Whistleblowing as a Recursive Sequence of Épreuves: A Boltanskian Theorization of Speaking Up

Mahaut Fanchini () and Meghan van Portfliet
Additional contact information
Mahaut Fanchini: IRG - Institut de Recherche en Gestion - UPEM - Université Paris-Est Marne-la-Vallée - UPEC UP12 - Université Paris-Est Créteil Val-de-Marne - Paris 12, ESTIA - ESTIA - Institute of technology

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: Abstract This paper presents a novel theoretical framework for understanding whistleblowing as a dynamic and recursive sequence of épreuves (tests), drawing on Luc Boltanski's sociology of critique. Traditionally, whistleblowing research has focused on either the whistleblower's experience or the organizational response, often treating these aspects in isolation. This study bridges these perspectives by conceptualizing whistleblowing as a co-constructed process in which the actions of whistleblowers and organizations shape and reshape each other. Central to this framework are three types of épreuves —ethical, responsive, and societal—which represent critical junctures in the whistleblowing journey. These tests determine the perceived legitimacy of the organization and their response and fuel the persistence of the whistleblower's critique. By framing whistleblowing as a recursive process, this paper highlights how each interaction between whistleblower and organization can alter the course of events, leading to varying outcomes. The recursive model captures the complex, iterative nature of whistleblowing and offers insights into why some whistleblowing cases persist or escalate, while others are resolved or silenced. This perspective enriches our understanding of whistleblowing dynamics and provides practical implications for fostering more responsive organizational cultures and managing whistleblowing disclosures effectively.

Keywords: Whistleblowing; Boltanski; Critique; Whistleblowing process; Organizational responsiveness; Épreuves Recursiveness (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025-04-04
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Published in Journal of Business Ethics, 2025, ⟨10.1007/s10551-025-05996-w⟩

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hal:journl:hal-05065058

DOI: 10.1007/s10551-025-05996-w

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().