Teachers’ Views Regarding Gossip and Rumour Mechanism:A Qualitative Study

Year 2012, Volume: 2 Issue: 2, 171 - 190, 01.03.2012

İ. Bakır Arabacı Meltem Sünkür , Fatma Zehra Şimşek

Abstract

Background. There are both formal and informal structures in organizations. These structures are effective in organizational communication process. Formal communication uses hierarchy as a main way and informal communication uses interpersonal relations. There are both benefits and damages of informal communication in organizations. Informal organizations are a source of support and communication for their members.Informal organizations also increase employees' job satisfaction and complete the formal organizations. However informal organizations are not controllable so as a result they occasionally hinder the works, demoralize the employees and alienate them from innovations. The most important examples of informal communication are rumour and gossip mechanisms. Generally gossip is defined as “talk about a person who is not present” and rumour is defined as “information that goes the rounds and that is not certain / unconfirmed information about an event that goes the rounds in a society”. Since at least three persons are involved, gossip is a social activity (Wittek & Wielers, 1998, p. 189). The importance of gossip in organizational life was first stated by Noon and Delbridge in 1993 and the concept of ‘organizational gossip' was suggested. First, people use gossip to learn important social information about other individuals in the group, often without ever having to meet these individuals. Second, gossip helps builds social networks by bonding people one another. Third, social-network formation and change is not accomplished merely by bonding; it is also achieved by breaking existing bonds that compete. Fourth, gossip enhances social status, power or prestige within a group. Finally, gossip informs us of what to do in order to gain admittance into and remain part of social networks (DiFonzo & Bordia, 2007, pp. 26-27). There are some negative consequences of workplace gossip: losing productivity and wasting time, erosion of trust and morale, increased anxiety among employees as rumors circulate without any clear information as to what is fact and what isn't, growing divisiveness among employees as people “take sides", hurting feelings and reputations, jeopardized chances for the gossipers` advancement as they are perceived as unprofessional, and attrition as good employees leave the company due to the unhealthy work atmosphere(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gossip). Dedikodu ve Söylenti Mekanizmasına İlişkin Görüşler Purpose. This study aims to investigate teachers' views regarding rumour and gossip mechanisms in educational organizations. The sample of the research consists of 64 teachers from different branches who work in Elazığ city center in 2010-2011 academic year. Method. A qualitative research design and interview technique were used in this research. As a data collection tool semi-structured interview form was used in this research. The form consisted of these questions: • Do you believe there are gossip and rumour mechanism in educational organizations? • Were you exposed to gossip during your career? • What are the reasons for gossip? • How did you feel when you were the subject of gossip? How do you feel when you think you are the subject of gossip? • What do you think about finding a solution for gossip? • In what kind of work environment do you feel comfortable? The design of the study was qualitative. The data was characterized to itself. During the analysis process, the interview records were decoded and analyzed. The teachers' opinions were examined by content analyses. In the analyses of the opinions, statements were grouped and classified according to their similarities. In the analyses, coding the teachers whose opinions had been taken and their statements revealed certain themes.The data obtained through the interview technique was digitized and frequency values were determined. Findings and Conclusion. Findings of the research show that % 93.75 of teachers believe there are gossip and rumour in educational organizations. Moreover % 93.75 of teachers stated that they were exposed to gossip during their career. The teachers believe that gossip results from mostly ‘jealousy and intolerance'. Other reasons are stated as skepticism, lack of self-confidence, lack of purpose, having too much free time, selfagrandizement and social acknowledgement. The most used reactions by teachers are identified as ‘feeling sadness and being furious' and ‘organizational alienation'. The code that has the least frequency is identified as ‘feeling ashamed'. Participants also state that they want a friendly environment that has sharing and helping each other

Keywords

gossip , rumour , qualitative research , teachers’ views , informal communication channels

Öğretmenlerin Dedikodu ve Söylenti Mekanizmasına İlişkin Görüşleri: Nitel Bir Çalışma

Abstract

Bu araştırmada, ilköğretim okullarında görev yapan öğretmenlerin dedikodu ve söylenti mekanizmasına ilişkin görüşlerini ortaya koymak amaçlanmıştır. Araştırmada nitel araştırma desenlerinden olgubilim deseni, veri toplama aracı olarak görüşme tekniği kullanılmıştır. Araştırmanın örneklemini 2010-2011 öğretim yılında Elazığ İli'nde görev yapan değişik branşlardaki 64 öğretmen oluşturmuştur. Sorulara ilişkin verilerin analizinde frekans analizi ve içerik analizi tekniği kullanılmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda, öğretmenlerin eğitim örgütlerinde dedikodu ve söylentinin varlığına inandıkları, dedikodunun ‘kıskançlık, çekememezlik' gibi nedenlerden dolayı ortaya çıktığını düşündükleri sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Araştırmaya göre dedikodu ve söylenti mekanizmasına maruz kalan öğretmenlerin en çok gösterdikleri tepki ‘üzüntü duyma ve öfkelenme' olarak belirlenmiştir.

