Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Laddered Motivations of External Whistleblowers: The Truth About Attributes, Consequences, and Values

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

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to explore the motivational structures of external whistleblowers involved in the decision to blow the whistle by applying MEC theory and the laddering technique. Using both soft and hard laddering methods, data were collected from 37 Korean external whistleblowers. Results revealed that the means-end chain of external whistleblowers was the hierarchical linkage among two concrete attributes (the power of external whistleblowing to make changes and its warning about the seriousness of wrongdoing to the public), two functional consequences (correcting a wrongdoing and making those who violated laws admit their offenses), and one terminal value (the truth). The extant whistleblowing literature has either made assumptions about whistleblowers’ motivations when developing models or has drawn indirect inferences from measures of other variables. Our study is the first with an explicit and empirical focus on whistleblowers’ motivations. The findings provide evidence of the motivational structures of external whistleblowers that consist of a set of complex paths linked by multi-layered motivators. This research will be helpful in designing and reviewing whistleblowing programs for organizations, regulatory agencies, and journalists.

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.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayers, S., & Kaplan, S. E. (2005). Wrongdoing by consultants: An examination of employees’ reporting intentions. Journal of Business Ethics, 57(2), 121–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bagozzi, R. P., Bergami, M., & Leone, L. (2003). Hierarchical representation of motives in goal setting. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 915–945.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bagozzi, R. P., & Dabholkar, P. A. (2000). Discursive psychology: An alternative conceptual foundation to means-end chain theory. Psychology and Marketing, 17(7), 535–586.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, T. (1992). A preliminary investigation of the relationship between selected organizational characteristics and external whistleblowing by employees. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(12), 949–959.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blenkinsopp, J., & Edwards, M. S. (2008). On not blowing the whistle: Quiescent silence as an emotion episode. In W. J. Zerbe, C. E. J. Hartel & N. M. Ashkanasy (Eds.), Research on emotion in organizations: Emotions, ethics and decision-making, volume 4 (pp. 181–206). Bradford: Emerald.

    Google Scholar 

  • Botschen, G., & Thelen, E. M. (1998). Hard versus soft laddering: Implications for appropriate use. In I. Balderjahn, C. Mennicken & E. Vernette (Eds.), New developments and approaches in consumer behavior research (pp. 321–339). Stuttgart: Schäffer-Poeschel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Botschen, G., Thelen, E. M., & Pieters, R. (1999). Using means-end structures for benefit segmentation: An application to services. European Journal of Marketing, 33(1–2), 38–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouville, M. (2008). Whistle-blowing and morality. Journal of Business Ethics, 81(3), 579–585.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braithwaite, J. (2013). Flipping markets to virtue with qui tam and restorative justice. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 38(6–7), 458–468.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Coolen, H., & Hoekstra, J. (2001). Values as determinants of preferences for housing attributes. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 16(3/4), 285–306.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Colle, S., & Werhane, P. (2008). Moral motivation across ethical theories: What can we learn for designing corporate ethics programs? Journal of Business Ethics, 81(4), 751–764.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dozier, J. B., & Miceli, M. P. (1985). Potential predictors of whistle-blowing: A prosocial behavior perspective. Academy of Management Review, 10(4), 823–836.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, S., & Arieli, S. (1999). Predicting intentions to report administrative and disciplinary infractions: Applying the reasoned action model. Human Relations, 52(7), 947–967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gengler, C., & Reynolds, T. (1995). Consumer understanding and advertising strategy: Analysis and strategic translation of laddering data. Journal of Advertising Research, 35(4), 19–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gengler, C. E., Mulvey, M. S., & Oglethorpe, J. E. (1999). A means-end analysis of mother’s infant feeding choices. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 18(2), 172–188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gobert, J., & Punch, M. (2000). Whistleblowers, the public interest, and the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998. Modern Law Review, 63(1), 25–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grunert, K. G., & Grunert, S. C. (1995). Measuring subjective meaning structures by the laddering method: Theoretical considerations and methodological problems. International journal of research in marketing, 12(3), 209–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gundlach, M. J., Douglas, S. C., & Martinko, M. J. (2003). The decision to blow the whistle: A social information processing framework. Academy of Management Review, 28(1), 107–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gutman, J. (1982). A means-end chain model based on consumer categorization processes. Journal of Marketing, 46(2), 60–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gutman, J. (1997). Means-end chains as goal hierarchies. Psychology and Marketing, 14(6), 545–560.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannah, S. T., Avolio, B. J., & May, D. R. (2011). Moral maturation and moral conation: A capacity approach to explaining moral thought and action. Academy of Management Review, 36(4), 663–685.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, J. C., Spraakman, G., & Sanchez-Rodriguez, C. (2014). What’s in it for me? An examination of accounting students’ likelihood to report faculty misconduct. Journal of Business Ethics, 123(4), 645–667.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaciak, E., & Cullen, C. W. (2006). Analysis of means-end chain data in marketing research. Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing, 15(1), 12–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaciak, E., & Cullen, C. W. (2009). A method of abbreviating a laddering survey. Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing, 17(2), 105–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaciak, E., Cullen, C. W., & Sagan, A. (2010). The quality of ladders generated by abbreviated hard laddering. Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing, 18(3/4), 159–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kenny, K. (2017). Censored: Whistleblowers and impossible speech. Human Relations. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726717733311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuisma, T., Laukkanen, T., & Hiltunen, M. (2007). Mapping the reasons for resistance to internet banking: A means-end approach. International Journal of Information Management, 27(2), 75–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larmer, R. A. (1992). Whistleblowing and employee loyalty. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(2), 125–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, C. (2002). Attribute-consequence-value linkages: A new technique for understanding customer’s product knowledge. Journal of Targeting Measurement and Analysis for Marketing, 10(4), 339–352.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundgren, B. A., & Lic, T. (2010). Customers’ perspectives on a residential development using the laddering method. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 25(1), 37–52.

