Determinants of Whistleblowing Intention in Organization

Journal of Environmental Treatment Techniques

2021, Volume 9, Issue 1, Pages: 54-58

J. Environ. Treat. Tech.

ISSN: 2309-1185

Journal web link: http://www.jett.dormaj.com

https://doi.org/10.47277/JETT/9(1)85

Determinants of Whistleblowing Intention in

Organization

Azizan Mohamed-Isa *, Ahmed Razman Abdul Latiff , Mohammad Noor Hisham Osman ,

Arman Hj Ahmad⁴

Department of Management & Entrepreneurship, Universiti Kuala Lumpur Business School

Putra Business School, Serdang, Malaysia

Faculty of Economics and Management, Universiti Putra Malaysia

Department of Marketing & International Business, Universiti Kuala Lumpur Business School

Received: 25/07/2020

Accepted: 03/10/2020

Published: 10/10/2020

Abstract

Whistleblowers have been applauded for their heroic acts for disclosing unethical practices in organization worldwide such as Enron,

Worldcom and Cambridge Analytica to name a few. Whistleblowing has been regarded as one of the internal control mechanisms to prevent

organizational wrongdoings. Despite establishment and enhancement of law, policies and regulations enacted to whistleblowing, potential

whistleblowers remain silent and reluctant to blow the whistle. It is therefore important to examine the factors that encourage individual to

come forward to disclose the wrongdoing. This conceptual article reviews prior literature that examined determinants of whistleblowing

intentions. Building from the theory and following the prior literature, the article expanded the review by looking into the interaction of

determinants such as ethical leadership, emotional intelligence and whistleblowing intention. Hence, it is expected that study of such

interaction would create new avenues for future research.

Keywords: Whistleblowing intention, ethical leadership, emotional intelligence, organizational misconduct

(

Protection of Public Interest Whistleblowers 2011) and Republic

Introduction

of South Africa (Protected Disclosures Act, 2000, Companies

Act, 2008) (4). Meanwhile in England, English Parliament

enacted the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 (PIDA 1998) as

a provision for whistleblowing in the country. In Malaysia, the

regulations regarding reporting of wrongdoing (misconduct) can

be found in Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009,

Capital Market and Service Act 2007, Company Act (as

Amended) 2007 (1, 5).

Nonetheless, despite the establishment of the whistleblowing

regulatory framework and policies across countries,

whistleblowing is not a common business practice (6). Employees

whom witness misconduct in organization prefer not to come

forward to disclose the wrongdoing and remain silent due to risky

and ambiguity elements associated with the whistleblowing

behaviour. Previous studies on whistleblowing has shown that

among the factors why employees reluctant to report the

misconduct is fear of retaliations, believe such effort will be futile,

lead to negative appraisals, job loss, career jeopardy, and to the

extent that an ongoing persecution (6-8).

Whistleblowing is a disclosure of unethical practices of

individuals or a group of individuals via designated avenues in the

organization (1). Whistleblowing is regarded as valuable tool for

curbing and detecting misconduct in organizations. Due to its

importance role, major world organizations such as Organization

for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and

European Commission are calling for implementation of

whistleblowing policy and procedure. The downfall of US based

companies such as Enron and Worldcom due to accounting

scandals came to light as a result of whistleblowing (2). Based on

survey assessed by the Association of Fraud Examiners has found

that 40% of occupational fraud detected by whistleblowers (3).

A whistleblower who reports the wrongdoing believed that

any misconduct happened in the organizations should be

conveyed to authorities or management for corrective measures.

Many countries have prepared laws to facilitate and encourage

more whistleblowers to step forward in reporting unethical

practices occured in their organizations. Among countries which

have been recognised to have

a very comprehensive

Given the aspect of whistleblowing as an important

mechanism in exposing wrongdoing and misconduct in

organization, it is vital for management to understand the factors

that determine the likelihood of employees to whistleblow.

