"One former partner called the settlement hugely significant because it shatters the distance that McKinsey — which argues that it only makes recommendations — puts between its advice and its clients’ actions."
So their defense was that they only recommended a way to destroy the lives of millions of people through drug addiction, but someone else did the implementation.
The nameless faceless corporation where responsibility for actions taken are diluted among many people, so that the fractional responsibility of a single person is low.
> McKinsey’s extensive work with Purdue included advising it to focus on selling lucrative high-dose pills, the documents show, even after the drugmaker pleaded guilty in 2007 to federal criminal charges that it had misled doctors and regulators about OxyContin’s risks. The firm also worked with a number of opioid makers to band together to “defend against strict treatment” by the Food and Drug Administration.
That's naughty ... oh wait, is that another conspiracy theory that turned out to be real, again ? That's hard to believe </s>
“ McKinsey’s extensive work with Purdue included advising it to focus on selling lucrative high-dose pills”
Wonder what McKinsey is doing to root out the psychopaths involved in this? Hope this causes them to be blacklisted by a bunch of clients, and lose staff.
A lot of the companies whose products were vital to the Nazis (IBM and VW immediately come to mind) are still around, so I'm guessing McKinsey will be fine.
If anything, they're more in danger of losing clients because they sell (mostly unusable) recommendations for millions of dollars.
One thing I’ve always wondered is why can’t people give themselves a price such that if they’re killed or otherwise a casualty the names price must be paid?
Of course people would name exorbitant prices but that’s exactly the incentive you need monetarily to disincentivize bad behavior. If McKinsey had to settle for say, 1 trillion, they would be finished. If they knew this before engaging in this behavior even the most basic risk analysis would’ve said “don’t do it!”
So their defense was that they only recommended a way to destroy the lives of millions of people through drug addiction, but someone else did the implementation.
Sickening ...