Penerapan Etika dalam Kawalan Korporat (Instilling Ethics in Corporate Control)

SURAIYA ISHAK (Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, suraiya@ukm.my)

Abstract


The purpose ofthis article is to develop a conceptual model for integrating ethics into corporate entity control. This is because modern corporate entities which separate its owners and management has raised a challenge to its stewardships. The management parties have been entrusted with resources and responsibilities to operate the organisation in the interest oftheprincipal as the proprietor. This article reevaluates the current corporate control concept in light of the macro environment which neglect the moral sentiment theory. The omission of moral sentiment theory has eventually led to the tendency of disregarding moral in human economic behaviours. The agency theory, on the other hand, assumes human (management group) as opportunist agents that need to be controlled through specific control mechanism which involve costs known as the agency cost. However, the control mechanism that rest on the domain of agency theory is still incapable of entirely protecting the proprietor's investment as had been proven by the domestic and international corporate scandals. However, the core problem that arises from the omission of moral sentiment theory transcends the rule-compliance scope. As a result, the non compliance mechanism based on human internal capacity is believed to better complement the corporate control system concept.

Keywords: control mechanism, corporate governance, business ethics, agency theory, behavioural control

ABSTRAK

Makalah ini bertujuan menghasilkan satu kerangka pemikiran penerapan etika dalam kawalan entiti korporat. Ini kerana bentuk entiti korporat moden yang mengasingkan pemilik dan pengurusan telah mewujudkan cabaran daripada segi keamanahan (stewardship) pentadbirannya. Pihak pengurusan telah diamanahkan dengan sumber dan tanggungjawab untuk mengendalikan organisasi dalam bentuk yang dapat memenuhi kepentingan prinsipal sebagai pemilik sebenar entiti. Justeru, makalah ini bertujuan memikirkan kembali konsep kawalan entiti korporat sedia ada yang terbina dalam konteks suasana makro yang meminggirkan teori sentimen moral. Peminggiran teori sentimen moral akhirnya telah menyebabkan pengabaian moral dalam perlakuan ekonomi manusia. Sehubungan itu, teori agensi telah mengandaikan manusia (kumpulan pengurusan) sebagai agen-agen yang oportunis dan perlu dikawal berterusan melalui mekanisme kawalan tertentu yang melibatkan sejumlah kos yang dikenali sebagai kos agensi. Namun begitu, mekanisme kawalan yang terbentuk dalam domain kefahaman teori agensi belum mampu menjamin keselamatan pelaburan pemilik secara sepenuhnya sebagaimana dibuktikan oleh beberapa skandal korporat yang telah berlaku di peringkat tempatan dan antarabangsa. Hasil perbincangan merumuskan pelaksanaan mekanisme kawalan luaran yang berasaskan teori agensi menekankan usaha mengawal berasaskan pematuhan (compliance) peraturan. Namun begitu, pengabaian masalah teras yang berpunca daripada peminggiran teori sentimen moral dalam perlakuan ekonomi manusia adalah sesuatu yang merentasi sempadan pematuhan peraturan semata-mata. Sehubungan itu, aspek merentasi pematuhan (non-compliance) yang bersumberkan kawalan dalaman diri manusia dipercayai dapat melengkapkan konsep kawalan korporat yang lebih berkesan.

Kata kunci: mekanisme kawalan, tadbir urus korporat, etika, teori agensi, kawalan perlakuan


Full Text:

PDF

References


Adams, M.B. 1994.Agency Theory and the Internal Audit. Managerial Auditing Journal 9(8): 8-12.

Aristotle. 1970. Ethics 1 Politics 1. Chicago: Henry Regnery Company.

Baron, D.P.2006. A Positive Theory of Moral Management, Social Pressure and Corporate Social Performance. Research Paper Series June 2006 No. 1940. Standford Graduate School of Business.

Business Week, India's Madoff? Satyam Scandal Rocks Outsourcing Industry. http://www.businessweek.comlglobalbiz/content/jan2009/gb2009017-807784.htm

Coker, E.W. 1990. Adam Smith's Concept of the Social System. Journal of Business Ethics 9(2): 139-142.

Covey, S. 1992. Principle-Centered Leadership. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Culpan, R. & Trussel, J. 2005. Applying the Agency and Stakeholder Theories to the Enron Debacle: An Ethical Perspective. Business and Society Review 110(1): 59-76.

