Speak up, stand strong: making whistleblowing work in practice

August 2026  |  FEATURE | FRAUD & CORRUPTION

Financier Worldwide Magazine

August 2026 Issue

In an era of heightened regulatory scrutiny, reputational risk and stakeholder activism, robust whistleblowing arrangements are essential to corporate resilience. A culture rooted in trust, transparency and accountability helps organisations identify misconduct early. Effective frameworks rely on clear reporting channels, anti-retaliation safeguards, leadership commitment, employee education and independent oversight. When embedded properly, they become a strategic component of ethical governance.

Whistleblowing is now a key pillar of corporate governance, risk management and compliance. It helps organisations expose misconduct, identify culture issues, detect data breaches and address sanctions risks. Employees and third parties are often the first to spot problems before they escalate into serious legal, financial or reputational crises. However, while most organisations recognise the value of speak-up mechanisms, creating a culture where individuals feel able and willing to raise concerns remains a challenge.

A rising tide of whistleblowing activity

Recent years have seen a significant increase in whistleblowing activity. According to Navex’s 2026 ‘Whistleblowing & Incident Management Benchmark Report’, global reports reached an all-time high in 2024 and remained at record levels through 2025. Several factors have driven this rise.

There has been a clear shift in both the volume and the significance of whistleblowing, driven less by altruism alone and more by a convergence of regulatory pressure, environmental, social and governance scrutiny, and heightened reputational risk, says Lauren Salt, an employment executive at ENS Africa.

“Whistleblowing has become a primary mechanism through which organisations gain early visibility of misconduct that would otherwise remain concealed,” she notes. “Its value lies in timing. Internal disclosures often emerge well before issues crystallise into formal disputes, regulatory investigations or public scandals. In that sense, whistleblowing functions as a real-time diagnostic tool within governance and risk frameworks.”

For Matthew Banham, a partner at Seyfarth Shaw, employee whistleblowing is increasing, driven by greater regulatory scrutiny, a stronger legislative focus on corporate accountability and a growing willingness among employees to assert their rights and challenge toxic cultures.

“Stakeholders are also increasingly prepared to challenge the social and environmental impact of corporate behaviour,” he says. “In the US, authorities use financial rewards to encourage whistleblowers to report misconduct. In the UK, there is still little direct financial incentive to put your head above the parapet. That makes trust, culture and effective speak-up arrangements vital, particularly as agencies increasingly look for evidence that governance controls work in practice.”

Creating a culture where speaking up is safe

With the number of whistleblower reports continuing to grow, it is imperative that organisations have an effective programme in place. Such a programme should protect individuals from retaliation while also helping the organisation mitigate reputational and financial harm. A well-designed whistleblowing framework provides an early warning system, enabling organisations to identify fraud, misconduct and compliance failures before they develop into major problems.

Beyond reducing potential losses and regulatory penalties, effective speak-up frameworks strengthen stakeholder confidence, protect brand value and reinforce a culture of integrity. By encouraging individuals to raise concerns safely and without fear, organisations can address issues internally while demonstrating a genuine commitment to transparency and accountability.

For Ms Salt, an effective whistleblowing programme is defined more by trust than by design. “While multiple reporting channels and formal procedures are necessary, they are not sufficient in themselves,” she believes. “The programme must be accessible, allowing for anonymous reporting where appropriate, and underpinned by clear investigative protocols that ensure consistency and independence.

“Speed and transparency of response are critical in maintaining credibility,” she continues. “A key, often overlooked, element is definitional clarity. Employees must understand what constitutes a reportable concern, particularly in jurisdictions like South Africa where only certain disclosures qualify for protection under the law. Failing to delineate these risks overburdens the system and undermines its integrity. Regular training and communication are essential to reinforce awareness, but trust ultimately hinges on whether employees see that speaking up leads to fair and meaningful outcomes.”

A whistleblowing programme is a core component of any genuine speak-up culture, but its effectiveness depends on more than policies and reporting channels. Individuals are far more likely to raise concerns when they trust that reports will be taken seriously, investigated fairly and handled confidentially, without fear of retaliation or damage to career prospects. Effective programmes combine clear reporting mechanisms with visible leadership commitment, consistent communication and demonstrable follow through when issues are identified.

Amanda Steadman, principal knowledge lawyer at Brahams Dutt Badrick French LLP, argues that a genuine speak-up culture requires more than compliance and depends on practical measures. Leadership must set the tone, as employees will only raise concerns if they trust they will be protected and heard. Boards, senior management and the whistleblowers’ champion all play key roles. Firms should review who is using reporting channels and target training to empower junior staff. With more reports relating to discrimination and harassment, HR teams must recognise issues that may constitute both grievances and whistleblowing.

Additionally, organisations should analyse recurring concerns, address gaps in awareness or trust, protect whistleblowers from victimisation through follow up, and regularly benchmark procedures against Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) expectations while providing feedback where possible.

Mr Banham emphasises that effective whistleblowing frameworks play a central role in helping organisations manage risk and reinforce ethical behaviour, while also underlining the importance of trust and leadership in making these systems work in practice. “Whistleblower programmes are a core pillar of corporate governance as they provide organisations with critical insight into legal, operational and cultural risks,” he says. “Effective speak-up frameworks foster accountability, ethical behaviour and employee trust while helping businesses identify issues before they escalate into regulatory, litigation or reputational crises.

