CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.0 Background of Study

Nowadays, integrity issues become frequently discuss and report among

reporters and society. As we know, integrity is a part of ethical values that shows

the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles. It is importance to

be integrity person to ensure the task or jobs are more honest and there is no

abuse of power among the public or private employees. The situation can be

seen in several countries, there are a lot of unethical behaviors from employer or

employees. There must be a reason unethical behavior happened. So, whistle-

blowing protection was introduced in order to prevent any unethically behaviors

in organization such as fraud, corruption, abuse of power and so on.

Whistle-blowing has been defined as ‘disclosure by a current of former

organization member of illegal, inefficient, or unethical practices in a organization

to a person or parties who have the power or resources to take action (Near and

Meceli, 1985). It continues to receive media intention (Vinten, 1997).

Whistleblowing is a deliberate non-obligatory act of disclosure, which gets onto

public record and is made by a person who has or had privileged access to data

or information of an organization, about non-trivial illegality or other wrongdoing

whether actual, suspected or anticipated which implicates and is under the

1

control of that organization, to an external entity having potential to rectify the

wrong doing. Whistleblowing is presented as dissent, in response to an ethical

dilemma, in the form of a public accusation against an organization. It contains

six elements. These are: the act of disclosing damaging news; the whistleblower

agent; a disclosure subject – some (potential) wrongdoing; a target organization

held responsible; a disclosure recipient; and an outcome –the disclosure enters

the public domain (Peter B. Jubb, 1999).

In early research, the researcher came out with idealism and relativism as

determinants of the whistle-blowing mode choice. Forsyth and Nye (1990) argue

that personal moral philosophy is a framework which is used by an individual to

decide on ethical dilemma. It helps guidelines for moral judgments, solution to

ethical dilemmas. Idealism, describes the individual concern for the welfare of

others. In contrast, relativism describes the degree to which individuals apply

universal moral principles as the basis for ethical decisions (Forsyth, 1992).

Idealistic individuals, with higher level of ethical reasoning are more likely to blow

the whistle than are more relativistic individuals. While idealistic individuals may

act out of a sense of duty (Vinten 1995); relativists may be less concerned when

they observed a wrongdoing in their organization.

In Malaysia, The Malaysian Parliament passed the Whistleblower Protection Act

2010 in May 2010 and the Act came into force on Dec 15 the same year, in a

major initiative under the Corruption National Key Results Area (NKRA) of the

2

Government Transformation Plan (GTP). It is aimed at providing protection to

whistleblowers who gave information of corrupt practices in the public and private

sectors (The Star, 2012). The Malaysian Government's commitment in the recent

budget to formulate a 'Whistle Blower Act' to encourage informers to disclose

corruption and other misconduct supports the contention that whistleblowing is

an important measure in the fight against fraud and corruption (David Lehman,

2010).

1.1 Problem Statement

It has been stated that up to 75% of organization members have attempted to

theft, computer fraud, vandalism, sabotage, or absenteeism while three quarters

of employees steal at least once from their employer, and that 95% of all

organizations experience employee theft. Since prevalence of organizational

wrongdoings has become widespread throughout the world, workplace deviance

has been an important issue for researchers and organizations for years. From

this point, whistle-blowers may suggest solutions to organizational problems

(Asiye, 2013).

Whistleblower is an act of noticing wrongful practices in an organization; being

motivated by the desire to prevent unnecessary harm to others; raising concerns

about wrongdoing; giving information generally to the authorities about the

wrongdoing; and exposing it to the press or suppressing it in a government office.

3

(Asiye, 2013). Information can be sensitive, leading to potential harm to the

whistleblower. Hence, the whistleblower protection has been established by

many governments to encourage informants to come out and help combat the

scourge of corruption. However, there is hardly any information given out by

companies on how or what their employees should do when they want to report

fraud (Ramlee, 2011). According to Kanason, he said the awareness among

Malaysian citizen still low regarding Whistleblower Protection Act. This

phenomenon might be because of lack of company’s effort to disseminate

information on the existence of this act to the employees in the form of circulars

and the like.

Therefore, employees are not aware how should they act on a fraud case despite

the existence of the Whistleblower Protection Act 2010 which was enforced last

December (Ramlee,2011). In addition, the causes also might lead employee to

do or not report on fraud or corruption of their employer. Furthermore, according

to David Lehmann (2013), he belief the reasons is because of ‘culture’, that is the

Malaysian culture of the preferring to ‘keep things to ourselves’ or it ‘not being in

our nature to do that’. Another reason often cited is that such a service would

only receive ‘poison pen letter’ complaints. If this situation prolonged, corruption

will further increase in the upcoming year. Even Global Corruption Barometer

Report announced that the 46% of people in Malaysia feel that from the year

2007 until 2010 the level of corruption in the country has increased and only 9%

individuals have reported paying a bribe while many of the victims of bribery do

4

not lodge formal complaints in 2010 (Transparency International, 2013). From

this point, this research will propose to study the factor that contribute to the

intention of whistle blowing among public sector agency in Selangor; hopefully its

might leading to increase the level of an awareness and decrease level of a

corruption at the same time.

1.2 Research Questions

These are the following questions to support the objectives:

1. What is the level of whistle-blowing intention among public sector agencies

in Selangor?

2. What is the association between organizational culture factor and the

whistle-blowing intention in the public sector agencies?

3. What is the association between motivation factor and the whistle-blowing

intention in the public sector agencies?

4. What is the association between ethical reasoning factor and the whistle-

blowing intention in the public sector agencies?

5

5. What is the association between organizational commitment factor and the

whistle blow intention in the public sector agencies?

1.3 Research Objectives

The main objective of this study is to investigate the association between whistle-

blowing intention and its potential predictors.

Thus, the specific objectives of the study are as follows:

1. To identify the level of whistle-blowing intention among public sector

agencies in Selangor.

2. To evaluate the association between organizational culture factor and the

whistle-blowing intention in the public sector agencies.

3. To evaluate the association between motivation factor and the whistle-

blowing intention in the public sector agencies.

4. To evaluate the association between ethical reasoning factor and the

whistle-blowing intention in the public sector agencies.

6

5. To evaluate the association between organizational commitment factor and

the whistle-blowing intentions in the public sector agencies.

1.4 Scope of study

The study will focus on level of whistle-blowing intention among public sector

agencies in Selangor. As Selangor is very modernize capital and most of public

sector agencies located in these area. The number of respondents for survey

purposes will be of 300 randomly who work as public servants in district area of

Selangor. The research will be conducted within 2 semesters from March 2013 to

Jan 2014.

The study will not cover level of whistle-blowing intention among public

sector agencies other than Selangor areas.

1.5 Significance of the study

This research will study on the potential predictors of the whistleblower intention

among public sector in Selangor, Malaysia. There are several significances on

this research which is on nation, organization, individual and also researcher.

Whistle-blowing implemented in Malaysia to prevent any unethical or illegal

behavior in the organization or the country.

7

1.5.1 Nation

Firstly, it is important to nation because this study will lead the nation to produce

a good public servant that alert the unethical behavior among the public servant.

In addition, according to research done by Global Corruption Barometer; he said

there is 91% of the victim of bribery in Malaysia does not lodge formal complaints

in 2010.It is important to organization because this research will help the

organization to identify any public servant that will act on the whistle-blowing if

there is any illegal behavior of the employee or employer of the organization.

1.5.2 Organization

In addition, whistle-blowing are implemented in all organization in Malaysia due

to reduce misconduct activities which is involved internal subordinate of

employees.

1.5.3 Individual

Then, it is important to individual because this research will enhance the

awareness towards individual. The individual will understand the concept of

whistleblower. The individual can determine what the predictors will influence in

order to handle the issues. Lastly, it is important to researcher because this

research will help in the plan, problem solution and strategies to achieve free

8

corruption environment in workplace. Furthermore, researchers are able to

influence the administration in order to set rule and regulation on procedure in

handling the Whistleblower issues.

1.6 Definition of Terms / Concepts

The terms used in this study are defined for ease of understanding as follows:

1.6.1 Whistle-blowing

Whistle-blowing is a process of giving information about the organizational

wrongdoings in which harm a third parties, and is an effective corporate

governance mechanism against organizational wrongdoings. (Association of

Certified Fraud Examiners, 2010)

1.6.2 Motivation

Public service motivation defined as ‘an individual’s predisposition to respond to

motives grounded primarily or uniquely in public institutions ‘and also may

describe as ‘the motivational force that includes individuals to perform meaningful

public service. Besides considering it to be a multidimensional concept, Perry

(1990) found that it has four dimensions: ’politics’, ’public interest’, ‘compassion’,

and ‘self-sacrifice’.(Vandenabeele & Kjeldsen, 2011)

9

1.6.2 Organizational Culture

Culture as a property or process of any group can now be defined as: A pattern

of shared basic assumptions that the group has learned as it solved its problems

of external adaptation and internal integration, that has worked well enough to be

considered valid and, therefore, to be taught to new members as the correct way

to perceive, think, and feel in relation to those problems (Schein, 1992)

1.6.3 Ethical reasoning

Ethical reasoning and judgement refers to ability of an individual to apply values

and standards to socio-moral issues and at the same time to determine a course

of action (Sivanathan & Fekken, 2002).

1.6.4 Organizational commitment

Organizational commitment is defined as the relative strength of an individual’s

identification and involvement in a particular organization (Mowday et al, 1979).

10

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.0 Introduction

This chapter provides a review of the literature on potential predictors and its

association towards whistle-blowing intention. Section 2.1 explains on the

whistle-blowing intention. Section 2.2 is determining of potential predictors.

Section 2.2.1 discuss motivation factor and Section 2.2.2 discuss culture

orientation. On the hand, Section 2.2.3 discusses ethical reasoning, whereas

Section 2.2.4 explains about organizational commitment. Finally, Section 2.3

provides the conceptual framework and identifies the hypothesis of the study.

