Compliance Culture: Building Ethical Organizations

Author: Sara El-Hassan

Affiliation: Independent Researcher

Abstract

In recent years, rising global regulatory expectations, public scrutiny, and stakeholder activism have changed compliance from a technical task to a key part of an organization's culture. More and more, research shows that companies with strong ethical cultures and strong compliance practices have fewer legal problems, more trust from employees, and better long-term performance. As global markets become more connected and risks become more complicated, from data breaches to financial fraud, building a culture of compliance has become an important part of keeping organisations ethical.

 This article offers an in-depth analysis of compliance culture through three theoretical lenses: Pierre Bourdieu’s sociology of habitus and symbolic capital; world-systems theory and the global hierarchical diffusion of norms; and neo-institutional theory, particularly institutional isomorphism. These frameworks elucidate the rationale behind organisations' adoption of analogous compliance structures, the variability of ethical cultures across different contexts, and the influence of internalised dispositions on organisational behaviour. The study employs an integrative literature review and conceptual analysis to delineate the factors that facilitate the evolution of compliance culture from formal systems to authentic organisational values.

 The results indicate that compliance culture is influenced by leadership conduct, governance frameworks, internal controls, the quality of risk assessment, cultural norms, global regulatory trends, and the lived experiences of employees. The article talks about the risks of symbolic or cosmetic compliance and how ethical organisations need long-term commitment, clear incentives, responsible leadership, and risk identification that involves everyone. A conceptual model and practical implications are provided to assist executives, regulators, compliance officers, and scholars in enhancing ethical governance globally.

Introduction

Ethical governance is no longer a minor issue. People all over the world don't trust businesses, banks, the government, and even nonprofits because of high-profile misconduct and regulatory failures. Stakeholders now want organisations to do more than just write down codes of conduct; they want to see that ethics really do guide decisions. Because of this, compliance culture, which is the set of values, behaviours, and assumptions that support legal and moral behaviour, has become a key part of organisational integrity.

 In management research, compliance used to mean mostly following rules. Today, compliance frameworks cover things like risk culture, ethics in decision-making, data protection, anti-corruption measures, transparency in reporting, and social and environmental responsibilities. There is more and more evidence that companies with strong ethical cultures have more accurate reporting, less corruption risk, and more committed employees. A culture of compliance is also a key factor in global markets: businesses with clear ethical standards get more investors, customers, and partners.

 But it is still hard to create a culture of compliance. Many companies use codes of conduct, training modules, whistleblowing channels, and risk assessments, but they still have trouble getting people to act ethically on a daily basis. Employees might think that compliance is just a lot of red tape, leaders might put money ahead of ethics, or the company's own systems might not be trustworthy.

 This article offers a comprehensive theoretical and practical examination of the construction, maintenance, and occasional erosion of compliance cultures. It connects modern management research with larger sociological and global frameworks to show why compliance cultures change in different ways in different sectors and places. It also includes new research on organisational ethics, risk culture, governance, and behavioural outcomes.

 The main point is that compliance culture is both a change within the organisation and a reaction to outside forces. It necessitates the reconfiguration of habitus, the alignment of incentives, the fortification of structures, the navigation of global regulatory influences, and the perpetual acquisition of knowledge from ethical quandaries. It also means being aware of the tension between symbolic compliance and real ethical commitment.

Background and Theoretical Framework

1. Understanding Compliance Culture

Compliance culture refers to the shared beliefs, behaviors, and organizational routines that support adherence to laws, regulations, internal policies, and ethical standards. It goes beyond formal frameworks and reflects whether an organization “lives” its values.

Key characteristics of a strong compliance culture include:

• Leadership that models ethical behavior.

• Employees who feel safe reporting concerns.

• Decision-making processes that integrate ethical considerations.

• Internal controls that reinforce accountability.

• Transparent communication about risks, expectations, and consequences.

This cultural dimension explains why two organizations with similar policies may behave differently when facing ethical dilemmas.

2. Bourdieu’s Theory: Habitus, Capital, and Symbolic Power

Pierre Bourdieu’s framework provides powerful tools for understanding compliance culture:

• Habitus refers to internalized dispositions shaped by professional and social experiences. Leaders act not only based on rules but on ingrained attitudes toward risk, responsibility, and authority.

• Capital (economic, social, cultural, and symbolic) shapes organizational priorities. Compliance may be embraced when it enhances symbolic capital—such as reputation or legitimacy.

• Field refers to the competitive environment where organizations seek recognition. Ethical behavior is part of positioning within this field.

• Symbolic Power explains how organizations project ethical images that may or may not reflect reality.

From a Bourdieusian lens, compliance culture becomes a form of “ethical habitus,” shaped by leadership upbringing, corporate history, and power relations. It also shows why compliance narratives can be used strategically as symbolic capital.

3. World-Systems Theory: Global Hierarchies and Diffusion of Ethics

World-systems theory views global markets as structured into core, semi-peripheral, and peripheral regions. Compliance culture is influenced by:

• Standards originating largely in core economies (North America, Western Europe).

