PROJE VATANDAŞLIĞI DAVRANIŞLARI, PROJEYE BAĞLILIK VE ÖĞRENEN PROJE ORGANİZASYONUNUN PROJENİN BAŞARISINA ETKİSİ: BİR MODEL ÖNERİSİ

Year 2018, , 275 - 285, 30.12.2018

Zeyd Gulesin , Yonca Gurol

https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2018.988

Abstract

Amaç- Bu çalışma örgütsel bağlılık, örgütsel vatandaşlık ve öğrenen organizasyon karakteristikleri kavramlarını proje organizasyonu bakış açısından inceleyerek; bu kapsamdaki davranış ve karakteristiklerin proje yönetiminde hayat bulması durumunda projenin başarısını nasıl etkileyeceğinin açıklanmasını ve bu sonuçlara dayanarak proje yönetiminde başarıyı maksimize edecek bir model ortaya konulmasını amaçlamaktadır.

Yöntem- Proje yönetimi açısından örtügsel vatandaşlık, öğrenen organizasyonlar ve örgütsel bağlılık kavramları üzerine geniş bir literatur araştırması yapılarak konu ile ilgili doğrudan ilişkili olan araştırmaların sonuçları bir araya getirilmiştir. Son aşamada ise araştırma bulguları sentezlenerek proje yönetiminde başarıyı pozitif etkileyen boyutlar üzerinden bir model önerisi yapılmıştır.

Bulgular- Projelerin hedeflerine başarı ile ulaşmasında, doğru araçları ve teknikleri bilip etkin uygulamanın yanında paydaşların projeye ve proje organizasyonuna olan bağlılıkları, öğrenen organizasyon olabilmesi ve proje vatandaşlığı davranışları gibi insani unsurların varlığının da çok önemli rol oynadığı ortaya çıkmıştır.

Sonuç- Son dönemlerde araç ve teknikler, proje ekibi üyelerinin teknik yetkinlikleri üzerine yoğunlaşılmakta, proje yönetiminde insani unsurlar ikinci planda kalmaktadır. Bu çalışma ile günümüzde yoğun olarak uygulanmakta olan geleneksel proje yönetim yaklaşımların gözardı edilen bu unsurlara ilişkin eksikliklere dikkat çekilmiştir. Geliştirilen model hem hem bu alanda çalışma yapan akademisyenlerin ve hem de profesyonel proje yöneticilerinin istifadesine sunulmuştur.

Keywords

Proje yönetimi, proje bağlılığı, proje vatandaşlığı, öğrenen proje organizasyonu, proje yönetiminde başarı

THE IMPACT OF PROJECT CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOURS, PROJECT COMMITMENT AND LEARNING PROJECT ORGANIZATION ON THE SUCCESS OF THE PROJECT: A MODEL PROPOSAL

Abstract

Purpose - This study examines the concepts of organizational commitment, organizational citizenship behaviors and learning organization characteristics from a project organization point of view; aims to explain how the behaviors and characteristics in this context would affect achieving the objectives of the project. Based on these results it is also aimed to create a model that would maximize success in project management.

Methodology - A broad literature survey has been conducted on the organizational citizenship behavior, learning organizations and organizational commitment concepts from project management point of view. The results of researches that are directly related to the topic have been put together. At the last stage, research findings were synthesized and a model is developed based on the dimensions that positively influence success in the project management.

Findings- In addition to knowing and implementing the right tools and techniques, it has become clear that the presence of human factors such as stakeholders’ commitment to the project, learning organization, and project citizenship behaviors also play a very important role in achieving the goals of the project successfully.

Conclusion- Recently, practitioners focus more on the tools and techniques used in the project management and the competencies of the team. But the human factors in project management remain neglected. This study draws attention to the shortcomings of these elements, which have been overlooked in traditional project management approaches, which are currently being implemented intensively. Drawing attention to these elements through this study, a model is developed which could be beneficial for the academicians as well as professional project managers.

Keywords

Project management, project commitment, project citizenship, learning project organization, successful project management

References

• Akerlof, G. A. (1970). The market for "Lemons": quality uncertainty and the market mechanism. Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 84, no. 3, pp. 488-500.
• Alessandri, T., Cerrato, D., Depperu, D. (2014). Organizational slack, experience, and acquisition behavior across varying economic environments. Management Decision, vol. 56, no. 5, pp. 967-982.
• Atkinson, R. (1999). Project management: cost, time and quality, two best guesses and a phenomenon, its time to accept other success criteria. International Journal of Project Management, 17-6, 337-342.
• Autry, C. W., Skinner, L. R., Lamb, C. W. (2008). Intraorganizational citizenship behaviors: an empirical study. Journal of Business Logistics, 29, 53—74.
• Baccarini, D. (1999). The logical framework method for defining project success. Project Management Journal, 30 (4) :25–32
• Barnard, C. (1938). The functions of the executives. Harvard University Press, Boston.
• Balay, R. (2000). Yönetici ve öğretmenlerde örgütsel bağlılık. Nobel Yayın Dağıtım, Ankara.
• Baker, B. N. Murphy, D. C., Fisher, D. (1983). Factors affecting project success. Project management handbook. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
• Bakker, R. M., (2010). Taking stock of temporary organizational forms: a systematic review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews 12, 466–486.
• Bolino, M. C., Turnley, W. H., Bloodgood, J. M. (2002). Citizenship behavior and the creation of social capital in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 27, 505—522.
• Braun, T., Ferreira A. I., Sydow J. (2013). Citizenship behavior and effectiveness in temporary organizations. International Journal of Project Management 31, 862-876.
• Chow, I. H. (1994). Organizational commitment and career development of Chinese managers in Hong Kong and Taiwan. International Journal of Career Management, 6, 4, 3-9.
• Cohen, A., Vigoda, E. (2000). Do good citizen make good organizational citizenship: an empirical examination of the relationship between general citizenship and organizational citizenship. Administration and Society, 32, 5, 596-625.
• Davies, D., Taylor, R., Savery, C. (2001). The role of appraisal, remuneration and training in improving staff relations in the Western Australian accommodation industry: a comparative study. Journal of European Industrial Training, 25, 366-373. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000005837.
• Drago, R., Garvey, G. (1998). Incentives for helping on the job: theory and evidence. Journal of Labor Economics, 1 –25.
• Guo, S., Wang, X., Li, M. (2016). Citizenship behaviour and performance in a project management context. Construction Research Congress 2016, ASCE.
• Gülesin, Z., Gürol Y. (2016). Proje yönetiminde paradigm değişimi: katı yönetim yaklaşımından yumuşak yönetim yaklaşımına geçiş. Yönetim Bilimleri Sempozyumu, İstanbul.
• Gülesin, Z., Can, E. (2015). A theoretical overview on challenges and solutions for global project management. Research Journal of Business and Management 2, 3.
• Güney, S. (2011). Örgütsel davranış. Nobel Dağıtım, pp:32-33.
• Hackett, R. D., Bycio, P., Hausdorf, P. A. (1994). Further assessments of Meyer and Allen’s (1991) three- component model of organizational commitment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79,1, 1-9.
• Ika, L. A. (2015). Opening the black box of project management: does World Bank project supervision influence project impact?. International Journal of Project Management, 33, 5, 1111-1123.
• Katz, R. (1982). The effects of group longevity on project communication and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly 27, 81–104.
• Khang, D. B., Moe, T. L. (2008). Success criteria and factors for international development projects: a life cycle based framework. Project Management Journal, 39 ,1, 72–84.
• Keskin, H., Akgün, A., Koçoğlu, İ. (2016). Örgüt teorisi. Nobel Dağıtım, 153-154.
• Kerzner, H. (1998). In search of excellence in project management. Wiley, New York.
• Kiani, M. N., Gillani S. H. M. (2014). The impact of learning organization practices on organizational effectiveness. Pakistan Business Review, 16, 2.
• Kidder, D. L. (2002). The influence of gender on the performance of organizational citizenship behvaviours. Journal of Management, 28, 5, 629 - 648.
• Kim, K., Watkins, K. E., Lu, Z. L. (2017). The impact of learning organization on performance: focusing on knowledge performance and financial performance. European Journal of Training and Development, 41-2, 177-193.
• Kontoghiorghes, C., Awbre, S. M., Feuring, P. L. (2005). Examining the relationship between learning organization characteristics and change adaptation, innovation, and organizational performance. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 16-2.
• Koys, D. J. (2001). Effects of employee satisfaction, organizational citizenship behavior, and turnover on organizational effectiveness: a unit-level, longitudinal study. Personnel Psychology, S.54, s.101-114.
• Lee, D.-J., Sirgy, M. J., Brown, J. R., Bird, M. M. (2004). Importers’ benevolence toward their foreign export suppliers. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 32, 32—48.
