Ethics in the world of regulatory compliance
Watching a series about lawyers and politics, the kind that “hooks,” a lawyer replied to a candidate for Governor of the United States that “Bad people take advantage of the words of good people"This can be applied to gray compliance. We can also extend it to actions. I leave it to each person's free choice as to who was doing the good and the bad.
Seen like this, it could simply be part of the series' script, specifically that episode, which wouldn't have had much impact or depth if it weren't for the fact that I kept reflecting on that phrase. And the truth is, when analyzed closely, the phrase has a lot more impact than it seems.
What is gray compliance?
In the world of Compliance, or Compliance, a phrase like this can do a great service in showing the “nooks and crannies"or gaps that"the bad ones"always find in the good deeds of"the good ones”.
When we talk about “This person or that person has no evil or duplicity whatsoever"Honestly, what are we referring to? From my perspective, and as a person myself, I think we're referring to that particular person acting in good faith, without expecting anything in return; that is, giving for nothing.
Going into more detail, everything seems to point to her being transparent, sincere, honest...noble, we could conclude. This is what we all hope will always happen: meeting people like this, who, if they have something to say to you, will tell you, and if it's something that could be considered a reproach, for example, well, we resolve it like adults, mature, and educated. And on to something else. But what if that turns out not to be the case? What if that person, in the end, hides behind their "shield" of fiction the reality of who they are: someone fake, self-serving, who has no qualms about deceiving and taking advantage of a situation to get something?
This situation, which unfortunately occurs frequently, can be perfectly extrapolated to the business world. If we replace people with companies, even though they are still people after all, we can encounter situations like those described, which would make us think about compliance.
Just like people, companies are also distinguished between good and "less good." And this doesn't just have to do with whether the people who comprise them are (good or bad) or not, or whether those who lead them are not up to par as human beings. We can find all kinds of people: dishonest people in ethically led companies and vice versa.
Well, if we take this last point into account, it's up to us, in any case (whether we're leaders of an organization or not), to know how to act, whether by following the "anything goes to achieve the goal" principle or by analyzing the possible options to achieve it in a reasonable, ethical, and appropriate manner. This is what I mean by "gray compliance."
Companies have profitability as one of their main objectives, if not their main objective. I think, and we'll all agree, that without profitability there is no continuity, and everything would be poetryAnd profitability depends on the preparation of those who make up a company, on its management, on its strategy, on the spirit of moving forward and growing. And there are those who make up for it by taking shortcuts that shorten efforts and "bring" success closer, although perhaps instead of bringing it closer, they are actually pushing it further away.
This does not mean that shortcuts are unethical or contrary to good business practices, as some organizations may be more lax in their strategies, professional profiles, lower quality, or require less "effort" than others because they are highly specialized in a specific product and/or service.
But if we compare organizations with similar characteristics, and we observe relevant differences in terms of results, more/less rapid evolution or some other significant peculiarity, it could happen, and it is not an exact science, that they were using the experiences and performances of those other well "organized" organizations, excuse the redundancy, drawing positive conclusions for themselves and altering their meaning in order to "take the bait."
This, stated this way, does not entail any illegality or malpractice. The market is free, competition is healthy, but only as long as the rules of the game, that is, the regulations, are respected. And once again, it is the people who are obligated to compete fairly.
If people less good They use the intentions of the good peopleIn principle, there wouldn't be a problem with this, at least that's how it seems to me. However, it would arise when, when using them, they were misrepresented in a false or spurious way to achieve the ends both parties pursue. If they were manipulated in this way, and from the perspective of profitability alone, it would be engaging in something that Compliance does not allow, which is achieving the objective by any means.
Culture and reputation play a defining role in our day and age. Given the widespread distrust in society due to major financial scandals, misconduct, and a lack of exemplary behavior, greater and more sustained efforts are needed. Performing the same activity or process as a competitor without considering continuous improvement, quality, and ultimately the social responsibility that any organization has (economic, legal, ethical and philanthropic < A.Carrol>) leaves the person who carries it out in a very bad light, even if in appearance they appear to be someone they are not in reality.
In the end, no matter how hard we try, the difference between right and wrong leads us to a philosophical debate: what is good and what is evil for each of us. Regulatory compliance is not exempt from this debate; rather, it is there that lies the line we can call gray compliance.
There is no doubt that what is good for one person may not be good for another. As Aristotle said, if the result obtained after performing an action is good for a person, that is because that action is good, and therefore any action that does not achieve that result will be an evil action. But it may happen that a less good person also obtains a good result for themselves by using an action that could not be considered good. Will it then also be a good action? From what perspective?
Therefore, in the Compliance function, not everything is black and white. The shades of gray play a significant role in the organization's day-to-day management. Being drastic or radical is not the desired option; hence, reflection and commitment go hand in hand to provide the desired certainty in decision-making, so that we can face challenges and risks while being socially responsible...and profitable, of course.
Definitely, using the words of good people is not bad, as long as it is done out of conviction and not just convenience...because as Aristotle also said, "Virtue is the habit by which man becomes good and performs well the work entrusted to him.”…
If you want to know more reflections on Regulatory Compliance and Data Protection, visit our blog.
