Many countries experience corruption and transgression as two destructive elements in the administrative system. Corruption is the abuse of power by a public official for personal gains. The extent differs according to social, political and cultural factors. Corruption, in its various forms, does not have the same harmful effects. Since lower economic efficiency and unequal distribution of wealth are the general impacts of corruption, many governments are paying serious attention to this phenomenon, the Persian weekly ’Barnameh’ reported.
The history of corruption in human societies is as old as civilization itself and it is hardly restricted only to developing countries or countries in transition. A study of the civilizations in Iran, Rome, China and India shows official corruption as a common trait. This was followed by social disorders. Corruption was sometimes the main cause of wars and downfall of regimes. One can say that corruption, in line with other factors, has been the main reason for the downfall of civilizations.
Corruption takes place in both political and administrative offices and can range from petty or grand, organized or unorganized. Governments are subject to abuse by their staff throughout history. This has constantly been mentioned in ancient texts showing that governments and rulers were always concerned about personal use of public positions. Crimes like embezzlement, forgery and bribery are old and have the same historical roots as governments.
Corruption and ignorance ultimately destroy both the governments and the people. When an opportunity arises, conditions are ripe for abuse of authority by government employees.
International organizations such as Transparency International (TI), International Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions (INTOSAI) and other regional institutions like Asian Supreme Audit Institution (ASOSI) or World Bank (WB), have offered some strategies for fighting corruption and bribery in different countries. Special attention to the culture of honesty and responsibility, adhering to principles as well as organizational culture are among the factors for preventing corruption in the society.
This essay focuses on organizational culture as a main factor for doing away with corruption. In other words, Hoftstede’s model demands transparency and prevents discrimination. Hoftstede contended that if his model is followed, the society will move forward toward development and the use of force and punishment will decline considerably.
Organizational Culture
Many definitions, exceeding 160, are available for culture. One of the first definitions was put forward by E. B. Taylor in 1871. This anthropologist believed that culture is a mixed collection of sciences, arts, thoughts, beliefs, rituals and customs or in other words all the habits and customs that a person, as part of a society, adopts.
Hoftstede says the culture is a collective programming of the mind which distinguishes members of a group or category from another.
Culture is divided into weak culture and strong culture. In strong culture, principles of organization are considered by members so the more they accept principles, the stronger organizational culture will be. Therefore in organizations in which principles are strongly secured and the staff is committed, the culture is stronger. Strong culture of an organization in which the staff is satisfied with the situation, reduces the risk of employees changing their jobs and quitting the organization. Therefore official rules of organizations can be replaced by a strong culture. In such an atmosphere, official rules which govern the behaviors of staff, will no longer be the concern of the manager. It is believed that strong culture noticeably reduces the possibility of corruption in an organization through solidarity, faithfulness and commitment among the staff. It can work better than control systems and makes it necessary for managers of different organizations to design and offer organizational culture in order to achieve their lofty objectives.
Definition of Corruption
Corruption is rooted from the Latin verb ’rumpere’ which means ’to break something’ so at the time of corruption something ’breaks’ or ’is ignored’. In Webster’s Dictionary corruption is defined as use of a position of trust for dishonest gain. Some experts believe that corruption is use of personal power for illegally benefiting from a career or social standing. Corruption is a mixed issue and this is obvious when minor organizations and market economy systems deviate.
World Bank defines corruption as abuse of public office for private gain.
Klitgaard offered a formula for corruption in 1996. Critical for understanding the micro-economy of corruption, but also its macro treatment, is his equation formula of corruption: C=M+D-A, where C is corruption, M is monopoly (or the extent of control over the ’client’), D is discretion (the degree of absolute, arbitrary power in decision-making) and A is accountability (the degree of responsibility by the decision-maker).
If we focus on corruption from this angle, which concentrates especially on the solicitor, who is frequently a public servant or institution, and excludes other elements characterizing the ’client’, it becomes clear that the fight against corruption must begin by reducing its economic and social utility.
Accountability in Islam begins from human beings who are responsible for their deeds. It goes deeper into political and social aspects of life. So lack of accountability, like lack of transparency, causes corruption in societies.
The Holy Prophet of Islam (PBUH) says, “It is not decent for a nation in which subordinates cannot take their rights from superiors without stammering.“
On the other hand the first and most important basis of accountability is supervision. Without supervision accountability is meaningless and managers and organizations cannot be held responsible.
Monitoring bodies can prevent corruption which cannot be controlled by organizational culture. They will also bring corrupt staff to justice. That’s why members of Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) underline the need to prevent corruption in regional countries taking into account the following important factors:
1. Establishing and developing transparent and effective system for governmental sectors
2. Strengthening anti-corruption sections for improving trade activities
3. Encouraging private sector participation
Heiden-Heimer, 1989, outlines shades of corruption from white through grey to black depending on the patterns of elite and mass opinion in different communities.
1. Black public office centers on corruption which political and social elites hate. The corrupt agent should be punished in this kind of corruption. A common example of this can be bribing governmental staff to overlook security factors in the construction of a building.
2. Grey public office centered corruption: Nearly all political elites hate this type of corruption but the public opinion is impartial. Shortcomings of government employees in implementing some regulations that are not favored by many people in a society are examples in this field.
