The role of organizational health in determining organizational effectiveness with competing values approach: A research on the four and five star hotels in the city centre of Izmir

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to determine the dimensions of organizational health and organizational effectiveness in four and five star hotels in the city of İzmir and the relationship between organizational health dimensions and organizational effectiveness. To measure organizational health, dimensions developed by Lyden and Klingele (2000) and to measure organizational effectiveness, dimensions developed by Quin and Rohrbaugh (1981, 1983) were employed. In order to achieve the validity of measurement models and the consistency of the proposed model showing the relationship between organizational health dimensions and organizational effectiveness, a confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling were performed. In an overall measurement models, the adequacy and the reliability of indicators were proved by measuring the composite reliability, the estimated percentage of variance extracted by each construct, discriminant and convergent validity. The results of DFA confirmed the seven dimensional nature of the organizational health and the nine dimensional nature of the organizational effectiveness. “Loyalty and morale, institutional reputation and ethics, development and resource utilization" dimensions were found to be effective in predicting organizational effectiveness in consequence of testing the structural equation model 1. As a result of the findings obtained from the proposed models in order to test the relationship between organizational health dimensions and organizational effectiveness dimensions, “development and resource utilization” dimension was determined as the reference dimension to predict organizational effectiveness. In addition, the findings indicated that “communication” dimension does not explain any dimension of organizational effectiveness.

Keywords

• Organizational health, Organizational Effectiveness, Competing Values Approach, Hotels, Structural Equation Model.

Rekabetçi değerler yaklaşımı ile örgütsel etkinliğin belirlenmesinde örgütsel sağlığın rolü: İzmir ili merkezindeki dört ve beş yıldızlı otel işletmelerinde bir araştırma

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, İzmir ili merkezindeki dört ve beş yıldızlı otellerde örgütsel sağlık ve örgütsel etkinlik boyutlarının belirlenmesi ve örgütsel sağlık boyutları ile örgütsel etkinlik arasındaki ilişkinin tespit edilmesidir. Örgütsel sağlık ölçümünde Lyden ve Klingele'nin (2000), örgütsel etkinlik ölçümünde, Quin ve Rohrbaugh'un (1981, 1983) geliştirdiği boyutlardan yararlanılmıştır. Ölçüm modellerinin geçerliliğini ve örgütsel sağlık boyutları ve örgütsel etkinlik arasındaki ilişkiyi gösteren yapısal modelin uygunluğunu sağlamak için doğrulayıcı faktör analizi (DFA) ve yapısal eşitlik modeli yürütülmüştür. Ölçüm modellerindeki göstergelerin yeterliği ve güvenilirliği; bileşik güvenilirlik, örtük değişkenlerin açıklanan varyans değerleri, ayırıcı ve yakınsak geçerliliğin ölçülmesi ile sağlanmıştır. DFA sonucunda, araştırmadaki otel işletmelerinde örgütsel sağlığın yedi, örgütsel etkinliğin ise dokuz boyuttan oluştuğu doğrulanmıştır. Yapısal eşitlik modeli 1'in test edilmesi sonucunda örgütsel etkinliğin tahminlenmesinde “sadakat ve moral, kurumsal itibar ve etik, gelişme ve kaynak kullanımı” boyutlarının etkili olduğu belirlenmiştir. Örgütsel sağlık boyutları ile örgütsel etkinlik boyutları arasındaki ilişkiyi test etmek amacıyla önerilen yapısal modellerden elde edilen bulgular sonucunda "gelişme ve kaynak kullanımı" boyutu örgütsel etkinliğin tahminlenmesinde referans boyut olarak belirlenmiştir. Ek olarak, bulgular örgütsel sağlığın "iletişim" boyutunun örgütsel etkinliğin hiçbir boyutunu açıklamadığını ortaya koymaktadır.

Keywords

• Örgütsel Sağlık, Örgütsel Etkinlik, Rekabetçi Değerler Yaklaşımı, Otel İşletmeleri, Yapısal Eşitlik Modeli.

