????“別理他。他就是個瘋子。”

????“她就是沒得到提拔，心里不痛快罷了。”

????“他大嘴巴好多年了，從來都沒講出個道道。”

????這些話聽起來耳熟嗎？如果你在商界工作，應該會耳熟，因為人們就是這么評價告密者的。告密者也許在媒體那里名聲不錯，但在公司內部，管理層常常對他們不屑一顧，要么用一段詆毀名譽的軼事，要么用一段往事來化解他們令人惱火的指控，就這樣把他們打發他們了事。他們這么做的原因是：絕大多數情況下，告密者在某種程度上要么是瘋了，要么一心報復，要么兩者兼而有之。可總有那么一個糟糕透頂的日子，不管是出于報復還是道德熱忱，告密者有時候恰巧說出了真相。這時候，危機就來了，就像眼下沃爾瑪深陷其中、不得自拔的處境一樣。

????別弄錯了。即使現在被控賄賂墨西哥官員，我們仍認為沃爾瑪（Wal-Mart）是一家偉大的公司。它為數以千計的人創造向社會上層流動的機會，在全球提供了超過100萬的就業機會，也依舊是美國消費者對抗通脹的最可靠盟友。而且，最近針對沃爾瑪的指控目前也僅僅是指控而已。但不管最終證實真實與否，這些指控都給我們一個重要教訓。這個教訓并不是現在到處傳播的那樣：沃爾瑪那樣的大公司就是仗著自己的規模和影響力才膽敢參與腐敗。我們認為，這種觀點通常來說并不正確。我們也不認為這個故事的最大要點就是，如果不賄賂，美國公司在海外就會舉步維艱。完全可以按照正統老派的美式法則和規矩在全球運營并取得成功。

????對我們來說，沃爾瑪故事最重要的地方在于，它提醒了我們，由于多數時候不過是浪費時間，公司內部有種廣泛的、甚至是可以理解的沖動，那就是對告密者視而不見。這也提醒我們絕不能對他們置若罔聞。實際上，應對告密者指控的唯一方法（我們強調每一次都必須這樣，即使這樣有違直覺）就是要特別偏向于相信，告密者看到了某個重大的問題。這樣的偏見會驅使人熱心地調查每一個指控。你也許會想這只是浪費時間和金錢，最終徒勞無功；可能真的會這么走運，但誰知道呢？幫幫忙，千萬別讓被指控的老板本人去調查！引入獨立機構進行偵查，最不濟，內部調查者也要與被調查的問題無關，和相關人士無關。對，你也許痛恨這樣大張旗鼓，其實所有相關的人都一樣。但只有這樣，才能補償輕視告密者的傾向，不能像慣常那樣僅僅是敷衍了事的抽查，或者只是隨口問一句，“沒什么事吧？”。

????'Ignore him. He's a wack job."

????"She's just bitter she didn't get promoted."

????"He's been shooting his mouth off for years -- and it's always nothing."

????Those lines sound familiar? If you work in business, they probably do -- it's how people talk about whistleblowers. Whistleblowers may have a noble reputation in the media, but when they surface within a company, management almost always brushes them off with a discrediting back story or a little piece of history that explains away all their annoying accusations. And here's why that happens: In the vast majority of cases whistleblowers are, to some degree, crazy or vengeful or both. Until one terrible, awful day when, speaking out of vengefulness or ethical earnestness, the whistleblower also happens to be telling the truth. And then, well, you get a crisis like the one Wal-Mart finds itself tangled in today.

????Make no mistake. We think Wal-Mart (WMT), which was accused of bribing Mexican officials, is a great company. It has created upward mobility for thousands of people and 1 million--plus jobs around the world, and it remains the American consumer's greatest ally in the war against inflation. Furthermore, the recent accusations against Wal-Mart are just that -- accusations. But those allegations, proven true or not, offer an important lesson to everyone in business, and we don't mean the one that's being widely bandied about right now -- that big companies like Wal-Mart, because of their size and power, engage in corruption because they can. We don't think that's generally true. Nor do we think the biggest take-away from the Wal-Mart story is how hard it is for American companies to do business abroad without bribery. It's perfectly possible to operate globally -- and win -- while playing by good old American rules and regulations.

????No, to us the Wal-Mart story is most importantly a reminder of the pervasive, even understandable, impulse within companies to ignore whistleblowers because they're so often time wasters. And it's a reminder of why you can't turn your back on them. Ever. In fact, the only way to deal with a whistleblower's accusations -- again, every single time and often against your own instincts -- is with a hyperbias toward believing that the informant is onto something big. Such a bias must impel you to investigate every claim ferociously. You may think it's a waste of time and money, and will go nowhere; you should be so lucky. And for goodness' sake, don't let the investigation be conducted by the boss who's been accused of wrongdoing! Bring in an outside agency to do the sleuthing, or at the very least executives outside the scope of the alleged problem, with no relationship to the people involved. Yes, you may hate the whole meshugaas and so might everyone it touches. But it's the only way to overcompensate for the propensity to wish whistleblowers away with the perfunctory spot check or the "Everything okay?" kind of look-see that usually occurs.