WHEN ETHICS GO UNSEEN

In 2023, a leading global consultancy came under international scrutiny over its role in enabling questionable practices when senior partners misused confidential Australian government tax information. 

This case is often cited as an example of ethical blindness, where profit motives and internal pressures overshadow ethical judgment. Despite having internal policies and a public pledge to integrity, senior leaders overlooked—or failed to challenge—decisions that caused systemic harm. The problem wasn’t malicious intent, but something far more dangerous: ethical blindness.

This prompts a deeper question: How do ethical lapses happen in organisations that appear to be doing everything “right”?

The answer is not so much about corruption but about a failure to see the ethical impacts of decisions from the start.

WHAT IS ETHICAL BLINDNESS?

Ethical blindness is a temporary, often subconscious inability to see the moral side of a decision or action. Unlike intentional misconduct, it is marked by a gap between what is intended and what happens. It is a failure to recognise the ethical importance of everyday business choices.

This isn’t an uncommon phenomenon. In complex environments where performance metrics are prioritised, values can gradually shift. Over time, a practical decision may hide moral responsibility. Ethical blindness often appears in cultures where short-term results are valued over long-term consequences or challenging authority is culturally risky.

This lack of awareness, rather than deliberate malice, renders ethical blindness such a serious concern.

PSYCHOLOGICAL UNDERPINNINGS OF ETHICAL BLINDNESS

To understand why ethical blindness happens, we must look into the psychological decision-making framework. 

Several cognitive biases act as silent accomplices that dull our ethical awareness.

COGNITIVE BIASES

1. Confirmation Bias
   People often look for evidence supporting their beliefs while ignoring information that disputes them. This selective perception can cause decision-makers to miss warning signs that challenge their preferred story.
   
2. Framing Effects
   When a choice is presented as a business or financial decision, its ethical considerations can become less noticeable. For example, reducing headcount might be seen only as a way to save costs, ignoring its human impact.
   
3. Slippery Slope Effect
   Minor ethical compromises can often lead to more serious ones. If small instances of bending the rules go unchallenged, the organisation becomes desensitised, which increases the likelihood of more serious outcomes.

ORGANISATIONAL AND SOCIAL DRIVERS

Ethical blindness is rarely just a personal failure — it often stems from broader structural issues.

1. Performance Pressure
   High pressure to achieve targets or shareholder returns can lead to unethical shortcuts. When success is narrowly defined, ethical considerations are regarded as less important.
   
2. Toxic Organisational Culture
   Cultures that normalise ambiguity, prioritise results over process, or penalise dissent foster blind spots. Ethics erode when leaders overlook how something is achieved in favour of what is achieved.
   
3. Diffusion of Responsibility
   In large or siloed organisations, individuals often assume that someone else is responsible for moral oversight, which diminishes personal responsibility and accountability.
   
4. Obedience to Authority
   Hierarchical structures can suppress ethical questioning. Employees may defer to their leaders’ directives, assuming alignment with broader values, even when they are not.
   
5. Groupthink and Conformity
   The desire for cohesion often overrides ethical instincts. People suppress concerns, fearing isolation, social rejection, or retribution, to maintain group alignment.
   
6. Lack of Psychological Safety
   Employees will remain silent when raising concerns is met with punishment or indifference. Silence becomes their only option.

EIGHT ORGANISATIONAL STRATEGIES TO PREVENT ETHICAL BLINDNESS

Ethical blindness does not disappear on its own. To build ethical resilience, businesses must implement systemic safeguards.

FOSTER A SPEAK-UP CULTURE

Companies must set up clear and confidential ways to raise ethical concerns and, more importantly, safeguard those who use them. An ethical culture flourishes when speaking up is met with listening, not punishment. 

MODEL ETHICAL LEADERSHIP

Ethical leadership isn’t just about statements; it’s about actions. Leaders must embody the values they expect from others, not just selectively, but consistently. When integrity is evident at the top, it becomes believable at every level.

INTEGRATE ETHICS INTO DECISION-MAKING

Embed ethical reflection into all strategic and operational processes. Regular pause points, impact assessments, and stakeholder reviews should be routine, not just crisis response mechanisms.

