WHISTLEBLOWER CORPORATE GOVERNANCE COMPANY MISCONDUCT CORPORATE ETHICS
Singapore - Corporate misconduct such as cooking the books or questionable integrity issues of financial institutions would never have been reported without the help of whistleblowers. Yet the whistleblower's credibility remains in doubt.
Professor Patrick McNutt, who specialises in economist and financial markets at Manchester Business School, says it doesn't help that most whistleblowers are usually disgruntled employees. That questions their credibility as a person and their underlying motives. How should one define a whistleblower today? McNutt says, "If an employee is morally responsible and they think what you're doing is wrong or the clients' rights have been infringed, they will be morally obligated to inform the director."
However, the line between a willing accomplice in a possible corporate misconduct and an ignorant employee who is simply helping a superior is remarkably thin. McNutt says if a personal assistant helps a CEO type and sends a memo on price-fixing to a competitor, that employee is already liable for the manager's culpability. Even though the employee might argue she was following orders, McNutt says the employee is still "liable for prosecution" as she was privy to the contents.
The employee has to stand up and report the questionable conduct to HR or the chief risk officer, says McNutt, so they can report it to the board of directors and carry out the internal governance procedure. Hence, employees have to be informed of their rights. Conducting personnel development courses is one way to educate employees of their liability risks.
But the fear of employer retaliation still exists. McNutt admits while employees are encouraged to whistleblow, it's also a harsh reality that "people who whistleblow are finished". Whistleblowers will never get a job again as they would become "persona non grata" (an unwelcome person), explains McNutt. "If you whistleblow on your company, right away you are going to leave because your colleagues will not like you, because you bring a problem to the company."
Another reason why companies fear employing a whistleblower could be they aren't as ethical or accountable as they seem, says McNutt. "It's interesting. If a company is completely ethical in everything you do, you should have no fear or whatsoever."
At the very least, legislation has to support the whistleblower in terms of their integrity as an employee. McNutt says it also helps to have reassurance that should a whistleblower be reemployed, he or she has nothing to fear from the new company. However, he concludes, "To tip the scales in favour of the whistleblower, there's a huge attitude shift that has to happen. I don't see it in the long run."
________________________________________________________
More quality Lighthouse titles
Get your marketing department up to speed with Asia's most read marketing site
marketing-interactive.com
Want to get on the right side of the procurement department?
Direct them to Procurement Asia
