One of the themes Professor Sugimoto is focusing on is "Organizational Virtue Ethics."

Some people might have heard of ethics, but this may be the first time they have heard the word "virtue" attached to it.

Virtue ethics is a way of thinking that focuses not on "what actions are right," but on "what kind of person (agent) one should be." It emphasizes individual "virtues (excellent character traits)" such as integrity and compassion over rules or consequences, and has its roots in the thoughts of the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle.

Originally, traditional virtue ethics tended to focus on individual ways of living. However, in today's business society where corporations and organizations have great influence, Professor Sugimoto has developed this into a new category called "Organizational Virtue" and proposes it as a unique framework for ethically evaluating corporate scandals.

"For example, when thinking about environmental issues, it is important for each individual not to waste paper. However, I have always felt that there are things we should be doing beyond that, which we haven't paid much attention to. To care for the environment, we must carefully consider organizational design and corporate governance. Focusing on such things is what organizational virtue ethics is about."

Professor Sugimoto says there are two key points to understanding organizational virtue ethics.

One is that "an organization is not just a collection of individuals." When explaining this to students, Professor Sugimoto talks about the idol group "AKB48." Even if all the original members graduate and the people inside are 100% replaced, it continues to maintain a single identity as "AKB48." Just as we are the same human being even if many of our cells are gradually replaced.

The same applies to companies that have caused scandals.

Even as time passes and all the individuals involved retire, the organization's liability for compensation and social responsibility remains. This is because the root of the problem lies not in the hearts of individuals, but in the "organizational system itself."

"When an organizational scandal occurs, 'cutting off the lizard's tail'—holding the individual who caused the direct problem responsible—often happens. However, it is important to question the organization itself, rather than the individual, and ask if there was something wrong with the organizational structure."

The other point is that "an organization does not have a mind that can exercise virtue."

"I am opposed to the simplistic view in conventional business ethics that corporations have minds or personalities.  A company cannot possibly have a mind. However, that is precisely why it is necessary to institutionally embed governance mechanisms for questioning management decisions and monitoring organizational systems within the organization."

An example of these mechanisms failing to function in real business is the issue at a television station that came to light in 2024.

Triggered by harassment and human rights violations against a former female employee of the TV station by a former talent, the station's inappropriate response and lack of governance—which could be seen as a cover-up—became a major issue, leading to the resignation of the president and chairman.

Professor Sugimoto says a key term for considering this issue is "Epistemic Injustice." It is one of the concepts receiving the most attention in modern philosophy and ethics; in other words, it refers to a state where structural injustice in society directly leads to a "distortion of our perception itself."

"At the TV station, there were only men in the decision-making positions. As a result, they fell into a structural trap where they simply could not see or recognize 'what the ethical problem was' in the first place. While maintaining a certain gender balance is important for being a healthy organization, at least for a news organization, unfortunately, that was not the case."

Harassment is not the only issue in Japanese workplaces that goes unrecognized due to structural injustice. Professor Sugimoto says we must design "epistemic justice as a system" where gender balance in daily internal decision-making and the voices of minorities are naturally reflected.

As he continued to think about "organizational virtue," Professor Sugimoto began to feel a certain "sense of discomfort."

Conventional Western-centric business ethics has emphasized only individual morality and individual "virtue." But have we overlooked the "virtue" unique to Japan and the East?

To bring this to light, Professor Sugimoto turned his attention to the "management philosophies" of Japanese companies.

Using digital analysis tools to process vast amounts of text data that are difficult to quantify, he analyzed the management philosophies of 2,828 companies, representing 70% of listed companies. He was surprised by the results.

The word "justice," which is considered a primary virtue in the West, hardly appeared in Japanese management philosophies. Instead, the overwhelmingly most common term was "social contribution."

"While domestic and international research has stated that the virtue of business is justice, I believe I was able to provide evidence that this may not actually be the case. In Japan, there may be a tendency to avoid the word 'justice' because of an image that it triggers conflict—such as 'one person's justice is another person's injustice'—or has a negative, authoritarian connotation."

"Anyway, I was a very questioning child," Professor Sugimoto says, looking back on his childhood. He was always thinking "Why?" and even asked his parents at the dinner table, "Why do people have to be moral?"

He became hooked on "bioethics," which he studied for university entrance exam essays, and pursued a path in philosophy. He became so immersed in pure questions like "Does the world really exist?" that he frequently attended academic conferences.

