What is the whistleblower's profile?

Whistleblowers deal with stressful situations in a problem-oriented way and with confidence. They are conscientious and proactive.

Wouter Boonstra
June 28, 2023

<img class="alignnone wp-image-3820" src="https://kindertoeslagaffaire.nl/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/Veermanlezing-2-300x168.jpg" alt="" width="379" height="212" />
veerman reading - van oudenhoven
Karen van Oudenhoven, director of the Social Cultural Planning Office
“Give the whistleblower a serious place in the organization and society, but as a metaphor,” said organizational psychologist Karen van Oudenhoven, director of the Social Cultural Planning Bureau in the first Veerman Lecture organized by the House for Whistleblowers last Friday. 'I hope that the image of the lonely whistleblower will be a thing of the past in not too long. '

Frits Veerman
'I'm standing here with a mixed feeling', minister Hanke Bruins Slot began her introduction to the lecture named after whistle-blower Frits Veerman in the warm Pulchri Studio in The Hague. In the 1970s, he worked at Stork FDO in Amsterdam, which developed ultracentrifuges for URENCO. There, he discovered that the person with whom he shared a workspace, Abdul Qasir Khan, was copying secret documents on a large scale and smuggling them to his native country of Pakistan. Veerman reported his findings to his employer, but instead of rewarding the information, Veerman received a gag order. He was later fired. It wasn't until 2020 that he received recognition as a whistleblower by the House for Whistleblowers. He passed away in 2021.

Research not yet completed
His son Paul Veerman, with his family present at the lecture, told in an introductory conversation what it was like for him to experience your father in such a position as a child and was occasionally taken for questioning by the homeland security service. He himself calls for psychosocial, financial and legal help for reporters and hopes for more attention to ethics and integrity and a better reporting culture within organizations. The minister believes it is important to acknowledge to the family that the investigation into the Veerman case has not yet been completed. She calls Veerman an “example for others”. She also points out that the law has changed. The Whistleblower Protection Act places the burden of proof on the employer. “A lot of work has been done on it, the House of Representatives really wants to do the right thing.” The next bill needs to be even better with a fund for psychosocial and financial support for whistleblowers. “We honor Veerman's bravery. Let this lecture be an inspiration. '

Pierre Niessen
Karen van Oudenhoven, for her part, recalls another whistleblower: Pierre Niessen, who raised abuses with the tax authorities years ago. He warned several times that when dealing with surcharges or debts, parents were often unfairly harshly dealt with and that legal protection was not in order. Achieving targets was more important than treating citizens fairly. In 2021, he sent a letter of fire to the House of Representatives, after which there was an apology and acknowledgment that the top of the tax authorities did not deal properly with his reports. Whistle-blowing is a lonely battle', notes Van Oudenhoven. 'The whistleblower is often sidetracked. '

An important characteristic of whistle-blowers is that they are morally idealistic

Karen van Oudenhoven, director of SCP

The importance of different voices
Van Oudenhoven points to the importance of openness to a different voice in the workplace. As an organizational psychologist, she focuses on the psychology of the whistleblower. What inspires them? What can we learn from them? And what does this require of safety within organizations? It is important to distinguish between noticing and interpreting behavior as reprehensible and moving to do something about it. Do I find the behavior unethical? Is it up to me to take action? And do the costs outweigh the benefits? “An important characteristic of whistle-blowers is that they are morally idealistic,” according to Van Oudenhoven, research shows. “They tend to regard anything that causes harm to others as morally unethical.” She gives the example of policy that you can only grow with the competence of foreign experience. This has negative consequences for people who are unable to travel easily. Unethical or not necessarily problematic?

Merged Identity
After that, Van Oudenhoven differentiates between personal and social identity. People with a dominant personal identity bring in different perspectives, but are also focused on self-interest. The social identity is formed by membership in an organization or team. New people in the organization are “socialized” into that identity. “In fact, they hand in part of their personal identity at the front door of the organization and exchange it for the collective identity.” In a strong organizational culture, that identity is called depersonalized. As an example, she mentions the police organization, where strong informal standards prevail and loyalty is very important. And then there is the merged identity: personal and social identities coexist there and reinforce each other positively. People connect with the group in a personal way. This is not at the expense of their own individuality. They are willing to sacrifice their own interests for the group. Whistleblowers often have a merged identity. Rather, they interpret behavior as unethical and take action to do something about injustice against others.

