Akademik Veri Yönetim Sistemi
37th EGOS Colloquium, Amsterdam, The Netherlands 8-10 July, 2021, Amsterdam, Hollanda, 8 - 10 Temmuz 2021, ss.1-22
In recent decades, it appears that professional wrongdoing has grown all-too-common. Even though organizational wrongdoing has been acknowledged as an important research area, it has limitedly attracted the attention of organizational researchers (Palmer, Smith-Crowe, & Greenwood, 2016). Specifically, however, no continuous and systematic effort has so far been made to analyze the phenomena of organizational wrongdoing, how it concerns professional organizations, and how it might lead to wider arrays of corruption and wrongdoing (Gabbioneta, Faulconbridge, Currie, Dinovitzer, and Muzio, 2019). This lack of attention might be attributed to the fact that wrongdoing implicitly involves the assumption that organizational wrongdoing rarely happens (Palmer et al., 2016), and when it “rarely” happens it is an exception. For instance, especially according to the dominant functionalist perspective of professional managers and in terms of corporate governance (Sherer and Leblebici, 2015; Muzio et al., 2016; Gambionetta et al., 2019) professional business organizations are operated under the features of high levels of trust, conscientious self-government, and informal peer auditing instruments. For instance, Brint (1994) noted that business organizations and their managers are social trustee, who act for the benefits of society, while Coffee (2006) conceptualizes business organizations as the gatekeepers of the society, ensuring the integrity and fair operation of crucial social institutions, ranging from education and healthcare to financial markets. However, this perspective, the view of the professions as inherently good and altruistic and their governance frameworks are operated according to this perspective, has been challenged because of the recent rise in the number of corporate scandals.