8)YERLEŞİKLİK ve İLİŞKİLERİ ANLAMADA AĞ DÜZENEĞİ KURAMI: SOSYOLOJİK BAKIŞ

Abstract

Economic sociology has long argued that economy and sociology are too inter twined to be thought of as independent disciplines. In recent years, economic sociology and the related concept of embeddedness have received considerable attention from researchers. However, questions over its epistemology still remain unanswered. In this article, we employ social network theory to analyze the networks and the relational bounds of embededdness. Economic and sociological paradigms will be explored via the arguments of philosophy of social sciences and the structures of networks within the social network theory will be investigated through the lens of sociological epistemology

Keywords

• Embeddedness, Social Network Theory, Sociological Epistemology

8)YERLEŞİKLİK ve İLİŞKİLERİ ANLAMADA AĞ DÜZENEĞİ KURAMI: SOSYOLOJİK BAKIŞ

Abstract

İktisadi faaliyetlerin sosyoloji biliminden ayrı düşünülemez olduğu gerçeğini savunan iktisadi sosyoloji ve bağlı bulunan yerleşiklik kavramı, son yıllarda araştırmacılar tarafından ilgi gösterilen bir konu olmuştur. Yerleşikliğin iktisadi ve sosyoloji boyutunun farklı bakış açılarına / farklı epistemolojilere dayandırılması tartışmalı bir durum yaratmaktadır. Bu makalede yerleşikliğin doğasında bulunan ilişkisellik, ağ düzeneği kuramı çerçevesinde incelenerek ortaya çıkarılmaya çalışılmaktadır. İktisadi ve sosyolojik bakış açıları sosyal bilim felsefesi argümanlarınca irdelenerek, ağ düzeneği kuramının açıklamaya çalıştığı ilişkisel yapılar sosyolojik epistemoloji bağlamında temellendirilerek incelenecektir

Keywords

• Yerleşiklik, Ağ Düzeneği Kuramı, Sosyolojik Epistemoloji

References

1. Aggarwal, C. C. (2011), "An Introduction to Social Data Analytics", 1-14. in: Charu, C. Aggarwal (ed.), Social Network Data
2. Analytics, London: Springer. Algesheimer, R., Dholakia, M.U. ve Herrmann, A. (2005). “The Social Influence of Brand Community: Evidence from European
3. Car Clubs”. Journal of Marketing, 69, 19-34. Anonymous, (2011), "Social Network Analysis: Theory and Aplications", Erişim: 12.09.2014, http://train.ed.psu.edu/WFED- 543/SocNet_TheoryApp.pdf.
4. Atmanspacher, H., (2002). “BetweenChanceandChoice: InterdisciplinaryPerspectives on Determinism”, ImprintAcademic, USA.
5. Aygül, C. (2006), "Şebeke Kuramlarına Eleştirisel Bir Bakış", Memleket Siyaset Yönetim, 1, 141-153.
6. Brown, Jo, Brocerick, A.J. ve Lee, N. (2007). “Word of Mouth Communication Within Online Communities: Conceptualizing the Online Social Network”. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 21(3), 2-20.
7. Burrell, G., ve Morgan, G. (1979). “Sociologicalparadigmsandorganizationalanalysis”,London: Heinemann.
8. Burt, R., (1992). “StructuralHoles: TheSocialStructure of Competition”, Cambridge, MA: Harvard UniversityPress.

