نوع مقاله : توصیفی

نویسندگان

• سعید رادمرد ¹
• علی حاجی پور کندرود ²
• ناصر رهبر فرش پیرا ³

¹ گروه حقوق عمومی، واحد تبریز، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تبریز، ایران.

² گروه حقوق، واحد ارومیه، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، ارومیه، ایران.

³ گروه حقوق عمومی، واحد تبریز، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تبریز، ایران

چکیده

شفافیت به‌عنوان یکی از مؤلفه‌های بنیادین حکمرانی خوب، نقشی اساسی در تقویت پاسخگویی، ارتقای اعتماد عمومی و پیشگیری از فساد در نهادهای عمومی ایفا می‌کند. در نظام‌های پارلمانی، شفافیت در فرآیندهای تقنینی به‌ویژه در نحوه رأی‌دهی نمایندگان، از مهم‌ترین ابزارهای نظارت عمومی و ارزیابی عملکرد نمایندگان به شمار می‌آید. آگاهی شهروندان از آرای نمایندگان می‌تواند به تقویت رابطه نمایندگی، افزایش مسئولیت‌پذیری سیاسی و ارتقای کیفیت تصمیم‌گیری‌های قانون‌گذاری منجر شود. پژوهش حاضر با هدف تبیین جایگاه اصل شفافیت در آرای نمایندگان مجلس شورای اسلامی با رویکرد حکمرانی خوب انجام شده است. این پژوهش از نظر هدف کاربردی و از حیث روش توصیفی ـ تحلیلی است و داده‌های آن از طریق مطالعات کتابخانه‌ای و اسنادی و بررسی منابع حقوقی و علمی مرتبط گردآوری شده است. یافته‌های پژوهش نشان می‌دهد شفافیت آرای نمایندگان با شاخص‌های اصلی حکمرانی خوب از جمله پاسخگویی، مشارکت عمومی، اعتماد نهادی و کنترل فساد ارتباطی معنادار دارد و می‌تواند به تقویت نظارت عمومی و افزایش مسئولیت‌پذیری نمایندگان در فرآیند تقنین کمک کند. در عین حال، تحقق کامل این اصل در نظام تقنینی ایران با چالش‌هایی همچون فقدان چارچوب قانونی جامع برای انتشار آرای نمایندگان، ابهام در قلمرو شفافیت و استثنائات آن، و نگرانی از پیامدهای سیاسی و اجتماعی مواجه است. بر این اساس، اصلاح آیین‌نامه داخلی مجلس، طراحی سازوکارهای حقوقی شفاف برای انتشار آرای نمایندگان و توسعه زیرساخت‌های داده‌باز پارلمانی می‌تواند گامی مؤثر در جهت تقویت شفافیت تقنینی و بهبود شاخص‌های حکمرانی خوب در نظام حقوقی جمهوری اسلامی ایران باشد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

• شفافیت
• آرای نمایندگان
• مجلس شورای اسلامی
• حکمرانی خوب
• پاسخگویی

موضوعات

• نظریه پردازی

عنوان مقاله [English]

The Position of the Principle of Transparency in the Votes of Members of the Islamic Consultative Assembly with a Good Governance Approach

نویسندگان [English]

• Saeid Radmard ¹
• Ali Hajipour Kondroud ²
• Naser Rahbar Farshpira ³

¹ Department of Public Law, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran.

² Department of Law, Urmia Branch, Islamic Azad University, Urmia, Iran.

³ Department of Public Law, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran.

