Assignment Instructions Discussion BSN301 Rachel:
Classmate responded to the following questions. Requesting an agreement or disagreement per discussion;
What role might diversity play in dissent? For example, are minorities more likely to dissent?
Is loyal dissent somehow better than whistleblowing, and on what ethical basis, or standard would you evaluate this point?
While dissension can occur in any group, one might argue that a diverse group would be more likely to have dissent. This is due to the differences in perspective that those in a diverse group might hold.
If a leader makes decisions based solely on their perspective, a follower from a different background might have different insight to lend to their leader, ensuring that the organization’s goal remains as a top priority.
That said, if a person is a minority within a group, there is possibility that they won’t feel comfortable to dissent. In the article In Command: The few the proud the white, Helene Cooper writes that marine Colonel Henderson, a black man, was passed over for opportunity to ascend in rank several times despite his extensive and impressive resume within the branch (Cooper, 2020).
In this article, it is noted that Marine Corps officials noted that this was due to Colonel Henderson’s “tendency to speak his mind”. Stories such as this may dissuade people of color within the branch from dissension for fear of losing opportunity to progress in their career.
One form of dissension which is particularly pertinent in national security is called whistleblowing. This is an act that brings wrongdoing within an organization to light. One might argue that neither dissension nor whistleblowing is more ethical than the other, as they may occur under varying circumstances in which either act is deemed necessary for the ‘greater good’. That said, it seems that, before resorting to whistleblowing, a conversation (or several) should occur between a follower, their leader, as well as other members within the organization to discuss the wrongdoing that the follower is planning to bring to attention. If the leader is not open minded to remedying the potential wrongdoing, perhaps only then is it ethical for one to resort to whistleblowing (provided it is deemed ethical and necessary for organizations goals, and the ‘greater good’. One might have to use consequentialism to ensure that they are striving for the best possible outcome with whistleblowing. That is, if the act will do more harm than good, one should not employ the method. Additionally, before whistleblowing, one should obtain opinions from those around them to ensure that it is a decision that will do less harm than good.