2.1 Whistle-blowing Intention

Whistle-blowing is an important organizational behavior that can cause quantum

change in modern organizations (Brewer & Seldon, 1998). As a process of

giving information about the organizational wrongdoings in which harm a third

parties, and is an effective corporate governance mechanism against

organizational wrongdoings (Jubb, 1999; Association of Certified Fraud

Examiners, ACFE, 2010) Whistle-blowing can be perceived as an effective

response to the failure of the state to develop adequate public accountability

mechanisms for corporations. More important, organization members,

11

stockholders, and society in general can benefit from the cessation of

organizational wrongdoing such as fraud, unfair discrimination, or safety

violations (Miceli et al., 1991). However, in enhancing its public interest role, the

whistle-blowing mechanism can still be argued to be particularly important in the

profession of public sector agencies (Alleyne et al., 2012). Brief and Motowidlo

(1986) define whistle blowing within the organizational setting as:

“Behavior which is (a) performed by a member of an organization, (b)

directed toward an individual, group, or organization with whom he or she

interacts while carrying out his or her organizational role, and (c)

performed with the intention of promoting the welfare of the individual,

group, or organization toward which it is directed (p.711).” (Hazzi &

Maldaon, 2012)

Dozier and Miceli (1985) added that whistle blowing is a form of prosocial

behavior as the act involves both selfish (egoistic) and unselfish (altruistic)

motives on the part of whistle blowers. With regards to whistle blowing, whistle

blowers take action to stop the wrongdoing within the organization with the

intention of benefiting persons within and outside the organization, as well as, the

whistle blowers themselves. The consequences of whistle-blowing, as they are

reflected in the objectives of whistleblower protection statutes (Callahan &

Dworkin, 2000), had been various, including prevention of harm to an

organization, control of corruption, enhancement of public interest, an

12

employee’s doing his or her duty, and an employee’s moral satisfaction, etc (H

Park & J Blenkinsopp, 2009)

As whistle blowing considered to being a type of prosocial behavior; whistle-

blowing intention needs to be understood as the issue of behavioral intention.

(Nadzri, Galbreath & Evans, 2011) According to Ajzen’s (1991) theory of planned

behavior, “behavioral intention is good predictor of actual behavior” (Chiu, 2003,

p.66)

A behavioral intention is the subjective probability that an individual assigns to

the likelihood that a given behavioral alternative will be chosen (Ajzen, 1991;

Hunt & Vitell, 1986). According to Demetriadou (2003), an individual’s behavioral

intention is a weighted additive function of three elements: the individual’s

attitude, subjective norm and perceived behavioral control. Chiu (2003) defines

all the elements: the individual’s attitude is the individual’s judgment of that

behavior, subjective norm is the individual’s perceived acceptability of that

behavior, and finally, perceived behavioral control is the individual’s perception of

the difficulty level of performing that behavior. With all these elements, the

dependent variable of this study, whistle-blowing intention, is referred to as “the

individual’s probability of actually engaging in whistle-blowing behavior” (Chiu,

2002, p. 582). The interest to study whistle-blowing intention rather than actual

whistle-blowing action stems from the impossibility and difficulty of carrying out

investigations of unethical conduct in the workplace by first hand observation

13

(Victor, Trevino, & Shapiro, 1993).Yet, a study on restaurant employees in the

fast food industry provides evidence that behavioral intention correlates with

actual peer reporting of unethical behavior (Victor, Trevino, & Shapiro, 1991).

Therefore, whistle-blowing intention is deemed appropriate in the context of this

study.

Whistle-blowing has thus been variously described as an example of civil

disobedience, ethical resistance, and/or principled organizational dissent, as if

ethical reasoning is always involved.

2.2 Potential predictors

2.2.1 Whistle-blowing Intention and Organizational Culture

Whistle-blowing is particularly affected by cultural contexts, as perceptions of

right versus wrong. Pioneering cross-cultural research has found that culture

impacts whistle-blowing (Brody et al, 2002). In certain situation, whistle-blowing

may affected by culture differences, as perceptions of tension between an

employee and the organization.

Previous studies made by Sajid Bashir et al reveal that a perception of apathy

and likely retaliation by the management, peers, and employees at large creates

a culture within organizations that negatively affects whistle-blowing. Data were

14

collected from 1,762 employees working in various public sector organizations of

Pakistan through a questionnaire. Frequency tables were used to analyze the

data. Results suggest that in Pakistan a number of factors, such as culture and

organizational retaliation, affect the whistle-blowing process. It also highlights

that some unique culturally induced factors contribute toward the employees’

perception and practice of whistle-blowing in their organizations. Results are

explained in light of Hofstede’s cultural indices, which indicate that whistle-

blowing is culture bound.

In worker environment, whistle-blowing has enormous potential as a mechanism

for exposing and controlling organizational misconduct; there are always costs

and benefits associated with the decision to blow the whistle (Brody et al, 1999).

Previous scholars were in agreement with the positive relationship between

whistle-blowing and cultural factors. Among the arguments are the culture

assimilated in organization that believing fraud or wrongdoing may eventually

harm the organization, employees, society and perhaps national security will

drive them to whistle-blow (Miethe and Rothschild, 1994). And a person may

become whistle-blower when his organization culture will give attention, fame,

promotion and monetary reward for their whistle-blowing (Miceli and Neard,

1992). In similar cases, negative cultures that discourage intention to whistle-

blow. A situation when a person feels threatened with being fired or other forms

of retaliation (Brody el at, 1999) or feel that the whistle-blowing has betrayed trust

with the perceptive and feeling about co-workers, and potential or existing

15

relationships among employees in a workplace (Loeb and Cory, 1989) and failure

to blow the whistle likely violates personally held ethical percepts (Loeb and

Cory, 1989)

On the other hand, other scholars like Laura P. Harman and el posits that there is

a negative relationship between whistle-blowing intention and culture. This is

because insufficient of reporting policies and procedure. It must be tenable or

inform to worker for them to useful and used. This is means that they must be

translated locally. On a country by country basis, policies and procedures are

effective when they take into local legal environment, history, social norm and

experience. In other words, the negative relationship between whistle-blowing

intention and culture happen when there is low concern by the organization on

the whistle-blowing act in the organization.

Hypothesis 1:

There is positive relationship between whistle blowing intention and

organizational culture.

2.2.2 Whistle blowing Intention and Motivation

According to Brewer and Selden (1998) ,motivation to blow the whistle is an drive

of action by someone in the organization that can cause major changes in the

organization in term of provides input for democratic accountability process which

16

can affect the organization reforms because of wrongdoing by someone. The

relationship between motivation and whistle-blowing intention already done by

previous researcher and it become references for future scholar (Brewer and

Selden, 1998).

In general, motivation is is generally regarded as the drive to achieve targets and

the process to maintain the drive, motivation provides an important foundation to

complete cognitive behavior, such as planning, organization, decision-making,

learning, and assessments (Pintrich & Schunk, 1996). According to

Vandenabeele (2011), he said motivation as the motivational force performs by

individual in meaningful objective. In addition, Vandenabeele (2011) also came

out with proper concept which is motivation is belief, values and attitudes that

beyond self-interest and organizational interest that concern of a larger political

entity and motivate individual to perform accordingly whatever appropriate.

In pointing out that whistle-blowing depends on individual motivation rather than

on structural measures, Dworking Near (1997) strikes an important issue.

Following this, one can connect to public servant motivation with issue of whistle

blowing and the interplay between structural measures, individual motivation and

whistle-blowing. As Brewer and Selden (1998) already stated, pro-social and in

particular whistle-blowing behavior will be associated with the personal

characteristic of higher levels of public service motivation.

17

According to Vandenabeele (2011), there is positive relationship between whistle

blowing intention and motivation. This was explained by look on the public sector

environment. Public servant motivation is an important determinant of what

drives the employee to blow the whistle. Positive relationship can be seen if the

individual respond and become whistle blower after obtaining influence from

organization in term intrinsic or extrinsic motivation (Vandenabeele, 2011). It can

be strengthen by Curtis C (2010); he said new statutory and regulatory changes

provide greater rewards to individuals who blow the whistle on fraudulent

activities and to organizations that actively encourage an effective ethical culture.

It is important steps at a time when the rate of misconduct in financial activity is

rapidly increase. Through extrinsic motivation, the organization will give

promotion and cost reward to individual motivated in becoming whistle blower.

For example, bonus, salary increment, promotion to higher position. As quoted

Brewer and Selden (1998) already stated, pro-social and particular whistle-

blowing behavior will be associated with personal characteristic of higher level of

motivation. In addition, according to Curtis C (2010), a person would be

whistleblower predominantly motivated by notions of public interest, which has

perceived the wrongdoings in a particular role and initiates the disclosure of her

or his own free will.

According to Dworkin and Near (1997), structural management such as

economic incentives and protection systems have limited impact on ‘traditional’

whistle-blower. For example, employees with high levels of motivation and

18

relatively lower levels of extrinsic motivation, as they will continue whistle-blowing

regardless of the costs. On the other hand, individual with lower levels of public

service motivation who experience some form of organizational wrongdoing will

likely be encouraged to report it if their costs by doing are minimized or

compensated.

Hypothesis 2:

There is positive relationship between whistle blowing intention and motivation.

2.2.3 Whistle-blowing Intention and Ethical Reasoning

Ethical reasoning and judgement refers to ability of an individual to apply values

and standards to socio-moral issues and at the same time to determine a course

of action (Sivanathan & Fekken, 2002). Meanwhile, as quoted by Coleman

(2006); Piaget (1985) defined ethical reasoning as cognitive operations, with

higher quality reasoning being the ability to consider more things at once and in

more complex ways. Theoretically, each individuals are capable of understanding

when they are doing the one and when the other. The reason is because of an

individual’s capacity to put themselves imaginatively in the place of others and

able to recognize the effects might occur to them if someone were to act toward

them as they are acting towards others. (Paul & Elder, 2009) Therefore, ethical

reasoning is considered to be essential for moral decision making and behavior

in other words the individuals will take an action or a stance about an ethical

19

issue is morally right. (Pettifor et al, 2000) Thus, it happens only when ethical

principles manifested in behavior then it will mean something. (Paul & Elder,

2009) On the other hand, Trevino (2013) stated that research on ethical

reasoning has been concerned with discovering people’s ethical judgment

strategies by presenting them with hypothetical moral dilemmas and asking them

to judge what is right or wrong, and to explain their judgments. Their explanations

and justifications are then used to define their reasoning about ethical issues.

