Hazır veya Değil? İşte Dijitalleşme: İşgücünün hazırlık ve değişim algısının değerlendirilmesi

Year 2022, Volume: 51 Issue: 2, 607 - 626, 30.12.2022

Ezgi Saatçi Yıldırım , Ceyda Ovacı

https://doi.org/10.26650/ibr.2022.51.806691

Abstract

Dijital dünya, yeni yüzyılın vazgeçilmez bir gerçeğidir. Dönüşümün teknik yönleri yoğun bir şekilde değerlendirilirken, insan kaynaklarının kabulü ve dijital dönüşüme hazır olması temel bir değişim yönetimi ilkesi olarak ele alınmamaktadır. Bu çalışma, bireylerin dijital değişime hazır bulunma algısını öçümleyerek literatürü zenginleştirmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Dijital entegrasyon çalışmalarının büyük çoğunluğu dijital olgunluk seviyelerini artırmayı hedeflemektedir. Ancak insan kaynaklarının dijital dönüşüme katılımını sağlamak için dijitalleşme ve kabullenmeye hazır olma algılarını ölçmek ve ardından katılımı sağlayacak stratejiler geliştirmek daha faydalı olacaktır. Bu nedenle bu araştırma, işgücünün dijital değişim yönetimi yolculuğunda yol gösterici olacaktır. Verileri analiz etmek için Yapısal Eşitlik modellemesi kullanılmıştır. Araştırma örneklemi, şirketlerde dijitalleşme süreçlerine katkı sağlayan 460 katılımcıdan oluşmaktadır. Araştırmanın sonuçları, bireyin dijital dönüşüme hazır olma durumunun algılanan öz yeterlik, değişim ihtiyacı, yönetim desteği ve örgütsel fayda ile ilgili olduğunu ve iş gücünün başarılı bir dijital dönüşümü sürecin önemli bir çarkı olduğunu göstermektedir.

Keywords

Dijital Dönüşüm, Dijital İnsan Kaynakları, Değişime Hazır Olma, Değişim İhtiyacı, Örgütsel Fayda, Özyeterlilik

Ready or Not, Here Comes the Digitalization: Assessment of Workforce Readiness and Change Perception

Abstract

The digital world is an indispensable reality of the new century. While technical aspects for transformation are heavily evaluated, the readiness of human resources for digital transformation is not handled as a basic change management principle. This study aims to enrich the literature by determining the perception of the readiness for a digital change of individuals. The purpose of the study is to investigate the factors that have a direct association with the readiness of the workforce during the digitalization process. The vast majority of the digital integration efforts are aimed at increasing digital maturity levels. However, in order to ensure human resources’ participation in a digital transformation, it will be useful to measure their perception of readiness for digitalization and develop strategies that will enable participation. Therefore, this research will be a guide in the journey of digital change management of the workforce. Structural Equation modelling has been used to analyse the data. The research sample consisted of 460 participants that implement a digital restructuring process in companies. The results of the research evaluated, indicate that an individual’s readiness for digital transformation is related to their perceived self-efficacy, need for change, management support and the benefit for the organization, and they are all like wheels in a machine wheels working for a successful digital transformation of workforce.

Keywords

Digital Transformation, Digital Human Resources, Readiness for Change, Need for Change, Organizational Benefit, SelfEfficacy

