Culture of corruption

Dr. Leonardo Silos has written three books on the philosophy of management. Although it may not have been his intention, his third book, The Asian Organization (Asian Institute of Management, 2001), might perhaps give us a clue as to why a culture of corruption is so widespread in the country.

Under Max Weber’s famous classification of organizations (charismatic, traditional and rational-legal), western organizations would generally come under the third and Asian organizations under the second. The model for the western objective-legal-formal organization is the machine; the model for the traditional is the family or the clan as extended family. These two types "represent two different management philosophies resulting in two different organizational cultures and management styles".

The western or objective rational-legal type is goal-oriented. In a capitalist system, an industrial corporation exists for a goal: To make money, the means to make money is to manufacture and sell automobiles. Employees are hired according to their qualifications to do a specific job. If they don’t do the job they are dismissed. Just as in a machine, individual parts can be replaced, so the members of an organization are replaceable.

In the traditional or kinship system, the goal is the good of the community itself, as in a family whose members are non-replaceable – they are stuck with each other – as in the kinship system. Therefore, the primary concern is to achieve harmonious coope-ration.

In short, "the [rational-legal] organization exists in order to achieve something; the community achieves something in order to exist" (p. 106).

This means, of course that in general the rational-legal organization will probably be more technically efficient. In the kinship type of organization to "get along" is the most important thing: But "getting along is not yet accomplishing the task; a cohesive society is not necessarily a progressive one" (p. 15).

This family-type of management so lucidly explained by Dr. Silos is in keeping with the various social values so often noted by foreign observers, like the great value placed on approachableness; on being "like us"; etc. But this family-type of management might also explain (although it does not excuse) the widespread belief that the one purpose for getting a post in the government is the chance to enhance one’s own (and one’s family’s) welfare. Remember the politician who said, "What are we in power for?"

I remember a taxi driver who, during election time, said to me, "I wonder why so-and-so is running for office: He is already rich!"

That taxi-driver was voicing a common philosophy of government: The one purpose of a government official is to get rich (or richer).