The Paradox of Corrupt Networks: An Analysis of Organizational Crime at Enron

Despite the prevalence of organizational crime and renewed academic interest in corruption, the coordination of corrupt activities remains undertheorized. This study uses longitudinal data based on the email communication from Enron Corporation prior to its demise and couples qualitative coding techniques with social network analysis to understand the effects of corruption on communication behavior. By contrasting the evolution of corrupt and noncorrupt projects at Enron, I examine how corruption influences the way individuals attempt to remain undetected while sharing information. Although transitive communications were not different at the projects' onsets, the members of corrupt projects communicate less and have fewer reciprocal relations than the noncorrupt project members. But as the corrupt project members' tenure on a project increases, their behavior tends to become more similar to the behavior of the noncorrupt project members. Potential mechanisms are explored to explain this finding. This study provides insight into how corruption is coordinated within firms over time and highlights the role of information in understanding the emergent properties of social networks.

[1]  Bethany McLean,et al.  The Smartest Guys in the Room: The Amazing Rise and Scandalous Fall of Enron , 2003 .

[2]  Stephen J. Mezias,et al.  Blind Trust: Market Control, Legal Environments, and the Dynamics of Competitive Intensity in the Early American Film Industry, 1893–1920 , 2005 .

[3]  A. Gouldner.  THE NORM OF RECIPROCITY: A PRELIMINARY STATEMENT * , 1960 .

[4]  T. Lewis,et al.  Outliers in multilevel data , 1998 .

[5]  J. Maxwell.  Using Qualitative Methods for Causal Explanation , 2004 .

[6]  Rob Cross,et al.  A Relational View of Information Seeking and Learning in Social Networks , 2003, Manag. Sci..

[7]  Mark Granovetter,et al.  Social construction of corruption , 2020, Investigating Corruption in the Afghan Police Force.

[8]  Kathleen M. Carley.  Destabilization of covert networks , 2006, Comput. Math. Organ. Theory.

[9]  P. Killworth,et al.  Informant accuracy in social network data IV: a comparison of clique-level structure in behavioral and cognitive network data , 1979 .

[10]  Mark S. Granovetter.  Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness , 1985, American Journal of Sociology.

[11]  Ray Reagans,et al.  Bridging the Knowledge Gap: The Influence of Strong Ties, Network Cohesion, and Network Range on the Transfer of Knowledge Between Organizational Units , 2012 .

[12]  H. Greve,et al.  Organizations Gone Wild: The Causes, Processes, and Consequences of Organizational Misconduct , 2010 .

[13]  Michael W. Maher,et al.  Developing the Process Model of Collective Corruption , 2006 .

[14]  Daniel J. Brass,et al.  Relationships and Unethical Behavior: A Social Network Perspective , 1998 .

[15]  Daniel J. Brass.  A social network perspective on human resources management , 1992 .

[16]  BundersonJ. Stuart,et al.  Structure and Learning in Self-Managed Teams , 2010 .

[17]  Kurt Eichenwald,et al.  Conspiracy of Fools: A True Story , 2005 .

[18]  Paul Cruickshank,et al.  Abu Musab Al Suri: Architect of the New Al Qaeda , 2007 .

[19]  David R. Schaefer,et al.  The Value of Reciprocity , 2007, Social Psychology Quarterly.

[20]  Georg Simmel,et al.  The Sociology of Secrecy and of Secret Societies , 1906, American Journal of Sociology.

[21]  A. Edmondson,et al.  METHODOLOGICAL FIT IN MANAGEMENT FIELD RESEARCH. , 2007 .

[22]  B. Uzzi,et al.  Embeddedness in the Making of Financial Capital: How Social Relations and Networks Benefit Firms Seeking Financing , 1999, The New Economic Sociology.

[23]  Steven B. Andrews,et al.  Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition , 1995, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[24]  P. Bonacich.  Communication networks and collective action , 1987 .

[25]  D. Isenberg.  Group polarization: A critical review and meta-analysis. , 1986 .

[26]  Anselm L. Strauss,et al.  Basics of qualitative research : techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory , 1998 .

