Short-Cutting Process Breeds the Next Corporate Scandal
When leaders trumpet results and dismiss the “plumbing” that produces them, the organization’s moral compass drifts, controls erode, and risk snowballs, often invisibly, until the inevitable blow‑up.
When former Wells Fargo CEO John Stumpf told U.S. senators, “I care about outcomes, not process,” he meant to sound decisive. Instead, he gave a perfect headline for why outcome obsession wrecks companies. The bank’s focus on cross-selling numbers drove employees to open two million fake accounts, torpedoing its brand and triggering billions in fines.
The lesson is not new, yet boards still ignore it, then wonder why they keep landing on front pages for the wrong reasons.
A Repeatable Pattern
Look back two decades, and you see the same movie, just with different costumes. Enron’s top brass “innovated” by hiding debt in off-balance sheet entities to hit earnings targets. At Theranos, Elizabeth Holmes skipped external validation to wow investors with impossible diagnostics. Volkswagen wrote defeat‑device software, so its diesels aced lab tests. Boeing trimmed pilot‑training time and fast-tracked certification on the 737 MAX.
Each firm chased a sparkling outcome – market value, growth, regulatory approvals – while treating the process as expendable overhead. Each paid in cash, credibility, or human lives.
Why Leaders Go Blind
Psychology explains part of it: outcome bias makes big numbers feel righteous, even if the methods used to achieve them are toxic.
Speed myths – “move fast and break things” – spread from Silicon Valley into every sector, persuading executives that thoroughness is for laggards. Meanwhile, glossy dashboards hide lurking defects; employees who spot the flaws often suffer cognitive dissonance or face retaliation.
The result is an ethical echo chamber where nobody wants to be the deliberate, cautious voice.
In my work, I’ve experienced the voice of toxic leadership. The VP I worked with was responsible for implementing major regulatory compliance changes. They were constantly being pushed to have tech and operational program staff work on the changes “from the corner of their desk” while still working on their day-to-day responsibilities. This was the equivalent of not caring about the process.
The VP was a firm believer that full attention was necessary until the hurdles had been passed. For months, they experienced the repeating pattern of cutting corners to be efficient and reduce operating costs.
We worked on creating a working model that raised the effectiveness of the program team while taming the aggressions of the senior leader. The VP put a lot on the line to defend her position to maintain the integrity of the compliance process and meeting regulatory timelines.
The Hidden Cost of “Efficiency”
Cutting corners often looks faster in Q1 and Q2. Then come years of claw-backs, class-action suits, regulator caps, and product redesigns.
Wells Fargo has been subject to a Federal Reserve growth limit since 2018.
Volkswagen’s diesel settlement has surpassed $30 billion.
Boeing is still fixing its safety culture in 2025.
If speed is your mantra, ask how many months these firms have spent on damage control versus the days they saved by bypassing process checks.
A Simple Guard‑Rail: The Process – Integrity Loop
To keep ambition from outrunning discipline, leaders need a lightweight, repeatable check that scales faster than bureaucracy. I call it the Process – Integrity Loop (PIL), which is encapsulated in the Alignment Schedule that many of our clients use.
These four simple steps will set you up to effectively achieve outcomes without bypassing reliable processes and their integrity.
- Clarify the Objective
Write the customer, the value proposition, the approach, and the outcome in one sentence. If you can’t, the objective is already at risk. - Map the Value Flow
Sketch the owners, steps, and controls on a single page. Highlight where incentives, capacity, or skills gaps could distort behaviour. Where more than one gap exists, you’re already at risk. - Stress Test for Misalignment
Run a quick Alignment Check that asks: Do resources, systems, timelines, tolerance, and ethics line up with the promise? If not, adjust before launch or prepare for a risk event. - Monitor Leading Indicators
Use a capacity Kanban or similar visual board to track workload, error rates, and near‑misses in real time. Escalate when signals blink amber, well before they hit red. We recommend using a four-stage escalation process.
The loop fits on one page (this is complexity designed out) and can be explained in quick time. Because it is transparent, teams gain speed by avoiding hidden rework, not by papering over it.
Quality Still Beats Hurry
Modern markets reward velocity, but only the kind rooted in scalable and repeatable processes. Toyota’s production system moves fast because every worker can stop the line to fix a fault; Amazon deploys code hundreds of times per day because automated tests flag issues instantly. In both cases, speed is a by‑product of disciplined design and alignment of strategy, people, processes, systems, and outcomes, not a substitute for it.
Taking Action
The time has come to retire the old “I care about outcomes, not process” with a more proactive mindset that might sound like this:
“Could we publish how we achieved this result without embarrassment?”
If the honest answer is no, you’re already borrowing against your reputation, credibility, and profits.
History is blunt: when leaders treat process as red tape, someone else eventually writes the headline and decides on the size of the settlement cheque.
Embed a simple integrity loop now, and you will still hit ambitious targets. The difference is that you’ll keep the company, the customers, and your conscience intact when you do.
