ÖRGÜTSEL SAPMA DAVRANIŞININ KONTROLÜNDE DUYGUSAL ZEKÂNIN ROLÜ: KONAKLAMA İŞLETMELERİNDE BİR ARAŞTIRMA

Year 2009, Issue: 26, - , 20.06.2015

Mahmut Demir

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to determine the ability and competencies of Emotional Intelligence on the control of organizational deviance in hospitality enterprises. Therefore, in this research the questionnaire was applied to 289 persons working in five-star hotels in Muğla Region. Questionnaire was conducted from the studies of Hollinger & Clark (1982) and Lawrence & Robinson (2007). Data were gathered from hotel employees with the help of a questionnaire which is conducted face to face. Data was tested with factor analysis and regression analysis on SPSS. Total variance explained in the organizational deviance scale was 0,78; Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) sampling value was 0,717 and Cronbach’s alpha value was 0,84. As a result, emotional intelligence has positive effects on the control of organizational deviance

Keywords

-

ÖRGÜTSEL SAPMA DAVRANIŞININ KONTROLÜNDE DUYGUSAL ZEKÂNIN ROLÜ: KONAKLAMA İŞLETMELERİNDE BİR ARAŞTIRMA

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, konaklama işletmelerinde duygusal zeka yetenek ve yeterliliklerinin örgütsel sapma davranışlarının kontrolündeki etkilerini ortaya koymaktır. Bu amaçla, Muğla Bölgesinde beş yıldızlı otellerde 289 işgörene yönelik bir anket uygulanmıştır. Anket soruları Hollinger ve Clark (1982) ile Lawrence ve Robinson’un (2007) çalışmalarından oluşturulmuştur. Veriler işgörenlerle yüzyüze görüşme yapılarak anket yardımıyla toplanmıştır. Veriler faktör analizi ve regresyon analizleri ile test edilmiştir. Örgütsel sapma ölçeğinde toplam varyansı açıklama oranı 0,78; Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) 0,717 ve güvenirlik analizinde ölçeğin Cronbach’s alpha değeri, 84 düzeyindedir. Sonuçta örgütsel sapma davranışının kontrolünde duygusal zekanın pozitif etkisi olduğu ortaya konulmuştur

