Printer Friendly

The relationship between organizational structure and level of corruption in administrative systems of Kashmar, 2014.

INTRODUCTION

The organizational structure on the one hand is the structure and set of ways in which the work is divided into specific tasks and provides the coordination among them and on the other hand, it is representative of rules, regulations, procedures, standards, and the role of decision-making, communication, and integrated business sectors and hierarchy of authority and marks the components and formal and informal communication between the system components. If we consider the organization as a system, this system is composed of several subsystems, which one of the most important sub-systems is human resources. Accordingly, in struggling with the phenomenon of corruption, focusing on factors that are directly related to the organizational structure and human resources of organizations can be more effective in reducing or eliminating corruption in the organization; although other factors such as organizational transparency of administrative rules are influential in this area [15].

Administration corruption is a complex phenomenon, which is multidimensional and has multiple causes and effects that in different situations find different aspects and roles. Given the importance of this topic in different countries, in recent years, extensive studies have been conducted to identify and explain the causes of the problem. It is recognized that economic factors, which are the basis for all social structures have a significant impact on individual activities such as bribery, embezzlement and corruption. Administration corruption is a disorder that is a present concern of all countries. Accordingly, various communities by viewing corruption as a problem rather inevitable, has been following the political and institutional arrangements to establish the species, which have the lowest level of corruption. Experiences from different countries indicate that corruption is so complicated, obscure and diverse. Therefore, it should be an ongoing, long and complex struggle. In fact, corruption in administration dimension and other dimensions of society is like infection which if it finds its way into body and organs of society, will disable its members one after another, and perhaps will corrupt the entire body of society. There are different factors and fields that can promote the emergence and spread of corruption in actual and potential form. Based on these factors and fields ways can be identified which have more effect on reducing and eliminating the corruption phenomenon in organizations [8].

Review of literature:

Organizational structure:

Although the concept of organizational structure is a fact and has impact on everybody in organization and everybody is involved with it in some way but it is more or less an abstract concept [10].

Relatively simple and concrete concept of organizational structure appears as an organizational chart that is a visible symbol of all activities, modes of communication and organizational processes. So it could be argued that the organizational chart is the summarization and abstract of the actual organizational structure. In a clearer sense, structure refers to those decision-making laws or playing rules which directs the behavior of organization members while deciding and identifies the domain of limitations and opportunities. Organization's structure reflects in staff's behavioral patterns, the purest and clearest parts of the structure, are rules, regulations and procedures of formal organizations [2].

From Frederickson point of view, the organizational structure implies the patterns of relationships within the organization, authority and communications (Frederickson, 1986). If the three pillars of formal complexity and focus are merged or/and combined they totally form organizational structure [2]. Hodge and Anthony believe that organizational structure clears reporting relations, communication formal channels, responsibility determination and delegation of authority (Hodge and Aiken, 1991). On the other hand, it should be indicated that structure, shows power distribution in organization and directs the managers to the matter such as who is supervision responsible and to employees introduces some managers who train and instruct them. Helping the stream of information is also of facilities that are provided for organizations by structure [3].

The relationship between the main structure of the organization and coordination of activities within the organization and expression of organizational communications from reporting aspect is of organizational structure duties [5]. Therefore, organizational structure should be able to accelerate and facilitate decision-making and find appropriate responses to the environment and conflict resolution between units. The organizational structure is not merely a coordination mechanism but also influences the organizational processes. Organizational structure is a framework of governing employment relationships, systems and operational processes and people and groups who are trying to achieve their purpose [4]. It will be arranged by organizational structures of operations within the organization, and lines of responsibility and selection will be determined. The base of structure, roles in the organization and pattern of relationships between roles, shape the organizational structure, therefore, structure can be known as available expectation of each role and the relationship between them. These roles are often legalized by descriptions of positions and description of jobs and documents that specify the scope of responsibility and scope of their employment [6].

In a general definition, organizational structure is considered as a body:

1--It is infrastructure of organizational chart and other management sub-systems (subordinate management systems).

