project of rearch metod & tecniques
TRANSCRIPT
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
1/53
1
Research Method And Techniques
Research Project
Title:
Impact of organizational policies and practices on
employee dissent
(The Case of AG Office, Lahore)
Acknowledgement
We are grateful to Allah almighty, for enabling us to fulfill this tiring but interestingjob for the completion of our project.We wouldnt have done justice in presenting this project without mentioning the
people around us who have been immense help for us. We would like to express our
heart-felt thanks to our course instructor Miss. Seemab Ara Farooqi for her endless
support and guidance, which she rendered throughout the study, and provided us
with such thought provoking ideas, to help us with this project. It couldnt have
been simply possible to accomplish this task, without her thoughtful guidance and
expertise.
In the end, we would like to conclude by saying that all errors, omissions and short-
comings of this project lie on our responsibility and we hope that we are forgiven for
this.
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
2/53
2
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................... 5
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY .............................................................. 7
PROBLEM STATEMENT ................................................................. 7
OBJECTIVES ................................................................................ 8
SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY ............................................................. 9
Individual influences: .................................................................................... 12
Individual influences concern qualities that employees bring to the
organization. ............................................................................................... 12
Roberto (2005) claims that employees may have a preference for avoiding
conflict. Therefore, they find confrontation in a public setting uncomfortablesituation. Individuals sense of powerlessness and senses of right and wrong
are contributing factors (Kassing & Avtgis, 1999). .......................................12
Following are some factors that defend individual influences: ......................12
Verbal aggressiveness & argumentativeness: ..............................................12
Kassing and Avtgis (1999) demonstrated that an individuals verbal
aggressiveness and argumentativeness influence the manner in which an
individual will approach expressing dissent. Verbal aggressiveness involves
attacking another persons self-concept. This may include character attacks,competence attacks, ridicule, and threats. Argumentativeness, on the other
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
3/53
3
hand, is when an individual argues about controversial issues. Individuals will
choose their strategy for expressing dissent based on the strength of their
arguments. Kassing & Avtgis (1999) found an individual who was more
argumentative and less verbally aggressive was prone to use articulated
dissent. On the other hand, an individual who lacks argumentative skills will
resort to using a less direct and more aggressive strategy, latent dissent... .12
Work locus of control: ................................................................................. 12
Work locus of control can also be a contributing influence. An individual with
an internal locus of control orientation believes that they have control over
their destiny. They feel the only way to bring about a desired outcome is to
act. Individuals who see their lives as being controlled by outside forces
demonstrate an external locus of control (Robbins, 2005). Kassings (2001)
study demonstrated that employees with an internal locus of control used
articulated dissent whereas an employee with an external locus of control
preferred to use latent dissent..................................................................... 12
Relational influence: .................................................................................... 13
This includes the types and qualities of relationships people maintain within
their organization. Following are its types: ................................................... 13
Employee Relationships: Employees develop and maintain various
relationships within organizations. These relationships can influence the
choices employees make about expressing dissent. Employees may feel
uncomfortable voicing their dissenting opinions in the presence of others
because they feel the best way to preserve relationships is to keep quiet.
Homogenous groups also place pressure on individuals to conform. Since
many people fear being embarrassed in front of their peers, they can easily
be lulled into consensus (Roberto, 2005)...................................................... 13
Superior-Subordinate Relationship: The superior-subordinate relationship is
an important relational factor. Employees who perceive they had a higher-
quality relationship with their supervisors are more often to use articulated
dissent. They feel their supervisors respect their opinions and that they have
mutual influence and persuasion over the outcome of organizational
decisions. Conversely, employees that perceive their relationship with theirsupervisor as low quality will resort to latent dissent. They feel that there is
no room to voice their opinions (Kassing, 2000). Management, which models
the use of articulated dissent, contributes to the use of articulated dissent
among its employees (Kassing & Avtgis, 1999). Subordinates who witness
their supervisors successfully articulating dissent may be more likely and
more willing to adopt similar strategies. However, a supervisor must keep in
mind that expressing dissent can be very difficult and uncomfortable for
lower-level managers and employees. Therefore, supervisors should not only
take actions to encourage dissent, they must be willing to seek out
individuals willing to say no to them (Roberto, 2005)................................... 13
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
4/53
4
Organizational influences: ............................................................................ 13
This concerns how organizations relate to their employees. Once an
employee joins an organization, it is through assimilation that they learn the
norms of the organization. Perlow (2003) states that organizations placing
high value on being polite and avoiding confrontation can cause employeesto be uncomfortable expressing their differences. Employees make
assessments about motives and restraints when others dissent and use this
knowledge to inform their own decisions about when and how to use dissent
(Kassing, 2001). Furthermore, some corporate assumptions are accepted
without questioning. For example, employees will defer to the experts
opinion (Roberto, 2005). Organizational identification and workplace freedom
of speech has an effect on an individuals choice of expressing dissent
(Kassing, 2000). If an individual highly identifies itself with the organization
they are more likely to use the dissent strategy that mirrors the
organizations values. If the organization demonstrates its values dissent andpromotes workplace freedom of speech, the highly identified employee will
demonstrate articulate dissent. An organization that limits the opportunities
for employees to voice their opinion, demonstrates contradictory
expectations, and gives the perception that openness is not favored, will lead
to employees to select latent dissent strategies (Kassing & Avtgis, 1999). . .14
Following are some factors affecting organizational influences: .................... 14
RESEARCH QUESTIONS .............................................................. 25
HYPOTHESIS ............................................................................. 25
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ........................................................ 25
RESEARCH DESIGN .................................................................... 28
Table 1.2: Level of whistle blowing among respondents ........................... 34
Low .................................................................................................34
Range ....................................................................................... 36
Frequency ................................................................................ 36
Percentage ...................................................................................... 36
Low .................................................................................................36
Figure 2.1: Motivational level of respondents ............................. 37
Table 3.2: Effect of whistle blowing on employee motivation ........................38
Motivation .................................................................................................... 38
Whistle blowing ........................................................................................ 38
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
5/53
5
Figure 3.1: Relation of whistle blowing and employee motivation 39
REFERENCES ............................................................................. 43
RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................. 47
APPENDIX ................................................................................. 48
INTRODUCTION
Organizational dissent is the expression of disagreement or contradictory opinions
about organizational practices and policies. Since dissent involves disagreement it
can lead to conflict, which if not resolved, can lead to violence and struggle. Dissent
serves as an important monitoring force within organizations. This study is about
organizational dissent because it is an important issue today. Dissent can either
be positive or can be negative. As sometimes it serves as an important
monitoring force and allows the organization to identify problem and issues
before they become damaging and sometimes it seems that employees who
express dissent are more satisfied with their organization. So we want to check
the influence of organizational dissent and its effect on the motivational level
of employees. The study in hand aims at exploring how organizational dissent
impacts motivational level of employees. So for this purpose, two variables are
selected. One of them is whistle blowing and the other one is motivational
level.
