Introducing a New Key Player in Internal Whistleblowing Procedures: Examining the Position of Confidential Advisers

REFERENCES

• Adams-Roy, J., & Barling, J. (1998). Predicting the decision to confront or report sexual harassment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19(4), 329–336. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199807)19:4<329::AID-JOB857>3.0.CO;2-S
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berendsen, L., Bos, A., Bovens, M., Brandsma, G. J., Luchtman, M., & Pikker, G. (2008). Evaluatie klokkenluidersregelingen publieke sector. Utrecht, The Netherlands: USBO.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, A. J. (Ed.). (2018). Whistleblowing: new rules, new policies, new vision (Work-in-progress results from the Whistling While They Work 2 Project). Brisbane, Australia: Griffith University.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, A. J., Lawrence, S. A., & Olsen, J. (2018). Why protect whistleblowers? Importance versus treatment in the public & private sectors. In A. J. Brown (Ed.), Whistleblowing: new rules, new policies, new vision (work-in-progress results from the whistling while they work 2 project) (pp. 27–52). Brisbane, Australia: Griffith University.
   Google Scholar
• Business Europe. (2017). Position paper on whistleblower protection in the EU. Brussels, Belgium: Business Europe.
   Google Scholar
• De Graaf, G. (2019). What works: The role of confidential integrity advisors and effective whistleblowing. International Public Management Journal, 22(2), 213–231. doi:10.1080/10967494.2015.1094163
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Graaf, G., Lasthuizen, K., Bogers, T., Ter Schegget, B., & Struwer, T. (2013). Een luisterend oor. Onderzoek naar het interne meldsysteem integriteit binnen de Nederlandse overheid. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Onderzoeksgroep Quality of Governance.
   Google Scholar
• Einarsen, S., & Skogstad, A. (1996). Bullying at work: Epidemiological findings in public and private organizations. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 5(2), 185–201. doi:10.1080/13594329608414854
   Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550. doi:10.5465/amr.1989.4308385
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Union. (2019). Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law. 2018/0106 (COD), LEX 1965.
   Google Scholar
• G20. (2018). G20 Anti-Corruption Action Plan 2019-2021. Published in: OECD, Directorate For Financial And Enterprise Affairs Working Group On Bribery In International Business Transactions, G20 Anti-Corruption Working Group Action Plan 2019 – 2021 and Extract from G20 Leaders Communiqué, 11-14 December 2018
   Google Scholar
• Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine Publishing Company.
   Google Scholar
• Hoekstra, A. (2016). Institutionalizing integrity management: Challenges and solutions in times of financial crises and austerity measures. In A. Lawton, Z. van der Wal, and L. W. J. C. Huberts (Eds.), Ethics in public policy and management: A global research companion (pp. 147–164). Oxon, UK; New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hoekstra, A., & Kaptein, M. (2012). The institutionalization of integrity in local government. Public Integrity, 15(1), 5–27. doi:10.2753/PIN1099-9922150101
   Google Scholar
• Hoekstra, A., & Kaptein, M. (2014). Understanding integrity policy formation processes: A case study in The Netherlands of the conditions for. Public Integrity, 16(3), 243–263. doi:10.2753/PIN1099-9922160302
   Google Scholar
• Hoekstra, A., Talsma, J., & Zweegers, M. (2018). The confidential integrity advisor. Current status and future prospects in the Netherlands. Utrecht, The Netherlands: Dutch Whistleblowers Authority.
   Google Scholar
• Huberts, L. (2014). Integrity of governance. What it is, what we know, what is done and where to go. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Huberts, L., & Hoekstra, A, (Eds.). (2016). Integrity management in the public sector. The Dutch approach. Hague, The Netherlands: BIOS.
   Google Scholar
• ICC. (2008). International chamber of commerce guidelines on whistleblowing. Paris, France: International Chamber of Commerce.
   Google Scholar
• Kaplan, S. E., Pope, K. R., & Samuels, J. A. (2010). The effect of social confrontation on individuals’ intentions to internally report fraud. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 22(2), 51–67. doi:10.2308/bria.2010.22.2.51
   Google Scholar
• Lasthuizen, K., Huberts, L., & Heres, L. (2011). How to measure integrity violations. Towards a validated typology of unethical behavior. Public Management Review, 13(3), 383–408. doi:10.1080/14719037.2011.553267
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawrence, S. A. (2018). What else makes a difference? Testing other key factors for effective whistleblowing management. In A. J. Brown (Ed.), Whistleblowing: New rules, new policies, new vision (Work-in-progress results from the Whistling While They Work 2 Project) (pp. 109–131). Brisbane, Australia: Griffith University.
   Google Scholar
• Loyens, K., & Vandekerckhove, W. (2018). The Dutch Whistleblowers Authority in an international perspective: A comparative study. Utrecht, The Netherlands: USBO.
   Google Scholar
• Maas, F., Verheij, T., Oostdijk, A., & Wesselink, T. (2014). Veilig misstanden melden op het werk. Utrecht, The Netherlands: Berenschot.
   Google Scholar
• Near, J. P., & Miceli, M. P. (1985). Organizational dissidence: The case of whistle-blowing. Journal of Business Ethics, 4(1), 1–16. doi:10.1007/BF00382668
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• OECD. (2017). OECD recommendation of the council on public integrity. Paris, France: OECD.
   Google Scholar
• O’Leary-Kelly, A. M., Bowes-Sperry, L., Bates, C. A., & Lean, E. R. (2009). Sexual harassment at work: A decade (plus) of progress. Journal of Management, 35(3), 503–536. doi:10.1177/0149206308330555
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park, H., Vandekerckhove, W., & Lee, J. (2018). Laddered motivations of external whistleblowers: The truth about attributes, consequences, and values. Journal of Business Ethics, 1–14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, R. (2018). Processes and procedures: Are organisational policies linked to reporter treatment? In A. J. Brown (Ed.), Whistleblowing: New rules, new policies, new vision (work-in-progress results from the whistling while they work 2 project) (pp. 67–80). Brisbane, Australia: Griffith University.
   Google Scholar
• Stubben, S., & Welch, K.T. (2018). Evidence on the use and efficacy of internal whistleblowing systems. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=3273589
   Google Scholar
• Talsma, J., Hoekstra, A., & Zweegers, M. (2017). Reporting procedures and integrity provisions among employers in the Netherlands. Utrecht, The Netherlands: Dutch Whistleblowers Authority.
   Google Scholar
• Vandekerckhove, W., & Phillips, A. (2019). Whistleblowing as a protracted process: A study of UK whistleblower journeys. Journal of Business Ethics, 159(1), 201–219. doi:10.1007/s10551-017-3727-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verweij, L., Talsma, J., Hoekstra, A., & Zweegers, M. (2019). Integrity in practice: The confidential integrity adviser. Utrecht, The Netherlands: Dutch Whistleblowers Authority.
   Google Scholar