9. Burt, R. (1997), “TheContingentvalue of socialcapital”, AdministrativeScienceQuarterly, 42: 339 365.
10. Burt, R., (2000), “The Network Structure of SocialCapital”, B. M. Staw ve R. I. Sutton (Der.), Research in
11. OrganizationalBehaviour, Vol:22: 345-423, ElsevierScienceInc., New York. Callon, M. (1986). "Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation: Domestication of the Scallops and The Fishermen of St Brieuc
12. Bay". in J. Law, Power, action and belief: a new sociology of knowledge?. London:Routledge, 196-223. Cock, K. S. ve Whitmeyer, J. M., (1992), “TwoApproachestoSocialStructure: Exchange Theoryand Network Analysis”,
13. AnnualReview of Sociology, Vol. 18:109-127. Coleman, J. S., (1988), “ Socialcapital in thecreation of humancapital”, AmericanJournal of Sociology, 94: 95-120.
14. Degenne, Alain ve Forse, Michel (1999). Introducing Social Networks, çeviri: Arthur Barges, Sage Publications, London.
15. Doyle, P. (1993), Değer Temelli Pazarlama, Çev. Gülfidan Barış, MediaCat, İstanbul.
16. Durkheim, E., (1985), “Toplumbilimsel Yöntemin Kuralları”, (Çev. C. B. Akal), BFS Yayınları, İstanbul.
17. Eğilmez, Ö., (2011), “Kaynak Bağımlılığı Bağlamında Dış Kaynak Kullanımına İlişkin Bir İnceleme”, Yüksek Lisans Tezi,
18. Bilecik Universitesi. Erdoğan, B. Z. ve Torun, T. (2009), “Bir İlişkisel Pazarlama Aracı Olarak Sanal Topluluklar”. Pazarlama ve Pazarlama
19. Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2, (4), 45-71. Escalas, Edson J. Ve Bettman, James R. (2003). “You Are What They Eat: The Influence of Reference Groups on Consumers’
20. Connections to Brands”. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13(3), 339-348. Gordon, I.H. (1998). Relatonship Marketing-New Strategies, Techiques and Technologies to Win the Customer You Want and Keep Them Forever. Canada:John Willey&Sons.
21. Gould, P., (1991), “DynamicStructures of Geographic Space”, Space and Time (ed. S. D. Brunch ve T. R. Leinbach), HarperCollins.
22. Granovetter, M., (1973), ”The Strength of Weak Ties”, American Journal of Sociology, 78 (6): 1360-1380.
23. Granovetter, M., (1985), “Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness”, AmericanJournal of Sociology, 91 (3).
24. Grönross, Christian (2004). “The Relationship Marketing Process: Communication, Interaction, Dialogue, Value”. Journal of
25. Business&Industrial Marketing, 19(2), 100-103. Gulati, R.,Dialdin, D. A. ve L., Wang, (2002).”Organizational Networks”, (Ed. J. Baum, J. A. C.), Companion toOrganizations. Malden: Blackwell, 281–303. Gürpınar, http://www.academia.edu/5164803/TUSKON. "İş Çevreleri ve Dış Politika: TUSKON", Erişim: 02014,
26. Håkansson, H. ve Ford, D., (2002), “How shouldcompaniesInteract in Business Networks”, Journal of Business Research, 55:133-139.
27. Hansen, D. L., Shneiderman, B. ve Smith, M. A. (2011), "Analyzing Social Media Networks With Nodexl: Insights Form a
28. Connected World", Morgan Kaufmann, USA. Homans, G.C. (1958), "Social Behavior as Exchange", American Journal of Sociology, 63(6), 597-606.
29. Johanisson, B. vd. (2002), “The Institutional Embeddedness of Local Interfirm Networks: A Leveragefor Business Creation”,
30. Entrepreneurship&Regional Development, 14:297-315. Kasapoğlu, A. ve Odabaşı, Y. (2009), "Sosyolojik Açıdan Teknoloji Odağında Güncel Sorunların Yorumlanması", Elektrik
31. Mühendisliği, 436 (Haziran), 31-33. Katz, N., Lazer, D., Arrow, H. ve N., Contractor (2004), “Network Theoryang Small Groups”, Small groupResearch, Vol.35:307-332.
32. Kitchen, J. Philip, Erdoğan, B. Zafer, ve Torun, Tolga (2011) '‘The Impact of IMC in Virtual Communities on University Brand”
