Here’s a great story: how whistleblowers help recover $3 billion in false healthcare claims. This gave me pause to ask a few questions for consideration, from an ethical perspective.


ImageWith the whistleblowers I know, all they wanted to do is “the right thing,” but often they were ostracized and punished for doing so. It got so bad that the government passed the “whistleblower law” to help protect them, if that is even possible.


Here are my reflections for consideration and discussion:


1. Why call them whistleblowers? Why not all them “protectors of the business,” or “standard bearers for good,” or “guardians of the code.” Point being, should we be accentuating the positive and not the negative?


2. Shouldn’t we be rewarding whistleblowers for what they do and therefore build a more positive, proactive environment for all? What’s the old phrase? “Catch someone doing good?”


3. If rewarding was the norm, leaders would have more people looking on how to make make things better. Leaders would also work to be mentors, cheerleaders, and coaches. Everyone would imagine going to work knowing that part of their job would be to see how one could do a job better, safer, more other-focused and certainly more friendly as the modus operandi.


4. I can’t understand why whistleblowers are retaliated against for trying to do “the right  thing." I bet those leaders and companies who seek to retaliate all have a code of ethics/conduct and wonderful mission statements, but who are they really trying to kid?