Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Ethical Behaviors and Merit-Based Professional Management Systems of Business Organizations: Turkey-European Union Comparison

Year 2018, Volume: 22 Issue: 1, 77 - 91, 30.06.2018

Abstract

This
study compares the prevalence of ethical behaviors and merit-based professional
management systems of business organizations in Turkey and 15 European Countries
(EU-15) covering the founders and initial members of the European Union.  In the study, a 12-year dataset of Executive
Opinion Survey conducted globally by World Economic Forum was used. On the
ethical behaviors of organizations, in the survey, executives are asked to rate
the extent of corporate ethics of companies in their countries regarding the interactions
with public officials, politicians, and other businesses. Merit-based
professional management system ranked by executives is based on a question
about whether
relatives
and friends or qualified professional managers hold senior management positions
of organizations in executives’ countries. The scores range between 1 and 7
that 1 refers to the worst practice (extremely
poor ethical behavior and no merit in manager selection
) and 7 refers to
best practice (excellent
ethical behavior
and merit-based qualified manager selection
). Scores of countries are compared
based on the annually weighed means of survey scores in country-level. Results
reveal that in both business ethics and professional management systems, Turkey
has scores varying around the world means those are far below of the EU-15
countries. Nevertheless, as the worst performers among the EU-15 countries, scores
of Greece and Italy are lower than those of Turkey. 