The turning point came in his third year of university. His father, a company employee, told him, "The kind of things you're studying are things that working people learn while they work," which led him to decide to experience the philosophy found in real business settings.

To learn "business ethics," he started a part-time job at a convenience store. The workplace was busy, leaving no room to think about ethics or goodness. He was occupied with dealing with unreasonable customers and making decisions outside the manual. In a university report, he wrote, "Aristotle's ethics was not useful in the slightest at the convenience store," which earned high praise from his supervising professor.

The times also pushed him forward. In the early 2000s, a series of corporate scandals occurred, increasing interest in social responsibility and compliance. In 2005, when he was writing his graduation thesis, the earthquake resistance data falsification scandal by a first-class architect came to light. News of Livedoor buying up shares of Nippon Broadcasting System, the top shareholder of Fuji TV, also caused a stir. What is a shareholder? What is corporate responsibility? Events that made him think deeply occurred one after another.

"In my graduation thesis, I considered business ethics using SRI (Socially Responsible Investment) as a subject. While ethical initiatives are required, there are companies that actually violate social responsibility and industries that have problems. I proposed that we should clarify the cause of this contradiction and that business should consider ethics at the organizational level."

That stance leads to his current research.

A theme Professor Sugimoto is currently putting particular effort into is the relationship between the "philosophy of the meaning of life" and "virtue ethics." In traditional philosophy, the theme of the "meaning of life" was not addressed for a long time.

"It is a big misunderstanding that 'philosophy solves specific life problems.' No matter how much you flip through a high school ethics textbook, the answers to your daily worries are not written there as they are."

On the other hand, virtue ethics, which Professor Sugimoto specializes in, has asked the question "What is a life well-lived?" since the time of Aristotle. However, at some point, that question changed into forms like "What is right for a virtuous person?"

Why did the two, which were originally discussing similar things, become separated? Professor Sugimoto continued his research with an interest in that, but the tide changed in the 21st century. A trend emerged, mainly in the English-speaking world, to consider the "meaning of life" using analytic philosophy methods.

Professor Sugimoto also participated in a research group, but the truth derived was a simple one: "It's better not to think too much about the meaning of life."

"If you think too much, your mind gets weary and you become unhealthy. The more attractive people in the world are, the less they worry about complicated things like 'what is the meaning of life' in their daily lives."

In modern society, many people feel their work is socially meaningless and are under a spiritual "curse" of "what am I working for?" Professor Sugimoto believes his role lies in lifting such "curses."

To people suffering from the "curse," he tells an anecdote (*) about the poet Shuntaro Tanikawa.

"A child asked me, 'Why do humans die?' and to be honest, I was at a loss for an answer." When asked by a mother, Mr. Tanikawa replied: "If I were the mother, I would give (the child) a big hug and cry together. After that, we'd have tea together. Mother, you don't always have to answer a question asked in words with words. You have to answer using both your heart and your body."

(* From "Shuntaro Tanikawa Question Box, August 16, 2006" on the website "Hobonichi")

(*Both will redirect to the Japanese site.)  

Professor Sugimoto believes this is the ultimate way for philosophy to answer a question.

"In real society, I feel that so many people live while worrying about life. If you think too much and get a headache, the best remedy is to just exercise, work up a sweat, and move your body."

Looking toward the future, what Professor Sugimoto wants to propose is a "shift in perspective"—looking at the existing systems of business and corporations from a completely different angle.

From the perspective of humanity's long history, the mechanism of the corporation is merely a "tool" recently invented for us to become happy. In a future where technology evolves, it is possible that it will have fulfilled its role and disappeared.

"Reflect on the ultra-long-term future and look at the world before you with fresh eyes. Don't just look for easy solutions; worry more and deepen your questions. I believe that continuing to present this to the media and business settings is the true role that philosophy should play."

If this philosophical perspective permeates business settings, diverse viewpoints enter decision-making, and systems are built to pick up the voices of those in weak positions, it might be possible to prevent "structural harassment" like what happened at the TV station. Ethics could become a practical tool that strengthens corporate governance from its foundation.

Composition: Toru Tamakawa, Editor-in-Chief, Asahi Shimbun GLOBE+

Interview/Text: Kaori Sawaki

Photography: Hidehiro Yamada