Review
BibTex RIS Cite

Örgütsel Meşruiyet: Kurumsal Kuram Gözüyle Derinlemesine Bir Bakış

Year 2020, Issue: 56, 255 - 278, 30.08.2020
https://doi.org/10.18070/erciyesiibd.691980

Abstract

Bu çalışma, kurumsal kuram düşünce okulunun temel tezlerini ve ortaya koyduğu temel argümanları inceleyerek örgütsel meşruiyet ve meşruiyet süreçlerine ilişkin kurumsal görüşü araştırmaktadır. Hiç şüphesiz, örgütsel meşruiyet kavramı tek bir paradigma ya da tek bir teorik mercekle açıklanabilecek veya sınırlandırılabilecek basit bir olgu değildir. Ancak, teorilerin araştırılan olguları etkileyen en ilgili faktörleri saptadığı düşüncesinden hareketle, kurumsal düşünce okulunun örgütsel meşruiyeti nasıl benimsediğini kristalleştirerek daha ileri teorik araştırmaların yolunu açmak hedeflenmektedir. Bu bağlamda, bu çalışma örgütsel meşruiyeti şekillendiren faktörlere derinlemesine bir bakış sunarak kurumsal yaklaşımın örgütsel meşruiyet yaklaşımını analiz etmekte ve üç temel kurumsal yönelimi ortaya koymaktadır. Makale, meşruiyet kazanmada kültürel çerçevelerin önemine işaret ederek ve gelecekteki araştırmalara yönelik öneriler sunarak sonuçlandırılmıştır.

References

  • Aldrich, H., & C. M. Fiol, (1994). Fools Rush in? The Institutional Context of Industry Creation, Academy of Management Review 19 (4): 645–670, https://doi.org/10.2307/258740
  • Berger Peter L. & Luckmann Thomas (1967). The Social Construction of Reality; a Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. Penguin, Harmondsworth (Original: Doubleday. Garden City, N. Y. 1966), https://doi.org/10.2307/3710424
  • Bitektine, Alex. (2011). Toward a Theory of Social Judgments of Organizations: The Case of Legitimacy, Reputation, and Status. Academy of Management Review. 36. 151-179, https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2009.0382
  • Brown, A. D. 1998. Narrative, politics and legitimacy in an IT implementation. Journal of Management Studies, 35: 35-58. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00083
  • Cathryn Johnson. (2004). Introduction: Legitimacy Process in Organization, in Cathryn Johnson (ed.) Legitimacy Processes in Organizations (Research in the Sociology of Organizations, Volume 22) Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp.1 – 24,
  • Cathryn Johnson, Timothy J. Dowd, Cecilia L. Ridgeway.( 2006). Legitimacy as a Social Process. Annual Review of Sociology 32:1, 53-78, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.32.061604.123101
  • Çakar, M., Danışman A. (2012). Örgüt kuramları: Kurumsal kuram (Ed: C. Sö en, N. Basım). İstanbul: Beta. s.241-271.
  • Chimezie A. B. Osigweh, Yg. (1989). Concept Fallibility in Organizational Science. The Academy of Management Review,14(4), 579-594. http://doi.org/10.2307/258560
  • Collins, Randall. 1975. Conflict Sociology: Toward an Explanatory Science. Academic Press.
  • Deephouse, D. & Suchman, M. (2008). Legitimacy in organizational institutionalism. In R. GreenwoodC. Oliver & R. Suddaby The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 49-77). London: SAGE Publications Ltd., http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781849200387.n2
  • DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. (1983). The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147-160., https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101
  • DiMaggio, P. J. , & Powell, W. W. (1991). Introduction. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 1-40). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Dooley, K. (2002), “Organizational Complexity,” International Encyclopedia of Business and Management, M. Warner (ed.), London: Thompson Learning, p. 5013- 5022.
  • Dornbusch, S. D., & Scott, W. R. (1975). Evaluation and the Exercise of Authority. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  • Dowling, J. & Pfeffer, J. (1975). Organizational Legitimacy: Social Values and Organizational Behavior Pacific Sociological Review. 18: 122-136, https://doi.org/10.2307/1388226
  • Ghoshal, S., & Bartlett, C. (1990). The Multinational Corporation as an Interorganizational Network. The Academy of Management Review, 15(4),603-625. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1990.4310825
  • Greenwood, R., Oliver, C., Suddaby, R. & Sahlin, K. (2008). The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism London: SAGE Publications Ltd. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781849200387
  • Habermas, Jurgen. 1973. Legitimation Crisis. Beacon Press.
  • Jepperson, R. L. (1991). Institutions, institutional effects, and institutionalism. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (eds.), The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis: 143–163. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Kalemci A, Kalemci Tüzün İ. (2008). Örgütsel alanda Meşruiyet Kavramının Açılımı: Kurumsal ve Stratejik Meşruiyet. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 13(2):403-413.
  • Kauffman, S., Keskinen, A., Aaltonen, M., Kaufmann, S., & Mitleton-Kelly, E. (2003). Organisational Complexity Foreword.
  • Kostova, T. & Zaheer, S. (1999). Organizational legitimacy under conditions of complexity: The case of the multinational enterprise. Academy of Management Review, 24(1): 64–81., https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1999.1580441
  • Kyung Ho Kang and Seoki Lee, (2014). The moderating role of brand diversification on the relationship between geographic diversification and firm performance in the US lodging industry, International Journal of Hospitality Management,Volume 38,Pages 106-117,ISSN 0278-4319,, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2013.01.001.
  • Lawrence, P., & Lorsch, I. 1967. Differentiation and integration in complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 12: 1-47.
  • Lenski, Gerhard. 1966. Power and Privilege. McGraw-Hill.
  • L. Richard Della Fave, (1986). Toward an Explication of the Legitimation Process, Social Forces, Volume 65, Issue 2, December, Pages 476–500, https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/65.2.476
  • Massey, J.E. (2001). Managing organizational legitimacy: communication strategies for organizations in crisis, The Journal of Business Communication, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 153-183.
  • Maurer, J.G. (1971). Readings in Organization Theory: Open- System Approaches. New York Random House.