3. White public office centered corruption: Although this type of corruption is against law, both people and elites do not consider punishments for offenders. Ignoring some rules that have lost their value due to social and cultural changes is an instance of this type of corruption.
Corruption needs the following factors:
- At least two parties are necessary, the person who offers and the one who accepts.
- An opportunity should be provided to abuse position or responsibility.
- Any action in which public or private sources are wrongly specified wrongly
- Clandestine agreements are possible.
- Corruption needs abusing trust of others
Factors Influencing Corruption
By definition misdemeanor means to tamper with the truth or important information in order to deceive to acquire illegal income.
There are many factors influencing corruption which differ from one country to another. Summing up these factors one can see the following factors as the most common reasons of corruption:
- Management and Organizational Factors that have an influential role on the motives for corruption among the staff. Lack of organizational culture and lack of commitment of the staff to the objectives of organization can be reasons for corruption.
- Social and Cultural Factors: Corruption is defined differently in different cultures. Cultural specifications are factors of corruption in societies.
- Political Factors: Sociopolitical structure of societies defines limits of power and responsibilities of politicians. Process of power division, political freedom and stability of societies are factors which influence corruption.
- Economic Factors: Some experts believe that economic growth and combating poverty can decrease corruption but historical evidence reveal that some societies which experienced economic growth were victims of corruption anyway.
Imam Ali’s (AS) Approach
Study of Imam Ali’s (AS) approaches shows that he stressed the need for accountability among officials. In a directive to Malek Ashtar, who was appointed governor of Egypt, he said, “When the peasants are suspicious of you, discuss your reason with them and free their minds of suspicions. This will guide them to the truth.“
“Never hide yourself from the people because this is the root cause of dishonesty in the society. Keeping away from the people will keep governors ignorant about the realities in the society.“
Imam Ali (AS) supervised his governors in a way that if their properties increased they had to report it and it was investigated in details. Offenders were brought to justice.
Hofstede’s Opinion
1. Power Distance: According to Hoftstede it can be defined as the extent to which the less powerful members of the institutions and organizations within a country expect and accept that power is distributed unequally. In this definition, institutions are the basic elements of the society like the family, school and the community while organizations are the places where people work.
Inequality remains the same in all societies. In societies with small power distance we can see decentralization is popular, hierarchy in organizations means an inequality of roles established for convenience and subordinates expect to be consulted. In societies with large power distance hierarchy in organizations reflects the existential inequality between higher-ups and lower-downs.
According to the Hoftstede’s researches Finland, Denmark, Sweden, Canada, England, Australia, Norway and Switzerland are societies with small power distance. Analyzing between Hoftstede’s model and Transparency International (TI) report shows that first-level countries are those with small power distance.
When injustice and inequality is low in a society and people resist injustice, we can expect justice and equality to combat corruption and wrongdoings.
Declining corruption and forgery will also help development of a society in which seeking justice is a value.
2. Individualism vs. Collectivism: Individualism pertains to societies in which the ties between individuals are lost and everyone is expected to look after himself or herself and his or her immediate family while collectivism as its opposite pertains to societies in which people from birth are integrated into strong, cohesive groups which throughout people’s lifetime continue to protect them in exchange for unquestioning loyalty.
In collectivist societies, identity is based on the social network to which one belongs and children learn to think in terms of ’we’. Relations between employers and employees are perceived in moral terms like a family link.
In individualist societies identity is based on the individual and relations of employers with employees is based on mutual advantage. In such societies task prevails over relationship.
Analyzing between Hoftstede’s model and TI report shows that the mentioned countries which are regarded as individualist societies have agreeable corruption indices. Family connections make one behave differently towards different people. It paves the way for corruption in organizations. Independency removes the possibility of different behaviors and finally reduces the possibility of corruption.
3. Masculinity or Male-Dominated Society: It indicates the extent to which the dominant values of a society are masculine. Masculinity pertains to societies in which social gender roles are clearly distinct. Men in such societies are supposed to be assertive, tough and focused on material success whereas women are supposed to be more modest, tender and concerned with the quality of life.
According to Hofstede’s researches Finland, Denmark, Singapore, Sweden, Canada, the Netherlands, and Norway are ranked as feminine countries while Japan, Austria, Venezuela, Italy, Mexico, Switzerland, England and America are male-dominated countries.
4. Avoiding Uncertainty: In Hoftstede’s view uncertainty avoidance can be defined as the extent to which the members of a culture feel threatened by uncertain or unknown situations and try to avoid such situations. This feeling, among other things, is expressed through nervous stress and in a need for predictability. It is a need for written and unwritten rules.
Avoiding uncertainty has a direct relation with transparency. In fact transparency is on the opposite side of uncertainty. Societies which are not transparent and have lots of uncertainty, there are lots of contradictory rules and it raises the risk of corruption.
Strategies
Since many countries, whether developed or not, suffer from corruption which influences public trust and wastes resources, it is necessary to suggest strategies for combating corruption. Combating corruption and wrongdoings differs from one country to another depending on the values of the societies and people’s beliefs. Therefore improving culture is the first step. Stronger culture of people who are committed to principles is a key element in preventing corruption in organizations. Removing discrimination and encouraging justice-seeking behaviors in societies as well as strengthening organizational culture are the key elements for fighting corruption in societies. Perhaps it will be followed by economic growth and is to the advantage of both the people and the government.
