The plausible deniability does not have to be just from shareholders. It can also be from the courts, or even other employees in the company. Also, the plausible deniability is for the person in the company doing the head rolling, so that they do not get caught up in it. Of course, some things can get so big that board members and CEO can get caught up in it, but not always.

I still don't buy it. Consultancies give recommendations and explain them. These things are well documented.

McKinsey and Purdue worked together on opioids. Both were sued and both had to pay for their strategy which resulted in addiction and death.

I would qualify that under:

> Of course, some things can get so big that board members and CEO can get caught up in it, but not always.

But that isn't what you're arguing - you're arguing that it provides plausible deniability, but it clearly doesn't, as I've shown in my example. It clearly doesn't provide plausible deniability in serious scenarios, which would be the ones that matter and you would want it from.

So let me get this straight - it's for plausible deniability, but it doesn't work in the case you would want it to the most?