References

1. Anantharaman, R. N. ve Chacko, A. (1997). Organizational climate: a predictor of organizational effectiveness. Malaysian Management Review, 32 (3)
2. http://portal.mim.org.my/resources/MMR/9709/970907.Htm, (17.04.2011)
3. Anderson, J. C. ve Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modelling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103: 411–423
4. Ashforth, B. E. (1985). Climate formation: issues and extensions. Academy of Management Review, 10 (4): 837–847
5. Aytaç, S. (2003). Çalışma psikolojisi alanında yeni bir yaklaşım: örgütsel sağlık. İş, Güç, Endüstri İlişkileri ve İnsan Kaynakları Dergisi, 5 (2)
6. http://www.isguc.org/?p=article&id=163&cilt=5&sayi=2&yil=2003 (15.03.2013)
7. Baumgartner, H. ve Homburg, C. (1996). Applications of structural equation modeling in marketing and consumer research: a review. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 13 (2), 139-161
8. Bennett, P. D. (1995). Dictionary of marketing terms. Lincolnwood, IL: NTC Business Books

9. Bentler, P. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models
10. Psychological Bulletin, 107 (2): 238-246
11. Bentler, P. ve Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88: 591-606
12. Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research
13. New York: The Guilford Press
14. Browne, J. (2002). Validation of the healthy work organizations model
15. Journal of American Academy of Business, 1 (2): 206-214
16. Browne, M. W. ve Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. İçinde K. A. Bollen ve S. Long (Der.) Testing structural equation models: 131- 161. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications
17. Byrne, N. M. (1989). A primer of LISREL: basic applications and programming for confirmatory factor analytic models. New York: Springer
18. Çakar, N. D., Yıldız, S. ve Dur, S. (2010). Bilgi yönetimi ve örgütsel etkinlik ilişkisi: örgüt kültürü ve örgüt yapısının temel etkileri. Ege Akademik Bakış/Ege Academic Review, 10 (1): 71-93
19. Cameron, K. S. (1986). Effectiveness as paradox: consensus and conflict in conceptions of organizational effectiveness. Management Science, 32 (5): 539-553
20. Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W. ve Rhodes, E. (1981). Evaluating program and managerial efficiency: an application of data envelopment analysis to program follow through. Management Science, 27 (6): 668-697
21. Chester, I. B. (1938). The function of the executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
22. Conolly, T., Colon, E. M. ve Deutch, S. J. (1980). Organizational effectiveness: a multiple constituency approach. Academy of Management Review, 5 (2): 211-219
23. Cox, T. ve Howarth, I. (1990). Organizational health, culture and helping
24. Work&Stress, 4 (2): 107- 110
25. Denison, D. R. (1996). What is the difference between organizational culture and organizational climate? A native’s point of view on a decade of paradigm wars. Academy of Management Review, 21 (3): 619-654
26. Denison, D. R., Haaland, S. ve Goelzer, P. (2004). Corporate culture and organizational effectiveness: is Asia different from the rest of the world?
27. Organizational Dynamics, 33 (1): 98-109
28. Denison, D. R. ve Mishra, A. K. (1989). Organizational culture and organizational effectiveness: a theory and some preliminary empirical evidence
29. www.denisonconsulting.com/Libraries/Resources/Denison-1989-Preliminary- Evidence.sflb.ashx (17.04.2011)
30. Denison, D. R. ve Mishra, A. K. (1995). Toward a theory of organizational culture and effectiveness. Organization Science, 6 (2): 204-223
31. Diamantopoulos, A. ve Siguaw, J. (2000). Introducing LISREL. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
32. Dive, B. (2004). The healthy organization: a revolutionary approach to people and management, (2. Baskı). United States: Kogan Page
33. Etzioni, A. (1960). Two approaches to organizational analysis: a critique and suggestion. Administrative Science Quarterly, 5 (2): 257-278
34. Fey, C. F. ve Denison, D. R. (2003). Organizational culture and effectiveness: can American theory be applied in Russia?. Organization Science, 14 (6): 686-706
35. Fornell, C. ve Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18 (1): 39–50
36. Friedlander, F., ve Pickle, H. (1968). Components of effectiveness in small organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 13 (2): 289-304
37. Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P. ve Borg, W. R. (2007). Educational research: an introduction, 8th ed. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon
38. Georgopoulos, B. S. ve Tannenbaum, A. S. (1957). A study of organizational effectiveness. American Sociological Review, 22 (5): 534-540
39. Gregory, B. T., Harris, S. G., Armenakis, A. A. ve Shook, C. L. (2009)
