From ancient Greece to the present day, the aim is to understand, judge, critique, and improve moral behavior and human conduct in society. This human perseverance has always had a common goal: to establish a better way of life for all of us – society. And this is called "ethics".
At the same time that we outline what would be ethical or not, we establish conduct standards that become habits, traditions, even codes and laws. To ensure that these conduct guidelines are followed by everyone, many organizations have established so-called ethics and compliance programs. In Brazil, some public institutions even provided a more complete name, the so-called integrity programs.
This progress occurred largely at the expense of the corruption scandals that mainly plagued the United States starting in 2000 with the Enron case and later affected major European companies, eventually reaching Brazil with the mensalão and Operation Car Wash.
The results of these investigations were very similar; companies paid extremely harsh fines, executives, partners, and even board members were dismissed, prosecuted, and imprisoned, not to mention the immeasurable damage to their image and reputations recorded forever in books, articles, newspapers, films, among other media. Even if the involved companies have changed their corporate name and address, they will always be remembered for the events that took place. Digital memory does not forgive, it is eternal.
On the positive side, these large corporations had to establish so-called ethics and compliance (or integrity) programs. These programs involved the application of various elements such as the implementation of internal controls and ongoing education about ethics, laws, codes, and conduct standards expected by society as a whole. In addition to ensuring the effectiveness of the contractual and legal commitments among all involved parties, additional elements such as continuous anti-corruption risk management, processes to prevent conflicts of interest, audits, independent reporting channels, and ongoing investigations have been implemented to ensure the highest standard of integrity.
On the other hand, not everything is perfect! Those affected by these processes reacted, and just like in Italy with the "Clean Hands" operations, those involved in Operation Car Wash faced setbacks. Despite advances towards more ethical conduct standards, what has been observed in recent years is a relaxation of the punishment process and new investigative initiatives. Executives and political entities had their sentences mitigated and even canceled, just as prosecutors were persecuted and/or left the prosecutor's office.
To complement this plot, recently the decisions of the new American government have also contributed to weakening the fight against corruption. By decision of the American President, one of the most important laws that propelled investigations into government corruption worldwide, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), was subject to a request for suspension of its effects coupled with guidance to the U.S. Department of Justice to halt investigations against companies and individuals.
Furthermore, due to the aforementioned, we have been monitoring the growth of a scenario where many companies no longer take integrity programs seriously. We have seen several companies with integrity programs that are ineffective, only to have the company claim to have something or just to participate in bidding processes, but in practice, there is nothing. Or again, the integration of integrity into the legal department, as well as the juniorization of integrity leadership to serve only the commercial interests of the companies. Companies don't want the person responsible for integrity at the table, but rather someone who is just an "order taker."
What are the effects of this setback on corporate integrity programs, and the degree of impact is still uncertain. The guardians of these programs, known as "compliance officers" or compliance executives, are overwhelmed, and many refer to the current times as difficult times or even "strange" times. Furthermore, the support from Top Management truly weakened. If that setback were not enough, we also see attacks on a series of other programs that also involve ethics of life, such as the cancellation of diversity and inclusion programs or sustainability programs like ESG.
In this scenario, doubt, uncertainty, and fear of regression set in. Initially, it is possible that some companies quickly adopt the new trend through reorganization, juniorization, or even reduction of such ethics and compliance programs, clearly demonstrating that they did so not out of principle or values, but solely out of obligation.
However, others must maintain a certain standard because they have realized that an integrity program is far beyond merely complying with laws. A company with the highest standards of conduct has much to gain, beyond reputation and image; its entire ecosystem of suppliers, partners, clients, and especially employees, desire a better, more ethical way of life. In this intact environment, relationships are stronger and more transparent, results are more solid, and there is undoubtedly a collective desire to see this company succeed.
And for those who do not believe in ethics, compliance, or integrity, those who only believe in making money and the survival of the smartest, a reminder is necessary:
First, every movement is pendular; everything that goes also comes back. Today, we are experiencing a moment of attack on ethical principles, concepts that have already been understood, judged, refined, and tested. It is no longer necessary to prove that corruption is harmful to the social well-being of all. Therefore, be careful, this pendulum will return. Mainly when new and larger scandals of public and private corruption begin to emerge again. Society is tired of being deceived.
Secondly, Newton's third law no longer needs to be proven; every action has an equal and opposite reaction. This attempt to deconstruct the progress achieved for society has generated opposition that will soon become a counterforce. Promoters, judges, compliance executives, defenders of ethics, sustainability, counselors, among others, are not idle; they are reflecting, even reluctantly, in search of a solution that will come. He says, "think compliance is bad, try non-compliance." Unfortunately, many companies are taking on this risk. They flipped a coin and hope that the coin does not fall to the ground.
Third, for those who have already seen and experienced the scandals of numerous public and private companies involved in corruption, people imprisoned and convicted, businesses and families destroyed, and an eternal tarnished reputation, they know that loosening all these programs is to take a huge risk. For those companies that value good governance and for those board members who had to pick up the pieces after disasters, has any lesson been learned or will another lesson be needed in a few years?
Finally, for all those who have ethics as a principle, not out of obligation, it is time for resilience; it is certain that the wheat and the chaff will be separated soon. Until then, it will be necessary to row without wind, have patience, stay firm, and not retreat, because in the end, integrity prevails.