Also in 1998, Davis, Johnson & Ohmer point out that “individuals regularly make

ethical reasoning based on incidents they have heard or read about’’. (Henik,

2005) Ethical issues may be problematic because they are non-traditional: they

have not been encountered in the past and do not easily fit into well-used

categorization schemes (Clegg et al., 2006).

Many whistle-blowing studies that look at what type of person ‘blows the whistle’

agree that one of the most important factors that affect an individual’s decision on

whistle blowing is his or her moral behavior (Near and Miceli, 2005). When one

decides to blow the whistle, according to Near and Miceli (1996), the decision is

affected by (i) the personality traits of the individual, (ii) the environment which

surrounds the individual, and (iii) the fear of retaliation. (Liyanarachchi &

Newdick, 2008) Thus, they suggested that organizations need to be serious

enhancing individual’s ethical reasoning ability among their employees via ethics

education and training programs as to help encourage ethical behavior, ethical

development and increase ethical awareness (Ab Gani et al., 2011). Richmond

20

(2001) mentioned that employee’s level of ethical development influences his or

her sensitivity to ethical issues present in work related ethical dilemmas.

However, Chiu (2003) suggested that through utilising a summed total of

Reidenbach and Robin’s ethical judgment scale (Multidimensional Ethics Scale

(MES)), the results of those studies indicate a strong positive relationship

between reasoning of the ethicality and whistle blowing intentions. It is due the

ability of would-be whistleblower to assess wrongdoing, and decide what to do if

wrong doing present. (Miceli et al., 2001) Moreover, would-be whistleblower view

of unconditional loyalty to the employer has been replaced by a loyalty to society

and issues that never addressed before such as health, fraud, safety and abuse

of office (Rohca & Kleiner, 2005). Near and colleagues (2004) found that

employees who observed perceived wrongdoing involving mismanagement,

sexual harassment or unspecified legal violations were significantly more likely to

report the wrongdoing than were employees who observed stealing, waste,

safety problem, or discrimination. Thus, the types of wrongdoing affect the level

stage of ethical reasoning. As the result, in general, the individuals with higher

levels of moral reasoning are more likely to blow the whistle than are individuals

with lower levels of moral reasoning.1 (Liyanaracchi & Newdick, 2009)

In agreement, Thorne (2000) states that several assumptions have been made

by many researchers, based on the theory, which propose that individuals

1 The terms ethical reasoning and moral reasoning are used interchangeably as commonly found in prior behavioural ethics research (Trevino, Weaver & Reynolds 2006).

21

sequentially progress through stages in the development of ethical reasoning.

The would-be whistle-blower with lower levels of ethical reasoning will calculate

the costs and benefits of the reporting if they do. (Gökçe, 2013) Xu and

Ziegenfuss (2003) also mentioned that individuals with relatively low levels of

ethical reasoning will be more sensitive to incentives of cash rewards and

employment contracts; and more willing to blow the whistle as a means for

disclosing wrongdoing when monetary incentives are provided. As for the would-

be whistle-blower with higher level of ethical reasoning; they still emphasize laws

and rules but they consider the possibility of changing these for social purposes

and guided by self-chosen ethical principles of justice and the rights of human

beings (Jordan et al., 2013)

On the other hand, negative significance between these two variables can be

occurred due to the impacts by issue and situation-related variables (such as fear

of being labelled as a troublemaker, appearing disloyal, and the possibility of

victimization by managers and colleagues may work as powerful disincentives

against speaking up openly about organizational wrongdoing) (DL Seifert, 2006;

Gökçe, 2013).

As quoted by Richmond (2001), Ponemon (1992) indicated that ethical reasoning

not significantly correlated with whistle-blowing intention when the participant

view himself as the person faced with ethical dilemma or when the participant

evaluated the third party’s ethical choice. McNab and colleagues (2007)

22

suggested the further research to examine in comparing typically profound

individualistic nations (like the US and Canada) with typically profound collectivist

nations (like China or Japan). Base on the above argument related, the following

hypothesis is proposed:

Hypothesis 3:

There is a positive relationship between whistle-blowing intention and ethical

reasoning.

2.2.4 Whistle-blowing Intention and Organizational Commitment

Organizational commitment is defined as the relative strength of an individual’s

identification and involvement in a particular organization (Devos et al, 2012). It

also is a sense of belonging and a sense of loyalty to an organization (Sims and

Keenan, 1998). Accordingly, organizational commitment can be characterized by

three factors: “(1) a strong belief in and acceptance of the organization’s goals

and values, (2) a willingness to exert considerable effort on behalf of the

organization, and (3) a definite desire to maintain organizational membership”

(Elizur & Koslowsky, 2001). In order to measure levels of organizational

commitment among individuals in an organization, Suman and Srivastava (2012)

concluded that organizational characteristics (job characteristics and

organizational structure) are the predominant factors in determining

organizational commitment of higher level employees, whereas personal

23

characteristics (age, length of service and locus of control) are the effective

predictors of organizational commitment of lower level employees.

Theoretical and conceptual works on organizational commitment basically

resemble prosocial behavior directed to organization (Devos et al, 2012).

Mowday et al (1982) justified that organizationally committed individuals ‘are

willing to give something of them in order to contribute to organizational well-

being”. Public service agencies, like other organizations, seek to develop robust

organizational culture, based on organizational commitment, in which members

are indoctrinated in a number of ways (Jenkins, Bedard et al, 2007) Individual

employees may exhibit varying levels of organizational commitment, depending

on many factors, including their length of employment and job satisfaction.

Street (1995) has attempted to directly link the concept of organizational

commitment to the likelihood of whistle-blowing. He contended that theoretical

models of whistle-blowing studies have acknowledged the potential influence of

such variable. There was a little empirical research commitment in whistle-

blowing studies (Street, 1995). Street (1995) argued that if individuals have a

high organizational commitment, they are more likely to display prosocial

behavior of whistle-blowing than those having a lower organizational

commitment. However, the argument cannot be proven due to little research

done to examine the application of organizational commitment and its impact on

the behavior of would-be whistleblower (Kwok & Bank, 2004).

24

Individuals with strong organizational commitment likely will act to preserve the

firm; these acts include identifying and remedying situations that may harm the

firm’s reputation (Taylor & Curtis, 2007). As Carvalho Wilks (2011) quoted from

Wiener (1982) asserts, organizational commitment is about behaving according

to organizational interests. This being the case, the lower acceptance of

unethical behaviours might simply be a corollary of adaptation. This is an

interesting point at a juncture when job tenure is being eroded due to the phasing

out of jobs for life.

Theoretically, individuals who have a high organizational commitment level will

be more likely to display whistle-blowing as prosocial behavior than those who

have a low organizational commitment (Brief & Motowidlo, 1986). According to

Taylor and Curtis (2007), the reason is the individuals with strong organizational

commitment is more favourable to become as whistleblower in order to preserve

the firm’s reputation from any harm. Mesmer-Magnus and Viswesvaran (2005)

also mentioned that senior employees are said to be more likely to blow the

whistle as they are closer to retirement, possess high levels of power and

organizational commitment. Those with organizational commitment may

persevere in their reporting to purge their organization of unethical individuals –

both for their own good and for the good of the organization (Taylor and Curtis,

2009).

25

On the other hand, new employees preserve low organizational commitment as

they may not know how their corporate culture operates, less familiar with

appropriate channels for whistle-blowing and are less concerned with stopping

the wrongdoing (SA Ahmad et al. 2011). These such commitment also applied

when employees feel that their work is meaningless and have no power over

their work (Tummers and Dendulk, 2012).

Somers and Casal (1994) has empirically examined the direct relationship

between organizational commitment and the willingness of employees to whistle-

blow. Using Mowday et al (1997) Organizational Commitment Questionnaire to

measure organizational commitment, they found that their subjects’

organizational commitment affect the probability that an observed wrongdoing is

reported to internal targets (persons to whom organizational wrongdoing is

reported), unfortunately such commitment does not related to reporting to

external targets. More specifically, the relationship between commitment and the

propensity to whistle-blow takes the form of an inverted U, suggested that

moderate levels of organizational commitment are most likely to result in whistle

blowing (Somers & Casal, 1994). They suggested that organizational

commitment increases the likelihood of whistle-blowing as the whistleblowers

that are characterized as committed employees wish to put their organizations

back on course. Mesmer-Magnus and Viswesvaran (2005) also tested that

theory. They suggested that whistle-blowing intent might best be predicted from

whistleblower age and the level of the job held by the intended whistleblower.

26

Their study failed to find significant results due to possibility that this construct is

relevant only in certain circumstances not previously explored. For example, Ray

(2006) illustrated that in the event of an organization might experience negative

effects if standards’ violations go unreported, a co-worker will likely suffer

negative effects if firm management learns of his or her standard’s violation.

Such circumstances may prompt would-be whistle-blower to act on behalf of their

colleague, mindless of the welfare of the firm as a whole (Osburn, Moran et al.

1990). It seems possible that organizational commitment cannot fully explain

whistleblower intentions without complementary consideration of colleague

commitment.

Meanwhile, previously research showed that there is no significantly relationship

between organizational commitment and whistle-blowing intention (r = 0.08; p >

0.05); it is due to additional demographic and individual variables (such as: age,

religion, gender, education and level of cognitive moral development) that affect

the likelihood to blow the whistle (Sims and Keenan 1998; McDevitt et al. 2007;

SA Ahmad et al. 2011). And Carvalho Wilks (2011) also stated that no significant

differences were found for organization type and size, and organizational

function. In other words, Cassematis and Wortley (2012) suggested that any

employees could be a whistleblower if they find themselves in the wrong place at

the wrong time.

