Defining Capitalism’s Character: Tom Peters versus McKinsey

<p style="color: rgb(197, 183, 131);"><strong> AWARD WINNER - Responsible Leadership Category at European Foundation for Management Development (EFMD) Case Writing Competition</strong></p><br>In early 2021, McKinsey & Company (McKinsey) agreed to pay US$573 million to end US state-level investigations into claims that it had helped exacerbate the global opioid crisis. Tom Peters, an influential and highly respected management guru, was upset by how far his former employer had been willing to go in helping US drug maker Purdue Pharma LP increase sales of OxyContin, a narcotic-based painkiller that helped drive an opioid epidemic responsible for hundreds of thousands of tragic deaths. As far as Peters was concerned, there was no question as to whether what McKinsey did was wrong: it had ignored the “moral responsibility of business” by helping an unethical client maximize profit by aggressively promoting the wide-scale use of a highly addictive drug. In addition to asking why McKinsey was still open for business, Peters posed a previously unimaginable question: “At this moment in time, why would anyone want to go to work for McKinsey?”

The case can be used in undergraduate-, graduate-, and executive-level courses or modules on corporate purpose, leadership, or managing careers. After working through the case and assignment questions, students will have the opportunity to do the following:<ul><li>Assess their moral compass and articulate their definition of corporate purpose.</li><li>Consider the importance of developing clear principles for decision-making that link personal values and career aspirations.</li><li>Consider whether, or under which conditions, they are prepared to bear the personal costs associated with not following one’s conscience in decision-making.</li><li>Discuss the issue of authenticity and hypocrisy in leadership.</li></ul>

• leadership
• shareholder
• stakeholder
• character