Terry Morehead Dworkin

Internal vs. External Whistleblowers: A Comparison of Whistleblowering Processes

We conduct quantitative and qualitative analysis of 33 cases of internal and external whistleblowers wrongfully fired for reporting wrongdoing. Our results show external whistleblowers have less tenure with the organization, greater evidence of wrongdoing, and they tend to be more effective in changing organizational practices. External whistleblowers also experience more extensive retaliation than internal whistleblowers, and patterns of retaliation by management against the whistleblower vary depending on whether the whistleblower reports internally or externally. We discuss implications for organizations and whistleblowers, and we conclude that researchers need to develop different theoretical explanations of internal and external whistleblowing processes.

A Better Statutory Approach to Whistle-blowing

Statutory approaches toward whistle-blowing currently appear to be based on the assumption that most observers of wrongdoing will report it unless deterred from doing so by fear of retaliation. Yet our review of research from studies of whistle-blowing behavior suggests that this assumption is unwarranted. We propose that an alternative legislative approach would prove more successful in encouraging valid whistle-blowing and describe a model for such legislation that would increase self-monitoring of ethical behavior by organizations, with obvious benefits to society at large. A defense contractor’s inspectors used improper calibration standards when inspecting missile parts and other military products, used noncertified inspectors when inspecting such products, and used employees without top-secret clearance to work on classified projects. This created potentially life-threatening products as well as potential compromises of military secrets. Quality-control officials on the Trans Alaska Pipeline were threatened with physical harm, demoted, and spied on in an effort to force them not to turn in negative reports or report problems. As a result, the likelihood of damaging oil spills due to improperly built and maintained equipment is heightened. A major corporation allegedly initiated an analysis of the cost savings that would result from circumventing or reducing compliance with health, safety and environmental standards. Two officers who objected to this noncompliance cost/benefit analysis were subsequently fired.

Responses to Legislative Changes: Corporate Whistleblowing Policies

Survey responses from Fortune 1000 firms were examined to assess whether firms changed their whistleblowing policies to response to changes in state statutes concerning whistleblowing. We predicted that firms might have created internal channels for whistleblowing in response to new legislation that increased their vulnerability to whistleblowing claims by employees. In fact, very few firms indicated that they had created their policies in responses to legal changes.

Wrongful firing in violation of public policy: Who gets fired and why

We extend the whistle-blowing literature to the context of wrongful firings that violate a public policy. Our results suggest that the incidence of wrongful firings varies, depending on the employee’s gender and tenure, and the industry in which the organization operates. Wrongful firings do not occur more frequently in certain occupations, since firms wrongfully discharge professional and managerial employees as often as employees in technical, clerical, and laborer occupations. We also show that gender, tenure, occupation, and industry, in combination, can distinguish between three types of wrongful firings in violation of public policy. Our results support the application of theory and empirical research on whistle-blowing to the wrongful firing context, aiding researchers interested in developing explanations of wrongful firings in violation of public policy. For managers, our study points to the need to develop more effective responses to employees exercising legal rights, refusing to participate in illegal or unethical activities, and performing a public duty or obligation, such as whistle-blowing.

Wrongful Firing in Violation of Public Policy: An Empirically Based Model of the Process

Wrongful firings in violation of public Policy have received inadequate attention from managers and researchers. Such firings involve ethical issues, including employees for refusing to engage in wrongdoing, reporting organizational wrongdoing, or exercising a legal right or duty. We develop a model of the wrongful firing in violation of public policy process, based on our qualitative analysis of 63 legal cases. The model specifies that these firings arise when managers confuse an organizational problem with the employee who raises the issue. Management either fires the employee immediately or labels the employee a “deviant,” often harassing or pressuring the employee to conform and then firing the employee when he or she does not comply. We outline ways researchers can test and extend our model, and we offer specific recommendations for managers interested in preventing firings in violation of public policy

Pathways to Success for Women Scientists in Higher Education in the US

A continuing problem regarding gender equity in higher education in the United States is attracting and retaining women in the STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) fields. For example, only 20% of the science and engineering faculty at four-year colleges and universities are women.1 Within certain disciplines such as mathematics and physics, the numbers are dramatically smaller.