27

As quoted by Stumpe (2000); he found a negative correlation occurred between

organization commitment and whistle-blowing intention. Consistent with the

theory presented by Allen and Smith (1987); even with higher level of

commitment, that commitment may prevent some potential whistle-blowers from

taking action because it involves inappropriate criticism of the organization, or

they feeling trapped in their position with no alternative job opportunities, or that

leaving the organization would cause personal sacrifices. He also mentioned that

individuals with low organizational commitment are more willing to contribute to

the organization effectiveness, and would therefore be more likely to contribute to

the organization by reporting wrongdoing. Based on the above arguments, we

proposed the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 4:

There is a positive relationship between whistle-blowing intention and

organizational commitment.

28

2.3 Conceptual Framework

In order to investigate and understand better potential predictors Whistle-

blowing intention on public servant in Shah Alam, this conceptual framework

provides an understanding ways on whether independent variables potential

predictors has significant association towards Whistle-blowing intention in the

organization. The independent variables are ethical reasoning, organization

commitment, culture and motivation.

H1

H2

H3

H4

Independent Variable

Organizational Culture

Culture can be one of the predictors in order to encourage the whistle blowing

intention. According to Brody et al, 2002, he opined that culture can give impact

29

Organizational Culture

Motivation

Ethical Reasoning

Organization Commitment

Whistle-blowing

Intention

Figure 2.0: The conceptual framework of the Potential Predictors of Whistle blowing intention among public servant.

Dependent Variable

to whistle-blowing. People in the organization will intent to blow the whistle when

the organization given the attention, fame, promotion and monetary reward for

their behavior (Dennis Wang et al, 2008). In other cases, negative culture also

will discourage the individual to become whistle blower. This is because he afraid

and feel threatened, or being fire if he or she blow the whistle (Brody et al, 1998).

In addition, an individual also feel that he will betray trust with perceptive and

feeling about co-workers (Dennis Wang et al, 2008)

Hypothesis

There is positive relationship between whistle blowing intention and

organizational culture.

Motivation

In this variable, the research tries to evaluate the relationship between whistle

blowing intention and motivation. As opined by Brewer and Selder (1998),

motivation to blow the whistle on wrongdoing of employer or individual in

organization is a drive of action that can cause major changes in organization. In

order to be motivated, as quoted by Vandenabelee (2011), he opined that public

servant motivation is an important determinant of what drives the employee to

blow the whistle when wrongdoing or misconduct happen. He also opined, an

individual become motivated because of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from

the organization to encourage them to become whistle blower.

30

Hypothesis

There is positive relationship between whistle blowing intention and motivation.

Ethical Reasoning

As whistle-blowing intention seem to be ethical, the connectivity between whistle-

blowing intentions with ethical reasoning undeniable. Pettifor et al (2000)

asserted that ethical reasoning considers to being important for decision making

whether to blow the whistle or not. According to Chiu (2003), a lot of instrument

involve in determine level of moral reasoning such as Multidimensional Ethics

Scale (MES), Cognitive Moral Development (CMD) and Defining Issue Test

(DIT). Thus, it result will justify the relationship between level of ethical reasoning

with whistle-blowing intention. Meantime, the higher level of ethical reasoning will

make individual more likely to whistle-blowing behavior.

Hypothesis

There is positive relationship between ethical reasoning with whistle-blowing

intention.

31

Organization Commitment

Level of individual involvement and identification in an organization may affect

their intention to blow the whistle when any wrongdoing occurs. Even there is

argument on the relationship between those two variables (independent and

dependent variable); it is due to little research done. Somers & Casal (1994)

suggested that the higher level of organizational commitment will correlate with

whistle-blowing intention, while Mesmer-Magmus and Viswesvavan (2005) failed

to find significant result due to certain circumstances. Both statements will be

applied in hypothesis.

Hypothesis:

There is positive relationship between whistle-blowing and organizational

commitment.

32

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.0 Introduction

In this chapter, the research methodology explained about how well the study will

be conduct. The main objectives of this chapter are to explain the details on the

method of the research. This chapter is very critical because the procedures can

easily invalidate the study. In simple words, research method is the blueprint of

the study. Section 3.1 discusses on research design, Section 3.2 explains on

example sample size and Section 3.3 discuss a sampling technique. Section 3.4

is discussing on unit discussing on unit of analysis. Besides, Section 3.5

discussing on measurement. Meanwhile, Section 3.6 is about data collection.

Lastly Section 3.7 explains data analysis which relates to this research.

3.1 Research Design

This is a correlation research since this research is to determine the whistle-

blowing intention among public servant in Shah Alam, Selangor. In this research,

the important variables are the organizational culture, motivation, organization

commitment and ethical reasoning. According to Kerlinger the basic purpose of

the research design is to ensure internal and external validity. We will use the

quantitative method as well. Furthermore, the study applies the quantitative

33

research. This kind of design is used in quantifying data and generalizing results

from a sample to the population of interest. The quantitative research basically

used structure technique in order to collect the data. The techniques include

online questionnaire, on street or telephone interview and others. In this study,

we use questionnaire in order to gain primary data from the respondent.

3.2 Unit of Analysis

Unit of analysis refers to the level that is the focus of the study. The unit of

analysis is the major entity that are being analysed in study (Uma Sekaran 2003).

It is the level of aggregation of the data collected during the subsequent data

analysis. In this study, the unit of analysis is based on individuals such public

servant in Shah Alam, Malaysia. We looked at the data obtained from each user

and treated the respondent’s respond as an individual data sources. The target

respondents will be from Department Secretary of Selangor, Police, Uitm Staff,

Jabatan Kerja Raya Shah Alam, General Hospital, Jabatan Pengakutan Jalan

Shah Alam, Jabatan Agama Islam Selangor, Majlis Bandaraya Shah Alam. The

reason they are chosen because they are involved in serving the society and

also given a lot of fund in distributive to the society. Therefore, this study will

evaluate and investigate each the sector mentioned in order achieve the

research objective.

34

3.3 Sample Size

The sample in this study is based on the Society that live within Malaysia. Then,

target group is confined to the public servant in government sector in Shah Alam,

Malaysia. After observation had been made, public servants who work in Shah

Alam are chosen as the target group in the research. 300 public servants will be

chosen in all area in Shah Alam with the age 20 and above. This study will be

conducted by distributing the questionnaire to the students in order to study the

whistle-blowing intention among public servant in Shah Alam.

3.4 Sampling Technique

In this research, convenience sampling is being used in conducting this research.

Convenience sampling involves the selection of units that are easily accessible.

This form of selection is done based on the ease of gaining the statistical data

from population which been collect. This sampling technique is chosen since it is

hard to determine the sampling frame of the public servant in Shah Alam. The

study and finding are strongly influenced by people who were contacted.

35

3.5 Measurement

3.5.1 Nominal Scale

Nominal scale which also called categorical scale is a mutual exclusive.

Nominal basically refers to categorically discrete data. Nominal scale

categorizes individuals into mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive

group (Uma Sekaran, 2003). This measurement is the most suitable in

determining different genotypes. There is no order or ranking basis will be

used in this type of scale. In this research, the most suitable section to use

the nominal scale is the demographic section as the data in the section is

mutually exclusive. The personal data in the demographic section includes

gender, age, faculty, and education level.

3.5.2 Interval Scale

Interval scale which also known as Likert-scale. It is a response scale to

acquire respondent’s preferences or degree of agreement or

disagreement on related statement. It is a non-comparative scaling and

unidimensional in nature. Likert-type or frequency scales use fixed choice

response formats and are designed to measure attitudes or opinions

(Bowling 1997, Burns & Grove 1997). The example of Likert-scale

36

includes agreement, frequency, and importance and like hood. This

Agreement Likert-scale is used in order to identify the mode of the level of

the sensitivity towards domestic violence against women. The Agreement

Likert–Scale is describe as strongly agree, agree, undecided, disagree

and strongly disagree.

37

Objectives Concepts/construct Measurement Question

No.

1 To identify the level of

whistle-blowing intentions

among public sector

agencies in Selangor.

Whistle-blower protection legislation and

establishing internal reporting channels are

important ways to encourage them to do the

right thing (Liyanarachchi & Adler, 2010).

I intent to blow the whistle only after

presence of legal protection

QB1

The consequences of whistle-blowing including

prevention of harm to an organization, control of

corruption, enhancement of public interest, an

employee’s doing his or her duty, and an

employee’s moral satisfaction, etc (H Park & J

Blenkinsopp, 2009).

I intent to blow because its can help

reduce the corruption and fraud.

QB2

Potential ramifications of the decision to blow

the whistle made some individuals are willing let

others to do it first as less likely to do it

themselves; even they feel that whistle-blowing

I intend to blow after see the

positive reaction from organization.

QB3

38

is necessary in cases of wrongdoing (Rafik,

2008).

Behavioral intention correlates with actual peer

reporting of unethical behavior (Victor, Trevino,

& Shapiro, 1991).

I report the wrongdoing when has

an intention to do so.

QB4

2 To evaluate the association

between cultural factor and

the whistle-blowing

intentions in the public

sector agencies.

Whistle-blowing may affected by culture

differences, as perceptions of tension between

an employee and the organization (Brody et al,

2002).

Culture environment in my

workplace not bring any pressure to

me.

QC1

Culture assimilated in organization that believing

fraud or wrongdoing may eventually harm the

organization.

(Miethe and Rothschild, 1994).

I believe that fraud or wrongdoing

may eventually harm the

organization, employees, society

and perhaps national security.

QC2

Person may become whistle-blower when his

organization culture will give attention, fame,

promotion and monetary reward for their whistle-

I believe my organization culture will

give attention, fame, promotion and

monetary reward for blow the

QC3

39

blowing (Miceli and Neard, 1992). whistle.

