The Olympus scandal – the dark side of social networks and corporate culture

Maria Ilieva
{"title":"The Olympus scandal – the dark side of social networks and corporate culture","authors":"Maria Ilieva","doi":"10.1108/cpoib-09-2020-0126","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>This study aims to build on the well-documented case of the Olympus scandal to dissect how social networks and corporate culture enabled corporate elites to commit fraud across multiple generations of leaders.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>A flexible pattern matching approach was used to identify matches and mismatches between behavioural theory in corporate governance and the patterns observed in data from diverse sources.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>The study applies the behavioural theory of corporate governance from different perspectives. Social networks and relationships were essential for the execution of the fraud and keeping it secret. The group of corporate elites actively created opportunities for committing misappropriation. This research presents individuals committing embezzlement because the opportunity already exists, and they can enrich themselves. The group of insiders who committed the fraud elaborated the rationalizations to others and asked outside associates to help rationalise the activities, while usually individuals provide rationalizations to themselves only.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Practical implications</h3>\n<p>The social processes among actors described in this case can inform the design of mechanisms to detect these behaviours in similar contexts.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>This study provides both perspectives on the fraud scandal: the one of the whistle-blowers, and the opposing side of the transgressors and their associates. The extant case studies on Olympus presented the timeframe of the scandal right after the exposure. The current study dissects the events during the fraud execution and presents the case in a neutral or a negative light.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":46124,"journal":{"name":"Critical Perspectives on International Business","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Perspectives on International Business","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/cpoib-09-2020-0126","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

This study aims to build on the well-documented case of the Olympus scandal to dissect how social networks and corporate culture enabled corporate elites to commit fraud across multiple generations of leaders.

Design/methodology/approach

A flexible pattern matching approach was used to identify matches and mismatches between behavioural theory in corporate governance and the patterns observed in data from diverse sources.

Findings

The study applies the behavioural theory of corporate governance from different perspectives. Social networks and relationships were essential for the execution of the fraud and keeping it secret. The group of corporate elites actively created opportunities for committing misappropriation. This research presents individuals committing embezzlement because the opportunity already exists, and they can enrich themselves. The group of insiders who committed the fraud elaborated the rationalizations to others and asked outside associates to help rationalise the activities, while usually individuals provide rationalizations to themselves only.

Practical implications

The social processes among actors described in this case can inform the design of mechanisms to detect these behaviours in similar contexts.

Originality/value

This study provides both perspectives on the fraud scandal: the one of the whistle-blowers, and the opposing side of the transgressors and their associates. The extant case studies on Olympus presented the timeframe of the scandal right after the exposure. The current study dissects the events during the fraud execution and presents the case in a neutral or a negative light.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
奥林巴斯丑闻--社交网络和企业文化的阴暗面
本研究旨在以奥林巴斯丑闻这一有充分证据的案例为基础,剖析社会网络和企业文化是如何使企业精英在多代领导人之间实施欺诈行为的。社会网络和关系对于欺诈行为的实施和保密至关重要。公司精英群体积极创造挪用公款的机会。这项研究提出,个人实施挪用公款是因为机会已经存在,他们可以中饱私囊。本案例中描述的行为者之间的社会过程可以为设计在类似情况下检测这些行为的机制提供参考。原创性/价值本研究提供了关于欺诈丑闻的两个视角:举报人的视角和违法者及其同伙的对立面。关于奥林巴斯的现有案例研究介绍了丑闻曝光后的时间框架。本研究剖析了欺诈执行期间发生的事件,并从中立或负面的角度介绍了这一案例。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
15.00%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: In recent years, the business practices and management philosophies of global enterprises have been subject to increasingly close scrutiny by commentators in the fields of journalism and academia. Such scrutiny has been motivated by a growing desire to examine the nature of globalisation, its impact on specific communities and its benefits for society as a whole. Coverage includes, but is not restricted to, issues of: ■Globalization ■Production and consumption ■Economic change ■Societal change ■Politics and power of organizations and governments ■Environmental impact
期刊最新文献
Understanding academic women’s silence in Poland: exploring with social cognitive theory Sustainability in business education: a systematic review and future research agenda Transcending the DEI contradictions: a Bourdieusian path to social justice in international business De-othering: indigenous perspectives on diversity, equity and inclusion Co-creating inclusion in research practices in the South Pacific: some highlights and challenges
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1