IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/bushor/v58y2015i6p659-667.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

We’re leaking, and everything's fine: How and why companies deliberately leak secrets

Author

Listed:
  • Hannah, David R.
  • McCarthy, Ian P.
  • Kietzmann, Jan

Abstract

Although the protection of secrets is often vital to the survival of organizations, at other times organizations can benefit by deliberately leaking secrets to outsiders. We explore how and why this is the case. We identify two dimensions of leaks: (1) whether the information in the leak is factual or concocted and (2) whether leaks are conducted overtly or covertly. Using these two dimensions, we identify four types of leaks: informing, dissembling, misdirecting, and provoking. We also provide a framework to help managers decide whether or not they should leak secrets.

Suggested Citation

  • Hannah, David R. & McCarthy, Ian P. & Kietzmann, Jan, 2015. "We’re leaking, and everything's fine: How and why companies deliberately leak secrets," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 58(6), pages 659-667.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:bushor:v:58:y:2015:i:6:p:659-667
    DOI: 10.1016/j.bushor.2015.07.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0007681315000919
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.bushor.2015.07.003?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Akkermans, Henk & Bogerd, Paul & van Doremalen, Jan, 2004. "Travail, transparency and trust: A case study of computer-supported collaborative supply chain planning in high-tech electronics," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 153(2), pages 445-456, March.
    2. Liebeskind, Julia Porter, 1997. "Keeping Organizational Secrets: Protective Institutional Mechanisms and Their Costs," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 6(3), pages 623-663, September.
    3. David R. Hannah, 2007. "An Examination of the Factors that Influence Whether Newcomers Protect or Share Secrets of their Former Employers," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(4), pages 465-487, June.
    4. Hannah, David & Parent, Michael & Pitt, Leyland & Berthon, Pierre, 2014. "It's a secret: Marketing value and the denial of availability," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 49-59.
    5. David R. Hannah, 2005. "Should I Keep a Secret? The Effects of Trade Secret Protection Procedures on Employees' Obligations to Protect Trade Secrets," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(1), pages 71-84, February.
    6. David R. Hannah & Kirsten Robertson, 2015. "Why and How Do Employees Break and Bend Confidential Information Protection Rules?," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(3), pages 381-413, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mazlan Maskor & Niklas K Steffens & Kim Peters & S Alexander Haslam, 2022. "Discovering the secrets of leadership success: Comparing commercial and academic preoccupations," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 47(1), pages 79-104, February.
    2. Hannigan, Timothy R. & Seidel, Victor P. & Yakis-Douglas, Basak, 2018. "Product innovation rumors as forms of open innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(5), pages 953-964.
    3. Baccarella, Christian V. & Wagner, Timm F. & Kietzmann, Jan H. & McCarthy, Ian P., 2018. "Social media? It's serious! Understanding the dark side of social media," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 431-438.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fedorenko, Ivan & Berthon, Pierre & Edelman, Linda, 2023. "Top secret: Integrating 20 years of research on secrecy," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    2. Robertson, Kirsten M. & Hannah, David R. & Lautsch, Brenda A., 2015. "The secret to protecting trade secrets: How to create positive secrecy climates in organizations," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 58(6), pages 669-677.
    3. Langlois, Jonathan & BenMahmoud-Jouini, Sihem & Servajean-Hilst, Romaric, 2023. "Practicing secrecy in open innovation – The case of a military firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    4. Kannan Srikanth & Anand Nandkumar & Deepa Mani & Prashant Kale, 2020. "How Firms Build Isolating Mechanisms for Knowledge: A Study in Offshore Research and Development Captives," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(2), pages 98-116, June.
    5. Delerue, Hélène & Lejeune, Albert, 2011. "Managerial secrecy and intellectual asset protection in SMEs: The role of institutional environment," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 130-142, June.
    6. Mills, Adam J., 2015. "Everyone loves a secret: Why consumers value marketing secrets," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 58(6), pages 643-649.
    7. repec:dau:papers:123456789/5246 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Heidi Olander & Pia Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, 2015. "Proactive Hrm For Reducing Knowledge Risks — Evaluating Commitment And Trustworthiness," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 19(06), pages 1-20, December.
    9. Zobel, Ann-Kristin & Lokshin, Boris & Hagedoorn, John, 2017. "Formal and informal appropriation mechanisms: The role of openness and innovativeness," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 44-54.
    10. Bos, Brenda & Broekhuizen, Thijs L.J. & de Faria, Pedro, 2015. "A dynamic view on secrecy management," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 2619-2627.
    11. Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, Pia & Yang, Jialei, 2022. "Distinguishing between appropriability and appropriation: A systematic review and a renewed conceptual framing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    12. Müller, Dirk, 2010. "Alliance Coordination, Dysfunctions, and the Protection of Idiosyncratic Knowledge in Strategic Learning Alliances," EconStor Preprints 41039, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    13. Gallié, Emilie-Pauline & Legros, Diégo, 2012. "French firms’ strategies for protecting their intellectual property," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 780-794.
    14. David R. Hannah & Kirsten Robertson, 2015. "Why and How Do Employees Break and Bend Confidential Information Protection Rules?," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(3), pages 381-413, May.
    15. Hannah, David & Parent, Michael & Pitt, Leyland & Berthon, Pierre, 2014. "It's a secret: Marketing value and the denial of availability," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 49-59.
    16. Campbell, Colin & Marks, Lawrence J., 2015. "Good native advertising isn’t a secret," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 58(6), pages 599-606.
    17. Sohn, So Young & Lim, Michael, 2008. "The effect of forecasting and information sharing in SCM for multi-generation products," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(1), pages 276-287, April.
    18. Miozzo, Marcela & Desyllas, Panos & Lee, Hsing-fen & Miles, Ian, 2016. "Innovation collaboration and appropriability by knowledge-intensive business services firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 1337-1351.
    19. Giorgio Zanarone & Desmond (Ho-Fu) Lo & Tammy L. Madsen, 2016. "The double-edged effect of knowledge acquisition: How contracts safeguard pre-existing resources," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(10), pages 2104-2120, October.
    20. Kummitha, Rama Krishna Reddy & Crutzen, Nathalie, 2019. "Smart cities and the citizen-driven internet of things: A qualitative inquiry into an emerging smart city," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 44-53.
    21. Sylwia Sobolewska, 2018. "Protection of Marketing Information," Collegium of Economic Analysis Annals, Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of Economic Analysis, issue 49, pages 113-124.

    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:eee:bushor:v:58:y:2015:i:6:p:659-667. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/bushor .

    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.