Whistle-blowing has betrayed trust with the

perceptive and feeling about co-workers (Loeb

and Cory, 1989).

I believe my organization culture will

not assume the whistle - blower as

a betray trust to the organization.

QC4

Negative culture occur when a person feels

threatened with being fired or other forms of

retaliation (Brody el at, 1999).

I believe my organization culture will

not make me feels threatened being

fired or other form of retaliation

when blow the whistle.

QC5

Negative relationship because insufficient of

reporting policies and procedure

(Loeb and Cory, 1989).

My organization culture provides

sufficient reporting policies and

procedure to their every employee.

QC6

3 To evaluate the association

between motivation factor

and the whistle-blowing

intentions in the public

Providing input for democratic accountability

process will reform a drive of action by someone

(motivation) to blow the whistle (Brewer and

Selden, 1998).

I believe Top Management in my

workplace is interested in motivating

their employees to blow the whistle.

QD1

Motivation as the motivational force performs by I will report the wrongdoing if there QD2

40

sector agencies. individual in meaningful objective

(Vandenabeele, 2011).

is formal guarantee from the

organization.

Through extrinsic motivation, the organization

will give promotion and cost reward to individual

motivated in becoming whistle blower. For

example, bonus, salary increment, promotion to

higher position.

(Vandenabeele, 2011)

My organization will give promotion

to individual motivated in becoming

whistle – blower.

QD3

Pro-social and particular whistle-blowing

behavior will be associated with personal

characteristic of higher level of motivation

(Brewer and Selden, 1998).

I believe that personal characteristic

will influence the level of motivation

of the employees.

QD4

In a public sector environment, public service

motivation is an important determinant of what

drives the employees (Rainey, 1982; Perry and

Wise, 1990).

I believe that motivation is an

important determinant to drives the

employees to blow the whistle.

QD5

41

Would-be whistleblower predominantly

motivated by notions of public interest, who has

perceived the wrongdoing in a particular role

and initiates the disclosure of her or his own free

will (Curtis C, 2010).

I am motivated to blow the whistle

when it involves public interest.

QD6

4 To evaluate the association

between ethical reasoning

factor and the whistle-

blowing intentions in the

public sector agencies.

Ethical reasoning is considered to be essential

for moral decision making and behavior (Pettifor

et al, 2000).

I believe ethical reasoning is

needed to be whistle blower.

QE1

Important factors that affect an individual’s

decision on whistle blowing is his or her moral

behavior (Near and Miceli, 2005).

I believe my moral behavior affect

the decision to blow the whistle.

QE2

42

Individuals regularly make ethical reasoning

based on incidents they have heard or read

about (Henik, 2005).

I make most of my ethical reasoning

based on my own reading and

observation.

QE3

Each individuals are capable of understanding

when they are doing the one and when the other

(Paul & Elder, 2009).

I will do anything if someone has

been threatening unfairly.

QE4

Would-be whistleblower should be able to

assess wrongdoing, and decide what to do if

wrongdoing is present (Miceli et al., 2001)

I am able to assess wrongdoing,

and decide what to do if wrongdoing

is present.

QE5

Low levels of ethical reasoning will be more

sensitive to incentives of cash rewards and

employment contracts (Xu & Ziegenfuss, 2003)

I will not change the decision to

blow the whistle even being offered

cash money and promotion.

QE6

Fear of being labeled a troublemaker, appearing

disloyal, and the possibility of victimization by

managers and colleagues (Gokce, 2013) may

stop lower levels of ethical reasoning to blow the

I will not change decision to blow

the whistle even knowing can be

labeled as a troublemaker in the

QE7

43

whistle (Thome, 2000) future.

5 To evaluate the association

between organizational

commitment factor and the

whistle-blowing intentions in

the public sector agencies.

Organizationally committed individuals ‘are

willing to give something of them in order to

contribute to organizational well-being (Mowday

et al, 1982).

Organization well-being is important

to me.

QF1

Strongly organizational commitment individuals

will act to preserve anything might harm firm

reputation (Taylor & Curtis, 2007)

I do not believe the organization

reputation will be damage if I blow

the whistle.

QF2

Would-be whistle-blower act on behalf of their

colleague at certain circumstances, mindless of

the welfare of the firm as a whole (Osburn,

Moran et al. 1990).

I identify more with my organization

than with my co-workers.

QF3

Individual employees may exhibit varying levels

of organizational commitment depending on

many factors, including their length of

employment and job satisfaction (Jenkins,

I want to stay in the organization

until retired.

QF4

44

Bedard et al, 2007). I am satisfied with my recent job

and position in this organization.

QF5

Lower organizational commitment also applied

when employees feel that their work is

meaningless and has no power over their work

(Tummers and Dendulk, 2012).

My job is meaning to me as I have

the authority over my work.

QF6

Commitment may prevent from taking action

because it involves inappropriate criticism of the

organization, or they feeling trapped in their

position with no alternative job opportunities

(Allen & Smith, 1987).

I am responsible to blow the whistle

even it involves inappropriate

criticism to my organization.

QF7

45

3.6 Data Collection

Questionnaire will be distributed in this research in collecting data. The

questionnaire will be distributed to public servant around Shah Alam. This

methodology is the most appropriate option since it is less expensive and did not

consume much time. As the questionnaires were distributed to the respondents,

the other respondents may already filled up all the necessary information and

answering the entire question provided in the questionnaire. The questionnaires

are printed in A4 white paper and use English language as the medium since the

English is intermediate language in UiTM Shah Alam. Therefore, the students are

to be believed do not feel difficult to answer the questionnaire.

The questionnaire will be distributed directly public servant in selected

government sector. Therefore, the questionnaire would be answered as soon as

the questionnaire is distributed. The researcher will ensure the questionnaire will

ensure the questionnaire distributed to them are kept confidentially and will not

result any bad effect to the public servant since this research is only meant for

academic purpose.

46

3.7 Data Analysis

The data gathered are statistically analyzed too see whether the results support

the generated hypothesis or not (Sekaran, 2009). The study that been conducted

are using SPSS version 20.0 descriptive statistics which involved transformation

of raw data into a form that would provide information to describe the factors in a

situation and this is done through ordering and manipulating of the raw data

collected (Uma Sekaran, 2003). In order to identify predictor whistle blowing

intention among public servant, the mean score or average is use as a measure

of central tendency that offers a general picture of the data without unnecessarily

inundating one with each of the observations in a data set.

47

CHAPTER 4

DATA ANALSYIS AND FINDINGS

4.1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter explains the findings and analysis of the research result. The

analysis involved in this research will be based on the profile of the respondents,

the pilot study, the reliability test, the normality test, correlation test and

description of the research findings. The data were analyzed using Statistical

Package for Social Science (SPSS) software. A total of 300 sets of

questionnaires were distributed among Public Sector in Shah Alam. The

percentage of total questionnaires returned is about eighty-one per cent (81%) or

equal to 242 respondents.

4.2 Pilot Study (Reliability Test)

The purpose of pilot study is to identify whether the respondents has fully

understood the questionnaires given. It is also to determine whether the result of

this pilot study is reliable. This is shown through the statistical result from SPSS

program. Cronbach’s Alpha statistic was used to verify the internal consistency of

the instrument. On a standard scale, the value cannot be less than 0.6 alpha

values. Twenty (20) questionnaires of pilot study were conducted at Faculty of

Administrative Science & Policy Studies, Faculty of Science Sport and

48

Recreation and Faculty of Communication and Media Studies. The result of the

pilot study as below:

Table 4.1:Reliability Test – Pilot Test Variables Number of

Items Cronbach’s

AlphaIndependent Variable Organizational Culture

Motivation

Ethical Reasoning

Organizational Commitment

Dependent VariableWhistle-blowing Intention

5

3

7

7

3

0.621

0.614

0.864

0.802

0.614

According to Table 4.1 shows the result of the reliability test with the independent

variable to determine the potential predictor element which is Organizational

Culture with the average of 0.621 Cronbach’s Alpha. The second independent

variable is Motivation with the average of 0.614 Cronbach’s Alpha. Third

independent variable is Ethical Reasoning with the average of 0.864 Cronbach’s

Alpha. This is followed by the fourth variable which is Organizational

Commitment with the average of 0.802 respectively. The dependent variable is

Whistle-blowing Intention with the average of 0.614 Cronbach’s Alpha. Based on

the result of the reliability test, it can be said that the result confirmed the

existence of internal consistency of the items in every single variable whereby

Cronbach’s Alpha range is 0.6-1. Thus, it can be concluded that all

questionnaires were relevant to be distributed.

49

4.3 Normality of Distribution

Table 4.2: Normality of distribution Variables Skewness Kurtosis

Independent Variable Organizational CultureMotivation Ethical ReasoningOrganizational Commitment

Dependent VariableWhistle-blowing Intention

-0.214 -0.295 -0.284 0.212

-0.174

-0.119 0.351 1.198 0.097

-0.044

Test of normality was conducted in order to see the shape of the distribution and

used with interval and ratio level. The normal distribution can be determined by

the values of the Skewness and Kurtosis. Zero value shows the exactly normal

distribution of the research questionnaire. All variable are accepted in the range ±

0 to ± 3 of the Skewness and Kurtosis. Based on the table 4.3, the value of

Skewness and Kurtosis for Organizational Culture were -0.214 and -0.119

respectively. Meanwhile, the value of Skewness and Kurtosis for Motivation were

-0.295 and 0.351 respectively. Moreover, the value of Skewness and Kurtosis for

Ethical Reasoning were -0.284 and 1.198 respectively. The value of Skewness

and Kurtosis for Organization Commitment were 0.212 and 0.097 respectively.

Besides, the value of Skewness and Kurtosis for Whistle-blowing intention is -

0.174 and 0.044 respectively. Thus, it can be concluded that the result of the

50

normality analysis shows that the distribution of both independent and dependent

variables in this study is normal whereby it range between ± 0 to ± 3.