• Pressure on semi-peripheral and peripheral economies to adopt global compliance frameworks to gain credibility.

• Uneven resources for implementation across regions.

This perspective helps explain why global corporations often impose compliance frameworks on local subsidiaries—even where cultural norms, legal institutions, or economic realities differ.

World-systems theory warns that compliance may become superficial when local contexts are not considered.

4. Institutional Isomorphism: Why Organizations Converge

Neo-institutional theory explains the widespread similarity of compliance systems through:

• Coercive pressures from regulators, investors, and international agreements.

• Mimetic pressures to imitate “best-practice” organizations during uncertainty.

• Normative pressures from professional communities, consultants, and auditors.

Compliance culture evolves through these isomorphic forces—but may only reflect surface adoption if internal behaviors do not shift accordingly.

Method

This study adopts an integrative literature review and theory-driven conceptual analysis. It synthesizes findings from management, sociology, corporate governance, behavioral ethics, and global regulation research. Sources include peer-reviewed articles, conceptual papers, empirical studies, and theoretical contributions, with emphasis on publications from the last 5 years.

The methodological steps include:

1. Identifying research related to compliance culture, ethical culture, governance structures, risk assessment, and behavior outcomes.

2. Reviewing classic theoretical texts from Bourdieu, world-systems theorists, and neo-institutional scholars.

3. Connecting contemporary findings with broader sociological frameworks to build a holistic model.

4. Integrating examples of compliance challenges in multinational firms, SMEs, regulated sectors, and digital industries.

The article does not include human subjects research but synthesizes existing scholarship to provide a multidisciplinary understanding of compliance culture.

Analysis

1. Leadership Habitus and Ethical Tone

Leadership is the foundation of compliance culture. Leaders transmit not only rules but also emotional cues, priorities, and acceptable behaviors. Their habitus—formed through education, career pathways, and social environments—influences how they perceive risk, fairness, and responsibility.

A leader with a compliance-oriented habitus:

• Balances performance pressure with ethical reasoning.

• Encourages transparency and truth-telling.

• Welcomes dissent and whistleblowing.

• Views compliance as strategic rather than as a constraint.

Conversely, leaders who prioritize short-term financial gains, or who internalize competitive aggressiveness, may unintentionally normalize unethical behaviors.

Studies show that employees follow signals from leaders more than from policies. Even the best compliance program becomes ineffective when leadership contradicts its values through informal behavior or reward systems.

2. Governance Structures and Internal Controls

Structures matter. Organizations with strong compliance culture typically have:

• Independent oversight bodies.

• Clear reporting lines.

• Internal audit and compliance functions with authority.

• Regular risk assessments.

• Transparent disciplinary processes.

Internal controls provide a backbone for ethical culture. Without them, culture becomes vague and inconsistent. However, overly bureaucratic controls can create the opposite problem—employees view ethics as paperwork rather than responsibility.

3. Risk Assessment as a Cultural Practice

Risk assessment is more than a technical exercise; it is a cultural practice that reveals what an organization considers important.

Effective risk assessments:

• Involve employees across departments.

• Encourage honest reflection on vulnerabilities.

• Prioritize risks based on behavior, not only financial metrics.

• Create action plans for improvement.

Ineffective risk assessments often appear only as formal documents, created to satisfy external expectations rather than internal learning.

A culture of compliance uses risk assessments as a tool of collective responsibility.

4. Middle Managers and Everyday Ethics

Employees experience compliance culture most directly through their supervisors. Middle managers:

• Translate rules into daily expectations.

• Shape psychological safety.

• Control resources that influence ethical choices.

If they trivialize compliance or overlook misconduct, employees follow their lead. If they integrate ethics into everyday conversations—during meetings, performance reviews, and client interactions—compliance becomes normalized.

5. Communication, Training, and Ethical Learning

Training is often the first step organizations take, but its effectiveness varies:

• Superficial training (short videos, generic modules) teaches little.

• Scenario-based training encourages ethical reasoning.

• Interactive workshops reveal hidden cultural norms.

• Leadership storytelling shapes shared meaning.

Communication must be frequent, authentic, and aligned with organizational behavior. When leaders act contrary to stated values, credibility collapses.

6. Symbolic vs. Substantive Compliance

A critical risk is the gap between “formal compliance” and “lived compliance.”

Symbolic compliance includes:

• Beautiful codes of conduct ignored in practice.

• Ethics certifications used for marketing.

• Reporting that highlights successes but hides dilemmas.

Substantive compliance includes:

• Ethical decision-making documented transparently.

• Leaders accepting accountability for failures.

• Incentives tied to integrity.

• Continuous evaluation of culture.

Organizations increasingly face scrutiny for symbolic compliance. Regulators, investors, and employees demand evidence of actual behavior, not declarations.

