The Impact of Whistleblowing on Business Social Responsibility

This report delves into the critical aspects of whistleblowing and its profound impact on business social responsibility. It defines whistleblowing as the act of disclosing misconduct and unethical activities within a company, emphasizing its role in protecting society and upholding ethical standards. The report explores internal and external whistleblowing, the challenges faced by whistleblowers, and the legal protections in place, such as the Whistleblower Protection Act. It examines standard and complicity theories of whistleblowing, highlighting the ethical dilemmas faced by employees torn between loyalty to their organization and their moral obligations. Furthermore, the report outlines strategies for promoting whistleblowing within organizations, including safeguarding whistleblowers, maintaining confidentiality, fostering open-door policies, and utilizing HR practices to encourage ethical conduct and reporting. The conclusion reinforces the importance of these practices in cultivating trust, enhancing corporate governance, and promoting a socially responsible business environment.

SOCIAL
RESPONSIBILITY
OF BUSINESS

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................3
MAIN BODY...................................................................................................................................3
CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................7

INTRODUCTION
The whistle blowing is the act of disclosing any misconduct and unethical things within
the company in front of higher authorities. It refers to the loyalty felt by personnel towards his
and her employer (Harford, Mansi and Maxwell, 2012). The major objective of this practice is to
overcome misconduct and unethical activities from the company. The current report provides
detail knowledge and understanding about the Whistle blowing and social responsibilities of
business.
MAIN BODY
In an organisation, while any employee raises his voice against unethical activities, then it is
known as whistle blowing and the person who raises his voice against the wrong activities and
unethical work is called as a whistleblower. This kind of misconduct can be in form of fraud,
corruption, violation of company rules and policies. The major objective of this whistle blowing
is to provide protection and safeguard to society and public for whom organisation is functioning
(Tricker and Tricker, 2015). Organisation should motivate and encourage employees for raising
their voice in case if they found any violation of rules and procedure. While company motivates
and encourages its workers to inform them about unethical and illegal activities, then it helps
company to overcome misconduct and violation.Shriek blowing is isolated into two sections:
interior shriek blowing and outside shriek blowing.
An informant is a man who uncovered any sort of data or exercises that is regarded illicit,
deceptive and not right inside an association that is either private or open. Internal whistle
blowing is that while an employee provides information about unethical, illegal and other
misconduct to his top management and senior authority in the same corporation. On the other
hand, external whistle blowing is that while an employee informs about the misconduct, illegal
and unethical activities to any third person who is not member of the corporation. The third
person may be lawyer another legal body (Wintoki, Linck and Netter, 2012.). Sometime,
personnel fears to provide information about misconduct within the company as they have fear
regarding conflicts, loss of jobs, careers, loss of friendship , breach of trust and loyalty,
resentment among workers etc.
As per the research, it has been found that for providing protection to the whistle blowers
within the corporation and outside business unit, government have passed the bill in 2011 by Lok

Sabha. This whistleblowers protection bill 2011 was passed on 27 December 2011 and this bill
was passed by the Rajyasabha on 21st February 2014 and received the assent of the president on
9 May 2014. With the help of this bill, government have provided protection to that person who
has raised the voice against misconduct and illegal activities. In 1989, the US Government
brought protection for all federal worker whistleblower when they introduced the whistle blower
protection act (Erkens, Hung and Matos, 2012). This protected the whistle blower by keeping
them anonymous and imposing more detailed performance deadline.
The Standard Theory of Whistle blowing
As per the standard theory of whistleblowing, disloyalty is morally permissible while
whistleblower have evidence that would convince a reasonable, impartial observer that their
view of the threat is correct.
The complicity theory of Whistle blowing
This is another one of the significant theory of Whistle Blowing. In this theory, Michael
Davis has detailed three anomalies for the received view that is the paradoxes of burdan, missing
harm and failure. As per this concept, whistleblowing have two obvious advantages that are
complicity itself presupposes wrongdoing, not harm. Because of this, complicity avocation
naturally dodges the Catch 22 of mission hurt (Blair and Roe, 2010). Another preferred
standpoint of this hypothesis is that complicity summons a more requesting commitment than the
capacity to anticipate hurt does. An individual are ethically required to uncover what he/she
knows to general society when individual will uncover gets from their work for the partnership.
This condition recognizes the informant from the covert operative. The covert agent searches out
data keeping in mind the end goal to uncover it. This hypothesis does not require any conviction
about what the whistleblowing can achieve. The informant uncovers what she knows keeping in
mind the end goal to forestall complicity in the wrong, not to keep the wrong in that capacity.
As per the above theories, it has been analysed that the informant eventually torn between
devotion toward association and their ethical promise to the law and society on the loose. It is the
great responsibility of business enterprise to motivate and encourage to workers so that they
cannot involve in misconduct and illegal work within the company and outside of business
entity. While company motivate personnel regarding whist blowing then this practice and

