Whistle Blowing in Businesses - Essay Example

Whistle Blowing affiliation Whistle Blowing in Businesses All businesses operate within the framework of some ethical Codes of Conduct that are understood employers and employees. The ethics regulate the professional conduct of every employee to safeguard to the good reputation of a business or a profession. However, as expected, businesses are usually faced with ethical issues in their operations. One issue that has become very common is whistle-blowing (Lewis, 2001). There are many definitions of whistle-blowing including the act of complaining, either publicly on within the business about the businesses’ unethical behaviors. It is also the disclosure by members of an organization of immoral, illegitimate or illegal practices to organizations or people who can effect action (Johnson, 2003). Body Whistle-blowing always involves preventing something bad that would have happened. There has been increased debate on how ethical whistle-blowing is and if it is good or bad. By virtue of the fact that many whistleblowers exist within an organization which they are exposing, in most cases they are bound by statutory of contractual requirement not disclose any information. If the obligations are taken at face value, then whistle blowing can be regarded as a breach of ethics in so far as the breach of employment contract with the organization where the employee works in is concerned. However, a lot of factors need to be taken into consideration when looking at this issue and many ethicists agree that it is ethical. Employees have an ethical obligation to blow the whistle. However, different schools of thoughts have their arguments with regards to the ethics behind whistleblowing. Analysis based on the utilitarian theory According to the Stuart Mill, the author of the utilitarian theory, an ethical act is one which increases happiness to the most people and reduces suffering for the most people. The theory analyzes the results of an action and if it has a positive effect on the greatest number (Rawls, 1999). It analyzes the level of happiness and unhappiness that results from an action. An action is mainly judged by its results and ability to have a balance of happiness over unhappiness. It is also judged by its ability to prevent harm to other people. Harm in this case take a number of forms and is not only limited to physical injuries. It can also be financial harm or reputational harm. According to this theory, the options available for a utilitarian include remaining silent, secondly is to inform the immediate manager and lastly is to blow the whistle outside the organization. Deciding the best option depends on the outcome of each option. Remaining silent is likely to encourage the fraudulent habit to continue. It will have damaging effects to the whistle-blower if it is discovered through other means because employees have an obligation to report fraudulent behaviors to their employers. The second option of reporting the matter to the immediate manager can stop the fraud. It can also result to praises for both the manager and the whistle-blower. The likely harm is possibly the whistle-blower being victimized by fellow employees and loss of employment. The third option of reporting the issue externally is likely lead to financial loss for stakeholders and loss of organization’s reputation. The positive outcome as a result of this action is that the fraudulent behavior will end. According to this theory, whistle-blowers are regarded to be acting morally if they chose the second option of reporting the matter to the immediate manager. The option is most likely to bring the most happiness and least harm. Ethical issues arise from this theory regarding the appropriate way of reporting fraud and if this is a duty. To determine this, people need to consider if non-disclosure will cause harm. Analysis based on deontological ethics The act of whistle-blowing in an organization can also be judged according to the deontology classical ethical theory. This theory assesses the morality of an action based on its intentions rather than the consequences of the action. According to Immanuel Kant, the author of this theory, to act from a good will is acting from a duty. Deontological ethics judges the morality of an action if the action is based on some duties or rules (Hinman, 2013). The duties can stem from an individual’s previous actions, such as those which are found in agreements that one has entered. Duties can also come from actions previously done by others and duty to justice. This means that whistle blowing is not a duty in all circumstances. According to this theory, employees have a duty to act according to the employment agreement with the company, including acting in the best interest of the company. They also have the duty to make up for any wrongdoing done previously to others. It means that they have a duty to report any fraud in the organization. The moral duty has nothing to do with the consequences of the action. However, some people might argue that whistle-blowing also results in a breach of the duty of employee loyalty. On the other hand, the theory can help argue that there is no obligation to loyalty because businesses are not proper objects of loyalty. Businesses are not bound together for support and mutual fulfillment but are meant to divide labor so that the business makes profits. Arguably, loyalty lies where a relationship has trust, confidence, and emotions. Loyalty is usually expected from an employee if it included in the employment agreement signed by both the employer and the employee. There is no obligation that is outside the employment agreement. Therefore, whistle-blowing is a moral action if it fulfills the terms of the employment agreement signed by the employer and the employee. A deontologist can argue that if an employee neglects his duties to seek out the business’s wrongdoing then the action is not morally right. Analysis based on virtue ethics Virtue ethics emphasizes the moral character or the virtues of people. According to this theory, whistleblowing is the right thing for people to do because it