  • Mazza, C. (1999). Claim, intent, and persuasion: Organizational legitimacy and the rhetoric of corporate mission statements. Boston: Kluwer, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-5061-7
  • Meyer, J. W. & Scott, W. R. (1983). Organizational Environments. Ritual and Rationality. BeverlyHills: Sage.
  • Meyer, J. W. & Scott, W. R. (1983). Organizational Environments. Ritual and Rationality. BeverlyHills: Sage., https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.4050030417
  • Meyer, J., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340-363. Retrieved February 13, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/2778293
  • Mintzberg, H., Waters, J.A., (1982). Tracking strategy in an entrepreneurial firm.Academy of Management Journal 25 (3), 465–499. https://doi.org/10.5465/256075
  • Ossewaarde, R., Nijhof, A., & Heyse, L. (2008). Dynamics of NGO legitimacy: How organising betrays core missions of INGOs. Public Administration and Development, 28, 42–53., https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.472
  • Parsons, T. (1956). Suggestions for a Sociological Approach to the Theory of Organizations-I. Administrative Science Quarterly,1(1), 63-85., https://doi.org/10.2307/2390840
  • Parsons, T. (1960). Structure and Process in Modern Societies. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
  • Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. New York: Harper & Row.
  • Powell, W.W. (1988). Institutional effects on organizational structure and performance. In L.G. Zucker (ed.), Institutional Patterns and Organizations: Culture and Environment, pp.115–36. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger
  • Ruef, M., & Scott, W.R.(1998). A multidimensional model of organizational legitimacy: Hospital survival in changing institutional environments: Administrative Science Quarterly, 43 (4): 877–904., https://doi.org/10.2307/2393619
  • Selznick, Philip, (1949). TVA and the Grass Roots. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  • Selznick, P. (1957). Leadership in Administration. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  • Selznick, P. (1996). Institutionalism ‘old’ and ‘new.’ Administrative Science Quarterly, 41: 270–277.
  • Scott, W.R. (1995). Institutions and Organizations, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Scott, W. R. (2001). Institutions and organizations. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Scott, W. R. (2014). Institutions and organizations. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
  • Scott, W. R. (2003). Organizations: Rational, Natural, and Open Systems. UpperRiver, NJ: Prentic
  • Scott, W.R. (2004). Reflections on a half-century of organizational sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 30: 1–21.
  • Singh, J.V., Tucker, D.J. and House, R.J. (1986) Organizational Legitimacy and the Liability of Newness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31, 171-193. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392787
  • Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Journal, 20(3), 571- 610., https://doi.org/10.2307/258788
  • Thompson, James (1967.) Organizations in Action. New York: McGraw-Hil
  • Tolbert, Pamela S., and Lynne G. Zucker. (1983). Institutional sources of change in the formal structure of organizations: The diffusion of civil service reform, 1880–1935. Administrative Science Quarterly 28:22–39.
  • Tolbert, P. and L. Zucker (1996), The institution- alization of institutional theory, in Clegg et al. (eds.), pp. 175–190. Tost, L. (2011). An integrative model of legitimacy judgments. Academy of Management Review, 36(4), 686–710. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2010.0227
  • Yüncü,V. & Koparal, C. (2017). "Fundamental Paradigms for Corporate Reputation," Economics and Applied Informatics, "Dunarea de Jos" University of Galati, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, issue 2, pages 60-65
  • Yüncü,V. & Fidan,Ü. (2019). Integrating organizational reputation mechanism to decision-making processes: the facebook case. Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi /Journal of Administrative Sciences Cilt/Volume 17, Sayı/N: 34 ss.pp.: 301-322, https://doi.org/10.35408/comuybd.425271
  • Walker, Henry. (2004). Beyond power and domination: legitimacy and formal organizations.. Research in the Sociology of Organizations. 22. 239-271. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0733-558X(04)22008-0
  • Weber, M. (1968). Economy and society. G. Roth & C. Wittich (Eds). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
  • Wright, E. O. (1985). Practical strategies for transforming concepts. In E. O.
  • Wright (Ed.), Classes: 292-302. London, UK: Verso
  • Zelditch, M., Jr. (2001). Theories of legitimacy. In: J. Jost & B. Major (Eds), The Psychology of Legitimacy: Emerging Perspectives on Ideology, Justice, and Intergroup Relations (pp. 33–53). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Zimmerman, M. A., & Zeitz, G. J. (2002). Beyond survival: Achieving new venture growth by building legitimacy. Academy of Management Review, 27(3), 414

Organizational Legitimacy: An In-Depth Overview Through The Lens of Institutional Theory

Year 2020, Issue: 56, 255 - 278, 30.08.2020
https://doi.org/10.18070/erciyesiibd.691980

Abstract

This paper investigates the institutional view on organizational legitimacy and legitimation processes by addressing the principal theses of the institutional school of thought and fundamental arguments raised by institutionalists. Beyond a shadow of doubt, the notion of organizational legitimacy is not a simple phenomenon that can be confined to a sole paradigm or a phenomenon that be explained through a sole theoretical lens. However, based on the idea that theories pinpoint the most relevant factors affecting the phenomena under investigation, I aim to pave the way for further theoretical research by crystallizing how the institutional school of thought embraces organizational legitimacy. In this regard, this paper analyzes the institutional approach to organizational legitimacy by suggesting an in-depth overview of the factors that shape organizational legitimacy and identifies three essential institutional orientations. The paper concludes by indicating to the prominence of cultural frameworks in gaining legitimacy and by suggesting directions for future research.

References

  • Aldrich, H., & C. M. Fiol, (1994). Fools Rush in? The Institutional Context of Industry Creation, Academy of Management Review 19 (4): 645–670, https://doi.org/10.2307/258740
  • Berger Peter L. & Luckmann Thomas (1967). The Social Construction of Reality; a Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. Penguin, Harmondsworth (Original: Doubleday. Garden City, N. Y. 1966), https://doi.org/10.2307/3710424
  • Bitektine, Alex. (2011). Toward a Theory of Social Judgments of Organizations: The Case of Legitimacy, Reputation, and Status. Academy of Management Review. 36. 151-179, https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2009.0382
  • Brown, A. D. 1998. Narrative, politics and legitimacy in an IT implementation. Journal of Management Studies, 35: 35-58. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00083
  • Cathryn Johnson. (2004). Introduction: Legitimacy Process in Organization, in Cathryn Johnson (ed.) Legitimacy Processes in Organizations (Research in the Sociology of Organizations, Volume 22) Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp.1 – 24,
  • Cathryn Johnson, Timothy J. Dowd, Cecilia L. Ridgeway.( 2006). Legitimacy as a Social Process. Annual Review of Sociology 32:1, 53-78, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.32.061604.123101
  • Çakar, M., Danışman A. (2012). Örgüt kuramları: Kurumsal kuram (Ed: C. Sö en, N. Basım). İstanbul: Beta. s.241-271.
  • Chimezie A. B. Osigweh, Yg. (1989). Concept Fallibility in Organizational Science. The Academy of Management Review,14(4), 579-594. http://doi.org/10.2307/258560
  • Collins, Randall. 1975. Conflict Sociology: Toward an Explanatory Science. Academic Press.
  • Deephouse, D. & Suchman, M. (2008). Legitimacy in organizational institutionalism. In R. GreenwoodC. Oliver & R. Suddaby The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 49-77). London: SAGE Publications Ltd., http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781849200387.n2
  • DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. (1983). The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147-160., https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101
  • DiMaggio, P. J. , & Powell, W. W. (1991). Introduction. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 1-40). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Dooley, K. (2002), “Organizational Complexity,” International Encyclopedia of Business and Management, M. Warner (ed.), London: Thompson Learning, p. 5013- 5022.
  • Dornbusch, S. D., & Scott, W. R. (1975). Evaluation and the Exercise of Authority. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  • Dowling, J. & Pfeffer, J. (1975). Organizational Legitimacy: Social Values and Organizational Behavior Pacific Sociological Review. 18: 122-136, https://doi.org/10.2307/1388226
  • Ghoshal, S., & Bartlett, C. (1990). The Multinational Corporation as an Interorganizational Network. The Academy of Management Review, 15(4),603-625. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1990.4310825
  • Greenwood, R., Oliver, C., Suddaby, R. & Sahlin, K. (2008). The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism London: SAGE Publications Ltd. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781849200387
  • Habermas, Jurgen. 1973. Legitimation Crisis. Beacon Press.
  • Jepperson, R. L. (1991). Institutions, institutional effects, and institutionalism. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (eds.), The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis: 143–163. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Kalemci A, Kalemci Tüzün İ. (2008). Örgütsel alanda Meşruiyet Kavramının Açılımı: Kurumsal ve Stratejik Meşruiyet. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 13(2):403-413.
  • Kauffman, S., Keskinen, A., Aaltonen, M., Kaufmann, S., & Mitleton-Kelly, E. (2003). Organisational Complexity Foreword.
  • Kostova, T. & Zaheer, S. (1999). Organizational legitimacy under conditions of complexity: The case of the multinational enterprise. Academy of Management Review, 24(1): 64–81., https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1999.1580441
  • Kyung Ho Kang and Seoki Lee, (2014). The moderating role of brand diversification on the relationship between geographic diversification and firm performance in the US lodging industry, International Journal of Hospitality Management,Volume 38,Pages 106-117,ISSN 0278-4319,, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2013.01.001.
  • Lawrence, P., & Lorsch, I. 1967. Differentiation and integration in complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 12: 1-47.
  • Lenski, Gerhard. 1966. Power and Privilege. McGraw-Hill.
  • L. Richard Della Fave, (1986). Toward an Explication of the Legitimation Process, Social Forces, Volume 65, Issue 2, December, Pages 476–500, https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/65.2.476
  • Massey, J.E. (2001). Managing organizational legitimacy: communication strategies for organizations in crisis, The Journal of Business Communication, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 153-183.
  • Maurer, J.G. (1971). Readings in Organization Theory: Open- System Approaches. New York Random House.
  • Mazza, C. (1999). Claim, intent, and persuasion: Organizational legitimacy and the rhetoric of corporate mission statements. Boston: Kluwer, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-5061-7
  • Meyer, J. W. & Scott, W. R. (1983). Organizational Environments. Ritual and Rationality. BeverlyHills: Sage.
  • Meyer, J. W. & Scott, W. R. (1983). Organizational Environments. Ritual and Rationality. BeverlyHills: Sage., https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.4050030417
  • Meyer, J., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340-363. Retrieved February 13, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/2778293
  • Mintzberg, H., Waters, J.A., (1982). Tracking strategy in an entrepreneurial firm.Academy of Management Journal 25 (3), 465–499. https://doi.org/10.5465/256075
  • Ossewaarde, R., Nijhof, A., & Heyse, L. (2008). Dynamics of NGO legitimacy: How organising betrays core missions of INGOs. Public Administration and Development, 28, 42–53., https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.472
  • Parsons, T. (1956). Suggestions for a Sociological Approach to the Theory of Organizations-I. Administrative Science Quarterly,1(1), 63-85., https://doi.org/10.2307/2390840
  • Parsons, T. (1960). Structure and Process in Modern Societies. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
  • Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. New York: Harper & Row.
  • Powell, W.W. (1988). Institutional effects on organizational structure and performance. In L.G. Zucker (ed.), Institutional Patterns and Organizations: Culture and Environment, pp.115–36. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger
  • Ruef, M., & Scott, W.R.(1998). A multidimensional model of organizational legitimacy: Hospital survival in changing institutional environments: Administrative Science Quarterly, 43 (4): 877–904., https://doi.org/10.2307/2393619
  • Selznick, Philip, (1949). TVA and the Grass Roots. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  • Selznick, P. (1957). Leadership in Administration. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  • Selznick, P. (1996). Institutionalism ‘old’ and ‘new.’ Administrative Science Quarterly, 41: 270–277.
  • Scott, W.R. (1995). Institutions and Organizations, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Scott, W. R. (2001). Institutions and organizations. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Scott, W. R. (2014). Institutions and organizations. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
  • Scott, W. R. (2003). Organizations: Rational, Natural, and Open Systems. UpperRiver, NJ: Prentic
  • Scott, W.R. (2004). Reflections on a half-century of organizational sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 30: 1–21.
  • Singh, J.V., Tucker, D.J. and House, R.J. (1986) Organizational Legitimacy and the Liability of Newness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31, 171-193. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392787
  • Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Journal, 20(3), 571- 610., https://doi.org/10.2307/258788
  • Thompson, James (1967.) Organizations in Action. New York: McGraw-Hil
  • Tolbert, Pamela S., and Lynne G. Zucker. (1983). Institutional sources of change in the formal structure of organizations: The diffusion of civil service reform, 1880–1935. Administrative Science Quarterly 28:22–39.
  • Tolbert, P. and L. Zucker (1996), The institution- alization of institutional theory, in Clegg et al. (eds.), pp. 175–190. Tost, L. (2011). An integrative model of legitimacy judgments. Academy of Management Review, 36(4), 686–710. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2010.0227
  • Yüncü,V. & Koparal, C. (2017). "Fundamental Paradigms for Corporate Reputation," Economics and Applied Informatics, "Dunarea de Jos" University of Galati, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, issue 2, pages 60-65
  • Yüncü,V. & Fidan,Ü. (2019). Integrating organizational reputation mechanism to decision-making processes: the facebook case. Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi /Journal of Administrative Sciences Cilt/Volume 17, Sayı/N: 34 ss.pp.: 301-322, https://doi.org/10.35408/comuybd.425271
  • Walker, Henry. (2004). Beyond power and domination: legitimacy and formal organizations.. Research in the Sociology of Organizations. 22. 239-271. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0733-558X(04)22008-0
  • Weber, M. (1968). Economy and society. G. Roth & C. Wittich (Eds). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
  • Wright, E. O. (1985). Practical strategies for transforming concepts. In E. O.
  • Wright (Ed.), Classes: 292-302. London, UK: Verso
  • Zelditch, M., Jr. (2001). Theories of legitimacy. In: J. Jost & B. Major (Eds), The Psychology of Legitimacy: Emerging Perspectives on Ideology, Justice, and Intergroup Relations (pp. 33–53). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Zimmerman, M. A., & Zeitz, G. J. (2002). Beyond survival: Achieving new venture growth by building legitimacy. Academy of Management Review, 27(3), 414
There are 59 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Journal Section Makaleler
Authors

Volkan Yüncü 0000-0001-5401-0683

Publication Date August 30, 2020
Acceptance Date July 13, 2020
Published in Issue Year 2020 Issue: 56

Cite

APA Yüncü, V. (2020). Organizational Legitimacy: An In-Depth Overview Through The Lens of Institutional Theory. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi Ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi(56), 255-278. https://doi.org/10.18070/erciyesiibd.691980

Ethical Principles and Ethical Guidelines

The Journal of Erciyes University Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences places great emphasis on publication ethics, which serve as a foundation for the impartial and reputable advancement of scientific knowledge. In this context, the journal adopts a publishing approach aligned with the ethical standards set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and is committed to preventing potential malpractice. The following ethical responsibilities, established based on COPE’s principles, are expected to be upheld by all stakeholders involved in the publication process (authors, readers and researchers, publishers, reviewers, and editors).

Ethical Responsibilities of Editors
Make decisions on submissions based on the quality and originality of the work, its alignment with the journal's aims and scope, and the reviewers’ evaluations, regardless of the authors' religion, language, race, ethnicity, political views, or gender.
Respond to information requests from readers, authors, and reviewers regarding the publication and evaluation processes.
Conduct all processes without compromising ethical standards and intellectual property rights.
Support freedom of thought and protect human and animal rights.
Ensure the peer review process adheres to the principle of double-blind peer review.
Take full responsibility for accepting, rejecting, or requesting changes to a manuscript and ensure that conflicts of interest among stakeholders do not influence these decisions.
Ethical Responsibilities of Authors
Submitted works must be original. When utilizing other works, proper and complete citations and/or references must be provided.
A manuscript must not be under review by another journal simultaneously.
Individuals who have not contributed to the experimental design, implementation, data analysis, or interpretation should not be listed as authors.
If requested during the review process, datasets used in the manuscript must be provided to the editorial board.
If a significant error or mistake is discovered in the manuscript, the journal’s editorial office must be notified.
For studies requiring ethical committee approval, the relevant document must be submitted to the journal. Details regarding the ethical approval (name of the ethics committee, approval document number, and date) must be included in the manuscript.
Changes to authorship (e.g., adding or removing authors, altering the order of authors) cannot be proposed after the review process has commenced.
Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers
Accept review assignments only in areas where they have sufficient expertise.
Agree to review manuscripts in a timely and unbiased manner.
Ensure confidentiality of the reviewed manuscript and not disclose any information about it, during or after the review process, beyond what is already published.
Refrain from using information obtained during the review process for personal or third-party benefit.
Notify the journal editor if plagiarism or other ethical violations are suspected in the manuscript.
Conduct reviews objectively and avoid conflicts of interest. If a conflict exists, the reviewer should decline the review.
Use polite and constructive language during the review process and avoid personal comments.
Publication Policy
The Journal of Erciyes University Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences is a free, open-access, peer-reviewed academic journal that has been in publication since 1981. The journal welcomes submissions in Turkish and English within the fields of economics, business administration, public finance, political science, public administration, and international relations.

No submission or publication fees are charged by the journal.
Every submitted manuscript undergoes a double-blind peer review process and similarity/plagiarism checks via iThenticate.
Submissions must be original and not previously published, accepted for publication, or under review elsewhere.
Articles published in the journal can be cited under the Open Access Policy and Creative Commons license, provided proper attribution is given.
The journal is published three times a year, in April, August, and December. It includes original, high-quality, and scientifically supported research articles and reviews in its listed fields. Academic studies unrelated to these disciplines or their theoretical and empirical foundations are not accepted. The journal's languages are Turkish and English.

Submissions are first subject to a preliminary review for format and content. Manuscripts not meeting the journal's standards are rejected by the editorial board. Manuscripts deemed suitable proceed to the peer review stage.

Each submission is sent to at least two expert reviewers. If both reviews are favorable, the article is approved for publication. In cases where one review is positive and the other negative, the editorial board decides based on the reviews or may send the manuscript to a third reviewer.

Articles published in the journal are open access and can be cited under the Creative Commons license, provided proper attribution is made.