It is common, in the literature on corruption (e.g., Nye, 1967; Rose-Ackerman, 1978) to define it as an act of an individual, an inappropriate or deviated act according to certain parameters or social values that are relatively accepted in a society or group. This definition even opens the possibility to understand that, beyond the inappropriateness of the behavior of the person, it could be considered, under certain circumstances, as a rational or calculated behavior. In other words, corruption, from this analytical angle, is the decision made by an individual during a transaction with another individual or group of individuals, (unduly) taking advantage of from a specific position in this relation or transaction. This individualistic vision is sustained on a starting point: that the individual knows or understands in a broad manner, the situation in which she is and has calculated that behaving corruptly is convenient or beneficial to her. This way, a very particular interaction model is formed between actors that consciously calculate and act, measuring the consequences with a certain logic and intention. In this way, when placing emphasis in calculating individuals that act substantively thanks to this calculation ability (i.e., based on a conscious behavior), corruption is seen as a decision made by individuals under a certain and particular value context. In thislogic of conscious and calculating individuals we can inferseveral things: first, that corruption is inevitable in social relations, as it is funded in the calculations of rational actors. Second, fighting it is basically a matter of affecting the balance between cost and benefit that the individuals are able to calculate. The main issue to be considered in this article is that this individualistic vision is incredibly limited, first, to understand the phenomenon in its entirety and therefore, as a second point, to propose long-term solutions. The main objective of this document is to demonstrate, through a review of the literature on organizational corruption, that corruption is not a phenomenon where individuals enter discreet relations, but rather a dense social phenomenon. It is a social relation, in other words. And this social logic is both true for corruption in the private sector as it is in the public one, thus this article does not make a particular distinction between them. In other words, we speak of corruption in organizations of any type. From the review of this organizational literature of corruption we seek to fairly identify how corruption may be normalized as a social process with stages and socialization processes and rationalization.