Policy and Ethics (Presentation)

Surname PAGE 5

Student’s name

Professor’s name

Course

Date

Policy and ethics

Is it necessary to blow the whistle on something without first trying to get the solutions? In most countries today, the general public, business owners, and government officials are increasingly expected to uphold high standards of moral values and integrity in the civil sectors and various government agencies. Ethics refers to the moral values that define a person’s behavior or how one conducts his/her duties. Reported cases of abuse of office, embezzlement of public funds, and mistreatment of work employees are just but a few cases where codes of conduct and ethics have been disavowed. Officials are expected to provide effective solutions to curb various internal and external factors that act as barriers towards efficient decision making in addressing the present issue. Therefore, It is not necessary to blow a whistle on something without first trying to fix the issue through the proper chain of command because it leads to loss of career, loss of friends and reputation, and unemployability.

Whistleblowing leads to loss of career. Most of the whistleblowers get terminated from their careers. When an employee notices wrongdoing in his or her organization and decides to blow a whistle, he or she will get fired (Dworkin & Near, 1997). For instance, if an employer seeks justice and reinstates his or her position, the employer takes the case to court, and he or she loses the job again. It is rare for an employee to win his or her lawsuit, reinstate their positions or get compensated for their jobs. Therefore, employees fear to report any misconduct within their organization because they do not want to lose their jobs( Goldberg 85). For example, the case study practically addresses the ethical issues facing the Community Development Department of Greenwood city. The department is experiencing ethical problems arising due to mistrusts amongst employees, constant abuse of office, and embezzlement of public funds has led to a drop in workforce morale and productivity. These issues have to be dealt with appropriately for the department to regain its former position and lost glory. With regards to the significant problems facing the department, the management should account for their actions and where they’ve failed to provide practical solutions to various internal (e.g., workforce) and external (e.g., society) issues that act as barriers towards effective decision making that address these issues adequately. These emerging issues hinder the department’s ability to achieve its sole purpose of renovating its communities (Daft & Armstrong 130). The department is a branch of the city’s legal franchise that focuses on municipal projects. In the context, Rose Almindinger heads the department due to her outstanding administrative experiences acquired while working with industrial firms and her a close relationship with influential political leaders from the Republican Party. Rose tended mismanaging public funds. From the context, the central ethical issue affecting the department is as a result of blowing the whistle without looking into solutions to help solve the problem by following the right chain of authority. Sylvan spills the beans to Governor Philipson who has no interests in the department’s affairs, telling him about Rose and other officials engaged in the unethical activities currently taking place in the system to make a name for himself to get a promotion. On the hand, If he had kept quiet about whole the scenario he would have landed himself that promotion but instead he lost his job. Gardner, the city manager, openly shuns Sylvan in front of his wife indicates their three-year relationship is deteriorating. Later onwards, Sylvan would receive notifications indicating he won’t be receiving any merit pays while most of the workers received theirs, he turned to teach in a community college built a new relationship with his students and workmates who enjoyed his real-life experiences concerning how the state-federal agencies operated. Fortunately, even after Almindinger campaign collapsed due to insufficient funds and her opponent, Hooper emerged as the winner yet still she managed to secure a job as an administrative assistant in the country’s Contractors Association.

Raising voice against wrongdoing within an organization without trying to fix the problems first leads to unemployability. Employees can find themselves in awkward situations where reporting wrongdoings or activity could save the organization from landing into serious trouble. Michael Davis states in his book ‘Some paradoxes of whistleblowing’ (Davis 3) that the action can be morally justified when it’s urgent at the moment, but in the real sense, the whistleblower is portrayed as the wrongdoer even when in the act of preventing harm. Although Andy Sylvan is dedicated to serving the bureaucracy for strictly twenty years, he does not secure the position of an assistant manager in the organization. He is described as a hardworking, responsible, secretive, and upholds ethical virtues. From the story, Andy remains quite for an extended period even though he knows the kind of activities his boss engages in are inappropriate and could damage the department’s reputation. Also dodging reports who dared ask questions regarding the irregularities facing the projects. He wrote and conducted all federal grant proposals which profoundly earned the department funds from the government to aid in redevelopment initiatives in the city. When he applied for a position in the public works department, he was not considered and therefore could not receive an invite for an interview. Later on, he shows interest by applying for an assistant managerial position in many failed attempts to sustain his family necessities.

Reporting of wrongdoings by employees causes loss of reputation and friends. It does not mean that doing right will make you get the rights things. It is very crucial to report wrongdoings and frauds within an organization. Any employee has a right to whistle blow regardless of his or her job level in an organization. The employee protection level is different depending on whether their organization is public or private, the way they are reporting, the authority they are reporting to, and the type of fraud being reported. The workmates and colleagues at work avoid the whistleblower. They do not want to get associated with him or her because they fear to lose their jobs. For instance, in the case study, we find that Andy Sylvan is avoided by the other employees from city hall and his department. In addition to this, his close friends would not like to interact with him. He could find them passing and just saying “Hello.” It really affected Andy Sylvan, and he decided to look for a job in a different department. He had already lost his reputation because of whistleblowing.

Conclusion

It is not necessary to blow a whistle on something without first trying to fix the issue through the proper chain of command because it leads to loss of career, unemployability, and loss of friends and reputation (Hunton and Jacob 75). Most whistleblowers get fired, find difficulties when searching for employment, and their friends and workmates avoid them. It is therefore advisable to come up with a solution before reporting the wrongdoings within an organization to avoid issues that can affect their lives.

References

Daft, Richard L., and Ann Armstrong. "The external environment." Organization theory and design (2009): 130-157

Davis, Michael. "Some paradoxes of whistleblowing." Business and Professional Ethics Journal 15.1 (1996): 3-19.

Dworkin, Terry Morehead, and Janet P. Near. "A better statutory approach to whistle-blowing." Business Ethics Quarterly 7.1 (1997): 1-16.

Goldberg, David Theo. “Tuning in to Whistle Blowing.” Business & Professional Ethics Journal, vol. 7, no. 2, 1988, pp. 85–94. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/27799978.

Hunton, James E., and Jacob M. Rose. "Retracted: Effects of Anonymous Whistle‐Blowing and Perceived Reputation Threats on Investigations of Whistle‐Blowing Allegations by Audit Committee Members." Journal of Management Studies 48.1 (2011): 75-98.