3 ms·

This sort of situation is something I suggest people think about ahead of time. If you decompose it into the basic "I just discovered that some one, or my comp

This sort of situation is something I suggest people think about ahead of time. If you decompose it into the basic "I just discovered that some one, or my company/institution, on which my livelihood currently depends, is engaged in fraudulent/immoral/illegal/unethical activies." The next question is "Now what do I do?" It ranges from report it and leave immediately, to let the leadership know you are there to help. When I was at Intel I discovered that someone within Intel was selling memory chips that had 'binned out' (failed one of the edge cases tested post production) on the grey market. I took the path of reporting it, which ended up in this employee's dismissal. My manager at the time talked with me and said that while he admired my integrity he wondered if I understood the risk I had taken. We talked about it, and the number of people that had to be working together in order for this little scheme to work, and they only fired one guy. The implication was that there were still an unknown number of people at the company who knew (or suspected) that I had interrupted their gravy train. At least one of them had to be reasonably high up the management chain. So now I likely had 'enemies' where before I was just an unknown. You might think, "Wow, are people really thinking like that?" and my experience suggests that yes, they really do. So think about the consequences of being the "good guy" can be just as painful for you in a different way than they are for the "bad guy." It isn't an easy choice.

rdtwo 7y ago
Can’t upvote this enough. This is exactly the reason most people choose not to report unless they find themselves in a position where the could not plausibly deny knowledge. I’m sure it happens in every industry that those that report get punished and there is no reward for it.
- guitarbill 7y ago
  I obviously don't know the details, but it sounds like proper whistleblower protections and channels would've helped? Ideally OP could have reported it, and stayed anonymous/not have his manager find out. It's probably not so simple in real life, but having to use existing management chains makes it harder, because they're usually not well equipped to deal with such situations (or worse, might have a hand in it).
  - rdtwo 7y ago
    There are usually no such thing as truly anonymous reporting. The act of reporting makes you a leper in the corporate structure and retaliation is pretty common, and difficult to prove in court.
joe_the_user 7y ago
This is why the only credible way that a company can say it is attempting not to do X fraud, once that fraud comes to light, is to have a process in place to support whistle blowers. Without such a process, all this stuff comes back in spades. With such a process, you still have a struggle but at least you have a chance. Also it's why journalists need strong protections when reporting this stuff. etc.
bsder 7y ago
Most of the time "Get out of the blast radius and cover your ass" is about as far as you want to go. Actually blowing the whistle is generally not in your best interest. Most people only do that when there really is no other option to protect themselves. The worst part is that if you have genuine evidence on someone with actual power, you're better off keeping that in your pocket rather than reporting them. As in chess, "The threat is often more effective than its actually execution."
- Gibbon1 7y ago
  Back in the day when every thing was paper my dad said they can purge the files of incriminating evidence. But nothing keeps someone with a grudge from slipping it back before the next audit.
HarryHirsch 7y ago
In academia it's slightly different: "I just discovered that the brand on which my livelihood currently depends, is engaged in fraudulent/immoral/illegal/unethical activities." If it transpires that your advisor has fabricated data your own achievements immediately become suspect and funding agencies, journal reviewers and future employers may treat you as collateral damage.
- mirimir 7y ago
  There's also the fact that new PhDs typically rely on recommendations from their advisors and dissertation committees. She's obviously not getting one from her advisor. And that in itself might be fatal. I mean, what might another dissertation committee member say to counter lack of support from her advisor? And how likely is it that any of them would say it? Also, it's not obvious why Tufts is at fault.
cjblomqvist 7y ago
I completely agree. To add to that, you could however also have created some people really thinking highly of you as well, especially for people appreciating such things as honesty and loyalty. That could be worth a lot as well. Not always enough, but sometimes a huge win.
godelski 7y ago
Unfortunately this is really the only way to do things though. Except to use a completely anonymous system (does such a tool even exist? Or one that is close?). And it creates a feedback of unethical behavior. Unethical behavior starts out small and grows step by step, the person might not even realize how far they've come. There's also this same ethical slipping on the viewers side. They may never participate, but what they become complacent with not reporting can grow. They may feel fear that something is only slightly unethical and don't want someone to be fired. That also grows. So unethical behavior needs to be stopped early on, before it is a firable offense. But that requires a change where ethical people can feel safe reporting and also not feel like they are going to ruin someone's career for something small (I think this is also a key component). So how do you take care of responsible reporting with these kinds of problems? Even if we ignore the already existing unethical behavior.
kajumix 7y ago
I think 'exit' (as opposed to 'voice') is an underrated strategy in this case. I have heard of many people being consumed by lawsuits, drawn out conflicts, wasted lives in pursuit of correcting a wrong, driven more by ego than by a desire for justice. Perhaps there is merit in doing that, but any corruption within any system feeds off of sincere people. Imagine, an organization couldn't survive for too long if most of the well meaning people left. Balaji Srinivasan's talk on this was quite insightful: https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/6qqcvl/balaji_srinivasan_exit_amplifies_voice_exit_is_an/ https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/6qqcvl/balaji_srinivas...
asfarley 7y ago
Hah, it kind of sounds like your manager was giving you the ol' Walter White "tread carefully" - are you sure he wasn't involved?

