This is a caption.
Mohammad Mohabbai

What is administrative corruption?

Administrative corruption is one of the organizational phenomena that significantly hinders the development process of countries and leads to the emergence of fundamental problems and crises throughout society. According to statistics published by the Transparency International organization, in 2015, Iran ranked 130th in the world in terms of corruption. This indicates the deep-rooted corruption in Iran’s bureaucratic system.

The main purpose of this article is to analyze the sociological aspect of administrative corruption in Iran. In addition to this general goal, the article aims to identify and diagnose the root causes and influential factors in the formation and spread of administrative corruption, the relationship between the economic, social, and political system and administrative corruption, the consequences and perpetuation of administrative corruption, and ultimately to provide appropriate solutions to combat this phenomenon. These are the specific objectives of this article.

The root of corruption comes from the Latin verb “Rumpere” meaning to break. Therefore, in corruption, something is broken or violated. Corruption is defined in Webster’s dictionary as an illegitimate reward given to induce someone to deviate from their assigned duty. Gunnar Myrdal studies corruption in a broader sense. In his opinion, corruption can be applied to all forms of deviation or abuse of personal power and the improper use of authority and job position.

In the past, administrative corruption was believed to be caused by the insatiable greed of humans. For example, scholastic philosophers in the Middle Ages thought about administrative corruption in this way. Enlightenment philosophers – the philosophical movement of the 18th century – who were characterized by rationalism, and democratic theorists in the 19th century, provided a more precise definition of administrative corruption: “The misuse of public funds by administrative officials for their own illegal gain.”

The theory of scholastic philosophers, which considers administrative corruption as a result of insatiable human greed, is flawed and incomplete; because it ignores the influence of different institutional conditions on administrative corruption and considers it a natural phenomenon. The theory of Enlightenment philosophers, although more precise, is still limited; as it only considers administrative corruption in its illegal form and ignores the “legal” forms of corruption. Some modern researchers define administrative corruption as “misuse of government power for personal gain”. In general, it can be said that “administrative corruption is a collection of plans, decisions, actions, behaviors, and relationships that occur in the administrative environment contrary to the public policy of the country and the laws governing the administrative process, and it leads to the destruction of public interests and the inefficiency of administration”. What is common in all of these definitions is a deviation from ethical and legal norms in administrative and organizational performance, and therefore, administrative corruption and its definition are dependent on the accepted norms in each

Historical Background of Administrative Corruption in Iran.

A look at the characteristics of the traditional administrative structure and the social and political environment of contemporary Iranian history shows many administrative corruptions. Corrupt and despotic governments have taken advantage of financial abuses and have done whatever they wanted with the Iranian people. Perhaps the most important reason for this is that the rulers were not thinking about the development of Iran and were primarily concerned with their own personal, bandit-like, and family interests. In Iran, positions of power and responsibility were accompanied by great wealth, and many individuals were able to obtain government and ruling positions by giving bribes, thus following a path of corruption and exploitative practices for personal gain. Some of the characteristics of the administrative structure in the first stage of the emergence and development of modern bureaucracy in Iran include:

– The existence of a system for buying and selling businesses and official positions.

– Giving autonomy to administrative organizations in exchange for their income.

– Giving up the return of state-owned agricultural lands or their tax revenues (in general, after their collection, a certain share was sent to the center and the rest belonged to the administrative authority) instead of paying regular and official salaries to administrative authorities.

Lack of financial resources for administrative and personal purposes.

– The loss of a regular payment system for salaries and bonuses in government bureaucracy and the delay in payment of salaries for government bureaucracy employees, military personnel, and police in many cases, even for a period of one year or more.

In such circumstances, it is more likely that an administrative figure would behave like a profiteer. In this traditional structure, the administrative figure considered their job as an exclusive source of income obtained through purchase or through some form of political, familial, or personal relationship, and therefore, they would try to maximize their exploitation of this monopoly while they had it.

During that time, due to the increase in expenses at the royal court or during times of famine and drought, or for paying fines and foreign debts, buying and selling positions and administrative roles became a major source of urgent and necessary income for the government. In some cases, this practice became so developed that officials would change positions frequently, even once or twice a year, and would give their positions to other individuals in order to earn more money. These methods of using positions and income sources in bureaucracy caused individuals who obtained a position to try and quickly make back the amount they had paid, plus its benefits, in the shortest amount of time possible.

