Dimitris joined the University of Exeter Business School and the Initiative for the Digital Economy (INDEX) in October 2021 as a Postdoctoral Research Fellow. Prior to this, he conducted doctoral research at Aarhus University (Denmark). During his doctoral studies he was a Visiting Research Fellow at the Center for Advanced Hindsight, Duke University (USA) and his research stay was funded by the Salling Foundation.
He has also received funding from the Interacting Mind Center (IMC) and the Interdisciplinary Center for Organizational Architecture (ICOA) in Denmark.
Dimitris holds a BSc in Economics from the University of Macedonia (Greece), an MSc in Economics and Econometrics from the University of Essex (UK), and an MSc in Enterprise in Risk Management from the Open University of Cyprus (Cyprus).
Prior to his move to academia, he worked in the banking sector.
Qualifications
- PhD in Management (Aarhus University)
- MSc in Enterprise Risk Management (Open University of Cyprus)
- MSc in Economics and Econometrics (University of Essex)
- BSc in Economics (University of Macedonia)
Links
Research interests
- Business Ethics
- Moral Psychology
- Judgement and Decision Making
- Digital Transformation
Dimitris’ research interests lie in ethical decision making, focusing in particular on business ethics and moral psychology. He is also interested in behavioural economics, social identities and digital transformation. Dimitris’ work mostly follows an empirical (experimentally based) approach, adhering to the principles of open science.
Research projects
Dimitrios is currently involved in a project investigating digital transformation in Large Established Organisations (LEOs)
Key publications | Publications by category | Publications by year
Publications by category
Journal articles
Batolas D, Perkovic S, Mitkidis P (2022). Psychological and Hierarchical Closeness as Opposing Factors in Whistleblowing: a Meta-Analysis.
Journal of Business and Psychology,
38(2), 369-383.
Abstract:
Psychological and Hierarchical Closeness as Opposing Factors in Whistleblowing: a Meta-Analysis
Abstract
Although employees are an important means of detecting and preventing misconducts through whistleblowing, many witnesses choose to remain silent. One reason to remain silent is the discomfort of reporting a colleague. Intuitively, employees should be less likely to report a close or trusted colleague, but a previous review suggests that the opposite may actually be true. However, later studies have shown mixed effects of social closeness on whistleblowing. To gain a better understanding of how social closeness affects whistleblowing, we meta-analyzed 22 experimental studies on intentions to blow the whistle. Overall, the studies show no effect of social closeness on whistleblowing intentions, d = − 0.21, p = .05. However, when separating the studies by type of closeness, we find that psychological closeness has a negative effect, d = − 0.46, p < .001, while hierarchical closeness has a positive effect, d = .34, p < .001 on whistleblowing intentions. This means that employees are most likely to report misconduct if the perpetrator is at the same hierarchical level in the organization and not a close or trusted friend. Since close psychological bonds are more likely to develop between employees at the same hierarchical level, the two types of closeness may counteract each other. This dilemma could be part of the explanation why so many witnesses choose to remain silent.
Abstract.
DOI.
Publications by year
2022
Batolas D, Perkovic S, Mitkidis P (2022). Psychological and Hierarchical Closeness as Opposing Factors in Whistleblowing: a Meta-Analysis.
Journal of Business and Psychology,
38(2), 369-383.
Abstract:
Psychological and Hierarchical Closeness as Opposing Factors in Whistleblowing: a Meta-Analysis
Abstract
Although employees are an important means of detecting and preventing misconducts through whistleblowing, many witnesses choose to remain silent. One reason to remain silent is the discomfort of reporting a colleague. Intuitively, employees should be less likely to report a close or trusted colleague, but a previous review suggests that the opposite may actually be true. However, later studies have shown mixed effects of social closeness on whistleblowing. To gain a better understanding of how social closeness affects whistleblowing, we meta-analyzed 22 experimental studies on intentions to blow the whistle. Overall, the studies show no effect of social closeness on whistleblowing intentions, d = − 0.21, p = .05. However, when separating the studies by type of closeness, we find that psychological closeness has a negative effect, d = − 0.46, p < .001, while hierarchical closeness has a positive effect, d = .34, p < .001 on whistleblowing intentions. This means that employees are most likely to report misconduct if the perpetrator is at the same hierarchical level in the organization and not a close or trusted friend. Since close psychological bonds are more likely to develop between employees at the same hierarchical level, the two types of closeness may counteract each other. This dilemma could be part of the explanation why so many witnesses choose to remain silent.
Abstract.
DOI.
Dimitrios is mostly interested in teaching Behavioural Economics, Business Ethics, and Quantitative Research Methods.