Cunningham, G.M. 1992. Management Control and Accounting Systems Under a Competitive Strategy. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 5(2): 85-102.

Ghoshal, S. 2005.Bad Management Theories are Destroying Good Management Practices. Academy of Management Learning and Education 4(1): 75-91.

Ghoshal, S. & Moran, P. 1996. Bad for Practice: A Critique of the Transaction Cost Theory. Academy of Management Review. 21(1): 13-47.

Gramp, W.D. 1948. Adam Smith and the Eonomic Man. Journal of Political Economy 56:315-336.

Hart, O. 1995. Corporate Governance: Some Theory and Implications. The Economic Journal 105(May): 678-689.

Herzberg, F. 2003. One More Time: How Do You Motivate Employees? Harvard Business Review 81(1): 87-96.

Jensen, M.C. & Meckling, W.H. 1976. Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure Journal of Financial Economics 3: 305-360.

Jones, I.W. & Pollitt, M.G. 1996. Economics, Ethics and Integrity in Business. Journal of General Management 21(3): 30-44.

Keasey, K. & Wright, M. 1997. Introduction Corporate Governance, Accountability and Enterprise. Dim. Corporate Governance. Responsibilities, Risks and Remuneration. Keasey, K. & Wright, M. (eds.). Toronto: John Wiley and Sons.

Kidder, D.L. 2005. Is It 'Who I Am', 'What I Can Get Away With' or 'You've Done To Me?' A Multi-Theory Examination Of Employee Misconduct. Journal of Business Ethics 57: 389-398.

Kohn, A. 1993. Why Incentive Plans Cannot Work. Harvard Business Review. September-October: 54-63.

Kulik, B.W. 2005. Agency Theory, Reasoning and Culture at Enron: In Search of a Solution. Journal of Business Ethics 59: 347-360.

Lee Mei Pheng. 2001. General Principles of Malaysian Law. Edisi ke-4. Shah Alam: Penerbit Fajar Bakti Sdn Bhd.

Loeb, S. E. 1971. A Survey of Ethical Behavior in the Accounting Profession. Journal of Accounting Research 9: 287-306.

Loh Leong Hua & Ragayah Haji Mat Zain. Corporate Governance: Theory and Some Insights into the Malaysia Practices. Akademika 71: 31-60.

Macfie, A.L. 1959. Adam Smith's Moral Sentiments as Foundation for His Wealth of Nations. Oxford Economics Papers 11.

Malaysia Code on Corporate Governance. March 2000.

OOghe, H. & Langhe, T.D. 2002. The Anglo-American versus the Continental European Corporate Governance Model: Empirical Evidence of Board Composition in Belgium. European Business Review 14(6): 437-449.

Ouchi, W.G. & Maguire, M.A. 1975. Organizational Control: Two Functions. Administrative Science Quarterly 20(4): 559-569.

Picard, R.R. & Reis, P. 2002. Management Control Systems Design: A Metaphorical Integration of National Cultural Implications. Managerial Auditing Journal 17(5): 222-233.

Pfeffer, J. 2005. Why Do Bad Management Theories Persist? A Comment on Ghoshal. Academy of Management Learning and Education 4(1): 96-100.

Raphael, D.D & Macfie, A.L. 1991. Adam Smith The Theory of Moral Sentiments. New York: Clarendon Press.

Skousen, K.F., Glover, S.M. & Prawitt, D.F. 2005. An Introduction to Corporate Governance and the SEC. Ohio: Thomson/South Western.

Spraakman, G. 1997. Transaction Cost Economics: A Theory for Internal Audit? Managerial Auditing Journal 12(7): 323-330.

Sridharan, U.V., Dickes, L. & Caines, W.R. 2002. The Social Impact of Business Failure: Enron. Mid-American Journal of Business 17(2): 11-21.

Steidlmeier, P. 1992. People and Profits. The Ethics of Capitalism. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Syed Muhammad Al-Naquib Al-Attas. 1981. Islam dan Sekularisme, Karsidjo Djojosuwarno (terj.). Bandung: Penerbit Pustaka.

Utusan Malaysia. 2007. Amalan Lebih Beretika Elak Salah Urus Korporat-ACCA. 18 tahun Jun 21.

Velasquez, M.G. 2002. Business Ethics Concepts and Cases. Edisi ke-5. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Yusuf Al-Qardawi. 1986. Iman dan Kehidupan. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Pustaka Fajar (DPF).


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


ISSN: 0126-5008

eISSN: 0126-8694