On Selective Social Consciousness

Being socially conscious is hip right now. We live in the era of Twitter activists, cause-related Facebook profile pictures, and revolutions that literally start on social media (most notably the Arab Spring of the early 2010s). In these times, individuals and organisations alike are placing an increasing focus on their branding, and making sure that it is aligned to social causes such as gender equality, racism, environmental conservation and poverty reduction. Multiple studies have been done on how such practices are beneficial to the bottom line of organisations.

But what happens when being socially conscious is no longer commercially viable? This is the uncomfortable question that I’ve seen start to unravel in so many contexts - be it organisations owning up to corruption, universities dealing with unending sexual violence, or government having to allocate scarce resources to a plethora of social ills. The fact of the matter is, when faced with a decision of profit or loss, security or scrutiny - the more difficult option seldom gets chosen, even when the consequences may be dire.

When I was studying Economics in university, it was quite the ‘ah-hah’ moment when we learnt about Sigwick/ Pigou’s concept of externalities: that there are non-economic costs that affect third parties which need to be taken into account. Finally, it appeared that there was a way to articulate these less-than-capitalist dynamics within our current paradigm of economic logic. While environmental economics has made some progress with quantifying these externalities and attempting to include them into existing market forces through mechanisms such as Carbon Tax (albeit under critique that this is still limited by neoliberal assumptions), unfortunately it seems that other social problems are far less quantifiable.

Gender equality is another social issue that has attempted to be quantified, although still in contexts where ultimately profits are being affected, and gender equality is aligned to organisational interests. From what I’ve read, a lot of the research conducted into the wage gap or maternity leave seeks to understand the economic impact on organisations and individuals. While it is necessary to ask these kinds of questions, again they differ fundamentally from the underlying discomfort of social consciousness: scenarios when social benefits and economic benefits are at odds. What happens when being socially conscious is no longer commercially viable?

Unfortunately, in so many cases, the answer to this dichotomous question is that social issues are de-prioritised. When it comes down to it, organisations choose to maintain the status quo and ensure their position or economic potential is not compromised. This is understandable, especially under the current neoliberal paradigm wherein self-interest seems to be the only option for success. However, it is also the exact reason why things do not change as rapidly or fundamentally as they should. It is the reason why South Africa’s richest people and top executives are still majority white. It is the reason why gender-based violence continues in universities. It is the reason why corruption is eroding our government. And while this short-sighted view makes sense to us now, what does it mean for the world we are shaping?

I have recently been thinking about how for me, social justice and asking these difficult questions is inextricably linked with an existential reflection. Ultimately, before we can cop out and say we would “rather not speak out” about something because it may affect our revenue, we first are faced with the question of what is really most important to us. With all the noise, it is so easy to forget about the direct link between these two questions.? Our time on earth is limited, and so it might not actually be worth protecting such fleeting gains, when what we do and what we say could have the power to alter power balances and change the course of history. It sounds dramatic - because it is.

Going back to the idea of branding, such existential reflection may also be needed. When an organisation espouses certain values, it needs to make sure that its actions follow through - even when the going gets tough and it is no longer convenient or trendy to stand by what is right. ‘Selective social consciousness’ - in which causes are rallied for when it is easy or socially appropriate to do so, without the monetary or potentially reputation-compromising commitment to actually make a change - needs to stop. The rising generation of millennials and Gen Zs are placing an increasing importance on transparency - be it when choosing an employer, an organisation to support, or a product to buy. Coupled with this, the increasing polarisation of modern politics is making it even more evident where people stand. The proverbial lines in the sand are being drawn.

This blog was originally written in February 2020, while I was working in management consulting, with a variety of private companies, government departments, and NGOs, on their strategies and economic development priorities.