What is certain is that administrative corruption is not a characteristic of traditional authoritarian systems and can be found in most power-oriented and dictatorial systems, and even in some industrial democracies. However, the forms of administration, its depth and scope, and the methods and techniques through which it is implemented, are subject to the fundamental characteristics of the political system. But what emerges from the study of administrative corruption in contemporary political systems in Iran is that this phenomenon is rooted deeper than can be fixed by changing systems and governments.

Administrative corruption as an obstacle to development.

There is no doubt that the emergence of administrative corruption has a long history in human society and its relationship with the development of the political system is direct; to the extent that its occurrence can disrupt the political system of a country. In a corrupt administrative system, employees take advantage of their monopolistic position in providing services and engage in trade with their jobs, which not only harms development but also hinders healthy competition and social justice. The administrative system of any society is the executive arm of its political system and its proper or improper functioning can either perpetuate or undermine the legitimacy of the political system. Therefore, paying fundamental attention to the administrative system of any society and accurately identifying its issues (administrative corruption) can greatly assist policymakers in finding necessary solutions by timely recognition.

Administrative corruption is an incurable disease in all governments and its history dates back to the beginning of human societies. Administrative corruption, which is rooted in the country’s administrative system and management of government affairs, is a major problem that plagues many developed and developing societies and continues to grow as societies progress. An administrative system free of corruption provides the necessary foundation for governments to achieve development and benefit from its positive effects by reducing unnecessary costs and burdens on society. Experiences from different countries show that corruption is a complex, hidden, and diverse issue, and therefore, the fight against it must be continuous, long-term, coordinated, and carefully planned. In fact, corruption is like an infection in the body of society that corrupts its members one by one and can even destroy the entire society if left unchecked. Today, administrative and financial corruption has become a global problem and governments are aware that it causes many damages and knows no boundaries. Its consequences and impacts vary depending on the type of political and economic

Administrative corruption can mainly be referred to in two levels: the first level is the corruption that is mainly associated with political elites and involves high-ranking officials and government authorities, while the second level involves lower-level employees and is characterized by public bribery and illegal dealings with the private sector and society. Empirical studies have shown that administrative corruption in middle and lower levels of the administrative system is largely dependent on the level of corruption among politicians and high-ranking officials. Administrative corruption can stem from behavioral patterns and can be influenced by destructive national or societal structures, cultural attitudes, and the behavior of public service agents and those in positions of power. It can lead to economic losses, weaken institutions, cause political damage, and result in the redistribution of wealth and power among the wealthy and powerful, causing social harm. Corruption undermines property rights, rule of law, and investment incentives, hindering political and economic development.

The download of unwanted effects of administrative corruption has caused experts in political, social, and economic sciences to pay attention to the phenomenon of administrative misconduct and to develop effective and low-cost methods to combat it in recent decades. To the extent that the approach of Montesquieu in the separation of powers is seen as a means of preventing corruption, and the function of the constitution is to divide power and prevent abuse of power. Administrative corruption, due to its significant negative impact on the efficiency and effectiveness of the administrative management system of countries, has always been a concern for governments and international organizations such as the United Nations Development Program, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, and the Transparency and Accountability Program. The general perception of countries regarding the concept of administration is the misuse of government facilities for personal gain. Since administrative corruption leads to a decrease in investment and productivity, a reduction in social services – especially for the poor and low-income individuals -, an increase in cost of living and prices, a decrease in economic

Roots and causes of administrative corruption.

a) Cultural and social roots.

The most important factor in the emergence of administrative corruption is cultural and ideological roots; in a way that if the values, norms, beliefs, and attitudes governing society are based on materialistic, individualistic, and consumerist values, and social structures lack cohesion and necessary functions, it will lead to inefficiency and weakness in the cultural and social system, resulting in the formation of corruption at all levels and layers of society.

The higher the level of public morality, the higher the psychological and moral costs of administrative corruption will be; because the individual will suffer more as a result of committing immoral acts. On the other hand, the higher the level of employee morality in the workplace, the greater the risk of discovery, punishment, and reputational costs, and the more shameful the perpetrators of corruption will be.

