Whistleblowing vs. Grievance – Is There Any Difference?

When dealing with the terms 'whistleblowing' and 'grievance', it is not rare to see them being used interchangeably. In fact, it is quite common to observe this in ESG assessment processes, when organisations are asked about a grievance system integrated into governance, and, instead, they mention a whistleblower mechanism. These two are not the same, though.

When it comes to the definitions, both terms are comparable in terms of essentially being reporting mechanisms. However, at a first glance, it still remains quite unclear what the difference is.

Whistleblowing concerns itself with issues, which reporting and subsequent disclosure are conducted in the public interest. This means it must affect others, for example, the general public. Grievance, on the other hand, can be addressed only by a party that is being the sole victim of the situation. Just as whistleblowing, it can relate to violations of rules e.g., policies, employment contract, standards.

Although grievance topics frequently fall under the aforementioned categories, they are not constrained by them. Sustainability grievance mechanism can be highlighted as a separate category - those are grievance procedures to address any issues of concern that might arise, for instance, in connection with organisation’s sustainability commitments. While whistleblowing might be a bit 'too strong' for those, a grievance system comes into use. Sustainability-related grievance matters such as community, environmental, and land management were the ones that Eni determined to be the most frequent in 2021.

More supply chain participants are able to use the whistleblowing mechanism, expanding the pool of stakeholders that can use it. Grievance, however, is peculiar in terms of more openness to civil society.

Whistleblowing mechanisms are now unquestionably integrated into organisational governance, yet grievances are still not that regular. According to the World Bank Group (2008), the benefits brought about are rather justified.

A solid grievance procedure should be easy to understand but not overly straightforward in the way it approaches people and problems. A user-friendly approach and clarity will undoubtedly produce fruitful outcomes (ibid.). Design of a simple grievance mechanism structure proposed by the World Bank Group (2008) looks as follows:

1. Receive and register: concerns can be expressed to the organisation directly, and if required, anonymously or through intermediaries.
2. Screen and assess: prior to rejecting a complaint, give complainants the benefit of the doubt and engage in a dialogue. Decide who will do the assessment, encourage a corporate representative to speak with the complainants directly to get a first-hand understanding, identify the parties, concerns, points of view, and available choices, and, finally, assign a severity level to the complaint.
3. Formulate a response: the process for handling the complaint should make clear who speaks with whom and how. In some circumstances, it could be appropriate for the staff member in charge of assessments to provide comments alongside the complaints procedure coordinator. Depending on how serious the issue is, the site manager might take part in the feedback.
4. Track and Monitor: create a plan to change the mechanism, establish precise standards and criteria for evaluation, and report your findings to the community. An organisation may enhance both its own performance and any development benefits on the ground by implementing regular review and incorporating findings into improvements in corporate procedures and activities.

The early resolution of issues at the lowest level is one of the grievance mechanism's core objectives, and it is crucial to support that with personnel training. Businesses should encourage staff to see criticism and disapproval as a source of insightful data that can enhance operations, lower risk, and foster positive relationships with the community. But it is key to remember that, like with many governance tools, the grievance mechanism is likely to be inefficient or underused without strong commitment from the top leadership.

Sources:

brighthr. (2022). Employee Grievances: What you Need to Know. https://www.brighthr.com/articles/employee-conduct/grievances/types-of-grievances-in-the-workplace/#:~:text=An%20employee%20grievance%20is%20a,and%2For%20unjust%20on%20them.

The Economic Times. (2022). What is 'Whistleblower'. Accessed on 2 October, 2022. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/definition/whistleblower

The World Bank Group. (2008). A Guide to Designing and Implementing Grievance Mechanisms for Development Projects. Accessed on 3 October, 2022. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/598641478092542645/pdf/108864-WP-CAO-ENGLISH-Implementing-Grievance-mechanisms-PUBLIC.pdf

eni.com. (2021). Stakeholder Management System and Grievance Mechanism. Accessed on 2 October, 2022. https://www.eni.com/en-IT/just-transition/stakeholders-relationship/complaint-management.html

gov.uk. (2022). Whistleblowing for Employees. Accessed on 2 October, 2022. https://www.gov.uk/whistleblowing

Dillon, M. & Radal, T. (2021). Mechanisms Spur Responsible Business. ksapa. Accessed on 2 October, 2022. https://ksapa.org/grievance-mechanisms-spur-responsible-business/

Credits:

Photo by Miguel Amutio from unsplash.com