چکیده [English]

Introduction
Organizational transformation has become essential for organizations facing rapid technological, economic, social, and environmental changes. However, successful transformation depends not only on technological and financial resources but also on managers’ attitudes, capabilities, and willingness to support change. In large public and semi-governmental organizations, bureaucratic structures, centralized decision-making, organizational conservatism, regulatory instability, and limited resources may create conditions for avoiding transformational initiatives.
Managers’ transformation avoidance is broader than conventional resistance to change and may involve delaying, weakening, or avoiding transformation initiatives. Despite the importance of this phenomenon, previous studies have mainly examined resistance to change, organizational inertia, transformational leadership, or digital transformation separately, while the multidimensional nature of managers’ transformation avoidance has received limited attention.
Therefore, this study aimed to identify and theorize the main dimensions and formative factors of managers’ transformation avoidance in the Social Security Organization. The study sought to develop a context-sensitive model explaining how managerial, organizational, psychological, cultural, environmental, economic, and technological factors interact to sustain transformation avoidance.
This study employed a qualitative approach based on an interpretive paradigm and used thematic analysis to investigate managers’ experiences and perceptions of organizational transformation. The research population consisted of managers of the Social Security Organization with at least three years of managerial experience at the branch level. Using purposive sampling, 15 managers were selected for semi-structured in-depth interviews. Theoretical saturation was reached at the 13th interview, and two additional interviews were conducted to confirm the adequacy of the data.
The interviews were transcribed and analyzed using MAXQDA through three stages of coding. Open coding generated 225 basic themes, axial coding produced 77 organizing themes, and selective coding resulted in eight global themes. To ensure credibility and reliability, expert assessment, test-retest coding, inter-coder agreement, and Holsti’s coefficient were used. Ethical principles, including informed consent, confidentiality, anonymity, and voluntary participation, were also observed.
 
Findings
The findings identified eight major dimensions of managers’ transformation avoidance: managerial, structural, behavioral, personality, environmental, cultural, economic, and technological factors.
Managerial factors included weak change-management competencies, insufficient leadership commitment, inadequate strategic vision, and weaknesses in knowledge management. Structural factors involved bureaucracy, centralized decision-making, rigid hierarchies, weak communication, and limited organizational learning. Behavioral factors included organizational conflicts, low employee participation, mistrust, and a tendency to preserve the status quo.
Personality factors consisted of risk aversion, fear of failure, negative attitudes toward change, and limited confidence in uncertain situations. Environmental factors included political instability, regulatory changes, political intervention, and policy inconsistency. Cultural factors reflected organizational conservatism, traditionalism, attachment to established routines, and preference for stability.
Economic factors included inadequate transformation budgets and resource-allocation constraints, while technological factors involved outdated infrastructure, insufficient digital skills, weak training systems, and difficulties adapting to rapid technological change. The findings further showed that these dimensions interact and reinforce one another, with managerial and structural factors functioning as important foundational causes.
 
 Discussion and Conclusion
The findings indicate that managers’ transformation avoidance is not simply an individual reaction to organizational change but a multidimensional and systemic phenomenon resulting from the interaction of managerial, structural, behavioral, psychological, cultural, environmental, economic, and technological conditions. In particular, weak managerial commitment and rigid organizational structures can provide the foundation for transformation avoidance, while organizational culture, individual risk perceptions, resource limitations, and technological deficiencies may intensify and sustain it.
The study contributes to the literature by conceptualizing managers’ transformation avoidance as an independent and context-sensitive organizational phenomenon rather than merely a form of resistance to change. Practically, the findings emphasize the need for competency-based managerial selection, development of change-leadership capabilities, continuous professional training, greater participation and decentralization, development of a learning-oriented organizational culture, regulatory stability, technological modernization, and improvement of employees’ digital competencies.
 
Overall, the proposed eight-dimensional model provides a framework for diagnosing and reducing managers’ transformation avoidance in large public organizations. Addressing the identified factors can help organizations move from organizational inertia toward greater adaptability, innovation, organizational learning, and sustainable transformation. The study’s main limitation is its qualitative focus on a single organization; therefore, future research can test and validate the proposed model in other public and private organizations.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

• Transparency
• Parliamentary Voting
• Islamic Consultative Assembly
• Good Governance
• Accountability