Örgütsel Açıdan Yolsuzluk: Kavramsal Yönü, Özelliği, İşletme Çevresi, Örgütsel Davranışve Örgüt Mimarisi Bağlamında Bir İnceleme

Year 2009, Issue: 22, 219 - 237, 01.08.2009

Sait Gürbüz Onur Dikmenli

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, son yıllarda en çok konuşulan konulardan biri olan yolsuzluk olgusunu örgütsel açıdan incelenmektir. Bu amaçla bu çalışmada, öncelikle yolsuzluk ve yolsuzluk türlerinin kavramsal çerçevesi ortaya konulmuştur. Türkiye’yi hedef alan yolsuzlukla ilgili araştırmaların sonuçlarıve önemli bulgularına değinildikten sonra yolsuzluk konusu örgütsel açıdan irdelenmiştir. Büyük oranda, Luo tarafından geliştirilen modelden istifade edilerek yolsuzluk ve işletme çevresi kurumsal ve faaliyetsel çevre , yolsuzlukların sınıflandırılması, yolsuzluk ve örgütün mimarisi, örgütsel davranışve yolsuzluğa karşıörgütsel açıdan alınabilecek bazıtedbirler ortaya konulmaya çalışılmıştır.

Keywords

Yolsuzluk, Rüşvet, İşletme Çevresi, Örgütsel Mimari

Organizational Perspective of Corruption: An Exploratory Study in the Context of Its Concept, Its Nature, Organizational Environment, Organizational Behavior, and Organizational Architecture

Abstract

Corruption is a phenomenon that it’s old as the history of government itself. In recent years, the topic of corruption has taken much attention both in Turkey and abroad. The corruption practices in many well known companies such as Enron and WorldCom has raised importance of the issue in terms of organizational perspective. According to the result of a study, corruption in organizations has increased as of 71 % in last three years and one of two organizations is corrupted by its members Anthony, 2006 . The corrupt practices generally include bribery, fraud, favoritism, extortion embezzlement, and insider trading. Although the topic of corruption has gained much importance in recent years, there are little or no studies on organizational view of corruption in management literatures as far as we know. Hence, the purpose of the present study is to elucidate the corruption phenomenon, which has been one of the most discussed topics in recent years, from organizational perspective by using model of Luo 2005 . There are many definitions about corruptions in the literature because the phenomenon is complex and multiple causes. Viewed most broadly, corruption is using or abusing the public resources for private ends or interests World Bank, BEEPS, 2006 or using public responsibility against the law Emre, 2003: 222 . From organizational perspective, corruption can be defined as “role behavior in any organizations not just government or public service that violates formally defined role obligations in search of private gain” Luo, 2005: 121 . According to Klitgoard 1998 corruption may be represented as following a formula: C = M + D – A. Corruption equals Monopoly plus Discretion minus Accountability. Whether the activity is public, private, or nonprofit. Luo observes seven characteristics of corruption phenomenon which are, context–based, norm-deviated, power-related, virtually covert, intentional, opportunistic, and perceptional . Some scholars suggest that a firm’s behavior and strategy are shaped by organizational institutional and task environment Scott ve Meyer, 1994: 134 . Hence, organizational environment may be predictor of corrupt behaviors and practices. The task environment includes oligopolistic intensity, regulatory control and structural uncertainty. On the other hand traits of institutional environment consist of institutional transparency, institutional fairness and institutional complexity Luo, 2005: 128 . According to model of Luo, traits of institutional and task environment which cited above escalates pressure for corruption and probability of corruption. But transmitting of pressure into corruption depends upon organizational moral, norms and culture Luo, 2005: 129 . Corrupt practices in organizations differ in the intensity quantity and hierarchical level group, team, unit level which is defined as the taxonomy of corrupt organizations by Luo. Using the intensity and hierarchical scales four metaphorical identities is emerged “mad fox” high intensity and more hierarchies , “errant rabbit” low intensity and few hierarchies , “sick bulldog” low intensity and more hierarchies , and “wild puppy” high intensity and few hierarchies Luo, 2005: 125 . “Mad fox” metaphor represents an organization where many managers and employees are related to corrupt activities at many hierarchal levels or in various sub-units. In this kind of corrupt organizations, a system malfeasance exist which refers an entire organizations system is

