Business Ethics and Leadership: Whistle-blowing - Term Paper Example

?Introduction The concept of business ethics and leadership is one which has raised several controversies, specifically because of decisions which have to be made and the consequences which may arise because of this. When looking at the ethical decisions, it can be seen that it takes a specific approach to leadership and determining the standards which should be upheld within a corporation. The concept of whistle - blowing is one of the ethical decisions which many will re-examine. Determining whether one should go against the company to tell if something is immoral or wrong becomes controversial because of the consequences and risks which are involved. To do this effectively, one also has to have a strong sense of leadership, vision and determination to continue moving forward with the ethical values which one believes are correct. Examining the several perspectives of whistle - blowing in an organization can also determine the ethical legitimacy that is a part of this as well as how it takes a specific sense of leadership to follow through with the situation. The Institution of Ethical Decision Making The current concept of ethics within businesses is now recognized as an institution. This is designed because corporations are expected to follow through with a code of conduct that assists with doing what is right and fair for employees and the general public. The institution began with the ethics that were associated with Enron and the complexities which came from the financial situation and deceptions which occurred. This was followed by several believing that a framework needed to be followed within corporations, specifically which would create programs, guidelines and practices that would hold various companies liable for the actions which they were supposed to follow. The defined elements of this institution are based on the cultural and social expectations, relationship to politics and looking at withholding standards in real life situations which occur. By examining and contributing to these various expectations in the right manner, there is the ability to withhold the expectations through the performance of the company and the results which the public is able to look into (Ferrell, Fraedrich, p. 15). The framework which has been built with the institution of ethics is followed with the understanding of moral problems and how this creates specific responses from employees and to the public. The main response through the institution is based on ethical management, meaning that a company has to make specific promises to the community and follow through with these. More important, practices that would cause harm to employees or the public are supposed to be prevented and hold to specific standards. While there are certain issues which don’t carry a difference between right and wrong, others are determined by the harm which it may cause, which becomes the basis for the standard business practices which are to be followed. While each business is able to withhold the standards and practices, there is also a direct association with others holding corporations accountable for actions which may become public at any time (Geva, p. 133). Ethics and Whistle - Blowing The concept of whistle - blowing is able to move up into an organization because of ethical standards which have been violated. These ethics are based on the institutional standards that are withheld by an organization and which are expected by the public. If there are violations of the employees, organization or to the public, then an individual has the right to point fingers at those responsible. Whistle blowing takes place when an individual decides to point out the faults of a company, specifically with a focus on illegal, immoral or illegitimate practices that are taking place over the organization. It is expected that the response to the whistle blowing will be a large amount of publicity as well as mediation which takes place to resolve the issue. It is further expected that there will be sets of questions which are asked pertaining to the immorality of the situation and how this may affect those that are in the organization (Applebaum p. 7). Ethical Concerns in Whistle - Blowing The main approaches which are taken with those who are concerned with the dynamics of a work force take two perspectives. The first is based on the conflicts which occur. If one decides to point fingers about the ethical considerations, then it may be considered a violation of those that are within the corporation. Other employees will be affected, which creates a sense of disloyalty. There is also a lack of protection that occurs from those who may be a part of the incident and which aren’t able to create a strong response or who may be guilty of the unethical behaviors. The philosophy behind showing that one commits a wrongdoing in a business then has two sides. The first is deciding if it is morally imperative to the business as well as determining whether other levels of morality are broken because of the employee trust, loyalty and protection that are expected in the business. These main consequences have created some of the main controversies within each of the businesses (Varelius, p. 263). The concept of creating a sense of loyalty and protection is further in conflict because of the sense of morality that is based on cultural expectations. The organizational culture which is set up is usually associated with specific codes of conduct and expectations that are a part of the main actions taken on a daily basis. This is combined with the ideology of holding to