2--Represents an image of boundaries and ranges of responsibilities and authorities.

3--Determines the overall missions of each basic unit.

4--Determines the fundamental management in each field.

5--Represents an image of communication system.

6--Represents an image of how to divide management fields.

7--Represents an image of decision centers.

8--Determines the main areas of an organization.

9--Determines the fundamental mission of each of the areas [17].

Administration corruption:

Administration corruption is a complex phenomenon, which is multidimensional and has multiple causes and effects that in different situations find different aspects and roles. Given the importance of this topic in different countries, in recent years, extensive studies have been conducted to identify and explain the causes of the problem. It is recognized that economic factors, which are the basis for all social structures have a significant impact on individual activities such as bribery, embezzlement and corruption. Administration corruption is a disorder that is a present concern of all countries. Accordingly, various communities by viewing corruption as a problem rather inevitable, has been following the political and institutional arrangements to establish the species, which have the lowest level of corruption. Experiences from different countries indicate that corruption is so complicated, obscure and diverse. Therefore, it should be an ongoing, long and complex struggle. In fact, corruption in administration dimension and other dimensions of society is like infection which if it finds its way into body and organs of society, will disable its members one after another, and perhaps will corrupt the entire body of society. There are different factors and fields that can promote the emergence and spread of corruption in actual and potential form. Based on these factors and fields ways can be identified which have more effect on reducing and eliminating the corruption phenomenon in organizations [8].

On the other hand, the issue of corruption in organizations has received much attention today. Ibn-Khaldun had noted administration corruption and indicates that its main reason is the intense interest of the ruling classes to luxuries life. In his opinion, the high cost of luxury, forces the ruling class to resort to corruption [8].

Vito Tanzi has presented a different definition of corruption and explains it in terms of staff and policymakers decision-making. He argues that a public authority or agent is involved with administration corruption when is influenced by personal interests or relationships, and family interests and social attachments while deciding about administrative affaires. This definition applies in developing countries more than industrialized countries because in developing countries, social and family relationships are highly important and everyone considers himself bound to help his family and relatives as much as possible (Tanzi, 2004).

World Bank and Transparency International Organization, recognizes corruption as an abuse of public authority (public power) for personal benefit (private). This definition is general agreement in the world (Abbaszadegan, 2004).

By comprehensive statistical studies on a large set of organizations Paulo has shown that organizational structure is associated with corruption such that in organization with long and wide bureaucracy the level of corruption is more and at the national level these organizations make investment and economic growth to be lower than other countries [16].

Research hypotheses:

Main hypothesis

There is correlation between the type of organizational structure and corruption.

Subordinate hypotheses

1--There is correlation between organizational structure and career inappropriate behavior.

2--There is correlation between organizational structure and level of abuse.

3--There is correlation between organizational structure and level of forged activities.

4--There is correlation between organizational structure and level of discrimination.

5--There is correlation between organizational structure and level of insouciance.

Research method:

Present study is functional in terms of purpose and descriptive- correlational in terms of research design. The study population of this research consists of 2488 of all employees working in administrative systems of Kashmar, in 2014. The used sampling in this research is sampling method of stratified random proportional to population size.After determining the sample size for each class the simple random sampling was used to select the unit. Given that the population consisted of 2488 people, the sample size was estimated at 335 people.

In this study the data collection tool included two questionnaires. The inventory questionnaire of the organizational structure is composed of 20 indicators. The five-item Likert questionnaire is the base for responding to questions and considered options for each question include quite the opposite (too low), the opposite (low), somewhat agreed (average), agree (high), absolutely agree (a lot) and values are scored as 1,2,3, 4 and 5. In sum, based on a score that can be achieved the type of organizational structure is determined.

