Today, it is not uncommon to find a transition manager suffering from burnout within a company. While businesses loudly proclaim their commitment, fierce denunciations on social media — such as those seen with the Tarte Cosmetics movement — are multiplying. Why? Because company management very often acts against the very values expected of them.
Where does this difference in perception come from? First, we need to define what we mean by moral value. Larousse summarises it as:
"Relating to the rules of conduct practised in a society, particularly in relation to the concepts of good and evil."
The Oxford Reference dictionary goes further: "A system of values, normative rules or principles according to which intentions or behaviours are judged good or bad, right or wrong. This judgement may stem from cultural, religious or philosophical beliefs. See ethics."
The concept is important since these values impact our decisions and behaviours in embodying the notion of a societal ideal.
The renowned biologist and philosopher Francisco José Ayala Pereda studied the origins of morality. According to him, it is the product of a biological heritage and a cultural evolution based primarily on:
- Religion,
- Language,
- Political history,
- Life context: the experience and environment in which one evolves,
- Art
In 1958, American psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg developed his theory of moral development through stages, The Development of Modes of Thinking and Choices in Years 10 to 16, based on the principle that morality is acquired at different stages of life, alongside maturity. As individuals age, they would aspire to universal ethical principles encompassing concepts such as: human dignity, equality, justice and fundamental rights. This sociological proposition has since been called into question.
If the structuring of moral values has evolved through the ages to reach a peaceful, comfortable and civilised society, one may wonder where they stand today. More and more French organisations are adopting CSR values through a charter, a purpose statement or a mission-driven company model as part of a committed approach. But are these values consistent with the cultural heritage in this area?
Through a series of 2 articles, we will therefore study the history of moral values linked to CSR, and what we must take away to establish company values that are coherent with this principle.
Understanding the Origins of CSR: The Protestant Response to Moral Abuses
Several academic articles attribute the emergence of CSR to Protestant moral values. In the economic journal Business & Society published in 2011*, we learn that Howard Bowen's Social responsibility of the businessman (1953) was first published in 1949 as one of the volumes in a series of works commissioned by the Federal Council of Churches: a committee of 29 Protestant and Orthodox institutions. This Federal Council also counted among its distinguished members another major name in CSR and a self-proclaimed Protestant: Chester Barnard.
CSR, much like modern capitalism, are principles we owe to Protestant history. This approach, grounded in morality rather than an institutional or legal framework, is said to trace back to the colonisation of the United States by Protestants in the 16th century. At that time, these pilgrims from Holland, France and Spain found themselves on a new territory rich in natural resources. Without a regulatory framework, without courts, without police to dictate their conduct, they rejected the arbitrary codes of the old world and used their Christian values to organise themselves and create a balance around the value of work.
These newly arrived Protestants did not want to see repeated the injustices of the old continent — namely that social standing is determined from birth. Moral character, strength and the quality of one's work should be what gives a person their worth.
For unlike the Catholic, Jewish and Muslim religions, Protestantism is built on the idea that there is no head of the Church: each individual is responsible for their own behaviour before God. God is everywhere — not only in places of worship. In other religions, supreme representatives reinterpret the sacred texts, which convey, in their traditional form, the idea of unquestionable male authority and societal hierarchy.
If the Protestants of that era upheld these values, it was also in response to a growing historical awareness.
Looking back in history: in the Middle Ages, the right of primogeniture — or nobility of the robe and sword — was designed to prevent the dispersal of wealth. The eldest son inherited the land and devoted himself to war, feasting and women, while the younger sons of noble families became high-ranking representatives of the Church. It was hard for these sons of nobles, accustomed to the finest privileges from birth, to suddenly live in celibacy and modesty — the very precepts expected of the parish flock.
Logically, the Catholic countries of Western Europe ended up with high-ranking members of the Clergy who did not at all practise the virtues of the sacred texts taught during Mass.
The straw that broke the moral back of Christians was the principle of the "trade in indulgences". Priests began officially selling redemption and access to paradise to the worst offenders and criminals in exchange for hard cash. However, from 1517 onwards, the true values of the Bible suddenly became accessible thanks to the invention of the printing press, which made it possible to produce books in mass quantities at affordable prices. Some believers realised the hypocrisy and "protested" against these free interpretations by the Clergy. They joined the movement of the German monk Martin Luther.