SET ALIGNED AND REALISTIC GOALS

Performance targets should reward both outcomes and methods. Unrealistic KPIs can lead to ethical compromises. Aligning incentives with the organisation’s stated values ensures people do not have to choose between results and integrity.

INVEST IN ETHICS TRAINING

Beyond compliance modules, ethical training should promote moral reasoning and courage. Case-based learning, peer discussion, and scenario rehearsal (e.g., “Giving Voice to Values”) are more effective than memorising policies.

PROMOTE PSYCHOLOGICAL SAFETY

Create space for dissent. When team members can question, challenge, and disagree without fear, blind spots become visible. Both innovation and ethics depend on curiosity, not merely compliance. Ethical cultures start where curiosity outweighs fear.

Psychological safety means individuals can express themselves honestly, make mistakes, ask questions, or voice dissent without fearing punishment, humiliation, or rejection. When psychological safety exists, people feel secure enough to present their whole selves, take interpersonal risks, and engage in learning-oriented behaviours. This safety is not about comfort or avoiding challenges, but about trust. It indicates that a person’s voice is valued, even when it disrupts consensus or exposes vulnerability.

Importantly, psychological safety builds through consistency—when people repeatedly find that speaking up does not lead to negative consequences, their sense of safety grows. Encouraging empathy, recognising effort over just outcomes, and quickly addressing exclusionary behaviours are vital steps that foster a trusting environment.

EMBRACE DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION

Diverse teams break groupthink by bringing in wider experiences, values, and worldviews that challenge uniform thinking and automatic agreement. When people from different cultural, professional, or personal backgrounds work together, it becomes harder for biased or unethical assumptions to go unexamined. This mental variety encourages critical thinking, better risk awareness, and more innovative problem-solving. Therefore, inclusion is not just a moral duty—it improves decision-making by ensuring different voices are heard and respected. By creating an environment where dissent is possible and welcomed, diverse teams lead to more ethical, resilient, and effective results.

ESTABLISH INDEPENDENT OVERSIGHT

Internal ethics committees, third-party audits, and whistleblower protections are essential structural tools. They detect risks and demonstrate that ethics are a core business metric.

CASE STUDY: WELLS FARGO AND THE COST OF ETHICAL BLINDNESS

Between 2011 and 2016, Wells Fargo generated over 3.5 million unauthorised bank accounts to meet aggressive sales targets. Facing pressure to hit unrealistic quotas, employees engaged in dishonest practices, though many did not initially view their actions as unethical.  

What failed?  

Psychological safety was absent, and ethical framing was suppressed by performance-focused language. Leadership rewarded results without scrutinising the process, reinforcing self-serving bias and obedience to authority.  

This was not just an example of a few bad apples; instead, it reflected a cultural and structural failure.

STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS: FROM AWARENESS TO ACCOUNTABILITY

Addressing ethical blindness requires businesses to shift from reactive to proactive ethical governance. This involves embedding moral reflection into daily practices.:

1. Structure: ethics committees, anonymous reporting, and oversight mechanisms.
   
2. Culture: celebrating moral courage, not merely quarterly wins.
   
3. Leadership: integrity as a behavioural standard, not merely a branding message.
   
4. Measurement: Tracking not just compliance, but ethical climate indicators (e.g., trust, transparency, voice).

Ethical resilience is a competitive edge. Stakeholders—especially employees and consumers—are increasingly scrutinising authenticity. A transparent and responsive ethics framework builds loyalty, boosts reputation, and supports long-term sustainability.

STAYING AWAKE IN THE GREY

Ethical blindness is not about bad people; it is about systems that fail to foster ethical awareness. As Harvard ethicist Max Bazerman writes, “Most unethical behaviour is driven not by bad intentions, but by unconscious biases and pressures.”

To build ethical businesses, companies must expose the unseen and recognise the gradual erosion of integrity before it becomes a scandal.

This means asking better questions:

1. What assumptions are we not challenging?
2. Who isn’t being heard?
3. What outcome are we privileging, and at what cost?

