When we talk about compliance and compliance violations (scandals), we tend to think of these occurrences in a stark contrast of right and wrong.
However, there are many types of compliance violations.
One type is a compliance violation with malicious intent. These are dishonest cases that cross the line in which the person or persons committing the violation is fully aware of their wrongdoing. It may be caused by unsavory decisions made by one individual, or it may be conducted by an entire organization. Frankly, cases like these have moral, ethical and conscience-related issues.
Another type is a compliance violation due to amae (dependence). There is no certain malicious intent in these cases, but sloppy self-management or immature awareness leads to the perpetrator thinking, "who cares," or becoming negligent, thoughtlessly involved, having weak defenses, or getting carried away on what was initially supposed to be a joke. There are some instances of organizations committing this type of compliance violation, but most violations are on a personal level.
Additionally, there are unwarranted compliance violations. These violations are caused by conspiracy, scapegoat, responsibility that comes with one's status, and involve forced resignation with no opportunity to explain oneself, and being forced to accept the situation, which was out of their control in the first place.
However, when compliance is taught focusing on the most heinous types of compliance violations in order to preach the importance of observing compliance, the audience reaction usually is, "I'm not such a bad person, and would never have the nerve to do such a thing. This does not apply to me." This disassociation consequently leads to the audience dozing off…
As I have said, there are many levels of compliance violations, which means that on the other end of the spectrum, observing compliance also has various facets to it. Examples include enhancement of corporate value-type or conventional/controlled-type compliance and both types are consistent with each other.
This multifaceted approach can also be applied to the idea of "compliance brings profit." For instance, B2C companies can positively boost their corporate image by applying compliance "makeup," which will directly result in sales. On the other hand, even if B2B companies apply their compliance "makeup," it will not score them points in competitive bidding. Because positive effects are not seen immediately, it would be easier to understand the reasons for observing compliance from different viewpoints—for instance, making efforts to observe compliance to prevent losses from penalties such as debarment from bidding.
Of course, the idea "compliance brings profit" is true for B2B companies as well. Yet, the meaning of profit differs from B2C companies. For B2B companies, profit is something that is not immediately visible. We can say that for these companies, profit means leading each employee toward happiness by enabling sustainability as a "good company" on a medium to long-term basis.