Whistleblowing analysis for detection of insider threat in an multicultural environment. Seok-Ki Cho 1, Man-Sung Yim 1

Transcription

1 Whistleblowing analysis for detection of insider threat in an multicultural environment Seok-Ki Cho 1, Man-Sung Yim 1 1 Department of Nuclear and Quantum Engineering Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology ABSTRACT With the rise of terrorism, importance of nuclear security has been paid increased attention recently. Many recommendations are also being made to enhance nuclear security of a nuclear power plant. Furthermore, as more and more countries are involved with nuclear power developments through international cooperation, nuclear security of a nuclear power plant takes international dimension, possibly involving multi-culture issues. One of the issues that have received particular attention in recent years in nuclear security discussions is the threat by insiders. Insiders, with access to the system knowledge, have advantage in adversely affecting the system if necessary motivation is involved. Vulnerability to an insider threat could be significant as detection of such threat is very difficult and potential impact on physical security of a plant from such threat could be significant. If nuclear security of a nuclear power plant is run by multicultural workforce, early detection of an insider threat could be even more difficult due to cultural differences involved among the manpower. In this study, whistleblowing is examined as potentially an effective way in detecting an insider threat, in particular when multicultural workplace is involved. In this study, relationships between culture dimension and whistleblowing tendency are analyzed based on survey results for various ethnic groups. Previous study on the issue by John P.Keenan s and Heung-sik Park are utilized. From these, ways to establishing optimized reporting channels through whistleblowing in a multicultural working environment are examined. This paper also attempts to give recommendations to properly use and encourage whistleblowing for the multi-cultural workforce in the UAE, as a test case. 1. Introduction Nuclear power is a field where government and a nuclear power plant is typically owned and operated by a government organization. Nuclear power plant operation is done by domestic workforce with its organizational structure, which demonstrates a reflection of culture of the government. In another word, following the international requirements of nuclear power program, a government seeks the most efficient system for establishing nuclear power program that is apt to and satisfies domestic and international needs. One of the most important components in nuclear safety and security system is human factor and the government tries to keep its uni-culture in the system. However, the number of international consortium of nuclear power projects seems to be on its rise and the multi-cultural working environments might affect the organizational efficiency of such projects due to the involvement of different languages, religions and economic capabilities [1]. Detection of insiders, who once received personal surveillance when employed, is very challenging. They have access to nuclear facilities and know how to detour the physical protection system. Recent reports from IAEA emphasize the importance of minimization of insider threats [2,3] for nuclear security. Rather than through the physical protection system, detection of insiders is through internal audit system. In this study, behavior of one of the commonly used internal audit systems whistleblowing in different culture, is investigated. The objective of this investigation is to give recommendations on establishment of whistleblowing channel in a multi-cultural organization.