standards as a team, creating a sense of value by everyone following through with the same actions or allowing those who have a stronger foundation, such as a manager, to take actions that are outside of the knowledge of other employees. The expectations that are in an organizational culture are then based on the hierarchy which is created as well as the associations which are built from the actions that are taken. Most in organizations will work to create specific policies and expectations that are within the business to withhold a sense of prevention and management while making those that are within the organization to be accountable for the actions. By making the culture surround a sense of risk and conflicts with whistle – blowing and by creating a culture which builds a belief over specific standards that are expected is also the inability to move outside of the organization to hold a sense of accountability for immoral practices (Lachman, p. 265). Leadership and Whistle – Blowing The organizational culture and the personal affiliations within a business often make the concept of whistle – blowing more difficult. To overcome this, are those who are required to move outside of the organization and into a sense of leadership that is able to recognize the immoral conduct and to show and lead into different alternatives that are a part of the problems within the organization. The first step which any leader has to do is to create a sense of individual judgment about the situation and whether it is correct or incorrect. This has to be combined with an understanding of moral leadership, which is based on what one personally believes their moral obligations are to a given situation. These two concepts are able to provide systematic action that allows an individual to move forward and to begin communicating with others about given problems in the standards and associations that are created in a given situation. Moral leadership becomes based on the ideology that something must be done to change a situation and which shows that what is being done is harming others and is immoral. The individual which decides to take this leadership position is required to interchange their ideologies and morals with that of the moral institutions, specifically so the communication which is used specifies which actions are being taken that are immorally incorrect (Rhode, p.1). The concept of leadership which is taken is not only based on the ideologies of morals. Most believe that there is a sense of responsibility that one has to the public and to other employees to stop the corruption from occurring. The harm which may be occurring out of a given situation is the main concept which leads to a sense of leadership among whistle – blowers. The morality of leaders then moves a step further, specifically in defining what is corrupt and how it is causing harm. The sense of moral leadership which is created is based on the ideal of building a leadership role in identifying what is occurring within the organization. This is combined with strong communication skills and the ability to be reflective of the moral implications which are stated from the whistle – blowers. The charisma that has to be withheld from the leaders who go into the public is based on the need to show that there is a sense of morality with the leader while creating an understanding and belief that the activities within the organizational environment go outside of this. The charisma also has to separate the organizational environment and the personal relationships from the communication which is used, specifically so there are more options to publicize the information and to continue to give the necessary message without any communication gaps to the public (Koontz, Weihrich, p. 54). The concept of creating a sense of communication with leaders, while dividing the organizational environment from the public prestige is one which then leads into specific attributes that create leadership challenges. The charisma is one which is based on a sense of courage, ability to communicate effectively and to separate the various organizational environments with the message which needs to move before the public. More important, there has to be an understanding of the risks that are involved, potential outcomes and problems which may occur both with the public and from the organization. The difference in leadership is based on getting followership from the general public to secure one’s position, while not causing those in the organizational environment to create a sense of hostility to those that are in the environment. At the same time, this has to continue with the moral respect and obligations that are associated with the leader and those who are following or going against the ideals and morality of the whistle – blower. These several perspectives to the leadership values which have to be created then determine the level of responsibility which is a part of the management and creation and responses to what is occurring within the environment (Daft, Lane, p. 192). Business Ethics and Whistle – Blowing Leadership The concepts which are approached with whistle – blowing in terms of leadership values are intertwined with the business ethics which those in a given environment are expected to be a part of. When one begins to move into whistle – blowing, they also become a representative of the teams, environment and the organization. However, this representation alters according to the type of communication which one uses as well as the approach which is taken in terms of morality and ethics. Even if a business isn’t breaking any ethical values, those who are