rdtwo 7y ago

Can’t upvote this enough. This is exactly the reason most people choose not to report unless they find themselves in a position where the could not plausibly deny knowledge. I’m sure it happens in every industry that those that report get punished and there is no reward for it.

guitarbill 7y ago
I obviously don't know the details, but it sounds like proper whistleblower protections and channels would've helped? Ideally OP could have reported it, and stayed anonymous/not have his manager find out. It's probably not so simple in real life, but having to use existing management chains makes it harder, because they're usually not well equipped to deal with such situations (or worse, might have a hand in it).
- rdtwo 7y ago
  There are usually no such thing as truly anonymous reporting. The act of reporting makes you a leper in the corporate structure and retaliation is pretty common, and difficult to prove in court.

joe_the_user 7y ago

This is why the only credible way that a company can say it is attempting not to do X fraud, once that fraud comes to light, is to have a process in place to support whistle blowers. Without such a process, all this stuff comes back in spades. With such a process, you still have a struggle but at least you have a chance. Also it's why journalists need strong protections when reporting this stuff. etc.

bsder 7y ago

Most of the time "Get out of the blast radius and cover your ass" is about as far as you want to go. Actually blowing the whistle is generally not in your best interest. Most people only do that when there really is no other option to protect themselves. The worst part is that if you have genuine evidence on someone with actual power, you're better off keeping that in your pocket rather than reporting them. As in chess, "The threat is often more effective than its actually execution."

Gibbon1 7y ago
Back in the day when every thing was paper my dad said they can purge the files of incriminating evidence. But nothing keeps someone with a grudge from slipping it back before the next audit.

HarryHirsch 7y ago

In academia it's slightly different: "I just discovered that the brand on which my livelihood currently depends, is engaged in fraudulent/immoral/illegal/unethical activities." If it transpires that your advisor has fabricated data your own achievements immediately become suspect and funding agencies, journal reviewers and future employers may treat you as collateral damage.

mirimir 7y ago
There's also the fact that new PhDs typically rely on recommendations from their advisors and dissertation committees. She's obviously not getting one from her advisor. And that in itself might be fatal. I mean, what might another dissertation committee member say to counter lack of support from her advisor? And how likely is it that any of them would say it? Also, it's not obvious why Tufts is at fault.

cjblomqvist 7y ago

I completely agree. To add to that, you could however also have created some people really thinking highly of you as well, especially for people appreciating such things as honesty and loyalty. That could be worth a lot as well. Not always enough, but sometimes a huge win.

godelski 7y ago

Unfortunately this is really the only way to do things though. Except to use a completely anonymous system (does such a tool even exist? Or one that is close?). And it creates a feedback of unethical behavior. Unethical behavior starts out small and grows step by step, the person might not even realize how far they've come. There's also this same ethical slipping on the viewers side. They may never participate, but what they become complacent with not reporting can grow. They may feel fear that something is only slightly unethical and don't want someone to be fired. That also grows. So unethical behavior needs to be stopped early on, before it is a firable offense. But that requires a change where ethical people can feel safe reporting and also not feel like they are going to ruin someone's career for something small (I think this is also a key component). So how do you take care of responsible reporting with these kinds of problems? Even if we ignore the already existing unethical behavior.

kajumix 7y ago

I think 'exit' (as opposed to 'voice') is an underrated strategy in this case. I have heard of many people being consumed by lawsuits, drawn out conflicts, wasted lives in pursuit of correcting a wrong, driven more by ego than by a desire for justice. Perhaps there is merit in doing that, but any corruption within any system feeds off of sincere people. Imagine, an organization couldn't survive for too long if most of the well meaning people left. Balaji Srinivasan's talk on this was quite insightful: https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/6qqcvl/balaji_srinivasan_exit_amplifies_voice_exit_is_an/ https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/6qqcvl/balaji_srinivas...

asfarley 7y ago

Hah, it kind of sounds like your manager was giving you the ol' Walter White "tread carefully" - are you sure he wasn't involved?