2 Studies of culture often utilize Hofstede s cultural dimension to predict a tendency of a culture, offering quantitative dimension of score for further analysis. The studies of whistleblowing performed by John P.Keenan et. al and Heung-sik Park et. al, also utilized Hofstede s dimension and present whistleblowing behaviors of cultures by regression analysis. The two methods of measuring whistleblowing behavior are applied to a test case of bilateral cooperation between the United Aram Emirates (UAE) and the Republic of Korea (ROK). Using Hofstede s cultural dimension, the behavior of whistleblowing in the two cultures are examined through a survey and recommendations on establishing whistleblowing channel are made. In this study, questionnaire surveys of Keenan s model (18 of UAE respondents and 14 ROK respondents) and Heung-sik Park s model (18 UAE respondents and other data for ROK [5,9]) were performed and present comparison of whistleblowing tendencies of the both countries, based on a premise adopted in other studies that Hofstede s culture dimension affects whistleblowing behavior. 2. Methodologies for measuring whistleblowing tendency 2.1. Hofstede s model The primary goal of Hofstede s study was to understand respondent s value and to define broad cultural tendencies as core elements in a culture by extracting pre-existing data within IBM subsidiaries [1]. In the study, four statistically-independent dimensions were chosen to present cultural s by the nations and categorized into power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism, and masculinity. Each scoring of dimension ranges from 0 to 100. Higher scores show the greater extent to exhibiting the four cultural characteristics. Power distance refers to the degree of acceptance of unequal power distribution or social treatment. Culture with high power distance may possess a hierarchical organizational structure and admire power in bureaucracy. Uncertainty avoidance represents the extent to how people are afraid of uncertain, unknown, or unclear circumstances. Therefore, culture with high uncertainty avoidance tends to prefer status-quo to taking risks of a challenge. Individualism refers to the extent to how a culture more emphasizes the goal and role of an individual than these of a group the individual belongs to. Lastly, masculinity refers to how much a culture values traditional masculine values such as competition, achievement, ambition, and high rewarding. The dimensions of collectivism and femininity are the counter concepts of individualism and masculinity. Over the years, through many studies, Hofstede s model has been validated and used for making reliable suggestions in the field of social science John P.Keenan s model of whistleblowing J. P. Keenan s methodology was a revised version of what United States Merit Systems Protection Board (USMSPB) employed for employee whistleblowing tendencies within federal agencies in Data is collected by questionnaire survey and the questionnaire uses a Likerttype response format with 32 survey questions. These include measurement of; moral perceptions of major fraud (3 items); minor fraud (3 items), and harm to others (3 items); the degree of likelihood of blowing the whistle on major fraud (3 items), minor fraud (4 items), and harm to others (3items); organizational propensity for whistleblowing (3 items); individual propensity for whistleblowing (6 items); and degree of fear of retaliation for whistleblowing (4 items) [4]. Moral perceptions were measured by the nine questions in the questionnaire. For example, a respondent with a question on minor fraud is asked increasing travel expense report $25 to cover the cost of drinks though your company s policy states prohibition of reimbursement for

3 alcoholic beverage and marks a five-point scale between not a fraud to a very serious fraud. Questions on major fraud/harm to others are about discrimination, sexual harassment and unfair rewarding. Likelihood of blowing the whistle measures one s willingness to report a wrongdoing he or she observed by the severity of wrongdoings. The questions are such as kick-backs, stealing, bribery and giving unfair advantage. Items of individual propensity ask a respondent to indicate the degree of obligation felt to blow the whistle when observing a wrongdoing, and these of organizational propensity are related to the degree of the company s encouragement a respondent belongs to and providing information about the reporting channel. Questions on fear of retaliation ask a respondent to indicate the degree of adequacy of protection his or her company offers, and his or her confidence that the organization would not take an action against the respondent if he or she reports wrongdoings of it. Also, the Likertformat scale is used in these items Heung-sik Park s model of whistleblowing In Park s whistleblowing study [5], the cultural dimensions of individualism and collectivism are seen as the key factor that differentiates whistleblowing behavior. The model suggests four specified individualism dimensions: horizontal individualism, vertical individualism, horizontal collectivism, and vertical collectivism. Horizontal individualism indicates the extent to being self-resilient, unique, and distinctive from groups, and finding an individual equal to others. Vertical individualism refers to the degree that one wants to be distinguished and competitive with others and move up in the hierarchy. Horizontal collectivism refers to the tendency towards equality and highlighting common goals, interaction and sociability and vertical collectivism is the tendency that values loyalty to the group one belongs to, commitment to hierarchical relationships in a group and willingness to sacrifice for the common goal. Collectivists tend not to be willing to give coworkers criticism that harms preservation of harmonious working relationships and vice versa. In a vertical culture, employees tend to be reluctant to use an internal channel of whistleblowing. The typology of the model is of three dimensions: formal vs informal, identified vs anonymous, and internal vs external. Formal whistleblowing means using an official or institutional channel to report wrongdoings in compliance of established procedures whereas informal whistleblowing is to report personally to close associates with trust and power to correct the wrongdoings. Identified whistleblowing is to use his or her name or other information which might identify the whistleblower, whereas anonymous whistleblowing is to cover personal information or use assumed information. Internal and external whistleblowing are determined by whether reporting is to someone inside or outside. There are also questions on three types of value orientation in the survey. They present value and motivation when a whistleblower is encouraged to blow the whistle: legal and moral obligation, social and human relation, and economic value. They imply ways to block or encourage whistleblowing in a culture. The questionnaire consists of 32 items of which fourteen are for preference measurement of whistleblowing, ten are for cultural orientation and eight are for value orientation. This measurement also used the Likert-scale and a respondent is asked to indicate scores from (1), strongly disapprove to (5), strongly approve.

