Organized Hypocrisy

By David Penklis

Organized Hypocrisy is the disconnect between talk, decision-making, and action by multiple actors and is evident in our daily lives and part of our DNA. We cannot ignore or avoid it. It occurs globally in international politics, within a nation-state by its government, and by corporate and government organizations. Significant scandals are connected to organized hypocrisy, such as the VW and Enron scandals, and it is in international climate change discussions, nation-state elections, and proven to be evident in renowned organizations such as the African Union, UNICEF, and the World Bank.

This book provides an in-depth understanding of organized hypocrisy by breaking down the concept and its many components. Intriguing and interesting case studies provide evidence of the prevalence and reasons for organized hypocrisy. The case studies cover climate change, foreign policy and arms control, state-building, government corruption, BREXIT, membership to the EU, human rights, Enron corporate reporting, General Electric silence, VW defective cars, the African Union, World Bank, and much more. This book demonstrates that organized hypocrisy is being used strategically across the globe and is part of our daily lives and, essentially, our DNA.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Troubador Publishing Ltd
• Release date: Apr 28, 2024
• ISBN: 9781805148548

David Penklis

David Penklis is a scholar and practitioner in organizational management, transformation, and United Nations peacekeeping operations. David has senior executive level experience, leading organisations' global management, establishment, integration and downsizing. His experience covers banking, education, financial services, superannuation, government, and peacekeeping. David teaches university post-graduate courses, and holds a PhD and professional qualifications. He has worked in ten countries and resides in New York, USA.

Book preview

9781805148548.jpg

Copyright © 2024 David Penklis

The moral right of the author has been asserted.

The views expressed herein are those of the author and do not reflect

the views of the United Nations.

Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of research or private study, or criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, this publication may only be reproduced, stored or transmitted, in any form or by any means, with the prior permission in writing of the publishers, or in the case of reprographic reproduction in accordance with the terms of licences issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside those terms should be sent to the publishers.

Troubador Publishing Ltd

Unit E2 Airfield Business Park

Harrison Road, Market Harborough

Leicestershire LE16 7UL

Tel: [phone]

Email: [e-mail]

Web: www.troubador.co.uk

ISBN 978 1805148 548

Cover Design: Kez Leigh Robinson

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data.

