Why Saying “I'm Sorry” Isn't Good Enough: The Ethics of Corporate ...

Ethics Corporate Apologies
our offices undergoes a more rigorous review” (Patel, 2009, 1). By printing the apology
in the industry’s flagship magazine Advertising Age, DDB Worldwide helped educate
competitors about the need to monitor rigorously all work, including work for not-for-
profits. In a similar vein, CEO Toyoda’s apology, while falling short in some respects,
was ethically good insofar as he began his talk by making Toyota’s plans to improve their
cars a central part of his apology (Montopoli, 2010). Not surprisingly, the media and the
larger public generally gave Toyoda pretty high marks for his willingness to discuss
candidly how Toyota had lost its way and what measures it was pursuing to restore the
quality consumers had come to expect from the Toyota brand.
Speaker regret manifesting itself in changed behavior is a crucial factor when making an
apology. If the speaker can specify future plans to act in a more responsible and caring
way, the audience will interpret the speaker’s emotions as more authentic because the
expressed emotions are more moving—their effect is extending from the present into the
future. This continuity of emotions reinforces a perception that the speaker’s character is
changing for the better. The recipients of the apology are witnessing the emergence of a
new and more virtuous set of habits or ethos on the part of the firm and its CEO. The
audience can thus legitimately hope for an altered and better future for themselves as
well. That hope, in turn, curtails any feelings of rage and fear, thereby predisposing them
to repose more trust in the firm and its brand.
Of course, the CEO and firm will need to embark upon a concrete plan to realize the
stated corrective steps. That is why some audience members take a “wait and see”
attitude before accepting an apology as such. If a CEO promises reparations and then
does not make the specified payments, or if the CEO commits to putting a more rigorous
40