Internal Whistle‐Blowing in the Public Service: A Matter of Trust

Taylor, Jeannette

doi:10.1111/puar.12946

Cited by 35 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 73 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As discussed previously, some whistleblowing studies document that whistleblowing intention might not be able to predict whistleblowing behavior due to the higher risk and greater difficulty associated with whistleblowing when compared to other types of behaviors (Chiu, 2003;Mesmer-Magnus & Viswesvaran, 2005;Taylor, 2018). However, empirical evidence on the link between the two is scarce.…”

Section: Predicting Whistleblowing Behavior: a Function Of Whistleblowing Intention And Perceived Behavioral Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Psychological Process of Bureaucratic Whistleblowing: Applying the Theory of Planned Behavior

Lee

Kang

Kim

2021

The American Review of Public Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Whistleblowing is a psychological process that involves the calculation of risks and benefits. While there exists a broad range of research on whistleblowing in the public sector, previous studies have not examined its entire process due to the limited focus on either whistleblowing intention or whistleblowing behavior. This study aims to fill this gap by applying the theory of planned behavior (TPB) to the whistleblowing context. Specifically, we examine how individual beliefs about the likely consequences of whistleblowing (attitude toward whistleblowing), others’ expectations about whistleblowing (subjective norm), and the capability of blowing the whistle (perceived behavioral control) influence public employees’ actual whistleblowing by way of their intention to report wrongdoings. A series of structural equation models are tested using data from the 2010 Merit Principles Survey. The findings show that the more the employees perceive that the consequences of whistleblowing are important, the more the key referents support whistleblowing, and the more the protections for whistleblowers are available, the more likely are their intentions to disclose wrongdoings and then actually engage in whistleblowing behavior. We conduct additional analyses for internal and external whistleblowers separately and find that there are both meaningful similarities and differences between the two groups. This study provides support for the validity of TPB as a theoretical framework for better understanding and explicating the psychological process of bureaucratic whistleblowing.

show abstract

Section: Predicting Whistleblowing Behavior: a Function Of Whistleblowing Intention And Perceived Behavioral Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Psychological Process of Bureaucratic Whistleblowing: Applying the Theory of Planned Behavior

Lee

Kang

Kim

2021

The American Review of Public Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The typical internal bottom‐up instruments are staff morale or noncorrupt organizational culture and whistle‐blowing, referring to employees who expose corrupt activities within their own organization (Taylor ). External bottom‐up measures work by increasing the awareness of citizens by making corruption visible and understandable.…”

Section: Anticorruption Classificationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Corruption as Resource Transfer: An Interdisciplinary Synthesis

Jancsics

2019

Public Administration Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite significant investment in anticorruption instruments in the past decades, confusion about their effectiveness remains. While a growing body of scholarship claims that anticorruption reforms have generally failed, other scholars have shown that particular anticorruption tools may actually work. A likely explanation for these puzzling outcomes is that public administration research holds a mistaken view of corruption, and improperly selected anticorruption strategies often target the wrong type of corruption. To overcome this problem, this article proposes a four‐cell typology of corruption, reflecting two critical dimensions along which most corrupt behaviors occur: the resource transfer and the primary beneficiary. Synthesizing recent research developments, this article introduces a new conceptualization of corruption that integrates perspectives from several disciplines. It also offers a series of propositions concerning how each corruption type could be fought. The article concludes with implications for research and practice.

show abstract

“…They may find it hard to get access to evidence (IBAC, ; ICAC, ). They may have low levels of trust in the capability of their organisation and senior management to handle the whistle‐blowing process and come up with an effective remedy (Taylor, ; Wortley et al., ). They may be fearful of reprisals, especially when acts of favouritism are often committed by more senior organisational members (Brown & Olsen, ; CCC, ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…At the same time, it is equally likely that such a culture can deter whistle‐blowing when the rules and procedures for reporting are perceived to be ambiguous and/or cumbersome. The fact that government bureaucracies are often characterised by red tape (Bozeman, ) would suggest a negative impact on whistle‐blowing, particularly when employees do not trust their organisation's capability to handle the whistle‐blowing process well (Taylor, ; Wortley et al., ). Hypothesis 2b : A hierarchy organisational culture is negatively related to internal whistle ‐ blowing . …”

Section: Determinants Of Internal Whistle‐blowingmentioning

confidence: 99%

What causes employees to whistle while they work? Factors affecting internal whistle‐blowing in the Australian Public Service

Taylor

2019

Aust J Public Adm

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What causes employees in the Australian Public Service (APS) to internally blow the whistle on corruption in the workplace? This research examines the impact of the nature of corruption, organisational culture, and employees’ work attitudes and actions on internal whistle‐blowing in the APS. The respondents were found to internally blow the whistle for most types of corruption: fraud, conflict of interest, unlawful disclosure of government information, and perverting the course of justice. Their whistle‐blowing behaviour was, however, unaffected by observations of theft of official assets. They were also unlikely to report observations of cronyism and nepotism. Active observers of workplace bullying (those who have blown the whistle after witnessing someone else being bullied) were three times more likely to also internally report corruption than inactive observers of bullying.

show abstract

Internal Whistle‐Blowing in the Public Service: A Matter of Trust

Cited by 35 publications

References 73 publications

A Psychological Process of Bureaucratic Whistleblowing: Applying the Theory of Planned Behavior

A Psychological Process of Bureaucratic Whistleblowing: Applying the Theory of Planned Behavior

Corruption as Resource Transfer: An Interdisciplinary Synthesis

What causes employees to whistle while they work? Factors affecting internal whistle‐blowing in the Australian Public Service

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About