| Abstract: | The potential explanations of why some observers report organizational wrongdoing, whereas others do not, are considered in this study. Nearly 8,600 randomly selected employees of 15 organizations completed questionnaires concerning whistle-blowing. Archival data and aggregate measures of organizational climate were also used. Discriminant analysis revealed that organization members who had observed alleged wrongdoing were more likely to blow the whistle if they had convincing evidence of wrongdoing, if the wrongdoing was serious, and if it directly affected them. Further, where the organization appeared to be dependent on the wrongdoing and threatened retaliation, whistle-blowers were more likely to report it to someone outside the organization. Implications for management practice and suggestions for future research are discussed. |
