| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立臺北大學 === 犯罪學研究所 === 101 === Using the cases between these two companies , Dih Yeon Industrial Company Limited and Winson Group. This study investigates the process of the company bribery. It is intended to explore the incentive structure of these two bribery companies and two state-owned provider, namely CPC Corporation, Taiwan and China Steel Company. This study adopts qualitative methods through depth interviews and secondary data analysis to explore the process of corporate bribery. Through comparative case studies, organizational behavior theory and organizational ecology are applied to understand the bribery corporates. It combines the macro-level organizational structure analysis and micro-level behavior such as motivation and bribery process analysis to explore the critical factors to affect enterprises engaging in bribery activities.
The research findings show that the monopolistic industrial structure is crucial. Since both cases in the study are the downstream manufactures of the former state-owned enterprises , they manage to take advantage of the loopholes in order to ensure the contract and maximize their profit. In spite of being privatized, it was found that the state still have power over the personnel appointment of the enterprises.
Drawing from the two cases analyzed, deregulation, instead of improve fair competition, actually brings many opportunities and possibilities to the corporate bribery. Some social factors including environmental consciousness led to business costs. Rather than improve their production process, bribery corporate actually choose to bend the rules by more illegal activities, including bribery. Secondly, the complex political and commercial relations, leading entrepreneurs used to pull their strings with politicians and key persons in order to influence national policy-making.
Above all, the internal structure of the organization is the key factor. Both enterprises are with centralized power structure and all decisions were being made by individual who is responsible for the bribery behaviors. The concentration of power and lack of supervision open the doors for corporate leaders to abuse their power without answering to anybody. Therefore, the company is likely to engage in criminal behaviors such as bribery.
|
|---|
