Resistance Will Be Futile? The Stigmatization (or Not) of Whistleblowers
- PDF / 1,141,930 Bytes
- 14 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 95 Downloads / 235 Views
ORIGINAL PAPER
Resistance Will Be Futile? The Stigmatization (or Not) of Whistleblowers Meghan Van Portfliet1 Received: 16 March 2020 / Accepted: 2 November 2020 © Springer Nature B.V. 2020
Abstract Does speaking up ruin one’s life? Organizational and whistleblowing research largely accept that “whistleblower” is a negative label that effects one’s well-being. Whistleblowing research also emphasizes the drawn-out process of speaking up. The result is a narrative of the whistleblower as someone who suffers indefinitely. In this paper, I draw on theories of stigma, labelling, and identity, specifically stigmatized identity, to provide a more nuanced understanding of whistleblower stigma as relational and temporary. I analyse two cases of whistleblowing, one where the label “whistleblower” was accepted, and one where it was eventually rejected. By comparing how the whistleblower responds to stigmatizing and non-stigmatizing others, I explore how whistleblower stigmatization emerges, or does not, in interactions. This paper makes two important contributions. First, I add to the growing research on whistleblower stigmatization a more nuanced and developed framework: one that sees the interaction between whistleblowers and others as relational. Second, I provide an understanding of the identity “whistleblower” as one that can be temporary and revisable. Research has highlighted how whistleblowing is a process, but little attention has been paid to how one “moves on” from being a whistleblower and the potential stigmatization associated with the role. Rather than assuming a whistleblower is stuck with this identity—and the associated stigma—for life, I provide insight on how “whistleblower” can be a positive label that opens one up to support, and even when it is stigmatized, it does not have to be an end state. Keywords Stigma · Identity · Labelling · Whistleblowing · Goffman
Introduction Whistleblowing has been identified as an effective way of exposing and stopping corruption (ACFE 2018; Devine 2012) and increasingly organizations are urged to embrace whistleblowing as a way to root out issues and solve them before they cause reputational damage (ACCA 2016; Kenny et al. 2019; Transparency International 2019). Research on the experiences of whistleblowers, however, paints various pictures. Some find whistleblowers often suffer for speaking out (Bjørkelo 2013; Devine and Maassarani 2011; MesmerMagnus and Viswesvaran 2005; Paul and Townsend 1996; Rehg et al. 2008), while some large survey studies find those who speak up generally do not suffer (e.g. Smith and Brown 2008; Transparency International Ireland 2017). The * Meghan Van Portfliet [email protected] 1
Whitaker Institute, National University of Ireland Galway, Cairnes Building, Galway, Ireland
discrepancy may be due to on-going debates on the definition of “whistleblower” with some defining it broadly, as an organization member speaking up to someone that can affect action (Miceli et al. 2008) and others arguing retaliation is required (e.g. Alfor
Data Loading...
