| Summary: | The purpose of this research study was to better understand how existing organizational constructs (e.g., law, policy, ethics training) may influence the decision of cleared national security contractors to report or communicate wrongdoing in the workplace. Federal employees and contractors with security clearances are legally bound to protect national security information. Whistleblowing statutes for federal employees and contractors differ, especially regarding protection
from reprisal. Employees who seek recourse for reporting wrongdoing in the workplace lack guidance on how to disclose misconduct without revealing classified information. These gaps may influence the motivations of national security personnel and how, when, why, and to whom they choose to blow the whistle. Personal and public interest motivations for whistleblowing were explored through semi-structured interviews and a web-based survey. A non-experimental, non-observational, descriptive
design approach was used to provide an account of research participant knowledge of and ability to access mechanisms to report waste, fraud, and abuse; the effectiveness of reporting channels for such disclosures; and experience with prohibited personnel practices (e.g., harassment, discrimination, reprisal). The study resulted in collection and analysis of information from 39 individuals belonging to a hard-to-reach and under-studied population, cleared federal contractors working in
national security positions on behalf of the U.S. government. This research fills a void in the literature regarding the real and potential whistleblowing behavior of government contractors by examining the applicability of the spiral of silence theory to this population's knowledge, inclination, or experiences in speaking up and speaking out against workplace wrongdoing. Non-legislative policy solutions are presented to mitigate challenges to the protection of national security
secrets.
|
|---|
