Search results

Organizational wrongdoing is still very much prevalent in today’s society. Traditional and social media are full of examples of organizations engaging in unethical or illegal behavior. While it is difficult – if not impossible – to establish whether the ever-increasing number of reported cases of wrongdoing is due to an actual increase in the phenomenon (objectivist view of wrongdoing) or to more attention being paid to it (social-constructivist view of wrongdoing), the fact remains that organizational wrongdoing seems to have become the norm rather than an exception in our everyday life. This is concerning, as organizational wrongdoing tends to undermine trust in fundamental institutions, such as the Market, the State, Religion, and Law, and may lead to them being replaced by other – sometimes less desirable – institutions or create an “institutional void.” Because of its potential impact on established institutions, organizational wrongdoing deserves to be closely monitored and further examined. This volume of Research in the Sociology of Organizations is an attempt to draw attention to the theoretical and empirical relevance of the topic, consolidate and extend the knowledge accumulated in this area of research, and highlight potential direction for future research. The volume explores in particular the definitions and antecedents of organizational wrongdoing.

Organizational wrongdoing researchers often look to past cases to empirically develop and support theoretical understanding. Their research is therefore conducted at a temporal distance to focal events and frequently relies on retrospective accounts and surviving documentary evidence. These methodological circumstances define historical research practice, and we demonstrate in this paper the valuable insights that historical approaches can provide organizational wrongdoing research. Specifically, we draw on a range of practices from history and the social sciences to introduce four historically informed approaches: narrative history, analytically structured history, historical process study, short-term process study. We differentiate these based on their particular affordances and treatment of two key methodological considerations: historical evidence and temporality. We demonstrate the specific value these approaches represent to organizational wrongdoing research with several exemplars showing how they have been used in related fields of research.

The Volkswagen (VW) emissions scandal was one of the largest examples of organizational wrongdoing in corporate history, costing the firm immense damage to its reputation and over $33 billion in fines, penalties, financial settlements, and buyback costs. In this paper, we draw on the concept of boundary work to provide insight into the causes of wrongdoing at VW. Supplementing other work on the scandal, we show how the ways in which boundaries became established in the organization resulted in an internal context that defined “in” and “out” groups, normalized certain behaviors, and limited communication across intraorganizational boundaries. This allowed wrongdoing to not only become established but also to go unchallenged. We provide contributions to broader understandings of organizational wrongdoing and to the temporal unfolding of boundary work by theorizing how a combination of cognitive, horizontal, and vertical boundaries can create an infrastructure of organizational design that permits organizational wrongdoing, prevents it being challenged, and ultimately normalizes it in everyday activities.

The act of reporting illegal and unethical practices in the workplace has become an increasingly important issue for researchers and organizational management over the past several decades. This study tested a model of whistleblowing in which perceived organizational retaliation and upward communication satisfaction were hypothesized to act as predictors of types of whistleblowing intentions using a representative sample of employees working in Kirklareli, Turkey (n = 1,012). Structural equation modeling indicated that perceptions of upward communication satisfaction were positively associated to blowing the whistle to internal channels like immediate supervisor and upper management and negatively related to staying silent and external whistleblowing. In addition, perceived threat of retaliation from an organization was negatively related to blowing the whistle to internal channels and positively related to staying silent and external whistleblowing. The present study has contributed to our understanding of whistleblowing in a relatively new national context by clarifying its associations with perceived organizational retaliation and communication with management.

This paper aims to explore the key factors which influence whistleblowing intentions of teachers working with higher education institutions (HEIs) in India. Both internal and external whistleblowing intentions of the HEI teachers are studied by examining their relative intentions to report a potential wrongdoing to the authorities within the management of the institution and to the external statutory bodies. The reporting intentions of the HEI teachers are measured through the use of three vignettes related to academic frauds. Whistleblowing intentions are proposed to be determined by the individual, organizational and situational factors.

Survey method of descriptive research design has been used to obtain the primary data regarding the individual, organizational and situational variables deemed to influence HEI teachers’ internal and external whistleblowing intentions. A self-administered structured questionnaire is used as survey instrument for primary data collection. The respondents’ internal and external whistleblowing intentions are measured through the use of three vignettes related to academic frauds. Non-parametric tests such as Mann–Whitney U test, Kruskal–Wallis test and Spearman correlations have been used to test the research hypotheses.

The study has found that the HEI teachers are more likely to blow the whistle internally if there is a proper communication channel in their organization for reporting wrongdoings. However, they do not hesitate to blow the whistle externally in the absence of internal reporting channel, especially in those cases of wrongdoings where they perceive the cost of reporting to be high. The high status of the wrongdoer and high costs of reporting discourage the teachers to blow the whistle internally. However, if the wrongdoer holds a very powerful position in the organization, then the teachers prefer to report his wrongdoing to external agencies as they are afraid of the likely negative repercussions of reporting against him internally. In case of serious wrongdoings, the teachers intend to blow the whistle within the organization rather than going to external agencies probably because they do not want to spoil the image of their organization in the external world.

The first limitation is that because of the unavailability of pre-tested vignettes in the context of academic frauds, the study has used three vignettes which have been developed on the basis of few case studies. Second, the results showed the existence of social desirability bias across all the three vignettes. Also, the study has been conducted among teaching professionals; therefore, the findings cannot be generalized to the professionals of other sectors.

The findings of the study may bring awareness to the board of management of HEIs, regarding the importance of whistleblowing in their educational institutions. They should encourage the teachers working with their institutions to report the wrongdoings internally as external reporting may cause damage to their institute’s reputation. Proper reporting mechanisms should be designed and shared with the employees as a part of institutional culture.

