Society will not turn a blind eye, even to a single antisocial act.


 Read the original article (in Japanese):

One Scandal Can Shake an Entire Company

In September 2025, former Suntory Holdings Chairman Takeshi Niinami resigned after becoming the subject of a police investigation over CBD supplements purchased overseas. Although he defended himself by saying, “I broke no laws,” the public did not accept his explanation. Suntory, prioritizing crisis management and brand protection, quickly moved to secure his resignation.

The key issue here is not simply the act itself but rather why one individual’s conduct can damage the value of an entire company. Society does not only judge the act but also the company’s decision to appoint that individual in the first place. Appointment is not just a promotion—it is a message a company sends to society, and each personnel choice can alter corporate value.

Appointments Are Corporate Declarations

Appointing managers is never a neutral act. It is a statement: “This is the person we trust to represent our company.” That is why the scandal of a manager or executive is fundamentally different from that of an ordinary employee.

  • For rank-and-file employees → misconduct is often seen as an individual issue.

  • For managers and executives → it is perceived as “the company endorsed this person.”

Thus, HR decisions are symbolic of corporate culture and values. A poor decision becomes a declaration that undermines the entire organization.

“I Broke No Laws” Is No Excuse

At his press conference, Niinami insisted that he had broken no laws. But in today’s society, what matters is not mere compliance—it is whether leaders act in ways that earn public trust.

This is even more crucial because Niinami was an external “professional manager.” Unlike executives who rise internally, he had no foundation of accumulated trust within the company. Instead, he was expected to demonstrate both results and integrity simultaneously. With high compensation comes a higher level of responsibility, and excuses such as “it wasn’t illegal” or “I was under pressure” simply do not hold.

The reality of professional managers:

  • Without internal trust, they are judged by results and integrity.

  • Their high compensation requires proportional accountability.

  • “As long as it’s legal” is never a shield against scrutiny.

What Defines Managerial Suitability?

Scandals ultimately raise the question of whether the individual was suitable for management in the first place. Being able to deliver results is not enough. Managerial suitability can be defined as follows:

■ Five Elements of Managerial Suitability

  1. Risk Judgment: distinguishing between risks worth taking and those to avoid

  2. Transparency: awareness of how one’s behavior is perceived

  3. Ethics and Empathy: ensuring trust is never undermined

  4. Self-Control: not succumbing to pressure or temptation

  5. Reproducible Performance: delivering results that ripple across the organization, not just individually

Unnecessary risks—especially those outside one’s professional role—are the most unacceptable of all.

Managers Who Understand Failure

Great managers know the difference between types of failure:

  • Failure through challenge → acceptable, a source of learning

  • Failure through lack of preparation → a problem to be corrected

  • Failure that causes scandal → absolutely unacceptable

Managers who have experienced failure themselves are often more tolerant of their subordinates’ challenges. They treat mistakes not as grounds for punishment but as learning opportunities. This mindset fosters psychological safety within teams.

Psychological Safety Is Also for Managers

Psychological safety is often discussed only in terms of subordinates being able to speak freely. Yet, managers themselves also need psychological safety.

  • “I cannot show weakness.”

  • “If I fail once, it’s over.”

  • “There’s no one I can confide in.”

When these beliefs take hold, managers become isolated, defensive, and prone to poor decisions. In contrast, when managers themselves feel safe to seek support and admit vulnerability, they can make sound judgments and provide healthy guidance. Safety for leaders is what allows safety to spread across the organization.

Culture That Reduces Pressure

The true pressure on managers is not just performance expectations—it is the suffocating atmosphere of “I must not fail.” When combined with isolation, this becomes a trigger for scandals.

Organizations must cultivate structures that allow:

  • Managers to recover from mistakes

  • Peer networks where managers can consult each other

  • A culture where weakness is not punished

Such measures ease managerial pressure and encourage healthier decision-making, fostering challenge rather than fear.

Organizations That Encourage Challenge Grow

Workplaces with psychological safety encourage people to take risks. When mistakes are tolerated, individuals are more willing to innovate. Thus, scandal prevention and innovation can coexist.

Conversely, when organizations suppress challenges for fear of failure, they may appear stable on the surface but quietly stagnate. Managerial suitability and psychological safety are what separate growth from decline.

