Evaluation of executive behaviors in the 2008 US financial crisis in terms of Max Weber's rationality types

In this study, which examined the behaviors of managers who have an important role in the US financial crisis, it is aimed to build a theoretical link between the work that written 86 years ago and the crisis. In this context, the behaviors of 5 managers who worked in the same or different organizations as Richard Fuld, Thomas Cruikshank, Eric Kolchinsky, Mathew Lee and William Black were examined according to Max Weber's rationality types. For this reason, the expressions in the hearings held by different organizations related to the crisis in the USA on 6th October 2008, 20th April 2010 and 1st September 2010 were analyzed by content analysis method from qualitative research techniques. The critical research question in this study what kind of rationalities take part in the high-level managers behaviours In order to carry out the content analysis, the behaviors of the managers based on the expressions in these hearings were determined and a code was assigned to each behavior and categorization of these behaviors created according to the types of actions determined by Weber. Then, these behaviors were distributed according to 4 basic rationality types. After this distribution, a network map of behaviors was created with visualization software named Gephi. As a result of all these studies, the rationality distribution of the behaviors of each manager was determined proportionally. In addition, the relationships between managers' behaviors and types of rationality were reported in the network map. Total of 132 behaviors were determined as a result of the findings. The highest ratio in terms of formal rationality was determined by Lehman Brothers manager Richard Fuld. Also, the person with whom the formal rationality was determined as one of the highest rates was observed as Thomas Cruikshank, who is a Lehman Brothers executive. In the context of substantive rationality, it was found that Matthew Lee exhibited the behavior with 44% of 8 behaviors. In this research, it was observed that 48% of the behavior of the lawyer William Black, who took part in the audit duties, 38% was in the form of formal rationality. In Eric Kolchinsky, it was observed that 8% of the behaviors of 44% had the highest rate as formal rationality, but their basic rationality and practical rationality were equal. From this point of view, it was found that the explanations made by Fuld and Cruikshank were mainly within the scope of formal rationality. In the light of these findings, it was reported that the managers responded to the formal rationality-based criticisms directed against them with the same type of rationality. When all these reasons are examined, it is important to understand how the managers working in the same or different institutions interpret their behavior and the reasons behind them. Although it tries to create certain explanations through the results obtained, it has an effect on human behaviors and it is tried to emphasize the importance of the resources of formal-informal regulators in their organizations.