Ethical disclosure or organisational deviance? A comparative study of motivations and deterrents in England and South Africa

Purpose: This study aims to examine the motivations and deterrents influencing employee disclosure of organisational wrongdoing within higher education institutions in England and South Africa. By comparing how legal frameworks, institutional trust and cultural norms shape whistleblowing behaviours, this research introduces the Integrated Organisational Disclosure Model. The purpose is to explore whether disclosure is driven by ethical commitment or deviant intent, and how institutional environments moderate these decisions. This study seeks to inform organisational policy and improve whistleblower protections across differing legal and managerial systems.

Design/methodology/approach: A comparative mixed-methods design was used, using an anonymous online survey to collect both quantitative and qualitative data from 292 employees across higher education institutions in England and South Africa. The survey included closed-ended scenario-based questions and open-ended prompts to explore disclosure intentions. Quantitative data were analysed using chi-square tests and Cramér’s V to identify significant national differences, while qualitative responses were examined using reflexive thematic analysis. This dual approach enabled the triangulation of motivational constructs and deterrents.

Findings: This study identified significant cross-national differences in disclosure motivations. English participants were more likely to report disclosing for ethical or moral reasons, whereas South African participants were influenced more strongly by group consensus and risk perceptions. Key deterrents included institutional mistrust, perceived retaliation and lack of safe reporting mechanisms. Thematic analysis revealed complex ideological drivers, including justice, human rights and perceived betrayal. These findings underpin the differences between ethical and deviant disclosure behaviours, shaped by individual values and organisational context.

Research limitations/implications: The use of non-random, voluntary sampling may introduce bias and limit the wider applicability of findings. This study reflects the perspectives of higher education employees within two national contexts, and results may be influenced by differences in institutional culture, governance and access to reporting mechanisms. While these factors restrict generalisability, the research nonetheless highlights important patterns in how individuals interpret wrongdoing and navigate ethical decisions. Future studies should extend to other sectors and geographic regions and consider longitudinal approaches to examine how disclosure behaviours evolve over time.

Practical implications: The findings underscore the need for organisations to create ethically supportive environments that encourage safe and legitimate disclosure. Risk perception, group influence and institutional trust were the key factors shaping decisions to report wrongdoing. Institutions should invest in transparent reporting mechanisms, offer ethical training and foster cultures where integrity and accountability are normalised. This study also highlights the importance of tailoring whistleblowing frameworks to national and cultural contexts, as disclosure drivers vary significantly across settings. These insights can support compliance strategies, improve governance and strengthen protections for employees facing ethical dilemmas.

Social implications: This study highlights how institutional silence and fear of retaliation can suppress ethical voice, contributing to a culture where misconduct persists unchallenged. Promoting responsible disclosure is not only a governance issue but a social imperative, particularly in sectors that serve the public. The research illustrates how cultural norms, collective dynamics and perceived legitimacy shape individuals’ willingness to act in the public interest. By understanding these influences, organisations and policymakers can better protect whistleblowers, strengthen civic accountability and foster ethical resilience in institutions that hold significant social power and responsibility.

Originality/value: This study offers a rare cross-national comparison of disclosure motivations and deterrents within higher education, bridging psychological, organisational and cultural perspectives. It moves beyond traditional whistleblowing research by examining both ethical and self-interested reasons for disclosure, as well as the informal dynamics that influence decision-making. The inclusion of both qualitative and quantitative data enriches understanding of how individuals interpret wrongdoing and navigate institutional risk. The findings contribute original insights into how disclosure behaviours are shaped by context and offer practical relevance for organisations seeking to build ethical cultures and strengthen internal reporting frameworks.