Page 6 - Secrets, Sanctions & Smear Campaigns

2. Introduction

Whistleblowing—insider disclosure of corrupt, illegal, fraudulent or hazardous practices
threatening the public interest (Transparency International, 2013)—has moved from the
periphery of organisational studies to its centre. Contemporary scandals spanning financial
fraud, human-rights abuses and environmental harms underscore the indispensable role of
insiders as early-warning sensors (Miceli et al., 2008; Dyck et al., 2010; Stubben & Welch, 2020).
Yet the figure of the whistleblower remains morally contested: lionised as courageous truth-
teller by some, denounced as disloyal by others (Smith, 2014). This ambivalence maps onto the
growing complexity of organisations amid demographic, technological, ecological and economic
turbulence (Scharmer & Kaufer, 2013; Sowcik et al., 2015), where internal transparency is both
more necessary and more fragile.

Scholarship has matured from person-centric The organisation resisted the resignation,

explanations to multi-level accounts of when aware of the information the author held, but
and how disclosures occur. Early synthesis subsequent retaliation (reputational smears,
(Mesmer-Magnus & Viswesvaran, 2005) showed delayed payments, erosion of professional
that intention and action are shaped by moral standing) transformed avoidance into
reasoning, perceived support and anticipated escalation. Crucially, disclosure emerged as a

consequences. last resort after twelve months of attrition,
The most comprehensive review to date mirroring the literature’s emphasis on context,
(Nicholls et al., 2021) screened 9,136 records asymmetry and coercion (Nicholls et al., 2021).

and integrated 217 studies to identify eight This narrative reframes whistleblowing as a
overarching dimensions—personal, path-dependent sequence: organisations’
organisational, cost–benefit, outcome defensive manoeuvres often create the
expectancies, offence characteristics, reporting whistleblower they later disparage.
design, wrongdoer characteristics and social

context—further decomposed into 26 higher- Three propositions frame the wider study. First,
order and 119 lower-order themes. Their core formal speak-up architectures coexist with
claim is pragmatic: effective accountability “soft-power” retaliation—subtle but potent

requires organisations to empower, educate, tactics (process drag, access denial, reputation
protect, support and, where appropriate, management, economic pressure) that avoid
reward reporters, and to align policy with overt illegality while chilling disclosure. Second,
culture. legal frameworks—though necessary—are
Whistleblowing is not a single moral act insufficient absent behavioural alignment:

but a process contingent on structures, “psychological safety” must be tested under
incentives and norms. winter conditions (time pressure, senior
implication, material exposure), not merely

Against this backdrop, the present programme trained in summer. Third, cross-jurisdictional
contributes a lived-experience inflection. The engagement with regulators (SEC, SFO, ASIC,
author’s autoethnographic account traces an IAAC) reveals uneven enforcement and
arc from attempted exit to compelled fragmented protections; in such regimes,
disclosure. At the height of a commercial organisational incentives to contain or discredit

relationship (c. $2 million per annum), allegations remain strong.
resignation was motivated less by a planned act
of exposure than by fear of a Global CEO’s

temperament and anticipated reprisals.