They say nobody likes the man who brings bad news. This might be true for some people and in certain social or even political settings, but this adage could be seen as a boon by some sectors, particularly those in the corporate world. Or I could be wrong.

Corporate entities, whether private or public (e.g., the government or its municipalities), put in place checks and methods to detect and prevent misdeeds, errors, and unethical conduct. Those working in the private sector – such as Business Process Outsourcing (BPO) and in-house multinational companies in the Philippines – may be familiar with the methods and checks through which their leadership detects and prevents serious errors and grossly unethical behaviors.

One particular way for these private corporate entities to protect their bottom line is by implementing “speak-up policies” to encourage employees to escalate issues and report potential ethical issues and misconduct. These issues may pertain to violations of internal policies, unprofessionalism, failure to follow corporate guidelines, discrimination, sexual harassment, among others.

Many of you may be familiar with ethical dilemmas observed or personally experienced in the workplace but don’t have the courage to speak up due to fear of possible retaliation. This fear of speaking up could stem from a number of reasons.

Some companies with weak “speak-up policies” and grievance mechanisms tend to have brave employees who reported cases of reportable conduct retaliated against and end up losing or being forced out of their jobs due to retaliation by managerial or supervisory staff.

This particular example I’m giving actually came from my personal observation from a previous company.

A former colleague of mine who reported allegedly unethical conduct by a manager ended up being terminated due to performance issues. If people at the top wanted to get rid of an employee, they could always find reasons to justify termination. In a performance-based job, one can always intentionally select items for quality check to justify the termination of a target employee whom the managerial staff sees as a potential threat or what they consider to be a “rotten tomato.”

Even big corporations with well-established and strong “speak-up” and non-retaliation policies tend to have brave employees who report abuse and misconduct being retaliated against, bullied, and not considered for promotion. This happens when one particular department secretly discourages escalation and reporting by their employees.

This is a huge challenge many organizations confront – a disconnect between managerial staff and corporate leadership in terms of employees speaking up or escalating ethical concerns.

Picture this: a corporate culture where speaking up is encouraged, where employees are empowered to raise their voices against ethical lapses or misconduct. This is the ideal, the vision propagated by corporate leadership. But behind the scenes, in the trenches of day-to-day operations, a different narrative unfolds. Here, some managerial staff subtly, or even departments, discourage their direct reports from escalating issues, fearing repercussions or seeking to maintain the status quo.

In the second scenario where strong “speak-up and non-retaliation” policies are in place, retaliation may come in the form of not being considered for promotion by department heads, as roles for promotion are vetted and gate-kept by managers they tap to conduct the selection process.

Here, a cartel-like insider mob lurks to discourage people from reporting, bully and intimidate those who spoke up, and make life miserable for those who refused to toe the line.

This reminds me of a previous company where a colleague was subtly bullied by a manager for being labeled as “suki ng HR”, which is a subtle insult by insinuating he knew a lot of people from the HR department due to his reporting. Not only that he was given that moniker, the fact that he was being described to his colleagues within the workplace as someone who’s familiar with the escalation process or who knew some people from the HR team is insulting enough, not to mention the fact that this matter is supposed to be strictly confidential.

A department or sub-department with this kind of mentality tends to have adopted or migrated this behavior from their previous organizations.

Think of a BPO or multinational company which started to absorb top executives of a rival corporation with a notorious toxic culture. These migrating executives tend to bring with them their toxic culture and they’re the ones who end up establishing a mafia-like mob culture to bypass the corporate leadership which they ought to serve and keep dirt under the rug.

So why does this disconnect exist? It’s a complex interplay of factors – fear, misunderstanding, and power dynamics.

Managers may fear the consequences of reporting issues to higher-ups, worrying about their own positions or the reputation of their teams. They may not fully grasp the significance of the reported issues or perceive them as trivial. And in some cases, the power dynamics at play may lead to retaliation against employees who dare to speak up, disrupting the delicate balance of authority.

This disconnect may arise due to several factors:

1. Fear of Repercussions: Managers may fear that reporting ethics issues to corporate management could reflect poorly on their leadership abilities or the performance of their team, leading to potential consequences such as reprimand or job loss.
2. Protecting Reputation: Managers might prioritize protecting the reputation of their department or team over addressing ethical concerns, especially if they perceive that addressing such issues could damage the image of the team or the organization.
3. Lack of Understanding: Some managers may not fully understand the importance of ethics reporting or may underestimate the severity of the reported issues, leading them to downplay the significance of escalation.
4. Power Dynamics: In some cases, managerial staff may feel threatened by employees who speak up or escalate issues, perceiving them as challenging their authority or disrupting team dynamics. As a result, they may retaliate against these employees to maintain control and cohesion within the team.

But then, this misalignment doesn’t have to be the norm. Organizations can take proactive steps to bridge this gap and foster a culture of ethical reporting from top to bottom.

Firstly, education is key. Providing comprehensive training to managers on the importance of ethics reporting and the potential consequences of turning a blind eye can help shift mindsets and foster a culture of accountability.

Secondly, clear communication is essential. Corporate leadership must clearly articulate the company’s values and expectations regarding ethics reporting, ensuring that managers understand their role in upholding these principles.

Thirdly, support is crucial. Establishing robust channels for employees to report concerns anonymously and without fear of retaliation can empower whistleblowers to come forward, knowing that their voices will be heard and respected.

Finally, accountability is paramount. Holding managers accountable for their actions – or inactions – in addressing reported issues sends a strong message that ethics are not negotiable and that all employees are responsible for upholding the integrity of the organization.

In the end, bridging the gap between managerial staff and corporate leadership in terms of ethical reporting requires a concerted effort from all stakeholders.

By fostering a culture of transparency, accountability, and empowerment, organizations can ensure that ethical concerns are addressed swiftly and effectively, safeguarding both their reputation and their values. After all, in a world where ethical dilemmas abound, speaking up isn’t just a choice – it’s a duty.