Making Sense of Whistle-Blowing's Antecedents: Learning from Research on Identity and Ethics Programs

Abstract

<jats:title>ABSTRACT:</jats:title><jats:p>Despite a significant increase in whistle-blowing practices in work organizations, we know little about what differentiates whistle-blowers from those who observe a wrongdoing but chose not to report it. In this review article, we first highlight the arenas in which research on whistle-blowing has produced inconsistent results and those in which the findings have been consistent. Second, we propose that the adoption of an identity approach will help clarify the inconsistent findings and extend prior work on individual-level motives behind whistle-blowing. Third, we argue that the integration of the whistle-blowing research with that on ethics programs will aid in systematically expanding our understanding of the situational antecedents of whistle-blowing. We conclude our review by discussing new theoretical and methodological arenas of research in the domain of whistle-blowing.</jats:p>

When private internal investigators turn against the whistleblower

“…Since misconduct and white-collar crime is difficult to detect and prosecute, whistleblowers represent important information sources in the following fraud examinations and police investigations (Vadera et al, 2009). …”

“…Whistleblowers attempt to disclose information about what they perceive as illegal, immoral or illegitimate practices (Atwater, 2006;Vadera et al, 2009;Vadera and Aguilera, 2015). Private internal investigators are hired to reconstruct the past after suspicions of misconduct, often reported by whistleblowers (Brooks and Button, 2011;Green and Podgor, 2014;Miller, 2010).…”

Ethics, Values, Virtues, and Character Strengths in Mindfulness-Based Interventions: a Psychological Science Perspective

“…Through a process known as whistle-blowing, employees who report illegal or unethical activities can have a significant impact on organizational behavior (Vadera et al 2009). Miceli et al (2012) noted that most employees who observe wrongdoing do not report it but that those who do are more likely to have a proactive personality style characterized by the tendency to take action to influence their environment.…”

Religiosity, Job Status and Whistle-Blowing: Evidence from Micro-Finance Companies

“…Also apart from the unwillingness to expose wrongdoing in Ghanaian organizations, generally, previous studies exploring whistle-blowing have concentrated on organizational and structural factors influencing whistle-blowing in the areas of professional status of whistleblowers, and organizational support for whistleblowing (Near & Miceli, 1985;Dozier & Miceli, 1985;Vadera, Vadera, & Caza, 2009). There are however scanty researches dealing with how the belief system of an individual and the position the individual occupy on the organizational hierarchy affect whistle-blowing.…”

“…Nevertheless, the debate of whether religiosity and job status positively or negatively affect whistle-blowing is inconclusive. Some are of the view that religiosity and job status positively affect whistle-blowing (Barnett et al, 1996;Near & Miceli, 1985;Dozier & Miceli, 1985;Vadera, Vadera, & Caza, 2009;Gino & Bazerman, 2009). Others also suggest that religiosity and job status have no association or negatively affect whistle-blowing (Goldman, 2001;Keenan, 2000).…”