Five Paradoxes in Managing Whistle blowing

Transcription

1 Vlaams Netwerk Integriteit, Brussels, 29 March 2011 University of Surrey, 30 March 2011 Five Paradoxes in Managing Whistle blowing Dr Wim Vandekerckhove University of Greenwich Business School

2 1. Whistle blowing procedures work in organizations that do not need them. Whistle blowing procedure Early correction: little effort Implementation risks Necessary cultural conditions 2

3 1. Whistle blowing procedures work in organizations that do not need them. Necessary cultural conditions Trust towards management Trust among employees Risk management culture Examples of successful whistle blowing If you meet these, Concern rather than allegation Open communication about operation of whistleblowing channel Raise with person directly before using procedure You do not need it Employees involved in design and review of procedure 3

4 2. Anonymous channels are what whistleblowers want, not what they need. Across cultures (Park et al 2008): internally, through formal channels, and anonymously? Successful also means wrongdoing stopped? Best protection 4

5 2. Anonymous channels are what whistleblowers want, not what they need. Successful whistle blowing Safe Effective Wrongdoers guess Others experience reprisals (PCaW 2011) You had already told someone else Anonymous reports are perceived as less credible (Hunton & Rose 2011) Less resources are allocated to investigate 5

6 3. The easiest wrongdoing to stop, is the hardest to blow the whistle on. Based on Bjørkelo et al (2010) 6

7 3. The easiest wrongdoing to stop, is the hardest to blow the whistle on. Skiveness & Trygstad (2010) Norway has strong unionization Near & Miceli (1995) The more crucial the wrongdoing is for the survival of the organization, the less likely whistle blowing will be successful 7

8 4. Procedures acknowledge the right to blow the whistle, but they imply a duty to do so. Crisis: people on the work floor knew Moral autonomy fear Judgment Raising concern 8

9 4. Procedures acknowledge the right to blow the whistle, but they imply a duty to do so. (Tsahuridu & Vandekerckhove 2008, Vandekerckhove & Tsahuridu 2010a) T1 No procedure Fear Unrealistic right T2 implement procedure Make right realistic T3 procedure Silence is wrong Liability 9

10 5. Whistle blowing to correct wrongdoing often leads to wrongdoing. Near et al (2004): less reporting about unfair discrimination because nothing gets done about it. Brown (2008): whether or not it makes a difference is more important than whether or not I risk something. Organizational cooperation must go on! 10

11 5. Whistle blowing to correct wrongdoing often leads to wrongdoing. Communication Strengthen Organizational Culture Source: Vandekerckhove & Tsahuridu (2010b) 11

12 Whistleblowing Cycle (Vandekerckhove & Tsahuridu 2010b) Wrongdoing Whistleblowing Response to whistle blowing 12

13 References Bjørkelo, B, Einarsen, S, Nielsen, M B & Matthiesen, S B (2010). Silence is golden? Characteristics and experiences of selfreported whistleblowers, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, DOI / Brown, A. (2008). Whistleblowing in the Australian Public Sector, ANU E Press. Hunton, J E & Rose, J M (2011). Effects of Anonymous Whistle Blowing and Perceived Reputation Threats on Investigations of Whistle Blowing Allegations by Audit Committee Members, Journal of Management Studies 48:1, Near, J P & Miceli, M P (1995). Effective Whistle Blowing, Academy of Management Review 20(3), Near, J P, Rehg, M T, Van Scotter, J R & Miceli, M P (2004). Does Type of Wrongdoing Affect the Whistle Blowing Process?, Business Ethics Quarterly 14(2), Park, H, Blenkinsopp, J, Oktem, M & Omurgonulsen, U (2008). Cultural Orientation and Attitudes Toward Different Forms of Whistleblowing: A Comparison of South Korea, Turkey, and the U.K. Journal of Business Ethics, 82(4), Public Concern at Work (2011). Personal communication. Skivenes, M & Trygstad, S C (2010). When whistle blowing works: The Norwegian case Human Relations 63(7), Tsahuridu, E.E. & Vandekerckhove, W. (2008). Whistleblowing and Moral Autonomy in Organisations Journal of Business Ethics 82(1), Vandekerckhove, W. & Tsahuridu, E.E. (2010a). 'Risky Rescues and Whistleblowing', Journal of Business Ethics 97(3), Vandekerckhove, W & Tsahuridu, E E (2010b). Next please!, or why we should focus our research on the whistle receiver instead of the whistle blower. Paper presented at ICAP 2010, Melbourne, July