Keywords

Corruption, Bribery, Organizational Environment, Organizational Architecture

References

• Ackerman, S. R. (1978). Corruption: A study in Political Economy. New York: Academic Pres
• Adaman, Fikret; Çarkoğlu, Ali ve Şenatalar, Burhan, (2001). Hanehalkı Gözünden Türkiye’de Yolsuzluğun Nedenleri ve Önlenmesine İlişkin Öneriler, TESEV, İstanbul
• Adaman, Fikret; Çarkoğlu, Ali ve Şenatalar, Burhan, (2003). İş Dünyası Gözünden Türkiye’de Yolsuzluğun Nedenleri ve Önlenmesine İlişkin Öneriler, TESEV, İstanbul
• Aiden, Gerald E., (1991), “What Really Is Public Maladministration,” Public Administration Review , 51, 486-493.
• Aktan, Coşkun Can. (1997). “Yolsuzluk Türleri, Siyasallaşma, Siyasal Patronaj, Rant, Kollama, Rüşvet, Lobicilik, Korumacılık, Kayırmacılık”, Yeni Türkiye, 14, 1063-1075
• Anthony, Wayne. (2006). “PricewaterhouseCoopers Kıdemli Müdürü Wayne Anthony ile Şirket İçi Suistimal Konusu Üzerine Yapılan Söyleşi”, http://www.vergiportali.com/WAsoylesi.asp, 25 Ekim 2006
• Referans Gazetesi, 19.08.2006
• Argandona, A. (2003). “Private-To-Private Corruption”. Journal of Business Ethics, 47(3), 253-267.
• Banfield, E. C. (1975). “Corruption As A Feature Of Government Organization”. Journal of Law and Economics, 18, 587–605.
• Beck, P.J. ve M.W. Maher. (1986). ”A Comparison Of Bribery And Bidding İn Thin Markets”, Economics Letters, 20, 1-5
• Berkman, Ümit. (1983). Azgelişmiş Ülkelerde Kamu Yönetiminde Yolsuzluk ve Rüşvet , TODAİE, Ankara
• Beyaz Nokta Vakfı, (1995). Rüşvetin Sebepleri, Bu Sebepler Arasındaki İlişkiler ve Bunların Ağırlığı ile Mücadele Yolları, Ankara
• Caiden, Gerald E., (1991) “What Really Is Public Maladministration?” Public Administration Review, 51, 486-493.
• Chand, Sheetal and Moene, Karl O., (1997). “Controlling Fiscal Corruption”, IMF Working Paper No. 97/100, http://ssrn.com/abstract=882619, 11 Eylül 2006
• Child, J. (1972). “Organizational Structure, Environment And Performance. The Role Of Strategic Choice”, Sociology, 6, 1–22.
• Çelik, Vehbi. (2000).Eğitimsel Liderlik. Ankara: Pegem
• Daniel M. Hausman,Michael S. McPherson, (1993), “Taking Ethics Seriously:Economics And Contemporarymoral Philosophy”, Jornal of Economic Literature, 31, 671-731
• Dess, G. G. and Beard, D. W. (1984). “Dimensions of Organizational Task Environments”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 52–73.
• Dünya Bankası, (2006). “BEEPS”, http://web.worldbank.org/, 11 Eylül 2006
• Emre, Cahit, (2003). Yönetim Bilimi Yazıları, İmaj Yayıncılık, Ankara
• Frederic, William C. (1995). Values, Nature, and Culture in the American Corporation. New York: Oxford University Pres.
• Fries, Steven; Lysenko, Tatiana ve Polenac, Saso. (2003). “The 2002 Business Environment and Enterprise Performance Survey: Results from a survey of 6,100 firms”, Working papers, http://www.ebrd.com/pubs/econo/wp0084.htm, 10 Eylül 2006
• Gardiner, John A. (1970). The Politics of Corruption. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
• Gioia, D. A., Schultz, M. and Corley, K. G. (2000). “Organizational identity, image, and adaptive instability”. Academy of Management Review, 25 (1), 63–81.
• Goel, K.R. and Rich, D.P. (1989). “On the Economic Incentives for Taking Bribes”, Public Choice, 61 (3), 269-75.
• Goldsmith, Arthur A. (1999). “Slapping The Grasping Hand: Correlates Of Political Corruption In Emerging Markets”, American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 58 (4), 866–83. http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0254/is_4_58/ai_58496763/pg_1, 12 Eylül 2006
• Hasdemir, İsmail, (2006). “Sosyolojik Bakış Açısıyla Yolsuzluk Olgusu”, Gazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü ABD Kamu Yönetimi, Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ankara
• Hogg, M. A. and Terry, D. J. (2000). “Social İdentity And Self-Categorization Processes İn Organizational Contexts”, Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 121–40.
• Hustington, Samuel P., (1968).Political Order in Changing Societies,. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Pres.
• Jakobsen Rockey, (1991). “Economic Effiirciency And The Quality Of Life”, Journal of Business Ethics, 10(3), 201-209