“Creating a genuine speak-up culture requires more than a written policy. Reporting channels must be accessible and effective, investigations must be handled fairly, and employees must be seen to be protected from any retaliation. Most importantly, trust is built when employees see leadership model the right behaviours and apply accountability consistently every day,” he adds.

Compliance requirements and legal expectations

Fostering trust and encouraging employees to speak up are essential, but organisations must also ensure that their frameworks meet an increasingly complex range of regulatory requirements. Across jurisdictions, particularly for multinational organisations, there is an expectation that companies will provide secure reporting channels, protect whistleblowers from retaliation, investigate concerns appropriately, maintain confidentiality and demonstrate effective governance. Failure to meet these obligations can expose organisations to regulatory scrutiny, financial penalties, litigation and reputational damage.

“While there is no general legal requirement for employers to have whistleblowing procedures in place, these risks mean that all employers should take steps to prevent the victimisation of whistleblowers through appropriate policies and training,” advises Ms Steadman. “Within the financial services sector, however, in scope firms must comply with the UK FCA’s whistleblowing rules and those firms regulated by the Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) are subject to equivalent rules. The FCA’s rules prescribe that firms must have appropriate reporting channels, assess and escalate concerns effectively, and implement measures to prevent victimisation.”

Firms are required to maintain formal written procedures, keep detailed records of reports and outcomes, and provide an annual report to the board. They must also deliver training to all staff and appoint a senior individual, known as the whistleblowers’ champion, to oversee arrangements. While there are no specific penalties for non-compliance, the FCA retains broad enforcement powers, including the ability to impose financial penalties or issue public censure. Any evidence that a firm has treated a whistleblower detrimentally would be regarded as a serious issue and could call into question the fitness and propriety of both the organisation and its staff.

“Companies must design whistleblower frameworks that comply with evolving statutory protections and sector-specific regulation,” says Raymond Silverstein, a partner at Browne Jacobson. “In the UK financial services sector, the main elements of the legal framework are the Employment Rights Act 1996, the FCA’s Code of Conduct Rules and the PRA Rulebook. Beyond legal and regulatory requirements, it is critical that leadership creates a culture where speaking up feels genuinely safe, ensuring the framework works in practice.”

From April 2026, sexual harassment has been explicitly recognised as a form of wrongdoing that can be the subject of a whistleblowing disclosure. Although such complaints could already qualify in certain circumstances, this development is intended to encourage reporting and significantly changes the risk landscape for employers. Sexual harassment now sits clearly within the scope of whistleblowing policies, and organisations that fail to respond appropriately may face claims of whistleblowing detriment and automatic unfair dismissal, both of which carry uncapped compensation.

“From 1 September 2026, the FCA’s new rules and guidance on non-financial misconduct extend to approximately 37,000 firms,” points out Helen Simm, a partner at Browne Jacobson. “The rules extend the scope of the Conduct Rules in non-banking firms to cover serious bullying, harassment or violence where it relates to an individual’s role. Failure to comply can result in regulatory sanctions, including financial penalties, public censure and restrictions on activities, causing reputational harm and affecting talent attraction and retention.”

Next steps in whistleblowing reform and practice

Whistleblower protections are likely to become more comprehensive and more closely scrutinised by regulators, investors and stakeholders. As expectations around governance, culture and accountability increase, effective speak-up frameworks are increasingly viewed as a strategic asset, not just a compliance requirement.

Recent regulatory developments indicate that workplace harassment may increasingly be treated as a whistleblowing matter, notes Ms Steadman, while the possibility of introducing US-style financial incentives remains under consideration. “Currently, there are several limited incentive programmes for whistleblowers in the UK,” she explains. “For example, the Competition and Markets Authority offers rewards for whistleblowers who report cartel activity and HMRC offers discretionary payments for information on tax fraud.

“The FCA has so far declined to introduce a broader reward scheme. However, the government’s Anti-Corruption Strategy 2025 commits to assessing the feasibility of wider financial incentives for whistleblowers by 2027,” she adds.

For Ms Salt, whistleblowing regimes are evolving toward broader coverage and stricter accountability, with increasing recognition that employee-only models are insufficient. “The inclusion of contractors and other stakeholders within protection frameworks is likely to become standard,” she says. “More significantly, organisations are expected not only to respond to disclosures but to create environments where speaking up is normalised and continuous.

“This requires a shift from episodic reporting systems to ongoing listening mechanisms embedded within governance and risk processes,” she continues. “Businesses that fail to adapt risk treating whistleblowing as a reactive safeguard rather than a proactive source of organisational insight.”

Mr Banham also expects protections and expectations to continue expanding globally, with greater emphasis on culture, accountability and proactive compliance. This presents challenges for multinational organisations, as data privacy obligations and differing legal regimes require globally coordinated yet locally compliant frameworks.

“Businesses need strong listening cultures where employees feel safe raising concerns, with management actively monitoring emerging risks,” says Mr Banham. “Artificial intelligence (AI) will increasingly help organisations triage reports, identify patterns and support structured submissions. That creates both opportunity and risk. AI should support, not replace, fair, confidential and human-led assessment.”

In today’s complex business environment, organisations must take practical steps to build trusted reporting channels, protect whistleblowers and ensure concerns are investigated effectively. Successful whistleblowing programmes depend not only on policies and procedures but on a culture of transparency, accountability and trust.

© Financier Worldwide

BY

Richard Summerfield