RT Article
T1 ‘Whistleblowing Triangle’: Framework and Empirical Evidence
JF Journal of business ethics
VO 160
IS 1
SP 189
OP 204
A1 Latan, Hengky
A1 Chiappetta Jabbour, Charbel Jose
A1 Lopes de Sousa Jabbour, Ana Beatriz
LA English
PB Springer Science + Business Media B. V
YR 2019
UL https://www.ixtheo.de/Record/1785609084
AB This work empirically tests the concept of the ‘whistleblowing triangle,’ which is modeled on the three factors encapsulated by the fraud triangle (pressure or financial incentives, opportunity and rationalization), in the Indonesian context. Anchored in the proposition of an original research framework on the whistleblowing triangle and derived hypotheses, this work aims to expand the body of knowledge on this topic by providing empirical evidence. The sample used is taken from audit firms affiliated with both the big 4 and non-big 4 companies operating in Indonesia. The results of analysis using the PLS-PM method found a significant relationship between the components of the whistleblowing triangle and the intention of blowing the whistle. We found that financial incentives are the most significant predictor of auditors’ intention to blow the whistle in Indonesia. Other components, such as opportunity and rationalization, also play an important role in supporting auditors’ intention to blow the whistle. Our findings also suggest that related pressures are the top priority for audit firms in Indonesia to consider in increasing whistleblowing intention. We expand the previous literature on whistleblowing which has been derived from the components of the fraud triangle (Brown et al. in Account Public Interest 16(1):28–56, 2016; Smaili and Arroyo in J Bus Ethics, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3663-7, 2017) by adding empirical evidence.
K1 Reporting fraud
K1 Whistleblowing triangle
K1 Whistleblowing intention
K1 Whistleblowers
K1 Business Ethics
DO 10.1007/s10551-018-3862-x