7. Global Pressures and Local Realities

In multinational organizations, compliance culture interacts with diverse cultural and legal environments.

Core-economy headquarters often impose uniform standards that may conflict with:

• Local business norms.

• Informal economic practices.

• Resource limitations.

• Power dynamics between global and local teams.

Subsidiaries may adopt global frameworks symbolically to maintain legitimacy, even when implementation is limited.

A sustainable compliance culture recognizes local contexts and encourages adaptation rather than rigid standardization.

8. Institutional Isomorphism and the Evolution of Compliance Norms

Coercive, mimetic, and normative pressures explain how compliance norms spread. Organizations adopt certain structures because others do—yet imitation alone is insufficient. True compliance culture requires translating norms into lived practices.

For example:

• Regulated industries often adopt strong compliance functions due to coercive rules.

• Technology companies imitate financial-sector compliance to prepare for future regulations.

• Professional networks spread expectations about ethical audits, risk management, and transparency.

These dynamics accelerate global convergence but risk encouraging superficial adoption.

9. Towards a Deep Culture of Ethical Responsibility

The deepest expression of compliance culture occurs when:

• Employees speak up without fear.

• Leaders prioritize ethics in strategy.

• Misconduct is addressed fairly.

• Decisions consider long-term societal impact.

• Risk assessments inform action.

• The organization openly discusses mistakes and dilemmas.

This requires psychological safety, moral imagination, and shared ownership of ethical outcomes.

Findings

1. Ethical Culture and Controls Mutually Reinforce Each Other

Research shows that internal controls and ethical culture work best together—not separately. Controls shape behavior, while culture shapes attitudes. Organizations that strengthen both reduce compliance failures.

2. Leadership Is the Strongest Predictor of Compliance Culture

Leadership behavior, not policies, predicts whether ethics are lived. A misaligned leadership tone undermines even the strongest compliance tools.

3. Symbolic Compliance Remains Widespread

Many organizations focus on external legitimacy rather than internal transformation. This creates systematic risks and eventual reputational damage.

4. Global Models Do Not Always Fit Local Contexts

Compliance frameworks must be adapted, not copied. Local realities—including social norms, legal institutions, and economic constraints—shape ethical behavior.

5. Middle Management Is a Critical Cultural Link

Supervisors directly influence employee behavior. Their ethical conduct determines whether employees trust compliance systems.

6. Risk Culture Is as Important as Risk Management

Technical risk controls fail without a culture that encourages honest communication and collective responsibility.

7. Compliance Culture Requires Long-Term Investment

It cannot be built through occasional training or policy updates. It grows over time through consistent leadership behavior, reinforcement systems, and continuous learning.

Conclusion

For organisations to be ethical and long-lasting, they need a culture of compliance. It is not a list of rules; it is a way of life that includes values, behaviours, rewards, and structures. This article demonstrates that compliance culture is influenced by internal dispositions, power dynamics, global pressures, and local contexts, through the integrated perspectives of Bourdieu’s theory, world-systems theory, and institutional isomorphism.

To build truly ethical organizations, leaders must:

• Model ethical behavior.

• Integrate ethics into strategy.

• Ensure internal controls support integrity.

• Adapt global frameworks to local contexts.

• Prioritize substantive over symbolic compliance.

• Encourage open discussion of ethical dilemmas.

• Invest in long-term cultural development.

Compliance culture is not an endpoint but an evolving process. In an increasingly complex world, it is one of the most powerful tools organizations have to maintain legitimacy, build trust, and create long-term value.

Hashtags

#ComplianceCulture #BusinessEthics #CorporateGovernance #RiskManagement #OrganisationalIntegrity #LeadershipEthics #SustainableOrganisations

References

• Bourdieu, P. (1986). The Forms of Capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. Greenwood.

• Bourdieu, P. (1990). The Logic of Practice. Stanford University Press.

• Cerne, A. (2021). “Speaking of Business Ethics: Bourdieu and Market Morality as Discursive Practice.” Journal of Business Ethics, 174(4).

• DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. (1983). “The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields.” American Sociological Review, 48(2).

• Hallett, T. (2003). “Symbolic Power and Organizational Culture.” Sociological Theory, 21(2).

• Interligi, L. (2010). “Compliance Culture: A Conceptual Framework.” Journal of Management & Organization, 16(2).

• Interligi, L. (2015). “Compliance Culture Revisited.” Journal of Management & Organization, 21(3).

• Manor, K. (2025). “Risk Assessment and Its Influence on Corporate Compliance Programs.” Risk and Decision Analysis, 11(3–4).

• Musah, A., Padi, A., Blay, M., Okyere, D., & Ofori, B. (2025). “Ethical Culture, Internal Control Systems, and Tax Compliance in SMEs.” Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 11(1).

• Pellandini-Simányi, L. (2014). “Bourdieu, Ethics, and Symbolic Power.” The Sociological Review, 62(S2).

• Wallerstein, I. (1974). The Modern World-System. Academic Press.