Whistle blowing is a subset of dissent. It involves the expression of dissent to
external organizations. The whistle-blowing process begins at the superior-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Policieshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disagreementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflicthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organizationshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Policieshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disagreementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflicthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organizations -
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
6/53
6
subordinate relationship. Whistleblowers are often high-performing employees who
believe they are doing their job. They just want to bring peoples attention to a
problem that is potentially harmful. (Kassing, 2002).
Organizations need to realize that internal dissent is not itself a crisis, but rather
priceless insurance against disaster. Until the ugly headlines appear and the
consequences are unavoidable, companies too often forget that they will suffer far
more for ignoring their principled dissidents than by giving them a hearing (Bennis,
2004).
Motivator or intrinsic factors, such as achievement and recognition, produce job
satisfaction. Motivational level of employees can increased with the free
environment of the organization.
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
7/53
7
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this study is to find relationship between organizational
policies/practices and decision quality/motivation level of employees in the
paradigm of organizational dissent.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
To investigate effect of organizational dissent (whistle blowing) on motivational
level of employees
To find out the impact of organizational dissent we will conduct a co-relational
research. The use of this research is to find out the relationship between two
variables (1- whistle blowing, 2- Employee motivation); and its influence upon
each other.
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
8/53
8
OBJECTIVES
This study would comprehend the following important points in detail:
To find out about the perception of morally conduct in organization
To determine whether whistle blowing is discouraged by the authority
personnel
To find out the trend of communication about dissent among outside parties
To find out the trend of communication about dissent internally
To determine the level of accuracy of employees in work expectations and
who take the responsibility of their actions
To observe the environment whether there is freedom of decision making
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
9/53
9
SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY
It is with this study, we will prove that even though the word disagreement mayappear negative to some, its this disapproval among members that gives rise to
reasonable discussions and debates giving birth to new ideas and concepts. In other
words, disapproval is the spark required to ignite the flame of above average
performance. Reasonable disapproval is necessary in order to gain insight to
different angles of thoughts and develop well-formed strategies and bonding among
employees. Disapproval, as opposed to insubordination, comes from the fact that
the person has an alternate line of thinking and has the confidence that his line ofthinking can produce better results. Furthermore, disagreements provide the
employees with an opportunity to present their leadership skills. It will also show
that their quality of decision making and motivation level is considerably enhanced
by the results of our study.
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
10/53
10
LITERATURE REVIEW
Organizational dissent is the expression of disagreement or contradictory opinions
about organizational practices and policies (Kassing, 1998). Since dissent involvesdisagreement it can lead to conflict, which if not resolved, can lead to violence and
struggle. As a result, many organizations send the message verbally or nonverbally
that dissent is discouraged. However, recent studies have shown that dissent
serves as an important monitoring force within organizations. Dissent can be a
warning sign for employee dissatisfaction or organizational decline.
Redding (1985) found that receptiveness to dissent allows for corrective feedback to
monitor unethical and immoral behavior, impractical and ineffectual organizational
practices and policies, poor and unfavorable decision-making, and insensitivity to
employees workplace needs and desires.
Eilerman (2006) argued that the hidden costs of silencing dissent include: wasted
and lost time, reduced decision quality, emotional and relationship costs, and
decreased job motivation.
Perlow (2003) found that employee resentment could lead to a decrease in
productivity and creativity, which can result in the organization losing money, time,
and resources.
According to Kassing (1997) there are three types of Dissent:
1. Articulated
2. Latent
3. Displaced
1. Articulated dissent:
It involves expressing dissent openly and clearly in a constructive fashion to
members of an organization that can effectively influence organization adjustment.
This may include supervisors, management, and corporate officers. An individual will
use upward articulate dissent in response to functional and other-focused dissent-
triggering events. Organizations are more attractive to upward articulate dissentingwhen it is in regards to functional aspects. This type of dissent gives the perception
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
11/53
11
that dissenters are being constructive and is concerned with issues of principle
rather than personal-advantage. It allows the employee to signal their commitment
to cooperative goals.
2. Latent dissent:
Employees resort to expressing dissent to either their coworkers or other ineffectual
audiences within the organization. Employees employ this route when they desire to
voice their opinions but lack sufficient avenues to effectively express themselves.
Individuals may also express latent dissent in response to functional and other-
focused dissent triggering. They determine to use latent instead of articulate when
they believe that management is not receptive to employee dissent. This indicates
that individuals would use articulate dissent if they feel those channels are notavailable and accessible. Latent dissent is also used in protective dissenttriggering
events.
3. Displaced dissent:
It involves expressing dissent to external audiences, such as family and friends,
rather than media or political sources sought out by whistle-blowers. Individuals
readily used displaced dissent regardless of the focus or triggering event. External
audiences provide individuals with a low risk alternative to express dissent. The
downfall for organizations, however, is the loss of employee feedback. If an
employee expresses their dissent to outsiders, the organization will not hear about it
and will assume that less dissent exists within the organization. When an
organization fails to address potential issues, employees may then view the
organization as discouraging dissent and will resort to using either latent or
displaced dissent in the future.
Kassing (1997) states there are three factors that influence which dissent strategy an
employee will decide to use:
1. Individual
2. Relational
3. Organizational
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
12/53
12
Individual influences:
Individual influences concern qualities that employees bring to the organization.
Roberto (2005) claims that employees may have a preference for avoiding conflict.
Therefore, they find confrontation in a public setting uncomfortable
situation. Individuals sense of powerlessness and senses of right and wrong
are contributing factors (Kassing & Avtgis, 1999).
Following are some factors that defend individual influences:
Verbal aggressiveness & argumentativeness:
Kassing and Avtgis (1999) demonstrated that an individuals verbal aggressiveness
and argumentativeness influence the manner in which an individual willapproach expressing dissent. Verbal aggressiveness involves attacking another
persons self-concept. This may include character attacks, competence
attacks, ridicule, and threats. Argumentativeness, on the other hand, is when
an individual argues about controversial issues. Individuals will choose their
strategy for expressing dissent based on the strength of their arguments.
Kassing & Avtgis (1999) found an individual who was more argumentative and
less verbally aggressive was prone to use articulated dissent. On the otherhand, an individual who lacks argumentative skills will resort to using a less
direct and more aggressive strategy, latent dissent.
Work locus of control:
Work locus of control can also be a contributing influence. An individual with an
internal locus of control orientation believes that they have control over their
destiny. They feel the only way to bring about a desired outcome is to act.