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

Contents

Preface

Acknowledgements

Introduction

1.1. Introduction

1.2. Global

1.3. National

1.4. Organizational

1.5. Summary

Logic and Coupling

2.1. Introduction

2.2. Hypocrisy

2.3. Logic and Reasoning

2.4. Coupling

2.5. Summary

Talk, Decision-making and Action

3.1. Introduction

3.2. Organized Hypocrisy

3.3. Defining Organized Hypocrisy

3.4. Talk

3.5. Decision-making

3.6. Action

3.7. Summary

Behaviors and Traits

4.1. Introduction

4.2. Worldview

4.3. Morals

4.4. Trust

4.5. Credibility

4.6. Legitimacy

4.7. Truth and Lies

4.8. Self-deception

4.9. Summary

Elements and Practices

5.1. Introduction

5.2. Power

5.3. Abstraction

5.4. Identity and Groupthink

5.5. Entity Survival

5.6. Facades and Their Uses

5.7. Information Dissemination and Its Inaccuracies

5.8. Criminality and Corruption

5.9. Summary

The Global Environment

6.1. Introduction

6.2. International Environment

6.3. Nation-States and Organized Hypocrisy

6.4. Case Study—The Hypocritically Convenient Agreement on Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards

6.5. Case Study—Global Climate Mainstreaming and Protection

6.6. Case Study—Identifying Hypocrisy as a Propaganda Weapon

6.7. Case Study—Foreign Policy and Arms Control

6.8. Case Study—International State-Building

6.9. Summary

International Organizations

7.1. Introduction

7.2. International Non-Government and Supranational Organizations

7.3. Case Study—Membership of Turkey in the European Union

7.4. Case Study—EU International Maritime Border Monitoring and Delivery of Humanitarian Assistance

7.5. Case Study—World Bank Policy and Operations Disconnect

7.6. Multinational and Transnational Organizations

7.7. Case Study—Regulatory Treaty on Multinational and Transitional Corporations’ Impunity and Human Rights

7.8. Case Study—Volkswagen Group Deception and Defective Vehicles

7.9. Summary

The National Level

8.1. Introduction

8.2. Political Hypocrisy

8.3. Elections and Organized Hypocrisy

8.4. Head of State

8.5. Government

8.6. Case Study—Cannabis: A Caribbean Government Challenge

8.7. Case Study—Jamaican Corruption

8.8. Case Study—The United Kingdom’s Brexit Politics

8.9. Case Study—South Africa’s Official Development Assistance Practitioners

8.10. Summary

Organizational Attributes

9.1. Introduction

9.2. Stakeholders and Influential Actors

9.3. Leadership and Management

9.4. Ethical Behavior

9.5. Values

9.6. Culture

9.7. Conformity

9.8. The Coexistence of Lean Processes, Best Practices, and Organized Hypocrisy

9.9. Summary

Action and Political Organizations

10.1. Introduction

10.2. Defining Action and Political Organizations

10.3. Case Study—Chevron and ConocoPhillips – Corporate Sustainability Reporting

10.4. Case Study—Enron Corporate Reporting and Financial Fraud

10.5. Case Study—General Electric Avoiding Hypocrisy Through Silence

10.6. Case Study—African Union and its Normative Responsibility to Protect Framework

10.7. Case Study—UNICEF’s Institutionalization of Decoupling

10.8. Case Study—European Commission Leak Prevention

10.9. Summary

Final Thoughts

Abbreviations and Acronyms

Bibliography

About the Author

Preface

Every day, the media report acts by Heads of States, Governments, Chief Executive Officers, profit and non-profit organizations that appear to be illogical, deceitful, or hypocritical. Heads of State blatantly tweet untruths, the distribution of fake news is rising, and organizations disconnect what they say and do. There appears to be a prevalence of either a real or perceived, intentional or accidental, disconnect between what is stated, decided, and undertaken. Understanding how and why this disconnect occurs can give us invaluable insights into how our world actually operates.

The disconnect or contradiction between talk, decision-making, and action creates undesirable and unfortunate accusations of hypocrisy and deceitfulness. This book explores the disconnect between talk, decision, and action in multi-actor situations conceptualized as organized hypocrisy.

The concept and term organized hypocrisy provides a new understanding of why the disconnect between talk, decision-making, and action occurs. Organized hypocrisy is also a tool that has been and is being used by Heads of State, nation-states, governments, non-profit and corporate organizations.

Organized hypocrisy is a way of responding to situations where there are competing, irreconcilable, and conflicting demands. It can be found in global, national, and organizational activities and is an intrinsic part of how our world operates. The reasons and logic for this disconnect and contradiction can be complicated, situation-driven, unintended, or part of a deliberate strategy.

In this book, the elements of organized hypocrisy are dissected so that the prevalence and existence of organized hypocrisy can be fully understood. The valid existence of organized hypocrisy is found to occur in many different situations. This book is not alone in identifying organized hypocrisy as it builds and draws on the work of achieved scholars, such as Michael Barnett, Nils Brunsson, Martha Finnemore, Stephen Krasner, James March, Johan Olsen, Catherine Weaver, and many others¹. Overall, this book aims to provide an in-depth understanding of organized hypocrisy and how it appears in the world in which we live today.

Understanding organized hypocrisy, its prevalence, use, components, and application provides a way of grasping how our world operates and why, what we are told, and what is done can be so different.

Notes

1. Bodies of work such as (Barnett & Finnemore, 2004), (Brunsson, 1989; 2006), (Krasner, 1999) (March & Olsen, 2004), (Weaver, 2008) and many others cited in this book and the bibliography.

Acknowledgements

Many people have contributed directly and indirectly to this book, so I wish to recognize the academics, reviews, and my supporters. Firstly, my wife Leigh, my greatest supporter, who has lived through this book’s development over the past many years. Those that have reviewed and contributed, most importantly, Dr. Julia Hagn, author of UNICEF: Caught in a Hypocrisy Loop, for her suggestions, and Linda (Mereness) Kleinschmidt, whose in-depth editing was invaluable. Dr. Judith S. MacCormick and Professor Adriana Salcedo for their reviews and comments. Professor Susan Park who first raised my curiosity about organized hypocrisy during my doctoral research.

