Discussion replies:
Burkman
“No matter what our circumstances, our greatest limitation isn’t the leader above us—it’s the spirit within us” (Maxwell, 2011, p. 40). We all have been in a situation when our inner conscience has questioned the reasoning or morals of a leader. For some, we can trace this feeling back to childhood and how we were parented. I can remember frequently standing up against getting whipped with a belt for not finishing my dinner, regardless of being full or not. This act instilled a fear in me for challenging leadership throughout my life. This concept is annotated by Carsten et al. (2016) as a passive follower (p. 175). Around the mid-2000s is where I embraced that challenging things I found unethical or wrong were indeed the correct and reasonable thing to do. However, sometimes I am too crass when addressing unethical and immoral issues, but this is something that I am working on throughout this course.
During research, the article I found was an article that involved a whistleblower who found faults in the quality of materials sold to the U.S. government defense department (Phillips and Cohen, 2009). The case follows Northrop Grumman and states they were required to pay an amount of $325 million to the government and $48.7 million to the whistleblower Robert Ferro. Like many followers, Ferro was conflicted by something that challenged his moral compass. Because of a non-disclosure agreement, Ferro could not proceed with the case (Phillips and Cohen, 2009, para. 6). What finally pushed Ferro to find a loophole to the non-disclosure agreement was continued issues with systems, causing the government to scramble to address while not knowing what part was causing the failures. “Ferro then went directly to the government with his information and later hired Phillips & Cohen, which filed a “qui tam” (whistleblower) lawsuit in federal district court in Los Angeles to make sure his disclosures were properly investigated“ (Phillips and Cohen, 2009, para. 10). The challenging of a whistleblower reminds me of Proverbs 3:27-28; “Do not withhold good from those to whom it is due, when it is in your power to act. Do not say to your neighbor, “Come back tomorrow, and I’ll give it to you”—when you already have it with you.”
References
Carsten, M. K., Koonce, R., Bligh, M. C., & Hurwitz, M. (2016). Chapter 20: To follow or not to follow? A tale of corrupt power and unethical leadership. In Followership in action : Cases and commentaries (1st ed., pp. 171–177). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Maxwell, J. C. (2011). The 360° leader developing your influence from ANYWHERE in the ORGANIZATION. Harper Collins Leadership.
The Maxwell Leadership Bible, New International Version. (2018). Thomas Nelson.
Phillips and Cohen. (2009, April 2). Largest defense contractor whistleblower case: Northrop Grumman pays $325M to settle. Phillips and Cohen.
https://www.phillipsandcohen.com/scientist-blew-whistle-faulty-military-satellite-parts-northrop-grumman-pays-325-million-settle-case/
less
Mary
Harvey Weinstein was a Hollywood producer that was accused of sexual harassment by an anonymous victim in 2017 sparking a large outpouring of other victims in the industry and their own accusations. The list of accusers and accusations led to the downfall of the famous movie producer and his conviction for rape and sexual assault resulting in a 23-year prison sentence.
Weinstein was wielding his power in the movie industry to manipulate women into providing sexual favors to him in exchange for roles in his movies. Harassment reporting rates are generally low because of the adverse consequences to those reporting the harassment and worse outcomes from the reporting than a resolution to the issue (Siuta & Bergman, 2019). The Weinstein scandal became a vital component of the #Me Too movement where women across the country held their employers accountable for sexual harassment and discrimination.
It was only the courage of one anonymous woman that was necessary for starting a means for others to come forward and report their own experiences. This kind of courage empowers followers and solicits support from other followers in their cause. The list of victims in the Weinstein case was more than 20 names long (Harvey Weinstein Timeline: How the Scandal Unfolded, 2021).
The fall of Harvey Weinstein is an example of how one courageous follower could solicit support from other courageous followers in holding a high-ranking executive in Hollywood accountable for this unethical and criminal behavior.
References
Harvey Weinstein timeline: How the scandal unfolded. (2021, April 7). BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-41594672
Siuta, R., & Bergman, M. (2019, June 25). Sexual Harassment in the Workplace. https://oxfordre.com/business/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190224851.001.0001/acrefore-9780190224851-e-191
less
Discussion repl
ie
s:
Burkman
“No
matter
what
our
circumstances,
our
greatest
limitation
isn’t
the
leader
above
us
—
it’s
the
spirit
within
us”
(
Maxwell
,
2011
,
p.