Individuals who see their lives as being controlled by outside forces
demonstrate an external locus of control (Robbins, 2005). Kassings (2001)
study demonstrated that employees with an internal locus of control used
articulated dissent whereas an employee with an external locus of control
preferred to use latent dissent.
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
13/53
13
Relational influence:
This includes the types and qualities of relationships people maintain within their
organization. Following are its types:
Employee Relationships: Employees develop and maintain various relationships
within organizations. These relationships can influence the choices employees
make about expressing dissent. Employees may feel uncomfortable voicing
their dissenting opinions in the presence of others because they feel the best
way to preserve relationships is to keep quiet. Homogenous groups also place
pressure on individuals to conform. Since many people fear being
embarrassed in front of their peers, they can easily be lulled into consensus
(Roberto, 2005).
Superior-Subordinate Relationship: The superior-subordinate relationship is an
important relational factor. Employees who perceive they had a higher-
quality relationship with their supervisors are more often to use articulated
dissent. They feel their supervisors respect their opinions and that they have
mutual influence and persuasion over the outcome of organizational
decisions. Conversely, employees that perceive their relationship with their
supervisor as low quality will resort to latent dissent. They feel that there is
no room to voice their opinions (Kassing, 2000). Management, which models
the use of articulated dissent, contributes to the use of articulated dissent
among its employees (Kassing & Avtgis, 1999). Subordinates who witness their
supervisors successfully articulating dissent may be more likely and more
willing to adopt similar strategies. However, a supervisor must keep in mind
that expressing dissent can be very difficult and uncomfortable for lower-
level managers and employees. Therefore, supervisors should not only take
actions to encourage dissent, they must be willing to seek out individuals
willing to say no to them (Roberto, 2005).
Organizational influences:
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
14/53
14
This concerns how organizations relate to their employees. Once an employee joins
an organization, it is through assimilation that they learn the norms of the
organization. Perlow (2003) states that organizations placing high value on
being polite and avoiding confrontation can cause employees to beuncomfortable expressing their differences. Employees make assessments
about motives and restraints when others dissent and use this knowledge to
inform their own decisions about when and how to use dissent (Kassing,
2001). Furthermore, some corporate assumptions are accepted without
questioning. For example, employees will defer to the experts opinion
(Roberto, 2005). Organizational identification and workplace freedom of
speech has an effect on anindividuals choice ofexpressing dissent (Kassing,
2000). If an individual highly identifies itself with the organization they are
more likely to use the dissent strategy that mirrors the organizations values.
If the organization demonstrates its values dissent and promotes workplace
freedom of speech, the highly identified employee will demonstrate
articulate dissent. An organization that limits the opportunities for employees
to voice their opinion, demonstrates contradictory expectations, and gives
the perception that openness is not favored, will lead to employees to select
latent dissent strategies (Kassing & Avtgis, 1999).
Following are some factors affecting organizational influences:
Perceptions of organizational dissenters: The perception of supervisors and
co workers can be used to further determine an individuals choice of dissent
strategy. Employees will take notice of other dissenters and the consequences
of their actions and will use this information to refine their sense of
organizational tolerance for dissent, to determine what issues merit dissent,and to inform their future dissent strategy choices. Articulated and latent
dissenters were perceived differently. People perceived articulated dissenters
to be more satisfied, more committed, possess higher quality relationships
with their supervisors, and seen as employees who believed they have
influence within their organizations than latent dissenters. Furthermore,
articulated dissenters, compared to latent dissenters, were perceived to be
less verbally aggressive (Kassing, 2001).
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
15/53
15
Triggering events: Organizational dissent begins with a triggering event. This
triggering event is what propels individuals to speak out and share their
opinions about organizational practices or politics. An individual will consider
the issue of dissent and whom it concerns before deciding what dissentstrategy to use. The types of issues that cause employees to dissent vary. The
majority of employees expressed dissent due to resistance of organizational
change. Other factors include employee treatment, decision-making tactics,
inefficiency, role/responsibility, resources, ethics, performance evaluations,
and preventing harm In addition to the dissent-triggering event, the focus of
the issues can be relevant to how one expresses dissent. Individuals may focus
on improving matters within the organization that affect themselves (self-
focused), they may focus on the welfare of the organization of the whole
(other-focused) or they may focus on issues concerning their co-workers
(neutral) (Kassing, 2002).
Benefits of upward dissent:
In 2002, Kassings research found upward dissent could be beneficial to both the
organization and the individuals involved. Following are some of its benefits:
Organizational Benefits: Upward dissent serves as an important monitoring
force and allows the organization to identify problems and issues before they
become damaging.
Individual Benefits: Employees who express upward dissent seem more
satisfied, to have better work relationships, and to identify with their
organization.
Upward dissent strategies:
Not all organizations are designed to recognize and respond to employee dissent.
Furthermore, employees consider expressing upward dissent as a risky proposition.
In several studies Kassing (1997, 1998) found that employees decided to express
dissent by considering whether or not they will be perceived as constructive or
adversarial, as well as the risk of retaliation associated with dissenting. In 2002,
Kassing found that once an individual decides to strategically express dissent, they
use five different categories: direct-factual appeal, repetition, solutionpresentation, circumvention, and threatening resignation.
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
16/53
16
Direct-Factual Appeal: When an employee uses factual information derived
from physical evidence, knowledge of organizational policies and practices,
and personal work experience, they use the direct-factual appeal strategy.
This strategy is considered active and constructive due to the fact that theemployees seek evidence and base their assumptions on facts, evidence, and
first-hand experience. Employees avoid using verbal attacks and unsupported
data.
Repetition: Repetition involves expressing dissent about a topic/issue
repeatedly at different points in time. This strategy is often used when an
employee feels nothing is being done to correct the original articulated
problem/issue and feel that the issue warrants being repeated. The problemwith this strategy is that repetition in a short period can be seen as
destructive. Especially if the abbreviated time frame does not allow the
supervisor enough time to respond. However, if repetition is used over an
extended time period it may be considered active-constructive since it may
serve as a reminder to the supervisor.
Solution Presentation Strategy: The solution presentation strategy is
deemed as active-constructive since an employee will provide solutions, with
or without supporting evidence. This allows the supervisor to be receptive to
the expressed dissent and indicates that you have put effort into solving the
problem/issue.
Circumvention: If an employee feels their immediate supervisors are not
responsive to dissent, they may employ the circumvention strategy. This
entails the employee choosing to dissent to an audience higher in the
organizational hierarchy. If an employee uses this strategy before giving their
supervisor they opportunity to handle the situation first, this strategy can be
deemed active-destructive. However, when used to express dissent regarding
unethical practices it is considered active-constructive since the dissent is
issue driven.