References

• Andriessen, D. (2006). On the metaphorical nature of intellectual capital: a textual analysis. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 7(1), 93-110.
• Aldag, R.J., & Stearns, T.M. (1991). Management (2nd ed.). Cincinnati, OH: South-Western Publishing.
• Barnes, B.R., Leonidou, L.C., Siu, N.Y.M., & Leonidou, C. (2010). Opportunism as the inhibiting trigger for developing long-term-oriented Western exporter - Hong Kong importer relationships. Journal of International Marketing, 18(2), 35-64.
• Barroso, J.M.D. (2013). Speech by President Barroso on the outcome of the European Council meeting on the Multiannual Financial Framework of 7-8 February 2013. Retrieved from http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-13-130_en.htm. - Bratianu, C. (2011a). Changing paradigm for knowledge metaphors from dynamics to thermodynamics. System Research and Behavioral Science, 28, 160-169.
• Bratianu, C. (2011b). A new perspective of the intellectual capital dynamics in organizations. In Vallejo-Alonso, B., Rodriguez-Castellanos, A., Arregui-Ayastuy, G. (Eds.). Identifying, measuring, and valuing knowledge-based intangible assets: new perspectives (pp. 1-21). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
• Bratianu, C. (2013). The triple helix of the organizational knowledge. Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, 1(2013), 207-220.
• Armenakis, A.A., Harris, S.G., & Mossholder, K.W. (1993), Creating readiness fororganizational change. Human Relations, 46(6), 681-702.
• Backer, T. E. (1995). Assessing and enhancing readiness for change: Implications for technology transfer. In T. E. Backer, S. L. David, & G. Soucy (Eds.), Reviewing the behavioral science knowledge base on technology transfer (pp. 21–41). Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
• Bandura, A., & Adams, N.E. (1977). Analysis of self-efficacy theory of behavioral change. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 1(4), 287-310.
• Bentler, P. M., & Bonnet, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness-of-fit in the analysis of covariance structure. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588–606.
• Brislin, R. (1986). The wording and translation of research instruments, In: W. Lonner, J. Berry (Eds.), Field Methods in Cross-Cultural Research, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, Capp. 137–164.
• Bundesministerium Für Bildung und Forschung. Available Online: https://www.bmbf.de/files/Umsetzungsempfehlungen_Industrie4_0.pdf (Accessed on 22 December 2019)
• Cunningham, C. E., Woodward, C. A., Shannon, H. S., MacIntosh, J., Lendrum, B., Rosenbloom, D., & Brown, J. (2002). Readiness for organizational change: A longitudinal study of workplace, psychological and behavioral correlates. Journal of Occupational and Organizational psychology, 75(4), 377-392.
• Choi, M. & Ruona, W.E.A. (2011). Individual readiness for organizational change and its implications for human resource and organization development. Human Resource Development Review, 10(1), 46-73.
• Eby, L. T., Adams, D. M., Russell, J. E., & Gaby, S. H. (2000). Perceptions of organizational readiness for change: Factors related to employees' reactions to the implementation of team-based selling. Human relations, 53(3), 419-442.
• Friedman, T. (2019). Thank You for Being Late: An Optimist’s Guide to Thriving in the Age of Accelerations. New York: Picador USA.
• Garvin, D. A. (1993). Manufacturing strategic planning. California Management Review, 35(4), 85-106.
• Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., & Anderson, R. 2010. Multivariate Data Analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Pearson Education.
• Hecklau, F., M. Galeitzke. M, Flachs, S., &Kohl, H. (2016). Holistic Approach for Human Resource Management in Industry 4.0. Procedia CIRP, 54, 1-6.
• Hitt G., M. A. & Sirmon, D. (2009). Contingencies within dynamic managerial capabilities: Interdependent effects of resource investment and deployment on firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 30(13), 1375-1394.
• Hoelter, J. W. (1983). The analysis of covariance structures: Goodness-of-fit indices. Sociological Methods and Research, 11, 325–344.
• Holt, D. T., Armenakis, A. A., Feild, H. S., & Harris, S. G. (2007). Readiness for organizational change: The systematic development of a scale. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 43(2), 232-255.
• Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. (2008). Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53-60.
• Huws, U. (2014). Labor in the Global Digital Economy. NYU Press.
• Jimmieson, N.L., Terry, D.J. & Callan, V.J. (2004). A longitudinal study of employee adaptation to organizational change: The role of change-related information and change -related self-efficacy. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 9(1), 11-27.
• Kilmann, R. H., & Covin, T. J. E. (1988). Corporate transformation: Revitalizing organizations for a competitive world. Jossey-Bass.
• Kotter, J. P. (1995). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Business Review, 95204, 59-67.
• Kwahk, K. Y., & Lee, J. N. (2008). The role of readiness for change in ERP implementation: Theoretical bases and empirical validation. Information & Management, 45(7), 474-481.
