New research suggests that when it comes to blowing the whistle, women may face more retaliation than their male counterparts. However, a slight reframing of the message can reduce the chances of retaliation for both men and women.
Published in the Academy of Management Journal, the study found that men in powerful positions in organisations are less likely to face retaliation when they speak up and point out moral infractions. But this benefit of power doesn’t apply to women. Women of all levels face retaliation when they blow the whistle at work.
In one experiment, the researchers had participants complete a team project via group chat. During the project, the experimenters had a fake participant named Kevin or Kate raise a moral objection related to the task the group was completing. The study’s lead author Tim Kundro, a professor at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, says the objections raised weren’t necessarily illegal or unethical but typically fell into “a moral gray zone.”
“You are a petulant little child. You need to grow up and get a grip,” one participant wrote in response to a concern raised by Kate in the experiment. The objections from the fictional female participant named Kate (worded identically to those from Kevin) faced retaliation, even when Kate was said to have power in her organisation. In contrast, a powerful position helped protect Kevin from facing retaliation when the objection came from him.
The researchers believe that women face more retaliation because, in raising moral objections, they aren’t adhering to gender stereotypes. Even though the whistleblowers may feel they are working toward a greater good, others perceive them as putting their own interests first. And women aren’t expected to put their interests first. When women deviate from expectations of how they are expected to behave, they can face backlash and retaliation at work.
“The onus should not be on women to alter their behaviour to avoid this retaliation; the onus is on organisations to remove the bias and systematically eliminate this issue,” said Kundro. Nonetheless, the researchers found that if they slightly altered the objection, they could reduce the likelihood of retaliation. When the researchers reframed the moral objections in terms of the benefits to the organization, the retaliation was reduced for both men and women.