4.4 Profile of respondent

Table 4.3:Profile of Respondents

Profile Frequency Percentage (%)

Gender MaleFemale

115 127

47.552.5

Age 20-24 years old25-29 years old30-34 years old35-39 years old40 and above

3568603148

14.528.124.812.819.8

Qualification Level

Race

Year of Services

SPMSTPM/ MatriculationDiplomaDegreeMasterPhDOthers

MalayIndianChineseOthers

1-5 years6-10 years11-15 years16 years and above

592171651529

2141594

108693233

24.4 8.7 29.3 26.9 6.2 0.8 3.7

88.46.23.71.7

44.628.513.513.6

Table 4.3 shows the frequency and percentage of distribution for the profile of the

respondents. Five demographic factors were included for this research. By

51

looking at gender percentage, female respondents were higher than male

respondents which 47.5 % and 52.5% respectively. Majority of respondents were

in the age of 25-29 years old which 28.1% followed by the age of 30-34 years

which the percentage of 24.8%, 20-24 years old which have percentage of

14.5%, 40 years and above which have percentage of 19.8% and finally the age

of 35-39 years old which have percentage of 12.8%. Majority the race of the

respondents were Malay with 88.4%, followed by Indian with 6.2%, Chinese with

3.7% and lastly for ‘Others’ with 1.7% only.

The respondents mostly are Diploma holder with the percentage of 29.3%,

followed by Degree holder with 26.9% respectively. SPM with 24.4%, STPM with

8.7, Master with 6.2%, ‘Others’ with 3.7, and lastly for PhD with 0.8%.

Last but not least, for year of services, the highest percentage is 1-5 years with

44.6%. Followed by 6-10 years with 28.5%, 16 years and above with 13.6%, and

11-15 years with 13.5% respectively.

4.5 FINDINGS

In this session, the result of the data analysis of the study is presented according

to each objective.

4.5.1 To identify the level of whistle-blowing intention among public sector

agencies.

Table 4.5.1:

52

To identify level of whistle-blowing intention Variables Mean Standard

Deviation

Organizational Culture factor

Motivation factor

Ethical reasoning factor

Organization commitment factor

Whistle-blowing intention (Average)

3.372

3.324

3.852

3.772

3.581

0.647

0.647

0.552

0.598

0.660

Table 4.5.2:Measurement of the average scales for the whistle-blowing intention among public sector agencies.

Based on table 4.4, it is found that the mean of public servant’s commitment is

3.581 which indicate above average result. The output also indicates that the

standard deviation value is 0.660. As the mean of result in between 3.01 - 3.99, it

can be said that the level of whistle-blowing intention is moderate. Thus, it can be

potential predictor influenced whistle-blowing intention.

4.5.2 To determine whether the organizational culture factor can affect the

whistle-blowing intention among public sector agencies.

53

Average: 3.581

0 1 2 3 4 5Very low Low Medium High Very High

The first objective of this study is to determine whether there is a relationship

between the culture factors and the whistle-blowing intention. To examine this

relationship, correlation analysis was used. However, before a correlation

statistics can be used, few important assumptions were tested through scatter

plot. These include homoscedasticity and linearity. As can be seen in Table

4.5.1, there is a relationship between organizational culture factor and whistle-

blowing intention. There is exists a relationship between the value of r = 0.115

and p > 0.05. Therefore, it supports the hypothesis that:

H1: There is a positive relationship between organizational culture factor and

whistle-blowing intention among public sector agencies.

The hypothesis is not accepted because the result shows that there is no

relationship between organizational culture factor and whistle-blowing intention.

Table 4.5.2 Correlation between organizational culture factor and whistle-blowing intention

________________________________________________________________Variable Person Correlation (r) Whistle-blowing Intention Organizational Culture factor 0.115**

54

Sig 0.074 N 242

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

4.5.3 To determine whether motivation factor affect whistle-blowing

intention among public sector agencies.

The second objective of this study is to identify whether there is relationship

between motivation factor and whistle-blowing intention. To examine this

relationship, correlation analysis was used. However, before a correlation

statistics can be used, few important assumptions were tested through scatter

plot. These include homoscedasticity and linearity. As can be seen in Table

4.5.2, there is a relationship between motivation factor and whistle-blowing

intention. There is exists a relationship between the value of r = 0.455 and p <

0.05. Therefore, it supports the hypothesis that:

H1: There is a positive relationship between motivation factor and whistle-

blowing intention.

As a result, the hypothesis can be accepted because the result shows there is a

relationship between motivation factor and whistle-blowing intention among

public sector agencies.

Table 4.5.3 Correlation between motivation factor and whistle-blowing intention

55

________________________________________________________________ Variable Person Correlation (r)

Whistle-blowing Intention Motivation factor 0.455** Sig 0.000N 242

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

4.5.4 To determine whether ethical reasoning factor affect whistle-blowing

intention among public sector agencies.

The third objective of this study is to determine whether there is relationship

between ethical reasoning factor and whistle-blowing intention. To examine this

relationship, correlation analysis was used. However, before a correlation

statistics can be used, few important assumptions were tested through scatter

plot. These include homoscedasticity and linearity. As can be seen in Table 4.5.3

there is a relationship between ethical reasoning factor and whistle-blowing

intention with the value of r = 0.302 and p < 0.05. Therefore, it supports the

hypothesis that:

H1: There is a positive relationship between ethical reasoning and whistle-

blowing intention among public sector agencies.

As a result, the hypothesis is accepted because the result shows that there is a

relationship between ethical reasoning factor and whistle-blowing intention

among public sector agencies.

56

Table 4.5.4 Correlation between ethical reasoning factor and whistle-blowing intention

________________________________________________________________ Variable Person Correlation (r)

Whistle-blowing Intention Ethical reasoning factor 0.302** Sig 0.000N 242

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

4.5.5 To determine whether organization commitment factor affect whistle-

blowing intention among public sector

The forth objective of this study is to determine whether there is relationship

between organization commitment factor and whistle-blowing intention among

public sector agencies. To examine this relationship, correlation analysis was

used. However, before a correlation statistics can be used, few important

assumptions were tested through scatter plot. These include homoscedasticity

and linearity. As can be seen in Table 4.5.3 there is a relationship between

organization commitment and whistle-blowing intention with the value of r = 0.214

and p < 0.05. Therefore, it supports the hypothesis that:

H1: There is a positive relationship between organization commitment and

whistle-blowing intention.

As a result, the hypothesis can be accepted because the result shows that there

is a relationship between organization commitment and whistle-blowing intention

among public sector agencies.

57

Table 4.5.5 Correlation between organization commitment and whistle-blowing intention

________________________________________________________________ Variable Person Correlation (r)

Whistle-blowing Intention Organization Commitment factor 0.214** Sig 0.001N 242

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

4.6 Conclusion

The research data was analysed based on the profile of the respondent involved

in the research, the pilot study, the reliability test, the normality test, frequency

test the correlation test and description of the research finding. The analysis on

the profile of the respondents provides the demographic characteristic of the

respondents. The pilot study was conducted to test logistics and gather

information prior to a larger study in order to improve the latter’s quality and

efficiency. The reliability indicates the variables are reliable and internally

consistent based on the reliability index, Cronbach’s Alpha which has a value

more than 0.6. The normality test shows the distribution of the data is normally

distributed. Besides, the frequency test is used to determine the level of public

servant commitment and last but not least the correlation test supports the

hypothesis for all variables.

58

CHAPTER 5

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

5.1 Introduction

59

This chapter will discuss further on the findings that has be presented in Chapter

4. It will also conclude our research and provides practical implication of the

findings, limitation of the study as well as the recommendation.

5.2 Discussion

This study has identified the potential predictors whistle blowing intention among

public sector in Shah Alam.

5.2.1 To determine the relationship between organizational culture factor

and whistle blowing intention among public sector agencies.

Based on the resulted from chapter 4, in order to identify the relationship

between organizational culture factor and whistle-blowing intention the

correlation analysis had been choose to measure it. The resulted showed that,

the value of r= 0.115 and p<0.074. In that case, we can see that, there is no

relationship between culture factor and whistle-blowing intention.

By looking on the result, the culture factor does not correlate significant with

whistle-blowing intention. It is because the number of significant exceeds p<

0.05. The culture in an organization play important roles in order to drive the

organization achieve their goals. However, in these cases the culture not related

to whistle-blowing intention because of several factors.

60

In previous research Ab Ghani (2011), he conclude collectivist cultures reflect the

subordination of personal goals to group goals, a sense of harmony and

independence, and concern for others (Hofstede 1991). Malaysia has three

major ethnic groups: Malay, Chinese and Indian. However, Abdullah (1996)

states that, although Malaysian society is a multi-cultural mix, Malaysian workers

share common and distinct workplace values. In addition, Malays represent a

collectivist community with collectivist minds (Abdullah 1996; Hofstede 1980;

House, Hanges, Javidan, Dorfman and Gupta, 2004).

According to Jinyun (2002), his finding was consistent with the previous

discussion that members of collectivistic countries view loyalty to the in-group so

paramount that they might consider it acceptable to protect a colleague or

supervisor who has committed an unethical act in order to protect the reputation

of the in-group.

Furthermore, according to Lehmann (2004), the culture factor fail or does not

significant with whistle-blowing intention because the Malaysian culture of

preferring to 'keep things to ourselves' or it 'not being in our nature to do that'.

Last but not least, in this research, there are many respondents which is not

aware about the whistle-blowing act that introduce by government. It can be one

of the reasons which the public servant did not give a adequate procedure and

61

information about the whistle-blowing act. Moreover, the act just been initiated by

government in 2010 under NKRA’s program.

“Malaysia has joined more than 50 countries in introducing the whistleblower

protection laws in varying scopes as part of their anti-corruption efforts” ( thestar,

2010)

Therefore, there is no relationship between culture factor and whistle-blowing

intention among public sector in Shah Alam.

5.2.2 To determine the relationship between Motivation factor and whistle-

blowing intention among public sector agencies.

