· MathieuBouville. (2008).
Whistle-Blowing and Morality. The Journal of Business Ethics.81 (3), p579–585. Journal Article. · EileenZ. Taylor, Mary B. Curtis. (2010).
An Examination of the Layers of WorkplaceInfluences in Ethical Judgments: Whistleblowing Likelihood and Perseverance inPublic Accounting. The Journal of Business Ethics. 93 (1), p21–37. Journal Article.· GranvilleKingIII. (1999).
The Implications of an Organization’s Structure onWhistleblowing. The Journal of Business Ethics. 20 (4), p315–326.
Journal Article.· GeorgeW.Reynolds (2012). Ethics in Information Technology. 3rd ed.
Boston,USA: Joe Sabatino. p331-373. Book.Journal Article.
· ErikaMcCallister, Timothy Grance, Karen A. Scarfone., (2010). Guide to Protecting the Confidentiality of Personally IdentifiableInformation (PII). National Institute of Standards and Technology SpecialPublication 800-122 Natl. Inst.
Stand. Technol. Spec. Publ. 800-122, 59 pages.Reference Like there’s no rose without athorn, either way whistleblowing would or would not be considered as wrongdoing depending on the weightage of the consequence relating to the company andthe person himself.Internal whistle blowing is beingencouraged by many legal systems and legislations where there is also aprobability factor that the person may have chosen to leak information aboutthe company which may have negatively affected the society in the future andhence forth the whistle-blower might be saved in the face of law, if proventhat the information leaked would cause a commotion.Whistle-blowers need to beinsiders, that is, either currently or previously associated with theorganization and a further discrepancy may be made between open and anonymouswhistleblowing during a situation.
To conclude and summarize the essay,this literature explains that whistleblowing is a serious ethical dilemma wherefrom the perspective of ethics in general, whistle-blowers are faced withdeciding whether to break the bond of loyalty to their respective organizationsor to make a 3rd party aware about it in such a situation apart frombeing beneficial or elsewise.Conclusion “Whistle-blowing is generallyconsidered from the viewpoint of professional morality. Morality rejects theidea of choice and the interests of the professional as immoral. Yet thedreadful retaliations against the messengers of the truth make it necessary formorality to leave a way out of whistle-blowing. Therefore it forges rights -sometimescalled duties- to trump the duty to the public prescribed by professionalcodes. This serves to hide the obvious fact that whether to blow the whistle isindeed a choice, not a matter of objective duty. One should also notice that ifit fails to achieve anything then blowing the whistle was the wrong decision(or maybe the right decision that nobody would want to make).
There isnevertheless a tendency to judge it based on the motivation of the whistleblower. In a way, whistle blowers should strive to act like saints. Yet, it islogically impossible to hold both whistle-blowing as mandatory andwhistle-blowers as heroes or saints. Moreover, this tends to value the greatdeeds of a few over the lives of the many, which is incompatible with the basicassumptions of morality.” (Bouville,2008) “More over as per Eileen and Mary’ssayings Whistle blowing has a volatile reputation, at best. First, it directlyimplies ethical failure and involves one person judging the ethical behaviourof another.
Second, whistleblowing is often anonymous, depriving thereported-on an individual the right to face his or her accuser. Third,whistleblowing often entails reporting outside of the established lines ofcommunication and authority. Finally, whistleblowing requires trust in those atthe top of the organization to take appropriate actions when they learn ofmisdeeds by their employees. Unfortunately, even when wrong doing isdetrimental to many people external to the organization (e.g.
