How to identify and stop a corporate wrongdoing?

1) Being informed by employee or public

a) Whistleblowing
Whistleblowing can be defined as the deliberate, voluntary, intendeddisclosure of
individual or organizational malpractice or improper conduct by a person who has or had
privileged access to data, events or information about areal, suspected or anticipated
wrongdoing within or by theorganization. A whistle blower might do disclose internally, for
example, to their supervisors. Alternatively, through exterior authorities such as reporting to a
legislator, an enforcement agency, a watchdogorganization, or a journalist if he or she
believes that the top management are involved in the misconduct.

b) Receive complaint from consumer

When there is illness outbreak happens among the public, the same product which
was been used or consumed must be suspected to be the source of illness. The victim
undoubtedly will tell this serious situation to some legal agent.

2) Investigation

Investigation is also a method to identify the corporate wrongdoing by apply it to a

suspected business organization. Still, it is always the step to be taken after being informed of
any wrongdoing committed by that organization.

After receiving the whistle blow by the legal authorities, an investigation is necessary
to be carried out with the purpose of to gather enough evidence in order to prosecute the
faulty corporation. These authorities can be Consumer Affairs Authority (CAA), Securities
and Exchange Commission (SEC), Financial Industry Regulation Authority (FINRA),
Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Department of Labor, Commodity Futures Trading
Commission (CFTC) which were authorities were approved by government. Before the
investigation was to be conducted, the authorities need to determine the scope and nature of
the investigation, and then confirming the responsibilities and power of the investigator.

In each stages of investigation, the investigator must act in accordance with the rule of
procedural fairness or natural justice, for example, they must give all parties a fair hearing
and ensure that they are informed and allowed to make their comment or expression. The
procedural fairness should urge the investigator to do rigorous checking of facts,
meticulousidentification of issues and to consider all points of view. They also need to record
down the remark or criticism that exposes any weak spot of the investigative process.

The evidence is necessary to be gathered so that they will stand up in court of law.
This purpose can be achieved through interview which might have positive effect on the
extent and quality of information obtained.At the beginning of the interview, the employee
should be informed that why the investigators there and what is going to be discussed with
the interviewee. Also, they should be known about the fact that the interviewtook place
confidentially. During the actual interview, “who, what, where, when, andhow” are the focus
point and such like questions about the allegedwrongdoing will convey a complete portrait
aboutthe scale of the corporate misconduct.The potential liar must be deal with technique of
lie detection, for example, when a person’s hand, arm and leg moved toward their own body
and takes up less space, then they can be suspected to be a liar. Usually, person who is lying
to you will avoid making eye contact.

Apart from the interview, a test on product may be required if the company is selling
a potential unsafe product suchas toy, mobile phone and food. In reality, there is no food
safety system can guarantee zero risk. Conversely, in the production process, a food can be
intentionally contaminated with MSG(Monosodium glutamate) which acts as a “flavor
enhancer.” MSG can raise a symptom within person’s body, such as headache, flushing,
nausea, chest pain and so on. So, the investigator such as food scientist is responsible to
determine if there is a health risk and what is the ingredient that contaminated the food. Not
only that, an external audit is needed in proving the truthfulness of an account such as
statement of financial position.

Maintaining whistleblower’s confidentiality is crucial in ensuring the integrity of the

inquiry, furthermore, the impact of the investigation will definitely been reduced. The risk of
evidence being spoiled, victimisation of discloser, or prejudgment of the results will be
decreased if relevant information was handled in caution. For example, all files, either paper
or electronic, are kept in a secure room and can only be accessed as necessary by Protected
Disclosure Coordinator. All printed material such as form or document should be kept in files
that are noticeably marked as a whistle-blower protection matter. Password protection will be
attached to electronic files will be produced and stored on Protected Disclosure Officer’s
computer. Identity or other relevant information to a whistle-blower or any witnesses’ matter
must not be shared.
3) Prosecution towards the guilty corporate
At the end of the investigation, the result will be presented to the authorities. If a
corporate was proven to be definitely guilty, then it will be prosecuted and receive the
judgment from the court. For example, an injunction will be imposed by court to prevent a
company to be undertaking or continuing with an activity. A dangerous product would be
recalled and the sale of such product is prohibited. A faulty corporate might be obliged to
make remediation of environmental damage by taking steps to repair, remove, mitigate, or
prevent any damage that arises from their action or any omission. Sometimes they may be
imposed together with penalties. Eventually, a corporate wrongdoing will come to its halt.

How to prevent the corporate wrongdoing?

The human resources department in a company can make internal disciplinary

procedures which must be in line with and support the company policy statement and
response plan. They should give useful advice to the organization’s personnel management
strategies, individual employment histories and matters relevant to employment law or equal
opportunities so that those employees who committed misconduct would not be promoted to
management position.

The audit committee is responsible to carry out review of organization’s internal

control and risk management. It may include design and implementation of anti-fraud
programs and controls, monitoring the reliability of the financial statement, assessing the
corporate performance in fraud prevention, reviewing the investigation log of cases no less
than onea year, and report any matter that are considered material or important to the board.

The external auditor should implement accounting controls. For example, checking the
arithmetical accuracy of the records, maintaining and checking of totals, reconciliation,
accurately prepare the trial balance.

The internal auditor committee should carry out internal check. It is designed to check
the day-to-day transactions whereby the work of each internal auditor is proved
independently or is complementary to the work of another, the object being the prevention or
early detection of errors and fraud. It will includes the delegation and allocation of authority
and the separation of work, the methods of recording transactions and the use of
independently ascertained totals, against which a large number of individual items can be
proved.

The managers should develop a plan to cultivate the personal ethics in a workplace.
They should set a better mission for their company such as to care about the health of
consumer. With such a good image among the public, a company is unlikely to commit
wrongdoing as to protect their image. The managers can hold up a speech in order to express
their target or hope so that employees will become moral person.

The media like newspaper or TV programme have the responsibility to report the unbiased,
accurate information as it is received from reliable sources. The media bear the obligation to obtain
all sides of a story and their watchdog-type function is vital in a democratic society whereby the
people must know what company is doing. The media has the capacity to hold a business entity
accountable, forcing them to explain their actions and decisions, all of which influence the people
they represent.

The legal authorities can make the public aware of their existence together with their role in
boycotting the corporate wrongdoing through the mass media so that the victim will not remain
silent. The victims would see alternatives to solve the crisis which will either harm themselves or
public.