We have spent some time recently in reviewing our business strategy, and in so doing we have looked at our core values using a particular model which discounts “qualifiers” such as “honesty” because who would choose someone who was not honest as a business partner or an employee?

The result is a shorter list than we had before but one that still retains the same direction and emphasis on a can-do attitude to the customer. I hope that the simplification and the greater clarity of the new list will be easier to communicate and to promote within the business.

This came to mind when my daughter told me of a recent experience when she had cause to advise someone on her team how to respond to an example of potential corrupt practice in the selection of a supplier in return for a financial or political incentive. The case was of a low commercial value and may have been entirely acceptable. My daughter quickly identified that the circumstances necessitated a particular course of action in accordance with her company procedures designed for the purpose. The potential corruption or dishonesty was caught in whistleblowing process which is designed to protect both the individual and the company by means of a third-party investigation which, depending on the evidence, might lead to a disciplinary outcome or to the expunging and complete elimination of all reference to the matter.

The original complainant, however, has no certainty that the matter will be resolved without an adverse reflection on them. The decision to engage in any form of whistleblowing requires a considerable amount of trust in the integrity of the system and the people who run it. This is true of any company or institution whether private, public, or state, as many in the NHS have learned to their cost. My daughter must also trust that the fact that the issue has been raised will not be tallied and reflected on her management of her team whatever the outcome of the third-party investigation.

This situation highlights an ongoing one of my own in which I was approached by an employee of a blue-chip new client who suggested that they could improve the prospects of further business with that client if I would commit to make them a regular supplement to their salary. The conversation, whilst carefully phrased, left me in no doubt as to the intent and to the potential significance to our business. The Bribery Act 2010 would be contravened.

I chose to delay my response until I had consulted my Management Team who impressed me with their quick and unequivocal reply that this would not be in line with our values, which at that time included “honesty.” I duly responded accordingly, and I have not heard from the individual since then. But that is not the end of the matter.

It is not the end of the matter because I have not blown the whistle, and this is unfinished business.

First perhaps a thought or two on bribery. The Bribery Act is clear: A person is guilty of a crime if he or she “offers, promises or gives a financial or other advantage to another person” intending that advantage to “induce the person to perform improperly a relevant function or activity” or to reward a person for such behaviour.

A person is guilty of this offence if he or she requests, agrees to receive, or accepts a financial or other advantage intending that, in consequence, a relevant function or activity should be performed improperly.

I remember a conversation with my father many years before the Act was passed in which he explained his belief that “the Sheik knows very well that his Defence Minister is being bribed by one contractor or another and that he, the Sheik, is paying for the bribe in the price of the armaments but that the Defence Minister is his son or his nephew and that is the way that the Sheik pays him”. It is just the way things get done in some countries. Who is to say that this is wrong?

Our policy and employee handbook covers the matter clearly but on returning to the office after receiving the approach I Googled the 2010 Act for confirmation. There is no doubt about it and our new blue-chip client publishes a global whistleblowing policy to the same effect but based on the assumption that I might be offering the bribe rather than being asked for it. Reading the policy, I find myself wondering if I was being exposed to an integrity test which my failure to “blow the whistle” has caused me to fail.

Then I wonder if to “blow the whistle” would in any way, jeopardise the on-going contractual negotiations with that same company for what, to us, is of existential significance. When is the right time to speak? Is it already too late or would a premature revelation disrupt the process and introduce unnecessary doubt and uncertainty? Where should I place my trust?

839 words FRE 45.6 FKG 13.7