Keywords

dedikodu , söylenti , nitel çalışma , öğretmen görüşleri , informel iletişim kanalları

References

• Akdoğan, A., Mirap, S. ve Cingöz, A. (2009). İşgörenlerin dedikoduya inanma düzeyleri ve dedikodunun amaçlarina ilişkin algilamalari: Örgütsel ve bireysel değişkenler açisindan bir inceleme. 17. Ulusal Yönetim ve Organizasyon Kongresi Bildiriler Kitabı (ss: 17-25). Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Yayını.
• Aydın, M. (2005). Eğitim yönetimi. Ankara: Hatiboğlu.
• Bursalıoğlu, Z. (2005). Okul yönetiminde yeni yapı ve davranış. Ankara: Pegem A.
• Demir, K. (2003). Örgütlerde iletişim yönetimi. İçinde C. Elma-K. Demir (Ed.), Yönetimde çağdaş yaklaşımlar. Ankara: Anı.
• DiFonzo, N., & Bordia, R. (2007). Rumor, gossip and urban legends. Diogenes. http://dio.sagepub.com/content/54/1/19 (Erişim Tarihi: 11.09.2011).
• Doğan H. (2002). İşgörenlerin adalet algılamalarında örgüt içi iletişim ve prosedürel bilgilendirmenin rolü. Ege Akademik Bakış, 2(2), 71-78.
• Dubrin, A. J. (2000). Applying psychology, individual organizational effectiveness. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc.
• Eğinli, A. T. ve Bitirim, S. (2008). Kurumsal başarının önündeki engel: Zehirli (Toksik) iletişim. Selçuk Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Dergisi, 5(3), 124-140.
• Erdoğan, İ. (2005). İletişimi anlamak. Ankara: Erk.
• Gözütok, D. (Haziran 1999). Öğretmenlerin etik davranışları. The Third International Conference on Teacher Education Almost 2000: Crises and Challenge in Teacher Education. http://dergiler.ankara.edu.tr/dergiler/40/127/865.pdf8 ( Erişim11.10.2011).
• Beit Berl Kolej’de Sunulan Bildiri.
• Grosser, T. J., Lopez-idwell, V., & Labianca, G. (2010). A social network analysis of positive and negative gossip in organizational life. Group & Organizational Management, 35(2), 177-212.
• Karasar, N. (2006). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi. Ankara: Nobel.
• Kazancı, M. (2004). Kamuda ve özel kesimde halkla ilişkiler. Ankara: Turhan.
• Kapferer, J. N. (1992). Dünyanın en eski medyası, dedikodu & söylenti (Çev: Işın Gürbüz). İstanbul: İletişim.
• Kniffin, K. M., Wilson, D.S. (2010). Evolutionary perspectives on workplace gossip: Why and how gossip can serve groups. Group & Organization Management, 35(2), 150-176.
• Kurland B. N., & Pelled L. H. (2000). Passing the word: Toward a model of gossip and power in the workplace. Academy of Management Review, 25(2), 428-438.
• Matteson, İ. (2002). Organizational behavior and management (6th ed.). Columbus: McGraw Hill.
• McAndrew, F. T. (2008). The science of gossip: Why we can't stop ourselves. Scientific American Mind. 1-10.
• Michelson, G., Iterson, A., & Waddington, K. (2010). Gossip in organizations: Contexts, consequences, and controversies. Group & Organization Management, 35(4), 371-390.
• Mills, C. (2010). Experiencing gossip: The foundations for a theory of embedded organizational gossip. Group & Organization Management, 35(2), 213-240.
• Morgan, G. (1998). Yönetim ve örgüt teorilerinde metafor (Çev: Gündüz Bulut). İstanbul: MESS.
• Sezerel, H. (2007). Örgütlerde mobbingin etkileri ve TÜLOMSAŞ’da bir uygulama. (Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Anadolu Üniversitesi, Eskişehir.
• Solmaz, B. (2004). Kurumsal söylenti ve dedikodu. Konya: Tablet yayınları.
• Solmaz, B. (2006). Dedikodu ve söylenti yönetimi. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 16, 563-575.
• Şimşek, M. Ş., Akgemici, T. ve Çelik, A., Fettahlıoğlu, T. (Mayıs 2006). Örgütlerde yabancılaşmanın yönetimi araştırması. 14. Ulusal Yönetim ve Organizasyon Kongresi’nde Sunulan Bildiri. Atatürk Üniversitesi İİBF, Erzurum.
• Terzi, A. R. (2005). İletişim ve Sosyal Etkileşim. İçinde Yüksel Özden (Ed.), Eğitim ve okul yöneticiliği el kitabı. Ankara: Pegem A.
• Tınaz, P. (2006). İşyerinde psikolojik taciz (Mobbing). İstanbul: Beta.
• Thompson, B. L. (2003). Yeni yöneticinin el kitabı (Çev: Vedat G. Diker). İstanbul: Hayat.
• Töremen, F. (Temmuz, 2004). İlköğretim okullarının sahip oldukları sosyal sermaye konusunda öğretmen görüşleri. XIII. Ulusal Eğitim Bilimleri Kurultayı’nda Sunulan Bildiri. İnönü Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi, Malatya.
• Türk Dil Kurumu (2011). Büyük Türkçe Sözlük. http://www.tdk.gov.tr/ (Erişim:11.10.2011).
• Wittek, R., & Wielers, R. (1998). Gossip in organizations. Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory, 4(2), 189-204.
• Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek H.(2008). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara Seçkin.
• (http://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Dedikodu)