40. Organizational culture and effectiveness: a study of values, attitudes, and organizational outcomes. Journal of Business Research, 62 (7): 673-679
41. Hannan, M. T. ve Freeman, J. (1977). Obstacles to comparative studies
42. İçinde P. S. Goodman ve J. H. Pennings (Der.) New perspectives on organizational effectiveness: 106-131. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
43. Henri, J. F. (2004). Performance measurement and organizational effectiveness: bridging the gap. Managerial Finance, 30 (6): 93-123
44. Herzberg, F. (1974). The wise old Turk. Harward Business Review, 52 (5): 70- 80
45. Hitt, M. A. ve Middlemist, R. D. (1979). A methodology to develop the criteria and criteria weightings for assessing subunit effectiveness in organizations
46. Academy of Management Journal, 22 (2): 356-374
47. Hoy, W. K., Tarter, C. J. ve Kottkamp, R. B. (1991). Open schools /healthy schools. Newbury Park, CA: Sage
48. Hu, L. ve Bentler, P. M. (1995). Evaluating model fit. İçinde R. Hoyle (Der.) Structural equation modelling: concepts, issues and applications: 76-99
49. Thousand Oak, CA: Sage
50. Hubert, J. A. (1984). The relationship of school organizational health and teacher need satisfaction to teacher stress. Dissertation Abstracts International, 45(5)-A: 1343
51. Jaffe, D. T. (1995). The healthy company: research paradigms for personal and organizational health. İçinde S.L. Sauter ve L.R. Murphy (Der) Organizational risk factors for job stress: 13-40. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association
52. Jöreskog, K. G. (1973). A general method for estimating a linear structural equation system. İçinde A. S. Golderger ve O. D. Duncan (Der.) Structural equation models in the social sciences: 85-112. New York: Academic Press
53. Jöreskog, K. G. ve Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL VIII manual. Mooresville, IN: Scientific Software
54. Kalliath, T.J., Bluedorn, A.C. ve Strube, M. J. (1999). A test of value congruence effects. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20 (7): 1175-1198
55. Karasar N. (1998). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi: kavramlar, ilkeler, teknikler. Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım
56. Keeley, M. (1978). A social-justice approach to organizational evaluation
57. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23 (2): 272-292
58. Kentucky State University Organizational Health Survey, (2005)
59. http://www.kysu.edu/about/divisions/officeofthepresident/institutionalresearch/Sur veys.htm, (17.04.2011)
60. Kimpston, R. D., ve Sonnabend, L. C. (1975). Public secondary schools: the interrelationship between organizational health and innovativeness and between organizational health and staff characteristics. Urban Education, 10 (1): 27-45
61. Köseoğlu, M. A. ve Karayormuk, K. (2009). Örgüt sağlığı nedir? Yöneticiler arasında görüş farklılığı var mıdır?. Atatürk Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 23 (2): 175-193
62. Lim, S., ve Murphy, L. (1999). The relationship of organizational factors to employee health and overall effectiveness. American Journal of Industrial Medicine Supplement, 36 (1): 64-65
63. Lopez-Cabrales, A., Vale, R. ve Herrero, I. (2006). The contribution of core employees to organizational capabilities and efficiency. Human Resource Management, 45 (1): 81-109
64. Lyden, J. A. ve Klingele, W. E. (2000). Supervising organizational health
65. Supervision, 61 (12): 3-6
66. Mahoney, T. A. ve Weitzel, W. (1969). Managerial models of organizational effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 14 (3): 357-365
67. Marcoulides, G. ve Heck R. (1993). Organizational culture and performance: proposing and testing a model. Organization Science, 4 (2): 209-225
68. McHugh, M., Humphreys, P. ve Mclvor, R. (2003). Buyer-supplier relationships and organizational health. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 39 (2): 15-25
69. Miles, M. B. (1969). Planned change and organizational health: figure and ground. İçinde F. D. Carver ve T. J. Sergiovanni (Der.) Organizations and human behavior: 375-391. New York: Mcgraw- Hill
70. Miles, M. B. (1971). Planned change and organizational health: change process in the public schools. Oregon: University of Oregon Press
71. Miller, R. L., Griffin, M. A. ve Hart, P. M. (1999). Personality and organizational health: the role of conscientiousness. Work & Stres, 13 (1): 7-19
72. Mott, P. E. (1972). The characteristics of effective organizations. New York: Harper and Row
73. Mulaik, S. A., James, L. R., Alstine, J. V., Bennett, N., Lind, S. ve Stilwell, C. D. (1989). Evaluation of goodness-of-fit indices for new alternatives. Structural Equation Modelling, 6 (1): 1-55
74. Neugebauer, R. (1990). Do you have a healthy organization? Exchange, 1990 (72): 38-41
75. Nunnally, J. (1967). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill
76. Ostroff, C. ve Schmitt, N. (1993). Configurations of organizational effectiveness and efficiency. Academy of Management Journal, 36 (6): 1345-1361
77. Özdamar, K. (2002). Paket programlar ile istatistiksel veri analizi
78. Eskişehir: Kaan Kitabevi
79. Özdemir, A. (2010). Yönetim biliminde ileri araştırma yöntemleri ve uygulamalar. İstanbul: Beta Basım A.Ş
80. Pfeffer, J. (1977). Usefulness of the concept. İçinde P. S. Goodman ve J
81. M. Pennings (Der.) New perspectives on organizational effectiveness: 132-143. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
82. Podgurski, T. P. (1990). School effectiveness as it relates to group consensus and organizational health of elementary schools. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Rutgers the State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick
83. Poulin, L. ve Leclerc, S. (2004). Organizational health evaluation and implementation process. Final Report Presented To The Canada Council For The Arts: 1-53. http://www.canadacouncil.ca/NR/rdonlyres/85171F2C-853C-439B- A9D310F7F78C7B58/0/OrganizationalHealthLPoulinNov252004.pdf, (17.04.2011)
84. Pounder, J. S. (1997). Organizational effectiveness in higher education: towards an operational definition. Hong Kong Institute of Business Studies: 1-33, http://www.library.ln.edu.hk/eresources/etext/hkibs/hkws_0008.pdf, (17.04.2011)
85. Price, J. L. (1972). Handbook of organizational management. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath
86. Quick, J. C., Quick, J. D., Nelson, D. L. ve Hurrell, J. J. (1997). Preventive stress management in organizations. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association
87. Quinn, R. E. ve Rohrbaugh, J. (1981). A competing values approach to organizational effectiveness. Public Productivity Review, 5 (2): 122-140
88. Quinn, R. E. ve Rohrbaugh, J. (1983). A spatial model of effectiveness criteria: towards a competing values approach to organizational analysis
89. Management Science, 29 (3): 363-377
90. Rohrbaugh, J. (1981). Operationalizing the competing values approach: measuring performance in the employment service. Public Productivity Review, 5 (2): 141-159
91. Rosen, R. (1991). The healthy company. Los Angeles: Tarcher
92. Schneider, B., Gunnarson, S. K. ve Niles, J. K. (1994). Creating the climate and culture of success. Organizational Dynamics, 23 (1): 17-29
93. Seashore, S. E. ve Yuchtman, E. (1967). Factorial analysis of organizational performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 12 (3): 377-395
94. Shoaf, C., Genaidy, A., Karwowski, W. ve Huang, S. H. (2004). Improving performance and quality of working life: a model for organizational health assessment in emerging enterprises. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing, 14 (1): 81-95
95. Siehl, C. ve Martin J. (1990). Organizational culture: a key to financial performance? İçinde B. Schneider (Der.) Organizational climate and culture: 241- 81. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
96. Steers, R. M. (1977). Organizational effectiveness: a behavioral view
97. Santa Monica, CA: Goodyear
98. Steiger, J. H. ve Lind, J. M. (1980). Statistically based tests for the number of common factors. Paper presented at the meeting of the Psychometric Society, Iowa City, IA. May 30, 1980
99. Stevens, J. M., Beyer, J. M. ve Trice, H. M. (1978). Assessing personal, role and organizational predictors of managerial commitment. Academy of Management Journal, 21 (3): 380-396
100. Tsui, K. T. ve Cheng, Y. C. (1999). School organizational health and teacher commitment: a contingency study with multi-level analysis. Educational Research and Evaluation, 5 (3): 249–268
101. Webb, R. J. (1974). Organizational effectiveness and the voluntary organization. Academy of Management Journal, 17 (4): 663-677
102. Williams, B.W. (2010). Organizational health and mindfulness as predictors of school effectiveness: using the balanced scorecard. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi. Graduate School of The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama
103. Wilson, B. R.A. ve Wagner, D. I. (1997). Developing organizational health at the worksite. American Journal of Health Studies, 13 (2): 105-108
104. Yazıcıoğlu, Y.ve Erdoğan, S. (2007). SPSS uygulamalı bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Detay Yayıncılık
105. Yılmaz, C. ve Ergun, E. (2008). Organizational culture and firm effectiveness: an examination of relative effects of culture traits and the balanced culture hypothesis in an emerging economy. Journal of World Business, 43 (3): 290-306
106. Yuchtman, E. ve Seashore, S. E. (1967). A system resource approach to organizational effectiveness. American Sociological Review, 32 (6): 891-903
107. Zwetsloot, G. ve Pot, F. (2004). The business value of health management
108. Journal of Business Ethics, 55 (2): 115-124