In order to investigate the corruption, the questionnaire consists of 5 components and 21 indexes has been used that in order to measure the considered factors the form of a Likert scale of five optionsquite the opposite (too low), the opposite (low), somewhat agreed (average), agree (high), absolutely agree (a lot) andscores 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 have been used. Total scores of this questionnaire show the extent of organization's corruption. The validity of the organizational structure questionnaire 93 hundredths and the validity of the organization's corruption questionnaire 92 hundredths were determined. The reliability obtained through Spearman correlation coefficients for questionnaires of organizational structure and corruption respectively are 99 hundredths and 98 hundredths, which indicates the acceptable reliability of data collection.

Data analysis:

Main hypothesis:

Based on the analysis of the data, it was indicated that the correlation between two variables, organizational structure and corruption equals to 0.183 (significance level 0.001).As a result there is a significant and positive relationship between the organizational structures and administrative corruption in Kashmar and this means that as much as organizational structure is closer to the mechanic structure the corruption level increases and when organizational structure is organic the corruption is reduced (Table 1).

The first subordinate hypothesis:

1. The results show that Pearson correlation coefficient between two variables of organizational structure and inappropriate career behavior equals to 0.225 (significance level 0.000) as a result there is a direct and significant correlation between organizational structure and inappropriate career behavior and this means that as much as the organizational structure is more mechanic the level of inappropriate career behavior (such as leave and holidays, delays in arrival and rush out and refusing orders from a superior officer) will increase and vice versa (Table 2).

The second subordinate hypothesis:

Based on the analysis of the data, it was indicated that the correlation between two variables, organizational structure and level of abuse equals to -0.017 (significance level 0.760). Therefore it cannot be said that there is a significant relationship between the organizational structures and level of abuse in Kashmar administrative systems (Table 3).

The third subordinate hypothesis:

Based on the analysis of the data, it was indicated that the correlation between two variables, organizational structure and level of forged activities equals to -0.014 (significance level 0.797). Therefore it cannot be said that there is a significant relationship between the organizational structures and level of forged activities in Kashmar administrative systems (Table 4).

The fourth subordinate hypothesis:

Based on the data analysis it was indicated that Pearson correlation coefficient between two variables of organizational structure and level of discrimination equals to 0.285 (significance level 0.000) as a result it can be said that there is a direct and significant correlation between organizational structure and level of discrimination and this means that as much as the organizational structure is more mechanic the level of discrimination (prejudice in administrative relations, discrimination in pay and pensions distribution, discrimination in the distribution of employment opportunities, and discrimination in employment and recruitment) will increase and as much as the organizational structure is more organic the level of discrimination will decrease in the organization (Table 5).

The fifth subordinate hypothesis:

Based on the data analysis it was indicated that Pearson correlation coefficient between two variables of organizational structure and level of insouciance and self-restraint equals to 0.210 (significance level 0.000) as a result it can be said that there is a direct and significant correlation between organizational structure and level of level of insouciance and self-restraint and this means that as much as the organizational structure is more mechanic the level of insouciance (such as insouciance in performing duties, insouciance in maintenance of documents, insouciance and refusal to accept and discussing the complaints) will increase and as much as the organizational structure is more organic the level of insouciance will decrease in the organization (Table 6).

Discussion:

* Statistical analysis shows a significant positive relationship between organizational structure and corruption; in the research carried out several reasons for corruption in various countries have been identified. Income poverty and economic distress of employees of organizations, cultural poverty and the lack of strong moral beliefs, and the lack of preventive regulations and effective control systems have been main reasons for the occurrence of corruption. But the most important reason for spreading corruption is lack of clear structures for organizations affairs. In unclear and ambiguous administrative environments, the possibility of distortions is increased and corruptive behavior is facilitated [11] and [16]. Therefore, in organizations with mechanical structure compared to organizations with organic structure the incidence of corruption is more likely.