It means treating ethics as more than a compliance checkbox or a PR stunt. Ethics must develop into an operational rhythm—something practised, supported, and authentic. The real danger isn’t malevolence; it’s the ethical fog that settles when we cease to look.

In business, as in life, the most dangerous failures are the ones we do not see coming.

FROM SEARCH TO CERTAINTY

In May 2024, Google launched its AI Overviews feature, which received mixed reviews. One thing was clear: search was no longer just about finding content; it was about getting answers. At the same time, generative AI platforms like ChatGPT and Perplexity AI quickly became the preferred tools for students, professionals, and consumers in a variety of situations, offering curated, personalised answers rather than just a list of links.

This shift is important because it goes beyond changes in search behaviours; it concerns what many now call the Answer Economy. The Answer Economy is characterised by instant access to information, AI-driven problem-solving, and AI-supported decision-making. For organisations willing to adapt, the potential for new business models and opportunities has never been higher.

The Answer Economy is redefining prominence, trust, and differentiation.

UNDERSTANDING THE ANSWER ECONOMY

Over the past several years, the number of industries, sectors, and uses of digital services has grown significantly, driven by the digitalisation of knowledge, skills, behaviours, products, and services. The Answer Economy describes the digital landscape where economic value increasingly depends on those who can deliver relevant, reliable, timely, and contextual answers rather than just content or products. In this context, being relevant through first-page rankings on Google is less important, while providing the answer a consumer needs via voice assistants, chatbots, and AI-generated summaries is much more significant.

The Answer Economy exists independently of any specific approach, platform, or industry. It includes generative AI models, large language systems, vertical search engines, voice interfaces, and expert networks. Today, whether Lululemon’s ReChair provides customised compliance answers through a legaltech tool, Amazon’s AI-enabled medical diagnostics in their health services, or a retailer’s use of chatbots, it increasingly focuses on immediacy, credibility, and personalised solutions.

The changing behaviour can be attributed to a combination of:

1. Information Overload – with the vast amount of online content and review sites like Yelp or TripAdvisor, search results are no longer helpful, and searches become overwhelming (Haider, 2022).
   
2. AI Maturity – the development of large language models, context-aware generative AI, and the ability to deliver conversationally relevant, summarised responses at scale that have nothing to do with search (OpenAI, 2023).

3. Consumer Behaviour Changes – frictionless matters more to consumers: quick and easy will guide their decisions in their buying, learning, or deciding behaviour (Gartner, 2024); and

4. Platform Dynamics – Platform owners have designed platforms to be more focused on providing answers rather than just results, which affects their visibility and discoverability.

Hence, the Answer Economy represents a shift from producing a large volume of content to understanding the context and providing relevant answers.

TECHNOLOGICAL LENS: FROM RETRIEVAL TO RESOLUTION

Traditional search engines operate by indexing billions of pages and producing ranked lists of results. In the Answer Economy, the process is not based on indexes but on resolution. AI is adopted to understand intent, extract relevant meaning from large datasets, and generate a confident answer. It is often done without pinpointing the source of the answer.

This has two important implications.

Content may become somewhat detached from its source—when a Large Language Model (LLM) generates an answer, the visibility of original publishers and experts can be overlooked entirely. However, while this could harm traditional traffic models based on SEO, backlinks, and content marketing (Kleinberg & Mishra, 2023), SEO remains a vital part of the Answer Economy.

The other key point is that the authority of answers depends on the training data and model design, not on brand reputation. A startup with a sophisticated vertical AI model trained on niche legal or medical data could outrank established institutions in perceived credibility, not necessarily because it is more trustworthy, but simply because it responds more quickly.

This increases the visibility and accessibility of some expertise; however, it also raises concerns about misinformation, bias, and the erosion of expertise authority.

BUSINESS LENS: WHAT NEEDS TO CHANGE

For businesses, the emergence of an Answer Economy impacts three key areas.

THE EVOLUTION OF SEO AND CONTENT MARKETING MODELS

As LLMs answer specific questions, it might be tempting to dismiss SEO as irrelevant or outdated. SEO remains just as important as ever, but the focus has shifted from simply ranking well in search results to shaping how AI models perceive, analyse, and transcribe information.

LLMs like GPT-4 and Google’s Gemini do not fabricate facts – they source facts from well-organised, credible, evidence-based references. In other words, both humans and machines consult reputable and trustworthy content (Kleinberg & Mishra, 2023).

THREE STRUCTURAL CHANGES

1. Structure is Strategic

Schema, metadata, and structure are now vital to how AI assesses relevance and rankings (and ultimately results). Content must be understandable by both human readers and algorithms.

2. E-E-A-T is Still Important.

Experience, expertise, authoritativeness, and trustworthiness continue to be the foundations of AI outputs and Google results. Unique content from experts is most likely to be trusted and cited (Google Search Central, 2023).

3. SEO Supports AI Visibility

SEO supports AI rather than competing with it, and improves models, citation potential, and reading depth when users look beyond the answer.

Basically, AI needs answers, but it also depends on trustworthy sources: users rely on AIs to give correct information. Companies that optimise content for both human understanding and machine readability will lead in the Answer Economy.

TRUST AND AUTHORITY

As users stop verifying sources and begin trusting outputs, the credibility of brands within AI ecosystems needs to be reassessed. This requires becoming part of the data used to train, inform, and refine these systems. For example, Google’s AI Overviews highlight sources with high E-E-A-T (Experience, Expertise, Authority, and Trust); however, these sources are still separate from an AI output.

Companies need to move beyond brand recognition to brand embedment, which involves being cited, referenced, or encoded into the AI knowledge systems’ knowledge base. This may involve partnership and licensing deals with vertical AI, as well as creative opportunities to contribute to public or open data sources in strategic ways.

CULTURAL AND ETHICAL PERSPECTIVES: CONVENIENCE COSTS

The speed and accuracy of the Answer Economy also come with a higher cost in cultural and ethical compromises.

1. A Crude Reduction of Complexity

An answer makes understanding easier. The problem is that not all questions have simple answers. When AI produces conclusions through nuanced models that effectively turn complexity into simplicity, we risk reducing complex issues to easy insights – and that can be dangerous in any field of knowledge, especially those that impact humans, such as mental health, legal advice, or even the more interpretative aspects of history.

2. Loss of Source Recognition

What is the purpose of the Answer Economy when it commodifies insight for users who stop engaging with the source? That source could be a journalist, a scholar, or a small business. The landscape of the Answer Economy might commodify insights at the expense of the ecosystem that creates them. As Metz and Roose (2023) pointed out, “AI does not just use the internet – it devours it.

3. Bias, Hallucination

AI-generated answers are only as reliable as their training data and the learnings developed by the algorithms from that dataset. Just like users, businesses need to consider not only accuracy but also oversee the models that represent them. However, users often treat these outputs as absolute, which creates a false sense of certainty, especially when AI provides incorrect answers with confidence and assertiveness.

STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS: ONBOARDING FOR THE ANSWER ECONOMY

For organisations to succeed in the Answer Economy, they will need to shift from creating content to curating and licencing knowledge. This requires strategic investment in the following areas:

KNOWLEDGE ARCHITECTURE

Building and understanding all structured knowledge bases that AI can harvest and use effectively. AI might be able to read web content optimised for schema, but it will not be able to read internal tools used by your customer service reps, FAQs, etc.

CONVERSATIONAL INTERFACES

Investing in AI-enabled assistants that reflect your company’s voice and domain expertise. These assistants should not only answer questions but also understand ambiguity, escalate intelligently, and learn from user inputs.

AI PARTNERSHIP STRATEGY

Consider partnering with AI service providers to access or license data, which can help improve training datasets or customise their knowledge networks with domain-specific expertise. Just as a company’s SEO strategies adapt to Google’s algorithm, the landscape of the Answer Economy will grow alongside AI ecosystems.

DIGITAL TRUST MANAGEMENT

Create a system to manage trust across platforms by regularly checking the accuracy of AI-generated answers that mention your brand—and by monitoring how your business appears in real time through chatbots, search engines, and smart devices.

