Source: The Conversation – France – By Wim Vandekerckhove, Professeur en éthique des affaires, EDHEC Business School
Whether it’s the Mediator pharmaceutic scandal in France or the outcry over the Dieselgate emissions case that rocked Europe’s largest carmaker, when a scandal breaks, we often hear about one or two whistleblowers, but we are also left wondering why all those who knew said nothing as the disaster unfolded.
Why do most people remain silent when they see wrongdoing?
A recent study in corporate whistleblowing practices by Transparency International reveals that 15% of employees believe wrongdoing is taking place in their workplace. Two thirds of them say they share their concern with others. Most of the time with their direct manager.
During a team meeting they might ask whether they understood the process correctly, or they might ask a colleague whether what they are supposed to do is in line with company policy. At that point, they express a concern, but that doesn’t necessarily make them a whistleblower or at least they do not see themselves as a whistleblower.
Previous research indicates the most common response to this low level of sharing a concern is that the employee is ignored.
Being ignored is for most of us also why we don’t take a concern further. At this stage, we then tend to remain silent. Very few employees will raise their concern with higher management or through a dedicated whistleblowing channel.
Why the ‘silent majority’?
According to Navex], one of Europe’s market leaders in operating internal whistleblowing systems and software within firms, on average the number of employees reporting wrongdoing through an internal whistleblowing channel sits at 1.57 in 100 employees.
Now let’s appreciate how little this is with actual figures. Imagine a company of 200 employees, according to the study by Transparency International, among 30 employees who witness wrongdoing, 19 will express some doubt.
The Navex study suggests that when ignored, only 3 will report their concern through an internal whistleblowing channel.
Summing this up, if you have 200 employees and 30 of them see wrongdoing, 27 remain silent and only 3 speak up.
Speaking up largely depends on the type of wrongdoing: we are most likely to report wrongdoing that poses a threat to someone’s health or safety, and least likely to report wrongdoing that concerns a breach in company policy. But here is the catch: before someone’s life is in danger, we have already spent much time remaining silent on the slippery slope of company policy breaches. Our silence on “lesser wrongdoings” provides behavioural training that actually encourages silence on bigger misconduct we might witness.
A lack of trust in ‘the process’
What seems to hold us back is a perception that speaking up is risky. In the TI study, only 17% of employees said they felt confident that reporting wrongdoing to their employer would be acted upon and they would not suffer as a result of reporting their concern. This stands in contrast to the over-confidence observed among top management: 68% of employers in the survey believed that if someone reported wrongdoing through the organization’s whistleblowing channel, it would be acted upon by the organization and the whistleblower would remain unharmed. In other words, employees remain silent because they do not trust reporting channels.
What are the big truth-telling demotivators?
The TI study also gives insight into the barriers employees see. Fear of retaliation is the biggest barrier, with 32% of employees saying they feared losing their job if they reported a wrongdoing. The second highest barrier is also important, with 24% indicating they remained silent because they did not believe their report would make any difference.
Hence, employee silence is driven by fear and futility.
Since 2019, the EU whistleblowing directive requires that all organizations of more than 50 employees have an internal whistleblowing channel, and that they have the capacity to carry out a diligent follow up of reports that come through those channels.
Transpositions into national legislation across the European Union’s 27 Member States have been in place for a while. With enhanced protection measures and channel requirements, the aim of the EU Whistleblowing Directive was to create an environment for employees to raise their concerns safely and effectively.
A new tool for testing whistleblowing monitoring in the EU
The fact remains that among organizations there is a lot of room for improvement.
As part of the EDHEC Business school’s European Commission backed BRIGHT project – Building Resilience through Integrity, Good Governance, and Honesty Training, a free online Speak-Up Self Assessment tool (SUSA) was developed for integrity professionals across Europe to self-assess the speak-up culture and whistleblowing systems in their organizations.
The tool is designed to provide feedback on how firms such as France’s EDF group for example, align with the EU
requirements, the ISO37002:2021 standard, and the guidelines from the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC).
What is the future of speak up culture?
SUSA data indicates that whistleblowing channels exist but are too often of poor quality. Whilst most organizations seem to hope for a quick fix, what is really needed is a continuous management effort to build and strengthen speak-up cultures.
We should not rest on our laurels in the hope that the silence of the old generation is on its way out, making way for the voice of the new generation. On the contrary, a study by Protect, the UK’s leading charity that supports and advises whistleblowers, shows that Gen Z is even more silent that the Baby Boomers.
Their recent study found that young workers (18-24 years old) are less likely to speak up than any other age group, regardless of the type of wrongdoing. The silent majority facing barriers of fear and futility seems to be growing, and that should be a cause for concern.
A weekly e-mail in English featuring expertise from scholars and researchers. It provides an introduction to the diversity of research coming out of the continent and considers some of the key issues facing European countries. Get the newsletter!
Wim Vandekerckhove was the coordinator for EDHEC Business School of the BRIGHT project, funded by the European Commission.
– ref. Red flags in the workplace: why whistleblowers are still few and far between – https://theconversation.com/red-flags-in-the-workplace-why-whistleblowers-are-still-few-and-far-between-278239
_%DB%B9_%D9%86%DB%8C%D8%B1%D9%88%DB%8C_%D8%AF%D8%B1%DB%8C%D8%A7%DB%8C%DB%8C_%D8%B3%D9%BE%D8%A7%D9%87_(1).jpg){kind=link}