[27]  Ray Reagans,et al.  Network Structure and Knowledge Transfer: The Effects of Cohesion and Range , 2003 .

[28]  Laurel Richardson,et al.  Secrecy and Status: The Social Construction of Forbidden Relationships , 1988 .

[29]  Francesca Gino,et al.  When misconduct goes unnoticed: The acceptability of gradual erosion in others’ unethical behavior , 2009 .

[30]  Ajay Mehra,et al.  Network Churn: The Effects of Self-Monitoring Personality on Brokerage Dynamics , 2010 .

[31]  Ronald S. Burt,et al.  Network-Related Personality and the Agency Question: Multirole Evidence from a Virtual World1 , 2012, American Journal of Sociology.

[32]  David Obstfeld.  Social Networks, the Tertius Iungens Orientation, and Involvement in Innovation , 2005 .

[33]  J. Stuart Bunderson,et al.  Structure and Learning in Self-Managed Teams: Why "Bureaucratic" Teams Can Be Better Learners , 2010, Organ. Sci..

[34]  D. Vaughan.  THE DARK SIDE OF ORGANIZATIONS: Mistake, Misconduct, and Disaster , 1999 .

[35]  T. Jick.  Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: Triangulation in Action. , 1979 .

[36]  P. Killworth,et al.  Informant Accuracy in Social Network Data , 1976 .

[37]  W. Baker,et al.  THE SOCIAL ORGANIZATION OF CONSPIRACY: ILLEGAL NETWORKS IN THE HEAVY ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT INDUSTRY* , 1993 .

[38]  Sophia Rabe-Hesketh,et al.  Multilevel and Longitudinal Modeling Using Stata , 2005 .

[39]  K. Klein,et al.  Team mental models and team performance: a field study of the effects of team mental model similarity and accuracy , 2006 .

[40]  Stanley Wasserman,et al.  Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications , 1994, Structural analysis in the social sciences.

[41]  Marshall Van Alstyne,et al.  The Diversity-Bandwidth Tradeoff , 2010 .

[42]  David A Harrison,et al.  Bad apples, bad cases, and bad barrels: meta-analytic evidence about sources of unethical decisions at work. , 2010, The Journal of applied psychology.

[43]  G. Simmel.  The sociology of Georg Simmel , 1950 .

[44]  Adam M. Kleinbaum.  Organizational Misfits and the Origins of Brokerage in Intra-Firm Networks , 2012 .

[45]  F. Heider.  The psychology of interpersonal relations , 1958 .

[46]  Linda D. Molm,et al.  Risk and Trust in Social Exchange: An Experimental Test of a Classical Proposition , 2000, American Journal of Sociology.

[47]  J. Coleman,et al.  Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital , 1988, American Journal of Sociology.

[48]  P. Holland,et al.  Transitivity in Structural Models of Small Groups , 1971 .

[49]  Morten T. Hansen,et al.  The Search-Transfer Problem: The Role of Weak Ties in Sharing Knowledge across Organization Subunits , 1999 .

[50]  Kathleen M. Eisenhardt,et al.  Making Fast Strategic Decisions In High-Velocity Environments , 1989 .

[51]  S. Watkins,et al.  Power Failure: The Inside Story of the Collapse of Enron , 2003 .

[52]  Linda Argote,et al.  Managing Knowledge in Organizations: An Integrative Framework and Review of Emerging Themes , 2003, Manag. Sci..

[53]  Pamela J. Hinds,et al.  Communication across Boundaries: Work, Structure, and Use of Communication Technologies in a Large Organization , 1995 .

[54]  K. Cook,et al.  Power, Equity and Commitment in Exchange Networks , 1978 .

[55]  Mark S. Granovetter.  The Strength of Weak Ties , 1973, American Journal of Sociology.

[56]  B. Uzzi,et al.  Social Structure and Competition in Interfirm Networks: The Paradox of Embeddedness , 1997 .

[57]  P. Ingram,et al.  Friendships among Competitors in the Sydney Hotel Industry1 , 2000, American Journal of Sociology.

[58]  T. Snijders.  Statistical Models for Social Networks , 2011 .