Paper Versus Practice: A Field Investigation of Integrity Hotlines
通过向近250家公司提交四种不同类型的违规举报，实地测试了诚信热线的实际响应情况，发现约五分之一的热线存在故障，约10%的公司未能及时回应，揭示了热线在纸面规定与实际运作之间的差距。
ABSTRACT In an effort to motivate firms to more rapidly detect potential misconduct, legislators, regulators, and enforcement agencies incentivize firms to have integrity or “whistleblowing” hotlines. These hotlines provide individuals an opportunity to report alleged misconduct and seek guidance about how to appropriately respond. Beyond some isolated examples, little is known about the responsiveness of hotlines to actual claims of alleged misconduct. I undertake a field study to investigate how hotlines function in practice by making four different inquiries involving alleged misconduct to nearly 250 firms. I find that one‐fifth of firms have impediments (e.g., phone line disconnected, email bounce back, direct to incorrect website) that hinder reporting and approximately 10% of firms do not respond in a timely manner. Overall, this investigation illuminates several differences between integrity hotlines “on paper” and how they actually perform in practice.