33. In: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Corporate and Marketing Communications, Athens University of Business and Economics, Athens - Greece. (Bildiri Özeti), 2011, 18-19.
34. Ku, Edward C.S. (2011). “How Virtual Community Influence Travel Products Purchasing Decisions: The Flow Experience Perspective”. Conference conference.org/files/BAI2010%20Proceeding/Papers/4.MIS/4063.pdf. 2011 BAI Internatioanl of Business and Information, http://bai- Lane, D.
35. RelatetoTraditionalSocialTheoriesandtheVoluntarism/DeterminismDebate?”, Syst. Dyn. Rev., Vol.17:97-118. “How C., (2001), Do TheIdeas of System Dynamics
36. Law, J. (1992), "Notes on the Theory of the Actor Network: Ordering, Strategy and Heterogeneity", 1-11. Erişim: 12.09.2014, http://www.lancaster.ac.uk/fass/sociology/research/publications/papers/law-notes-on-ant.pdf.
37. Marwell, G. ve Oliver, P. (1993), “The Critical Mass in Collective Action: A Micro-SocialTheory”, MA: Cambridge
38. UniversityPress, Cambridge. Müsiad, http://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%BCstakil_Sanayici_ve_%C4%B0%C5%9F_Adamlar%C4%B1_Derne%C4%9Fi. 2014, Erişim: 02014,
39. Otte, E. ve Rousseau, R., (2002), “Social Network Analysis: A PowerfulStrategtyAlsoforThe Information Sciences”, Journal of
40. Information Science, Vol.28:441-453. Pfeffer, J. ve Salancik, G. R., (1978), “TheExternal Control of Organizations: A Resource DependencePerspective”, New York:
41. Harper&RowPublishers. Polanyi, K., (1944), “The Great Transformation”, New York: Holt, Rinehart.
42. Rashid, T. (2003). “Relationship Marketing: Case Studies of Personal Experiences of Eating Out”. British Food Journal, 105(10), 742-750.
43. Sayer, A., (1985), “TheDifferenceThat Space Makes”, (Ed. D. Gregory ve J. Urry), SocialRelationsandSpatialStructures, Macmillan, London.
44. Sargut, Selami A. (2010). Kültürlerarası Farklılaşma ve Yönetim, İmge Kitabevi, 3. Baskı, Ankara.
45. Sayer, A., (1955), “RadicalPoliticaleEconomy”, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
46. Sayer, A., (2000), “RealismandSocialScience”, Sage Publications, 13, New Delhi.
47. Sayli, H., Kurt, M. ve Baytok, A. (2006). "Şebeke (Network) Organizasyon Yapılarının Rekabet Gücü Kazandırma Rolü ve AFYONKARAHİSAR Mermer Sektöründe Bir Uygulama Örneği". Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 16, 31-46.
48. Smith, A., (2006), “Ulusların Zenginliği”, (Çev. Derin, H.), İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları, İstanbul.
49. STREETER, Calvin L. ve GILLESPIE, David F. (1992). “Social Network Analysis”. Journal of Social Service Research, 16(1/2), 201-222.
50. Tichy, N. M.,Thusman, M. L. ve C. Fomburn (1979), “Social Network Analysis for Organizations”,Academy of Management Review, 4(4):507-519.
51. Tüsiad, 2014. Erişim:12.09.2014. http://www.tusiad.org.tr/tusiad.
52. Stokburger-Sauer, Nicola (2010). “Brand Community: Drivers and Outcomes”. Psychology&Marketing, 27(4), 347-368.
53. TDK, www.tdk.gov.tr, erişim: 18.07.2012.
54. Thomas, Friemel N. (2008). Why Context Matters: Applications of Social Network Analysis, Vs Verlag, Germany.
55. Torun, T. ve Erdoğan, B. Z. (May 2013) “Effects of Marcoms and Social Interactions through Virtual Communities on
56. Consumer-based Brand Equity” Integrated Communication in Post-modern Era, Izmir University of Economics. Uzzi, B.,(1996), “Thesourcesandconsequences of embeddednessfortheeconomicperformance of organizations: The network effect”, AmericanSociologicalReview, 61: 674 698. Uzzi,
57. AdministrativeScienceQuarterly, 42: 35-67. in InterfirmNetworks: TheParadox of SocialEmbeddedness”, Weber, M., (1965), “SocialandEconomicOrganization”, Free Press, New York.