Analysis of Local Head Leadership (Study Behavior Deviate Leader Regional Headin Lampung Province)


Corruption is a wrong behavior, one can deviate. Case corruption inside the government that involves head area happened in Lampung Province, it can be seen from KPK arrests Regent of Mesuji (Khamamik), Regent Tanggamus (Bambang Kurniawan), South Lampung Regent (Zainudin Hasan), Central Lampung Regent (Mustafa), and North Lampung Regent (Agung Knowledge Mangkunegara). Destination study this for knowing form behavior deviant (corruption) Leader Head of corruption in Lampung Province. Method used descriptive qualitative. Data obtained from study theory, letter news, books, online media, and source/reference other. Results study show form behavior deviate head area are (1) Differential Association , corruption occur because studied; (2) Anomie, corruption because weak supervision and control social; (3) GONE, corruption because greed (Greed), opportunity (Oportunity), needs (Needs), and disclosure (Expose); (4) Rationalization , corruption considered a justification; (5) Profit, corruption will get profit; (6) Capability, corruption because ability; (7) Structure, corruption is reality crime that is not free from structure and agency human; (8) Function, corruption because position head area susceptible cheating. From various form behavior deviate, the form of labeling is not apply in corruption by the heads area in Lampung Province, because there is no a label or nickname people in the area who see negative to head the area before occur case corruption that triggers head area for To do action corruption that.

Keywords: Leadership, Regional Head, Corruption, Behavior Deviate

[1] Poerwandari E. Metode penelitian sosial. Jakarta: Universitas Terbuka; 1998.

[2] Narwoko DJ. Sosiologi Komunitas Menyimpang. Bologne; 2018.

[3] Parwitaningsih, Pengantar Sosiologi, Tangerang Selatan: Universitas Terbuka, 2019.

[4] Senior L. Corruption the world big C: Cases, Causes, Consequences, Cures. London: Institute of Economic Affairs; 2006.

[5] Sutherland EH, Williams FP, McShane MD. Differential association, 2015.

[6] Nurhasanah, “Nilai-nilai lokal dalam Kepemimpinan Kepala Desa Tanarigela Kecamatan Bua Kabupaten Luwu,” Goverment. Jurnal Ilmu Pemerintahan. 2018;11(1):1–7.

[7] Arifin Z, Irsan. ”Korupsi Perizinan dalam Perjalanan Otonomi Daerah di Indonesia,”. Lex Librum: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum. 2019;5(2):887–896.

[8] Bologne J. Handbook on corporate fraud: Prevention, detection, and investigation. Butterworth-Heinemann; 1993.

[9] De Vries M. The leader on the couch: A clinical approach to changing people and organizations. John Wiley & Sons; 2006.

[10] Mouro P. Corruption and growth. Q J Econ. 1995;110(3):681–672.

[11] Mansor ARN. Fraud triangle theory and fraud diamond theory. Understanding the convergent and divergent for future research. Int J Acad Res Account, Finance Manage Sci. 2015;1(4):38–45.

[12] Tedika OK, Kanyana, Aziadimbu F. “Alcohol and corruption.” J Adv Res Law Econ. 2013;4(8):14–157.

[13] Dobel JP. The corruption of a state. Am Polit Sci Rev. 1978;72(3):958–973.

[14] Wolfe D, Hermanson D. The fraud diamond: Considering the four elements of fraud. CPA J. 2004;74(12):38–42.