HR as the Watershed of Corporate Value

Ultimately, scandals underscore the gravity of who is appointed as a manager. It is not enough to base appointments on performance alone.

  • Results matter, but not in isolation

  • Trust, ethics, and psychological safety must be part of the equation

  • The best leaders foster both challenge and security within the team

HR decisions are the very expression of corporate philosophy. They shape the company’s present reputation and its future trajectory.

✅ Conclusion

In an age where a single scandal can shake an entire company, “I broke no laws” is no longer an acceptable defense.
The true safeguard lies in appointing managers who embody managerial suitability—leaders who take the right risks, inspire trust, and nurture psychological safety.

HR decisions are not routine—they are watershed moments that define both corporate resilience and long-term growth.


Read in Japanese↓

一人の不祥事が企業価値を損ねる｜マネージャー適格性と人事の役割（2025.9.5）

Read more articles (in Japanese)↓

Z世代のPCスキル不足が本当の問題か？｜世代対立構造を排除せよ（2025.9.3）

コメント

コメントを投稿

このブログの人気の投稿

Why Aren’t Wages Rising in Japan?

イメージ
  Why Aren’t Wages Rising in Japan? — How the Labor Share Ratio and Retained Earnings Are Stalling Economic Growth Read the original article (in Japanese): 生産性3割アップも「増えない給料」　原因は「貯めこむ大企業」にあった | TBS NEWS DIG Chapter 1: The Illusion of Wage Growth Despite government announcements of a “historic wage increase,” most workers in Japan feel no real difference in their paychecks. The reality is that real wages have barely moved in 25 years , even though labor productivity has risen by roughly 30% during the same period. This growth rate exceeds that of major European economies like France and Germany. The popular narrative — “wages haven’t increased because productivity is low” — is no longer credible. The real question is this: Why are companies making more money, yet not paying workers more? Chapter 2: Record Corporate Profits, Yet No Pay Raises The most glaring figure is Japan’s retained earnings , also known as corporate savings or internal reserves. In 1998: approximately...
続きを読む

Proposing the Radical Idea of a “Tenure-Based Retirement System”

イメージ
Read the original article (in Japanese): 「もう長すぎた…」宇宙飛行士・野口聡一氏が57歳でJAXAを辞めた納得のワケ( ダイヤモンド・オンライン ) The Reality Behind the 45-Year Retirement Debate The ongoing public debate around the “45-year retirement” and early retirement plans in Japan was initially intended to encourage self-directed career development. Yet, many workers interpret these initiatives as thinly veiled attempts to push them out. As astronaut Soichi Noguchi has noted, Japan’s work culture tends to reward compliance over skill-building or career ownership. If we want to change that, we need structural reform—not just slogans. The Proposal: A Tenure-Based Retirement System A better alternative is the Tenure-Based Retirement System . Rather than setting a fixed age for retirement, the idea is to define an employee’s career cycle within a company by tenure—say, a 20-year maximum. Such a system allows for natural career reflection without age-based discrimination. More importantly, it promotes a mindset where workers are exp...
続きを読む

How “Incompetent Seniors” Drive Young Employees Away Through Broken OJT Structures

イメージ
 Read the original article (in Japanese): なぜ「OJT」ばかりの企業に若者は定着しないのか？　上司が部下育成を勘違いする理由 「うちはOJTで育てる」と胸を張る企業がある。OJTとはOn-the-Job Trainingの略で、現場で実務を通じて部 www.itmedia.co.jp Introduction: Is “We Train Through OJT” a Cop-Out? “We develop people through OJT”—how many times have we heard this in Japanese workplaces? On-the-Job Training (OJT) is originally meant to be a practical learning method where skills are honed through real work. Yet in practice, many companies abuse this term as a way to justify throwing new employees into unfamiliar tasks without guidance. This leads to frustration, underperformance, and ultimately, resignation. This article explores why such “OJT in name only” is problematic and what structural improvements companies must make—drawing comparisons to the foundational training methods found in sports and the arts. 1. Without Form, Growth Can’t Begin Karate, Baseball, and Art: Why Mastery Begins with Form Karate has kata. Baseball has standard stances and pitching mechani...
続きを読む