The influence of individual, team and contextual factors on external auditors' whistle-blowing intentions in Barbados. Towards the development of a conceptual model of external auditors' whistle-blowing intentions.

Abstract

Following the collapse of Arthur Andersen in the Enron debacle, whistle-blowing within audit firms has taken on greater importance. Given the profession's requirements to be confidential, independent and to act in the public's interest, there is a need for a model that addresses auditors' whistle-blowing intentions. This thesis presents a conceptual model on whistle-blowing intentions among external auditors, where individual-led antecedents influence whistle-blowing intentions, but are moderated by isomorphic and issue-specific factors. Survey questionnaires were administered to 226 external auditors, and 18 individual interviews as well as 2 focus groups were conducted in Barbados. Results indicated that individual antecedents (attitudes, perceived behavioural control, independence commitment, personal responsibility for reporting, and personal cost of reporting) were significantly related to internal whistle-blowing, but only perceived behavioural control was significantly related to external whistle-blowing. Partial support was found for the moderating effects of perceived organizational support, moral intensity, team norms and group cohesion on the relationships between the majority of the independent variables (attitudes, perceived behavioural control, independence commitment, personal responsibility for reporting and personal cost of reporting) and internal whistle-blowing. However, partial support was found for the moderating effects of perceived organizational support, moral intensity, team norms iii and group cohesion on the relationships between fewer independent variables and external whistle-blowing. Overall, respondents preferred anonymous internal channels of reporting, and showed a general reluctance to report externally. The presence of an open-door policy, ethics partners, hotline, on-going training and clearly defined policies could encourage whistle-blowing. Further implications for research and practice are discussed.