Standing Up or Standing By: What Predicts Blowing the Whistle on Organizational Wrongdoing?

Abstract

Research on whistle-blowing has focused on the questions of who blows the whistle, who experiences retaliation, and who is effective in stopping wrongdoing. In this article, we review research pertinent to the first of these questions. Since the last known review (Near & Miceli, 1996), there have been important theoretical and, to a lesser extent, empirical developments. In addition, the U.S. law is changing dramatically, which may serve to promote valid whistle-blowing, and international interest in whistle-blowing is widespread and increasing. Unfortunately, evidence strongly suggests that media, popular, and regulatory interest is far outpacing the growth of careful scholarly inquiry into the topic, which is a disturbing trend. Here, we argue that the primary causes of the underdevelopment of the empirical literature are methodological, and that workable solutions are needed but very difficult to implement. By calling attention to these issues, we hope to help encourage more research on whistle-blowing.

Citation

Miceli, M.P. and Near, J.P. (2005), "Standing Up or Standing By: What Predicts Blowing the Whistle on Organizational Wrongdoing?", Martocchio, J.J. (Ed.) Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management (Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, Vol. 24), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Leeds, pp. 95-136. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-7301(05)24003-3