• Kathleen A Getz,Roger J Volkema, (2001), “Cultur,Perceıved Corruptıon, And Economıcs”, Business and Society, 40(1), 7-24
• Klitgaard, Robert. (1998), “International Cooperation Against Corruption”, Finance & Development, March, 3-6
• http://www.worldbank.org/fandd/english/0398/articles/080398.htm, 23 Ekim 2006
• Laffont, J.J. and Guessan, T.N. (1999). “Competition and Corruption in an Agency Relationship”, Journal of Development Economics, 60, 271-295
• Leff, Nathaniel, (1964), “Economic Development Through Bureaucratic Corruption” American Behavioral Scientist, 8 (3), 8-14.
• Lui, Francis. (1985). “An Equilibrium Queueing Model of Bribery,” Journal of Political Economy, 93, 760-781.
• Luo, Yadong, (2002). Multinational Enterprises In Emerging Markets. Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School Pres
• Luo, Yadong, (2005). “An Organizational Perspective of Corruption”, Management and Organization Review, 1 (1), 119-154
• Mauro, P. (1995). “Corruption and Growth”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110 (3), 681–712
• Minkes A.Leonard, (1995), “Business Policy,Ethics And Society”, Journal of Business Ethics, 14 (8), 593-602
• Morris Michael H, Marks Amy S, Allen Jeffry A, Peery Newman S. Jr., (1996), “Modelling Ethicalattitudes And Behaviours Under Conditions of Enviromental Turbulence:The Case of South Africa”,Journal of Business Ethics, 15 (10), 1119-1131
• Morris Sara A., Rehbein Kathleen A.,Hosseini Jamshid C.,Armacost Robert L., (1995), ”A Test Of Enviromental,Situational And Personal Influenceson The Ethical Intentions of CEOs”, Business and Society , 34 (2), 119-128
• Onyancha, O.B. and Ocholla, D.N. (2002) “An Informetric Analysis of The Corruption Literature Based on Africa Between 1990 and 2001”, South African Journal of Libraries and Information Science, 70 (2), 86-98
• Ökçesiz, Hayrettin.(2003). Hukuk ve Siyaset Geriliminde Hukuk Kültürünün Yapısı Üzerine Yedi Üçüzlü Bir Açıklama Şeması, HFSA, 7. Kitap, İstanbul
• Paul J. Beck and Michael W. Maher, (1986), “A Comparison Of Bribery And Bidding şn Thin Markets”, Economics Letters, 20 (1), 1-5
• Price, R. M. (1975). Society And Bureaucracy in Contemporary Ghana, Berekely, Universityof CaliforniaPress.
• Rauch, E.J. and Evans, B.P. (2000), “Bureaucratic Structure and Bureaucratic Performance in Less Developed Countries”, Journal of Public Economics, 75, 49-71.
• Rijckeghem, Caroline ve Weder, Beatrice, (2001). ”Bureaucratic Corruption And The Rate of Temptation: Do Wages in The Civil Service Affect Corruption, And By How Much?”, Journal of Development Economics, 65 (2), 307-331
• Sanyal Rajib, (2005), “Determinants of Bribery in International Business:The Cultural And Economic Factors”, Journal of Business Ethics, 59, 139-145
• Sayan, İpek Özkal ve Kışlalı Murat, (2004). “Yolsuzluk Üzerine Ekonometrik Bir Çalışma”, Amme İdaresi Dergisi, 37 (2), 31-50
• Scott, W. Richard ve Meyer John W. (1994) Institutional Environments and Organizations: Structural Complexity and Individualism, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication
• Scott, W. Richard. (2002). Organizations: Rational, Natural, and Open Systems, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.
• Tarhan R. Bülent vd. (2004). “Bir Olgu Olarak Yolsuzluk: Nedenler, Etkiler ve Çözüm. Önerileri”, www.tbmm.gov.tr/komisyon/yolsuzluk_arastirma/kaynaklar/Kisim_1.pdf -, 28 Ağustos 2006
• Treisma, Daniel. (2000). “The Causes of Corruption: A Cross-National Study”, Journal of Public Economics, 76 (3), 399-459 Uluslararası
• Şeffaflık Örgütü, (2006) “Corruption Perceptions Index”
• http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/cpi, 23 Ekim 2006 UNICRI, (2006).
• “United Nations Action Against Corruptıon And Brıbery”
• http://www.uncjin.org/Documents/corrupt.htm, 12 Ekim 2006
• Warigi, G. (2001). “Global Corruption Report: East and East-Central Africa”, http://archive.netscript.sytes.net, 23 Ekim 2006
• Weaver, Gary R.; Trevino, Linda Klebe ve Cochran Philip L. (1999). “Integrated and Decoupled Corporate Social Performance: Management Commitments, External Pressures, and Corporate Ethics Practices”, Academy of Management Journal, 42 (5), 539-552
• Weiner, Myran, (1962).The Politics of Scarcty, Şikago Üniv.