Author
Listed:
- Brenda Tumuramye
- Joseph Mpeera Ntayi
- Moses Muhwezi
Abstract
Purpose - This study aims to investigate the whistle-blowing behaviour in Ugandan public procurement by using whistle-blowing supporting institutions, procuring and disposing entity (PDE) ethical climate and whistle-blowing expectancy. Design/methodology/approach - A quantitative cross-sectional survey was conducted using a sample of 118 drawn from a population of 179 central government (PDEs). Data were collected using self-administered questionnaires, resulting in 222 usable questionnaires from 70 PDEs, representing a response rate of 62.71 per cent. Findings - The results reveal that the whistle-blowing supporting institutions and PDE ethical climate are significant predictors of whistle-blowing intentions and behaviour, accounting for 30.2 per cent of the variance. The authors therefore recommend that whistle-blowing supporting institutions, like the Whistle Blowers Protection Act, should be reviewed and strengthened to promote whistle-blowing intentions and behaviour. This could be done through reviewing the Act to make it enforceable, giving power to the whistle-blowers, strengthening policies, developing safeguards against retaliation by making every chief executive officer in the public sector accountable, increasing whistle-blowing incentives and providing whistle-blowing hotlines for anonymous whistle-blowers. PDEs should also create conducive ethical climates that encourage people to voice their concerns internally or externally, and ethical committees should be established within PDEs and other bodies such as the Inspector General of Government for ensuring that whistle-blowing systems are in place and promoted. There is a need to increase whistle-blowing expectancy through the effective handling of reported cases to their conclusion and the use of role models.
Suggested Citation
Brenda Tumuramye & Joseph Mpeera Ntayi & Moses Muhwezi, 2018.
"Whistle-blowing intentions and behaviour in Ugandan public procurement,"
Journal of Public Procurement, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 18(2), pages 111-130, June.
Handle:
RePEc:eme:jopppp:jopp-06-2018-008
DOI: 10.1108/JOPP-06-2018-008
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
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:eme:jopppp:jopp-06-2018-008. 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: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.