whistle – blowing are more interested in gaining the public interest and in creating a level of followers for their own interest. This leads to specific approaches with the leadership values and the communication which is used to create a different ending situation. The leadership value is combined with two levels of integrity which have to work as the main attributes of the whistle – blowers, including discernment and the ability to speak about the discernment. If the organizational process doesn’t foster the integrity then the personal integrity may retaliate even more from the organization. This can create further problems with the communication and create exaggerations with the publicity which is offered. The leadership value which has to be created is based on facts as information and the action to talking that is incorporated with the ethical values which the whistle – blower has, as well as how the organization responds to this (Carter, p. 167). The amount of whistle – blowing which is in a corporation, as well as the responses that occur then becomes measures that are from an organization. If one decides to begin communicating against a specific problem, then the organization will respond positively or negatively with the reaction. Many will consider the ethical values, reconsider their position and begin to work toward different solutions to change the outcome as a business procedure that creates specific values. However, if the communication which is used by whistle – blowers creates a negative reaction, then this leads to more publicity, mediation and other efforts to try to get the morality levels and ethics to change within the business. The distribution of information that begins the process of whistle – blowing is triggered by specific reactions that are from the organization and which cause the information to be communicated even more widely or to be resolved from the organization. The main leadership which occurs from those who decide to press certain issues then becomes focused on the support of the organizational culture, recognition of what occurs, communication methods which are used and the company ethical questions and principles that are at stake. The focus which has to occur with the company then creates specific efforts to change with the general practices (Lewis et al, p. 75). Morality Against Whistle - Blowing Even though there are certain precautions that arise within an organization, there are also other considerations to make with one’s decision to move into whistle-blowing. The intent and motivation that is associated with whistle – blowing is expected to be based on the need to justify the morality that is within a company. However, there are considerations which move in the alternative direction, specifically if the information begins to go into court or if outside negotiations are made with competitors or the public media. The popularity of whistle – blowing has also led to deals that several make to create problems from an organization. The first example of this was in 1992 when the False Claims Act was created. This stated that if a whistle – blower came forward they would receive 25% of the money recovered by the government from illegal transactions which were taken. This occurred first with Christopher Urda who was awarded $7.5 million for showing that the Singer Corporation had unfair practices with the Pentagon, valuing at over $77 million. While the particular methods for whistle – blowing might only state the facts, there are also other incentives that are associated with this, specifically which doesn’t make a statement toward morality, but instead is used with alternative intents for those that are interested in prospects such as money values (Lewis et al, p. 76). The implication of whistle – blowing from this perspective further combines with the sociological interpretations that may be associated with the problems in the work place. There may be an individual that believes the information presented is based on offering public service and giving important information about the misjudgments of a business. However, if the leadership skills aren’t given in the correct manner, then it may also be responsible for reactions and giving advice that is out of a place of power, rather than speaking about the truth or trying to assist others that are having difficulties with the morality of a company. The question of whether the ethics are being tested is the first component to this. This is followed by the intent of one who has decided to be a part of whistle – blowing, specifically because it is expected they will gain media coverage and the public interest. Gaining this trust is one that can help an individual to receive a sense of fame, power and trust while using other initiatives as a part of the whistle – blowing which is created. From this point of view, there are more complexities to the whistle – blowing because of the procedures which are used as well as the intent of the individual. If the misconduct is interpreted in several ways, then it further adds into the problems of those who take this leadership position while creating complexities in the corporate and public decisions that are made as a result (Kernaghan, p. 148). Conclusion The concepts that are associated with whistle – blowing incorporate several levels of business ethics and leadership. Today, the institution of whistle – blowing constitutes the expected problems that arise in businesses and which may cause harm to employees or the general public. The expectations for one who decides to stand against this include personal values, attributes that are associated with the