Does the nature of the company's business and market have any influence on its culture?

Solution Preview

1.While a genuine whistleblower in a company may be doing the morally and legally correct thing, it is important NOT to encourage whistle blowing to preserve the values of loyalty and discipline. After all who likes a snitch?

In this question you are being asked to demonstrate that while whistleblowing may be an, from a moralistic and legal standpoint, appropriate form of behaviour, whistleblowing can nonetheless have adverse effects on company morale. Specifically, the question is asking how encouraging whistleblowing effects loyalty and discipline.

If you were to support this argument you could use these arguments:

An organization maintains its strength from forming a collective unit. Solidity is gained by solidarity. If people were encouraged to snitch on their co-workers, it could create a divisive collective unit, wherein people stop trusting each other. Here, trust, a vital component of any organization, may be placed in jeopardy. Or even worse, it could create an environment where people try and use snitching to their advantage (i.e. maybe if I find something unfavourable about a co-worker, I could get promoted, etc.). Thus, instead of fostering a healthy and unified labour force, whistlingblowing could lead to inherent strife, as people look out for themselves and give more credence to individual concerns.

The question of discipline again can be looked at from the perspective of the might of the collective. Certain organizations, like military groups, are effective because they are well-disciplined, as their ranks follow a well-structured hierarchical system. This system may be jeopardized by a world where lower ranking individuals may question the actions and authority of high ranking officials.
Other arguments: the case of Wikileaks raises important questions about the dangers of encouraging whistleblowing. For example, the recent leaking of important and secure military documents ...