Marcia P. Miceli

Potential Predictors of Whistle-Blowing: A Prosocial Behavior Perspective

Why do some observers of organizational wrongdoing choose to report it? This question has received little research attention despite its prominence in the popular media. This paper attempts to show that whistle-blowing is a form of prosocial behavior. Empirical studies in the social-psychological literature of prosocial behavior provide clues about personality and situational variables predictive of whistle-blowing. Latanes and Barleys (1968, 1970) bystander intervention framework is modified for whistle-blowing decisions. Propositions for future research are offered.

The quest for responsibility : accountability and citizenship in complex organisations

Part I. The Quest for Responsibility: 1. Complex organisations and the quest for responsibility 2. Complex organisations as corporate actors 3. Two concepts of responsibility Part II. Passive Responsibility: 4. Accountability: the problem of many hands 5. Corporate accountability: the organisation as a person 6. Hierarchical accountability: one for all 7. Collective accountability: all for one 8. Individual accountability: each for oneself Part III. Active Responsibility: 9. Virtue: active responsibility in complex organisations 10. Exit: resignation and refusal 11. Voice: whistleblowing and leaking 12. Loyalty: responsibility as a by-product.

An Exploration of the Meaning and Consequences of Workaholism

Although much has been written about“workaholism,” rigorous research andtheoretical development on the topic is in its infancy.We integrate literature from multiple disciplines andoffer a definition of workaholic behavior. We identify three types ofworkaholic behavior patterns: compulsive-dependent,perfectionist, and achievement-oriented workaholism. Apreliminary model is proposed; it identifies potential linkages between each type of workaholismpattern and important outcomes such as performance, joband life satisfaction, and turnover. Specificpropositions for future research are articulated. Weconclude that, depending on the type of workaholicbehavior pattern, workaholism can be good or bad, andits consequences may be experienced or evaluateddifferently by individuals, organizations, and societyat large. Researchers and managers should avoidmaking judgments about the positive or negative effectsof workaholism until more carefully controlled researchhas been published.

Whistle-Blowing: Myth and Reality

In this article, we attempt to separate myth from reality by reviewing research results pertinent to two questions: are whistle-blowers really crackpots and do most of them suffer retaliation following their actions? Because scholars interested in these questions have come from several different fields, and because integration is lacking among their perspectives, myth is often perpetuated. We try to ameliorate this situation by exploring the phenomenon from a broad interdisciplinary perspective and by reviewing the findings of recent empirical work in the area. Providing a realistic view of the problem is critical at this juncture, as organizations struggle to find mechanisms to deal with whistle-blowers and as legislators attempt to find policies to encourage whistle-blowing, in order to control illegal organizational behavior.

Oppositionists and group norms: The reciprocal influence of whistle-blowers and co-workers

Who blows the whistle — a “loner” or a well-liked “team player”? Which of them is more likely to lead a successful opposition to perceived organizational wrongdoing? The potential influence of co-worker pressures to conform on whistle-blowing activity or the likely effects of whistle-blowing on the group have not been addressed. This paper presents a preliminary model of whistle-blowing as an act of nonconformity. One implication is that the success of an opposition will depend on the characteristics of the whistle-blower and how the complaint is pursued. Specific hypotheses and general suggestions for future research and practice are offered.

Antecedents and Outcomes of Retaliation Against Whistleblowers: Gender Differences and Power Relationships

Whistle-blowing represents an influence attempt in which organization member(s) try to persuade other members to cease wrongdoing; sometimes they fail; sometimes they succeed; sometimes they suffer reprisal. We investigated whether women experienced more retaliation than men, testing propositions derived from theories about gender differences and power variables, and using data from military and civilian employees of a large U.S. base. Being female was correlated with perceived retaliation. Results of structural equation modeling showed significant gender differences in antecedents and outcomes of retaliation. For men, lack of support from others and low whistleblowers power were significantly related to retaliation; for women, lack of support from others, serious wrongdoing, and the wrongdoings direct effect on the whistleblower were significantly associated with retaliation. Retaliation in turn was negatively related to relationships with the supervisor for both men and women, and positively related to womens---but not mens---decisions to blow the whistle again, using external channels. We finish by discussing implications for theory and practice.

What Makes Whistle-Blowers Effective? Three Field Studies

Organization members face difficult choices when they encounter situations which they consider illegitimate, immoral, or unlawful, but lack corrective power. They can ‘blow the whistle’ to authorities, but often, their organizations do not change the objectionable practice. Circumstances under which whistle-blowers succeed in terminating perceived wrongdoing have not been studied, so this study tests portions of a preliminary model of effectiveness derived from power theories. Results from three field studies show that whistle-blowers perceive that wrongdoing is more likely to be terminated when: (i) it occurs less frequently, is relatively minor in impact, or has been occurring for a shorter period; and (ii) whistle-blowers have greater power - reflected in the legitimacy of their roles and the support of others. Implications for research and for would-be whistle-blowers, their organizations, and policy makers, are discussed.

Can Laws Protect Whistle-Blowers? Results of a Naturally Occurring Field Experiment

Data collected over three time periods, from 1980 to 1992, show massive changes in the ways in which federal employees reported wrongdoing and the effects on them for having done so. Laws intended to encourage whistle-blowing seem to have two desired effects: to reduce the incidence of perceived wrongdoing and to increase the likelihood of whistle-blowing. However, two unintended effects are also observed: perceived retaliation increased and whistle-blowers increasingly sought anonymity. The basic model predicting retaliation is essentially the same in the three time periods in which data were collected. Implications for research, practice, and the design of future legislation are discussed.

Consequences of Satisfaction with Pay Systems: Two Field Studies

Research on pay satisfaction has been criticized for inattention to determining whether its multiple dimensions have different consequences and for overreliance on cross-sectional designs. Structural equation analyses of data from two field studies showed that satisfaction with pay systems, but not pay levels, led to greater perceived organizational support, which in turn affected employer commitment and organizational citizenship. Union commitment was a positive function of pay system satisfaction and a negative function of pay level satisfaction.

Standing up or standing by: What predicts blowing the whistle on organizational wrongdoing?

Research on whistle-blowing has focused on the questions of who blows the whistle, who experiences retaliation, and who is effective in stopping wrongdoing. In this article, we review research pertinent to the first of these questions. Since the last known review (Near & Miceli, 1996), there have been important theoretical and, to a lesser extent, empirical developments. In addition, the U.S. law is changing dramatically, which may serve to promote valid whistle-blowing, and international interest in whistle-blowing is widespread and increasing. Unfortunately, evidence strongly suggests that media, popular, and regulatory interest is far outpacing the growth of careful scholarly inquiry into the topic, which is a disturbing trend. Here, we argue that the primary causes of the underdevelopment of the empirical literature are methodological, and that workable solutions are needed but very difficult to implement. By calling attention to these issues, we hope to help encourage more research on whistle-blowing.