40
).
We
all
have
been
in
a
situation
when
our
inner
conscience
has
questioned
the
reasoning
or
morals
of
a
leader.
For
some,
we
can
trace
this
feeling
back
to
childhood
and
how
we
were
parented.
I
can
remember
frequently
standing
up
against
getting
whipped
with
a
belt
for
not
finishing
my
dinner,
regardless
of
being
full
or
not.
This
act
instilled
a
fear
in
me
for
challenging
le
adership
throughout
my
life.
This
concept
is
annotated
by
Carsten
et
al.
(
2016
)
as
a
passive
follower
(p.
175).
Around
the
mid
–
2000s
is
where
I
embraced
that
challenging
things
I
found
unethical
or
wrong
were
indeed
the
correct
and
reasonable
thing
to
do.
However,
sometimes
I
am
too
crass
when
addressing
unethical
and
immoral
issues,
but
this
is
something
that
I
am
working
on
throughout
this
course.
During
research,
the
article
I
found
was
an
article
that
involved
a
whistleblower
who
found
faults
in
the
qu
ality
of
materials
sold
to
the
U.S.
government
defense
department
(
Phillips
and
Cohen
,
2009
).
The
case
follows
Northrop
Grumman
and
states
they
were
required
to
pay
an
amount
of
$325
million
to
the
government
and
$48.7
million
to
the
whistleblower
Robert
F
erro.
Like
many
followers,
Ferro
was
conflicted
by
something
that
challenged
his
moral
compass.
Because
of
a
non
–
disclosure
agreement,
Ferro
could
not
proceed
with
the
case
(
Phillips
and
Cohen
,
2009
,
para.
6
).
What
finally
pushed
Ferro
to
find
a
loophole
t
o
the
non
–
disclosure
agreement
was
continued
issues
with
systems,
causing
the
government
to
scramble
to
address
while
not
knowing
what
part
was
causing
the
failures.
“Ferro
then
went
directly
to
the
government
with
his
information
and
later
hired
Phillips
&
Cohen,
which
filed
a
“qui
tam”
(whistleblower)
lawsuit
in
federal
district
court
in
Los
Angeles
to
make
sure
his
disclosures
were
properly
investigated“
(
Phillips
and
Cohen
,
2009
,
para.
10
).
The
challenging
of
a
whistleblower
reminds
me
of
Proverbs
3:27
–
28;
“Do
not
withhold
good
from
those
to
whom
it
is
due,
when
it
is
Discussion replies:
Burkman
“No matter what our circumstances, our greatest limitation isn’t the leader above us—it’s
the spirit within us” (Maxwell, 2011, p. 40). We all have been in a situation when our inner
conscience has questioned the reasoning or morals of a leader. For some, we can trace this
feeling back to childhood and how we were parented. I can remember frequently standing up
against getting whipped with a belt for not finishing my dinner, regardless of being full or not.
This act instilled a fear in me for challenging leadership throughout my life. This concept is
annotated by Carsten et al. (2016) as a passive follower (p. 175). Around the mid-2000s is where
I embraced that challenging things I found unethical or wrong were indeed the correct and
reasonable thing to do. However, sometimes I am too crass when addressing unethical and
immoral issues, but this is something that I am working on throughout this course.
During research, the article I found was an article that involved a whistleblower who
found faults in the quality of materials sold to the U.S. government defense department (Phillips
and Cohen, 2009). The case follows Northrop Grumman and states they were required to pay an
amount of $325 million to the government and $48.7 million to the whistleblower Robert Ferro.
Like many followers, Ferro was conflicted by something that challenged his moral compass.
Because of a non-disclosure agreement, Ferro could not proceed with the case (Phillips and
Cohen, 2009, para. 6). What finally pushed Ferro to find a loophole to the non-disclosure
agreement was continued issues with systems, causing the government to scramble to address
while not knowing what part was causing the failures. “Ferro then went directly to the
government with his information and later hired Phillips & Cohen, which filed a “qui tam”
(whistleblower) lawsuit in federal district court in Los Angeles to make sure his disclosures were
properly investigated“ (Phillips and Cohen, 2009, para. 10). The challenging of a whistleblower
reminds me of Proverbs 3:27-28; “Do not withhold good from those to whom it is due, when it is
