The (In)Tolerance in the Application of Penalties in the Brazilian Public Administration
Main Article Content
Abstract
Objective: the option to enter into a contract for goods and services has been used by the public sector since ancient times, and to improve the productivity of these contracts, the actors involved have resorted to different forms of incentives. In Brazil, the only form of incentive formally admitted is a sanction, but empirical evidence suggests that some types of breaches of contracts have been overcome through negotiation. We intended to identify which factors influence management’s (in)tolerance regarding misconduct in the execution of government contracts/purchases. Methods: this was based on multiple case studies, the authors’ reflexivity, and abductive logic for the analysis of interviews with experts in the area, analysis of publications in official journals, internet information, and internal documents in 14 government institutions. Results: we present a list of factors that are (in)tolerable by the administration in managing contracts/purchases and their underlying reasons. As a theoretical contribution, this study expands the existing public administration literature by including, innovatively, tolerance theory and misconduct and relating them to administrative contract management. Conclusions: having as foremost concern to improve the productivity of administrative contracts, this study clarifies that tolerating can be legitimate and offers measures that can be taken to inhibit the occurrence of misconduct in government procurement and contracting, based on the recommendations of the servants involved in the management of administrative contracts. Still, a research agenda makes proposals for analysis of new factors and explanations eventually not captured in this study.
Download data is not yet available.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Since mid-February of 2023, the authors retain the copyright relating to their article and grant the journal RAC, from ANPAD, the right of first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC BY 4.0), as stated in the article’s PDF document. This license provides that the article published can be shared (allows you to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format) and adapted (allows you to remix, transform, and create from the material for any purpose, even commercial) by anyone.
After article acceptance, the authors must sign a Term of Authorization for Publication, which is sent to the authors by e-mail for electronic signature before publication.
References
Alsafadi, Y., & Altahat, S. (2022). How ethical leadership and incivility tolerance affect intention to sabotage at Jordanian universities? Organizational Psychology, 12(3), 9-26. https://doi.org/10.17323/2312-5942-2022-12-3-9-26
Andreoli, N., & Lefkowitz, J. (2009). Individual and organizational antecedents of misconduct in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(3), 309-332. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40295117
Arrow, K. J. (1963). Uncertainty and the welfare economics of medical care. The American Economic Review, 53(5), 941-973. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1812044
Bandeira de Melo, L. F., Filho. (2008). A licitação na constituição de 1988. Estudos Legislativos, 2, 1-16. https://www12.senado.leg.br/publicacoes/estudos-legislativos/tipos-de-estudos/outras-publicacoes/volume-ii-constituicao-de-1988-o-brasil-20-anos-depois.-o-exercicio-da-politica/a-licitacao-na-constituicao-de-1988
Bispo, M. S. (2023). Contribuições teóricas, práticas, metodológicas e didáticas em artigos científicos. Revista de Administração Contemporânea, 27(1), e220256. https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-7849rac2023220256.por
Bonelli, F., & Cabral, S. (2018). Efeitos das competências no desempenho de contratos de serviços no setor público. Revista de Administração Contemporânea, 22(4), 487-509. https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-7849rac2018170152
Cadastro de Empresas Inidôneas e Suspensas. (n. d.). Sanção aplicada. https://portaldatransparencia.gov.br/sancoes/ceis/8100133
Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil de 1988. (1988). Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil: Texto constitucional promulgado em 5 de outubro de 1988. http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/constituicao/constituicao.htm
Costa, C. C. M. (2019). Análise do efeito educativo das sanções nos contratos administrativos da administração pública federal no Brasil (Cadernos Enap, 65). Enap. https://repositorio.enap.gov.br/handle/1/4870
Decreto-lei n. 4.657, de 4 de setembro de 1942. (1942). Lei de Introdução às normas do Direito Brasileiro. Rio de Janeiro, RJ. https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/decreto-lei/del4657.htm
Doorn, M. V. (2014). The nature of tolerance and the social circumstances in which it emerges. Current Sociology Review, 62(6), 905-927. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392114537281