Keywords

-

References

• APPLEBAUM, S.H. ve DİĞERLERİ (2005). “The Relationship of Ethical Climate to Deviant Workplace Behavior”,
• Corporate Governance, 5, (4): 43-55. AQUINO ve DİĞERLERİ (2004). “Social Status and Aggressiveness as Moderators of the Relationship Between
• Interactional Justice and Workplace Deviance”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34, (5): 1001-1029.
• ARBAK, Y. ve DİĞERLERİ (2004). “İşyerinde Sapkın Davranış: Akademik Personel Üzerinde Yerel Bir Tanım ve Tipoloji Çalışması”, Yönetim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4, (1): 5-24.
• BALTAŞ, A. ve BALTAŞ, Z. (2000). Bedenin Dili. İletişim Becerinizin Anahtarı Sessiz Diliniz, İstanbul: Remzi Kitabevi.
• BAR-ON, R. (2005). “The Bar-On model of emotional-social intelligence”, (In P. Fernández-Berrocal and N. Extremera), Special Issue on Emotional Intelligence. Psicothema, 17.
• BARON, R.A. ve NEUMAN,J.H. (1996). “Workplace violence and workplace aggression: Evidence on their relative frequency and potential causes”, Aggressıve Behavıor, 22: 161-173.
• BENNETT, R.J. ve ROBINSON, S.L. (2003). “The Past, Present, and Future of Workplace Deviance Research”,
• (Greenberg J.S. Editör), Organizational Behavior: The State of the Science. USA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associate, 247-2
• BLAU, G. (2006). “A process model for understanding victim responses to worksite/function closure”, Human
• Resource Management Review 16: 12–28. BRACKETT, M. A. ve DİĞERLERİ (2003). “Emotional intelligence and its realition to everyday behaviour”.
• Personality and Individual Differences, 36: 1387-1402.
• BROCKERT, S. ve BRAUN, G. (2000). Duygusal zekanızı değerlendirin (Çeviren: N. Süleymangil), İstanbul: MNS Yayıncılık.
• COOPER, R. ve SAWAF, A. (1996). Executive EQ: Emotional intelligence in leadership and organizations, New
• York, NY: Berkley Publishing Group. COOPER, R. ve SAWAF, A.. (2003). Liderlikte Duygusal Zeka: Yönetim ve Organizasyonlarda Duygusal
• Zeka(EQ), (çev. Z.B. Ayman ve B. Sancar) İstanbul: Sistem Yayıncılık. DEMİR Ş.Ş. ve DEMİR, M (2009). “Örgütsel İletişimde Duygusal Zekanın Rolü: Konaklama İşletmelerinde Bir
• Araştırma”, Selçuk İletişim, 6, (1), 67-77. FREEDMAN, J. ve EVERETT, T. (2004). The Business Case for Emotional Intelligence, EQ: At the Heart of
• Performance, USA; Six Seconds Institute For Organizational Performance GIACALONE, R.A. ve GREENBERG, J.(1997). Antisocial Behavior in Organizations, London: SAGE.
• GOLEMAN, D. (1995), Duygusal Zeka, (Çev.Banu Seçkin Yüksel), İstanbul; Varlık Yayınları.
• GOLEMAN, D. (2000) İşbaşında Duygusal Zeka (çev. H. Balkara), İstanbul: Varlık Yayınları.
• GRIFFIN, R.W. ve DİĞERLERİ (1998). Dysfunctional Behavior in Organizations: Violent and Deviant
• Behavior, London: Jai Pres Inc GRUYS, M.L. ve SACKETT, P.R. (2003). “Investigating the Dimensionality of Counterproductive Work Behavior”,
• Internatıonal Journal Of Selectıon And Assessment,11, (1): 30-43. HARVEY, P. ve DASBOROUGH, M.T. (2006) “Consequences of employee attributions in the workplace: The role of emotional intelligence”, Psicothema, 18: 145-151.
• HOLLINGER, R.C. ve CLARK, J.P. (1982). “Formal and Informal Social Controls of Employee Deviance”. The Sociological Quarterly, 23, (3): 333-343.
• JUDGE, T. A. ve DİĞERLERİ. (2006). “Hostility, Job Attitudes, and Workplace Deviance: Test of a Multi-level
• Model”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, (1): 126-138. KIDWELL, R.E. ve MARTIN, C.L. (2005). Managing Organizational Deviance, London: Sage Publications.
• LAWRENCE, T.B. ve ROBINSON, S.L. (2007). “Ain’t Misbehavin: Workplace Deviance as Organizational
• Resistance”, Journal of Management, 33, (3): 378-394. LIAO, H. ve DİĞERLERİ (2004). “Sticking Out Like a Sore Thumb: Employee Dissimilarity and Deviance at
• Work”, Personnel Psychology,57: 969-1000.
• MANTELL, M.R. (1994), Ticking Bombs: Defusing Violence in the Workplace, Burr Ridge, III: Irwin
• Professional Publishing. O’LEARY-KELLY, A.M. ve DİĞERLERİ (1996). “Organization-motivated aggression: A research framework”,
• Academy of Management Review, 21(1): 225-253. ORIOLI, E. ve COOPER, R. (2005) “Emotional Developing” http://www.qmetricseq.com, (01.06.2009)
• ÖZDAMAR, K. (1999) Paket Programlar ile İstatistiksel Veri Analizi. Eskişehir: Kaan Kitabevi.
• ÖZDEVECİOĞLU, M. ve AKSOY, M.S. (2005). “Organizasyonlarda Sabotaj: Türleri, Amaçları, Hedefleri ve Yönetimi”, ÇÜ. İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi,6, (1): 95-109.
• ÖZDEVECİOĞLU, M. (2003). “Algılanan Örgütsel Adaletin Bireylerarası Saldırgan Davranışlar Üzerindeki
• Etkilerinin Belirlenmesine Yönelik Bir Araştırma”, Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 21, (Temmuz-Aralık): 77-96. PORATH, C.L. ve PEARSON, C.M. (2004) “On the Nature, Consequences and Remedies of Workplace Incivility:
• No Time for “Nice”? Think Again”, USC Marshall Research, California: Human Resources Monograph Series. PUFFER, S.M. (1987). “Prosocial behavior, noncompliant behavior, and work performance among commission salespeople” Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, (4): 615-621.
• ROBINSON, S.L. ve BENNETT, R.J. (1995). “A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: A multidimensional scaling study”, Academy of Management Journal, 38: 555–572.
• SACKETT, P.R. (2002). “The structure of counterproductive work behaviors: Dimensionality and relationships with facets of job performance”, International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 10, (1/2): 5–11.
• SALOVEY, P. ve MAYER, J. D. (1990). “Emotional intelligence”, Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 9: 185-2
• SEKARAN, U. (2000) Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
• SPECTOR, P.E. ve FOX, S. (2002). “An emotion centered model of voluntary work behavior Some parallels between counterproductive work behavior and organizational citizenship behavior”, Human Resource Management Review, 12: 269–292.
• SULIMAN, A.M. ve AL-SHAIKH, F. N. (2007). “Emotional intelligence at work: links to conflict and innovation”,
• Employee Relations,29, (2): 208-220. VARDI, Y. ve WIENER, Y. (1996). “Misbehavior in Organizations: A Motivational Framework”, Organization Science, 7, (2): 151- 167.
• WEISINGER, H. (1998) İş Yaşamında Duygusal Zeka, İstanbul: Mns Yayıncılık.