The distinction between being "Good" and being a "Principled Performer" lies in the approach and framework used to meet objectives, irrespective of whether the objectives are considered "good" or "bad" by society.
* "Good" vs. "Principled Performer":
* "Good" is a subjective measure based on societal norms, values, or preferences.
* A "Principled Performer", however, aligns its objectives and operations with ethical practices, risk management, compliance, and governance, irrespective of societal perceptions.
* Definition of a Principled Performer:
* The term originates from OCEG's Principled Performance model, which emphasizes the achievement of objectives with integrity, accountability, and foresight.
* Organizations that ensure their processes and decisions meet defined principles of performance, even under external pressures, qualify as "Principled Performers."
* Misconceptions Debunked:
* Option B is incorrect because "Principled Performers" do not necessarily align with what society perceives as "Good."
* Option C is incorrect as it equates two fundamentally different concepts.
* Option D is irrelevant, as charity is not a determining factor of principled performance.
References:
* OCEG's GRC Capability Model: Defines the characteristics of Principled Performance and how it differs from subjective notions of "Good."
* Ethics and Compliance Standards (ISO 37301): Demonstrates the operationalization of principles within organizations.
* NIST RMF and COSO ERM Frameworks: Discuss how principled approaches are embedded into risk and governance processes.