* The results of statistical analysis show that there is a significant and direct correlation between organizational structure and inappropriate career behavior, based on the researches carried out in relation to reasons of occurrence of corruption it can be said that the reduction of internal control as a result of self-interest of groups will lead to corruption. In an organization where there is a disparity between the staff and there is no justice it seems natural that in the realm of unfair social competition, people try to achieve their goals and intention through improper and illegal ways which indicates a social mutation of corruption in society. In mechanical organizations due to the existence of so many hierarchies there are lots of intermediaries between the staff and managers and the administrative relations are not clear, when people find the organization conditions in a manner in which they can freely commit any act and there is no monitoring on the actions taken by them (Abbaszadegan, 2004).

* According to statistical analysis there is no significant relationship between organizational structure and the level of abuse in administrative systems of Kashmar. In organic organizations hierarchical levels are reduced to the lowest level and there are not many intermediaries between managers and staff and the relations between them are more direct and clear. When organizations provide costs to training or education of their staff, thus, some parts of the staff needs will be supplied therefore people are not looking for misuse of company resources for personal purposes [14].The lack of relationship between organizational structure and abuse, yet the high level of abuse in surveyed organizations suggest that in Iranian organizations no matter mechanic or organic, the organizations' staff members seek to take advantage of the facilities and their employment status. Hence, this is due to something other than organizational structure and refers to the cultural and economic conditions of the people.

* According to data analysis, it was specified that cannot be said there is a significant relationship between organizational structure and the level of forged activities. Forging documents in order to achieve the objectives, facilitating the implementation of laws, expedition in the legal affairs, breaking the law, illegal access to resources is done and this is not only in Iran but also at the international level is highly prevalent [1].In organizations that have mechanical structure the needs of employees are ignored and the decisions are made at the top of the organizational pyramid. Thus, people for achieving their goals and refusing the law and also illegal access to income resources commit forgery and false documents, and do forged activities. But it can be said that without considering organizational structure in Iran, in order to accelerate the advancement of their goals people turn to forgery and this problem may have roots in cultural issues of Iran.

* There is a direct and significant relationship between organizational structure and discrimination level in administrative systems of Kashmar. In organic organizations unlike mechanic organizations, lower level employees are empowered to make decisions that is why all staff are valuable, so in order to create and maintain the values of the staff, it is tried to some behaviors such as discrimination in pay and pensions distribution and discrimination in the distribution of employment opportunities be avoided.

* According to results, it was specified there is a direct and significant relationship between organizational structure and level of insouciance and self-restraint, unlike organic organizations, in organizations that are mechanic there are lots of middle classes and intermediates which cause achieving goals of the organization to be doubtful and in field of achieving goals employees are inconsiderate (Coulisse and Henning, 1995) and this leads to the fact that managers are not well aware of how the staff work and provide an opportunity for staff insouciance and negligence.

Suggestions:

1--Since 8/52 percent of surveyed people have evaluated the score of organizational structure high and very high and this means that the studied organizations had been mechanical and since in the mechanic structure the corruption is greater than the organic structure so the following suggestions are presented to change the organizational structure to organic structure and therefore reduce the amount of corruption :

--Giving decision-making authority to lower level staff and the senior managers tend to have the decision-making even by lowest possible hierarchical structure.

--Reducing the hierarchical levels to the lowest possible level and removing of intermediaries between managers and employees.

--Details of the objectives for the various units are specified and individuals are encouraged to submit proposals in expecting and achieve future goals in order to achieving the objectives are the most important for employees.

--Employees have some freedom of action not just do the same way that they have been told to do. And the views of employees in relation to decisions about organizational procedures should be considered and employees are allowed to work in a way that is appropriate to their diagnosis.

--Organizations should not spare the costs for Employees' education. Educating employees and updating their information will empower them.

--Eliminating physical obstacles which impede the direct relation of employees in one unit and facilitating relations between employees of different units through different means such as phone and e-mail and complete freedom of employees to talk to their colleagues or managers about organizational issues.

2--Due the direct and significant relationship between organizational structure and inappropriate career behavior, in order to reduce inappropriate career behavior it is recommended to use intangible and periodically control and surveillance to identify employees who leave their work in the hours when they shall work. Also controlling the enter and exit time of employees, granting financial and non-financial rewards to employees who have been at work on time and to the end of working hours are engaged in activities can be very effective.

