Many employers assume that employees have an obligation to remain loyal to the organization from the time they join the organization up to when they leave. Employees are therefore expected to expose their colleagues (even those who are very close to them) in case they act in an immoral way. However, is it really necessary for the employees to expose their close colleagues in the workplaces?
Some ethical employees find it necessarily to expose people who do not act in expected manner. Speaking out (after getting someone acting in an immoral manner) is necessary because it prevents the other people who may be thinking of acting in the same manner to change their ways. However, the consequences of speaking out depend on the people that are also close to the individual exposed. If they are ethical and understanding employees, then the exposer would not lose the confidence of the other employees; consequently, they would not be bullied (Oppermann, 2009). In addition, the organization may become more productive hence leading to an improvement its profitability.
However, exposing individuals who act immorally in the workplace is a challenge for most of the employees. Not because these employees also find themselves in the same immoral behavior but because of the other employee who also happen to witness their colleagues acting unethically. If, for example, an employee working in a good industry that requires all the employees to cover their heads exposes a colleague who does not cover his or her head, then the exposes can expect some form of bullying from the other employees. Bullying the good employee forces him or her to alienate the other close workmates. Without the cooperation of the other employees in the workplace, the productivity of the organization is affected as well as its profitability (Oppermann, 2009).
Besides experiencing bullying, one may fail to expose a workmate because no action would be taken. For example, in some organizations, people who have economic power and position still continue to dominate even after they are exposed by their colleagues (Rogowski, 2010). They may even later start discriminating their colleagues in the workplace, which may also have an impact on the productivity and profitability of the organization.
Also, another factor that contributes to the failure to expose immoral behavior in the workplace is because failing to do so may be interpreted by the culprits to mean close friends. For instance, if one of the workers happens to witness his or her close workmate engaging in something that is immoral and fails to speak out, many interpret that as being “good colleagues”. The disadvantage of this is a downward spiral may be experienced whereby other unethical and immoral acts are not exposed in the organization.
In conclusion, the advantages of exposing immoral individuals are very less compared to the benefits of failing to do so. The advantages only favor the workers but do not have any benefit to the organization that has employed those workers. For instance, when the moral people fail to speak out on the immoral conduct of their close colleagues, they exempt themselves from being bullied. However, this has a very negative impact on the profitability of the organization because many may repeat the same thing because there is no punishment faced after acting immorally. Therefore, people in the workplaces should be educated on the advantages of exposing their immoral colleagues.
References
Oppermann, S. (2009). Workplace Bullying: Psychological Violence. Workplace Bullying Institute. Retrieved 21 April 2016, from http://www.workplacebullying.org/workplace-bullying-psychological-violence/
Rogowski, S. (2010). Social work: The rise and fall of a profession?. Bristol: Policy Press.
