A company’s code of ethics is necessary in ensuring that ethical decisions are made when performing day-to-day activities. The McKesson Corporation is governed by ICARE principles that serve to ensure proper service is rendered to their customers and to the patients they serve. The company is committed to putting the customer first and serving them with respect and dignity. McKesson believes that a customer’s success is the company’s success hence strive to make their customers fulfill their dreams of getting quality care, products and services (Andrew, 2013) . It also takes personal responsibility whereby results of the company are driven by emphasis on quality, accuracy and safety. This paper will focus on McKesson’s code of conduct with much focus being placed on the whistle blowers of the company and their role in society.
McKesson Corporation strives to be the best. This excellence is dependent on the service they render to their clients. They therefore act in integrity when dealing with their clients and their supporting partners. McKesson’s commitment to good corporate responsibility is fundamental in creating sustained value for both the society and the company (Lawrence, 2001) . The company also values opportunities to give back to the community. The McKesson Volunteer Program encourages community involvement efforts to improve the health of communities, develop a highly engaged and healthy workforce, and create better health for all. The company strives to do business with corporations that share its ICARE principles while also seeking to preserve and protect the environment and is committed to complying with environmental laws.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The company’s employees are mandated to follow the company’s code, policies and the State laws. This includes abstaining from any corrupt activities such as receiving anything that interferes or influences their conduct as outlined in the McKesson’s Global Anti-Corruption policy, complying with quality and safety related standards, being fair by not collecting information about competitors through deception, manipulation or misrepresentation and being committed to protecting a patient’s and customer’s confidentiality (Malcolm, 2012) . Failure to adhere to this may lead to dire consequences such as termination of contract or summary dismissal.
McKesson works to ensure the development of an ethical culture through its code of ethics. The company advocates for raising of any concerns met by the employees, customers or even the public. This includes presenting forth of a suspicion one believes to be true even though it may later be found false. Such concerns may be raised by contacting various people such as the manager or supervisor, the Global Compliance and Ethics office, the Law Department or the McKesson Integrity Line. The McKesson Integrity Line is run by an independent third party and is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, with operators available in various languages. It is accessible via the phone or web and can be used by anyone within or outside the company to raise a confidential concern. The McKesson Integrity Line is the best path to trace in raising a concern as it ensures confidentiality with respect to knowing who the whistleblower is. Such reports may include actual or potential environmental, health, or safety problems, or violations of McKesson policies in any area (Malcolm, 2012) . The company is committed to investigating any concern that has been raised and requires that its employees cooperate with the investigative process while not withholding information or giving misleading information (Andrew, 2013) . Retaliation to those raising the concern is not tolerated by the company.
Whistle blowing is an internal control mechanism and serves to deter organizational misconduct. While it may seem as a heroic act, whistleblowers may find themselves unemployable or even blacklisted from a certain industry and on the extreme case, in depression to the point of suicide when the tables turn (Lawrence, 2001) . The Dodd-Frank Act provides a means of rewarding and protecting individuals who report violations of regulations governing a range of activities in the financial markets and in the activities of US companies doing business abroad. It is very important for an individual to give it a lot of thought before considering whistleblowing whether within or without the bounds of this act.
Before a whistleblower acts, one must have evidence. Such evidence should be specific, credible and timely (Lawrence, 2001) . It could be information gathered from experience, observation, or even communications with other employees, clients, suppliers or non-parties. One should also have in mind the possible risks that may be encountered in whistle blowing. Such risks include emotional cost and employer’s retaliation (Lawrence, 2001) . Emotional cost may occur in the form of loss of job, bankruptcy, divorce, depression or even suicide especially when the case in question does not go as planned. Though various Acts such as the Dodd-Frank Act prohibits retaliation from employers, the employers may find a way to circumvent such a situation and hence the whistleblower could be passed on for promotions, handed down least satisfying projects and even ignored by colleagues (Andrew, 2013) . Such situations do not offer for peaceful and fulfilling working environment.
Though whistle blowing is meant to be a control measure in the internal workings of an organization, some whistleblowers main incentive in reporting cases is the money. Hence for one whose main incentive is to earn from the situation, such a person should consider his/her legibility for a reward if at all the case pushes through (Malcolm, 2012) . The Dodd-Frank Act for instance prohibits some people for example directors, officers, partners who are informed of the allegations, attorneys, accountants and foreign governments from receiving any rewards for any reported cases.