    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.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Miceli, M. P., Near, J. P., Rehg, M. T., & Van Scotter, J. R. (2012). Predicting employee reactions to perceived organizational wrongdoing: Demoralization, justice, proactive personality, and whistle-blowing. Human Relations, 65(8), 923–954.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miceli, M. P., Near, J. P., & Schwenk, C. R. (1991). Who blows the whistle and why? Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 45(1), 113–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morandin, G., Bergami, M., & Bagozzi, R. (2006). The hierarchical cognitive structure of entrepreneur motivation toward private equity financing. Venture Capital, 8(3), 253–271.

    Google Scholar 

  • Near, J. P., & Miceli, M. P. (1985). Organizational dissidence: The case of whistle-blowing. Journal of Business Ethics, 4(1), 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Near, J. P., & Miceli, M. P. (1995). Effective whistleblowing. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 679–708.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, H., & Blenkinsopp, J. (2009). Whistleblowing as planned behavior—a survey of South Korean police officers. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(4), 545–556.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, H., Blenkinsopp, J., Oktem, M. K., & Omurgonulsen, U. (2008). Cultural orientation and attitudes toward different forms of whistleblowing: A comparison of South Korea, Turkey, and the UK. Journal of Business Ethics, 82(4), 929–939.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, J. M., & Reynolds, T. J. (2009). A hard look at hard laddering: A comparison of studies examining the hierarchical structure of means-end theory. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 12(1), 83–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pieters, R., Baumgartner, H., & Allen, D. (1995). A means-end chain approach to consumer goal structures. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 12(3), 227–244.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds, T. J., Dethloff, C., & Westberg, J. W. (2001). Means-end chains and laddering: An inventory of problems and an agenda for research. In T. C. Reynolds & J. C. Olson (Eds.), Understanding consumer decision-making: The means-end approach to marketing and advertising strategy (pp. 91–118). MahwahJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds, T. J., & Gutman, J. (1988). Laddering theory, method, analysis, and interpretation. Journal of Advertising Research, 28(1), 11–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, P. (2014). Motivations for whistleblowing: Personal, private and public interests. In A. J. Brown, D. Lewis, R. Moberly & W. Vandekerckhove (Eds.), International handbook on whistleblowing research (pp. 207–229). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rugg, G., Eva, M., Mahmood, A., Rehman, N., Andrews, S., & Davies, S. (2002). Eliciting information about organizational culture via laddering. Information Systems Journal, 12(3), 215–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, C. G., Flight, I., Leppard, P., van Pabst, J. A. V., Syrette, J. A., & Cox, D. N. (2004). A comparison of paper-and-pencil and computerized methods of “hard” laddering. Food Quality and Preference, 15(3), 279–291.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seifert, D. L., Sweeney, J. T., Joireman, J., & Thornton, J. M. (2010). The influence of organizational justice on accountant whistleblowing. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 35(7), 707–717.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sims, R. L., & Keenan, J. P. (1998). Predictors of external whistleblowing: Organizational and intrapersonal variables. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(4), 411–421.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skytte, H., & Bove, K. (2004). The concept of retailer value: A means-end chain analysis. Agribusiness, 20(3), 323–345.