4 3. The Case of UAE and ROK Cooperation 3.1. Cultural difference Figure 1. Typology of Whistleblowing [5] The Hofstede center offers country s cultural dimensions and they are available at the website. To compare whistleblowing behavior between UAE and the ROK, overall cultural characteristics should first be understood. In the John,P Keenan s model, whistleblowing propensity shows increasing tendency with higher collectivism and masculinity, and lower power distance. Moral perception tends to decrease when individualism increases and uncertainty avoidance decreases. In a culture of high power distance and low masculinity, fear of retaliation tends to increase and vice versa, likelihood to blow the whistle does to do so. Therefore, cultural dimension data may give analogy to expect preference of whistleblowing of a culture. As no UAE specific data of Hofstede s culture data was available, a survey using questionnaire was conducted on 20 university students from the UAE. For the ROK, existing data on the Hofstede s culture was used. Table 1 shows Hofstede s culture dimensions of UAE and the ROK. Table 1. Hofstede s culture dimensions of UAE and the ROK [6] Description UAE The ROK Power distance Individualism Masculinity Uncertainty Avoidance Both culture exhibits high power distance, low individualism and high uncertainty avoidance. They both tend to well put up with unequal power distribution and hierarchical system, and feel responsibility for and loyalty to large groups of people. Also, they both prefer to make certain and secure choices rather than challenging the traditional practices. The difference in both countries is masculinity. The ROK possess femininity whereas UAE has masculine culture. The ROK is inclined more to compromise and negotiation, and less receptive to the idea of confrontation and confliction to achieve goals.

5 3.2. Results of whistleblowing behavior from Keenan s model Based on the data on Hofstede s dimension, whistleblowing behavior of the ROK and the UAE is analyzed by using the Keenan s model. Table 2 shows the results for the UAE. Table 2. Whistleblowing tendency of UAE by Keenan s model UAE (N=18) The ROK (N=14) Description Mean S.D. Mean S.D. T-Score Individual propensity * Organizational propensity N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Against major fraud * Moral Against minor fraud perceptions Against harm to others Fear of retaliation N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Likelihood to blow the whistle *p<0.05 Against major fraud Against minor fraud Against harm to others T-test findings reported in Table 2 show that Emirati people have stronger individual propensity of whistleblowing (t=2.22, p<0.05) and a little higher degree of moral perception on major frauds (t=0.469, p<0.05) than Korean people do. Through the results of the ROK presenting lower individual propensity and moral perception, it seems masculinity affects whistleblowing behavior more than power distance for the two cultures. Individual propensity of the Emirati students is scored high and there exists little gap between moral perception and likelihood to take an action of reporting their observation of wrongdoings. However, the ROK presents a substantial gap between recognition of frauds and likelihood to blow the whistle. Also, moral and ethical standards of the both cultures are not much different from other culture, taking into account that the scores show gradual increasing tendency along with the order of severity of wrongdoings. In the case of the ROK that possess similar cultural characteristics to UAE except for masculinity, it can also be assumed that Korean people feel more fearful about retaliation which lowers propensity likelihood to blow the whistle as other existing studies predict [7, 8] Results of whistleblowing behavior from Park s model In 2012, a whistleblowing study on Korean students by Heung-sik Park et al, was published. This study was used in this study. For the UAE, relevant data to apply Park s model was collected through the survey on 20 Emirati students in this study. The results are shown in Table 3.

