To Blow or Not to Blow the Whistle: The Role of Rationalization in the Perceived Seriousness of Threats and Wrongdoing
Whistleblowers who need to decide whether or not they should report wrongdoing usually experience several anxieties and pressures before making a final decision. As whistleblowers continue to attract the attention of a wide range of stakeholders, more research is necessary to understand the effects of the perceived seriousness of threats (PST) and perceived seriousness of wrongdoing (PSW), as well as the effect of the rationalization process on the intention to blow the whistle. We make the original proposal that the rationalization process can affect how PST and PSW trigger whistleblowing intentions. We tested our model using employees of tax offices operating in an emerging economy. We suggest several research findings, which can be summarized as follows: (i) PST reduces individuals’ intention to blow the whistle. That is, the greater the threat perceived by whistleblowers, the higher the likelihood they will choose to remain silent; (ii) we find evidence of a positive relationship between PSW and whistleblowing intention, whereby PSW increases individuals’ intention to blow the whistle. That is, the more serious the wrongdoing perceived by potential whistleblowers, the more likely they are to choose to blow the whistle; and (iii) we find evidence of the important role of rationalization in moderating the relationships between PST, PSW, and whistleblowing intention. The implications of these findings for business ethics scholars, managers, and end-users interested in whistleblowing are also presented.
KeywordsBusiness ethics Perceived seriousness of threats Perceived seriousness of wrongdoing Rationalization Whistleblowing intentions
We thank Steven Dellaportas (section editor), three exceptional reviewers for their helpful comments and suggestions on prior versions of this manuscript.
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- ACFE. (2018). Report to the nations: 2018 global study on occupational fraud and abuse. Association of Certified Fraud Examiners.Google Scholar
- Apaza, C. R., & Chang, Y. (Eds.). (2017). Whistleblowing in the world: Government policy, mass media and the law. Palgrave: Macmillan.Google Scholar
- Bandalos, D. L. (2018). Measurement theory and applications for the social sciences. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- DeVellis, R. F. (2017). Scale development: Theory and applications (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
- Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2014). Internet, phone, mail, and mixed mode surveys: The tailored design method (4th ed.). Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Fowler, F. J., Jr. (2013). Survey research methods (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
- Groves, R. M., Fowler, F. J., Jr., Couper, M. P., Lepkowski, J. M., Singer, E., & Tourangeau, R. (2009). Survey methodology (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C., & Gudergan, S. P. (2018). Advanced issues in partial least squares structural equation modeling (1st ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
- Hayes, A. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Kock, N. (2017). Common methods bias: A full collinearity assessment method for PLS-SEM. In H. Latan & R. Noonan (Eds.), Partial least squares path modeling: Basic concepts, methodological issues and applications. Springer International: Cham.Google Scholar
- Latan, H., & Noonan, R. (Eds.). (2017). Partial least squares path modeling: Basic concepts, methodological issues and applications. Cham: Springer International.Google Scholar
- Martin, B. (2014). Research that whistleblowers want – and what they need. In A. J. Brown, D. Lewis, R. Moberly, & W. Vandekerckhove (Eds.), International handbook on whistleblowing research (pp. 497–521). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
- Miceli, M. P., Near, J. P., & Dworkin, T. M. (2008). Whistle-blowing in organizations. New York: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
- Near, J. P., & Miceli, M. P. (1995). Effective whistle-blowing. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 679–708.Google Scholar
- Near, J. P., & Miceli, M. P. (2011). Integrating models of whistle-blowing and wrongdoing: A proposal for a new research agenda. In J. Jetten & M. J. Hornsey (Eds.), Rebels in groups: Dissent, deviance, difference and defiance (pp. 302–323). Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
- Noonan, R., & Wold, H. (1986). Partial least squares path analysis. In T. Husen & T. N. Postlethwaite (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of education (Vol. 7, pp. 3769–3775). Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
- Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
- Vandekerckhove, W. (2006). Whistleblowing and organizational social responsibility: A global assessment. Burlington: Ashgate Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
- Wold, H. (1982). Soft modeling: The basic design and some extensions. In K. G. Joreskog & H. Wold (Eds.), Systems under indirect observation: Causality, structure, prediction (Vol. 2, pp. 1–54). Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar