Resource or Threat? On the Ambivalence of Internal Criticism in International Organizations

This article argues that internal criticism from employees is ambivalent – it can be both a resource and a threat to International Organizations (IOs). On the one hand, internal criticism is an important resource for organizational learning processes, enabling IOs to prevent failures and deliver better results. On the other hand, it can also be a serious threat to the reputation of IOs, uncovering the inevitable differences between talk and action (“organized hypocrisy”). Up to now, this ambivalence of internal criticism has received little attention in IO research. The article takes this as an opportunity to sketch out an explicit perspective on "criticism from within" for the first time. The central question is: How do IOs deal with this dilemma? How do they handle internal criticism in practice? Building on first interviews and preliminary findings of an ongoing case study on the UN Secretariat, it is shown that internal criticism is not really treated as a resource there but is primarily seen as a threat: The expression of criticism is not rewarded, employees are afraid of consequences if they express criticism, and internal scandals are covered up. While "criticism from within" exists among UN employees, it is thus barely ever discussed openly. One reason for this is the overall imperative in the UN Secretariat to avoid any conflict with member states. The perceived impossibility of criticizing their principals leads to a generally conflict-averse culture, which is an obstacle for staff to express substantive criticism. What further weakens the criticism culture is that the (necessary) organizational hypocrisy of the UN makes it very difficult for employees to constructively criticize their own institution without being naïve or cynical. The article critically discusses these first results and outlines theoretically and empirically fruitful questions for future research.