6 Table 3. Whistleblowing tendency of UAE and the ROK by Park s model UAE (N=18) The ROK [5,9] Description Mean S.D. Alpha Mean S.D. Alpha Attitudes towards whistleblowing Internal External Identified Anonymous Formal Informal Cultural orientation Horizontal individualism Vertical individualism Horizontal collectivism Vertical collectivism Value orientation Legal and moral Social and human relations economic Both countries prefer the use an internal whistleblowing channel rather than to do an external channel. The gap between the scores of identified and anonymous in the ROK is greater than the UAE, which draws an analogy of the ROK s culture that is more afraid of being uncovered of whistleblower s identification. The preferred reporting channel for UAE is Internal-Anonymous-Informal type and that of the ROK is Internal-Anonymous-Formal type. Value orientations of the two countries are also different. In the UAE, legal and moral values are esteemed the highest whereas the ROK thinks legal and moral, and economic values are important. With a combination with cultural orientation, UAE pursues common goals and protection of their organization from an external entity due to the effect of its high collectivism and legal value orientation, whereas the ROK values being distinctive and winning competition in a group to move up the hierarchy affected by its high individualism and economic value orientation. 4. Discussion and conclusion In the questionnaire of Keenan s model, items for organization propensity and fear of retaliation are measured through the respondents occupational experiences. Since our respondents for the research were university students, these parts were excluded during the survey and the observation is through qualitative analysis based on the tendency of whistleblowing behavior according to the Hofstede s culture dimensions. The results from Keenan s model show that UAE exhibits high individual propensity and little gap between moral perception and the likelihood to blow the whistle. Due to high power distance and low individualism, we expected UAE to exhibit low propensity and hesitation to blow the whistle. It may be because of the effect of masculinity in the culture. However, in

7 ROK s case, the femininity score was 61 and it is observed that ROK feels more fear of retaliation and hesitation to blow the whistle than UAE does. The results from Park s model provide specific insights regarding whistleblowing behavior [5]. Since the UAE people that have high collectivism and are distinctive as a group pursuing common goals of a group, they are not much afraid of being uncovered when blowing the whistle, and prefer informal types of whistleblowing channel so that they can solve wrongdoings in the group they belong to. However, the ROK people have high individualism values with emphasis on winning competition, being promoted and economically rewarded. They tend to be afraid of opening their identification when blowing the whistle, and prefer formal types of whistleblowing so that protection of the whistleblower is guaranteed. In both countries, the first priority of whistleblowing is legal and moral reasons. If necessary information and procedures are provided, they feel justice to correct wrongdoings they observed in an organization. The second motivation for whistleblowing is economic gain for the ROK while the UAE values social and human relations as the second priority. It seems individualism is reflected in the preference of economic value and collectivism is in that of social and human relations. Based on the findings, it is suggested that a successful whistleblowing channel for common use by the UAE and the ROK is the Internal-Anonymous-Formal type of whistleblowing. Informal type of whistleblowing is hard to protect the identification of a whistleblower, which is the different concern of the ROK, but by selecting internal type of whistleblowing, formal reporting channel also can minimize employment of external force to correct wrongdoings, which is a concern of UAE. To motivate whistleblowing in these cultures, clear procedures and regular promotion of whistleblowing at workplace should be given and if economic reward is given, willingness of the ROK to blow the whistle might be reinforced. REFERENCES 1. Rian Drogendijk, Arjen Slangen, 2006, Hofstede, Schwartz, or managerial perceptions? The effects of different cultural distance measures on establishment mode choices by multinational enterprises, International Business Review 15: Nuclear Security Recommendations on Physical Protection of Nuclear Material and Nuclear Facilities (INFCIRC/225/Revision 5) : recommendations, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Key Practical Issues in Strengthening Safety Culture, INSAG-15 / a report by the International Nuclear Safety Advisory Group, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Randi L. Sims, John P. Keenan, 1999, A Cross-Cultural Comparison of Managers Whistleblowing Tendencies, International Journal of Value-Based Management 12: Heungsik Park, John Blenkinsopp, M. Kemal Oktem, Ugur Omurgonulsen, 2008, Cultural Orientation and Attitudes Toward Different Forms of Whistleblowing: A Comparison of South Korea, Turkey and the U.K., Journal of Business Ethics 82: John P.Keenan, 2002, Comparing Indian and American Managers on Whistleblowing, Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, Vol 14, Nos. 2/3, September. 8. John P.Keenan, 2007, Comparing Chinese and American Managers on Whistleblowing, Employ Respons Rights J 19:85-94.

8 9. Heungsik Park, John Blenkinsopp, Myeongsil Park, 2014, The Influence of an Observer s Value Orientation and Personality Type on Attitudes Toward Whistleblowing, Journal of Bus Ethics 120: