Author
Abstract
Whistleblowing is an effective means to uncover fraud and other misconduct in organizations. However, it is puzzling why some employees come forward despite numerous disadvantages, severe retaliation, and negative social perceptions of the whistleblower within and outside the firm. Understanding whistleblowing as an act of deviance can enrich explanations for whistleblowing in such dilemmas. Drawing on psychology literature, we look at the moderating effect of the Dark Triad (Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy), as well as moral reasoning on the factors behind the whistleblowing process. We surveyed 375 economics and business majors and found that both forms of deviance influence the decision process, making internal whistleblowing more likely. Dark Triad personalities are less influenced by adverse subjective norms and their attitude toward the consequences of whistleblowing. The negative impact of perceived retaliation on whistleblowing intention is lessened by high moral reasoning. Both types of deviations from the norm may foster whistleblowing, making it ex-post challenging to distinguish different types of whistleblowers. Importantly, we argue that specific policies, such as protection, may only serve one kind of whistleblower, disregarding the important influence of subjective norms, which may foster a more desirable type of whistleblower. Our research shows that deviant personality characteristics can counteract insufficient protection or negative cultural views on whistleblowing. These findings have direct practical implications for whistleblowing systems, corporate governance policies, and policymakers. Moreover, we contribute to an emerging stream of research that moves away from a purely pro-social view and toward a more comprehensive understanding of whistleblowing by introducing a holistic concept of whistleblowing as deviance.
Suggested Citation
Sebastian Oelrich & Anne Chwolka, 2024.
"When deviants talk: the role of Dark Triad traits and moral reasoning in whistleblowing,"
Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 333-369, September.
Handle:
RePEc:spr:jmgtco:v:35:y:2024:i:3:d:10.1007_s00187-024-00379-0
DOI: 10.1007/s00187-024-00379-0
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:jmgtco:v:35:y:2024:i:3:d:10.1007_s00187-024-00379-0. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.