Dubois, A., & Gadde, L.-E. (2002). Systematic combining: An abductive approach to case research. Journal of Business Research, 55(7), 553-560. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(00)00195-8
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 57-74. https://doi.org/10.2307/258191
Fiuza, E. P. S. (2009). Licitações e governança de contratos: A visão dos economistas. In L. H. Salgado, E. P. S. Fiuza (Org.). Marcos regulatórios no Brasil: É tempo de rever regras? (vol. 1, pp. 239-274). Ipea. https://acervo.enap.gov.br/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?biblionumber=31450&shelfbrowse_itemnumber=19221
Gibson J. L. (2006). Enigmas of intolerance: Fifty years after Stouffer’s communism, conformity, and civil liberties. Perspectives on Politics, 4(1), 21-34. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3688624
Girth, A. M. (2014). A closer look at contract accountability: Exploring the determinants of sanctions for unsatisfactory contract performance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24(2), 317-348. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24484845
Greve, H. R., Palmer, D., & Pozner, J.-E. (2010). Organizations gone wild: The causes, processes, and consequences of organizational misconduct. Academy of Management Annals, 4(1), 53-107. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416521003654186
Hart, O., & Moore, J. (2006). Contracts as reference points [Working Paper n° 12706]. National Bureau of Economic Research, 1-66. https://www.nber.org/papers/w12706
Hersel, M. C., Helmuth, C. A., Zorn, M. L., Shropshire, C., & Ridge, J. W. (2019). The corrective actions organizations pursue following misconduct: A review and research agenda. Academy of Management Annals, 13(2), 547-585. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2017.0090
Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X
Lambright, K. T. (2009). Agency theory and beyond: Contracted providers’ motivations to properly use service monitoring tools. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19(2), 207-227. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mun009
Lee, F. L. F. (2013). “Tolerated one way but not the other”: Levels and determinants of social and political tolerance in Hong Kong. Social Indicators Research, 118, 711-727. https://doi.org/10.1007s11205-013-0433-5
Lei n. 8.666, de 21 de junho de 1993. (1993). Regulamenta o art. 37, inciso XXI, da Constituição Federal, institui normas para licitações e contratos da Administração Pública e dá outras providências. Presidência da República. http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/l8666cons.htm
Lei n. 9.469, de 10 de julho de 1997. (1997). Dispõe sobre a mediação entre particulares como meio de solução de controvérsias e sobre a autocomposição de conflitos no âmbito da administração pública; altera a Lei nº 9.469, de 10 de julho de 1997, e o Decreto nº 70.235, de 6 de março de 1972; e revoga o § 2º do art. 6º da Lei nº 9.469, de 10 de julho de 1997. Congresso Nacional. https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/l9469.htm
Lei n. 9.784, de 29 de janeiro de 1999. (1999). Regula o processo administrativo no âmbito da Administração Pública Federal. Presidência da República. https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/L9784.htm
Lei n. 12.846, de 1.º de agosto de 2013. (2013). Dispõe sobre a responsabilização administrativa e civil de pessoas jurídicas pela prática de atos contra a Administração Pública, nacional ou estrangeira. Presidência da República. https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2011-2014/2013/lei/l12846.htm
Lei n. 13.140, de 10 de julho de 1997. (1997). Regulamenta o disposto no inciso VI do art. 4º da Lei Complementar nº 73, de 10 de fevereiro de 1993; dispõe sobre a intervenção da União nas causas em que figurarem, como autores ou réus, entes da administração indireta; regula os pagamentos devidos pela Fazenda Pública em virtude de sentença judiciária; revoga a Lei nº 8.197, de 27 de junho de 1991, e a Lei nº 9.081, de 19 de julho de 1995, e dá outras providências. Presidência da República. https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2015-2018/2015/lei/l13140.htm
Lei n. 14.133, de 1.º de abril de 2021. (2021). Lei de licitações e contratos administrativos. Presidência da República. http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2019-2022/2021/lei/L14133.htm
Lewis, G., & Bajari, P. (2011). Procurement contracting with time incentives: Theory and evidence. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 126(3), 1173-1211. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjr026
Lima, G. C. L. S., Carvalho, G. S. D., & Figueiredo, M. Z. (2020). A incompletude dos contratos de ônibus nos tempos da COVID-19. Revista de Administração Pública, 54(4), 994-1009. https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-761220200292
Locke, J. (2018). Carta sobre a Tolerância (2nd ed.). Grupo Almedina.
MacLean, T. L. (2008). Framing and organizational misconduct: A symbolic interactionist study. Journal of Business Ethics, 78(1-2), 3-16. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25075585
Marinho, R. C. P., Andrade, E. P., Marinho, C. R. P., & Motta, E. F. R. O. (2018). Fiscalização de contratos de serviços terceirizados: Desafios para a universidade pública. Gestão & Produção, 25(3), 444-457. https://doi.org/10.1590/0104-530X1595-18
Medida Provisória n. 1.167, de 31 de março de 2023. (2023). Altera a Lei nº 14.133, de 1º de abril de 2021, para prorrogar a possibilidade de uso da Lei nº 8.666, de 21 de junho de 1993, da Lei º 10.520, de 17 de julho de 2002, e dos art. 1º a art. 47-A da Lei nº 12.462, de 4 de agosto de 2011. Presidência da República. https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2023-2026/2023/mpv/mpv1167.htm
Meirelles, H. L. (2000). Direito administrativo brasileiro (25th ed.). Malheiros Editores.
Miller, G. J., & Whitford, A. B. (2006). The principal’s moral hazard: Constraints on the use of incentives in hierarchy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 17(2), 213-233. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mul004
Motta, G. S. (2022). O que é um artigo tecnológico? Revista de Administração Contemporânea, 26(Sup. 1), e220208. https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-7849rac2022220208.por
Olson, J. D., McAllister, C., Grinnell, L. D., Gehrke Walters, K., & Appunn, F. (2016). Applying constant comparative method with multiple investigators and inter-coder reliability. The Qualitative Report, 21(1), 26-42. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2016.2447
Ozcan, P., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (2009). Origin of alliance portfolios: Entrepreneurs, network strategies, and firm performance. Academy of Management Journal, 52(2), 246-279. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40390287
Robinson, J., Witenberg, R., & Sanson, A. (2001). The socialization of tolerance. In M. Augoustinos, K. J. Reynolds (Eds), Understanding prejudice, racism and social conflict (pp. 73-88). Sage.
Schatterly, K., Gangloff, K. A., & Tuschke, A. (2018). CEO Wrongdoing: A review of pressure, opportunity, and rationalization. Journal of Management, 44(6), 2405-2432. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206318771177
Schiefler, G. H. C. (2016). A possibilidade de negociação em caso de descumprimento do contrato administrativo e a questão da indisponibilidade do interesse público. Revista Zênite – Informativo de Licitações e Contratos (ILC), 267, 456-465. https://scholar.google.com.br/scholar?cluster=17453394831031889435&hl=pt-BR&as_sdt=2005&as_ylo=2019&as_yhi=2019
Silva, M. A. (2008). O conceito de eficiência aplicado às licitações públicas: Uma análise teórica à luz da economicidade. Revista do TCU, (113), 71-84. https://revista.tcu.gov.br/ojs/index.php/RTCU/article/view/367
Sullivan, J. L., Piereson, J., & Marcus, J. E. (1982). An alternative conceptualization of political tolerance: Illusory increases, 1950s-1970s. American Political Science Review, 73(3), 781-794. https://doi.org/10.2307/1955404
Tribunal de Contas da União. (2011). Auditoria governamental. Boletim do Tribunal de Contas da União, 44(12), 1-59. https://portal.tcu.gov.br/biblioteca-digital/normas-de-auditoria-do-tribunal-de-contas-da-uniao-nat.htm
Vaara, E., Sonenshein, S., & Boje, D. (2016). Narratives as sources of stability and change in organizations: Approaches and directions for future research. The Academy of Management Annals, 10(1), 495-560. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520.2016.1120963
Vaughan, D. (1999). The dark side of organizations: Mistake, misconduct, and disaster. Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 271-305. https://www.jstor.org/stable/223506
Verkuyten, M., & Kollar, R. (2021). Tolerance and intolerance: Cultural meanings and discursive usage. Culture & Psychology, 27(1), 172-186. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354067X20984356
Vogt, W. P. (1997). Tolerance and education: Learning to live with diversity and difference. Sage.
Williamson, O. E. (1985). The economic institutions of capitalism: Firms, markets, relational contracting. Free Press.
Yin. R. K. (2016). Pesquisa qualitativa do início ao fim. Penso.