A common misconception
There exists a common misconception that morality is measured by outcomes.
It is not. History is littered with individuals who achieved precisely what they intended to achieve. They secured promotions. Acquired influence. Won arguments. Silenced critics. Eliminated rivals. Preserved reputations.
Success, however, has never been a reliable measure of virtue. Or honest values – if they still exist…
Morality concerns itself with methods. It asks not merely what was accomplished, but how: Was the truth told when a lie would have been more convenient? Was power exercised fairly when it could have been abused? Were others judged by the same standards one demanded for oneself?
These are awkward questions.
They possess the irritating habit of remaining relevant long after triumphs have faded and official narratives have been carefully curated.
For morality is an inconvenient creditor; it eventually presents its account.
Not in boardrooms.
Not in performance reviews.
Not in carefully drafted corporate communications…
But in the quiet reckoning between conduct and conscience.
The difficulty, of course, is that conscience presupposes a desire to know whether one has acted rightly.
Not everyone shares that desire.
Some individuals concern themselves exclusively with whether they can do a thing.
Others occasionally pause to ask whether they should.
The distinction is not insignificant. Indeed, corporate survival itself may depend on it.
And so the Editor poses a simple question.
Not whether Charlotte succeeded.
Not whether she prevailed.
Not whether she convinced others.
A far simpler question.
Students… Readers… Partners-in-crime at CorpX… Board of Directors, co-CEOs, other partners and vague non-entities…
You know who you are!
So please answer the question, given what you now must be aware of:
Is Charlotte Kok a moral woman?
Leave a comment