The Answer Economy is not just about how consumers seek information using various methods — it is also a new way for people to understand information. In this rapidly evolving landscape, information is not inherently powerful; it only becomes meaningful when communicated with clarity, context, and care.

For businesses, this presents a strategic and philosophical dilemma – is the business just providing information, or does the business help people understand what counts most?

Companies that respond early by codifying knowledge, offering trust, or providing human meaning where AI cannot will significantly influence the next chapter of the digital economy.

---

[1] Forrester. (2024). Marketing in the Era of Generative AI: New Challenges, New Playbooks. Forrester Research.

[2] Gartner. (2024). Future of Customer Experience: Answer Engines and the Death of Search. Gartner Insights Report.

[3] Haider, J. (2022). Information Overload in the Digital Age: Navigating Knowledge Scarcity in a Content-Rich World. Oxford University Press.

[4] Kleinberg, J., & Mishra, S. (2023). Authority without Attribution: How Generative AI Rewrites the Rules of Online Visibility. Stanford Digital Society Review, 12(3), 44–61.

[5] Metz, C., & Roose, K. (2023). The Internet Is Disappearing Into AI: The New York Times, December 15.

[6] OpenAI. (2023). GPT-4 Technical Report. OpenAI Research. https://openai.com/research/gpt-4

Non-profit mergers are becoming increasingly common as organisations seek to scale their impact, enhance efficiency, and ensure long-term sustainability. However, unlike corporate mergers, non-profit combinations focus not on profits or shareholder value but mission alignment, community needs, and operational synergy. A merger carried out effectively can create influential, resilient organisations. Conversely, a poorly executed merger can squander resources, damage reputations, and erode trust.

While mergers can be transformative, they are complex ventures. They impact people, systems, governance, and public trust. To navigate this landscape effectively, non-profits should approach mergers not as mere administrative reshuffles but as strategic, relational, and cultural redesigns. Below are five essential considerations for non-profits contemplating a merger.

1. MISSION COMPATIBILITY

The most critical factor in any non-profit merger is mission alignment. For-profit companies may merge for market access or financial gain, but non-profit organisations exist to serve a mission. If two organisations diverge on fundamental purposes or values, a merger will likely create internal friction and confuse stakeholders.

Before entering intensive negotiations, both boards must consider the following: Are our missions truly aligned? Do we serve the same communities? Do we agree on fundamental values, goals, and strategies?

Surface-level similarities can be misleading. For example, two organisations involved in youth development might have different philosophies—one emphasising sports-based engagement while the other prioritises academic achievement. Without a shared vision, merged operations can become disjointed and ineffective.

Boards must hold joint sessions with leadership teams to identify value alignment or discrepancies. They should also review strategic plans, program models, and theory of change documents to assess compatibility.

Mission alignment must consider future direction, not just current operations. Strategic questions such as “Where do we want to be in five years?” and “How do we see our role evolving in the sector?” assist in forecasting the long-term compatibility of missions.

“Mergers between non-profit organisations are most successful when mission fit is high and organisational cultures are compatible” (La Piana Consulting, 2018).

2. GOVERNANCE & LEADERSHIP STRUCTURE

Mergers inevitably raise governance questions: Who will lead the new entity? How will the board be structured? Will one organisation effectively be “absorbing” the other, or is this a merger of equals?

In non-profits, leadership is not just a management issue—it also encompasses trust, representation, and stakeholder confidence. Ineffective management of these aspects can lead to power struggles, leadership exits, or disillusionment among donors and staff.

Ideally, the merged organisation should have a governance structure honouring both legacies while establishing a clear path forward. This involves defining:

• Board composition (e.g., equal representation vs. newly formed board)
• Executive leadership roles
• Decision-making protocols
• Conflict resolution mechanisms

Addressing leadership identity and continuity is also crucial. Co-CEO models are often considered during the interim, although they can introduce their own complexities. Early planning for leadership transitions and succession in the merger process ensures continuity and boosts morale.

“Boards must be intentional in addressing leadership succession and power-sharing during a merger to prevent the erosion of organisational trust” (McLaughlin[1], 2010).