Neuroticism and Extraversion
In relation to whistle-blowing, Van Oudenhoven mentions some of the properties that have to do with regulating emotions: neuroticism and extroversion. Neurotic people are more likely to have negative emotions, extroverts are more likely to have positive emotions. Neurotic people are more likely to see ambivalent behavior as unethical and weigh it more heavily. Rather, they use an idealistic-ethical perspective, but do not take immediate action. Extroverts, on the other hand, take action more quickly if they notice unethical behavior. A whistle-blower is someone with empathy. This is often associated with “friendliness”. And friendly people often show pro-social behavior. Extroverts also show pro-social behavior. But sensitivity to what others think doesn't help friendly individuals in the whistle-blower's lonely struggle. That characteristic is therefore not often found among whistle-blowers, while there is much more evidence of the role of extroversion.

In organizations, whistleblowers are not necessarily seen as someone who comes to bring good.

Karen van Oudenhoven, director of SCP

Conscientious and proactive
Whistleblowers deal with stressful situations in a problem-oriented way and with confidence. They are conscientious and proactive. People with these traits are dutiful, ordered and persistent and want to control their environment, drivers of change and don't shy away from resentment in the environment. Confidence that someone can achieve the desired results with their own behavior is the aspect of trust that leads to someone ringing the alarm indoors more often. That trust in one's own ability to solve problems makes whistle-blowers resilient. It is also increasingly recognized that people who “do good” have the quality of “integrity”. They are loyal, honest, reliable and helpful, and not arrogant, sneaky, complacent, lying, or greedy. Van Oudenhoven does not know whether this factor is related to whistleblowing. “But I can imagine something about it. You too? '

The Whistleblower Paradox
But what ensures that a whistleblower in an organization can speak out safely and that something is also done with their critical voice? “In organizations, whistleblowers are not necessarily seen as someone who will bring good.” This is called the “whistleblower paradox”. On the one hand, the whistle-blowers are seen as a hero, on the other hand as someone who disrupts the harmony in the group. Their behavior is often seen as “immoral” and they are blamed for a lack of loyalty. This mainly occurs in organizations with strong behavioral standards and great pressure to commit to them. “You shouldn't soil your own nest.”

Inclusive behavior
So how do you achieve psychological safety in the organization? First, people must be able to speak out safely and be valued. “There must be a culture where standing up for what feels like injustice isn't at odds with loyalty.” People need to know that they are not being charged for asking critical questions. In unsafe organizations, that trust is not there and there is often gossip or even a culture of fear. “There are fears of sanctions, an angry manager or no longer joining the team.” Leaders should act inclusively and invite contradiction. Leadership that stimulates a “merged team identity” by focusing on both the individual and the collective. “Niessen should have been able to express his concerns in the team. His colleagues could therefore have contributed their images of the situation. ' People should also be allowed to make mistakes and be encouraged to experiment. “It is crucial that everyone can have an input and that they receive serious attention.”

Give the whistleblower a serious place in the organization and society, but as a metaphor

Karen van Oudenhoven, director of SCP

“Toxic” environment
In the government, there are still too many organizations with an unsafe environment, also known as “toxic”. People are less likely to speak up and the chance to learn and develop is less. “Bet on a merged identity: from top down to bottom up. Let the characteristics of individuals determine the identity of the group. ' This creates an organizational identity based on what you want to achieve together and that offers space for personal identities. An organization can use these identities to define the shared identity. Experiments show that this works: cohesion and trust are created and people speak out earlier. People also show more cooperative and solidarity behavior in organizations. While codes are necessary against unheard behavior, they do not solve everything and can even have unintended negative effects. 'Open reflection helps then. '

Debate about values
Whistle-blowing should not be necessary. But Van Oudenhoven would like several people to behave sincerely and authentically in organizations: a whistleblower. This is because employees with a critical voice can encourage ethical reflection and adjustment. Reflection is also necessary to help people regain confidence in institutions. And for that, the public debate should be more about values, such as justice, the public interest and what it means to be a citizen. The whistleblower could be the instigator of this type of debate. “Give the whistleblower a serious place in the organization and society, but as a metaphor.” And so no longer the whistle-blower who is praised and maligned as a kind of Don Quixote.

&nbsp;