There are many academics cited in this book whose research into organized hypocrisy or a linked subject has contributed to this publication. Their teaching and research provide us with the intellectual insights and stimulus to better understand our world. I would like to recognize the many professors, researchers, and authors whose work is used in, and contributed to, this book. They are Zafer Adıgüzel, Gordon Allport, Ilan Alon, Paul Babiak, Darrin Baines, Vian Bakir, Jamie Barden, David Beetham, Michael Behnam, Macalester Bell, Warren Bennis, Ibrar Bhatt, Eva Boxenbaum, Malte Brosig, Hedley Bull, Chad Carlos, Charles Cho, Max Clarkson, Carolyn Coburn, Hakan Çora, Eugenio Cusumano, Jennifer M. Dixon, Janet Dukerich, Jane Dutton, Daniel Effron, Robert Egnell, Norbert Elias, Oznur Gulen Ertosun, Henry Farrell, Martha Finnemore, Margaret Gilbert, David Grant, Ruth Grantargues, Em Griffin, Edward Hacker, Timothy Hallett, Morton Halperin, Robert Hare, Frank Harrison, Roger Harrison, Edward Herman, Jessica Isserow, Irving Janis, Stefan Jonsson, Axel Klein, Colin Klein, Stephen Krasner, Milli Lake, Wendy Lambourne, Joris Lammers, Lee Lane, Ben Lewis, Michael Lipson, Jeremy Lott, William Lutz, Alison MacKenzie, Tammy MacLean, Andrew McStay, Alfred Mele, Bruce Bueno de Mesquita, David Messick, Chris Paul Methmann, John Meyer, Hans Morgenthau, Ulf Mörkenstam, Steven Morrison, Eric Neumayer, William Parry, Ronny Patz, Patrizia Pedrini, Richard Perkins, Charles Perrow, Todd Pettys, Irene Prete, Brian Rowan, Jay Seitz, Judith Shklar, David R Simon, Tony Simons, Patricia Springborg, Herb Stokes, Ann Tenbrunsel, Kenneth Thompson, Peter Vanderwicken, Catherine Weaver, Karl Weick, David Wiggins, Charmaine Williamson, Albert Wolters, Edward Wreisband, Ekow Yankah, Natalie Zähringer, David Zarefsky and many others.

Introduction

1.1. Introduction

Claims of hypocrisy, misinformation, and inappropriate acts by Heads of State (HoS), governments, organizations, and individuals are peppered throughout and disseminated by the mainstream, independent, and social media. These claims and those charged are typically perceived as immoral or acting against the best interests of their nation-state, government, community, or organization. This circumstance may or may not be the case, as those who act hypocritically can have many different motives or intents. They could pursue their own self-interest, maneuver between irreconcilable situations, try to appease multiple stakeholders or seek to protect other parties.

Hypocrisy is complex and can be a deliberate organized strategy or the unintended outcome of a situation. Understanding the complexity and application of organized hypocrisy can shine new light on how the world, nation-states, and organizations operate and how it can manipulate and manifest.

This book explores the concept of organized hypocrisy² that was theorized by organizational theorist and Professor of Management, Nils Brunsson. The investigation moves across the global, national, and organizational frameworks to provide a broader cross-disciplinary view, examine the related components, and bring greater clarity and understanding to the concept overall. Although Brunsson’s concept of organized hypocrisy has been used and cited, there remains significant room for the idea to be further developed and clarified.

Strengthening the concept and identifying its relationships and components will bring a greater understanding of organized hypocrisy. It will also assist people in making sense of their world. This book identifies its existence, and by defining its components, citing research and situations brings greater breadth and more clarity to the concept.

The terms organized and hypocrisy have existed for centuries. The etymological derivation of organized is from Latin, and that of hypocrisy comes from Ancient Greek, Latin, and French. Both words found their way into Middle English in the 15th-century. The father of modern political science, Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli, also identified hypocrisy as a deceptive practice and an essential tool for rulers in his 15th-century publication, The Prince (Machiavelli, 1998).

Machiavelli claimed that hypocrisy or deception is needed for reasons of necessity, stating that a prudent ruler cannot and must not honor his word when it places him at a disadvantage and when the reasons for which he made his promise no longer exist. If all men were good, this precept would not be good, but because men are wretched creatures who will not keep their word to you, you need not keep your word to them (Bull G. , 1981, pp. 99–100). Hence, Machiavelli advocated for the use of hypocritical acts by a sovereign HoS in order to rule a country.