Putting systems and regulations in place may not guarantee the

whistleblowing legislations coverage in public and private sector

are USA (Corporate and Auditing Accountability, Responsibility

and Transparency Act 2002, commonly known as Sarbanes-

Oxley Act), Japan (Whistleblower Protection Act 2004), Korea

Corresponding author: Azizan Mohamed-Isa, Department of Management & Entrepreneurship, Universiti Kuala Lumpur Business School.

E-mail: azizan@unikl.edu.my

Journal of Environmental Treatment Techniques

2021, Volume 9, Issue 1, Pages: 54-58

employees to report misconduct, due to risk and uncertainties

associated with the respective disclosure. For whistleblowing to

happen effectively, key influential factors that may increase the

likelihood of employees to report wrongdoing may derived from

organizational and individual perspectives. Previous study posits

that whistleblowing policy will only be effective if the leaders

provide an environment, which encourages and reinforces the

ethical behaviour (9).

the attention of external parties, such as law enforcement

agencies, political representatives, external advocacy groups,

non-governmental organizations, mass media or journalists (16-

18). Prior studies have shown that both internal and external

channels have been employed to report wrongdoings. According

to Miceli and Near (15, 19), almost all whistlebowers made an

effort to disclose misconduct by way of internal channels prior to

using external channels.

This article aims to explore the impact of ethical leaders in the

employees’ organizational environment to increase the likelihood

of whistleblowing (whistleblowing intention). In addition,

whistleblowing may also depends on the individual aspect of

employees. It is not an easy decision for employees to resort with

whistleblowing (10). There are many states of emotion involve

that lingers in the mind of employees when seeing misconduct

2.2 Whistleblowing intention

It is rather difficult to measure the actual whistleblowing by

first hand observation due to infeasibility and complexity in

performing investigations of misconducts in the work setting. It

is preferable to study actual cases of whistleblowing actions and

behaviours, nonetheless scholars examining whistleblowing are

often limited to examining reporting intention due to its

occasional characteristics (7, 20-22). Whistleblowing is a

sensitive topic, thus it poses challenge in gaining entry into

organizations and participants may fear their anonymity might be

compromised (23). As such, previous studies used

whistleblowing intention as a proxy for actual whistleblowing

behaviour (24, 25). Therefore, this article considers

whistleblowing intention as the main subject of the study and

addresses both internal and external channels of reporting.

happen.

The feeling such as anger, disbelief, upset in

acknowledging the incidences. However, before the employee

decide to disclose the misconduct, the feeling of fear, distress and

anxious will exist knowing the negative consequences will take

place soon after reporting. Employees with high level of

emotional intelligence tend to exhibit more adaptive defence

mechanism such as denial (11) and may have the ability to

regulate own emotion effectively when encounter the risk,

overcome fears, and thus will increase the likelihood of

whistleblowing.

This article is structured in three parts. First, the article

deliberates the literature based on two factors of whistleblowing

that are organizational and individual. Second, from the

respective findings, a conceptual framework of whistleblowing

intentions is proposed. The final part of the article culminates the

significance of whistleblowing intentions in the organizations.

2.3 Ethical leadership and whistleblowing intention

Ethical leadership plays such a central role in encouraging

employees to report organizational wrongdoings. Corporate

misconduct may be detected through whistleblowing and

organizations and leaders may be able to encourage the

whistleblowing action (26). Previous research illustrates drawing

from social learning theory and social learning perspective of

leadership, posit that leaders may affect ethical attitudes and

behaviour by way of role modelling (27). Ethical leaders as moral

managers will enhance the employees’ ethical consciousness and

encourage their whistleblowing intention in several ways.

First, leader is observed as an ethical role model by the

employees. They are regarded as credible, trustworthy,

responsible and speak up against inappropriate misconduct occur

in organization. Employees observe those behaviours and

influence them thus modelling the normatively appropriate

behaviour. Employees are expected to report any observed

unethical conduct and ethical leaders support this reporting

behaviour.

Literature review

The topic of whistleblowing has gained substantial interest

from numerous researchers nearly forty years ago. Many

researches have since been conducted in an attempt to provide

framework for whistleblowing intention.

The proposed

framework illustrated the determinants which either influence

and/or facilitate whistleblowing intention. Understanding these

contributing factors would be able to provide insightful guidelines

that may increase the likelihood for employees to whistleblow.

This article explore the impact of ethical leaders and the personal

attributes of employees on whistleblowing intention.

Second, given the fact that the negative consequences

associated with whistleblowing such as retaliation, employees

probably are ready to accept those risk with the presence of ethical

leaders. Ethical leaders may protect them against risk of

retaliation and any risk associated with whistleblowing.

Whistleblowers are regarded as helpful to organization and they

should be given appreciation, support and rewards.

Third ethical leaders are seen to establish standards, creating

the appropriate norms and practices and hold direct reports

accountable (28). They set expectation and support the reporting

behaviour. Thus, it is proposed that:

.1 Whistleblowing and whistleblowing intention

Chiu (12), states that whistleblowing can be defined as “the

voluntary release of information, as a moral protest by a member

of an organization about illegal or immoral conduct in the

organization that is opposed to the public interest”. MacNab and

Worthley (13) state that “whistleblowing as a communication

process in which the process itself focuses on voluntary reporting

of potential or improper acts by an employee or ex-employee

within an organisation to authorities”. There are two types of

whistleblowing; internal and external. The act of disclosing

unethical conduct happened in organizations or its members can

be done internally or externally (14).

Internal whistleblowing happens when a whistleblower

reports the act of misconduct to someone of authority within an

organization or through a confidential hotline (13, 15). External

whistleblowing arises when a whistleblower discloses the illegal

practices in the organization and decides to bring the matters to

Proposition 1: Ethical Leadership positively influences

whistleblowing intention

.4 Emotional intelligence and business ethics setting

Previous research has substantially investigated the role of

Journal of Environmental Treatment Techniques

2021, Volume 9, Issue 1, Pages: 54-58

emotion in business ethics setting (29-33). Emotional

intelligence, represent an importance personal attributes related to

ethical decision making in whistleblowing. Only very recently,

researchers started to investigate the effects of emotional

intelligence on business ethics.

Emotional intelligence (EI) is defined as the skills to observe

one’s own and others feelings, to distinguish among them and to

utilize the information as a guidance on one’s thinking and action

whistleblowing intention. This study applies quantitative

approach with the adoption of Structural Equation Modelling

using Smart PLS as the quantitative analytical tool. Survey

method is adopted and this study utilizes self-administered

questionnaires that match appropriately to measure the constructs.

The research entailed using systematic random sampling

techniques by collecting data obtained from Malaysian Anti-

Corruption Commission (MACC) website.

(

34, p.189). The definition was later honed and categorized based

upon four dimension: identifying, facilitating, understanding, and

regulating emotions.

3.1 Proposed conceptual framework

The concept of emotional intelligence has been used widely

in the management research due to its practicality aspect in work

environment such as performance, job satisfaction, absenteeism,

organizational commitment, intentions, and leadership issues

(

35). Emotional intelligence is an ability acquired by people

whereby the set of of skills that can be taught, learned, and/or

acquired. The intelligence skills may be developed through role

models from organization and appropriate training (36).

Figure 1. Conceptual framework for determinants of whistleblowing

intention in organizations

.5 Moderating role of emotional intelligence

Emotional intelligence (EI) has been proposed to act as

moderator for the relationships between ethical leadership and

whistleblowing intention in this study. Much of the current

literature pays particular attention to the direct influences of

antecedents on whistleblowing and neglecting the possible

moderating factors on these influences (37).

EI is anticipated to moderate the relationship between ethical

leadership and whistleblowing intention. Individual with EI may

have a more positive expectation when disclose unethical

practices and shows less concern about probable risks, and

potentially involved in risk-taking events (38). Hence, individual

with high level of EI hve the inclination that there is minimal risk

involved in whistleblowing, and avoid harsh retaliation.

High emotional intelligence individuals are more conscious

of their own and others’ feelings (39). They have the ability to

understand emotional information, pay attention to the

relationships among them, and accurately managing feelings (40).

Emotionally intelligent employees are able to address their

supervisors unstated needs (41). They can easily strengthen the

emotional connections with their supervisors thus intensify the

ethical leadership impact (42). An employee would anticipate a

lot of emotional responses before deciding to become potential

whistleblower. Individuals whom possess high level of emotional

intelligence are optimistic and remain focused on the outcome

positive rather than negative ones.

3.2 Instruments and measurement

The items of the variables in the questionnaire were adapted

from previous studies related with whistleblowing intention,

ethical leadership, and emotional intelligence to go well with the

research objectives of the study. Respondents will be requested

to respond to the statement of the question using a six-point Likert

scale ranging from 1 ‘‘strongly disagree’’ to 6 ‘‘strongly agree’’

to record the degree of their assessment and perception on each

item.

The scale of “Whistleblowing Intention” will be adapted from

Park and Blenkinsopp’s (43) 8-item scale. The first part measured

whistleblowing intention and Whistleblowing intention was

measured through a total of 8 items, asking the question “If you

found wrongdoing in your workplace, how hard would you try to

do the following?” A 6-point Likert-type scale was employed to

rate statements that ranged from one (1) =Not at all to six (6) =

Very hard.

“Ethical Leadership” will be assessed utilizing scale

developed by Brown et al. (27). Ten items of measurement

reflecting individual perceptions of their leader’s ethical conduct.

Examples of items include ‘(The leader in my organisation)

disciplines employees who violate ethical standards’ and ‘(The

leader in my organisation) sets an example of how to do things

the right way in terms of ethics’. The reported internal consistency

for this 10-item scale is 0.92 (27). Participants will respond along

a 6-point Likert-type scale with anchors from 1 (strongly

disagree) to 6 (strongly agree).

“Emotional Intelligence” measurement scale consist of 16

items instruments of four-dimensional classification of overall

emotional intelligence proposed by Davies et al. (44). The

construct of this measurement will be adopted from Law et al.

(45) labeled as the Wong and Law EI Scale (WLEIS). The

respondents is requested to indicate their level of agreement with

each of the items on a 6-point agree–disagree scale. The higher

score reflects higher level of emotional intelligence.

This article proposed that the relationship between ethical

leadership and whistleblowing intention will be moderated by

emotional intelligence (EI), such that the relationship will be

stronger for people with high EI than people with low EI.

Proposition 2: The relationship between ethical leadership and

whistleblowing intention is moderated by emotional intelligence

in a way that ethical leadership positively impacts whistleblowing

intention when the employees exhibit high degree of emotional

intelligence.

Methodology

This study employs descriptive approach because the purpose

of this study is to describe the nature of relationships that exist

among ethical leadership, emotional intelligence and

Journal of Environmental Treatment Techniques

2021, Volume 9, Issue 1, Pages: 54-58

Greene AD, Latting JK. Whistle-blowing as a form of advocacy:

Guidelines for the practitioner and organization. Soc Work.

Conclusion

The function of whistleblowing is crucial in exposing

004;49(2):219-230.

wrongdoing due to the nature of corruption that it is not easily

detect through formal channels especially in developing

countries. Employees whom witness misconduct in organization

prefer not to come forward to disclose the wrongdoing and remain

silent due to risky and ambiguity elements associated with the

whistleblowing behaviour. In this instances, management should

address the issue immediately by encouraging the employees to

disclose any wrongdoing observed. Two factors are proposed as

the key determinants of whistleblowing intention. These two

factors are ethical leaders and emotional intelligence that might

play an important roles in influencing employees’ whistleblowing

intention.

Lewis D. Whistleblowing in a changing legal climate: Is it time to

revisit our approach to trust and loyalty at the workplace? Bus Ethics-

European Rev. 2011;20(1):71-87.

10. Cho YJ, Song HJ. Determinants of whistleblowing within

government agencies. Public Pers Manage. 2015;44(4):450-472.

1. Mayer JD, Salovey P, Caruso DR. Emotional intelligence: Theory,

findings, and implications". Psychol Inq. 2004;15(3):197-215.

2. Chiu RK. Ethical judgment and whistleblowing intention: Examining

the moderating role of locus of control. J Bus Ethics. 2003;43(1-

):65-74.

3. MacNab BR, Worthley R. Self-efficacy as an intrapersonal predictor

for internal whistleblowing: A US and Canada examination. J Bus

Ethics. 2008;79(4):407-421.

4. Miceli MP, Near JP. Characteristics of organizational climate and

perceived wrongdoing associated with whistle‐blowing decisions.

Pers Psychol. 1985;38(3):525-544.

5. Miceli MP, Near JP. What makes whistle-blowers effective? Three

field studies. Hum Relat. 2002;55(4):455-479.

6. Hollings J. Let the story go: The role of emotion in the decision-

making process of the reluctant, vulnerable witness or whistle-

blower. J Bus Ethics. 2013;114(3):501-512.

Acknowledgment

This study was funded through the Short Term Research

Grant provided by the Centre of Research and Innovation,

Universiti Kuala Lumpur.

Ethical issue

Authors are aware of, and comply with best practice in

publication ethics specifically with regard to authorship

7. Kaptein M. From inaction to external whistle blowing: the influence

of the ethical culture of organizations on employee responses to

observed wrongdoing. J Bus Ethics. 2011;98(3):513–530.

(

avoidance of guest authorship), dual submission, and

manipulation of figures, competing interests and compliance with

policies on research ethics. Authors adhere to publication

requirements that submitted work is original and has not been

published elsewhere in any language.

18. Ali KK, Ramly Z, Chai TC. Business ethics. 2nd ed. Oxford; 2018.

19. Miceli MP, Near JP. Blowing the whistle: The organizational and

legal implications for companies and employees. Lexington Books;

992.

0. Victor B, Trevino LK, Shapiro DL. Peer reporting of unethical

behavior: The influence of justice evaluations and social context

factors. J Bus Ethics. 1993;12(4):253-263.

Competing interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest that

would prejudice the impartiality of this scientific work.

21. Patel C. Some cross-cultural evidence on whistle-blowing as an

internal control mechanism. J Int Account Res. 2003;2(1):69-96.

2. Trongmateerut P, Sweeney JT. The influence of subjective norms on

whistle-blowing: cross-cultural investigation. J Bus Ethics.

2013;112(3):437-451.

Authors’ contribution

All authors contributed equally to this work

23. Bjørkelo B, Bye HH. On the appropriateness of research design:

Intended and actual whistleblowing. In International Handbook on

Whistleblowing Research. Edward Elgar Publishing; 2014.

24. Kaplan SE, Schultz JJ. Intentions to report questionable acts: An

examination of the influence of anonymous reporting channel,

internal audit quality, and setting. J Bus Ethics. 2007;71(2):109-124.

25. Latan H, Ringle CM, Jabbour CJC. Whistleblowing intentions among

public accountants in Indonesia: Testing for the moderation effects. J

Bus Ethics. 2018;152(2):573-588.

26. Dozier JB, Miceli MP. Potential predictors of whistle blowing: A

proposal behavior perspective. Acad Manage Rev. 1985;10:823-836.

27. Brown ME, Treviño LK, Harrison DA. Ethical leadership: A social

learning perspective for construct development and testing. Organ

Behav Hum Dec. 2005;97(2):117-134.

References

Rachagan S, Kuppusamy K. Encouraging whistle blowing to improve

corporate governance?

013;115(2):367-382.

A Malaysian initiative. J Bus Ethics.

Bedi A, Alpaslan CM, Green S. A meta-analytic review of ethical

leadership outcomes and moderators. J Bus Ethics. 2015;139(3):517–

36.

Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE). Report to the

Nation’s 2018 global study on occupational fraud and abuse

[Internet]. 2018. Available from: https://www.acfe.com/report-to-

the-nations/2018/default.aspx

Wolfe S, Worth M, Dreyfus S, Brown AJ. Whistleblower protection

laws in G20 countries: Priorities [Internet]. 2014. Available from:

https://blueprintforfreespeech.net/wpcontent/uploads/2014/09/Whist

leblower-Protection-Laws-in-G20-Countries-Priorities-for-

Action.pdf

Meng TP, Fook OS. Comparative analysis of whistleblower

protection legislations in England, USA and Malaysia. Afr J Bus

Manage. 2011;5(27):11246-11255.

Zhang J, Chiu R, Wei LQ. On whistleblowing judgment and

intention: The roles of positive mood and organizational ethical

culture. J Manage Psychol. 2009;24(7):627-649.

Mesmer-Magnus JR, Viswesvaran C. Whistleblowing in

organizations: An examination of correlates of whistleblowing

intentions, actions, and retaliation. J Bus Ethics. 2005;62(3):277-297.

28. Mayer DM, Nurmohamed S, Treviño LK, Shapiro DL, Schminke M.

Encouraging employees to report unethical conduct internally: It

takes a village. Organ Behav Hum Dec. 2013;21(1):89-103.

29. Bonifield C, Cole C. Affective responses to service failure: Anger,

regret, and retaliatory versus conciliatory responses. Market Lett.

2007;18(1-2):85-99.

30. Chebat JC, Slusarczyk W. How emotions mediate the effects of

perceived justice on loyalty in service recovery situations: An

empirical study. J Bus Res. 2005;58(5):664-673.

31. DeWitt T, Nguyen DT, Marshall R. Exploring customer loyalty

following service recovery: The mediating effects of trust and

emotions. J Serv Res. 2008;10(3):269-281.

32. Schoefer K, Diamantopoulos A. The role of emotions in translating

perceptions of (in) justice into post complaint behavioural responses.

J Serv Res. 2008;11(1):91-103.

Journal of Environmental Treatment Techniques

2021, Volume 9, Issue 1, Pages: 54-58

3. Baron S, Harris K, Elliott D, Schoefer K, Ennew C. The impact of

perceived justice on consumers' emotional responses to service

complaint experiences. J Serv Mark. 2005;19(5):261-270.

4. Salovey P, Mayer JD. Emotional intelligence. Imagin Cogn Pers.

990;9(3):185-211.

5. Rozell EJ, Pettijohn CE, Parker RS. Customer‐oriented selling:

Exploring the roles of emotional intelligence and organizational

commitment. Psychol Market. 2004;21(6):405-424.

6. Akers MD, Porter GL. Your EQ skills: Got what it takes? J

Accountancy. 2003;195(3):65-69.

7. Miceli M, Near J, Dworkin T. Whistle-blowing in

organizations. Lea’s Organization and Management Series,

Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group; 2008.

8. Bless H, Clore GL, Schwarz N, Golisano V, Rabe C, Wölk M. Mood

and the use of scripts: Does happy mood really lead to mindlessness?

J Pers Soc Psychol. 1996;71:665–679.

9. Farh CI, Seo MG, Tesluk PE. Emotional intelligence, teamwork

effectiveness, and job performance: The moderating role of job

context. J Appl Psychol. 2012;97(4):890-900.

0. Newman DA, Joseph DL, MacCann C. Emotional intelligence and

job performance: The importance of emotion regulation and

emotional labor context. Ind Organ Psychol. 2010;3(2):159-164.

1. Wolff SB, Pescosolido AT, Druskat VU. Emotional intelligence as

the basis of leadership emergence in self-managing teams.

Leadership Quart. 2002;13(5):505-522.

2. Qian J, Wang B, Han Z, Song B. Ethical leadership, leader-member

exchange and feedback seeking: A double-moderated mediation

model of emotional intelligence and work-unit structure. Front

Psychol. 2017;8:1174.

3. Park H, Blenkinsopp J. Whistleblowing as planned behaviour: A

survey of South Korean police officers. J Bus Ethics.

009;85(4):545-556.

4. Davies M, Stankov L, Roberts RD. Emotional intelligence: In search

of an elusive construct. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1998;75(4):989-1015.

5. Law KS, Wong CS, Song LJ. The construct and criterion validity of

emotional intelligence and its potential utility for management

studies. J Appl Psychol. 2004;89(3):483-496.