IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/reggov/v2y2008i2p165-192.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Decentralized enforcement in organizations: An experimental approach

Author

Listed:
  • Yuval Feldman
  • Orly Lobel

Abstract

Social enforcement, the decentralized action by organizational actors of monitoring, identifying, and reporting legal violations, is widely recognized as a key factor in ensuring good governance. This article reports on an experimental survey conducted in the US and Israel examining the behavior of individuals when confronting workplace unlawful conduct. The study provides novel insights into the relationships between state based, organization based, and employee based enforcement. It finds that the likelihood and the manner of reporting will vary depending on the type of illegality and are strongly correlated to perceptions of legitimacy, job security, and voice within the workplace. Comparing illegalities, employees prefer to report clear violations by rank and file employees rather than violations by managers. At the same time, external reporting to government or media entities is most likely when violations involve the organization as a whole or implicate top management. The study also finds cultural and gender differences in reporting patterns. Finally, the study provides support for the understanding that social norms are more predictive of social enforcement than expected organizational costs.

Suggested Citation

  • Yuval Feldman & Orly Lobel, 2008. "Decentralized enforcement in organizations: An experimental approach," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(2), pages 165-192, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:reggov:v:2:y:2008:i:2:p:165-192
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1748-5991.2008.00038.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-5991.2008.00038.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1748-5991.2008.00038.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ernst Fehr & Urs Fischbacher, "undated". "Third Party Punishment and Social Norms," IEW - Working Papers 106, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    2. Schmidt, Matthias, 2005. ""Whistle Blowing" Regulation and Accounting Standards Enforcement in Germany and Europe--An Economic Perspective," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 143-168, June.
    3. Frances J. Milliken & Elizabeth W. Morrison & Patricia F. Hewlin, 2003. "An Exploratory Study of Employee Silence: Issues that Employees Don’t Communicate Upward and Why," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(6), pages 1453-1476, September.
    4. Carpenter, Jeffrey P., 2007. "The demand for punishment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 62(4), pages 522-542, April.
    5. Jeffrey Carpenter & Peter Matthews & Okomboli Ong’ong’a, 2004. "Why Punish? Social reciprocity and the enforcement of prosocial norms," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 407-429, October.
    6. repec:bla:econom:v:70:y:2003:i:277:p:19-29 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Axel Ockenfels & Gary E. Bolton, 2000. "ERC: A Theory of Equity, Reciprocity, and Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(1), pages 166-193, March.
    8. Michael T. Rehg & Marcia P. Miceli & Janet P. Near & James R. Van Scotter, 2008. "Antecedents and Outcomes of Retaliation Against Whistleblowers: Gender Differences and Power Relationships," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(2), pages 221-240, April.
    9. Ernst Fehr & Simon Gächter, 2002. "Altruistic punishment in humans," Nature, Nature, vol. 415(6868), pages 137-140, January.
    10. Janet P. Near & Terry Morehead Dworkin & Marcia P. Miceli, 1993. "Explaining the Whistle-Blowing Process: Suggestions from Power Theory and Justice Theory," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 4(3), pages 393-411, August.
    11. Alon Harel & Alon Klement, 2007. "The Economics of Stigma: Why More Detection of Crime May Result in Less Stigmatization," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 36(2), pages 355-377, June.
    12. Parker,Christine, 2002. "The Open Corporation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521818902, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Netta Barak‐Corren, 2022. "Regulating for integration by behavioral design: An evidence‐based approach for culturally responsive regulation," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), pages 1079-1100, October.
    2. Kristina Murphy & Tom R. Tyler & Amy Curtis, 2009. "Nurturing regulatory compliance: Is procedural justice effective when people question the legitimacy of the law?," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(1), pages 1-26, March.
    3. Netta Barak‐Corren & Yael Kariv‐Teitelbaum, 2021. "Behavioral responsive regulation: Bringing together responsive regulation and behavioral public policy," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(S1), pages 163-182, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fluet, Claude & Galbiati, Rpbertp, 2016. "Lois et normes : les enseignements de l'économie comportementale," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 92(1-2), pages 191-215, Mars-Juin.
    2. Christine Clavien & Colby J Tanner & Fabrice Clément & Michel Chapuisat, 2012. "Choosy Moral Punishers," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(6), pages 1-6, June.
    3. Leibbrandt, Andreas & López-Pérez, Raúl & Spiegelman, Eli, 2023. "Reciprocal, but inequality averse as well? Mixed motives for punishment and reward," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 210(C), pages 91-116.
    4. David Masclet & Marie-Claire Villeval, 2008. "Punishment, inequality, and welfare: a public good experiment," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 31(3), pages 475-502, October.
    5. Leibbrandt, Andreas & López-Pérez, Raúl, 2011. "Individual Heterogeneity in Punishment and Reward," Working Papers in Economic Theory 2011/01, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (Spain), Department of Economic Analysis (Economic Theory and Economic History).
    6. Uriel Haran & Doron Teichman & Yuval Feldman, 2016. "Formal and Social Enforcement in Response to Individual Versus Corporate Transgressions," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(4), pages 786-808, December.
    7. Christian Thöni, 2014. "Inequality aversion and antisocial punishment," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 76(4), pages 529-545, April.
    8. Andras Molnar & Shereen J. Chaudhry & George Loewenstein, 2020. ""It's Not about the Money. It's about Sending a Message!" Unpacking the Components of Revenge," CESifo Working Paper Series 8102, CESifo.
    9. Cameron, Lisa & Chaudhuri, Ananish & Erkal, Nisvan & Gangadharan, Lata, 2009. "Propensities to engage in and punish corrupt behavior: Experimental evidence from Australia, India, Indonesia and Singapore," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(7-8), pages 843-851, August.
    10. Simon Halliday, 2011. "Rarer Actions: Giving and Taking in Third-Party Punishment Games," Working Papers 211, Economic Research Southern Africa.
    11. Marianna Baggio & Luigi Mittone, 2016. "Experience and History: An Experimental Approach to Generational Heterogeneity," International Journal of Applied Behavioral Economics (IJABE), IGI Global, vol. 5(4), pages 1-23, October.
    12. Patel, Amrish & Cartwright, Edward & Mark, Van Vugt, 2010. "Punishment Cannot Sustain Cooperation in a Public Good Game with Free-Rider Anonymity," Working Papers in Economics 451, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    13. Balafoutas, Loukas & Nikiforakis, Nikos, 2012. "Norm enforcement in the city: A natural field experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(8), pages 1773-1785.
    14. Leibbrandt, Andreas & López-Pérez, Raúl, 2012. "An exploration of third and second party punishment in ten simple games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(3), pages 753-766.
    15. Bogliacino, Francesco & Codagnone, Cristiano, 2021. "Microfoundations, behaviour, and evolution: Evidence from experiments," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 372-385.
    16. Vyrastekova, Jana & Funaki, Yukihiko & Takeuchi, Ai, 2011. "Sanctioning as a social norm: Expectations of non-strategic sanctioning in a public goods game experiment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 919-928.
    17. Ernst Fehr & Urs Fischbacher, "undated". "Third Party Punishment and Social Norms," IEW - Working Papers 106, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    18. Hoeft, Leonard & Mill, Wladislaw, 2024. "Abuse of power," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 220(C), pages 305-324.
    19. Brownback, Andy & Kuhn, Michael A., 2019. "Understanding outcome bias," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 342-360.
    20. Christoph Engel & Lilia Zhurakhovska, 2013. "Do Explicit Reasons Make Legal Intervention More Effective? An Experimental Study," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2013_16, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods, revised Mar 2018.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:reggov:v:2:y:2008:i:2:p:165-192. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1748-5991 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.