DEFINING CORRUPTION IN A CORRECTIONAL ENVIRONMENT
In the correctional literature, the concept of corruption has been used fre quently, usually referring to a general adulteration of the formal goals of the correctional process (Rothman, 1971; Sykes, 1956, 1958). The literature on
corruption, particularly police corruption, provides a much narrower defi nition, which aids researchers interested in studying the more specific problem (see Kleinig, 1996). For the purposes of this paper, corruption is defined as the intentional violation of organizational norms (i.e., laws, rules, and regulations) by public employees for personal material gain.
This definition was formulated on the basis of a review of the corrup tion literature—particularly the literature on police corruption—and guides our discussion of the issue. As one might expect, varying definitions and cor responding approaches to the study of corruption exist (Heidenheimer, 1970). In the research on police corruption, most studies appear to use what has been referred to as a public office—centered definition of corruption (Simpson, 1978). The public office—centered definition views corruption as essentially a violation of organizational norms by a public employee for personal gain (Heidenheimer, 1970). Examples of this approach may be found in the writings of Sherman (1974), Meyer (1976), Goldstein (1977), Barker (1977), and Kleinig (1996), and the approach has been adopted in this paper. Corruption occurs when a public servant (prison employee) violates organizational rules and regulations for his or her own personal material gain.
In operationalizing this definition of corruption for research purposes, certain conditions must be satisfied before an act can be defined as corrupt. First, the action must involve individuals who function as employees. Sec ond, the offense must be in violation of the formal rules of the organization. Third, the offense must involve an employee receiving some personal mate rial gain (something of value) for the misuse of one’s office. These condi tions are used to distinguish corrupt behavior clearly from other forms of staff misconduct, such as excessive use of force. A standard definition of cor ruption, consistent with the general literature, is critical in building an information base regarding corrupt practices in corrections and for com parative purposes with the larger criminal justice system.