• Leblebici, D. N. (2008). Örgüt kuramında paradigmalar ve metaforlar. Selçuk Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Sosyal ve Ekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 8 (15), 245-360.
• Lundin, R. A., Söderholm, A. (1995). A theory of the temporary organization. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 11, 437– 455.
• McGill, M. E., Slocum, J. W. (1993). Unlearning the organization. Organizational Dynamics, 22,2, 68-73.
• Meyer, J. P., Paunonen, S. V., Gellatly, I. R., Goff, R. D., Jackson, D. N. (1989). Organizational commitment and job performance: it`s the nature of the commitment that counts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74 (1): 152–6.
• Meyer, J. P., Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human Resource Management Review 1 (1): 61–89.
• Morrison, E. W. (1995). Organizational citizenship behavior as a critical link between HRM practices and service quality. Human Resource Management, S.35, s.493-512.
• Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W., Steers, R. M. (1982). Employee organization linkages: the pyschology of commitment, absenteeism and turnover. Academic Press, London.
• Netemeyer, R. G., Maxham, J. G. (2007). Employee versus supervisor ratings of performance in the retail customer service sector differences in predictive validity for customer outcomes. Journal of Retailing, 83, 131 –145.
• Norashikin, H., Omar, S., Noordin, F., Ishak, N. A. (2014). Learning organization culture, organizational performance and organizational innovativeness in a public institution of higher education in Malaysia: a preliminary study. Procedia Economics and Finance, 37, 512-519.
• O'Brien, K. E., Allen, T. D. (2008). The relative importance of correlates of organizational citizenship behaviour and counterproductive work behaviour using multiple sources of data. Human Performance, 21, 62-88.
• Organ, D., Smith, C. A., Near, P. J. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior: its nature & antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(4):653:663.
• Organ, D. (1988). Organizational citizenship behaviour: the good soldier syndrome. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
• Organ, D. W., Ryan, K. (1995). A meta-analytic review of attitudinal and dispositional predictors of organizational citizenship behavior. Personnel Psychology, S.48, s.775-802.
• Pedler, M., Burgoyne, J., Boydell, T. The learning company: a strategy for sustainable development. McGraw-Hill Book, London.
• Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S., Paine, J., Bachrach, D. (2000). Organizational citizenship behaviors: a critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal of Management, 26 (3), 513-563.
• Podsakoff, P. M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (1997). Impact of organizational citizenship behavior on organizational performance: a review and suggestions for future research. Human Performance, 10, 133—151.
• Pokharel, P. M., Choi, S. O. (2015). Exploring the relationships between the learning organization and organizational performance. Management Research Review, 38, 2, 126-148.
• Project Management Institute (PMI). (2013). A guide to the project management body of knowledge- Fifth edition. Newtown Square.
• Pinto, J. K., Prescott J. E. (1990). Planning and tactical factors in the project implementation process. Journal of Management Studies, 27, 305–327.
• Senge, P. (2016). Beşinci disiplin. Yapı Kredi Yayınları, İstanbul.
• Selznick, P. (1948). Foundations of the theory of organization. American Sociological Review, 13(1), 1948, 38-55.
• Skinner, L. R., Autry, C. W., Lamb, C. W. (2009). Some measures of interorganizational citizenship behaviors: scale development and validation. International Journal of Logistics Management, 20, 228—242.
• Provan, G. K., Sydow, J. (2014). Network citizenship behaviour: toward a behavioral perspective on multi-organizational networks. Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings, DOI: 10.5465/AMBPP.2014.11520abstract.
• Ochieng, E., Price, A. D. F. (2010). Managing cross-cultural communication in multicultural construction project teams: the case of Kenya and UK. International Journal of Project Management, 28, 449-460.
• Turner, J. R. (1999). The project management profession: knowledge or faith?. PM Network, 13(10), 41.
• Walz, S. M., Niehoff, B. P. (1996). Organizational citizenship behaviors and their effect on organizational effectiveness in limited-menu restaurants. Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings, s.307-311.
• Westerveld, E. (2003). The project excellence model: linking success criteria and critical success factors. International Journal of Project Management, 21, 411 -418.
• Wiener, Y., Vardi, Y. (1980). Relationships between job, organization, and career commitments and work outcomes - an integrative approach. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 26, 81-96.
• Yang, L., Chiang, Y., Yen, H. (2012). A framework for assessing impacts of leadership competency on police project performance: mediating role of job satisfaction and moderation role of project type. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies Management, 35 ,3, 528–550.
• Zinn, J. (2007). Use soft skills to solve hard challenges. Material Handling Management, 56.