activity can effectively implement within organisation. In addition to this, company should
develop such impressive policies and norms regarding whistleblowing through which they can
easily promote it in the company. It is a great responsibility of organisation to develop such
impressive practices and policies through which misconduct and unethical activities can easily
overcome from company.
Whistleblowing has now turned into an extremely noteworthy issue as it assumes a critical
part in upgrading and enhancing corporate risk in organization. The enterprise all around the
globe presently endeavor to hone great corporate administration, keeping in mind the end goal to
as it advance incredible business relationship.
Corporate administration is the term that used to allude to the laws, principles and procedures by
which organization and organizations are worked, directed and controlledIn addition to this,
corporate social responsibility refers to conducting business in such ethical manner through
which environment, society and economy cannot get any harm.(Giroud, and Mueller, 2010).
While any association are mode in charge of their activity then this would give more corporate
responsibility. The witness is finally torn between unwavering quality to their supervisor (or the
subject of their divulgence) and their moral guarantee to the law and society free to move around
at will. Various feels they have the most to lose, at any rate in the foremost event. It could be
fought that it is stirred up for human intuition to indicate loyalty to a bureaucratic relationship
since it is made out of such a noteworthy number of people. This dehumanizing condition could
damage the source's perspective of their noteworthiness inside an association or their ability to
affect change, likewise degrading their attention to other's desires and motivation to report.
For whatever time allotment that the source is sure that their motivations are sound and that
they are certain about the structure, they should not dither to hand-off such information and be
fulfilled that they are making a more secure work environment for their accomplices. The
showing of whist blowing can cause a beyond reconciliation situation between the individual,
legitimate and societal circles. A considerable amount of this dispute originates from the setting
in which a witness is seen: paying little respect to whether as some individual sharing learning of
bad behavior for the upside of others or as someone who is acting "traitorous" to their affiliation.

Following are some strategies and practices by which organisation can engage with whistle-
blowing-
 Company should provide safeguarding to personnels who report misconduct against any
form of retaliation. In addition to this company should maintain confidentiality and
provide full protection to employees ho is whisteblower (Armstrong, Guay and Weber,
2010).
 Company should provide full confidence to employees as they must believe that their
concern will take seriously and company should take immediate responses regarding the
concern.
 Corporation should allow open door policy for promote whistblowing in the company.
HR plays a very crucial role for promotion this whisteblowing practices within the
company. HR can help by advancing a culture that is with solid morals and practice an
open-entryway strategy where representatives would not feel reluctant to blow the shriek
or look for guidance from a HR proficient. Aside from clinging to the genuine open-
entryway approach, you can likewise start by welcome them and discover time to meet
them all the time to build up that coveted level of trust and solid work relationship.
 Human resource department can use anonymous suggestion boxes for promote the
whisteblower and social responsibility toward the company. With help of this practice,
HR department can promote employees to disclose each and every things and information
regarding any misconduct happens in the company (Giroud and Mueller, 2011). With
help of this practice, confidentiality between employer and employees can maintain in an
effective manner and trust can maintain among employees and higher authority.
 Organisation should establish and consistently enforce a disciplinary policy and make
periodic update in the whistle-blowing program. In addition to this, company should also
information about the whistle-blowing program, disciplinary policy and company code of
conduct.

CONCLUSION
From this report it has been concluded that there are several practices by which
organisation can promote effective social responsibility and whistle-blowing among employees
toward the organisation. With help of effective working relationship and protocols company can
generate trust among employees toward company.

REFERENCES
Harford, J., Mansi, S.A. and Maxwell, W.F., 2012. Corporate governance and firm cash holdings
in the US. In Corporate Governance (pp. 107-138). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Tricker, R.B. and Tricker, R.I., 2015. Corporate governance: Principles, policies, and practices.
Oxford University Press, USA.
Wintoki, M.B., Linck, J.S. and Netter, J.M., 2012. Endogeneity and the dynamics of internal
corporate governance. Journal of Financial Economics. 105(3). pp.581-606.
Erkens, D.H., Hung, M. and Matos, P., 2012. Corporate governance in the 2007–2008 financial
crisis: Evidence from financial institutions worldwide. Journal of Corporate
Finance. 18(2). pp.389-411.
Blair, M.M. and Roe, M.J. eds., 2010. Employees and corporate governance. Brookings
Institution Press.
Giroud, X. and Mueller, H.M., 2010. Does corporate governance matter in competitive
industries?. Journal of Financial Economics. 95(3). pp.312-331.
Armstrong, C.S., Guay, W.R. and Weber, J.P., 2010. The role of information and financial
reporting in corporate governance and debt contracting. Journal of Accounting and
Economics. 50(2). pp.179-234.
Giroud, X. and Mueller, H.M., 2011. Corporate governance, product market competition, and
equity prices. The Journal of Finance. 66(2). pp.563-600.