encourages people to tell the truth, thus promoting positive virtues like courage, empathy, and honesty. Employees who uphold these virtues feel obligated to blow the whistle to improve their integrity. It also argues that the motive to tell the truth is more crucial than the potential consequences of not whistle blowing. The courage to go against the possibility of being punished by the employer and the courage to go against all odds is crucial in maintaining best business practices. However, this theory comes with a number of ethical issues, as some people argue that whistle blowing disregards virtues in a number of ways. A good example is that the act of whistleblowing is regarded as putting people’s lives and careers at risk and degrading privacy, integrity, and loyalty. Hence, looking from this theory’s point of view, whistle blowing is not a duty. People following this approach often find themselves breaching their ethical virtue of loyalty to the organization. Therefore, employees need to weigh their priority between the virtues of honesty and loyalty to the organization. When comparing loyalty and honesty, with regards to whistleblowing, it is noted that honesty is more crucial. It is considered to the most crucial part of any honor code. Hence, it can be concluded that whistle blowing needs to be a duty from the virtue perspective. Perspective on whistleblowing introduced by ethical egoism From the egoist point of view, people need to pursue their self-interests. The morality of an action is based on promoting individual selfish motives. Those in favor of this theory argue from the Altruism point of view that people are not in a position to know other people’s interests. It further argues that trying to help others can be degrading and invasive to the individual who may feel less competent to take care of themselves. Ethical Egoism also encourages common-sense moral intuitions for our self-interest. However, the theory also endorses wickedness where people look out for their self-interest and not for others. It says that the actions people take need to be for their interests no matter the cost. From the egoist point of view, employees rarely face the ethical dilemma when deciding if they should blow the whistle. Many factors need to be considered including fear of being investigated by the authorities or being fired from the organization. They fear being scapegoat because of following the policies. On the other hand, employees do not face these problems if they follow egoism approach. Egoism advocates for self-interest, so employees consider their interests. In many cases, employees do not even consider whistleblowing if they follow this method of making ethical decisions because of the trouble that they may face after their action. However, people argue that if people consider the consequences of whistle blowing, some level of egoist traits need to be acceptable. This differs from the utilitarian point of view that encourages people to consider the well being of other people when making ethical decisions. Ethical egoism cannot be regarded as a moral theory meaning that it is in itself a breach of ethical behavior (Arnold, 2013). As such, employees following this theory usually do not have a duty but a choice to blow the whistle on fraudulent acts. They only do this if its serves their interests and if they are not negatively affected by their act. Perspective on whistleblowing introduced by emotivism The theory of emotivism is the idea that people’s moral opinion is based on their feelings. With this theory, ethical statements are considered as emotional attempts to get people to agree with certain views. For this reason, it is also regarded as the Boo/Hooray theory. Boo for people who disagree with and ethical position and Hooray for those who agree with a position. This ethical position is potentially dangerous because serious ethical issues can occur. According to this theory, whistle blowing is ethical if an individual feels that it is ethical. People can argue that it does not give a morals stand but a mere expression of approval. According to this theory, employees do not have a duty to whistle blow but can act according to their feelings. An individual’s decision to act on not to act is moral depending on their feelings. However, this theory has received a lot of debate and has become unpopular among philosophers because it has made many emotivists to think that moral statements have no meaning. Conclusion Ethical codes of conduct are crucial for the success of any business and profession. However, many businesses today are facing a lot of issues in their operations. One of the most common issues is whistle-blowing. Ethical theories provide an analysis of the morality of whistleblowing. From the utilitarian point of view, the duty to blow the whistle needs to come from the principle of not causing harm. It also comes from recognizing that people’s actions have significant consequences on other people’s lives. From the deontological point of view, the morality comes from an employee’s duty as indicated in the employment contract. On the other hand, the virtue theory gives two sides. Whistleblowing should be a duty based on certain virtues and not others. However, people need to weigh their priority between the virtues of honesty and loyalty to the organization. Egoism is the only theory that does not support whistleblowing as an ethical duty. It mainly focuses on the conflict of interest between an individual’s interests and the interests of other people. It is clear that from the ethical theories analyzed, except the egoism theory, employees have a duty to report fraudulent activities. Bibliography Arnold, D. G., Beauchamp, T. L., & Bowie, N. E. (2013). Ethical theory and business. Boston: Pearson Education. Hinman, L. M. (2013). Ethics: A pluralistic approach to moral theory. Boston, MA: Wadsworth Pub Co. Johnson, R. A. (2003). Whistleblowing: When it works and why. Boulder [u.a.: Rienner. Lewis, D. (2001). Whistleblowing at work. London: Athlone. Rawls, J. (1999). A theory of justice. Cambridge, Mass: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Read More