Pengaruh Profesionalisme, Komitmen Organisasi dan Sensitivitas Etika Terhadap Intensi Whistleblowing Pada Badan Keuangan dan Aset Daerah (BKAD) Kota Kendari
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.71417/j-sime.v3i2.2299Keywords:
profesionalisme, komitmen organisasi, sensitivitas etika, intensi whistleblowing, BKAD Kota KendariAbstract
Risiko penyimpangan dalam pengelolaan keuangan daerah menuntut partisipasi aparatur sipil negara dalam melaporkan pelanggaran untuk mendukung transparansi dan akuntabilitas pemerintahan. Penelitian ini bertujuan menganalisis pengaruh profesionalisme, komitmen organisasi, dan sensitivitas etika terhadap intensi whistleblowing pada Badan Keuangan dan Aset Daerah (BKAD) Kota Kendari, baik secara parsial maupun simultan. Penelitian menggunakan metode kuantitatif dengan pendekatan deskriptif. Peneliti mengumpulkan data melalui kuesioner kepada 83 responden yang dipilih dari populasi 104 aparatur sipil negara menggunakan teknik simple random sampling. Peneliti menganalisis data menggunakan regresi linear berganda dengan bantuan IBM SPSS Statistics versi 26. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa profesionalisme, komitmen organisasi, dan sensitivitas etika masing-masing berpengaruh positif dan signifikan terhadap intensi whistleblowing, dengan nilai signifikansi berturut-turut sebesar 0,003; 0,005; dan 0,021. Secara simultan, ketiga variabel berpengaruh signifikan dengan nilai F sebesar 10,693 dan p < 0,001. Model penelitian menjelaskan 28,9% variasi intensi whistleblowing, dengan nilai adjusted R² sebesar 0,262. Temuan ini menunjukkan bahwa profesionalisme, keterikatan terhadap organisasi, dan kemampuan mengenali persoalan etika merupakan faktor yang mendukung niat pegawai untuk melaporkan pelanggaran. Oleh karena itu, BKAD Kota Kendari dapat menjadikan pengembangan profesionalisme, penguatan komitmen organisasi, dan peningkatan sensitivitas etika sebagai dasar pembinaan pegawai untuk mendukung pelaporan pelanggaran dan tata kelola keuangan daerah yang akuntabel.
Downloads
References
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
Antoh, A., Sholihin, M., Sugiri, S., & Arifa, C. (2024). A perspective on the whistleblowing intention of internal auditors: An integrated ethical decision-making model. Cogent Business & Management, 11(1), Article 2292817. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2292817
Aslam, M. K., Akhtar, M. S., Akhtar, M. W., Asrar-ul-Haq, M., Iqbal, J., & Usman, M. (2023). “Reporting the wrong to the right”: The mediated moderation model of whistleblowing education and the whistleblowing intentions. Kybernetes, 52(3), 981–996. https://doi.org/10.1108/K-02-2021-0123
Batolas, D., Perkovic, S., & Mitkidis, P. (2023). Psychological and hierarchical closeness as opposing factors in whistleblowing: A meta-analysis. Journal of Business and Psychology, 38, 369–383. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-022-09849-5
Cooper, C. A. (2022). Encouraging bureaucrats to report corruption: Human resource management and whistleblowing. Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration, 44(2), 106–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/23276665.2021.1894955
Lakens, D. (2022). Sample size justification. Collabra: Psychology, 8(1), Article 33267. https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.33267
Latan, H., Chiappetta Jabbour, C. J., Ali, M., Lopes de Sousa Jabbour, A. B., & Vo-Thanh, T. (2023). What makes you a whistleblower? A multi-country field study on the determinants of the intention to report wrongdoing. Journal of Business Ethics, 183, 885–905. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-022-05089-y
Oelrich, S., & Chwolka, A. (2024). When deviants talk: The role of Dark Triad traits and moral reasoning in whistleblowing. Journal of Management Control, 35, 333–369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00187-024-00379-0
Podsakoff, P. M., Podsakoff, N. P., Williams, L. J., Huang, C., & Yang, J. (2024). Common method bias: It’s bad, it’s complex, it’s widespread, and it’s not easy to fix. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 11, 17–61. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-110721-040030
Previtali, P., & Cerchiello, P. (2022). Organizational determinants of whistleblowing. A study of Italian municipalities. Public Organization Review, 22, 903–918. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-021-00554-0
Rosadi, A., Marta, M. S., Supriadi, D., Sanusi, A., & Somawinata, Y. (2022). Career opportunity of whistle-blower in the workplace: The role of privacy legislation and supervisor support. Heliyon, 8(10), Article e10962. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10962
Shatz, I. (2024). Assumption-checking rather than (just) testing: The importance of visualization and effect size in statistical diagnostics. Behavior Research Methods, 56, 826–845. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-023-02072-x
Sideridis, G., Tsaousis, I., & Ghamdi, H. (2023). Equidistant response options on Likert-type instruments: Testing the interval scaling assumption using Mplus. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 83(5), 885–906. https://doi.org/10.1177/00131644221130482
Srivastava, S., & Gupta, P. (2022). To speak or not to speak: Motivators for internal whistleblowing in hotel industry. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 34(10), 3814–3833. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-11-2021-1366
Tuan Mansor, T. M., Mohamad Ariff, A., Hashim, H. A., & Ngah, A. H. (2022). External whistleblowing intentions of auditors: A perspective based on stimulus–organism–response theory. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 22(4), 871–897. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-03-2021-0116
Zhang, Y., Hung, W.-J., Dong, H.-K., & Chen, D.-Y. (2025). Public employees’ whistleblowing intention: Explanation by an adapted theory of planned behavior. Public Administration, 103(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.13009
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Ananda Pratiwi Hamdani, Ishak Awaluddin, Sulvariany Tamburaka (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
