Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on whistle blowing effectiveness
Essay on whistle blowing effectiveness
Whistleblowing advantages and disadvantages on organisations
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essay on whistle blowing effectiveness
In a general form, whistleblowing occurs when a person exposes activity that is illegal, unethical or incorrect within an organization. When this happens, many controversial issues come into play. The whistleblower becomes untrusted in the workplace, the business's reputation gets pulled into the line of fire, and the act of whistleblowing becomes abused.
Although there are laws put into place to protect whistleblowers, there is no law protecting what individuals think about one another. When an employee takes the correct step of exposing illegal doings, there are many aspects that need to be looked at. If a whistleblower takes the proper steps to handle the bad situation, the statement works its way through the chain of command. Depending
…show more content…
If the problem is substantial, the owner of the company has many things to think about. Mainly, whether or not the statement will hurt the businesses reputation. According to Michael McMillan, author of Retaliation against Whistleblowers: No Good Deed goes Unpunished in the Enterprising Investor's Collection of the CFA Institute, ethics in a business has to be the main key to success. Otherwise there is room for exceptions that become larger problems. To ignore a whistleblowing statement, even if it's best for the company to let it slide under the rug, will pile up that will eventually be unable to ignore. Ignoring the problem will leave the owner with multiple liabilities. In most cases, those liabilities are: the whistleblower knowing that their statement is being ignored, the wrongdoing continues to happen and the build up will only make a bigger explosion. In heated situations that could potentially hurt the company, owners and decision makers will want to place blame. They intend to put the blame on someone else to ensure the company does not go down. This leaves the original Whistleblower with a big decision, is it important enough to risk it …show more content…
They take pride in Ethical standards and created the IMA Statement of Ethical Professional Practice. There is a list of standards members need to abide by, they are: Competence, Confidentiality, Integrity and Credibility. Within those categories there are rules and steps to take in order to resolve ethical issues. In the Snowden Case, he did not follow this code of ethics or really any other type of business ethics. He did not speak to a manager or go to any type of member in his line of work when he found a problem. Snowden lied to his work and family claiming he had to get testing done on his epilepsy problem for a week in a hospital. Instead he went to another country in hopes of blowing the whistle on the United States
The article’s purpose is to clarify the thin line between patriotism and treason in a whistleblowing action. Depending on the information available for the public to digest, many people could have different opinions on the whistleblower (s) and their intentions. The author discusses a case of Tim Priest, who disagreed with his management’s new policies and the way they were applied in practice, thus publicly announcing the hidden truths about the department. Priest worked for the police department as a detective sergeant. Questions of his intentions about disclosing the authority’s dishonest actions were raised amidst the investigation.
Bouville (2008) describes whistleblowing as an act for an employee of revealing what he believes to be unethical or described as an illegal behaviour to a higher management (internal whistleblowing) or to an external authority or the public (external whistleblowing). Whistle-blowers are often seen as traitors to an organisation as they are considered to have violated the loyalty terms of that organisation while some are described as heroes that defend the values and ethics of humanity rather than loyalty to their company. In the medical community, it is the duty of a practitioner aware of patient care being threatened to make it known to those in charge and for those in charge to address the issues and act on it. The General Medical Council (GMC) stipulated this act of raising concern as a doctor’s duty in its Good medical practice guide. This paper will be based on the analysis of the experience of whistle blowers, reasons why they chose or chose not to take such actions and personal opinions on whistleblowing in the medical community.
This occurs when someone tells a coworker about an illegal or immoral practice, in hopes that this person will do something to change the company. This usually occurs when they are trying not to cause any bad publicity for the company. If a company discourages the internal reporting, they are likely to become worse off and the individual that initially started the internal report will have to go out of the company and notify a governmental agency or even the press. From an ethical standpoint, internal reporting is a big part of keeping companies clear from whistle blowing. Even when whistleblowers keep the problem inside the company, they are still often seen as traitors or not company
The term Whistleblower means “An employee who discloses information that s/he reasonably believes is evidence of illegality, gross waste or fraud, mismanagement, abuse of power, general wrongdoing, or a substantial and specific danger to public health and safety. When information is classified or otherwise restricted by Congress or Executive Order, disclosures only are protected as whistleblowing if made through designated, secure channels. (What is a Whistleblower?)” The idea behind whistleblowers is that they believe trying to inform the public of illegal acts within their businesses has the potential to protect the public from wrongdoing. The following studies analyze scholar’s findings on different factors related to whistle blowing as
With the emergence of unethical practices found in international corporations, whistleblowing has been more and more common. A whistleblower is a person who exposes any kind of information that is deemed illegal, immoral, or dishonest. In SNC-Lavalin, the whistleblower was justified. In this case, the senior executives were paying bribes and taking money from mega projects won under the Gadhafi regime (Wikipedia, 2015, n.p). There are several issues in this case.
On November 29th, Mary Inman gave us a talk on the topic whistleblowing, which let me know more about the whistleblower activities and the whistleblower protection. According to the definition given by the website whistleblowers international, whistleblowing is someone who reveal the unethical or illegal activities within the company. The person can be current or past employee, or an outside individual who is familiar with the unethical activity. This whistleblower does not need to be U.S. citizen.
