BibTex RIS Cite

CORPORATE WEBSITE CONTENT RELATED TO DISABILITY IN THE TOP 50 FORTUNE FIRMS IN TURKEY

Year 2018, , 163 - 186, 01.01.2018

Murat Nazlı Eda Evla Mutlu

https://doi.org/10.17130/ijmeb.2018137580

Abstract

As a result of worldwide increased awareness in disability, organizations in Turkey are also assumed to reconsider their values, norms and behaviors accordingly. Considering the intention of maintaining legitimacy in especially high revenue firms, this study aims to reveal similarities and differences about disability disclosure of top 50 Fortune firms’ websites in Turkey. Website contents are analyzed via content analysis. Results indicate that firms give emphasis on ‘physical conditions in facilities’, ‘education of people with disabilities and employees’, ‘products’, ‘requirements to get services’ and ‘donations’. In some industries firms share similar contents though differences are more than similarities in overall. Firms’ poor application of disability employment related legislations are also discussed in results. Accordingly this study reveals current understanding while emphasizing potential improvements

Keywords

Disability Website Content Institutionalization Stakeholder

References

  • Bell, D., & Heitmueller, A. (2009). The disability discrimination act in the UK: Helping or hindering employment among the disabled? Journal of Health Economics, 28 (2), 465- 480.
  • Ball, P., Monaco, G., Schmeling, J., Schartz, H., & Blanck, P. (2005). Disability as diversity in fortune 100 companies. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 23, 97-121.
  • Blair, M. M. (2004). The great pension grab: Comments on Richard Ippolito, bankruptcy and workers. Washington University Law Quarterly, 82, 1305.
  • Branco, M. C., & Rodrigues, L. L. (2006). Communication of corporate social responsibility by Portuguese banks: A legitimacy theory perspective. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 11 (3), 232-248.
  • Briggs, B. S., & Saas, C. (2016). Websites and mobile applications: Do they comply with title III of the Americans with disabilities act? Florida Bar Journal, September 1.
  • Bundon, A., & Clarke, L. H. (2015). Unless you go online you are on your own: Blogging as a bridge in para-sport. Disability & Society, 30 (2), 185-198.
  • Callison, C. (2003). Media relations and the internet: How Fortune 500 company web sites assist journalists in news gathering. Public Relations Review, 29, 29-41.
  • Deephouse, D. L. (1996). Does isomorphism legitimate? The Academy of Management Journal, 39 (4), 1024-1039.
  • De Villiers, C., & Alexander, D. (2014). The institutionalization of corporate social responsibility reporting. The British Accounting Review, 46 (2), 198-212.
  • DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociology Review, 147-160.
  • Ellis, K., & Kent, M. (2011). Disability and new media. New York: Routledge.
  • Engelliler Hakkında Kanun (2005). Kanun No: 5378, Resmi Gazete, 5 (44).
  • Frank, J. (2008, January). Web accessibility for the blind: Corporate social responsibility or litigation avoidance? Proceedings of the 41st Hawaii International Conference on Systems Science, USA.
  • Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management, a stakeholder approach. Pitman, Boston.
  • Gabel, S. L., Reid, D., Pearson, H., Ruiz, L., & Hume-Dawson, R. (2016). Disability and diversity on CSU websites: A critical discourse study. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 9 (1), 64-80.
  • General Directorate of Services for People with Disabilities and Elderly People (2016). Engelli ve yaşlı bireylere ilişkin istatistiki bilgiler, engelli ve yaşlı hizmetleri genel müdürlüğü istatistik bülteni. Retrieved February 03, 2017, from http://eyh.aile.gov.tr/ data/56179f30369dc5726c063e73/B%C3%BClten_Temmuz2016.pdf
  • Goggin, G., & Newell, C. (2003). Digital disability: The social construction of disability in new media. Amyland: Rowman and Littlefield.
  • Greenwood, R., & Hinings, C. R. (1996). Understanding radical organizational change: Bridging together the old and the new institutionalism. Academy of Management Review, 21 (4), 1022-1054.
  • Gutierrez, C. F., & Windsor, J. C. (2005). An evaluation of Fortune 500 company home pages for disability-access. International Journal of Electronic Business, 3 (2), 137-153.
  • Harrison, J. S., & Freeman, R. E. (1999). Stakeholders, social responsibility and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 42 (5), 479-485.
  • Huang, Z., & Cappel, J. J. (2012). A comparative study of website usability practices of Fortune 500 versus INC. 500 companies. Information Systems Management, 29 (2).
  • İşkur - Turkish Labor Agency (2015). 2015 yılında engellilerin engel gruplarına göre dağılımı. Retrieved February 02, 2017, from http.//www.iskur.gov.tr/kurumsalbilgi/ istatistikler.aspx
  • Jones, S. L., & DeGrow, D. (2011). Fortune 500 homepages: Design trends. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 54 (1).
  • Jones, S. L. (2015). A re-examination of Fortune 500 homepage design practices. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 58 (1).
  • Kim, S., Park, J. H., & Wertz, E. K. (2010a). Expectation gaps between stakeholders and web- based corporate public relations efforts: Focusing on Fortune 500 corporate web sites. Public Relations Review, 36 (3), 215-221.
  • Kim, D., Nam, Y., & Kang, S. (2010). An analysis of corporate environmental responsibility on the global corporate web sites and their dialogic principles. Public Relations Review, 36 (3), 285-288.
  • Knuz, M., Ratliff, J. M., Blankenbuehler, M., & Bard, T. (2014). A preliminary examination of sustainable disclosures on Fortune 500 company websites. Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 13 (1), 1.
  • Lee, I. (2005). E-recruiting: Categories and analysis of Fortune 100 career web sites. In T. Torres-Coronas, & M. Arias-Oliva (Eds.), e-Human resources management: Managing knowledge people (pp. 86-100). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
  • Levy, J. M., Jessop, D. J., Rimmerman, A., & Levy, P. H. (1992). Attitudes of Fortune 500 corporate executives toward the employability of persons with severe disabilities: A national study. Mental Retardation, 30 (2), 67-75.
  • Liu, C., & Arnett, P. K. (2002). Raising a red flag on global WWW privacy policies. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 43 (1), 117-127.
  • Liu, C., Arnett, K. P., Capella, L., & Beauty, B. (1997). Web sites of the Fortune 500 companies: Facing customers through home pages. Information and Management, 31 (1), 335-345.
  • Moore, M. (2013). Disability, global conflicts and crises. Disability & Society, 28 (6), 741-743.
  • Pate, J. R., Ruihley, B. J., & Mirabito, T. (2014). Displaying disability: A content analysis of person-first language on NCAA Bowl Championship Series college athletic department websites. Journal of Applied Sport Management, 6 (1).
  • Patten, D. M. (1991). Exposure, legitimacy, and social disclosure. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 10, 297-308.
  • Perry, M. L., & Bodkin, C. D. (2002). Fortune 500 manufacturer web sites: Innovative marketing strategies of cyberbrochures? Journal of Promotion Management, 31 (2), 133-144.
  • Podlas, K. (2015). Website accessibility and the Americans with disabilities act. Journal of Internet Law, 19 (5), 3-16.
  • Quevedo-Puente, E., Fuente-Sabate, J. M., & Delgado-Garcia, J. B. (2007). Corporate social performance and corporate reputation: Two interwoven perspectives. Corporate Reputation Review, 10 (1), 60-72.
  • Republic of Turkey Ministry of Family and Social Policy (2014). 2002-2013 development and disability in Turkey: A report of the last decade. Retrieved Feb. 13, 2017, from http://eyh.aile.gov.tr/data/549d6891369dc5abbc92cc7e/bm_kitapcigi_ingilizce_ tumu_23.05.2014.pdf
  • Romano, N. C. (2002). Customer relationship management for the web-access challenged: Inaccessibility of Fortune 250 business web sites. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 7 (2), 81-117.
  • Seale, J. K. (2007). Strategies for supporting the online publishing activities of adults with learning difficulties. Disability & Society, 22 (2), 173-186.
  • Suarez, M. (2003). Scientific representation: against similarity and isomorphism. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 17 (3), 225-244.
  • Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20, 571-610.
  • Tas, S., & Bozyaka, G. (2012). Avrupa Birliğine uyum sürecinde Türkiye’de uygulanan istihdam politikaları. Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi IIBF Dergisi, 2 (1), 151-176.
  • TUIK - Turkish Statistical Institute (2015). Dünya nüfus günü, haber bülteni. Retrieved February 04, 2017, from http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreHaberBultenleri.do?id=18617
  • USDL - United States Department of Labor (n.d.). Americans with disabilities act. Retrieved November 02, 2016, from https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/disability/ada
  • Web Accessibility Initiative – WAI (2017). Web accessibility initiative. Retrieved January 07, 2017, from https://www.w3.org/WAI/
  • World Health Organization & The World Bank (2011). World report on disability. Retrieved November 21, 2016, from http://www.who.int/disabilities/world_report/2011/report. pdf.
  • Young, J., & Foot, K. (2005). Corporate e-cruiting: The construction of work in Fortune 500 recruiting web sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11 (1), 44-71.
  • Zhao, J. J., Truell, A. D., & Alexander, M. W. (2006). User-interface design characteristics of Fortune 500 B2C e-commerce sites and industry differences. Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, 48 (1), 43-55.