Keeping all this in mind, one who considers being a whistleblower should therefore follow the right process in doing so. Evidence must be gathered and documented. Documentation may include the names and contacts of those involved in the wrongdoing and possibly the location of incriminating documents, files or computers. The individual should also be keen in observing confidentiality and therefore should convey the information through a means that keeps one’s identity unknown (Lawrence, 2001) . Since most case s tend to be long, one should prepare for a lengthy process. Additionally, preparation to encounter problems along the way is necessary. This may take one as far as looking for new employment. Finally, a prospective whistleblower should be a model citizen, that is, one should not do anything that risks their credibility.
Quite a number of acts are available when it comes to rewarding and protecting individuals who report felonies in the society. They include False Claims Act, Dodd-Frank Wall Street and Consumer Protecting Act and Sarbanes Oxley Act. Inasmuch as this Acts have been useful in boosting enforcement activities, many arguments have been raised to question their reliability especially with regard to rewarding of whistleblowers (Lawrence, 2001) . Some proponents argue that awarding of large reward enables other people who have been reserved to come forward and report various felonies. We may consider a case whereby a member of an organization is afraid to report a crime for fear of retaliation from the employer. Such a member may be able to come forward knowing that they will receive compensation for any substantial risk that may be incurred (Lawrence, 2001) . Others argue that offering rewards does res ult to increased reporting and destabilization of collusion. This is because reward programs just like leniency programs motivate those colluding with the major felons to report the felonies.
However, opponents argue that the requirement that the whistleblower’s disclosure must result in a successful enforcement to be eligible for the bounty for instance under the False Claims Act, means that very few will receive payments as most cases are not successful. Additionally, financial incentives may result in fraudulent reporting’s from opportunistic and uninformed parties selling rumors that result in innocent parties being unfairly damaged (Malcolm, 2012) . A common phrase used to describe this situation in the world today would be “more money more problems”. An employer would readily run to the government upon witnessing a misconduct knowing that there will be a reward rather than report the incident internally (Malcolm, 2012) . This frustrates efforts of internal compliance. Rewarding also has serious effects on trust and team spirit within corporations, both of which are necessary to the success of any corporation.
The rewards offered to whistleblowers are in such a way that calibration of the amount of the reward is directly from the amount of penalty and hence dependent on the degree of seriousness and the extent of the wrongdoing. This situation provides whistleblowers with the incentive to report a wrongdoing later rather than earlier as they allow the damage to be extensive with the aim of earning more from it. It is also difficult for courts to find the claim of one whose incentive is to receive a reward as true (Malcolm, 2012) . While the reward program may compliment the leniency program it may also undermine it as it makes self-reporting impossible. One who is involved in the crime may be afraid to come forward for fear of meeting legal consequences together with the organization.
When examining the penalty to be incurred by an organization due to a crime, the degree of blameworthiness in the commission of the crime must be considered. Two mechanisms may be applied in doing so (Lawrence, 2001) . In one, the court has total discretion to impose any fine it deems fit after considering several factors such as the defendants income, the size of the organization and the amount of restitution (Lawrence, 2001) . The other mechanism is a more mathematical one and has less judicial discretion. The fine in this case is generally a function of the culpability of the organization that is, the seriousness of the offence. An organization also has more culpability when higher level personnel have participated in the wrongdoing, there is prior history of misconduct in the company, the organization violates existing court orders and attempts are made to obstruct justice.
A company, private or public should have code of ethics to which it adheres to. This ensures corporate social responsibility and a safe and serene working environment. It should also have a system through which misconduct can be reported to avoid cases whereby employees run to the government for help for issues that can be solved internally. However, sometimes it is necessary for external help to be sought. Generally, whistleblowers play a key role in protecting organizations and the society. In as much as it helps in enforcing the law, rewarding whistleblowers seems to be counter-productive. A strong ethical culture and moral sense of duty would be a much better incentive for people to come forward and report cases.
References
Andrew, L. (2013). Ethical leadership: Creating and sustaining an ethical business culture (3rd ed.). New York: Kogan Page.
Lawrence, D. F. (2001). Overview of the federal sentencing guidelines for organizations and corporate compliance programs. Houston: McKinney.
Malcolm, G. (2012). The tipping point: How little things can make a big difference. Back Bay Books.
