By SHLOMO BENARTZI

They say frequent traveling can be a real killer. On one recent flight, I saw how this could literally be true.

After a flight to Los Angeles, I entered the terminal to find a man in the gate area passed out and turning blue. An airline official was already with him but no medical care was being administered. When I inquired if an announcement could be made to summon a doctor from the near vicinity, the employee informed me that 911 had been called and help was on the way. There was nothing to be done in the meantime.

I found the lack of action astounding. Whatever happened to “Is there a doctor in the house?” In an airport with its extensive paging and intercom systems as well as bustling activity, it seems an ideal place to quickly send out the call for help and get a first responder in seconds rather than minutes.

But what the airport also offers thanks to poorly run airlines, government intervention and bankruptcies galore are nameless, faceless, company-less employees with zero authority and little incentive to think beyond the training manual.

Apparently, the manual says to call 911 and then wait (another thing airports are famous for). These manuals are no doubt written with great reverence to the attorneys who prescribe the path of least discretion to avoid potential lawsuits. (Never mind that Good Samaritan laws protect those who aid the injured or ill in emergency situations.)

The employee in “charge” was hired to do a specific job: to follow directions. He doesn’t get paid to assess a situation and take action to solve the problem at hand in the most expedient fashion. When you pay employees as little as possible, you get as little as possible.

Disturbing trend

While this was just one small incident (though the injured man and his family would probably disagree), it illustrated a disturbing trend toward the dumbing down of employee performance. When I asked for the employee’s name and contact information, he became rude and aggressive. Apparently there is no need for a customer to follow up on specifics of the service provided. Or more likely, he knew the best way to avoid trouble is to remain anonymous.

As a professor of business at UCLA and researcher of economic behavior, I see this trend playing out in government institutions, corporate boardrooms, factory floors and in the classroom. The old can-do American attitude has changed into a shrug of the shoulders and a “what can I do?” indifference. The employee no longer feels accountability for his or her actions (or inactions) and is not given responsibility by the employer. The end result is diminished service, sometimes even life-threatening in nature (such as in this case).

While we fear the hidden cells of mass chaos, could there already be small-scale chaos on a daily basis? Poorly trained employees of American businesses and government-subsidized entities have little skin in the game and little desire to go above and beyond. What once made our country strong ingenuity, entrepreneurial thought, risk taking has been squashed by fear.

This experience and several others not always life-threatening but troubling nonetheless lead me to an unnerving conclusion. If we can’t save one man from turning blue, how will we prevent a large-scale disaster?

Hindsight is always 20/20, but maybe the problem is that foresight is ignored. As I raise this issue, will anything be done? Will airport management reconsider how they handle emergency situations? Will individual employees be allowed and even encouraged to take action when required?

The less-than-stellar response to the medical condition of one man in one airport is not considered a national disaster, but the warning signs are there that if something is not done, this one incident will be replayed again and again. In the face of a true disaster, the consequences may be too much to bear.

Shlomo Benartzi is professor and co-chair of the behavioral decision making group at UCLA Anderson School of Management.