The Pros And Cons Of Blowing

Whistle-blowing is a person who exposes any kind of information or activity that is deemed illegal, unethical or not correct either private or public within an organization or company. When an individual discovers evidence of malpractice or misconduct in an organization he/ she faces an ethical dilemma in which a decision has to be made. Either present documentation or turn the blind eye and not acknowledge the situation. Such information can be classified as a violation of company policy, rules, and regulations or a threat to public interest, national security, as well as fraud and corruption. Those that choose to become whistle-blowers can disclose their information either internal or external.

Review “Just pucker and blow: An analysis of corporate whistleblowers” in Chapter 2. Please respond to the following:

Whistleblowing encourages and enables employees to raise serious concerns within the company rather than overlooking a problem or 'blowing the whistle' outside. Employees are advised to speak to their designated senior CareGiver or a member of the

In an age when accelerated communications contribute to growing perceptions of organizational improprieties, the ethical and legal implications of whistleblowing have become a major topic of discussion. According to Lawrence and Weber (2014), whistleblowing is an employee disclosing apparent organizational misconduct to the government or media; however, this reporting of information should come after attempts at going through proper channels in order to persuade the organization to take appropriate actions has been ineffective.

Corruption with government secrets is a main topic as to why whistleblowers are needed. There is a fine line between what the government needs to hold and what the government should share, but it is popularly believed that the government needs to release more so it can actually feel like the people get their own say. Whistleblowers don't just believe that there are huge amounts of secrets that need to be released, but they only say what must be said. Edward Snowden was a technical assistant who worked for the NSA and

It used to be that whistleblowers were applauded, and they still are in the private sector, but it seems as if government whistleblowers are criticized and many are even criminally charged. There is certainly a different take on their activities. In fact, some advocates counsel federal employees not to come forward with information because if they do, their lives will be destroyed (Shulman, 2007). What often happens is that they will never be able to work in their careers again in the same capacity (Shulman, 2007). Many whistleblowers not only lose their jobs, but they lose their families and friends, and much of their money ends up going to attorneys (Shulman, 2007). Indeed, in today’s day and age, there is a surge of whistleblowers

A person who uncovered any kind of details or facts that is unlawful, illicit, criminal, dishonest or incorrect within any corporation is known as whistleblower. A whistleblower has two options to bring information or accusation to surface by internally or externally. Internally, a whistleblower can lead his/her statement to awareness of other people within the accused corporation. Externally, a whistle-blower can also contact a third party outside of the corporation such as media.

If the CEO received a report of his misconduct, the business would surely fall as the boss was the key person who kept the business running steadily. Most often, this event can cause massive damage to employee’s salaries, and affect the economic values as well. Furthermore, one may argue that whistleblowing may violate individual rights as employee’s signed a contract abiding by company’s standard. In an article called “Whistleblowing and Professional Responsibilities” by Sissela Bok, she emphasizes “employees have a loyalty oath of confidentiality and secrecy” (Bok 178) which may violate human rights as well. Individuals often view that they often have the right to privacy. However, whistleblowing to the company can create a breach in loyalty. Similar to a friend posting every secret about the person, employers contain information to avoid mass media and future damages to the community. Therefore, whistleblowing may create further chaos and future problems. While whistleblowing has its flaws regarding the standards placed on the employee, moral and ethical rights are higher than what an employer can offer for their

Whistleblowers are typically just normal American citizens that find out maybe something they shouldn’t. An example is after the 911 attacks, a employ of the NSA was trying to prove a theory he had about the attacks. But instead he found out that the NSA was going against the right of privacy. The NSA was tapping into phone conversations and listening to people's phone calls. So the employee, Thomas Drake, started telling a news reporter of his findings after his boss dismissed his findings. The government was going to far and invading citizens privacies. They knew it was wrong too yet they still did it. But that's not the only case. Many people have found out things and gave it out because citizens have a right to know. There is now laws that protect whistleblowers against corporations so that

I don’t agree with the statement provided that ‘whistleblowing’ is an enemy of business and creates suspicion and disharmony. This is simply the old traditional view of the idea of whistleblowing that there is a spy or snitch within the camp looking after his/her own interests. This old and traditional view is largely based on the case that employee’s within organisations had very little rights and they weren’t encouraged to be vocal about any misbehaviour or inappropriate dealings they would have witnessed within the organisation. The idea that whistleblowing is encouraging a widespread disunity within a firm is a purely

According to the Congressional Research Service, whistleblowing is defined as “making a disclosure evidencing illegal or improper government (and corporate) activities” (Whitaker cited in Koh, 2012). The individuals who make these disclosures are termed whistleblowers, and while the information they expose is protected by legislation and codes of conduct, they are usually not afforded the same level of protection, and indeed, are open to prosecution for breaking the law.

The whistleblower him or herself must be carefully scrutinized. What are the personal and the professional reputations of the whistleblower? What is the motive driving the whistleblower? Is it to benefit the client or the organization, or is it a need for attention or revenge? Is the whistleblower's cause seen as legitimate and significant by trustworthy colleagues and friends? Is the whistleblower aware of the potential consequences of blowing the whistle and still willing to accept responsibility for actions taken?

Whistleblowing is the practice in which employees report illegal and immoral practices of their employers to parties that can take corrective actions (Waytz et al. 1027). It is a controversial organizational subject. On one hand, whistleblowers help companies to correct dangerous working conditions, defective products and curb fraudulent or wasteful practices. These individuals may be in form of a previously overlooked source of information that is crucial in upholding the conduct of huge, sophisticated organizations. On the contrary, whistleblowers may upset the public image, cohesiveness and authority structure of an organization. Despite these issues, managers struggle with handling

Whistle blower according to Harris textbook is ‘‘one who discloses wrongdoing within an organization to the public or to those in positions of authority.’’ It is the term used to protest any ethical issue in organization. Usually, the whistle-blower comes from the insider, the staff of a company. There are 2 characteristic of whistleblowing. First, one exposes information that the association does not want revealed to the public or some authority. Some of information is confidential for organization. They either want to maintain the profit of the company in a good way and health competition or having unethical issue. Second, one does this out of appropriate

Whistleblowers can highlight and prosecute wrongdoers within a company by releasing and discussion information only very few have access to within an organization. When observing the common model of whistleblowing, the process of whistleblowing is composed of five stages (Henik, 2008): “the occurrence of the triggering event, recognition of the event and decision of actions to take, conduct of action, organizational reaction to whistle-blowing, and whistle-blower’s assessment to the organizational response”. The second stage is critical in that the decision to blow the whistle is made in that stage. Many people who want to come forth about information regarding an organization that they work for are usually too afraid to do so because of certain limitations. These limitations can include losing your job, lose of benefits, media locked on to you, and the organization itself can come after you. President Obama emphasized the importance of whistleblowing by saying, “Often the best source of information about waste, fraud, and abuse in government is an existing government employee committed to public integrity and willing to speak out” (CBC News, 2013). Sometimes, people interchangeably use the terms “whistleblowing and voice”. Earlier, Hirschman (1970) listed four ways to respond to dissatisfaction: “exit, voice, loyalty, and neglect”. “Dissatisfied employees adopt “voice” when they decide to stay in the organization and seek to improve current conditions (Zhou & George,