Threatening Resignation: Threatening resignation can also be seen as both
active-constructive and active-deconstructive. This strategy involves the
employee threatening to resign as a form of leverage for obtaining
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
17/53
17
responsiveness and action from supervisors and management. When used to
express your concerns about unsafe and intolerable work conditions it is
deemed constructive. However, this strategy will appear to be deconstructive
when the managers view the threat as antagonistic and unprincipled.
Encouraging dissent in the workplace:There are some tricks that leaders
can utilize to develop their employees attitudes, knowledge, and skills that
are needed to foster constructive dissent.
Change decision-making focus: Leaders should focus on How I should make
the decision instead of What decision should I make. In the end, if they
perform the following steps the decision the leader should make will be
obvious.
Encourage constructive conflict:
Leaders need to ensure that conflict remains constructive. That is, they must
stimulate task-oriented disagreement and debate while trying to minimize
interpersonal conflict. Eilerman (2006) claims that the way conflict is handled will
determine whether the outcome is constructive or destructive. According to Roberto
(2005) leaders can create constructive conflict by taking concrete steps before,
during, and after a critical decision process.
Following are the steps involved:
Establish ground rules:
Before the process begins, leaders can establish ground rules for how people should
interact during the deliberations, clarify the role that each individual will play in the
discussions, and build mutual respect. Asking individuals to role-play or to become
the devils advocate ahead of time can help reduce effective conflict while also
stimulating constructive conflict (Roberto, 2005). Macy and Neal (1995) claim that
since the role of the devils advocate is to present convincing counterarguments and
to challenge the main position, its benefit lies in the fact that it automatically builds
conflict into the decision-making process.
Intervene when necessary:
During deliberations, leaders can intervene when debates get heated. They might
redirect peoples attention and frame the debate in a different light, re-describe
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
18/53
18
the ideas and data in novel ways so as to enhance understanding and spark new
branches of discussion or may revisit ideas in hopes of finding common ground
(Roberto, 2005). Deutsch and Coleman (2000) explain that reframing allows
conflicting parties to see themselves as being in a collaborative, while producing apositive atmosphere that is conductive to creativity and one that increases the
potential solutions available.
Reflect on the process:
After a decision process ends, leaders should reflect on the process and try to derive
lessons learned regarding how to manage conflict constructively. Since reflections
can lead to new insight, individuals must take time to critically assess the
experience. They also must address and repair any hurt feelings and damaged
relationships that may not have been apparent during the process itself. If these
relationships are not repaired, trust could be lost which could negatively affect the
effort of the next collaboration. Additionally, leaders should celebrate constructive
conflict management and help others to remember the success of the process
(Roberto, 2005).
Establish a supportive climate:
Bennis (2004) emphasizes that corporate leaders must promise their followers that
they will never be devalued or punished because they express dissent. All too often
in the past, organizations would marginalize or terminate any employee who voiced
an opposing view. Additionally, leaders should reward dissent and punish conflict
avoiders. Anyone who clearly withholds a dissenting view only to obstruct the
implementation later should be held responsible.
When leaders establish a climate of openness, they make constructive conflict a
habit in the organization and develop behaviours, which can be sustained over time.
Kassings (2000) research found that when leaders emphasize workplace freedom of
speech, employees openly and clearly express dissent to audiences that are
responsible for organizational adjustment. However, for leaders to ensure this
type of sustainability, they need to not only change the way they make decisions,
but they must develop a pipeline of leaders who approach decision making
differently (Roberto, 2005).
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
19/53
19
Kassing (2000) believes that the whistle-blowing process begins at the superior-
subordinate relationship. If a superior response to an employees effort to dissent is
negative this may cause the employee to seek other avenues of dissent. In fact,
evidence indicates that only as a last resort does the dissident finally go public withtheir tales (Bennis, 2004, Kassing, 2000).
Moore (1922) clearly explained that if you want good intelligence then you need
independence of dissent and prerogatives to guarantee employees that top
management will hear their views. Different types of organizations in various
cultures have found it desirable to establish formalized systems for expressing their
dissenting views. Private sector whistle blowers need more legal protection. Many
research areas contribute to the under-standing of why and how individuals andgroups perceive and respond to information input during the process of making
decision
Stanley (1981)also discussed dissent in broader area. Sometimes dissent does not
strike/hit at the decision, but at the reasoning employed in their support. So there
are several kinds of dissent that create doubts about whether the majority is
capable or incapable, wise or unwise and right or wrong. The habit of dissent has
grown and is growing because everyone in the world wants to give his own reason
and disagrees withothers reasons. So thats why its ratio is increasing gradually.
After having peoples opinion about dissent, the writer regrets that he did not then
and there protest against the dissent habit as not only useless but undesired.
Berry (2005)explained seven dimensions of organizational culture that influence the
employee reflection process that ultimately leads to whistle blowing behavior are
presented. These include vigilance, engagement, credibility, accountability,
empowerment, courage and options. Key considerations within each dimension are
discussed and a compliance framework is used to identify strategies for encouraging
a culture that supports employee communication, questioning, and reporting of
illegal, unethical, and illegitimate practices within organizations. According to
Berry, as organizations seek to enhance standards and controls for effective
corporate governance the important role of whistle blowing has become increasingly
evident. Whistle blowing is an avenue for maintaining integrity by speaking ones
truth about what is right and what is wrong. It is a strategy for asserting rights,
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
20/53
20
protecting interests, influencing justice, and righting wrongs. Whistle blowing is the
voice of conscience. Organizational cultures seven dimensions are quite important
as it tells employees weather to report or not and it will have greater impact on
organizations overall performance.
Lianthi Ravishankar (2002) in his famous article for university of Oxford magazine
Encouraging internal whistle blowing in organization also explained whistle blowing.
He termed it as employees who bring wrongdoing at their own organizations to the
attention of superiors. He argued that whistle blowers encounter hostility and
alienation from people and in industry faced retaliation from their employers in the
form of dismissal or other personal hardships. And are generally defined as snitch or
a lowlife who betrays a sacred trust largely for personal gain.
There are several ways whereby problems can be solved timely thus encouraging
whistle blowing according to writer:
1. Full support and confidence should be provided to employee so that they can
bring problems quickly and immediately to internal authorities to be solved as soon
as possible.
2. Employees should be made clear about the importance of adherence to codes of
conduct.
De Dreu, De Vries, Franssen, Altink (2000) have done an in-depth study regarding the
concept of Whistle blowing. Based on their research study they have made some
hypothesis then tried to prove it. Lastly they also have highlighted the limitations in
the article, so a bit of a summary of every part is given below:
Minority dissent may consume time and deteriorate interpersonal relations but italso increases organizational effectiveness, the quality of group decision making,
and individual problem solving capacity. They have related the organizational
dissent to innovation.