References

  • Betz, J. (1998). Business Ethics and Politics. Business Ethics Quarterly, 8(4), 693-702. Doi: 10.2307/3857548
  • Boone, P. F. & Van Den Bosch, F.A.J. (1997). Discerning a Key Characteristic of a European Style of Management: Managing the Tension between Integration Opportunities and the Constraining Diversity in Europe. International Studies of Management & Organization, 25(3), 109-127.
  • Brewster, C. (1995). Towards a 'European' Model of Human Resource Management. Journal of International Business Studies, 26(1), 1-21.
  • Büte, M. (2011). The Effects of Nepotism and Favoritism on Employee Behaviors and Human Resources Practices: A Research on Turkish Public Banks. TODAİE’s Review of Public Administration, 5(1), 185-208.
  • Çetinkaya, F. F., Şener, E. & Korkmaz, F. (2017). Aile İşletmeleri ve Kayırmacılık: Nitel Bir Araştırma. PESA Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 3(4), 119-133. Doing Business (2018). http://www.doingbusiness.org/data (11.03.2018).
  • Eğri, T. & Sunar, L. (2010). Türkiye’de İş Ahlakı Çalışmaları: Mevcut Durum ve Yönelimler. İş Ahlakı Dergisi, 3(5), 41-67.
  • European Communities (2006). Creating an Innovative Europe. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. http://www.eua.be/Libraries/research/aho_report.pdf?sfvrsn=0 (08.03.2018).
  • Fernández-Aráoz, C., Iqbal, S. & Ritter, J. (2015). Why Family Firms in East Asia Struggle with Succession. Harvard Business Review, https://hbr.org/2015/03/why-family-firms-in-east-asia-struggle-with-succession (17.03.2018).
  • Foss, N. J. & Saebi, T. (2016). Fifteen Years of Research on Business Model Innovation: How Far Have We Come, and Where Should We Go? Journal of Management, 43(1), 200-227. Doi: 10.1177/0149206316675927
  • Gopinath, C. (2008). Recognizing and Justifying Private Corruption. Journal of Business Ethics, 82(3), 747-754. Doi: 10.1007/s10551-007-9589-8
  • Greve, P. & Ruigrok, W. (2017). When Blood Is Thicker: Top Management Team Nepotism and Firm Growth in a Transition Context. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2017(1). Doi: 10.5465/ambpp.2017.17554abstract
  • Haley, U. C. V. & Haley, G. T. (2006). The logic of Chinese Business Strategy: East Versus West: Part II. Journal of Business Strategy, 27(2), 43-53, Doi: 10.1108/02756660610650037
  • Hedman, J. & Kalling, T. (2003). The Business Model Concept: Theoretical Underpinnings and Empirical Illustrations. European Journal of Information Systems, 12(1), 49-59. Doi: 10.1057/palgrave.ejis
  • Hemmert, M. & Jackson, K. (2016). Is There An East Asian Model of MNC Internationalization? A Comparative Analysis of Japanese and Korean Firms. Asia Pacific Business Review, 22(4), 567-594, Doi: 10.1080/13602381.2016.1168617
  • Jones, R. G. (2012). Nepotism in Organizations. New York: Routledge.
  • Karahan, A. & Yılmaz, H. (2014). Nepotizm ve Örgütsel Bağlılık Arasındaki İlişkinin İncelenmesi ve Bir Uygulama. Sosyal Ekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 14 (27), 123-148.
  • Katz, L. (2007). Negotiating International Business: The Negotiator's Reference Guide to 50 Countries Around the World, 2nd Edition, Charleston: BookSurge Publishing.
  • Keats, B. W. & Hitt, M. A. (1988). A Causal Model of Linkages Among Environmental Dimensions, Macro Organizational Characteristics, and Performance. Academy of Management Journal, 31(3), 570-598. Doi: 10.5465/256460
  • Özkanan, A. & Erdem, R. (2015). Yönetimde Kayırmacı Uygulamalar Üzerine Nitel Bir Çalışma. MAKÜ İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 2(4),7-28.
  • Parker, M. (2003). Introduction: Ethics, Politics and Organizing. Organization, 10(2), 187-203. Doi: 10.1177/1350508403010002001
  • Pérez-González, F. (2006). Inherited Control and Firm Performance. American Economic Review, 96(5), 1559-1588. Doi: 10.1257/aer.96.5.1559
  • Pritchard, J. P. & Armistead, C. (1999). Business Process Management-Lessons from European Business. Business Process Management Journal, 5(1), 10-35, Doi: 10.1108/14637159910249144 (07.03.2018).
  • REF-TÜSİAD ve Sabancı Üniversitesi Rekabet Forumu (2018). http://ref.sabanciuniv.edu/tr (11.03.2018).
  • Salvato, C., Minichilli, A. & Piccarreta, R. (2012). Faster Route to the CEO Suite: Nepotism or Managerial Proficiency? Family Business Review, 25(2), 206-224. Doi: 10.1177/0894486511427559
  • Schwab, K. (2017). The Global Competitiveness Report 2017–2018. Geneva: World Economic Forum.
  • Steidlmeier, P. (1999). Gift Giving, Bribery and Corruption: Ethical Management of Business Relationships in China. Journal of Business Ethics, 20(2), 121-32.
  • T.C. Avrupa Birliği Bakanlığı (2018). Türkiye'nin AB Müktesebatına Uyum Programı (2007-2013). https://www.ab.gov.tr/6.html (07.04.2018).
  • Tonus, H. Z. & Oruç, İ. (2012). İnsan Kaynakları Yönetiminde Etik Dışı Davranışlar ve Yönetimi: Bir İşletmenin Personel Yönetmeliği İçerik Analizi. İş Ahlakı Dergisi, 5(10), 149-181.
  • Velasquez, M. (2010). Corruption and Bribery. Brenkert, G. G. & Beauchamp, T. L. (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Business Ethics, 471-500. Doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195307955.003.0017
  • Weber, J. & Getz (2004). Buy Bribes or Bye-Bye Bribes: The Future Status of Bribery in International Commerce. Business Ethics Quarterly, 14(4), 695-711.
  • World Economic Forum-WEF (2018). The Executive Opinion Survey, Global Competitiveness Reports (2006-2018), https://www.weforum.org/reports (10.04.2018).

İş Örgütlerinin Etik Davranışları ve Liyakate Dayalı Profesyonel Yönetim Sistemleri: Türkiye-Avrupa Birliği Karşılaştırması

