{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02384227418615314, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.861635220125786, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Accounting professionals and whistleblowing: a typology of the influence of institutional logics

ABSTRACT The main objective of this article is to understand how institutional logics (ILs) - family, religion, community, state, profession, organization, and capital and labor market - influence (or not) the Brazilian accounting professional in their intention to report irregularities. The study helps fill an epistemic gap by using the theory of ILs to comprehensively understand the professional in their world, in contrast with the whistleblowing studies that are generally based on behavioral theories. Most of those studies are quantitative, using the vignette technique (elaborated by researchers), which highlights the relevance of this paper, as it chooses to allow the accountants to reflect on the phenomenon and elaborate explanations for their actions and the dimensions that surround them. The main contribution lies in the theoretical advancement in accounting by extending the classic whistleblowing model, in order to socioinstitutionally recognize the individual’s reflection process (at the micro level) and the structuring elements (macro and meso levels) involved. In methodological terms, the study is qualitative and interpretative, based on content analysis (CA) through the lens of the hermeneutic circle. Standing out among the results are: (a) a typology of the influence of ILs on the accounting professional’s intention to report irregularities; (b) the differentiation of influences that favor whistleblowing or lead to the avoidance of it according to various logics; and (c) discussions about the premises that greater protection and support for the whistleblower would favor whistleblowing or, in contrast, that recognition and financial reward would be considered as factors that would not favor whistleblowing, among other aspects. The impact and applicability of the study derive from an alternative approach in epistemic-methodological terms, enabling an understanding of the socioinstitutional structure that influences whistleblowing intentions, thus allowing for the construction of mechanisms that increase the potential for whistleblowing.