Minority dissent may be broadly defined as:
Publicly advocating and pursuing beliefs, attitudes, ideas, procedures, and policies
that go against and challenge the position or perspective assumed by the majorityof the groups or organizations members
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
21/53
21
According to Santee and Maslach (1982), personality characteristics proved to be a
powerful determinant. Result has shown that extraversion is the key to whether or
not individuals in organizations stand up and voice their dissenting positions. When
forming teams in organizations, organizational leaders may take into account theproportion of extraverted group members. Too few and too many extraverts in a
group are not good. So a positive relation is found that number of team members
high in extraversion may lead towards more dissent and innovation. Results for work
pressures were in the predicted direction and revealed that a higher workload
positively associates with willingness to dissent. Perhaps increased levels of work
provide the stress level that is needed to think about the tasks in a constructive way
and hence to foster willingness to dissent in a work team.
Intergroup competition was not significantly related to willingness to dissent. They
say that may be intergroup competition is not a salient factor in their setting in
which their respondents were engaged. They say that they have measured this on
one base so the reliability is doubtful. They have also found out that past neglect of
minority dissent reduced willingness to dissent. The reason they have given is based
on the result of another researcher (Grahams 1986) that an organizational culture
that disrespects individual conscience and that fails to foster interpersonal trust may
reduce the occurrence of dissent. Their result also supports the hypothesis number 5
and 6 with the extraverted people. They advised the leaders to set the goal in the
early phases of teamwork, but in later phases they should focus on communicating
about how to achieve the goal. So that positive dissent and space for innovative
ideas remain there.
Now as we are focusing more on dissent and its impact on individuals, we tried to
summarize its impact as whole also. Now we wanted to study organizational dissent
as ethical dissent and its impact on organizations overall culture or vice versa.
Ethical dissent, which was quiet important for summarizing dissent, impacts on
whole organization not on one individual. So Stephens study was important in this
regard.
Thickett (2005) argued ethical dissent that the process of ethical dissent is not
merely a single action but is a series of events taking up a significant amount of theemployees time. Starting with an employee noticing something going wrong in the
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
22/53
22
organization this issue can be resolved very quickly or may go on, involving lawyers,
agencies etc. After this it is in the employees hands what he wishes to do keeping in
mind that his career is at stake. It is not necessary that an individual goes public to
voice himself; it can be resolved within the organization by suggesting that aparticular policy be changed. Ethical dissent becomes whistle blowing when you
make your dissent public by going outside the organization and contacting others to
convince them to help you change the policies of your organization. Ethical dissent
like establishing a technical background, meaning that you can only make your point
if you have done your homework, if not then you should be fully aware of the
procedures and the exceptions in detail only then are u in the position to speak.
Secondly, you should keep your arguments on a high professional plane, as
impersonal and objective as possible, avoiding extraneous issues and emotional
outbursts keeping your argument as productive as possible. Try to catch problems
early, and keep the argument at the lowest managerial level possible because once
the problem gets big bigger is the solution. Finding out the problem late is
extremely crucial so its best if we work out problems at a lower managerial level.
Thirdly, one should always make sure that the issue is sufficiently important. This
basically means whistle blowing going outside your organization to resolve issues.
The costs are high as you may even lose your position in the organization so its
better in your interest to stay within the organization. Whistle blowing may
sometimes be the right decision but the cost is high. Use (and help establish)
organizational dispute resolution mechanisms; this will help you to a great extent.
Check if your organization has such mechanisms, use them if not or help establish
some. Lastly, keep records and collect paper, this should be done at the very
beginning once you realize that you may have to resolve disputes within the
organization or follow the path of whistle blowing. Records that you develop later
are not too convincing as they are vague and depend completely on your memory. It
is advisable to develop them as you move forward. Your complaint must be clearly
laid out, without any personal bias, and argued on the basis of reason and not
emotion. All recommendations are for those individuals who want to take action
within the organization against the policies they disagree with in terms of ethics.
Argyres and Mui (1999) explained that one of the most important dimensions of anorganizations culture is the degree to which internal dissent is valued by the
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
23/53
23
organization. Organizational culture and leadership differences suggest that these
differences can help explain differences in organizational performance, and that
changing the way dissent is valued in an organization is extremely difficult. This
develops a political-economic approach to organizational dissent aimed at betterunderstanding when internal dissent can help or harm organizational performance,
why changing an organizations dissent regime is so difficult, and how some
organizations nevertheless manage such changes successfully. They argue that
organizations face a difficult political-economic trade-off in managing internal
dissent. While liberal tolerance of dissent can improve decisions by bringing better
information and deeper insight to bear on them, it can also incur costs from
excessive politicization of decision-making processes. Inculcating or changing an
organizations approach to dissent is much difficult because it requires commitments
by top managers to observe and enforce particular rules of engagement and
policies towards informal Authority that may not be seen as credible by organization
members. If such commitments are not credible, members will refrain from
expressing the kind of dissent that can enhance organizational performance. On the
other hand, if the commitments are credible, organization members may be able to
exploit them in pursuit of their own interests. This is a second important trade-off
involved in the management of organizational dissent.
Pomsuwan (2007)argued that highly motivated employees are key to organizational
success and effectiveness. If employees fail to achieve their, day to day objectives
then organization have to suffer a lot. Long term and short term interests of
organization lies in individual and team based competencies of organizations
employees, leaders and managers.
In this research author briefly explain and interpret the results. For example he
explained first managing self-competency that any manager irrespective of his
experience pays good attention to his goals and time management to Asses his own
work and follow accordingly. Because employees at all levels of experience are high
in managing communication competency, it can be concluded that employees use all
the modes of transmitting, understanding and receiving ideas. In same way he
explained all competencies optimistically.
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
24/53
24
These studies explained dissent in different aspects and using different kind of
dimensions but we read more than 30 articles and we came to conclusion about one
variable which is almost discussed in all articles. Organizational dissent or whistle
blowing is our first independent variable concluded from our articles discussedabove. Now from most of the studies which we read, we have concluded that most
important variable usually affected by dissent or discouraging dissent is motivation.
If we discourage dissent then motivation will decrease or if we encourage it then it
will lead to highly motivated employees but we are still not clear about it until we
carry out research in this field ourselves. But one thing is sure highly motivated
employee's lead to organization's high performance but does encouraging whistle
blowing lead to highly motivated employees is still a question in our readers minds.
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
25/53
25
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
Q.1: Will organizational policies and practices affect decision making quality and
motivation level of employees in a negative way?
Q.2: Will organizational policies and practices affect decision making quality and
motivation level of employees in a positive way?
HYPOTHESIS
If employees do not agree with policies/practices of organization, then their
decision making quality and motivation level will decline or vice versa.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
This research is conducted on Organizational dissent and its impact on employeemotivation level. It also includes two variables Whistle Blowing and Employee
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
26/53
26
Motivation. Whistle Blowing is independent variable and Employee Motivation is
dependent variable.
Conceptual Definition of Variables
In our theoretical framework, the first variable is whistle blowing which is our
independent variable. It is basically a concept which is concerned with employees to
communicate their dissent or disagreement with the upper management and parties
outside organization. Our second and dependent variable is employee motivation. It
is the extent to which employees are involved in decision making policies and
practices. It also involves the level of motivation employees gain by being
appreciated for their work and job performance.
According to our hypothesis, there exists a positive relationship between the two
variables, which states that if whistle blowing is encouraged in an organization, then
the employees motivational level will also be enhanced.
Operationalization of Variables
Following are the dimensions and elements associated with the variable Whistle
Blowing:
1. Perception of morally incorrect conduct in organization. This means
disagreement in the minds of employees. It includes elements that
Disagreement with upper management, Disagreement with practices and
Disagreement with written policies.
(This dimension and elements is referring to Q.1 to Q.4 in our Questionnaire).
2. Communication of this perception to outside parties. It includes elements
that Tell about your organization dissent to your family, Share with yourinformal group of friends and Share with people of other organizations
(This dimension and elements is referring to Q.5, 6, 11, 12, 13 in our
Questionnaire).
3. Perception by authority that this communication should not have taken place.
This means the upper management discourages dissent. It includes elements that
Dissent is something negative, Communication outside is discouraged, Stop informal
communication and maintain strict hierarchy for flow of information.
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
27/53
27
(This dimension and elements is referring to Q.7 to Q.8 in our Questionnaire).
4. Communication within organization about disagreement. This means people
expressed their feelings with upper management, which is also known as
Grapevine. It includes elements that Tell your juniors about disagreement
and Complain to your seniors about your dissent
(This dimension and elements is referring to Q.9 to Q.10 in our
Questionnaire).
Following are the dimensions associated with the variable Employee Motivation:
1. Level of accuracy in work expectations. This means that employees should be
efficient in achieving accuracy. It includes elements achieving possible
accuracy in each task and should be efficient enough.
(This dimension and elements refer to Q.14 and Q.15 in the Questionnaire).
2. Early arrival at office. This means that employees should be punctual about
their timetables and work hours. It includes element must be punctual.
(This dimension and elements refer to Q.16 in the Questionnaire).
3. Taking responsibility.This means that employees should be able to take responsibility of their own
actions and not be dependent on anyone else. It includes element should take
responsibility of their actions
(This dimension and elements refer to Q.17 in the Questionnaire).
4. Taking subordinates in confidence. This means that upper management should
involve employees in all activities of the organization. It includes elementsthey should communicate about their actions to their sub-ordinates and
should informally take them in confidence.
(This dimension and elements refer to Q.18 and Q.19 in the Questionnaire).
5. Participation in training programs. This means that upper management should
motivate employees to participate in training programs. It includes single
element that they Should participate in occasional training programs
(This dimension and elements refer to Q.20 in the Questionnaire).
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
28/53
28
6. Good employees communication. This means that strong communication
between employees of different departments should be encouraged. It
includes single element that Horizontal communication should be there
(This dimension and elements refer to Q.21 in the Questionnaire).
7. Use freedom to make decisions and allow it to subordinates. This means that
employees should be encouraged to openly discuss their views and ideas with
upper management. It includes single element that Take decisions without
fear independently
(This dimension and element refer to Q.22 in the Questionnaire).
8. No fear of mistakes. This means that employees are not afraid of committing
mistakes in fear of being fired. In this way, they learn new things. It includes
elements that Learn from mistakes and having no fear of mistakes
(This dimension and elements refer to Q.23 and Q.24 in the Questionnaire).
9. Having someone to coach. This means that employees should have strong
coaching figures in their work place. This is to encourage and support them in
their work. It includes element that they should have someone to take advise
from
(This dimension and element refer to Q.25 in the Questionnaire).
10. Do not teach but lead. This means that upper management should not only
show employees the means of achieving their targets but also lead them to it.
It includes element that they should Guide and lead them to right direction.
(This dimension and element refer to Q.26 in the Questionnaire).
RESEARCH DESIGN
Purpose of the study:
The purpose of this study is to find relationship between organizational
policies/practices and decision quality/motivation level of employees in the
paradigm of organizational dissent. It is a correlational research as it intends to findout the relationship between the two variables.
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
29/53
29
Unit of Analysis:
The unit of analysis is at the Individual level. Because data was collected individually
from every employee related to our sample.
Time Dimension:
The time dimension used here is cross-sectional studies, as data was collected at a
single point in time.
Researcher control of variables:
This study is non-contrived based on natural environment due to extensive field
work and correlational studies.
Mode of Observation:
Due to the non-contrived technique employed here, the mode of observation used in
this study was Survey, which was conducted efficiently with the use of a
Questionnaire.
Sampling Design:
Target Population:
The population of this research is AG Office (Office of DG Accountants works)
Lahore. There are almost 40 Bureaucrats working for this particular organization.
Sampling Terminology:
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
30/53
30
This research was engaged in Non probability sampling under which the
technique of Purposive Sampling was employed. The sample size was 22. And
the grades of employees were between 18 and 22.
Tools for data collection:
The data collection tool that was utilized under survey technique was Self
Administered Questionnaire. In the questionnaire there are twenty six
questions, in which thirteen questions are of the Whistle blowing variable and
thirteen questions are of Employee Motivation variable. The wording of the
questions is very easy to understand for any literate respondent. Throughout
the five point Likert scale is used in the Questionnaire.
The study is correlational in nature, because it will find relationship between
the variable Whistle blowing and the variable Employee Motivation level.
Editing and Coding Strategies:
As the five point Likert scale is used for the questionnaire so each option is assigned
a particular number i.e.
Strongly Disagree Uncertain Agree Strongly
Disagree Agree
1 2 3 4 5
As the hypothesis suggests, there should be positive relationship between the two
variables, so the statements were placed in such a way that if someone agrees or
strongly agrees then he has been encouraged by whistle blowing from his upper
management and vice versa. And same with second variable if someone strongly
agrees or agrees then his motivational level will be enhanced and vice versa.
E.g. If the Question is:
Q.1: There is morally incorrect conduct in organization.
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
31/53
31
Strongly Disagree Disagree Uncertain Agree Strongly Agree
1 2 3 4 5
And suppose respondent go for the option for Strongly Disagree, then its coding
would be:
Question number Respondent answer Code number
1 1 1
So in this way for the five options Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Uncertain, Agree and
Strongly Agree, then the code numbers are assigned 1,2,3,4,5 respectively.
If the questionnaire is not filled more than 50% then that questionnaire will be
discarded.
If the respondent does not give answer of any particular question then for coding
and analysis the answer would be considered uncertain.
The reason for using a sample of 22 was due to the fact that an approximate of
almost 75% respondents for this questionnaire was needed and if the respondents
would be less than 50% then the questionnaire would not have been used.
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
32/53
32
Data Processing and Analysis:
On the basis of this research, some conclusion is drawn with the help of calculations,
tables and graphs. The study was bi-variate in nature because it involves two
variables. So for this purpose, first uni-variate analysis is done.
Table 1.1: Data on Whistle Blowing
No.
X
Whistle Blowing Gender
1 39 M
2 37 M
3 31 M
4 39 M
5 65 M
6 38 F
7 42 M
8 41 M
9 41 M
10 49 M
11 42 M
12 40 F
13 41 M
14 43 M
15 33 M
16 39 M
17 29 M
18 43 M
19 32 M
20 38 M
21 45 M
22 33 M
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
33/53
33
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
34/53
34
First table for X variable was created, which is Whistle blowing. On the basis of this
table, the graph and frequency table were made, which are:
Table 1.2: Level of whistle blowing among respondents
Whistle blowing Range Frequency Percentage
Low0-15 0 0
16-30 1 4.55
31-45 19 86.36
Medium 46-60 2 9.09
61-75 0 0
76-90 0 0
Hi 91-105 0 0
106-120 0 0
121-135 0 0
Total 22 100
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
35/53
35
Organizational dissent
0
20
40
60
80
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21
Respondents
WhistleBl
Series1
Figure 1.1: Trend of whistle blowing among respondents
So the above frequency table and graph clearly shows the trend that data mostly lies
between 31 and 45 which is approximately medium.
Now, tables and graphs for second variable, that is Employee Motivation are as
follows:
Table 2.1: Data on Employee Motivation
No.
Y
Employee Motivation Gender
1 52 M
2 54 M
3 59 M
4 52 M
5 45 M
6 52 F
7 60 M
8 48 M
9 43 M
10 52 M
11 54 M
12 50 F
13 52 M
14 52 M
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
36/53
36
15 52 M
16 53 M
17 52 M
18 51 M
19 56 M
20 42 M
21 48 M
22 58 M
With the help of table for second variable, the graph and frequency distribution
table were created as follows:
Table 2.2: Motivational level of respondents
Employee
motivation Range Frequency
Percentage
Low 0-15 0 0
16-30 0 0
31-45 3 13.64
Medium 46-60 19 86.36
61-75 0 0
76-90 0 0
Hi 91-105 0 0
106-120 0 0
121-135 0 0
Total 22 100
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
37/53
37
Organizational disse
0
20
40
60
80
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21
Respondent
Employee
Motivation
Series1
Figure 2.1: Motivational level of respondents
So the graph and frequency table of second variable Employee Motivation shows that
most of the employees scored between 46 and 60 which is medium. Bi-variate
tables and graphs would be created by relating the both variables.
Table 3.1: Data on Whistle Blowing and Employee Motivation
No.
X
Whistle Blowing
Y
Employee Motivation Gender
1 39 52 M
2 37 54 M
3 31 59 M
4 39 52 M
5 65 45 M
6 38 52 F
7 42 60 M
8 41 48 M
9 41 43 M
10 49 52 M
11 42 54 M
12 40 50 F
13 41 52 M
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
38/53
38
14 43 52 M
15 33 52 M
16 39 53 M
17 29 52 M
18 43 51 M
19 32 56 M
20 38 42 M
21 45 48 M
22 33 58 M
Now with the help of this bi-variate table, frequency distribution table was created
which will relate both variables and also graph was drawn that showed both
variables combining for relative trend of both variables.
Table 3.2: Effect of whistle blowing on employee motivation
Employee
Motivation Whistle blowing
16-30 31-45 46-60 Total
F. % F. % F. % F. %
Low (0-45) 1 4.55 0 0 2 9.09 3 13.64
Medium (46-90) 0 0 19 86.36 0 0 19 86.36
High (91-135) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
39/53
39
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
whistle
blowing
emplyeemotivation
Figure 3.1: Relation of whistle blowing and employee motivation
Interpretation of Table 3.2 and Figure 3.1:
It clearly has been proved or shown in the relative frequency table and graph that
both variables approximately have correlation. Because when Whistle Blowing
remains medium or between 40 to 60 then Employee Motivation of most of the
employees also remains at medium level or between 40 and 60. But still it is
unclear, so for that purpose statistical calculations were done for the more
quantitative analysis of this research.
Statistical calculations start with value of mean because it is where most of the
employees or average employees lies on the questionnaire.
Mean:
The mean of independent variable that is Whistle blowing turned out to be 3.07,
which indicates that Whistle blowing is slightly being encouraged in the said
organization. Moreover, mean of dependent variable is 3.98, which also indicates
that motivational level of employees is enhanced.
Standard Deviation:
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
40/53
40
The standard deviation of independent variable Whistle blowing is 0.55 which
shows a little spread of real values from mean. The standard deviation of dependent
variable Employee Motivation is 0.352 which also shows a little deviation from
mean.
Coefficient of Correlation:
The coefficient of correlation turned out to be 0.44 which means that there is linear
positive relationship between both variables.
Regression
Equation:
The regression
equation turned out
to be:
Y = 62.7 + 0.28 X
This shows that if
independent
variable or Whistle blowing is increased by one unit then Employee Motivation will
be enhanced by 0.28 units. In the absence of dependent variable change in
independent variable will be 62.7 units.
Dummy Table:
Table 4: Dummy Table of both variables
70 30 100
EnenEn
30
100
70 100
100 200
Encourage
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
41/53
41
CONCLUSION
As the hypothesis suggests that if Whistle Blowing is encouraged then,
Employee Motivation will be enhanced. So the bi-variate tables and frequency
distribution tables showed that most of the employees scored medium in
both variables. Secondly graphical trends also showed that both variables lied
in somewhere near to each other in graphs. Then mean for whistle blowingwas 3.07 which is more than uncertain and mean for employee motivation
Discourag
ed
Enhanc
ed
Decreas
ed
Employee
Motivation
Whistle
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
42/53
42
was 3.98 which means that most of the employees feel that they are
motivationally enhanced which they have been encouraged whistle blowing.
Then value of R is very important, which is coefficient of correlation and
whose value is 0.44, which clearly shows positive relationship betweenwhistle blowing and employee motivation. In the end dummy table and
regression line concludes whole discussion by clearly showing that if whistle
blowing is encouraged then employee motivation will be enhanced. So Theory
of Organizational dissent withstand at AG office Lahore that If whistle
blowing is encouraged then employee motivation will be enhanced or vice
versa. However this research was limited to AG office and bureaucrats but it
gave us deep insight into the system of AG office and also understanding of
organizational dissent theory. We hope to research again on same topic on
wider scale.
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
43/53
43
REFERENCES1. Kassing (1998). Organizational dissent and motivation. Retrieved from
http:/www.wikipedia.com/organizational dissent.
2. Organizational dissent and motivation. (n.d.). Retrieved May 21, 2008, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organizational_dissent/
3. Moore, R., W. (1922, September). The habit of Dissent. The Virginia law
register, 8(5), 338-341.
4. Stanley, J., D. (1981, January). Dissent in Organizations. The Academy of
Management review, 6(1), 13-19.
5. Berry, B. (2004). Organizational culture: A framework and strategies for
facilitating Employee Whistle Blowing. Employee Responsibilities and rightsJournal, 16(1).
6. Ravishankar, L. (2002). Encouraging internal whistle blowing in organization.
Retrieved from JSTORE April 14, 2008.
7. Argyres, N., Mui, V. (1999). A Political-economic approach to organizational
dissent. A journal from New York Press.
8. Pomsuwan, S. (2007). Study of Individual and Managerial Effectiveness: a
Case of employee of Thai life Assurance Association.Journal of Academy ofManagement, 17(2), 190-210.
9. Blumenfield, S., B., Thickett, G. (2005). Journal of academy of management
retrieved from LUMS Library.
9. De Dreu, C., K.,W., De Vries, N., K., Franssen H., Altink., W., M., M. (2000) .
Factors influencing willingness to dissent. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, 30(12), 2451-2466.
10.
Pfeiffer, J. (1981). Power in Organizations and organization theory.Marshfield, MA: Pitman Publishing.
11. Milgrom, P. and Roberts, J. 1988. An economic approach to influence
activities in organizations. American Journal of Sociology.
12. Santee, R., & Maslach, C. (1982). To agree or not to agree: personal dissent
amid social pressure to conform. Journal of personality and social
psychology, 42, 690-700.
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
44/53
44
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Uncertain Agree Strongly
Agree
1. There is morally incorrect
conduct in organization.
1 2 3 4 5
2. I disagree with our upper
management on several issues.1 2 3 4 5
3. I disagree with the written
policies of organization.
1 2 3 4 5
4. I disagree with the practices
followed inside organization.
1 2 3 4 5
5. I usually tell my juniors about
these disagreements.
1 2 3 4 5
6. I usually complain to my
seniors about my disagreements. 1 2 3 4 5
7. My organization thinks that
dissent is not something negative.
1 2 3 4 5
8. Organization usually encourage
communicating dissent outside.1 2 3 4 5
9. Informal communication or
grapevine is encouraged.
*Grapevine: People expressing
their feelings with upper
management.
1 2 3 4 5
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
45/53
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
46/53
46Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Uncertain Agree Strongly
Agree
14. I usually achieve possible
accuracy in a given task.1 2 3 4 5
15. I am quite efficient at doing
operational tasks.
1 2 3 4 5
16. I am usually punctual in
arriving office on time.
1 2 3 4 5
17. I take responsibility of myown actions.
1 2 3 4 5
18. I communicate to my sub-
ordinates about my business
actions. 1 2 3 4 5
19. I also take them in
confidence informally.
1 2 3 4 5
20. I participate in occasional
training programs.
1 2 3 4 5
21. I also communicate
horizontally with people of other
departments. 1 2 3 4 5
22. I take decisions without fear
independently.
1 2 3 4 5
23. I have no fear of mistakes. 1 2 3 4 5
24. I learn from my mistakes. 1 2 3 4 5
25. I usually take advice from
experienced people in same
field. 1 2 3 4 5
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
47/53
47
RECOMMENDATIONS
After working on this project, following recommendations were observed:
Organizations should give more freedom to employees to express their viewspositively or negatively through the concept known as Whistle Blowing,
which was also thoroughly studied under this research.
In order to increase employees moral, whistle blowing should be encouraged
in organizations, as the hypothesis presented in this research clearly showed
that.
More extensive research should be done in various organizations, in order to
find out about their views regarding this concept.
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
48/53
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
49/53
49
QUESTIONNAIRE:
Name (Optional): _____________________
Age: __________________
Sex:
Male Female
Marital Status:
Married Single Divorced
Department Name: _______________________
Instructions: Please rate Strongly Disagree to 1 and Strongly Agree to 5 according to the
statement.
PART 1:
Continued.
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
50/53
50
PART 2:
Thank You!
LIST OF RESPONDENTS
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
51/53
51
1. Zaheer Ahmed
DG Accounts (Works) Lahore
2. Furqan Salabat
Assist. Director (Works)
Office of DG Accounts (Works)
AG office
Phone no: 042- 9210143
3. Sameen Asghar
DG AATI, Lahore
4. Adrees Tarar
DG AUDIT (Works), Lahore
5. Mirza Kamran Baig
DDG AUDIT(Works), Lahore
6. Wasim Shahzad
Assist. Director,
Office of DG AUDIT (Works), Lahore
7. Babar Bashir
Assist.AG, AG Pb (Sub office), Lahore
8. Kashif Haroon
Assist.AG, AG Pb (Sub office), Lahore
9. Shahzad Khalid
Assist.AG, AGPR (Sub office), Lahore
10.Abdul Basit Jasra
Assist.AG, AGPR (Sub office), Lahore
11.Saadiq Saleem
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
52/53
52
AAG,AG(Pb) Sub office, Lahore
12.Asma Fayaz
AAG,AG(Pb) Sub office, Lahore
13.Farzeena LalAssist.CMA, CMA Lahore
14.Ibrar-Ul-Haq
Defence AUDIT Lahore
15.Federal Secretary
Planning PAKISTAN
Mr. Khawaja Sohail Safdar
Phone no: 051-9225211
16.Sheikh Muhammad Amin
Director Admin and Finance
Directorate General Publishing
Welfare Punjab
17.Muhammad Aslam Pervaiz
Deputy Director Finance, Punjab
18.Salman-Ur-Rashid
Assist. Director Finance, Punjab
Residence no: 042-5420208
19.Abdul Rauf
DG Finance, Punjab
20. Dr. Zabda
Deputy Director Planning
21.Javaid Akhtar Javaid
-
7/31/2019 Project of Rearch Metod & Tecniques
53/53
53
(General & Procurement)
22.Muhammad Hanif Khan Assist.
Director Planning, Punjab
23.Javaid RafiqueSection Officer Budget
24.Muhammad Shahid
Deputy Director ADMIN and General