fraudulent?nancial reporting, hacking into to the system resulting in arti?cially highstock prices and leaking sensitive data regarding the organization), thoseinternal to the organization often view the whistle-blower’s report (ratherthan the initial wrongdoing) as the cause of their losses. Evidence ofwidespread retaliation and cost to the whistle-blower himself is welldocumented. However uncomfortable we are with the notion of reporting on the behaviourof others, whistleblowing is an important organizational control. Indeed,industry surveys and academic research support the contention that reportingmechanisms aid in the prevention and detection of unethical behaviour.” (Taylor and Curtis, 2010)”Furthermore, internal disclosurecreates an ethical atmosphere within the organization where employees areencouraged to report unethical behaviour. If, however, the organization’sclimate is favourable to suppressing internal disclosure, the wrongdoing may gounreported for months causing the organization to suffer. Although internal andexternal whistleblowing appear to be different, they are conceptually similar.For instance, both forms of whistleblowing start with individuals observingorganizational wrongdoings committed by executives/ managers or employees.
Besides, both use the active voice i.e., verbal communication, as a means ofeliminating the wrongdoing, instead of alternative approaches, such as sabotageor violence where both forms of whistleblowing may threaten organizationalnorms and culture, creating an atmosphere of animosity and retaliation againstthe observer of the wrongdoing.” (King III, 1999)”On the other hand, in circumstanceswhere the wrongdoer is a higher official, the observer of the wrongdoing couldreport the incident to other members of upper management who could eliminatethe unlawful act. This type of action may be accompanied by the exiting of thewrongdoer and/or rebel.
Whistleblowing is a sensitive style of communicationwhich requires the successful communicator to consider the audience, purpose,language, and tone of the wrongdoing that is being disclosed. There are acouple of benefits to internal whistleblowing as opposed to externaldisclosure. For an example, Internal disclosures allow organizations a chanceto fix problems before they develop into full-blown scandals in the eyes ofpublic.” (King III, 1999) “However according to Granville whistleblowingcan occur when parties external to the organization are informed of illegal orunlawful wrongdoing within an organization. These individuals may be members ofthe media, government officials, members of public support groups, or variousother parties external to the organization who can bring about change.definition of whistleblowing, however, describes it as taking place when aperson reports individual or corporate wrongdoing to sources either internal orexternal to the organization. Internal whistleblowing may be defined asdisclosure to sources within the organization (for example, members of uppermanagement and supervisors) who can bring about effective change regarding aperceived wrongdoing. Reports of wrongdoing to co-workers (peer reporting),however, would not be considered whistleblowing.
” (Granville,1999)”For an example, an ITprofessional of a company may know and have access to the organization’ssensitive information regarding the accounting side of its aspect since he orshe may be in charge of the ERP system and may notice the numbers are beingfraudulent in the company’s record. A conscientious employee would call theproblem to management’s attention and try to correct it by working withappropriate resources within the company. But what if the employee’s attempt tocorrect the problem through internal channels was dissatisfied or ignored? Theemployee could then consider becoming a whistle-blower and reporting theproblem to people outside the company, including state or federal agencies thathave jurisdiction. Obviously, such actions could have negative consequences onthe employee’s job, perhaps resulting in vengeance and firing. In May 2005,Oracle Corporation paid $8 million to settle charges that it fraudulently collectedfees before providing training for clients and failed to comply with federaltravel regulations in billing for travel and expenses. The charges arose from awhistle-blower lawsuit brought by a former Oracle vice president.
As a resultof the settlement, the whistle-blower received $1.58 million of the $8 milliontotal settlement.” (Reynolds, 2012) “Whistle-blowing is aneffort by an employee to attract attention to a negligent, illegal, unethical,abusive, or dangerous act by a company that threatens the public interest andthat of the organization. Whistle-blowers often have access to specialinformation based on their expertise or position within the offendingorganization.” (Reynolds, 2012)”Althoughthe modern technology that is being used in work places promises competitiveadvantages to the organization it also increases apprehensions about unethicalinformation practices by employees who are caught up in an ethical dilemma.These technologies also makes it much easier to copy and distribute informationamong the organization and 3rd parties as IT professionals gainaccess to equipment and information to violate intellectual property andprivacy decisions.” (McCallister et al, 2010)