TÜRKİYE’DEKİ TOP 50 FORTUNE FİRMALARININ KURUMSAL WEBSİTELERİNDE ENGELLİ İÇERİĞİ

Year 2018, , 163 - 186, 01.01.2018

Murat Nazlı Eda Evla Mutlu

https://doi.org/10.17130/ijmeb.2018137580

Abstract

Engellilik konusunda dünya genelinde artan farkındalık neticesinde, Türkiye’deki örgütlerin değerlerini, normlarını ve davranışlarını bu doğrultuda gözden geçirdikleri varsayılmaktadır. Bu çalışmada meşruiyetini koruma niyetinde olan, özellikle de yüksek gelirli firmalar dikkate alınarak, Türkiye’nin en iyi 50 Fortune firmasının web sitelerinin engelli kavramına ilişkin içeriğinde benzerlik ve farklılıkları ortaya çıkarmak amaçlanmıştır. Web sitesi içerikleri, içerik analizi kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Sonuçlara bakıldığında, firmalar ‘tesislerdeki fiziksel koşullar’, ‘engelli ve çalışan eğitimi’, ‘ürünler’, ‘hizmet alabilme koşulları’ ve ‘bağışlar’ konularına ağırlık vermişlerdir. Bazı sektörlerde firma web sitelerinin benzer içerikleri paylaştığı görülmektedir, ancak genel olarak farklılıklar benzerliklerden fazladır. Firmaların engellilere yönelik yasal zorunlulukları uygulamadaki yetersizliği de sonuçlarda tartışılmıştır. Bu açıdan, yapılan çalışma mevcut anlayışı ortaya koyarken, olası iyileştirme alanlarını da vurgulamaktadır

