When companies behave badly: Is more purpose really what we need?
2018: the year of the trust crisis. From global #metoo, to boys in hoodies becoming the new shadowmen in suits, to discovering that the Donald is actually who he said he was, to our own rotating cast of national leaders and bank CEOs dancing to show tunes for their institutional lives. 2018 was, if nothing else, interesting. Interesting like a car crash chock full of real people running real organisations getting caught behaving as real people often do…badly.
The rather curious response from organisations to their new lead role in the TV show, “Middle-aged entitled men behaving badly” seems to be to double down on establishing a better purpose and a stronger moral compass. The questions I have are, “Is this what we really want or what is actually required? Could the response be far simpler? Should more companies and their leadership just be more honest about the human condition and their role in it?” Bad behaviour is as old as time (think Adam selling out Eve) it’s just that the chances of getting caught are now far higher. The surveillance is simply better at catching stupid. That is the real reputational risk to manage. Maybe we should start with first principles: dishonest behaviour is always in organisations because it’s also within all of us.
Is it post truth or real truth?
Rather than see the crisis of trust through the lens of company and process, could we be better placed viewing it through the lens of humanity? A lens that says we are flawed, complex beings riddled with doubts, addictions and maladies. No one remains untouched. Isn’t this the truth that we all seek? Isn’t this what our companies should be saying? That they know what they are? A flawed human creation led by humans. Not perfect, not the solution, not the almighty, not above it all but a critical participant in the wealth creation for society. Kind of like sharks, an important part of the eco system but also something that will eat a cute baby seal given an opportunity to do so. The difference is though that sharks stop eating baby seals when they are full. The issue is that companies are led by flawed humans rather than perfect predators who always want more, more, more no matter what is on the menu and really the secret is so do we as their customer because we are human too.
Lets accept that. Rather than wrap themselves up in brand general cause no offence statements shouldn’t they and we really aim for honestly about what they do, fairness in actions and acceptance of natural consequences of an overreach? Shouldn’t they just say we are here to make money through making good products and services but we will behave in a way consistent with the morals of our community? Shouldn’t we hold them to that rather than thinking they will cure everything that ail our souls?
Aren’t we all a bit messed up?
I haven’t smoked for eight years. It was how I used to cope with that deep empty feeling many of us have. While that’s always going to be a WIP I decided to quit when my wife was pregnant with our first child and well…let’s just say I hit a few bumps in the road. After swearing that I’d stopped, I got caught out. My missus found my beloved Marlies in my bag. The thing is I sent her in there to get something too, which makes me not only dishonest but also forgetful. Now, I could have promised that it was the last packet, maybe even that I’d seen the light and error of my ways, but all I could muster was, “I’m sorry. I’m trying. I lied because I was embarrassed, I’m not the guy who finds quitting anything hard”. While I thought I was gearing up for a duly deserved talking to, my wife’s face softened and she said something to the affect of, “Ok then”.
Isn’t this what Facebook, banks, aged care providers and others are doing? They’re like me saying he’s stopped smoking whilst hiding a pack of darts in a backpack. Rather than hiding behind the bullshit of false purpose shouldn’t they just hold up the packet and say, “Yeah it’s hard, we often slip up but we’re trying?” Isn’t that what we should let them do?
Should we just be clear?
If we could rewrite Google’s, “Do no Evil” we would say, “We capture, index and add value to the world’s data to make money for our shareholders” (data, our greatest recurring resource, source of wealth and currently given free but I am getting off point). “We aim to treat data as we would want someone to treat our child’s data. We are kinda evil by design but we don’t ever want to be mean, we need to pay our taxes and submit to better oversight to check our baser instincts.” That seems right, seems more like what we actually need.
Welcome to 2019. Be better to each other.
—
Picture courtesy by Uzalendo News