Based on the resulted from chapter 4, in order to identify the relationship

between motivation factor and whistle-blowing intention the correlation analysis

had been choose to measure it. The resulted showed that, the value of r= 0.455

and p<0.05. In that case, we can see that, there is positive relationship between

motivation factor and whistle-blowing intention.

In previous research, according to Jos et al (1989), as everywhere else, people

working in public sector are concerned with their job security and apparently

cost-benefit analysis when considering whistle-blowing. This is means, every

employee prior their self-interest as their motivation to become whistle blower.

62

Positive relationship can be seen if the individual respond and become whistle

blower after obtaining influence from organization in term intrinsic or extrinsic

motivation (Vandenabeele, 2011). It can be strengthen by Curtis C (2010), he

said new statutory and regulatory changes provide greater rewards to individuals

who blow the whistle on fraudulent activities and to organizations that actively

encourage an effective ethical culture.

According to the result, almost 50% of respondent said agreed to become the

whistle blower if there is legal or written protection to them. This is because, they

choose to become whistle blower after the organization provide or guarantee

their status as the whistle blower. In addition, the almost 50% respondent agree

to become whistle blower if it involve public interest. This result can be conclude,

the public servant very concern on the public interest rather than the organization

reputation or the person that involve in misconduct activity. Therefore, motivation

is one of the factors that influence the public servant to become whistle blower.

5.2.3 To determine the association between ethical reasoning factor and

whistle-blowing intention among public sector agencies.

The third objective on this study is to determine the association between ethical

reasoning factor and whistle-blowing intention among public sector agencies.

Based on this research, it is belief that there is existence of weak positive

relationship between ethical reasoning factor and whistle-blowing intention

63

among public sector agencies and thus result is consistent with prior studies

(Gundlach, Douglas & Martinko 2003; Gundlach, Martinko & Douglas 2008).

Table 4.5.3 shows that the relationship between ethical reasoning factor and

whistle-blowing intention. Similarly to the research done by Ab Ghani et al

(2011), it is shows that the ethical reasoning factor has a significant relationship

with whistle-blowing intention. Ethical reasoning factor score in Pearson

correlation value is 0.302. According to Liyanaracchi and Newdick (2008), this

data relating to the impact of ethical reasoning levels on whistle-blowing intention

will be helpful in emphasizing the importance of developing employees’ moral

awareness in the public sector agencies. Therefore, they asserted that the

individuals’ decisions whether intent to blow the whistle or not depend upon their

levels of ethical reasoning.

5.2.4 To determine the association between organizational commitment

factor and whistle-blowing intention among public sector agencies.

The forth objective on this study is to determine the association between

organizational commitments and whistle blowing intention among public secctor

agencies. Through the finding shown in this research, it is belief that there is

existence of weak positive relationship between organizational commitment and

64

whistle-blowing intention. Table 4.5.4 shows that the relationship between

organizational commitment and whistle-blowing intention. It is shows that the

organizational commitment has a significant relationship with whistle-blowing

intention. Organizational commitment score in the Pearson correlation value is

0.214. Consistent with the previous hypothesis in which had proposed by Street

(2011), he suggested the organizational commitment as the variables to increase

the likelihood to blow the whistle (related to disclose unethical or prohibited

practices). Hence, committed employees will want to preserve their organizations

from any harm that might tarnish the organizations goodwill (Taylor & Curtis,

2007)

5.3 Limitation of Study

Upon the completion of this study, there were some limitations faced by the

researchers in conducting this research study. Nevertheless, the limitations have

somehow affected the reliability of the findings that wanted to be achieved

through this study. In short, the researchers’ limitation in completing this study is

the sampling problem. The sampling problem includes small number of sample

size, difficulties in finding the respondents, limited scope of study and limited

location of study.

5.3.1 Small Sample Size

65

The first and foremost limitation of this study faced by the researchers is in term

of the small number of the sample size collected. The sample size indicates the

number of observation used for calculating estimates from a given population.

Generally as required by the faculty, the minimum number of the sample size

was around 300 and yet it was still can be understood as a small portion of

sample size. The researchers only managed to obtain around 242 sample size

after the questionnaires had been distributed. This limitation had somehow

predicted to affect the overall results or findings of this study. In order to get a

more significant result, the sample size should be enlarged. As according to

Hazman (2011), the higher the sample size the lower the sampling error and vice

versa.

5.3.2 Difficulties in Finding the Respondents

Moving into the second limitation which is difficulties in finding the respondents,

this limitation nevertheless added up the effect of the above limitation. To obtain

a more reliable, significant and fair result for this study, the researchers needed

to get the opinion from other races such as Chinese and Indian. Since, most of

the public servant was Malay races; the researchers were hardly to find the

respondents especially the Chinese and Indian. It is good if other races could

give their opinion towards the study because different races have different

opinion about the whistle-blowing.

66

5.4 Recommendation for Public Sector Agencies

Based on the analysis, the results show that most of the public sector employees

are moderately according to the levels of whistle-blowing intention (mean=3.581)

and from the four element of potential predictors that had been proposed, only

three variables have the significant to whistle-blowing intention while culture an

otherwise. Thus, it shows that the necessary steps or initiatives need to be taken

by the public sector agencies in order to increase the levels of whistle-blowing

intention and construct the existence of an inappropriate culture among their

employees. Hence, the following recommendation had been proposed:

5.4.1 Continually promote whistle-blowing awareness campaign.

First recommendation suggested for this study, public sector agencies need to

continually promote whistle-blowing awareness campaign among the public

servants. As mentioned before in this study, most of the respondent are public

servants and most of them are responsible in planning, maintaining, and

executing government policies and programs aimed at achieving economic

growth and social equity in the nations journey towards development and

modernisation (PMO, 2013). Due to that, they need to understand the importance

to disclosure the wrongdoing act in order to preserve the public sector agencies

from any harm such as bribe, corruption, abuse of power, sexual harassment, et

cetera. Through continually promote whistle-blowing awareness campaign

67

among public sector agencies, its activities will increase the awareness on the

importance of whistle-blowing, motivation of the public sector employees and

produce the likelihood of the potential whistle-blower among them. Whistle-

blowing is not the responsibility of a concerned few only. It is a concern and

responsibility of everyone acts. All level of management should take part in

encouraging these campaigns so that the wrongdoer act shall be minimize and

increase the intention to blow the whistle in the public sector agencies (Noeradji

Prabowo, 2003).

5.4.2 Organizing more ethics training programmes

Instead of understanding the whistle-blowing, several ethics training programmes

or activities can be introduced by the public sector agencies in order to

enhancing ethical reasoning ability among their employees. This kind of activities

which have been suggested by many researchers will be indirectly helpful each

of public servants for the development of their ethical reasoning ability

respectively (Jones, Massey & Thorne 2003; Trevino, Weaver & Reynolds 2006).

As quoted by Ab Ghani et al (2011), many scholars agree that each individuals

need to understanding ethical reasoning process as part of an individual’s overall

moral consciousness when dealing with difficult conflicts or dilemmas in everyday

practice (Louwers, Ponemon & Radtke, 1997). The outcomes from these

activities will be enhancing the levels of whistle-blowing intention and giving the

long-term benefits to the public sector agencies at the same time.

68

5.4.3 Provide the alternative whistle-blowing services

Whistleblowing services can be operated internally or externally. Internally

operated services, however, are time consuming and costly to manage. Many

only operate during normal business hours with a recorded message to record

after hour’s calls. Lehmann (2013) suggested that the most cost effective and

successful whistleblowing services are operated independently, offer multiple

reporting avenues, including a dedicated phone number, email, internet, freepost

and free facsimile, operate 24/7 and have trained, multilingual response centre

analysts to receive calls. As many of the employees are still uncomfortable

reporting their concerns on wrongdoing act happened in their workplace to line

management, particularly when the report relates to an immediate supervisor or

senior management. It is in these circumstances that an alternative method or

reporting misconduct should be available. Generally though, it appears that when

senior management is involved in the wrongdoing, employees become much

more interested in maintaining their anonymity, and sometimes avoid reporting

details that, although helpful, would more easily identify them as the

whistleblowing source.

Business-hours-only services do not provide the flexibility to make a disclosure in

a place that employees feel totally comfortable in and at a time that suits them.

Thus, 24/7 capability will guarantee the feeling of employees as anonymity and

69

leading them to made the disclosure. And also the independent and anonymous

reporting mechanism reduces the perception that when significant matters are

reported they will not be swept under the carpet, particularly when the complaint

relates to senior management. Anonymity reduces the fear of the possible

repercussions of making a disclosure and provides the additional impetus for

employees to report serious misconduct (Lehmann, 2013). There are many other

alternative whistle-blowing services that can be rethink, construct and introduce

among public sector agencies in order to promote the likelihood of whistle-

blowing.

5.5 Recommendation for future research.

Next recommendation is for future researcher to be more details and getting

more respondent from various types of public sector since this study is focusing

on public servants as a respondent only in Shah Alam.

5.5.1 Future research should focus on other variables

Future researchers are suggested that to include more various governments

office departments instead of Shah Alam to get their opinion on the issues that

being study so that the respondent of the study will be increase. Furthermore, the

method of data collection can be improved. Instead of having a questionnaire,

the researchers may use other methods of collecting data such as interview,

70

online survey and others to get additional information regarding the study. Next,

the researcher should focus on other variables in order to determine the

variables with whistle-blowing intention. For example, personal relation, locus of

control, religion and job satisfaction.

5.5.2 Increase sample size

While completing this study, there are also some recommendations suggested by

the researchers in order to make some improvement with regards to the

limitations faced by the researchers. The first recommendation for future

researchers to be improved on is in term of the sample size use. The sample size

should be enlarged in order to increase the significant of the findings for the

study. As stated earlier, the required number of sample is around 300 samples

and yet the researchers only managed to collect around 242 sample sizes.

The small sample size normally will have a tendency to achieve the result of non-

normal distributions of data (Hazman, 2011). Nevertheless, the future

researchers should consider enlarging the number of respondents to obtain more

accurate and significant data.

