somewhere midway between the growth rates we had before and after the changeover in our economic policy, one can instead calculate the mean value of the mean values during the periods 1980-1992 and 1993 onwards. The result is then 2.2 per cent. No procedure is perfect, of course. As I mentioned initially, the estimate results vary significantly depending on which method is applied and this is one of the reasons why the Riksbank has chosen not to specify an exact figure for potential growth. We have instead chosen to work with an interval of 2 to 2.5 per cent, which has emerged gradually as we have endeavoured to refine our analyses and improve our knowledge. The interval indicates that we have been influenced by the strong growth figures during the latter part of the 1990s, but that we have been cautious in stipulating to any great degree our assessments of some form of "new economy". A further reason for not specifying potential growth in more detail than this is that new information is received continuously and this affects our assessment.
2 The pattern of bad behavior did not end with the financial crisis, but continued despite the considerable public sector intervention that was necessary to stabilize the financial system. As a consequence, the financial industry has largely lost the public trust. To illustrate, a 2012 Harris poll found that 42 percent of people responded either “somewhat” or “a lot” to the statement that Wall Street “harms the country”; furthermore, 68 percent disagreed with the statement: “In general, people on Wall Street are as honest and moral as other people.” I reject the narrative that the current state of affairs is simply the result of the actions of isolated rogue traders or a few bad actors within these firms. As James O’Toole and Warren Bennis observed in their Harvard Business Review article about corporate culture: “Ethical problems in organizations originate not with ‘a few bad apples’ but with the ‘barrel makers’.” 3 That is, the problems originate from the culture of the firms, and this culture is largely shaped by the firms’ leadership. This means that the solution needs to originate from within the firms, from their leaders. What do I mean by the culture within a firm? Culture relates to the implicit norms that guide behavior in the absence of regulations or compliance rules – and sometimes despite those explicit restraints. Culture exists within every firm whether it is recognized or ignored, whether it is nurtured or neglected, and whether it is embraced or disavowed. Culture reflects the prevailing attitudes and behaviors within a firm.