In the moral history of CSR, values defend a society of integrity where each individual (later, man or woman) starts on equal footing. They would draw their standing from their capacity to work hard while maintaining exemplary conduct in accordance with religious foundations.
The Moral Framework Through Language
In France, political history reveals the desire to separate the nobles from the people. This distinction is also reflected in the construction of the language. Since writing was reserved for nobles and members of the Church, it was important that knowledge remained in the hands of a few trusted allies. The invention of Gutenberg's press in the 15th century and the mass dissemination of biblical principles had already endangered the lifestyles of the upper classes — there was no question of making the same mistake twice.
In 1694, the preparatory notebooks of the very first dictionary of the Académie Française stated: "Spelling will serve to distinguish men of letters from the ignorant and from mere women." The spelling rules of the French language were deliberately made complex to enable value judgements. The mockery directed at the unfortunate Madame de Sévigné proves this, despite her literary talent.
This preference for form over substance has spread through the ages in France, to the point of often producing pompous formulas or administrative paperwork that is no longer understood, hindering communication and therefore efficiency.
This idea is 'visionary' since language is one of the primary factors through which values are disseminated and economic and diplomatic opportunities are generated. Today, the English language is by far the most spoken in the world, despite France's colonial past.
For on the other side of the Channel, England did exactly the opposite. Born from a fusion of Germanic, Scandinavian and French influences, the English language was shaped by commercial needs, particularly in the colonies. Add to this the rise of literacy and literature, and you get a simplification of usage rules as early as the 16th century.
For language enables exchange and mutual enrichment. It is also a vehicle for values — such as the ideas of Adam Smith or utilitarianism, which evaluates the morality of actions based on their consequences. Through good communication, one can encourage as well as discourage global well-being.
The art of communication contributes to 'soft power', a notion that would reinforce English influence in the United States and the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth also continues to generate billions today.
Political History and Life Context in Defining Values
France has always championed a strong man at the head of the State: an all-powerful executive. From Louis XIV to Emmanuel Macron, by way of Napoleon: the French collective unconscious would hold that full powers must be centralised and vested in a strong man supported by a loyal inner circle. Other nations have preferred a more diluted form of power, such as a parliamentary monarchy or a federal system — even if recent decades show that regardless of the constitutional form adopted, it increasingly resembles authoritarianism as the boomer generation sings its swan song.
For centralised power, embodied by a single man, implies a vision with a strong cognitive bias. This is the origin today of the popular revolt around Trump. He disregards the prerogatives of the States to seize all power for himself. Yet Trump carries significant biases: he comes from a very wealthy family and built his career in a sector known for its harshness, corruption and poor practices — particularly in environmental matters: construction and real estate. How could this professional experience fail to influence his politics?*
In France, the implementation of the first sustainability measures driven by Europe in 2019 was carried out by Emmanuel Macron. He responded to these expectations through the lens of his values and experience: officially the absence of religion, and a professional background as an investment banker. Yet finance is not exactly known for its exemplary conduct in terms of ethics and CSR.**
If these Presidents held less power, or if they had constructed their worldview through a different career, we would surely have a different translation of CSR values today.
In France in particular, CSR has been taken over and driven by the world of finance — even as the history of the movement denounced greed.
If the birth of American business culture was underpinned by a certain number of deeper values, this reappropriation by a very narrow inner circle at the head of the French State seems more hypocritical than ever.
Conclusion: CSR is not driving business forward, and the negative social and environmental impacts are simply shifting. After the rush for black gold, it is now the race for electrification — and in both cases, the land is over-exploited and destroyed, causing considerable economic and environmental damage.
For the vast majority of electric batteries come from China, with Chinese maintenance, only to be buried as hazardous waste after a very short lifecycle. The attempts to bring the technology back to Europe call to mind the words of physicist Niels Bohr: "It is not by improving the candle that one invents the light bulb."
The term CSR — corporate social responsibility — has been replaced by the government with the term 'transition' or ESG, causing the economic pillar that contributed to wealth redistribution to disappear, reduced instead to the notion of 'Governance'.
The desire of large consulting firms to complexify universal moral principles serves to justify extra zeros on the invoice, guarantee monopolies (see our piece on the CSRD) and ensure that nothing changes.
In France, the idea that CSR is a market like any other is spreading. The terms and methods borrow a small portion of their international equivalents — whether in the terminology used, administrative formalities or evaluation tools — but in an incomprehensible and opaque way. So is this a translation problem linked to cultural bias, or a genuine desire to subvert the principles?
One of the latest examples of this schizophrenia is the extra-financial reporting solution (CSRD), which followed Bruno Lemaire's request to his friend Patrick de Cambourg. A page that the Government has since deleted — a curious notion of transparency for an entity in the service of the people promoting an 'ethical' approach — but which can still be found with a little effort using the online navigation tool Wayback.
With such cognitive bias, the government sees in CSR the opportunity to sell high value-added services. In practice, the subsidies — managed by BPI France — and the schemes devised benefit only large companies and consulting firms. At all costs, giants of 'sustainable development' must be created.
This vision of sustainability through a financial lens is spawning CSR measurement tools such as that of société.com, which base their benchmark on accounting statements rather than on societal actions. In the corridors, one hears phrases such as "the priority of my company is to make as much money as possible, as fast as possible," coming from the leaders of so-called "CSR" solutions. Their priority is therefore not to serve companies, let alone to find solutions to contemporary problems.
Art as a Vehicle for Societal Values in the Early 20th Century
The United States — heirs to Protestant and English influence, despite the French presence for over 200 years — place the first half of the 20th century under the banner of responsible capitalism. During the Progressive Era, major American leaders redistributed their fortunes for the benefit of education and culture. After the war, the great fortunes accepted a marginal tax rate rising to 91% of their income well into the 1960s.
These principles of wealth redistribution and the emergence of a wealthy middle class fed the culture of the American dream: colour and pop culture took off. Anyone could enjoy comfort and leisure, and live happily and freely, provided they showed moral uprightness and worked hard. These values proved appealing and spread internationally.
They contributed to the commercial success of American products: Converse, Levi's, Ray-Ban, Marvel… Products that continue to enjoy a second wind today, so strongly are they associated with a golden age. Culturally, this was also the birth of the American hero who defends 'the greater good': sacrifice for the common good and the idea that 'with great power comes great responsibility'.
Around the world, the 1960s were prosperous and Westernised. Yet by the late 1970s, a series of poor political decisions would lead the United States (and consequently the rest of the world) to 'the Great Inflation'.
This economic and political crisis caused a rupture. The collective Keynesian approach was replaced by individualist theories — specifically the laissez-faire doctrine championed by the Chicago School, led by Milton Friedman. They advocated for the withdrawal of the State. Their monetary policy worked and inflation fell.
But in reality, the values Milton Friedman defended went further: for him, the businessman should be freed from responsibility and at liberty to create whatever wealth he desires, without concern for the consequences. Companies should care ONLY about returning dividends to shareholders.
A cascade effect was felt across the world. The social fabric and the associated moral values collapsed. The business world shed its inhibitions, and Christian religions in Western cultures declined rapidly.
Perceptions around culture changed. The seventh art — a vehicle not only for moral values, but also a contributor of wealth — bore witness to this. From the joyful cinema of the 1980s and 90s, content gradually shifted towards darker, more confusing narratives. Today, screenplays invite us to pity, even appreciate — if not identify with — the villain.
To find out how these values should be taken into account when defining your purpose, and how they positively or negatively affect your CSR approach, see Part 2.
Did You Know?
Many cultural stereotypes influence art, which in turn influences business. We asked an AI to summarise the stereotypes of each nationality's businessman over the past century:
The American: a man of action, a hero with a keen sense of justice and a love of freedom — but sometimes a little thick.
The French: forever tormented by love or sex, a solitary intellectual figure, arrogant, who enjoys challenging the established order and is not afraid to suffer.
The Italian: the somewhat scattered seductive artist, or the mob operator who works in a group. The Italian stands out and stirs emotions.
The German: a rigid, methodical person. The German does not live through their emotions and favours structure, order and science instead.
The Englishman: the gentleman with unshakeable composure and a sense of humour, often representing elegance and tradition with a sense of sacrifice.
The Japanese: a disciplined and honourable person. The Japanese respects nature and traditions while projecting a futuristic image.