Keywords

Engelli Web Sitesi İçeriği Kurumsallaşma Paydaş

References

  • Bell, D., & Heitmueller, A. (2009). The disability discrimination act in the UK: Helping or hindering employment among the disabled? Journal of Health Economics, 28 (2), 465- 480.
  • Ball, P., Monaco, G., Schmeling, J., Schartz, H., & Blanck, P. (2005). Disability as diversity in fortune 100 companies. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 23, 97-121.
  • Blair, M. M. (2004). The great pension grab: Comments on Richard Ippolito, bankruptcy and workers. Washington University Law Quarterly, 82, 1305.
  • Branco, M. C., & Rodrigues, L. L. (2006). Communication of corporate social responsibility by Portuguese banks: A legitimacy theory perspective. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 11 (3), 232-248.
  • Briggs, B. S., & Saas, C. (2016). Websites and mobile applications: Do they comply with title III of the Americans with disabilities act? Florida Bar Journal, September 1.
  • Bundon, A., & Clarke, L. H. (2015). Unless you go online you are on your own: Blogging as a bridge in para-sport. Disability & Society, 30 (2), 185-198.
  • Callison, C. (2003). Media relations and the internet: How Fortune 500 company web sites assist journalists in news gathering. Public Relations Review, 29, 29-41.
  • Deephouse, D. L. (1996). Does isomorphism legitimate? The Academy of Management Journal, 39 (4), 1024-1039.
  • De Villiers, C., & Alexander, D. (2014). The institutionalization of corporate social responsibility reporting. The British Accounting Review, 46 (2), 198-212.
  • DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociology Review, 147-160.
  • Ellis, K., & Kent, M. (2011). Disability and new media. New York: Routledge.
  • Engelliler Hakkında Kanun (2005). Kanun No: 5378, Resmi Gazete, 5 (44).
  • Frank, J. (2008, January). Web accessibility for the blind: Corporate social responsibility or litigation avoidance? Proceedings of the 41st Hawaii International Conference on Systems Science, USA.
  • Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management, a stakeholder approach. Pitman, Boston.
  • Gabel, S. L., Reid, D., Pearson, H., Ruiz, L., & Hume-Dawson, R. (2016). Disability and diversity on CSU websites: A critical discourse study. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 9 (1), 64-80.
  • General Directorate of Services for People with Disabilities and Elderly People (2016). Engelli ve yaşlı bireylere ilişkin istatistiki bilgiler, engelli ve yaşlı hizmetleri genel müdürlüğü istatistik bülteni. Retrieved February 03, 2017, from http://eyh.aile.gov.tr/ data/56179f30369dc5726c063e73/B%C3%BClten_Temmuz2016.pdf
  • Goggin, G., & Newell, C. (2003). Digital disability: The social construction of disability in new media. Amyland: Rowman and Littlefield.
  • Greenwood, R., & Hinings, C. R. (1996). Understanding radical organizational change: Bridging together the old and the new institutionalism. Academy of Management Review, 21 (4), 1022-1054.
  • Gutierrez, C. F., & Windsor, J. C. (2005). An evaluation of Fortune 500 company home pages for disability-access. International Journal of Electronic Business, 3 (2), 137-153.
  • Harrison, J. S., & Freeman, R. E. (1999). Stakeholders, social responsibility and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 42 (5), 479-485.
  • Huang, Z., & Cappel, J. J. (2012). A comparative study of website usability practices of Fortune 500 versus INC. 500 companies. Information Systems Management, 29 (2).
  • İşkur - Turkish Labor Agency (2015). 2015 yılında engellilerin engel gruplarına göre dağılımı. Retrieved February 02, 2017, from http.//www.iskur.gov.tr/kurumsalbilgi/ istatistikler.aspx
  • Jones, S. L., & DeGrow, D. (2011). Fortune 500 homepages: Design trends. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 54 (1).
  • Jones, S. L. (2015). A re-examination of Fortune 500 homepage design practices. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 58 (1).
  • Kim, S., Park, J. H., & Wertz, E. K. (2010a). Expectation gaps between stakeholders and web- based corporate public relations efforts: Focusing on Fortune 500 corporate web sites. Public Relations Review, 36 (3), 215-221.
  • Kim, D., Nam, Y., & Kang, S. (2010). An analysis of corporate environmental responsibility on the global corporate web sites and their dialogic principles. Public Relations Review, 36 (3), 285-288.
  • Knuz, M., Ratliff, J. M., Blankenbuehler, M., & Bard, T. (2014). A preliminary examination of sustainable disclosures on Fortune 500 company websites. Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 13 (1), 1.
