Between 2011 and 2017, Boston Consulting Group (BCG), which is one of the world’s leading management consulting firms, engaged in high level bribery in Angola.
BCG has admitted to paying millions in bribes to secure contracts with the Angolan Ministry of Economy and the National Bank of Angola.
The misconduct orchestrated by employees in BCG’s Lisbon office was a clear violation of the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act 1977 (FCPA).
Despite the gravity of the crime, BCG has avoided prosecution by self-reporting the violations, cooperating with the US Department of Justice (DOJ), and taking remedial actions, including firing those involved and closing its Luanda office.
This scandal raises a number of key questions.
What went wrong at BCG?
The BCG bribery scandal has revealed serious internal failures at the firm that allowed unethical practices to persist for several years.
Firstly, the bribery scandal indicates that there was a lack of effective governance at BCG’s operations in Portugal. Employees were able to bypass internal controls and route payments to offshore accounts with ties to Angolan officials.
Secondly, the bribery scandal indicates that there was a culture within BCG’s Lisbon office that either tolerated or encouraged unethical behaviour. The concealment efforts were sophisticated, included backdating contracts and falsifying documents to disguise the true nature of the transactions, suggesting a coordinated system of deception.
Thirdly, the bribery scandal highlights deficiencies in BCG’s internal audit and compliance function. The fact that employees could falsify records without detection for years at a time suggests that the mechanisms for monitoring and investigating suspicious activities were either insufficient or not enforced.
How will the scandal impact BCG’s global brand?
BCG is one of the world’s most prestigious management consulting firms, known for advising governments and multinational corporations on how to address their most significant challenges.
The bribery scandal is likely to have a significant impact on BCG’s global reputation and its relationships with clients, particularly in emerging markets.
The revelation that the firm engaged in bribery to secure contracts in Angola raises concerns about its commitment to ethical standards and the integrity of its business practices.
This may lead existing clients to reconsider their engagements with BCG or demand stricter oversight. The scandal could also damage BCG’s ability to win new business as firms view BCG with increased skepticism.
The bribery scandal could also have broader implications for BCG’s brand as a trusted global advisor. Rebuilding trust will take time and require deliberate effort. The long-term impact on BCG’s client relationships and its market position will depend on how effectively the firm addresses these challenges and restores its damaged reputation.
How well has BCG responded to the scandal?
In response to the scandal, BCG has implemented a series of significant reforms that are likely to be significantly effective at restoring its damaged reputation and at least somewhat effective at preventing future misconduct.
BCG has closed its office in Luanda, Angola. This decision, a major structural reform, underscores BCG’s commitment to distancing itself from the epicentre of unethical behaviour and reflects a broader effort to rebuild trust with clients and restore its global image. The dismissal of individuals involved and the withholding of their bonuses further demonstrate BCG’s desire to hold accountable those responsible.
BCG also continues to enhance its risk and compliance function by hiring new risk & compliance professionals at the Managing Director and Partner level, providing regular mandatory training, and adopting digital solutions to improve risk monitoring and compliance decision-making.
The long term effectiveness of these reforms will depend on how well they are implemented and integrated into BCG’s global operations. The closure of the Luanda office and the restructuring of compliance functions are important steps, but the firm must also focus on cultivating a culture of transparency and ethical behaviour across all of its offices.
Is the current legal framework sufficient to deter corporate misconduct?
The FCPA is likely to be ineffective in deterring future corporate misconduct in emerging markets due to its small stick plus carrot approach. The FCPA is designed to prevent U.S. companies from engaging in bribery and corruption abroad by imposing significant penalties for violations. However, in the case of BCG, only modest penalties were handed out.
The DOJ imposed penalties on BCG for misconduct. BCG was required to repay more than US$14 million in profits that were earned from contracts in Angola obtained through bribery. This was a core part of BCG’s cooperation with DOJ. The repayment of profits prevents BCG from benefiting from its illegal actions, and should also make other firms think twice before engaging in similar conduct.
However, it is arguable that the financial penalty imposed on BCG did not go far enough. The financial penalty was calculated based on profits earned. Although this prevents BCG from benefiting from its wrongdoing, it falls short of actively punishing the firm. As a result, other firms that have an opportunity to profit from bribery in markets far from home have an incentive to do so. If the bribery is never detected, then a firm can profit handsomely. However, if the bribery is detected, then a firm might expect to merely forfeit its winnings. The calculus is a simple and financially attractive one, “heads we win, tails we don’t lose”.
In addition, DOJ did not criminally prosecute BCG. This leniency was afforded due to BCG being proactive in self-reporting the violations, cooperating with the DOJ, and implementing compliance reforms. The leniency proffered can be seen as an incentive for firms to cooperate and undertake necessary reforms. However, it also acts as a further incentive for firms to try their luck. It suggests that firms can mitigate the consequences of illegal actions by coming forward and cooperating after the fact, rather than prioritizing prevention.
The BCG bribery scandal underscores the challenges in enforcing the FCPA across different jurisdictions, especially in regions where corruption is endemic. The complexities of international enforcement, combined with the reliance on corporate self-policing are likely to limit the law’s effectiveness in achieving its anti-corruption goals.
The bottom line
The BCG bribery scandal offers a cautionary tale about the pitfalls of ethical complacency, and a reminder of the importance of effective governance and internal controls.
As globalisation and the behaviour of multinational firms become increasingly open to scrutiny, firms that hope to sustain their market position as a trusted global advisor must commit to a culture of transparency, accountability, and ethical behaviour.
While BCG’s proactive response to the scandal will go some way to restoring its damaged reputation, the scandal highlights a broader question – should a stronger legal framework be implemented to govern corporate behaviour internationally?
🔴 Interested in consulting?