However, it may not be the best solution to be used first when dealing with unethical corporate practices. From more of a Utilitarian approach one should seek to do the greatest good. An approach that gives the company a chance to change its unethical behavior internally would follow this idea. Having the ability to change practices internally before outside intervention can have many positive effects. The company is able to make the changes, reestablish its integrity, maintain business, and retain employees. The whistleblowing option brings in outside forces that could lead to repercussions for the company which may include restitution or even being closed down. If the business is closed it effects more than just the corporate entity, all of the employees are also negatively impacted by this as well when they would lose their jobs. Sometimes however, when the company is unwilling to change its practices and do business in a more ethical manner people are left with little choice but to report to outside sources what is occurring within the business. Many see whistleblowing as law-breaking when employees are contractually obligated to
First I will be telling you about the pressure of being a “whistleblower”. In Fahrenheit 451 the pressure of being a “whistleblower” is so real, everyone is told to rat out everyone who has a book in their household, if they find out they have a book in the home it is burned to the ground. This is related to our society because we are pressured to do what is right, and part of my belief system is to do what is right and to point out what is wrong. For example if someone were to gossip behind their back I would try to stand up and tell them it is wrong and tell the person what the others said
Many people have always wondered what the word ethics mean. To me ethics is the feeling of right and wrong. Many people have their own way of defining ethics and but this is what ethics mean to me. Ethics to other people might mean following the laws and some may say ethics is determined by what society is believed is right and wrong. For example Edward Snowden, a 30 year old man was born in North Carolina in 1983 (Edward snowden.biography, 2013, para. 1). Edward Snowden was a security guard that worked for the National Security Agency (NSA), after three months Edward Snowden started to collect NSA files and fled to Hong Kong and leaked the files. China started to print out report of the files that Edward Snowden has leaked to China about the NSA spying on U.S citizens. The reason that Edward Snowden left the United States (U.S) and leaked the NSA files is because he believed that what he had done was ethically correct and did not want people’s rights to be taken away.
“Faced with what is right, to leave it undone shows a lack of courage” (Confucius Quotes, 2012). The person who does her duty, at great risk to her own interest, when most others would defy from fear is considered a hero (Schafer, 2004). Dr. Nancy Olivieri is a hero who blew the whistle on Apotex, University of Toronto (U of T) and the Hospital for Sick Children (HSC); and fought for her academic rights till the end. Whistle-blowing refers to actions of an employee that breach her loyalty to the organization but serves the public interest. When other constraints proved to be ineffective, whistle-blowing acts as a check on authority of the organization. Whistle-blowers expose severe forms of corruption, waste, and abuse of power within their organization and put the organization in a position where it is answerable to the public, thus enhancing its accountability (Cooper, 2006, pg. 198-205).
The act of whistle-blowing is an ethical issue that all employees have the right to. Whether they decide to make the corrupt information known publicly or anonymously, the information they provide can protect everyone involved. The ethical and moral sides of whistle-blowing can go both ways. In order to protect the customers, patients, or consumers of the harmful products the companies are offering, employees that have morals and feel the need to make the truth be known have an ethical responsibility to do so. Issues of being a whistle-blower are more controversial than the responsibilities of the employees doing so. When a whistle-blower takes action, they expose information from their company that it not meant to be public. They basically turn their backs away from their company and colleagues by revealing the truth. When surveying these issues, an employee who is torn by exposing information or keeping silent must decide whether it is more ethical to stay loyal to their organization or to the organization's
In Module 1, Kindred Todd faced quite a few ethical dilemmas that included her values and technical ineptness. The first predicament was tested her personal morals and ethics. According to, Cumming and Worley, OD practitioners are dealing more and more with value conflicts with powerful outside groups (Cummings & Worley, 2008). Kindred was immediately faced with the issue of knowing what was ethically correct but being told the unethical approach was the best in order to benefit the client and her job security. Although compromising is one of the many skills of organization developers there are still morals that should be followed on each assignment. Kindred, know that deceiving the clients was unethical, took the first step to working on behalf of the client and immediately involved her superior, Larry, to resolve a potential conflict In the project. While her actions went in vain when she told her boss to remove her from the project and provide the client with a more qualified resource, Kindred did what she thought to be the best approach.
For this essay, I will evaluate the Employee Loyalty Argument derived from ‘Whistleblowing and Employee Loyalty’ by Ronald Duska. I will argue that this Employee Loyalty Argument is deductively valid but is not deductively sound because premise 2 is false. I will justify my claims that premise 2 is false by arguing about how it is rational for employees to expect their companies to recognize and fulfill a duty of loyalty to their employees if the employees also have a duty of loyalty to the companies that employ them.
Ethics in the Workplace "Ethics are personal and, at the same time, a very public display of your attitudes and beliefs. It is because of ethical beliefs that we humans may act differently in different situations" (University of Phoenix, 2007). Poor ethical choices in the workplace can truly hurt people. Poor ethics can damage their career, happiness, and quality of life. Not only can these actions hurt the individual who has made the bad choices, but also most often it hurts the innocent.
Morality is the biggest and best reason for this act because people generally want to do the good moral thing. If a person should have to blow the whistle on a company they should know that for every action there is a reaction, and the reaction of whistle blowing might lead to getting fired. One of the most controversial types of whistle blowing is that of impersonal. If a company is making products that are unsafe because they are trying to save a few dollars, an employee could see this as immoral and tell the public about it. The whistle blower would do this based on Kant's theory. It would be following the moral law to do so. If a company is cutting corners and hurting others, it would be morally unacceptable not to blow the whistle on this company. To knowingly let innocent people get hurt because of something that you could have stopped is morally wrong. A lot of people would blow the whistle on a company that is making unsafe products, but not all. A number of people would not inform the public of the company's wrongdoings. They would not do it out of fear that they might loose there job or even be blacklisted from the industry altogether. If they are not fired they will most likely be outcasts at their job and looked over at promotion time.