Abstract
Corrupt decisions in organizations may be influenced by the informal rules of the organizational culture. Therefore, hypotheses on influencing corrupt decisions due to competitive pressure, hierarchical pressure, the rationalizing and legitimacy of corporate social responsibility, organization-specific socialization, and gender are examined. By using laboratory experiments with students in Germany, these organizational-cultural conditions are tested for corrupt decisions either for personal or organizational advantages. The results support an analytical separation between individual and organizational corruption as well as the corruption-decreasing effects of competitive pressure, and the rationalizing and legitimacy of corporate social responsibility in our population.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
The experimental setup was developed in cooperation with Yuanyuan Liu and Dr. Elizangela Valarina at the University of Heidelberg.
References
Aguilera, R. V., & Vadera, A. K. (2008). The dark side of authority. Antecedents, mechanisms, and outcomes of organizational corruption. Journal of Business Ethics, 77, 431–449.
Akbar, Y. H., & Vujić, V. (2014). Explaining corruption: The role of national culture and its implications for international management. Cross Cultural Management, 21(2), 191–218.
Alexeev, M., & Song, Y. (2013). Corruption and product market competition: An empirical investigation. Journal of Development Economics, 103, 154–166.
Alatas, V., Cameron, L., Chaudhuri, A., Erkal, N., & Gangadharan, L. (2009). Gender, culture, and corruption: Insights from an experimental analysis. Southern Economic Journal, 75(3), 663–680.
Anand, V., Ashforth, B. E., & Mahendra, J. (2004). Business as usual: The acceptance and perpetuation of corruption in organizations. The Academy of Management Executive, 18(2), 9–23.
Armantier, O., & Boly, A. (2012). Chapter 5 on the external validity of laboratory experiments on corruption. In D. Serra & L. Wantchekon (Eds.), New Advances in Experimental Research on Corruption (pp. 11–144). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Ashforth, B. E., & Anand, V. (2003). The normalization of corruption in organizations. In R. M. Kramer & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational Behavior (pp. 1–52). Elsevier Ltd.
Campbell, J.-L., & Göritz, A. S. (2014). Culture corrupts! A qualitative study of organizational culture in corrupt organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 120(3), 291–311.
Dollar, D., Fisman, R., & Gatti, R. (2001). Are women really the “fairer” sex? Corruption and women in government. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 46(4), 423–429.
Esarey, J., & Chirillo, G. (2013). “Fairer sex” or purity myth? Corruption, gender, and institutional context. Politics & Gender, 9, 361–389.
Grieger, J. (2005). Corruption in organizations. Some outlines for research. Working Paper No. 203. url. http://elpub.bib.uni-wuppertal.de/edocs/dokumente/fbb/wirtschaftswissenschaft/arbeitspapiere/203/ab0502.pdf. Accessed 22 September 2021.
Katz, J. (1979). Concerted ignorance: The social construction of cover-up. Urban Life, (8), 295–316.
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363.
Palmer, D. (2012). Normal organizational wrongdoing: A critical analysis of theories of misconduct in and by organizations. Oxford University Press.
Pinto, J., Leana, C. R., & Pil, K. P. (2008). Corrupt organizations or organizations of corrupt individuals? Two types of organization-level corruption. Academy of Management Review, 33(3), 685–709.
Pohlmann, M., & Höly, K. (2017). Manipulation in der Transplantationsmedizin. Ein Fall von organisationaler Devianz? Kölner Zeitschrift Für Soziologie Und Sozialpsychologie, 69, 181–207.
Pohlmann, M., Höly, K., & Klinkhammer, J. (2016). Personal gain or organizational benefits? How to explain active corruption. German Law Journal, 17(1), 73–100.
Rivas, M. F. (2013). An experiment on corruption and gender. Bulletin of Economic Research, 65(1), 10–42.
Schulze, G. G., & Frank, B. (2003). Deterrence versus intrinsic motivation: Experimental evidence on the determinants of corruptibility. Economics of Governance, 4(2), 143–160.
Schwieren, C., & Weichselbaumer, D. (2010). Does competition enhance performance or cheating? A laboratory experiment. The Austrian Center for Labor Economics and the Analysis of the Welfare State. Journal of Economic Psychology, 31, 241–253.
Shleifer, A. (2004). Does competition destroy ethical behavior? American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings, 94(2), 414–418.
Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. (1993). Corruption. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108(3), 599–617.
Swamy, A., Knack, S., Lee, Y., & Azfard, O. (2001). Gender and corruption. Journal of Development Economics, 64(1), 25–55.
Zucker, G. L. (1977). The role of institutionalization in cultural persistence. American Sociological Review, 42(5), 726–743.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Fürstenberg, A. (2023). Experimental Corruption Research in Germany: The Lab Studies. In: Pohlmann, M., et al. Organizational Crime. Organization, Management and Crime - Organisation, Management und Kriminalität. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-38960-4_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-38960-4_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden
Print ISBN: 978-3-658-38959-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-658-38960-4
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)