• Lai, J.Y., & Ong, C.S. (2010). Assessing and managing employees for embracing change: A Multiple-item scale to measure employee readiness for e-business. Technovation, 30,76-85.
• Lewin, K. (1939). Field theory and experiment in social psychology: Concepts and methods. American Journal of Sociology, 44(6), 868-896.
• Lewis, L. K. (2000). Communicating change: Four cases of quality programs. The Journal of Business Communication, 37(2), 128-155.
• Lundberg, C. C. (1996). Designing organizational culture courses: Fundamental considerations. Journal of Management Education, 20(1), 11-22.
• Lunenburg, F. C. (2010). Leader-member exchange theory: Another perspective on the leadership process. International Journal of Management, Business, and Administration, 13(1), 1-5.
• Madsen, S. R., Miller, D., & John, C.R. (2005). Readiness for organizational change: Do organizational commitment and social relationships in the workplace make a difference? Human Resource Development Quarterly, 16(2).213-233.
• Marcon, E., Marcon, A., Le Dain, M. A., Ayala, N. F., Frank, A. G., & Matthieu, J. (2019). Barriers for the digitalization of servitization. Procedia CIRP,83, 254-259.
• Marsh, H. W, Balla, J. R., & MacDonald, R. P. (1988). Goodness-of-fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: The effect of sample size. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 245–258.
• Miller, V. D., Johnson, J. R., & Grau, J. (1994). Antecedents to willingness to participate in a planned organizational change. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 22, 59-80.
• Moran, J. W., & Brightman, B. K. (2000). Leading organizational change. Journal of Workplace Learning, 12(2), 66-74.
• Nunnally, J.C., & Bernstein, I.H. (1994). Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw- Hill.
• Oreg, S. (2006). Personality, context, and resistance to organizational change. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 15(1), 73-101.
• Pettigrew, A. M., Woodman, R. W., & Cameron, K. S. (2001). Studying organizational change and development: Challenges for future research. Academy of Management Journal, 44(4), 697-713.
• Pierce, J. L., & Delbecq, A. L. (1977). Organization structure, individual attitudes and innovation. Academy of Management Review, 2(1), 27-37.
• Prediscan, M., & Roiban, R. N. (2014). The main forces driving change in the Romanian SME's. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 124, 236-245.
• Rafferty, A. E., Jimmieson, N. L., & Armenakis, A. A. (2013). Change readiness: A multilevel review. Journal of Management, 39(1), 110-135.
• Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. (2012). Essentials of Organizational Behavior. 14th Ed. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall:
• Rüßmann, M., Lorenz, M., Gerbert, P., Waldner, M., Justus, J., Engel, P., & Harnisch, M. (2015). Industry 4.0: The future of productivity and growth in manufacturing industries. Boston Consulting Group, 9(1), 54-89.
• Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational Culture and Leadership. John Wiley & Sons.
• Schumacher, A., Erol,S., & Sihn, W. A. (2016). Maturity model for assessing industry 4.0. Readiness and maturity of manufacturing enterprises. Procedia CIRP, 52,161-166.
• Segars, A., & Grover, V.(1993). Re-Examining perceived ease of use and usefulness: A confirmatory factor analysis. MIS Quarterly, 17, 517-525.
• Selim, H.M. (2007). Critical success factors for e-learning acceptance: Confirmatory factor models. Computer & Education, 49, 396-413.
• Şimşek, Ö.F. (2007). Yapısal Eşitlik Modellemesine Giriş Temel İlkeler ve LISRELUygulamaları. Ankara: Ekinoks Yayıncılık.
• Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L.S. (2007). Using Multivariate Statistics. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
• Trends, D. G. H. C. (2017). Rewriting the rules for the digital age. Deloitte Development LLC. https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/global/Documents/HumanCapital/hc-2017-global-human-capital-trends-gx.pdf .
• TUSIAD, (2017). Türkiye’nin küresel rekabetçiliği için bir gereklilik olarak sanayi 4.0: Gelişmekte olan ekonomi perspektifi. 20.Turkish Industry and Business Association. Available Online: https://tusiad.org/tr/yayinlar/raporlar/item/8671-turkiyenin-sanayi-40-donusumu.
• Vakola, M. (2012). What’s in there for me? Individual readiness to change and the perceived impact of organizational change. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 35(3), 195-209.
• Van den Heuvel, Schalk, R., & Van Assen, M.A.L.M. (2015). Does a well-informed employee have a more positive attitude toward change? The mediating role of Psychological contract fulfillment, trust, and perceived need for change. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science. 1-22
• Venkatesh, V., Brown, S.A., & Bala, H. (2013). Bridging the qualitative- Quantitative Divide: Guidelines for Conducting Mixed Methods Research in Information Systems. Management Information Systems Research Center, MIS Quarterly, 37 (1), 21-54.
• World Economic Forum (2017). Gap, G. G. -World economic forum. Cologny/Geneva
• Yeniçeri, Ö. (2002). Örgütsel değişmenin yönetimi: Sorunlar, yöntemler, teknikler, stratejiler ve çözüm yolları. Ankara: Nobel.