condition and the ability to stand in a leadership role that opposes the actions of the corporation. The amount of publicity which is received as well as the responses which follow create a difference in how the whistle – blowing moves forward, specifically because of reactions from the organization, employees and the public. This particular application is followed by the expectations from whistle – blowers, which also indicate specific moral values based on the incentives for extra money or for a power position in the public. Considering the various perspectives of whistle – blowers and the ethical responsibilities and leadership roles which they are designated to have also changes the association and expectations with the defined roles of the corporation. References Applebaum, Steven. “Whistleblowing: International Implications and Critical Case Incidents.” Journal of American Academy of Business 10 (1), 2006. Carter, Chris. Business Ethics as Practice: Representation, Reflexivity and Performance. New York: Edward Elgar, 2007. Daft, Richard, Patricia Lane. The Leadership Experience. New York: Cengage Learning, 2007. Ferrell, OC, John Fraedrich. Business Ethics: Ethical Decision Making and Cases. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2008. Geva, A. “A Typology of Moral Problems in Business: A Framework for Ethical Management.” Journal of Business Ethics 69 (2), 2006. Kernaghan, Kenneth. Professionalism and Public Service: Essays in Honor of Kenneth Kernaghan. Canada: University of Toronto Press, 2008. Koontz, Harold, Heinz Weihrich. Essentials of Management New York: Routledge, 2006. Lachman, Vicki. “Whistleblowing: Role of Organizational Culture in Prevention and Management.” Ethics, Law and Policy. 17 (4), 2008. Lewis, Pamela, Stephen Goodman, Patricia Fandt, Joseph Michlitsch. Management: Challenges for Tomorrow’s Leaders. New York: Cengage Learning, 2007. Rhode, Deborah. Moral Leadership: The Theory and Practice of Power, Judgment and Policy. UK: John Wiley and Sons, 2006. Varelius, Jukka. “Is Whistle – Blowing Compatible with Employee Loyalty?” Journal of Business Ethics 85 (2), 2008. For online access: Applebaum, Steven. (2006). “Whistleblowing: International Implications and Critical Case Incidents.” Journal of American Academy of Business 10 (1). http://www.appelbaumconsultants.com/articles/2005-06/whistleblowing.PDF Carter, Chris. (2007). Business Ethics as Practice: Representation, Reflexivity and Performance. New York: Edward Elgar. http://books.google.com/books?id=AWjZyqhRBowC&pg=PA167&dq=whistleblowing+and+leadership+in+business+2006&hl=en&ei=iGXmTcODKs3srQfyooGXCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CEoQ6AEwBTgK#v=onepage&q=whistleblowing%20and%20leadership%20in%20business%202006&f=false Daft, Richard, Patricia Lane. (2007). The Leadership Experience. New York: Cengage Learning. http://books.google.com/books?id=JJ_HuV1KlyQC&pg=PA191&dq=whistleblowing+and+leadership+in+business+2006&hl=en&ei=-WPmTa7DMMyGrAfds52mCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CFAQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q&f=false Ferrell, OC, John Fraedrich. (2008). Business Ethics: Ethical Decision Making and Cases. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company. http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=f3jg2jhqfC8C&oi=fnd&pg=PR15&dq=whistleblowing+in+business+2006&ots=edw2e1Aesk&sig=1r5AOFigQaXV8_ifRq6gU4Uqpb0#v=onepage&q&f=false Geva, A. (2006). “A Typology of Moral Problems in Business: A Framework for Ethical Management.” Journal of Business Ethics 69 (2). http://www.springerlink.com/content/wnx4u11p729l0504/ (go to download pdf) Kernaghan, Kenneth. (2008). Professionalism and Public Service: Essays in Honor of Kenneth Kernaghan. Canada: University of Toronto Press. http://books.google.com/books?id=wtLgAUTJxHkC&pg=PA148&dq=whistleblowing+and+leadership+in+business+2006&hl=en&ei=cGnmTbXFNcTsrAfakqWxCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CDIQ6AEwAjge#v=onepage&q=whistleblowing%20and%20leadership%20in%20business%202006&f=false Koontz, Harold, Heinz Weihrich. (2006). Essentials of Management New York: Routledge. http://books.google.com/books?id=OSAkMZ3SMQ0C&pg=PA52&dq=whistleblowing+and+leadership+in+business+2006&hl=en&ei=-WPmTa7DMMyGrAfds52mCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CDQQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=whistleblowing%20and%20leadership%20in%20business%202006&f=false Lachman, Vicki. (2008). “Whistleblowing: Role of Organizational Culture in Prevention and Management.” Ethics, Law and Policy. 17 (4). http://cms.nursingworld.org/DocumentVault/Ethics/Culture-in-Prevention-and-Management.aspx Lewis, Pamela, Stephen Goodman, Patricia Fandt, Joseph Michlitsch. (2007). Management: Challenges for Tomorrow’s Leaders. New York: Cengage Learning. http://books.google.com/books?id=rs2Obr55ThsC&pg=PA75&dq=whistleblowing+and+leadership+in+business+2006&hl=en&ei=iGXmTcODKs3srQfyooGXCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=10&ved=0CGEQ6AEwCTgK#v=onepage&q=whistleblowing%20and%20leadership%20in%20business%202006&f=false Rhode, Deborah. (2006). Moral Leadership: The Theory and Practice of Power, Judgment and Policy. UK: John Wiley and Sons. http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=khYdztxw0KAC&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=whistleblowing+and+leadership+in+business+2006&ots=hbODYhc7nb&sig=FstSYqNuEK9Vsd4SciyQ_-eer5k#v=onepage&q&f=false Varelius, Jukka. (2008). “Is Whistle – Blowing Compatible with Employee Loyalty?” Journal of Business Ethics 85 (2). http://www.springerlink.com/content/p1gq4520865471qx/ Read More