The Whistle Blowers Protection Act passed by the Parliament of India in 2011 should be amended to include the private sector employees, especially the teachers working in higher education sector. This will encourage the HEI teachers to report the academic frauds fearlessly which will put a serious check on the growing number of frauds and wrongdoings in the education sector.

Previous research studies have discussed the factors influencing whistleblowing intentions in the context of various non-academic organizations. However, existing research has not adequately provided a better understanding of the influencing factors of whistleblowing intentions in higher education sector. The present paper addresses this gap by empirically examining the key factors which influence HEI teachers’ intentions of blowing the whistle and reporting the wrongdoings occurring in their institutions, in Indian context. An attempt has been made to identify the influencing factors of both internal and external whistleblowing intentions by using three different vignettes related with academic frauds.

We review and summarize accounting literature that examines whistleblowing in the accounting context. We organize our review around the five determinants of whistleblowing identified by Near and Miceli (1995). The first determinant is characteristics of the whistleblower. Studies related to this determinant examine whistleblowers’ personality characteristics, moral judgment, and demographic characteristics. Studies related to the second determinant, characteristics of the report recipient, examine characteristics of the individual or individuals who receive the report and characteristics of the reporting channel. The third determinant is characteristics of the wrongdoer. Studies in this area focus on the wrongdoer’s power and credibility. Fourth, accounting studies related to characteristics of the wrongdoing examine factors that affect the dependence of the organization on the wrongdoing and evidence credibility. Studies related to the final determinant, characteristics of the organization, examine organizational perceptions of the appropriateness of whistleblowing, organizational climate, and organizational structure. For each determinant, we first summarize and analyze the findings of prior research, and then we present suggestions for future accounting research in whistleblowing.

Whistleblowing has been receiving increased attention and support in recent times as a means of detecting and correcting wrongdoing in organizations. This study aims to examine perceptions, attitudes and consequences (actions and reactions) of whistleblowing, as well as the predictors of internal and external whistleblowing intentions, by using Graham’s (1986) model of principled organizational dissent in a small emerging and collectivist culture like Barbados.

The study utilized a self-administered survey of 282 accounting employees working in organizations in Barbados.

Results reveal that there is little awareness of whistleblowing legislation. Most respondents perceive whistleblowing as ethical and favor internal over external whistleblowing. Findings show that personal responsibility and personal costs significantly influence internal whistleblowing intentions, while personal costs influence external whistleblowing. Using qualitative data, several themes emerged as influencing whistleblowing: perceived benefits of whistleblowing, actual whistleblowing experiences (handling of reports), personal costs (climate of fear and hostility), perceived lack of anonymity and cultural norms.

Future research should control for social desirability bias and use more rigorous qualitative approaches such as face-to-face interviews and focus groups to gain in-depth opinions and feelings on the topic.

Whistleblowing can be achieved through such mechanisms as perceived organizational support, strong ethical codes of conduct, rewarding ethical behavior and promoting sound work ethics in organizations.

This paper explores whistleblowing in an emerging economy where there has been little research on the topic. Thus, this study supplements the existing research in emerging economies by examining the applicability of Graham’s (1986) model of principled organizational dissent.

The growth of research into whistle-blowing has produced some compelling insights into this important organizational phenomenon, but a number of areas remain under-explored, particularly the role of emotion and our understanding of the far more common response to wrongdoing, namely inaction. In this chapter we seek to problematize current conceptualizations of whistle-blowing and wrongdoing, as a basis for examining employee silence in the face of wrongdoing. We suggest that quiescent silence can be viewed as an emotion episode, and draw upon the feedback theory and the sensemaking paradigm to develop this proposition, illustrated through an analysis of accounts of quiescent silence in a clinical setting. We propose a new concept of “cues for inaction” which offers insights into the way quiescent silence arises and persists.

For over three decades, researchers have sought to identify factors influencing employees’ responses to wrongdoing in work settings, including organizational, contextual, and individual factors. In focusing predominantly on understanding whistle-blowing responses, however, researchers have tended to neglect inquiry into employees’ decisions to withhold concerns. The major purpose of this study was to explore the factors that influenced how staff members responded to a series of adverse events in a healthcare setting in Australia, with a particular focus on the role of perceptions and emotions.

Based on publicly accessible transcripts taken from a government inquiry that followed the event, we employed a modified grounded theory approach to explore the nature of the adverse events and how employees responded emotionally and behaviorally; we focused in particular on how organizational and contextual factors shaped key employee perceptions and emotions encouraging silence.

Our results revealed that staff members became aware of a range of adverse events over time and responded in a variety of ways, including disclosure to trusted others, confrontation, informal reporting, formal reporting, and external whistle-blowing. Based on this analysis, we developed a model of how organizational and contextual factors shape employee perceptions and emotions leading to employee silence in the face of wrongdoing.

Although limited to publicly available transcripts only, our findings provide support for the idea that perceptions and emotions play important roles in shaping employees’ responses to adverse events at work, and that decisions about whether to voice concerns about wrongdoing is an ongoing process, influenced by emotions, sensemaking, and critical events.

It has long been recognized that overwhelmed employees of bureaucratic organizations use a variety of strategies to cope with demand for their services, often at the expense of their clients. One such strategy involves discouraging clients from taking action by making references to complex bureaucratic procedures and routines. While the public management literature has a well-developed research program focusing on the mobilization of such administrative burdens, organization theory seems to be lagging behind in the analysis of that type of misconduct. In this chapter, we explain how references to the representational dimension of routines can be used to discourage clients from taking action, what are the boundary conditions of such a strategy, and its possible consequences for clients.