We are living in a very different world from that of the post-war era. The Establishment had a stronger hold on the media; there was greater loyalty to hierarchy; there was a clearer belief that society was strengthened by the closing of ranks to protect appearances; not showing any weakness, and certainly not washing our clothes in public! The information revolution has transformed not only industry and global trade, but also strongly influenced our society. Diversity is celebrated; transparency is actively sought; dirty laundry is not only encouraged to be washed in public, but more frequently is thrown on the rubbish heap – live media coverage included. This is for the greater good – isn’t it?
At the same time, as we embrace open society, the amount of information now transmitted to each and every one of us, through all manner of new sources is straining, if not surpassing our ability to absorb all that is directed at us. If we can’t absorb it, how can we then rationally analyse and interpret its meaning? In my function as Professor, I note the greater tendency of students to “multi-task” several sources of information simultaneously; a demand for straightforward and “quick” answers or solutions to complex quandaries. Questions are answered, not debated. How much of the information transmitted represents an exchange of opinion and views? How much is merely prejudicial “cyber-fill”?
Most of us face a tide-full of information, every day, of the type that King Knut of olde was known not to be able to resist, but with little coherent filtering – leaving us, like him, swimming. Even those who try to manage information inflow, through careful selection and de-selection of sources, still find the speed of news and twitter feeds near overwhelming. Do we, the recipients, have the capacity to evaluate this inflow intelligently and reach an independent opinion? Are we not all tempted to seek news stories that comfort us in our prejudices; accept and repeat simplified and non-validated messages of events as given truths; and find closure in quick justice and conclusions – perhaps at the detriment of a far more complex truth?
This blog was in part inspired by a recent viewing of the Danish film “Jagten” (the Hunt) by Thomas Vinterberg. The anti-hero despairingly floats towards his destiny on a current of lies and suspicion, created by unjust supposition and reinforced by self-righteous, all too rapid public condemnation, and an uncritical acceptance of “sound-bite”, prima facia evidence by the society in which he dwells. We, the voyeurs squirm in discomfort. Trapped in a cage of quick and easy social stigma, the plight of our anti-hero is hopeless as he faces estrangement from his community and the eternal perdition of “case closed”.
In our society, we regularly see accusations made, labels applied, based upon sources that may be more or less qualified. A recent article in the Daily Telegraph tells the story of a family business run to ruin as the result of false and unsubstantiated assumptions made and acted on by the UK HMRC. Business leaders today often stand accused of poor culture and/or criminal behaviour and lose their jobs and status – many probably justly, but surely some, possibly unjustly - a victim of a desire to apportion blame to cleanse public conscience and seek closure on what perhaps may have been misadventure, rather than misconduct. Were the Bankers, truly solely responsible for the financial crisis? What of the political encouragement of unfettered consumer growth? What of the “wilful blindness” of supervisors, large and small?
As governance, compliance and ethics professionals, it is our job to clarify the causes of poor decision-making or misconduct. The dangers we face are twofold:
1. To not allow ourselves to be overwhelmed by the rapid flow of opinion, popular within whatever circle is concerned, and not to prejudge any situation: to have the courage to maintain an open and judicious mind.
2. The responsibility to conduct our deliberations and investigations in an appropriate, systematic and non-accusing manner. To maintain the presumption of innocence, until guilt and responsibility is properly allocated to those truly accountable.
My New Year’s wish to all is to grant us the patience, courage and wisdom to do our jobs with fairness and justice, in a world expecting the quick and easy “fix”.