Kenny’s Whistleblowing and Stanger’s Whistleblowers

Abstract

In 2019 a number of books were published on whistleblowing. A niche topic in business ethics since the early 1980s, whistleblowing has received increasing attention since the start of the twenty-first century. I myself started researching whistleblowing in 1999. I remember having to explain to anyone I talked to what whistleblowing was; my fellow Phd students looked at me like they felt sorry for me, wasting my time and career on such a weird and freaky topic. But every year I've felt less marginal a scholar than the previous year. That was also true in 2019. There was the EU Directive on whistleblower protection. There was also Trump's threats to an anonymous Ukraine-gate whistleblower. And towards the end of 2019 there was Li Wenliang who tried the Chinese government to take his concerns about a new virus seriously. And in 2019 there was also … an exceptional number of scholarly books on the topic that got published. I will review two of them here. Whistleblowing scholarship falls apart in two main schools, which can be characterised by the definition they use. One school focuses on governance, structures and procedures. Their definition is the one by Near and Miceli (1985: 4): whistleblowing is 'the disclosure by organization members (former or current) of illegal, immoral, or illegitimate practices under the control of their employers, to persons or organizations that may be able to effect action'. The book reviewed here, which I see belonging to that school is Alison Stanger's Whistleblowers (Stanger, 2019). The other school's definition is the one by Alford (2001, 2007) who defines a whistleblower as someone who speaks out about unethical or illegal behaviour, and who suffers as a result. For this school, how whistleblowers live their experiences and struggles is the central focus. Kate Kenny's Whistleblowing (Kenny, 2019) situates itself in this suffering-school. Her book is based on a decade of interviewing whistleblowers from the financial sector and engaging with civil society organizations. Kenny documents how lives of whistleblowers are determined by structures of powerorganizational and beyondand she theorizes how 'affective recognition' (Kenny's term) constitutes the whistleblower identity, a constitution that takes part in structures of power. Kenny draws on Judith Butler's account of subjectivity, and finds the term 'affective recognition'

Problems with the Concept of Whistleblowing in the Intercultural Perspective and the EU Directive 2019/1937

“…Note that research in Ukraine shows that the lack of anonymity in whistleblowing can contribute to strengthening the desire to be a whistleblower in the fight against corruption (Los et al, 2022;Khalymon & Prytula, 2019). Being anonymous does not mean that threats against the whistleblower, even from dignitaries, will be abandoned (Vandekerckhove, 2021).…”

Whistleblowing as a Career Crisis: Recovering from Retaliatory Job Loss through a Process of Bifurcation

“…Job loss is a reality for most whistleblowers surveyed (69% in Rothschild and Miethe's (1999) sample and 41% in that of Vandekerckhove et al (2013)). The risk is all the greater if superiors are involved in the offences revealed and if the employee has to blow the whistle several times for the same issue (Vandekerckhove et al, 2013). For people who have lost their jobs, whistleblowing could then be considered as a 'turning point', impacting both the individual's professional career (Uys and Smit, 2016) and also his or her life course (Kenny et al, 2018), which relates to the concept of biographical crisis.…”

“…Reprisals are defined as ‘an undesirable action taken against a whistleblower – in direct response to the whistleblowing – who reported the wrongdoing internally or externally’ (Regh et al, 2008: 222). Reprisals can be formal (warnings, adverse evaluations, selective downsizing) or informal (rumours, defamation, harassment) (Kenny et al, 2018; Vandekerckhove et al, 2013) and can be exercised by colleagues, managers or employers. While it is difficult to estimate the number of employees who have actually been victimized, the majority of whistleblowers suffer psychologically, socially and/or professionally (Carollo et al, 2019; Erickson et al, 2019).…”

“…Concerning the whistleblower’s career trajectory, Perry (1998: 240, 235) considered that it would undergo a ‘downward spiral’ and described whistleblowing as an ‘occupational suicide’. Job loss is a reality for most whistleblowers surveyed (69% in Rothschild and Miethe’s (1999) sample and 41% in that of Vandekerckhove et al (2013)). The risk is all the greater if superiors are involved in the offences revealed and if the employee has to blow the whistle several times for the same issue (Vandekerckhove et al, 2013).…”