3. Cultural Integration

Culture often determines the success or failure of a merger. Even if missions align and leadership supports the initiative, incompatible organisational cultures can undermine integration. Culture includes communication norms, attitudes towards risk, hierarchy, and innovation.

Organisations should assess and compare their cultures before merging. Consider questions like:

• Are we collaborative or top-down?
• How do we handle conflict?
• What are our attitudes toward evaluation and accountability?
• How do we engage communities and stakeholders?

Cultural differences do not necessarily imply that a merger should not occur; however, they necessitate a deliberate effort to bridge the gaps. Overlooking this step can result in staff disengagement, decreased productivity, and confusion regarding identity.

Conducting a cultural audit before the merger and developing intentional integration plans—like joint retreats, culture champions, shared rituals, and cross-team collaboration—can help facilitate a smoother transition.

In particular, involving frontline staff in the design of the cultural integration process fosters a sense of ownership and conveys that culture is not imposed from the top down.

“Cultural misalignment is a leading cause of post-merger failure in the non-profit sector” (Bugg & Dering[2], 2011).

4. Financial Health and Liabilities

Like the private sector, financial health is crucial in a non-profit merger. However, the focus is not on maximising shareholder returns but on sustainability and fiduciary responsibility.

Every organisation must conduct thorough financial due diligence, which includes the following:

• Audited financial statements
• Asset and liability breakdowns
• Grant obligations and donor restrictions
• Pending legal or HR issues
• Long-term funding projections

One organisation may have greater financial strength, while the other offers programmatic depth or community trust. This is not necessarily a deal-breaker. However, complete transparency is essential. No one wants to discover hidden liabilities or structural deficits after the merger.

Donors and funders will also scrutinise the financial rationale behind the merger. Be prepared to demonstrate how the merger enhances sustainability, operational efficiency, or fundraising capacity.

Post-merger, the new entity should formulate a consolidated financial strategy that embodies its unified mission and capitalises on new economies of scale.

“Financial due diligence is not about eliminating risk, but understanding and managing it strategically in pursuit of mission goals” (BoardSource, 2021).

5. Stakeholder Communication and Buy-In

Even the best-planned merger can fail if key stakeholders are uninformed. Non-profits serve communities and are accountable to their funders, staff, volunteers, and the individuals they assist. Mergers raise both emotional and practical concerns for each of these groups.

• Staff may worry about job security or cultural shifts.
• Funders may question the merger’s purpose or lose confidence.
• Clients or community members may feel confused or betrayed if changes are not explained.

Transparent, proactive communication is essential. Start early. Share the “why” behind the merger, the anticipated benefits, and how changes will unfold. Hold listening sessions to address concerns and incorporate feedback.

This is not just PR – it is crucial for maintaining trust and minimising disruption. Rather than bailouts or hostile takeovers, mergers framed as growth opportunities have a better chance of long-term success.

Consistent updates via newsletters, town halls, and one-on-one engagement can transform potential resistance into advocacy.

“Effective communication during a merger fosters confidence and preserves essential human and financial capital. ” (Nonprofit Finance Fund, 2020).

Mergers as Strategic Tools, Not Last Resorts

Non-profit mergers should not be seen as desperate measures to prevent failure. When approached thoughtfully, they can function as strategic tools to expand reach, improve services, and manage donor resources responsibly.

However, successful mergers require more than good intentions; they demand thorough planning, open communication, and a clear grasp of each partner’s contribution.

The five areas outlined above—mission alignment, leadership structure, culture, finances, and stakeholder communication—are not simply checkboxes. They represent dynamic, interconnected systems that determine whether two organisations can become one.

As the non-profit sector faces increasing demands for collaboration, sustainability, and measurable impact, mergers may become less of an exception and more of a norm. With the proper groundwork, a merger can be more than just a survival strategy—it can be a bold move toward greater impact, a shared vision, and sector-wide transformation.

---

[1] McLaughlin, T. A. (2010). Nonprofit mergers and alliances: A strategic planning guide (2nd ed.). John Wiley & Sons

[2] Bugg, R., & Dering, T. (2011). Merging wisely: A guide for nonprofit leaders. National Council of Nonprofits