5.5.3 Widen the research to other location

The final recommendation for future research for this study is about to conduct

the research in various places, various public servant organization and

71

government office. The opinion of the people is different to one another and yet

researcher cannot rely on the result base on particular or limited places only. In

this study, researchers only conducted the research around various departments

in Shah Alam area. However, there are still a lot of places, government office and

public servant organization in Malaysia where this study can be conducted. The

researchers can identify the best location for conducting the study other than

public sector in Shah Alam area. The best location also should consider the level

of cooperation among the potential respondents is good enough so that data can

be collected effectively. Furthermore, gaining different respondent from different

area will make the research more accurate, significant and stronger. The most

important thing in doing a research is choosing a right place which the

commitment of the respondent in order to complete the research.

5.5.4 Expand research duration

Next recommendation is emphasized on time constraint issue. The time

allocation for conducting the research should be expanded in order to provide the

chance researcher to get more reliable data and information with regards to this

study. The needs for time are very necessary for the researchers to get the best

possible feedback and results. For example, the researchers unable to get back

72

a total 300 respondents as required in conducting the research. So, it is a good if

the time for finishing this research to be expanded and it seen as a crucial aspect

to be taken into consideration for future research.

5.6 CONCLUSION

Through this research, it shows that organizational culture, motivation, ethical

reasoning and organization commitment are the factors that contributing the

whistle-blowing intention among public sector in Shah Alam. It can be said that,

three of factors contribute to whistle-blowing intention which are motivation,

organization commitment and ethical reasoning. Unfortunately, one variable

which is organizational culture not contribute on whistle-blowing intention. In

other words, the organizational culture factor does not significant with whistle-

blowing intention. This is because the whistle-blowing act just been initiated by

government around 2010. Therefore, many organizations in the public sector still

not recognize this act in order to reduce the misconduct activity such as

corruption, abuse of power, bribe et cetera. As the 300 sets of questionnaire had

been distributed and 242 number of respondents had given feedback from

various public sector agencies which is applicable around district area of Shah

Alam such as Police, Shah Alam City Council (MBSA), Islamic Department of

Selangor (JAIS), Agriculture Department of Selangor, Social Welfare Department

of Selangor et cetera; the outcome of these study is to determine the association

between the various mentioned independent variables (organizational culture,

73

motivation, ethical reasoning and organizational commitment) and dependent

variables (whistle-blowing intention). Perhaps this research can be beneficial to

other researcher in order to enhance the development of whistle-blowing in

future.

References

Ab Ghani, Nadzri and Galbreath, Jeremy and Evans, Robert. (2011). Work

experience and whistle-blowing intention: The mediating role of ethical

reasoning, in Voges, Kevin and Cavana, Bob (ed), ANZAM 2011, Dec

72011. Wellington, New Zealand: ANZAM

74

Bashir, Sajid, Hamid Raffiq Khattaq, Ayesha Hanif, and Naseer Chocan. (2010)

"Whistle-Blowing in Public Sector Organizations: Evidence From

Pakistan."The American Review of Public Administration n.

pag.akademia.edu.

Coleman, R. (2006). The Effects of Visuals on Ethical Reasoning: What's a

Photograph Worth to Journalists Making Moral Decisions?. Journalism &

Mass Communication Quarterly, 83(4), 835-850.

Dennis Hwang, Blair Staley, Ying Te Chen, Jyh-Shan Lan, (2008)

"Confucian culture and whistle-blowing by professional accountants: an

exploratory study", Managerial Auditing Journal, Vol. 23 Iss: 5, pp.504 –

526

Devos, G., Hulpia, H., Tuytens, M., & Sinnaeve, I. (2012). Self-other agreement

as an alternative perspective of school leadership analysis: an

exploratory study. School Effectiveness and School Improvement,

(ahead-of-print), 1-20.

Elder, L., & Paul, R. (2009). Critical Thinking: Strategies for Improving

Student Learning, Part III. Journal of Developmental Education, 32(3),

40.

Elizur, D., & Koslowsky, M. (2001). Values and organizational commitment.

International Journal of Manpower, 22(7), 593-599.

Examiner, A. o. C. F. . (2010, September 20). Report to the Nations Archive.

75

Retrieved from http://www.acfe.com/rttn-archive.aspx

Gökçe, A. T. (2013). Prospective Teachers’ Attitudes toward Whistle-

Blowing According to Type of Intelligence. Mediterranean Journal of

Social Sciences, 4(4), 11.

Hazzi, O. A., & Maldaon, I. S. (2012). Prosocial Organizational Behaviors: The

Lifeline of Organizations. European Journal of Economics, Finance and

Administrative Sciences, (54)

Henik, E. (2008). Mad as hell or scared stiff? The effects of value conflict

and emotions on potential whistle-blowers. Journal of Business Ethics,

80(1), 111-119.

Jenkins, J. G., Deis, D. R., Bedard, J. C., & Curtis, M. B. (2008). Accounting

firm culture and governance: A research synthesis. Behavioral Research

in Accounting, 20(1), 45-74.

Jordan, J., Brown, M. E., Treviño, L. K., & Finkelstein, S. (2013). Someone to

Look Up To Executive–Follower Ethical Reasoning and Perceptions of

Ethical Leadership. Journal of Management, 39(3), 660-683.

Kjeldsen, A. M. . (20112). Dynamics of Public Service Motivation.Department of

Political Science and Government Business and Social Sciences.

Laura P. Hartman, Dawn R. Elm, Tara J. Radin And Kelly Richmond Pope,

(2009). “Translating Corporate Culture around the World: a cross-cultural

analysis of whistleblowing as an example of how to say and do the right

thing” Ethical Values in Global Business.

76

Lehmann, D. (2013.). Whistleblowing won't work in malaysia. Retrieved from

http://www.deloitte.com/view/en_MY/my/myii/2e375ecf32fd5210VgnVCM2

00000bb42f00aRCRD.htm

Lewis, D. (2011). Whistleblowing in a changing legal climate: is it time to revisit

our approach to trust and loyalty at the workplace?. Business Ethics: A

European Review, 20(1), 71-87.

Liyanarachchi G & Newdick C (2009) The impact of moral reasoning and

retaliation on whistleblowing: New Zealand Evidence, Journal of

Business Ethics 89: 37-57.

Martin, D. (2011). Whistle Blowing, Religiosity, Spirituality and Integrity:

Understanding the Impact of Social Dominance Orientation and

Environmental Context. Journal of Moral Occupational Psychology,

Forthcoming.

Mesmer-Magnus, J. R. & Viswesvaran, C. “Whistleblowing in Organizations:

An Examination of Correlates of Whistle blowing” Intentions, Actions,

and Retaliation. Journal of Business Ethics, (2005). 62, 277–297.

Mowday, R. T., Steers, R. M., & Porter, L. W. (1979). The measurement of

organizational commitment. Journal of vocational behavior, 14(2), 224-

247

Osburn, J. D., L. Moran, E. Musselwhite, & J. H. Zenger. 1990. Self-directed

work teams:Te new american challenge. Homewood, IL: Business One

Irwin.

77

Ramlee, J. . (2011). Whistleblowers Act awareness level still low, says

expert. Business Times.

Rattray, J. ., & Jones, M. C. . (2005). Essential elements of questionnaire design

and development. Journal of Clinical Nursing.

Schein, E. H. . (2006). Organizational Culture and Leadership.Business &

Economics.

Sivanathan N & Fekken CG (2002) Emotional intelligence, moral reasoning and

transformational leadership, Leadership & Organizational Development

Journal 23(4): 198-204.

Somers, M. J., & Casal, J. C. (1994). Organizational Commitment and

Whistle-Blowing A Test of the Reformer and the Organization Man

Hypotheses. Group & Organization Management, 19(3), 270-284.

Star, T. (2012, October 14). Whistleblowing - doing the right thing the right way.

Retrieved from

www.thestar.com.my/News/Nation/2012/10/04/Whistleblowing--doing-the-

right-thing-the-right-way.aspx

Taylor, E. Z., & Curtis, M. B. (2007). Whistleblowing in Public Accounting:

Examining Workplace Beliefs.

Toker, A. (2013). Prospective Teacher attitude towards whistle blowing

according to type of intelligence. Mediterranean Journal Social Science,

04.

Treviño, L. K., Weaver, G. R., & Reynolds, S. J. (2006). Behavioral Ethics in

78

Organizations: 1A Review. Journal of Management, 32, 951990.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0149206306294258

Treviño, L. K. (2013). Moral Reasoning and Business Ethics: Implications

for Research, Education, and Management. In Citation Classics from the

Journal of Business Ethics (pp. 131-151). Springer Netherlands.

Uma Sekaran (2003). Research method for business: A skill building

approach, 4th edition, John Wiley & Sons.

Vandenabeele, W. ., & Kjeldsen, A. M. . (2011). The relationship between

public service motivation and whistle-blowing intention: Interplay of

individual and structural elements . Paper presented at the annual EGPA

conference 2011.

Apendix

Culture OrganizationCommitmentReliability Statistics

Cronbach's

Alpha N of Items

.621 5

Motivation

79

Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's

Alpha N of Items

.802 7

Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's

Alpha N of Items

.614 3

Ethical Reasoning

Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's

Alpha N of Items

.864 7

Correlations

CLTR WBI

CLTR Pearson Correlation 1 .115

Sig. (2-tailed) .074

N 242 242

WBI Pearson Correlation .115 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .074

N 242 242

80

Correlations

WBI MOTIV

WBI Pearson Correlation 1 .455**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000

N 242 242

MOTIV Pearson Correlation .455** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .000

N 242 242

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Correlations

WBI ER

WBI Pearson Correlation 1 .298**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000

N 242 242

ER Pearson Correlation .298** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .000

N 242 242

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Correlations

WBI OC

WBI Pearson Correlation 1 .218**

Sig. (2-tailed) .001

N 242 242

OC Pearson Correlation .218** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .001

N 242 242

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

81