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, R., & Brown, A. J. (2008). The good, the bad and the ugly: Whistleblowing outcomes. In A. J. Brown (Ed.), Whistleblowing in the Australian public sector (pp. 109–135). Canberra: ANU Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stikeleather, B. R. (2016). When do employers benefit from offering workers a financial reward for reporting internal misconduct? Accounting, Organizations and Society, 52, 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Street, M. D. (1995). Cognitive moral development and organizational commitment: Two potential predictors of whistleblowing. Journal of Applied Business Research, 11(4), 104–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Horuragi Foundation. (2013). The report on whistleblowers’ human rights violations. South Korea: Seoul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vadera, A. K., Aguilera, R. V., & Caza, B. B. (2009). Making sense of whistle-blowing’s antecedents: Learning from research on identity and ethics programs. Business Ethics Quarterly, 19(4), 553–586.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valette-Florence, P., & Rapacchi, B. (1991). Improvements in means-end chain analysis: Using graph theory and correspondence analysis. Journal of Advertising Research, 31(1), 30–45.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Vandekerckhove, W., Brown, A. J., & Tsahuridu, 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., & Phillips, A. (2017). Whistleblowing as a protracted process. A study of UK whistleblower journeys. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3727-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veludo-de-Oliveria, T. M., Ikeda, A. A., & Campomar, M. C. (2006). Discussing laddering application by the means-end chain theory. The Qualitative Report, 11(4), 626–642.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, T. (2007). Shopping motivation revised: A means-end chain analytical perspective. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 35(7), 569–582.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, B., & Olson, J. (1991). Means-end chains: Connecting products with self. Journal of Business Research, 22(2), 111–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waytz, A., Dungan, J., & Young, L. (2013). The whistleblower’s dilemma and the fairness–loyalty tradeoff. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49(6), 1027–1033.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiskopf, R., & Tobias-Miersch, Y. (2016). Whistleblowing, parrhesia and the contestation of truth in the workplace. Organization Studies, 37(11), 1621–1640.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westin, A. F. (1980). Whistle-blowing: Loyalty and dissent in the corporation. New York: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeoh, P. (2014). Whistleblowing: Motivations, corporate self-regulation, and the law. International Journal of Law and Management, 56(6), 459–474.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zanoli, R., & Naspetti, S. (2002). Consumer motivations in the purchase of organic food: A means-end approach. British Food Journal, 104(8), 643–653.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by the Horuragi Foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Public Service, Chung-Ang University, 84 Heukseok-Ro, Dongjak-Gu, Seoul, 06974, South Korea

    Heungsik Park & Jaeil Lee

  2. Business School, Work and Employment Relations Unit, University of Greenwich, London, UK

    Wim Vandekerckhove

  3. Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University, 33 Gilmer Street SE, Atlanta, GA, 30303, USA

    Joowon Jeong

Authors
  1. Heungsik Park
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wim Vandekerckhove
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jaeil Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Joowon Jeong
    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

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Park, H., Vandekerckhove, W., Lee, J. et al. Laddered Motivations of External Whistleblowers: The Truth About Attributes, Consequences, and Values. J Bus Ethics 165, 565–578 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-4082-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-4082-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation