Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Whistleblowing and Information Ethics: Facilitation, Entropy, and Ecopoiesis

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper analyses whistleblowing from the perspective of Floridi’s information ethics (IE). Although there is a vast body of literature on whistleblowing using micro-ethical (egopoietic) or meso-ethical (sociopoietic) frameworks, whistleblowing has previously not been researched using a macro-ethical or ecopoietic framework. This paper is the first to explicitly do so. Empirical research suggests whistleblowing is a process rather than a single decision and action. I argue this process evolves depending on how whistleblowing is facilitated (positively or negatively) throughout that process, i.e. responding to whistleblowers and providing information about whistleblowing activity. The paper develops a typology of whistleblowing facilitation to complement Floridi’s IE. The findings suggest that for whistleblowing to be beneficial to the informational environment, facilitation must filter out untrue whistleblowing, and achieve closure with the whistleblower, especially when whistleblowing is mistaken or deliberately false. I also find that publishing information about whistleblowing activity can be beneficial for the informational environment, but only if all organizations or all regulators do so.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • ACCA. (2016). Effective speak-up arrangements for whistleblowers. London: Association of Chartered Certified Accountants.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berry, B. (2004). Organizational culture: A framework and strategies for facilitating employee whistleblowing. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 16(1), 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BIS. (2015). Whistleblowing: Prescribed persons guidance. London: Department for Business, Innovation & Skills.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A. J. (Ed.). (2008). Whistleblowing in the Australian Public Sector. Canberra: ANU E Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A.J. (2012). World online whistleblowing survey, stage 1 results release—Australian adult population sample. Retrieved March 2, 2014, from http://www.griffith.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/418638/Summary_Stage_1_Results_Australian_Population_Sample_FULL.pdf.

  • Brown, A. J., & Latimer, P. (2011). Whistleblower legislation in Australia—Analysis and reform. In M. Arzulowicz & W. W. Gasparski (Eds.), Whistleblowing: In defense of proper action (pp. 137–157). New Brunswick NJ: Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A. J., Lewis, D., Moberly, R., & Vandekerckhove, W. (Eds.). (2014a). International handbook on whistleblowing research. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A. J., Meyer, D. P., Wheeler, C., & Zuckerman, J. (2014b). Whistleblower support in practice: Towards an integrated research model. In A. J. Brown, D. Lewis, R. Moberly, & W. Vandekerckhove (Eds.), International handbook on whistleblowing research (pp. 457–494). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council of Europe (2014). Recommendation on the protection of whistleblowers. CM/REC (2014)/7.

  • Donkin, M., Smith, R., & Brown, A. J. (2008). How do officials report? Internal and external whistleblowing. In A. J. Brown (Ed.), Whistleblowing in the Australian public sector (pp. 83–108). Canberra: ANU E Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • FCA. (2015). Whistleblowing in deposit-takers, PRA-designated investment firms and insurers. Policy Statement PS15/24. London: Financial Conduct Authority.

  • Floridi, L. (2008). Information ethics, its nature and scope. In J. van den Hoven & J. Weckert (Eds.), Information technology and moral philosophy (pp. 40–65). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Floridi, L. (2010a). Ethics after the information revolution. In L. Floridi (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of information and computer ethics (pp. 3–19). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Floridi, L. (2010b). Information ethics. In L. Floridi (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of information and computer ethics (pp. 77–99). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Floridi, L. (2011a). Is whistleblowing wrong? The Philosopher’s Magazine, 53, 20–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Floridi, L. (2011b). The philosophy of information. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gibney, E. (2013). ‘Death threats’ in Thailand for UK whistleblower. Times Higher Education. Retrieved May 27, 2016, from https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/death-threats-in-thailand-for-uk-whistleblower/2006659.article.

  • Guardian. (2013). NHS whistleblower claims he was forced to quit then gagged. The Guardian. Retrieved May 27, 2016, from http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/feb/14/nhs-whistleblower-quit-gagged.

  • Hassink, H., De Vries, M., & Bollen, L. (2007). A content analysis of whistleblowing policies of leading European companies. Journal of Business Ethics, 75(1), 25–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, D. (Ed.). (2010). A global approach to public interest disclosure. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mesmer-Magnus, J. R., & Viswesvaran, C. (2005). Whistleblowing in organizations: An examination of correlates of whistleblowing intentions, actions, and retaliation. Journal of Business Ethics, 62(3), 277–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miceli, M. P., & Near, J. P. (1984). The relationship among beliefs, organizational position, and whistle-blowing status: A discriminate analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 27(4), 687–705.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miceli, M. P., & Near, J. P. (1992). Blowing the whistle. The organizational and legal implications for companies and employees. New York: Lexington.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miceli, M. P., & Near, J. P. (1994). Whistleblowing: Reaping the benefits. Academy of Management Executive, 8(3), 65–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moberly, R., & Wylie, L. E. (2011). An empirical study of whistleblower policies in United States corporate codes of ethics. In D. Lewis & W. Vandekerckhove (Eds.), Whistleblowing and democratic values (pp. 27–55). London: International Whistleblowing Research Network.

    Google Scholar 

  • Near, J. P., Miceli, M. P., & Dworkin, T. M. (2008). Whistleblowing in organizations. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • PCaW. (2013). Whistleblowing: The inside story. London: Pubic Concern at Work/University of Greenwich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pittroff, E. (2014). Whistle-blowing systems and legitimacy theory: A study of the motivation to implement whistle-blowing systems in German organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 124, 399–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radack, J., & McClellan, K. (2011). The criminalization of whistleblowing. The Labor & Employment Law Forum, 2(1), 57–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothschild, J., & Miethe, T. D. (1999). Whistle-blower disclosures and management retaliation the battle to control information about organization corruption. Work and Occupations, 26(1), 107–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turilli, M., & Floridi, L. (2009). The ethics of information transparency. Ethics and Information Technology, 11(2), 105–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vandekerckhove, W. (2006). Whistleblowing and organizational social responsibility. Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vandekerckhove, W. (2010). European whistleblower protection: Tiers or tears? In D. Lewis (Ed.), A global approach to public interest disclosure (pp. 15–35). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vandekerckhove, W. (2012). UK public attitudes to whistleblowing. London: University of Greenwich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vandekerckhove, W., Brown, A. J., & Tsahuridu, E. E. (2014). Managerial responsiveness to whistleblowing: Expanding the research horizon. In A. J. Brown, D. Lewis, R. Moberly, & W. Vandekerckhove (Eds.), International handbook on whistleblowing research (pp. 298–327). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vandekerckhove, W., & Rumyantseva, N. (2014). Freedom to speak up review qualitative research. Commissioned research report by the Department of Health. London: University of Greenwich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaughn, R. G. (2013). The successes and failures of whistleblower laws. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whistleblowing Commission. (2013). Code of practice. London: Public Concern at Work.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This research was funded by the University of Greenwich, Business School, Work and Employment Relations Unit (WERU).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Greenwich, Business School, Park Row, London, SE10 9LS, UK

    Wim Vandekerckhove

Authors
  1. Wim Vandekerckhove
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wim Vandekerckhove.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The author confirms there is no conflict of interest.

Research Involving Human and Animal Participants

This research did not involve human participants and/or animals.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Vandekerckhove, W. Whistleblowing and Information Ethics: Facilitation, Entropy, and Ecopoiesis. J Bus Ethics 152, 15–25 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3294-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3294-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation