Factors Affecting Innovative Work Behaviors of Teachers from the Perspective of Organizational Intelligence

Year 2022, Issue: 29, 203 - 234, 31.01.2022

Belgin Tura Sait Akbaşlı

Abstract

This study aims at revealing the individual and organizational factors that affect teachers’ innovative behaviors and examining and evaluating the results of organizational intelligence in these factors. The study group of the research included 20 teachers with different levels of education and different branches working in public schools affiliated with the Turkish Ministry of National Education (MoNE) in Ankara during the 2020-2021 school year. This study was designed in the basic qualitative research design, one of the qualitative research methods. The data collection tool was an open-ended questionnaire. Descriptive analysis and content analysis techniques were used to analyze the obtained data. In addition, direct quotations were included in this study to enable participant teachers to reveal their opinions more clearly. In line with the participants' opinions, it was determined that organizational intelligence produced results stimulating and strengthening individual and organizational factors that were effective in teachers’ innovative practices. Therefore, it can be concluded that organizational intelligence with all its dimensions positively affects teachers’ innovative work behaviors.

Keywords

Innovative work behavior, organizational intelligence, operational sub-dimensions of organizational intelligence, individual factors, organizational factors

References

• , S., Taskaya, S., Meydan, A. & Sahin, M. (2012). Teachers and Computer Technology: Supervisors’ Views. International Journal of Research in Social Sciences, 2(2), 113-124.
• Akbasli, S., Ercetin, S. S. & Kubilay, S. (2019). Relationship Between Prospective Teachers’ Deontic Justice Attitudes and Academic Dishonesty Tendencies. South African Journal of Education, 39(3), 1-12.
• Amabile, T., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J. & Herron, M. (1996). Assessing The Work Environment for Creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 39(5), 1154-1184.
• Aydug, D., Himmetoglu, B. & Turhan, E. (2017). Ogretmenlerin Orgutsel Sessizlige İliskin Goruslerinin Nitel Bir Arastırma İle İncelenmesi. Abant İzzet Baysal Universitesi Egitim Fakultesi Dergisi, 17(3), 1120-1143.
• Azma, F., Mostafapour, M. & Rezaei, H. (2012). The Application of Information Technology and Its Relationship with Organizational Intelligence. Procedia Technology, 1, 94-97.
• Binnewies, C. & Gromer, M. (2012). Creativity and Innovation at Work: The Role of Work Characteristics and Personal Initiative. Psicothema, 24(1), 100-105.
• Borasi, R. & Finnigan, K. (2010). Entrepreneurial Attitudes and Behaviors That Can Help Prepare Successful Change-Agents in Education. The New Educator, 6(1), 1-29.
• Bos-Nehles, A., Bondarouk, T. & Nijenhuis, K. (2017). Innovative Work Behaviour in Knowledge-Intensive Public Sector Organizations: The Case of Supervisors in the Netherlands Fire Services. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 28(2), 379-398.
• Buyukozturk, S. (2005). Anket Gelistirme. Turk Egitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 3(2), 133-151.
• Carungay, R. & Tsuruoka, Y. (2002). Innovativeness in Secondary Science Teachers of The Philippines. Journal of Science Education in Japan, 26(3), 227-234.
• Chang, C., Chuang, H. & Bennington, L. (2011). Organizational Climate for Innovation and Creative Teaching in Urban and Rural Schools. Quality & Quantity, 45(4), 935-951.
• Creswell, J. (2013). Nitel Arastırma Yontemleri: Bes Yaklasıma Gore Nitel Arastırma ve Arastırma Deseni. (Trans. Eds., M. Butun & S. Demir) Ankara: Siyasal Kitabevi.
• Cakici, A. (2007). Orgutlerde Sessizlik: Sessizligin Teorik Temelleri ve Dinamikleri. Cukurova Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu Dergisi, 16(1), 145-162.
• Celik, M. (2006). İlkogretim Okullarında Degisimin ve Yeniliklerin Uygulanmasını Engelleyen Faktorlerin Ogretmen ve Yonetici Algılarına Gore Belirlenmesi (Gaziantep İli Merkez İlceleri Ornegi). (Yuksek Lisans Tezi). Gaziantep Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu Egitim Bilimleri Anabilim Dalı, Gaziantep.
• Dagli, A. (2018). Teoriden Uygulamaya Orgutsel İklim (3 b.). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
• Das, M. (2015). Innovative Practices in Teacher Education: An Overview. International Research Journal of Interdisciplinary & Multidisciplinary Studies (IRJIMS), 1(4), 15-18.
• Demir, K. (2019). Motivasyon. N. Cemaloglu & M. Ozdemir (Eds.) In, Egitim Yonetimi (s. 295-314). Ankara: Pegem.
• Demiraslan, Y. & Kocak Usluel, Y. (2008). ICT Integration Processes in Turkish Schools: Using Activity Theory to Study Issues and Contradictions. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(4), 458-474.
• Ercetin, S. (2001). Orgutsel Zeka. Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dagıtım.
• Ercetin, S. (2004a). Orgutsel Zeka ve Orgutsel Aptallık. Ankara: Asil Yayın Dagıtım.
• Ercetin, S. (2004b). Okullarda Orgutsel Zekanın Eylemsel Boyutları. Turk Egitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 2(1), 1-13.
• Erdogan, I. (2000). Okul Yonetimi ve Ogretim Liderligi (2 b.). İstanbul: Sistem Yayıncılık.
• Glynn, M. (1996). Innovative Genius: A Framework for Relating Individual and Organizational Intelligences to Innovation. Academy of Management Review, 21(4), 1081-1111.
• Gokyer, N. (2017). Orgutsel Catısma. S. Ozdemir, & N. Cemaloglu (Ed) In, Orgutsel Davranıs ve Yonetimi (s. 391-420). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
• Guclu, N. (2001). Zaman Yonetimi. Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Yonetimi(25), 87-106.
• Gurbuz, M., & Aydın, A. (2012). Zaman Kavramı ve Yonetimi. Kahramanmaras Sutcu İmam Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 9(2), 1-20.
• Haelermans, C. & Blank, J. (2012). Is a Schools’ Performance Related to Technical Change? – A Study on the Relationship between Innovations and Secondary School Productivity. Computers & Education, 59(3), 884-892.
• Izci, I. (2017). Okul Yoneticilerinin Orgutsel Zeka ve Performans Degerlendirme Algıları Arasındaki İliski. (Doktora Tezi). Canakkale Onsekiz Mart Universitesi Egitim Bilimleri Enstitusu Egitim Bilimleri Anabilim Dalı Egitim Yonetimi ve Denetimi Bilim Dalı, Canakkale.
• Janssen, O. (2000). Job Demands, Perceptions of Effort–Reward Fairness and Innovative Work Behaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73(3), 287-302.
• Kahkha, A., Pourghaz, A. & Marziyeh, A. (2015). Examining the Relationship of Organizational Intelligence with Innovation Management and Career Advancement in an Organization. Journal of Behavioral and Brain Science, 5(10), 395-404.
• Kalkan, V. (2005). Organizational Intelligence: Antecedents and Consequences. Journal of Business & Economics Research, 3(10), 43-54.
• Kalkan, V.D. (2008). Orgutsel Zekanın Yenilik Yetenegine ve Firma Performansına Etkileri. (Doktora Tezi). Gebze Yuksek Teknoloji Enstitusu Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu, Gebze.
• Korucu, A. & Olpak, Y. (2015). Ogretmen Adaylarının Bireysel Yenilikcilik Ozelliklerinin Farklı Degiskenler Acısından İncelenmesi. Egitim Teknolojisi Kuram ve Uygulama, 5(1), 111-127.
• Kurtulus , M. (2012). Egitimde İnovasyon: Ogretmen ve Ogrencilerin İnovasyona Bakısı ve Yeterliliginin Sorgulanması. (Yuksek Lisans Tezi). Gebze Yuksek Teknoloji Enstitusu Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu Strateji Bilimi Anabilim Dalı, Gebze.
• Loogma, K., Kruusvall, J. & Umarik, M. (2012). E-learning as Innovation: Exploring Innovativeness of the VET Teachers’ Community in Estonia. Computers & Education, 58(2), 808–817.
• Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A Guide to Design and Implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
• Messmann, G. & Mulder, R. (2011). Innovative Work Behaviour in Vocational Colleges: Understanding How and Why Innovations Are Developed. Vocations and Learning, 4, 63-84.
• Miles, M. & Huberman, A. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis. An Expanded Sourcebook. (2 b.). California: SAGE Publications.
• Ordooie, M. (2016). Evaluation of Organizational Intelligence on Creative of High School Principals in The academic Year 2013-2014. International Journal of Humanities and Cultural Studies (IJHCS), 3(2), 1410-1423.
• Patton, M. (2014). Nitel Arastırma ve Degerlendirme Yontemleri. (M. Butun, S. Demir, Eds., B. Tarman & M. Yigit, Trans.) Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
• Scott, S. & Bruce, R. (1994). Determinants of Innovative Behavior: A Path Model of Individual Innovation in The Workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 580-607.
• Sezgin, F. & Sonmez, E. (2017). Orgut Kulturu ve İklimi. S. Ozdemir & N. Cemaloglu (Ed.) In, Orgutsel Davranıs ve Yonetimi (s. 179-226). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
• Suharyati, H. (2017). Interaction of Relationship between Job Motivation with Teacher Innovativeness in Improving Education. Journal of Education, Teaching and Learning, 2(2), 228- 232.
• Tomic, W. & Brouwers, A. (1999). Where Do Teachers Get Their Ideas From? Creativity and Innovation Management, 8(4), 262-268.
• Torrance, E. (1977). Creativity in the Classroom: What Research Says to the Teacher. Washington, D.C.: National Education Association.
• Tunca, N. (2012). İlkogretim Ogretmenleri İcin Mesleki Degerler Olceginin Gelistirilmesi ve İlkogretim Ogretmenlerinin Mesleki Degerlerinin Belirlenmesi. (Doktora Tezi). Anadolu Universitesi Egitim Bilimleri Enstitusu, Eskisehir.
• Tura, B. & Akbasli, S. (2021). Orgutsel Zekâ Duzeyinin Ogretmenlerin Yenilikci Calısma Davranısları Uzerindeki Etkisi. OPUS– Uluslararası Toplum Arastırmaları Dergisi, 18(43), 6790-6805. DOI: 10.26466/opus.937986.
• Ucus, S. & Acar, İ. (2018). Teachers' Innovativeness and Teaching Approach: The Mediating Role of Creative Classroom Behaviors. Social Behavior and Personality, 46(10), 1697-1711.
• UNESCO. (2002). Information and Communication Technologies in Teacher Education: A Planning Guide. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. Retrieved 25.04.2020 from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000129533
• Uzkurt, C. (2010). İnovasyon Yonetimi: İnovasyon Nedir, Nasıl Yapılır ve Nasıl Pazarlanır? Ankara Sanayi Odası Yayın Organı, 36-51.
• Van de Ven, A. (1986). Central Problems in the Management of Innovation. Management Science, 32(5), 590-607.
• Worthington, M. (2013). Differences Between Phenomenological Research and A Basic Qualitative Research Design. Retrieved from, 1149861.
• Yildirim, A. & Simsek, H. (2016). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Arastırma Yontemleri (10 b.). Ankara: Seckin.
• Yildirim, R. (2002). Yaratıcılık ve Yenilik. İstanbul: Sistem.