Attitude of Whistle Blowing in Corporate Sector
Introduction
Speak or Keep Silent… These are the two of many common rules that plays along with the ethical consideration and morale. Speak, whenever you asked to and be silent when somebody is talking. But in the event that an individual saw unnecessary actions such as fraudulent actions, will he speak for it or keep silent? What is the suspect involved is his close friend or high ranking official, will he speak about it or just remain silent? These and many others are simple yet tangled situations that might happen within an organization. The one who keep silent is called coward, and the courageous one is called the whistle blower.
Background and Problem Statement
Whistle blowing involves the employees who are trusted enough to report any illegal, immoral, or illegitimates practices nestled within the organization (Ponnu, Naidu, and Zamri, 2007). The people who take the step standing as the whistle blowers are often received threats, most especially when the whistle blower is against a very powerful person. Organizations are fully aware about the existence of any misconducts and thus, only giving the people the chance to change. However, still, the concept of good and bad doesn’t always saw in a cinema. There are times that the people who are the whistleblowers seen to have their own interest inflicted in the relationship of the other personnel and the organization. In this sense, what should be the right and desirable attitude of a whistle blower within the corporate sector?
Research Aim and Objectives
The main aim of the study is to recognize the right attitude of the whistle blowers in the cases that they are facing to. And to support the ongoing investigation on the assigned topic, there are three important objectives that need to satisfy. First is to determine the important behavior that a whistleblower should possess. Second is to recognize the extent of being a whistleblower. And third is to be certain on the benefits and drawbacks involved as a whistleblower in a corporation.
Literature Review
Whistle blowing is defined to be focused on three determinants. First is the attitude towards the behavior. In a corporation, an employee is appraised based on the performance and measuring the improvement in their role. A person can develop the attitude based on the beliefs and behavior under the circumstances. Second is the involvement of psychological pressure due to the social norms, like the influence of being rich and powerful (Asian Institute of Management, 2006). A person’s thought are often affected on how will the society reject or accept his attitude which may came from the behavior. And third is based on the intention that tends to control the behavior. Based on the theory, the intention can be dependent on the resources or opportunities available, and by creating such behavior there is a chance to achieve the said opportunities (Ponnu, Naidu, and Zamri, 2007). There are many motivation and motives for whistle blowing, but on the other side, an organization that lacks of whistleblower means that it is lack of protection. Whistle blowing may be the source of controversies and upon the comparison of the Western to Eastern culture, there is big gap pertaining to the existence of whistle blowing. For example, in the Philippines, the existence of a whistle blower is a good sign that promises anticorruption but the promotion of the said practice is unpopular in the political, social, cultural, and legal structures of other countries (AIM-Hills Governance Center, 2007). For other countries, whistle blowing can be disturbing in an institutional sense because, at the fundamental level, it challenges the settled reporting structures and relationships within organizations. In fact, it is surprising that many feel that whistle blowing is an unwise career move. In these instances, most of the organizations allow the whistle blowers to be anonymous or unknown just to gain the idea of any suspected personnel being involved at any wrong doing (KPMG, 2009). Whistle blowing can be holistically defined consisting with the attitudes that are contradictory on each other (IFC, 2007).
Methodology
The applicable source of ideas in this study is the use of the comparative case studies. There are many case studies that can give details about the situations involving the issue of whistle blowing. Through reviewing the corporate and political sector, the case studies can give ideas on the various events being faced by a whistleblower. In fact, the case studies are formed through the personal experience of the whistleblower, and by that, the study can recognize the attitudes that should prevail.
References:
AIM-Hills Governance Center, (2007) “Whistleblowing in the Philippines AIM-Hills Governance Center Project Proposal for the World Bank for FY 2005-2006”, Accessed 21 June 2010, from http://csis.org/images/stories/hills/AIM-RVR-Hills.pdf
Asian Institute of Management, (2006) “Whistleblowing in the Philippines: Awareness, Attitudes and Structures”, RVR Center-Hills Program on Governance, Accessed 21 June 2010, from http://www.rvrcvstarr.aim.edu/Library%20CV%20Starr/Center%20Publications/Whistleblowing%20Monograph.pdf
IFC, (2007) “WhistleBlowing: Recent Developments and Implementation Issues”, A Global Corporate Governance Forum Publication - International Finance Corporation, Accessed 21 June 2010, from http://www.ifc.org/ifcext/cgf.nsf/AttachmentsByTitle/PSO+5/$FILE/GCGF+PSO+issue+5+screen.pdf
KPMG, (2009) “Revisiting the Role of the Corporate Whistleblower”, Accessed 21 June 2010, from http://www.kpmg.com/AU/en/IssuesAndInsights/ArticlesPublications/Forensic-Update/Documents/Revisiting-the-role-of-the-corporate-whistleblower.pdf
Ponnu, C.H., Naidu, K., Zamri, W., (2007) “Whistle-Blowing as Planned Behavior: A Survey amongst Executives in the Banking Sector in Malaysia”, Accessed 21 June 2010, from http://eprints.um.edu.my/992/1/Ponnu_et_al_%28138%29.pdf
0 comments:
Post a Comment