Depending on the use of hypocrisy in English, the term can have both positive and negative connotations. The combined use of the terms organized and hypocrisy have appeared in speeches and publications for the past two hundred years. In his 1845 speech in the House of Commons, the British politician Benjamin Disraeli commented that a conservative government is, in effect, organized hypocrisy. Organized hypocrisy was also recognized in the 1911 New Thesaurus as a noun and classified as a falsehood (Disraeli, 1845; Mawson, 1911, p. 166).

Over the centuries, hypocrisy has become woven into our daily lives. In the book, In Defense of Hypocrisy: Picking Sides in the War on Virtue, Jeremy Lott claims we should expect hypocrisy to be a widespread practice. He argues that hypocrisy is so widespread that it may as well be part of our DNA, and it is widespread because it is functional. While hypocrisy usually helps prop up norms and preserve the existing order, that is not always the case. Hypocrisy also provides a way for good men to pay lip service to heinous governments and warped social customs while also working to thwart and ultimately undermine them (Lott, 2006).

If hypocrisy is widespread, we can assume it can be identified and can be in an organized form. This assumption is not new, as scholars and practitioners have identified and published evidence of organized hypocrisy in both the political and organizational subject areas. Professor Nils Brunsson claims that organized hypocrisy is endemic, and other scholars have supported this claim by identifying the concept’s existence and its use in global, national, and organizational frameworks.³

In Brunsson’s book, The Irrational Organization, he contends that irrationality (non-rationality) in decision-making and the use of organizational ideologies is a fundamental feature of organizational life. Decision-making, he argues, is almost always removed from the rational model and involves biased information from a limited set of alternatives, and this information is not and cannot be fully weighted by the decision-maker (Brunsson, 1985).

Through in-depth empirical studies conducted over a decade, Brunsson identified how organizations produce ideology and how ideology and action can systematically conflict with one another to either the benefit or the detriment of an organization. These conflicts or competing demands can create disconnects, resulting in either positive or negative outcomes for entities (Brunsson, 1985). In this book, the term entities or entity refers to an individual, organization, or nation-state.

The idea of disconnects and irrationality led Brunsson to the concept of the organization of hypocrisy and organized hypocrisy, for which he is credited as the leading academic. Organized hypocrisy focuses on the connection or coupling of talk, decisions, and actions. Coupling is commonly assumed to be a close and linear linking between the relationship of words, decisions, and actions. What is stated in words is thus expected to be complied with and acted on without any deviations.

Organized hypocrisy is a way of understanding how those faced with contradictory demands they cannot satisfy, or those who wish to pursue other aims or objectives, disconnect their statements, decisions, or actions from the commonly assumed linear and closely connected, initial statement to final action (Skelley, 2000; Brunsson, 2006, p. xiv).⁴

Any deviation from the stated word to the final action is usually viewed negatively as deceit. The belief that the entity cannot be trusted to do what is said is considered a lie. The perception is that they have low morals or questionable ethics, as their words and actions are disconnected, so they are not trustworthy. A disconnection between talk and action is usually avoided, as it could bring disgrace or have adverse consequences. Although organized hypocrisy de-couples talk, decisions, and actions, it is not viewed negatively. It can be used to produce positive results for the user.

There is a distinction between individual hypocrisy and organized hypocrisy. Individual hypocrisy is the disconnect of all the components of talk, action, and decision-making in relation to a matter being undertaken by one person. Individual hypocrisy can affect others. However, the others are not actors or participants in disconnecting the components of talk, decision-making, and action concerning a single matter. Here, one person is wholly responsible for the disconnects and the act of hypocrisy.

In contrast, organized hypocrisy involves multiple actors being involved in the talk, decision-making, and action of the same matter. The numerous actors all contribute to disconnecting talk, decision-making, and action and creating the hypocrisy, whether the actors are knowingly, unconsciously, intentionally, or unintentionally a participant.

In exploring organized hypocrisy, this book seeks to identify the various components and the situations where it has been used. The reason for the ongoing disconnect between talk, decisions, and action is not considered an accident. Instead, it is a product or tactic connected to one or many difficult or irreconcilable situations. The use, gap, consequences, repetition, and duration of the disconnect can vary and incorporate multiple concepts and tools.

Talk, decision-making, and action can be associated with language, narratives, facades, credibility, crisis management, perceptions, processes, tactics, politics, achievable activities, and both the internal and the external environment. Therefore, organized hypocrisy can be the sum of many parts and cross or incorporate different and overlapping concepts, ideologies, and understandings within the different global, national, and organizational frameworks it operates.