3--It cannot be said that there is a significant relationship between organizational structure and level of abuse in administrative systems of Kashmar but since 49/9 percent have indicated average and higher than average rates of abuse, therefore, in order to reduce the level of abuse it is suggested that serious reactions such a separation of job, transmission of job and demote organizational Posts should be done to employees who abuse their position to advance personal goals.

4--Given that the organizational structure and level of forged activities in administrative systems in Kashmar, are not significantly related and while 39/5 percent stated that incidence of forged activities is average and higher than average, therefore it is recommended by using mechanisms such as direct quotations from various organizations and the use of equipment to detect forged documents, the use of forged documents can be reduced to its minimum.

5--Since there is a direct and significant relationship between organizational structure and level of discrimination in order to reduce the level of discrimination it is suggested that equitable distribution of benefits is based on the expertise and productivity of employees also it is suggested that recruitment also be considered to reduce personal actions affecting many people in this area.

6--There is a direct and significant relationship between organizational structure and level of insouciance and self-restraint. It is suggested that should be opportunities for direct communication of the clients with organization managers, if the employee does not handle customers' complaints there should be some possibilities to transfer them to the administrators.

Conclusion:

Appropriate organizational structure and consistent with the environment is very important in manager and organization success. Since proper organizational structure can be a driving force and an important factor in achieving organizational goals. Thus, with regard to the environment and diagnosing authentic factors and available variables a structure should be selected that enables organization to be successful in its affairs by efficiency and efficacy. Appropriateness and consistency of a structure specifically due to the environment in which they are located in; are factors that determine goodness and badness or effectiveness and inefficiency of a structure. Corruption can be developed in unbalanced social, economic and institutional situations and what public and private institutions face in the name of corruption are caused by these unbalanced situations. Undoubtedly, when there is no hope for a bright future and socio-economic welfare for people in community, different motives encourage people, parties and groups to view corruption positively and optimistically. Weak management systems, abuse of official position, lack of planning on how to allocate and spend administrative budgets, family connections and complex administrative and bureaucracy can be considered as the reason for the emergence of corruption that organizations must be distant from in order to stay safe and sound. Therefore, organizations that have sound administrative system can lead societies toward enjoyment and better utilization of human resources, natural resources, technical and financial capital and become a success factor of communities.

REFERENCES

[1] Adeeb, M., 2009. Iran Sociology. Hashtbehesht Publication.

[2] Amiri, A., 2000. Structural Roots of Conflict in Organizations of the Police Car on the Islamic Republic of Iran. MA Thesis Tehran University.

[3] Arnolde, T.H. Fieldma, 1986. The Acquaintance Process, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, NY.

[4] Barney Barsness, Z.I., K.A. Griffin, M.D.L. Seidel, 1992. Motivation and Opportunity: The Role of Remote Work, Demographic Dissimilarity, and Social Network Centrality in Impression Management. Academy Of Management Journal, 48: 401-30.

[5] Daft, L., 1991. Motivation: Theories and Principles. Prentice-Hall, New York, NY.

[6] Danicrobey, J., 1986. Ingratiation toward Strangers, Friends and Bosses. Journal of Social Psychology, 122(81): 217-22.

[7] Danaeefard, H., 2007. Qualitative Research Methodology in Management: a comprehensive approach. Saffar publication.

[8] Habibi, N., 1996. Administration Corruption. Vosghi Publication, Tehran. First Edtion.

[9] Hage, A., S.M. Aiken, 1967. Upward Impression Management: Goals

[10] Kast, S.J., G.B. Rosenzwieig, 1985. Conveying More (Or Less) Than We Realize: The Role Of Impression Management In Feedback Seeking. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 53(5): 31034.

[11] Kabiri, N., 2003. Effects of Fiscal Decentralization on Corruption Control. Economic research, 43(8): 2536.

[12] Khaki, G.H., 2000. Research Method in Management, Tehran. Azad University Publication Center.

