Sounds of silence: Organisational trust and decisions to blow the whistle

Empirical Research Sounds of silence: Organisational trust and decisions to blow the whistle ELLI BINIKOS Department of Sociology University of Johannesburg South Africa Correspondence to: Elli Binikos e-mail: ABSTRACT Whistleblowing is a form of pro-social behaviour that occurs when an employee reports organisational wrongdoing to an authority able to implement corrective action. While a number of social factors may influence an employee’s decision to blow the whistle, very little cognisance is given to the role of organisational trust. Since whistleblowing situations often pose problems for whistleblowers, organisational trust becomes an important facilitator for the decision to blow the whistle. Drawing on a case study, this paper shows that when trust exists, employees are more likely to blow the whistle and to do so internally rather than externally. Keywords: whistleblowing, public disclosure, victimisation, hostility, decision-making, trust Courageous efforts of whistleblowers to save organisations from corrupt internal practices are often met with harsh retaliation (Camerer, 1996; Miceli & Near, 1992; Rothschild & Miethe, 1994; Uys, 2000b). Although the organisations, industries and contexts in which whistleblowing has occurred are dissimilar, the responses of victimisation, hostility and general lack of appreciation are consistently similar in South Africa, as in much of the world. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology The form retaliation takes and the consequences of such actions have been the focus of many research studies (Camerer, 1996; Miceli & Near, 1992; Rothschild & Miethe, 1994; Uys, 2000b). Within the literature, organisational retaliation is narrowly seen as a counterproductive means to avoid wrongdoing from being uncovered (Uys, 2000b, p. 265). The more severe the victimisation becomes, the greater the chances of further destructive outcomes for both the whistleblower and the organisation (Miceli & Near, 1992). Retaliation, however, has a further consequence that is seldom considered: The potential occurrence of future whistleblowing is seriously compromised when oppressive reprisals become evident. If organisations retaliate towards whistleblowers, not only is the whistleblower victimised and opportunities to address wrongdoing lost, but, importantly, trust in the relationship between the organisation and its employees is affected. Witnessing hostile and recriminatory treatment of an employee may have the effect of making other employees feel unsafe within that environment. Future actions of employees are impacted upon, and any behaviour that is considered risky may be avoided. The implication that this has for potential whistleblowing is that distrust may result in a disincentive to report future cases of wrongdoing. This paper conveys the results of a study that explores the role played by trust in the organisation1 (organisational trust) in the extent to which employees would disclose information about wrongdoing, or rather choose to keep quiet. It also seeks to explore whether trust would encourage whistleblowers to disclose organisational wrongdoing internally rather than externally. It is argued that internal whistleblowing as the first point of the reporting process brings about the greatest opportunity for corrective action and the least consequence for the whistleblower - and the organisation. Therefore, relationships of trust aimed at promoting internal whistleblowing should be pursued. However, the concept of trust has not been adequately developed in order to understand whistleblowing. The research indicates that this may constitute a gap in the literature and that trust does indeed correlate interestingly with some forms of whistleblowing. Problem statement Retaliation against whistleblowers typically occurs when organisations have something to hide, when allegations are serious, and/or when dire consequences exist for the organisation as a whole, or for many within the organisation. Because of these implications, whistleblowers are given derogatory labels such as “rat” or traitor (Camerer, 1996, p. 48; Miceli & Near, 1992, p.1; Uys, 2000b, p. 259), are considered to be dissenters (Miceli & Near, 1992, p. 16), are viewed as disloyal to the organisation and become recipients of harsh, negative treatment (Uys, 2000b, p.32). Contrary to the organisation’s expectation, retaliation affects the course of reporting, bringing about greater consequence for all involved. It inadvertently drives the whistleblower to seek alternative channels “as the reprisals confirm to the whistleblower just how morally bankrupt and lacking in integrity their superiors are” (Rothschild & Miethe, 1994, p. 266). Furthermore, retaliation “serves to strengthen their [whistleblowers’] convictions about the rightness of their cause and to escalate the conflict to a level and duration they may never have anticipated or intended” (Rothschild & Miethe, 1994, p. 269). As whistleblowers’ actions persist and escalate, reactions become more aggressive. Miceli and Near (1992, p. 80), citing Shepherd (1987), say, “[r] etaliation may recur in a series of events and it may escalate if the desired outcome of discouraging the whistleblower is not accomplished”. Repressive responses to reporting are therefore severely counterproductive for the parties involved. As Milliken, Morrison and Hewlin (2003, p. 1454) state: Employees are often reluctant to share information that could be interpreted as negative or threatening to those above them in the organisational hierarchy … This reluctance to speak up, and the silence or information withholding it gives rise to, has the potential to undermine organisational decision making and error-correction and to damage employee trust and morale. What Milliken et al. (2003) point to is that if organisations retaliate against whistleblowers, then not only is the opportunity This study makes use of the term ‘organisational trust’ to refer to trust in the organisation. 1 48 SA Tydskrif vir Bedryfsielkunde Vol. 34 No. 3 pp. 48 - 59 http://www.sajip.co.za Empirical Research Whistle blowing to address the wrongdoing lost but, in addition, trust in the relationship between the organisation and the whistleblower is broken and employee morale is harmed. The suggestion is made that trust plays a role in employees’ decisions to report wrongdoing. For, if trust is harmed, it may result in the whistleblower being discouraged to report irregularities by keeping quiet or perhaps pursuing external channels. On the other hand, Milliken et al. (2003) do not explore whether, if the whistleblower trusts the organisation, the option of remaining silent is reduced. Furthermore, since reporting to an authority within the organisation offers the greatest opportunity for constructive correctional action and ideally the least harm to the whistleblower, the question is raised: Would trust encourage internal whistleblowing? Could the effectiveness of whistleb (...truncated)