To Snitch or Not to Snitch? Applying the Concept of Neutralization Techniques to the Enforcement of Occupational Misconduct

Abstract

The controversy over self-regulation has been a central topic of inquiry in sociological research on occupational misconduct and crime. However, few studies have examined the process by which organizational members decide whether to respond to the misconduct of peers, and none have examined the use of neutralization techniques by rule enforcers in organizational settings. The research presented here is based on a case study of the U.S. Naval Academy. Three data sources are analyzed: Survey data collected from Academy midshipmen, semistructured interviews with graduates, and official statistics on occupational misconduct. Findings reveal that Academy members employ a number of neutralization techniques depending on whether they counsel peers, report peers, or choose not to respond to misconduct. Midshipmen who counsel are appealing to peer loyalty, while those who report wrongdoing find themselves neutralizing the effects of violating informal norms about peer loyalty. In contrast, those who ignore misconduct must neutralize the potential effects of betraying loyalty to the institution. In addition to calling for the expansion of neutralization techniques research to include rule enforcers, the implications of this study suggest that the concept be refined to examine the impact of conflicting loyalties on the types of neutralization techniques employed in systems of self-regulation.

From Inaction to External Whistleblowing: The Influence of the Ethical Culture of Organizations on Employee Responses to Observed Wrongdoing

“…(Miceli & Near, 2006), "Do I tell or do I not tell?" (Berry, 2004), or "Do I snitch or do I not snitch" (Pershing, 2003). When employees refrain from taking action, they become "inactive observers" (Miceli & Near, 1992) or "silent observers" (Rothschild & Miethe, 1999), which is undesirable when the norm is to prevent, detect and correct wrongdoing (Miceli et al, 2008).…”

Why People Don’t Take their Concerns about Fair Trade to the Supermarket: The Role of Neutralisation

“…Levi, 1981;Eliason and Dodder, 1999;Fox, 1999). It has also been the subject of more intuitive applications including the victimisation of battered wives (Ferraro and Johnson, 1983), genocide and the Holocaust (Alvarez, 1997), organisational rule enforcing (Fershing, 2003) and the management of the ''temporary deviant'' label of pageant mothers in the United States (Heltsley and Calhoun, 2003).…”

Whistle-Blowing Among Young Employees: A Life-Course Perspective

“…New employees shed their probationary status after they proved their solidarity with established employees by obeying and enforcing the rules (Barker, 1993). Moreover, although whistle-blowing is often considered a prosocial behavior (Brief and Motowidlo, 1986;Dozier and Miceli, 1985;Near, 1988, 1992), failure to blow the whistle on misbehavior is often construed as complicity in the deviance (Pershing, 2003;Treviño and Victor, 1992). Therefore, we expect to find that perceptions of informal prosocial control positively predict whistleblowing.…”

“…Criminologists have found that most varieties of deviant behavior peak in late adolescence, and slowly decline thereafter, although the causes of this decline are debated (Ezell and Cohen, 2005). Failure to report unethical behavior to organizational authorities is often officially or unofficially considered complicity in that behavior, howsoever common such complicity may be (Pershing, 2003;Treviño and Victor, 1992), so it is not unreasonable to suspect that nonreporting would be higher for the youngest employees along with other forms of deviance.…”