In all countries, especially developed countries, specific conditions are required for administrative and organizational positions, and the selection and appointment of individuals is based on these conditions. In the content of the conditions for administrative and governmental positions, a section is dedicated to the personal characteristics of the manager. The reason for this is the importance and role of personal characteristics of managers in organizational behaviors, which they demonstrate.

b) Economic roots.

Economic recession, decrease in incomes, injustice, materialism, economic instability, rampant inflation, income inequality resulting from economic injustice, decrease in purchasing power of people and unequal distribution of incomes in society, are important economic factors that create the grounds for financial abuse and administrative misconduct.

Facilitating factors, which are mainly political and administrative factors, are as follows:

Political factors: Lack of complete independence of the judiciary, influence of the executive branch over it and over supervisory and inspection bodies, pressure from influential groups within and outside the organization, corruption of high-ranking politicians, favoritism and chaos, recommendations for protecting offending managers from punishment, and ultimately, people’s unawareness of their political rights in the face of the law are facilitating factors for violations.

Administrative factors: Inefficient, bulky, and inappropriate administrative structures, complexity of laws, regulations, and numerous departmental memorandums and administrative guidelines, ineffective managers, lack of proper leadership system, existence of discrimination in employment, appointment, and promotion, inadequacy in the system of rights and salaries, reward and punishment system, and especially the monitoring and evaluation system, preference for group goals over organizational goals, are among the facilitating factors of administrative violations.

Roots and mentioned factors lead to the creation of problems in the administrative system that manifest in various forms, including: decreased job satisfaction, decreased employee motivation, personal stagnation, conservative attitudes, and frustration among employees, decreased creativity and innovation, decreased efficiency, irrational focus on administrative discipline, unhealthy competition, and the creation of a pessimistic and distrustful atmosphere within the organization. These causes and factors, along with their consequences, provide the grounds for administrative misconduct, ultimately leading to corruption.

The consequences of the formation and continuation of administrative corruption.

Just as corruption is caused by multiple and widespread factors, its effects and consequences in society are also very scattered. Corruption is like a cancerous gland that causes many damages to society and the country. Corruption, above all, disrupts development in the country. Because corruption hinders political and economic stability, social cohesion, and also economic development (through the destruction of fair competition in the market). The existence and continuity of corruption leads to a decrease in social credibility and the prestige of the administrative system, loss of trust and respect of the people towards government institutions and administrative bodies, and also creates and increases alienation and distance between the rulers and the masses. The persistence of corruption in society benefits the wealthier sections of society, while the consequences of this phenomenon are borne by the poorer and weaker classes of society. Additionally, the emergence of the risk of misconduct in an organization, damaging the process of human resource development, weakening internal controls and increasing external controls in the organization, diminishing moral virtues and creating negative

Solution.

Focusing on factors directly related to the future of human resources in an organization, which are essential for comprehensive development, can have a greater impact on reducing or eliminating administrative corruption in various government organizations, although other organizational factors such as transparency of administrative laws can also be effective in this regard. Emphasizing universal human principles and beliefs, strengthening ethical and human values, valuing human dignity, and fostering an organizational culture due to its strong influence on the behavior and performance of organization members, play an important role in controlling internal employee behavior and preventing administrative corruption. Due to the close connection between organizational culture and public and religious culture, organizational culture is an important factor in shaping organizational behavior and plays a crucial role in bringing about change in undesirable behaviors and creating stability in desired organizational behaviors. It is necessary to establish a link between religious culture and organizations and for organizations to utilize religious values and norms in order to create a solution for existing problems. Organizational culture, in the form of a set of shared beliefs and

It seems that as long as the government of a country is filled with individuals who have anti-development ideas, there can be no real eradication or at least reduction of administrative corruption. Development culture is anti-corruption. Unfortunately, in Iran, there is no thinking about development, no desire for development.

Sources.

Qaderi, Mehdi, Administrative Corruption in Iran; A Comprehensive Sociological Analysis, Maaref Monthly Magazine, Issue 138, May 2009.

2- Salehi, Javad, Administrative corruption; Concept, causes and consequences, website of the Association of Secretaries and Office Managers.

3- International Transparency: Iran ranks 130th in corruption, Radio Farda website, February 27, 2016.