Year 2018, Volume: 22 Issue: 1, 77 - 91, 30.06.2018

Abstract

Bu çalışma, Türkiye ile Avrupa Birliği’nin kurucuları ve
ilk üyelerinden oluşan 15 Avrupa ülkesinde (AB-15), iş örgütlerinin etik
davranışlarının ve liyakate dayalı profesyonel yönetim sistemlerinin
yaygınlığını karşılaştırmaktadır. Çalışmada, Dünya Ekonomik Forumu tarafından
küresel düzeyde uygulanan Üst-Düzey Yönetici Düşünce Anketi’nin 12 yıllık
verileri kullanılmıştır. İş örgütlerinin etik davranışlarına ilişkin olarak,
ankette üst-düzey yöneticilerden istenen, ülkelerindeki işletmelerin kamu
görevlileri, siyasetçiler ve diğer işletmelerle olan etkileşimleri kapsamında
iş etiği seviyesini derecelendirmeleridir. Liyakat sistemi ekseninde
profesyonel yönetim sistemi ise, katılımcılara sorulan, ülkelerindeki
işletmelerde üst-düzey yönetim pozisyonlarında akraba ve tanıdıkların mı yoksa kalifiye
profesyonel yöneticilerin mi olduğuna yönelik soruya verilen cevaplara göre
derecelendirilmektedir. 1’den 7’ye kadar değişen skorlarda 1 en kötü uygulamayı
(en zayıf etik uygulamaları ve tamamen
liyakatten uzak yönetici seçim sistemi
) ve 7 en iyi uygulamayı (mükemmel etik davranışı ve tamamen liyakat
temelli yetkin yönetici seçim sistemi
) ifade etmektedir. Ülkelerin skorları,
anket skorlarının ülke düzeyinde yıllık ağırlıklı ortalamasına göre karşılaştırılmıştır.
Sonuçlara göre hem iş etiği hem de profesyonel yönetim uygulamaları kapsamında,
Türkiye’nin skorları dünya ortalamasına yakın iken AB-15 ortalamasının oldukça
altında seyretmektedir. Bunun yanında, AB-15 ülkeleri içinde Yunanistan ve
İtalya en kötü performans sergileyen ülkeler olarak Türkiye’den bile daha düşük
skorlara sahiptirler. 