[13] Kikulis, W.C., S.F. Hinilngs, 1995. Exploring Boundaries of the Effects of Applicant Impression Management Tactics in Job Interviews. Journal of Management, 31(2): 108-32.

[14] Miller, J., 1987. Structural and Institutional Aspects of Corruption. Social Research, 61(2): 325-51.

[15] Moorhead, G., 2004. Organizational Behavior. Translated by: Alvani, SM and Memar Zade, Gh, Seventh Edition, Morvaride Tehan Publication.

[16] National Management and Planning Organization, 2005. the Struggle against Corruption and Bureaucracy Health Promotion (state), Tehran, National Management and Planning Organization, Zohal Publication, first Edition.

[17] Tehrani, A., 2008. Organizational Behavior Management. Teharn. Terme Publication. First Edition.

(1) Ali Darijani, (2) Mohammad Samii Daroneh and (3) Mohammad Ali Pourroostaei

(1) Assistant Professor, Department of Management, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran

(2) Department of Law, Kashmar Branch, Islamic Azad University, Kashmar, Iran

(3) Faculty Member of Imam Javd University, Yazd, Iran

ARTICLE INFO

Article history:

Received 18 October 2014

Received in revised form 31 December 2014

Accepted 18 January 2015

Available online 1 March 2015

Corresponding Author: Mohammad Samii Daroneh, Department of Law, Kashmar Branch, Islamic Azad University, Kashmar, Iran

E-mail: f_shab2007@yahoo.com

Table 1: Results of the Pearson test.

Variable                   Administrative Corruption

Organizational structure   Pearson

                           Correlation   Significance   Number
                           coefficient

                              0.183         0.001        335

Variable                   Administrative Corruption

Organizational structure     Sig      Type of relation   [R.sup.2]

                           There is        Direct          0.034

Table 1: Results of the Pearson test.

Variable                   Inappropriate career behavior

Organizational structure   Pearson

                           Correlation   Significance   Number
                           coefficient

                              0.225         0.000        335

Variable                   Inappropriate career behavior

Organizational structure     Sig      Type of relation   [R.sup.2]

                           There is        Direct          0.051

Table 3: Results of the Pearson test.

Variable         Level of abuse

Organizational                   Pearson
structure

                 Correlation   Significance   Number
                 coefficient

                 -0.017        0.760          335

Variable         Level of abuse

Organizational   Sig     Type of    [R.sup.2]
structure                relation

                 There   --         0.0003
                 is
                 not

Table 4: Results of the Pearson test

Variable         Level of forged activities

Organizational   Pearson
structure

                 Correlation   Significance   Number
                 coefficient

                 -0.014        0.797          335

Variable         Level of forged activities

Organizational   Sig     Type of    [R.sup.2]
structure                relation

                 There   --         0.0002
                 is
                 not

Table 5: Results of the Pearson test.

Variable         Level of discrimination

Organizational   Pearson
structure

                 Correlation   Significance   Number
                 coefficient

                 0.285         0.000          335

Variable         Level of discrimination

Organizational   Sig        Type of    [R.sup.2]
structure                   relation

                 There is   Direct     0.081

Table 6: Results of the Pearson test.

Variable         Level of insouciance and self-restraint

Organizational   Pearson
structure        Correlation   Significance   Number
                 coefficient

                 0.210         0.000          335

Variable         Level of insouciance and self-restraint

Organizational   Sig        Type of relation   [R.sup.2]
structure

                 There is   Direct             0.044
COPYRIGHT 2015 American-Eurasian Network for Scientific Information
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2015 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Darijani, Ali; Daroneh, Mohammad Samii; Pourroostaei, Mohammad Ali
Publication:Advances in Environmental Biology
Article Type:Report
Geographic Code:7IRAN
Date:Mar 1, 2015
Words:4478
Previous Article:Review of marketing margin of tomato in Bushehr province.
Next Article:Identification of factors affecting branding in commercial insurance companies of Iran.
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters