IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/lpadxx/v45y2022i12p894-906.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Merit Principles Merit Further Investigation: The Influence on Employee Perception of Whistleblowing

Author

Listed:
  • Sanghee Park
  • So Hee Jeon

Abstract

Merit principles have been fundamental to managing human resources for several decades in public administration. However, the meaning of merit and its relationship with other values needs more attention from the scholarship. This study investigates how three components of merit principles, i.e., tenure protection, merit-based hiring, and merit-based rewards, affect government employees in different ways by focusing on their willingness to report wrongdoings. This study finds from the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey that tenure protection is a significant positive predictor of whistleblowing, and its negative marginal effect turns to positive when employees perceive their tenures are well protected. However, their willingness to blow the whistle is less related to merit-based hiring, while merit-based rewards have a positive effect on whistleblowing despite the ambiguous expectation in the literature. Employee empowerment, trust in management, and ethical leadership consistently increase the probability of whistleblowing. This study finds no evidence of interagency differences.

Suggested Citation

  • Sanghee Park & So Hee Jeon, 2022. "Merit Principles Merit Further Investigation: The Influence on Employee Perception of Whistleblowing," International Journal of Public Administration, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(12), pages 894-906, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:lpadxx:v:45:y:2022:i:12:p:894-906
    DOI: 10.1080/01900692.2021.1928185
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01900692.2021.1928185
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/01900692.2021.1928185?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:lpadxx:v:45:y:2022:i:12:p:894-906. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/lpad .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.