References

  • Betz, J. (1998). Business Ethics and Politics. Business Ethics Quarterly, 8(4), 693-702. Doi: 10.2307/3857548
  • Boone, P. F. & Van Den Bosch, F.A.J. (1997). Discerning a Key Characteristic of a European Style of Management: Managing the Tension between Integration Opportunities and the Constraining Diversity in Europe. International Studies of Management & Organization, 25(3), 109-127.
  • Brewster, C. (1995). Towards a 'European' Model of Human Resource Management. Journal of International Business Studies, 26(1), 1-21.
  • Büte, M. (2011). The Effects of Nepotism and Favoritism on Employee Behaviors and Human Resources Practices: A Research on Turkish Public Banks. TODAİE’s Review of Public Administration, 5(1), 185-208.
  • Çetinkaya, F. F., Şener, E. & Korkmaz, F. (2017). Aile İşletmeleri ve Kayırmacılık: Nitel Bir Araştırma. PESA Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 3(4), 119-133. Doing Business (2018). http://www.doingbusiness.org/data (11.03.2018).
  • Eğri, T. & Sunar, L. (2010). Türkiye’de İş Ahlakı Çalışmaları: Mevcut Durum ve Yönelimler. İş Ahlakı Dergisi, 3(5), 41-67.
  • European Communities (2006). Creating an Innovative Europe. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. http://www.eua.be/Libraries/research/aho_report.pdf?sfvrsn=0 (08.03.2018).
  • Fernández-Aráoz, C., Iqbal, S. & Ritter, J. (2015). Why Family Firms in East Asia Struggle with Succession. Harvard Business Review, https://hbr.org/2015/03/why-family-firms-in-east-asia-struggle-with-succession (17.03.2018).
  • Foss, N. J. & Saebi, T. (2016). Fifteen Years of Research on Business Model Innovation: How Far Have We Come, and Where Should We Go? Journal of Management, 43(1), 200-227. Doi: 10.1177/0149206316675927
  • Gopinath, C. (2008). Recognizing and Justifying Private Corruption. Journal of Business Ethics, 82(3), 747-754. Doi: 10.1007/s10551-007-9589-8
  • Greve, P. & Ruigrok, W. (2017). When Blood Is Thicker: Top Management Team Nepotism and Firm Growth in a Transition Context. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2017(1). Doi: 10.5465/ambpp.2017.17554abstract
  • Haley, U. C. V. & Haley, G. T. (2006). The logic of Chinese Business Strategy: East Versus West: Part II. Journal of Business Strategy, 27(2), 43-53, Doi: 10.1108/02756660610650037
  • Hedman, J. & Kalling, T. (2003). The Business Model Concept: Theoretical Underpinnings and Empirical Illustrations. European Journal of Information Systems, 12(1), 49-59. Doi: 10.1057/palgrave.ejis
  • Hemmert, M. & Jackson, K. (2016). Is There An East Asian Model of MNC Internationalization? A Comparative Analysis of Japanese and Korean Firms. Asia Pacific Business Review, 22(4), 567-594, Doi: 10.1080/13602381.2016.1168617
  • Jones, R. G. (2012). Nepotism in Organizations. New York: Routledge.
  • Karahan, A. & Yılmaz, H. (2014). Nepotizm ve Örgütsel Bağlılık Arasındaki İlişkinin İncelenmesi ve Bir Uygulama. Sosyal Ekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 14 (27), 123-148.
  • Katz, L. (2007). Negotiating International Business: The Negotiator's Reference Guide to 50 Countries Around the World, 2nd Edition, Charleston: BookSurge Publishing.
  • Keats, B. W. & Hitt, M. A. (1988). A Causal Model of Linkages Among Environmental Dimensions, Macro Organizational Characteristics, and Performance. Academy of Management Journal, 31(3), 570-598. Doi: 10.5465/256460
  • Özkanan, A. & Erdem, R. (2015). Yönetimde Kayırmacı Uygulamalar Üzerine Nitel Bir Çalışma. MAKÜ İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 2(4),7-28.
  • Parker, M. (2003). Introduction: Ethics, Politics and Organizing. Organization, 10(2), 187-203. Doi: 10.1177/1350508403010002001
  • Pérez-González, F. (2006). Inherited Control and Firm Performance. American Economic Review, 96(5), 1559-1588. Doi: 10.1257/aer.96.5.1559
  • Pritchard, J. P. & Armistead, C. (1999). Business Process Management-Lessons from European Business. Business Process Management Journal, 5(1), 10-35, Doi: 10.1108/14637159910249144 (07.03.2018).
  • REF-TÜSİAD ve Sabancı Üniversitesi Rekabet Forumu (2018). http://ref.sabanciuniv.edu/tr (11.03.2018).
  • Salvato, C., Minichilli, A. & Piccarreta, R. (2012). Faster Route to the CEO Suite: Nepotism or Managerial Proficiency? Family Business Review, 25(2), 206-224. Doi: 10.1177/0894486511427559
  • Schwab, K. (2017). The Global Competitiveness Report 2017–2018. Geneva: World Economic Forum.
  • Steidlmeier, P. (1999). Gift Giving, Bribery and Corruption: Ethical Management of Business Relationships in China. Journal of Business Ethics, 20(2), 121-32.
  • T.C. Avrupa Birliği Bakanlığı (2018). Türkiye'nin AB Müktesebatına Uyum Programı (2007-2013). https://www.ab.gov.tr/6.html (07.04.2018).
  • Tonus, H. Z. & Oruç, İ. (2012). İnsan Kaynakları Yönetiminde Etik Dışı Davranışlar ve Yönetimi: Bir İşletmenin Personel Yönetmeliği İçerik Analizi. İş Ahlakı Dergisi, 5(10), 149-181.
  • Velasquez, M. (2010). Corruption and Bribery. Brenkert, G. G. & Beauchamp, T. L. (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Business Ethics, 471-500. Doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195307955.003.0017
  • Weber, J. & Getz (2004). Buy Bribes or Bye-Bye Bribes: The Future Status of Bribery in International Commerce. Business Ethics Quarterly, 14(4), 695-711.
  • World Economic Forum-WEF (2018). The Executive Opinion Survey, Global Competitiveness Reports (2006-2018), https://www.weforum.org/reports (10.04.2018).
There are 31 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Research Articles
Authors

Özge Demiral 0000-0003-0165-2206

Publication Date June 30, 2018
Submission Date May 18, 2018
Acceptance Date May 27, 2018
Published in Issue Year 2018 Volume: 22 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Demiral, Ö. (2018). İş Örgütlerinin Etik Davranışları ve Liyakate Dayalı Profesyonel Yönetim Sistemleri: Türkiye-Avrupa Birliği Karşılaştırması. Çukurova Üniversitesi İktisadi Ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 22(1), 77-91.