This book divides the exploration of organized hypocrisy into three main frameworks, namely, the global, national, and organizational. This approach was taken as there are some unique features attributed to each framework. Breaking the exploration of organized hypocrisy into these three frameworks allows for grouping the many aspects and situations to assist in understanding the nuances of each specific framework.

Generally, the global framework is identified as the international environment wherein nation-states, cross-border activities, and global positioning occur. The national framework covers those activities within the nation-state border itself, while the organizational framework refers to the workings within and connected to an organization. This division into three frameworks is not always precise, as there can be situations where two or even all three of the frameworks are interconnected. In those situations, the closest fit is used in this book. In contrast, there are also situations where organized hypocrisy clearly falls within a single framework.

1.2. Global

At the global level, the decoupling between talk, decisions, and actions can be viewed as a product of the global environment and its system where nation-states and international not-for-profit and corporate organizations operate.

Modern nation-states operate on the principle of sovereignty derived from a nation-state-centric world system associated with the 1648 Peace of Westphalia. Many of the key nation-state principles that were established at Westphalia were subsequently used to form the legal and political framework of our current modern inter-nation-state relationships.⁵ Westphalia explicitly recognized nation-states based on the principle of territorial sovereignty. It established the independence of those nation-states and emphasized that each nation-state had rights that all the others were expected to respect.

The idea of a nation-state is that the State includes people of a single ethnic stock and cultural traditions. The nation-state rules over a territory, defined by borders that it defends and controls, and has a bureaucracy and government to manage that territory using legal, education, and other systems. It legitimately controls the use of force in its territory and its resources at a national level (Kazancigil, 1986, p. 188).

Sovereignty has been recognized as a prime attribute of statehood and the qualification for full recognition and membership in international society and intergovernmental organizations. This doctrine of sovereignty also implies a double meaning and claim as follows:

1.Internal sovereignty or exclusive right in domestic affairs, where the nation-state is the supreme decision-maker and enforcer of authority for a particular territory and population.

2.External sovereignty or autonomy in foreign policy, where nation-states have an absolute right to do as they please, pursue their own best interests, and even go to war.

The term sovereignty implies an international environment where there is no supreme international authority above the nation-state. Hence sovereign nation-states are independent, can pursue their interests, and create an environment of international harmony or anarchy (Waltz, 1979). When a nation-state pursues its own interest, another nation-state can come under threat, or both can end up in violent conflict. Therefore, each nation-state must be continually aware of other nation-states’ interests and moves and balance relationships, allegiances, and threats.

Two fundamental systematic processes can also be identified in the global order that influences the nation-state. These are conflict and cooperation.⁶ Cooperation is possible when it serves the interests of the nation-state. The structure of the international system tends to gravitate toward a hierarchy based on power capabilities, and as such, it involves potential conflict situations. These situations significantly influence the nation-states whenever those states consider, plan, and implement their domestic and foreign policies.

The potential for conflict is part of the security dilemma that nation-states face in seeking to preserve their survival and why international recognition, alliances, and cooperation are essential. To address this situation, nation-states have chosen to create international regimes and organizations, such as the United Nations, to assist in maintaining international order and lessen their security threats.⁷ The concept of sovereignty is enshrined in the United Nations Charter and international law, along with the ideas of the equality of nation-states, non-intervention in domestic jurisdiction, and sovereign immunity.

For the nation-state to secure and protect itself from internal and external threats, maintain stability, and pursue its interests, it continually maneuvers internationally and domestically. They thus continuously reposition themselves internationally through diplomacy and relations with other nation-states, build alliances, and participate in forums and activities to pursue and obtain their desired outcomes.

In a democracy, domestically, the nation-state is assumed to derive power from its people. So, it is the citizens that can restrict or endorse the actions of the nation-state. In a democratic election, one political party must win favor and convince the citizens to vote it into power to lead that nation-state. Therefore, a dually elected nation-state government will typically try and keep in favor with most of its citizens when dealing with international and domestic issues, even if they are irreconcilable.

International relations Professors, Stephen Krasner and Norbert Elias, have identified the potential for nation-state organized hypocrisy due to the problem of balancing the often-conflicting internal and external demands. They highlight that hypocrisy in the duality of normative codes within nation-states often produces a two-fold code of norms whose demands