There are at least four important, institutional obstacles to whistle-blowing to regulatory institutions. First, regulatory institutions are often systematically understaffed and do not have the resources needed to adequately process whistle-blowing cases. Second, regulators who process whistle-blowing cases are often systematically inexperienced and do not understand the strategic importance of whistle-blowing cases. Third, regulators are often under systemic pressure from the politicians who appoint them to ignore whistle-blowing cases relevant to their sources of financial and/or ideological political support. Fourth, there (...) are high systemic risks to whistle-blowers who blow the whistle to regulatory institutions. Nonetheless, understanding how the institutions and obstacles operate can help us understand what types of whistle-blowing methods can be used to navigate around the obstacles and within the regulatory institutions. In addition, sometimes whistle-blowing methods can help reform regulatory institutions. (shrink)

The purpose of this article is to help educators and managers learn about a variety of win—win solutions to problems with ethical dimensions. The hope is that the larger the variety of win-win solutions we can consider, the higher the probability that we can find at least one that satisfies both ethical and material concerns. This article is motivated by the experiences of managers who have found that they need win-win solutions because it is very difficult to effectively advocate ethical (...) solutions to problems that lose money or do not make money for their organizations. The purpose of the article is not to build theory or a theoretical taxonomy of winwin solutions, but to gather from eclectic theoretical and applied sources a variety of win-win solutions that can help solve problems with ethical dimensions. Examples of the types of win—win solutions are illustrated. Ethical problems with win—win solutions are also considered. (shrink)