  • Lee, I. (2005). E-recruiting: Categories and analysis of Fortune 100 career web sites. In T. Torres-Coronas, & M. Arias-Oliva (Eds.), e-Human resources management: Managing knowledge people (pp. 86-100). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
  • Levy, J. M., Jessop, D. J., Rimmerman, A., & Levy, P. H. (1992). Attitudes of Fortune 500 corporate executives toward the employability of persons with severe disabilities: A national study. Mental Retardation, 30 (2), 67-75.
  • Liu, C., & Arnett, P. K. (2002). Raising a red flag on global WWW privacy policies. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 43 (1), 117-127.
  • Liu, C., Arnett, K. P., Capella, L., & Beauty, B. (1997). Web sites of the Fortune 500 companies: Facing customers through home pages. Information and Management, 31 (1), 335-345.
  • Moore, M. (2013). Disability, global conflicts and crises. Disability & Society, 28 (6), 741-743.
  • Pate, J. R., Ruihley, B. J., & Mirabito, T. (2014). Displaying disability: A content analysis of person-first language on NCAA Bowl Championship Series college athletic department websites. Journal of Applied Sport Management, 6 (1).
  • Patten, D. M. (1991). Exposure, legitimacy, and social disclosure. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 10, 297-308.
  • Perry, M. L., & Bodkin, C. D. (2002). Fortune 500 manufacturer web sites: Innovative marketing strategies of cyberbrochures? Journal of Promotion Management, 31 (2), 133-144.
  • Podlas, K. (2015). Website accessibility and the Americans with disabilities act. Journal of Internet Law, 19 (5), 3-16.
  • Quevedo-Puente, E., Fuente-Sabate, J. M., & Delgado-Garcia, J. B. (2007). Corporate social performance and corporate reputation: Two interwoven perspectives. Corporate Reputation Review, 10 (1), 60-72.
  • Republic of Turkey Ministry of Family and Social Policy (2014). 2002-2013 development and disability in Turkey: A report of the last decade. Retrieved Feb. 13, 2017, from http://eyh.aile.gov.tr/data/549d6891369dc5abbc92cc7e/bm_kitapcigi_ingilizce_ tumu_23.05.2014.pdf
  • Romano, N. C. (2002). Customer relationship management for the web-access challenged: Inaccessibility of Fortune 250 business web sites. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 7 (2), 81-117.
  • Seale, J. K. (2007). Strategies for supporting the online publishing activities of adults with learning difficulties. Disability & Society, 22 (2), 173-186.
  • Suarez, M. (2003). Scientific representation: against similarity and isomorphism. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 17 (3), 225-244.
  • Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20, 571-610.
  • Tas, S., & Bozyaka, G. (2012). Avrupa Birliğine uyum sürecinde Türkiye’de uygulanan istihdam politikaları. Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi IIBF Dergisi, 2 (1), 151-176.
  • TUIK - Turkish Statistical Institute (2015). Dünya nüfus günü, haber bülteni. Retrieved February 04, 2017, from http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreHaberBultenleri.do?id=18617
  • USDL - United States Department of Labor (n.d.). Americans with disabilities act. Retrieved November 02, 2016, from https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/disability/ada
  • Web Accessibility Initiative – WAI (2017). Web accessibility initiative. Retrieved January 07, 2017, from https://www.w3.org/WAI/
  • World Health Organization & The World Bank (2011). World report on disability. Retrieved November 21, 2016, from http://www.who.int/disabilities/world_report/2011/report. pdf.
  • Young, J., & Foot, K. (2005). Corporate e-cruiting: The construction of work in Fortune 500 recruiting web sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11 (1), 44-71.
  • Zhao, J. J., Truell, A. D., & Alexander, M. W. (2006). User-interface design characteristics of Fortune 500 B2C e-commerce sites and industry differences. Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, 48 (1), 43-55.
There are 49 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Journal Section Research Article
Authors

Murat Nazlı This is me

Eda Evla Mutlu This is me

Publication Date January 1, 2018
Published in Issue Year 2018

Cite

APA Nazlı, M., & Mutlu, E. E. (2018). CORPORATE WEBSITE CONTENT RELATED TO DISABILITY IN THE TOP 50 FORTUNE FIRMS IN TURKEY. Uluslararası Yönetim İktisat Ve İşletme Dergisi, 14(1), 163-186. https://doi.org/10.17130/ijmeb.2018137580