Managerial responsiveness to whistleblowing: Expanding the research horizon

Vandekerckhove, Wim; Brown, Alexander Jonathan; Tsahuridu, Eva E.

doi:10.4337/9781781006795.00021

Cited by 22 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Understanding why some managers display not only the courage to hear what is being said and take appropriate action, but also the courage to refrain from inappropriate action such as targeting the bearer of the news. Vandekerckhove et al 39 suggest future research should examine the variables that determine courage on the part of the recipient of the bad news, specifically on 'hearer courage' to understand why some managers 'have the courage to hear, ' under what circumstances and with regard to what type of reported wrongs. It is now time to specifically examine the human factors involved in the behaviours of healthcare managers, particularly those who distance themselves from staff who raise concerns about patient safety.…”

Section: Commissions Of Inquiry Both In the United Kingdom -Public Inmentioning

confidence: 99%

Whistleblowing Need not Occur if Internal Voices Are Heard: From Deaf Effect to Hearer Courage Comment on "Cultures of Silence and Cultures of Voice: The Role of Whistleblowing in Healthcare Organisations"

Cleary

Doyle

2015

Int J Health Policy Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Whistleblowing by health professionals is an infrequent and extraordinary event and need not occur if internal voices are heard. Mannion and Davies' editorial on "Cultures of Silence and Cultures of Voice: The Role of Whistleblowing in Healthcare Organisations" asks the question whether whistleblowing ameliorates or exacerbates the 'deaf effect' prevalent in healthcare organisations. This commentary argues that the focus should remain on internal processes and hearer courage.

show abstract

Section: Commissions Of Inquiry Both In the United Kingdom -Public Inmentioning

confidence: 99%

Whistleblowing Need not Occur if Internal Voices Are Heard: From Deaf Effect to Hearer Courage Comment on "Cultures of Silence and Cultures of Voice: The Role of Whistleblowing in Healthcare Organisations"

Cleary

Doyle

2015

Int J Health Policy Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is consistent with the 'deaf effect', a term originally coined by Keil and Robey 23 to describe the reluctance of senior managers to hear, accept and act on challenging observations from lower down the organisation. Vandekerckhove et al 24 suggest that researchers need to pay more attention to the question of how recipients of whistleblowing respond, and in particular to 'hearer action', which we might view as the antithesis of the deaf effect. Whereas it is widely recognised that it takes a degree of courage for someone to blow the whistle, it is less immediately obvious that it may also take courage for a manager to take on board the issues and act on them.…”

Section: The Conceptual Underpinnings Of Whistleblowingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Whistleblowing recipients in management roles know that their actions in raising the whistleblower's concerns may receive a negative response and may even lead to the sort of retaliation and victimisation that can sometimes be experienced by whistleblowers themselves. For this reason, Vandekerckhove et al 24 suggest that there is a need for research into 'hearer courage' to understand 'which managers have the courage to hear, under which circumstances, and with regard to which wrongs' (p. 316). The same issues may pertain to the new Speaking Up guardian roles in the NHS, for whom a whistleblower's report may feel like the whistleblower taking a burden off their own shoulders and placing it on the guardian's.…”

Section: The Conceptual Underpinnings Of Whistleblowingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding the knowledge gaps in whistleblowing and speaking up in health care: narrative reviews of the research literature and formal inquiries, a legal analysis and stakeholder interviews

Mannion

Blenkinsopp

Powell

et al. 2018

Health Serv Deliv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background There is compelling evidence to suggest that some (or even many) NHS staff feel unable to speak up, and that even when they do, their organisation may respond inappropriately. Objectives The specific project objectives were (1) to explore the academic and grey literature on whistleblowing and related concepts, identifying the key theoretical frameworks that can inform an understanding of whistleblowing; (2) to synthesise the empirical evidence about the processes that facilitate or impede employees raising concerns; (3) to examine the legal framework(s) underpinning whistleblowing; (4) to distil the lessons for whistleblowing policies from the findings of Inquiries into failings of NHS care; (5) to ascertain the views of stakeholders about the development of whistleblowing policies; and (6) to develop practical guidance for future policy-making in this area. Methods The study comprised four distinct but interlocking strands: (1) a series of narrative literature reviews, (2) an analysis of the legal issues related to whistleblowing, (3) a review of formal Inquiries related to previous failings of NHS care and (4) interviews with key informants. Results Policy prescriptions often conceive the issue of raising concerns as a simple choice between deciding to ‘blow the whistle’ and remaining silent. Yet research suggests that health-care professionals may raise concerns internally within the organisation in more informal ways before utilising whistleblowing processes. Potential areas for development here include the oversight of whistleblowing from an independent agency; early-stage protection for whistleblowers; an examination of the role of incentives in encouraging whistleblowing; and improvements to criminal law to protect whistleblowers. Perhaps surprisingly, there is little discussion of, or recommendations concerning, whistleblowing across the previous NHS Inquiry reports. Limitations Although every effort was made to capture all relevant papers and documents in the various reviews using comprehensive search strategies, some may have been missed as indexing in this area is challenging. We interviewed only a small number of people in the key informant interviews, and our findings may have been different if we had included a larger sample or informants with different roles and responsibilities. Conclusions Current policy prescriptions that seek to develop better whistleblowing policies and nurture open reporting cultures are in need of more evidence. Although we set out a wide range of issues, it is beyond our remit to convert these concerns into specific recommendations: that is a process that needs to be led from elsewhere, and in partnership with the service. There is also still much to learn regarding this important area of health policy, and we have highlighted a number of important gaps in knowledge that are in need of more sustained research. Future work A key area for future research is to explore whistleblowing as an unfolding, situated and interactional process and not just a one-off act by an identifiable whistleblower. In particular, we need more evidence and insights into the tendency for senior managers not to hear, accept or act on concerns about care raised by employees. Funding The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

show abstract

“…Over a time span of only two decades, descriptive ethics research has shifted normative discussions around whistleblowing from a focus on the whistleblower to a focus on the recipient of whistleblowing (Brown, Vandekerckhove & Dreyfus, 2014;Vandekerckhove, Brown & Tsahuridu, 2014). …”

Section: The Impact Of the Situationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing unethical behavior in organizations: The need for a behavioral business ethics approach

Cremer

Vandekerckhove

2016

Journal of Management & Organization

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Issues of morality and ethics have increasingly become more important in organizations and business settings. Traditionally, these issues of ethics and social responsibility in business settings have been discussed and commented on by prescriptive approaches that are grounded in philosophical traditions. Building on the idea that we need to develop a more comprehensive and complete understanding of the value that people assign to ethics and how it influences their actions and decisions, in the present article we discuss and review the importance and relevance of adopting also a descriptive approach that is grounded in the behavioral sciences (referred to as behavioral business ethics). This approach has the advantages to promote our insights into how people can show both good and bad behavior and why this is the case. Behavioral business ethics therefore represents an important research challenge for organizational researchers to pursue and engage more meaningfully with more prescriptive approaches.

show abstract

Managerial responsiveness to whistleblowing: Expanding the research horizon

Cited by 22 publications

References 0 publications

Whistleblowing Need not Occur if Internal Voices Are Heard: From Deaf Effect to Hearer Courage Comment on "Cultures of Silence and Cultures of Voice: The Role of Whistleblowing in Healthcare Organisations"

Whistleblowing Need not Occur if Internal Voices Are Heard: From Deaf Effect to Hearer Courage Comment on "Cultures of Silence and Cultures of Voice: The Role of Whistleblowing in Healthcare Organisations"

Understanding the knowledge gaps in whistleblowing and speaking up in health care: narrative reviews of the research literature and formal inquiries, a legal analysis and stakeholder interviews

Managing unethical behavior in organizations: The need for a behavioral business ethics approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About