“Do as I say, not as I do.”
This maxim, almost a cynical proverb, defines organizations that treat ethics as decoration: flashy, but irrelevant when pressure mounts. Codes of ethics shine on websites and in speeches, but crumble in practice. This article explores how ethics becomes elastic, governance turns into a façade, and integrity becomes an illusion — and proposes concrete paths to change this scenario.
1. Codes of Ethics: Paper Promises
Every organization displays a code of ethics. It appears in training sessions, annual reports, and corporate portals. But what happens when values are tested?
In 2015, Volkswagen promoted sustainability while manipulating emissions tests in the Dieselgate scandal (EPA, 2015). An employee who sends an inappropriate email faces immediate warning. An executive who falsifies reports? “Let’s analyze it calmly.” This selective justice is not a flaw — it’s a pattern that protects those at the top.
Max Bazerman and Ann Tenbrunsel, in Blind Spots (Princeton University Press, 2011), analyzed 200 executives and found that 70% rationalize ethical deviations under financial pressure. The code of ethics, in such cases, is just an ornament.
2. Governance: Mirror or Shield?
If codes of ethics fail, governance should align values and actions. Instead, it often serves as a shield to protect leaders.
Consider a fictional tech company in 2025 that boasts ESG goals to attract investors but ignores harassment complaints. That’s not governance — that’s situational ethics, shaped by convenience. A Deloitte study (2024) revealed that 65% of global employees distrust corporate codes of ethics, citing lack of transparency as the main reason.
Lynn Paine, in Managing for Organizational Integrity (Harvard Business Review, 1994), argues:
“Governance is only real when it protects principles, not people in power.”
Without this, internal and external trust erodes, leading to turnover, burnout, and reputation crises amplified on social media.
3. Selective Justice: Double Standards
Internal justice operates at different speeds. An employee makes a mistake? Immediate punishment. A leader fails? Strategic delay emerges: “We need more data” or “Let’s form a committee.”
In 2018, Uber faced harassment allegations ignored for years, while leadership received million-dollar bonuses (New York Times, 2018). In public institutions — such as in Brazil — corruption scandals often "wait" decades for judgment (Transparency International, 2024). Even in religious organizations, abuse cases were covered up for decades to “protect the reputation” (Boston Globe, 2002).
This hierarchy of punishment sends a clear message: title matters more than values. The result? Demotivation and cynicism become culture.
4. Leadership and Situational Ethics
Leaders are masters at reshaping principles under pressure. Ann Tenbrunsel and David Messick (Social Justice Research, 2004) show that in ambiguous contexts, 80% of managers justify deviations with phrases like “It was just this once” or “That’s how the market works.”
Imagine a manager who overlooks a compliance failure to “protect the team.” He doesn’t break ethics — he stretches it until it loses shape. Over time, these rationalizations become routine. Phrases like “Everyone does it” or “It’s technically legal” enter corporate vocabulary.
A tech company that promotes “diversity” in campaigns but maintains a homogenous leadership team exemplifies this contradiction. The base observes, learns, and repeats: “It’s just for show.” The cost? Loss of talent and innovation, plus social media-driven reputation crises.
5. Ethics in the Age of AI: A New Challenge
In 2025, organizational ethics faces an unprecedented challenge: artificial intelligence. Decision-making algorithms — used in hiring or performance evaluations — can perpetuate ethical biases if not audited. A 2023 MIT study showed that 60% of AI-based recruitment tools favored candidates from specific demographic profiles, even without explicit intention.
This new frontier demands ethics beyond static codes. Organizations must integrate algorithmic audits and value pacts co-created at all levels, challenging the traditional top-down ethics model.
6. Three Steps Toward Living Ethics
Changing this scenario requires courage and action. Here are three practical steps, with verifiable examples and recognized barriers:
Inspiring Leadership
Leaders must live the values, even under pressure. In 2022, Patagonia donated its company to environmental causes, prioritizing principles over profits (Patagonia, 2022). Barrier: Fear of financial loss. Solution: Link bonuses to ethical metrics, such as transparency indexes.
Governance Without Masks
Transparent processes are essential. Salesforce publishes annual ethics reports (Stakeholder Impact Report, 2024), detailing complaints and actions, without shielding executives. Organizations can create anonymous whistleblower channels with 30-day response targets, audited by external firms. Barrier: Internal resistance to audits. Solution: Offer virtual reality training to simulate ethical dilemmas, increasing engagement.
Justice Without Double Clocks
Ethics must be agile and equal. Unilever punishes supplier violations within weeks (Unilever, 2024). Internally, companies can review their codes of ethics every two years with input from all levels and use blockchain to track ethical decisions. Barrier: Implementation costs. Solution: Partner with tech startups to reduce expenses.
Conclusion: Ethics Is Action, Not Performance
Hannah Arendt, in Eichmann in Jerusalem (Companhia das Letras, 1963), warned:
Evil settles in when small transgressions become routine.
In 2025, with social media amplifying scandals and society demanding transparency, elastic ethics is unsustainable. Organizations that choose ethical consistency will lead the next decade — strengthening not only their reputations, but trust in global institutions.
Leaders, review your processes tomorrow. Employees, demand transparency today. Integrity starts with you.
References
- Bazerman, M., & Tenbrunsel, A. (2011). Blind Spots. Princeton University Press.
- Paine, L. S. (1994). Managing for Organizational Integrity. Harvard Business Review.
- Tenbrunsel, A., & Messick, D. (2004). Ethical Fading. Social Justice Research.
- Arendt, H. (1963). Eichmann in Jerusalem. Companhia das Letras.
- EPA. (2015). Volkswagen Clean Air Act Violations.
- New York Times. (2018). Uber’s Culture of Sexual Harassment.
- Boston Globe. (2002). Catholic Church Abuse Scandal.
- Deloitte. (2024). Global Trust in Corporate Ethics Survey.
- MIT. (2023). Bias in AI Recruitment Tools.
- Patagonia. (2022). Ownership Transfer Announcement.
- Salesforce. (2024). Stakeholder Impact Report.
- Unilever. (2024). Supplier Compliance Report.
- Transparency International. (2024). Corruption Perceptions Index.
