Conscious capitalism and the organizational propensity to fight corruption
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JFC-09-2020-0194 |
| Published date | 30 June 2021 |
| Date | 30 June 2021 |
| Pages | 686-701 |
| Subject Matter | Accounting & finance,Financial risk/company failure,Financial crime |
| Author | Michel Dion |
Conscious capitalism and the
organizational propensity to
fight corruption
Michel Dion
École de gestion, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Canada
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of thispaper is to examine how much the basic tenets of consciouscapitalism could
favor organizationalchange and anticorruption strategies.
Design/methodology/approach –The paper questions the vagueness of the tenets and principles of
conscious capitalism. It unveilsthe idealized worldview of conscious capitalism, as it is based on a “pseudo-
humanistic and pseudo-holistic”philosophy. The paper analyzes various kinds of rationale for justifying
anticorruption measuresand explains how the conscious capitalism movementshould assume the challenge
to develop one or the other rationale.
Findings –The conscious capitalism movement does not have basic rationale for any self-justified
discourse about anticorruption measures. The principles of conscious capitalism organizations can be
coherent witha rationale of individualand organizational compliance. They could be suitablewith a rationale
of legal, industry and international compliance.We could expect that the principles of conscious capitalism
allow radical changes in the organizationalculture. However, the main principles of conscious capitalism are
not explicitlyrelated to any rationale for a corporateself-justified discourse about anticorruptionmeasures.
Research limitations/implications –The three kinds of rationale for corporateself-justified discourse
about anticorruptionmeasures are not exhaustive. There can be other kinds of corporate rationale.Moreover,
the conscious capitalism movement appeared in 2000s and is still evolving. So, we should never take for
grantedthat the present ideals and principles of conscious capitalismwill never be improved and deepened.
Originality/value –The paper explains how the conscious capitalism movement remains unable to
present its rationale for justifying anticorruption measures. In doing so, it provides threekinds of rationale
that conscious capitalism organizations could use to develop their corporate self-justified discourse about
anticorruptionpolicies, measures and programs.
Keywords Anticorruption measures, Conscious capitalism
Paper type Conceptual paper
1. Introduction
The notion of “Conscious Capitalism”appeared in the mid of 2000s. Conscious Capitalism
presupposes that business is “part of a complex, interdependent and evolving system”
(Mackey and Sisodia, 2014, p. 53, 106). If so, then business must deal with unsurpassable
uncertainties. A complex system implies the interdependence between its constituencies
(Mackey and Sisodia, 2014, p. 106, 108). It is ever-changing, since its constituencies are
continuously evolving. Interdependence between all constituents of reality and continuous
change in every being, thing or phenomenon mirror our incapacity to globally know
complex realities. We can never globally know “what is in process”. Our knowledge of the
process and change is always fragmentary. Human existence is historically rooted.
Anything that changes is undefinable, sincewe cannot know the process of change as well
as the nature and scope of changes, at every moment (Nietzsche, 1975, p. 108; 1979, p. 112).
Facing uncertainties in the organizational life is being subjected to doubt and constant
JFC
28,3
686
Journalof Financial Crime
Vol.28 No. 3, 2021
pp. 686-701
© Emerald Publishing Limited
1359-0790
DOI 10.1108/JFC-09-2020-0194
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/1359-0790.htm
questioning about the meaning of organizational realities. Mackey and Sisodia did not
explain how to deal with the various uncertainties of business, social, and political life.
However, they asserted that all shared values “coevolve”and are “cocreated”by various
stakeholders (Mackey and Sisodia, 2014, p. 168). Nonetheless, the “cocreation”of shared
values in the organizational life is never described. Is it an issue of consensual decision-
making processes throughout the organizational culture? Or is it an issue of ethical and
shared leadership? The way shared values could be “cocreated”can unveil how various
stakeholder interests wouldbe harmonized, since the harmonization of stakeholder interests
requires the influence of sharedvalues.
The purpose of this article is to examine how much the basic tenets of Conscious
Capitalism could favor organizational change and anticorruption strategies. We will
describe how the basic tenets and principlesof Conscious Capitalism remain vague and frail,
given their orientation toward an undefined “humanistic and holistic”philosophy. We will
unveil the relative propensity of Conscious Capitalism to efficiently fight corruption. Until
now, the Conscious Capitalism movement is unable to develop any rationale for corporate
self-justified discourse about anticorruption measures. So, we will present three kinds of
rationale that Conscious Capitalism organizations could use to strengthen their prevention
strategies againstcorruption.
2. Conscious capitalism and the vagueness of its basic tenets/principles
Conscious Capitalism requires conscious leadership (Mackey and Sisodia, 2014, p. 38).
“Conscious Capitalism”has four basic tenets: conscious leadership, conscious culture and
management, higher purpose and core values, and stakeholder integration (Mackey
and Sisodia, 2014,p.33;Sisodia et al.,2018, pp. 4–6, 28). However, what does it mean “to
build and sustain a culture in a conscious way”(Sisodia et al.,2018, p. 177)? Conscious
Capitalism presupposes that a higher level of consciousness can be reached and would
positively affect leadership, management style, and organizational culture. Kofman (2006,
pp. 4–8) defined the basic characteristicsof consciousness: being conscious is being mindful.
It implies four attitudes:
(1) “perceiving the world around and within us, to understand our circumstances, and
to decide how to respond to them in ways that honor our needs, values, and goals”;
(2) giving witness to our internal world;
(3) being aware of others’otherness and improving the way we understand others’
desires and needs; and
(4) “transcending our concrete experiences through our intellectual ability to
understand, judge, and reason”.Mackey and Sisodia (2014, p. 29) explained that “to
be conscious means to be fully awake and mindful, to see reality more clearly, and
to more fully understand all the consequences –short term and long term –of our
actions”.
Being mindful of our ethical convictionsand values is attempting to improve organizational
members’wellbeingand social welfare (Fyke and Buzzanell, 2013, p. 1623).
The notion of “Conscious Capitalism”is now evolving,so that it is not still crystal-clear.
Conscious Capitalismhas three basic components.
Firstly, the requirement to transcend profitmaximization. Here, “transcending”is simply
overcoming the blind and egoistic quest for wealth. Any true transcendence looks at
something out there that can never be compared to “what-is-transcended”. We must know
how to transcend profit maximization. We must identify concrete business situations in
Organizational
propensity to
fight
corruption
687
To continue reading
Request your trial