The Relationship Between the Leadership Styles of School Managers and Organizational Cynicism According to the Perceptions of Secondary School Teachers

Year 2017, Volume: 7 Issue: 12, 33 - 53, 30.06.2017

Eray Demirçelik Mehmet Korkmaz

https://doi.org/10.26466/opus.309630

Cited By: 1

Abstract

The purpose of
this research is to determine the relationship between leadership styles
perceived by teachers of school principals and the organizational cynics. In
the research, it has been tried to investigate how much of organizational
cynicism can be attributed to leadership styles. The study was conducted
according to the relational screening model. The study group selected by the
purposeful sampling method consists of a total of 142 teachers working in five
secondary schools in Kayseri. The Organizational Cynicism Scale was used to determine
organizational cynicism. The Multicultural Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ
5x-short) was used to determine the leadership styles of school managers.
Correlation coefficients were calculated for the relationship between
variables, whether the variables influence each other and what the power of
explanation is revealed by multiple regression analysis. According to research
findings, school principals mostly exhibit transformative leadership
behaviours. There is a negative relationship between the transformational
leadership dimension and the cognitive and behavioural dimensions of
organizational cynicism. As a result of the regression analysis performed,
transformational leader's influence on cognitive and behavioural dimensions of
organizational cynicism is significant.

Keywords

Leadership styles, organizational cynicism, school manager, teacher

Ortaokul Öğretmenlerinin Algılarına Göre Okul Yöneticilerinin Liderlik Stilleri İle Örgütsel Sinizm Arasındaki İlişki

Abstract

Bu araştırmanın amacı okul
yöneticilerinin öğretmenler tarafından algılanan liderlik stilleri ile örgütsel
sinizm arasındaki ilişkiyi belirlemektir. Araştırmada örgütsel sinizmin ne
kadarının liderlik stillerine bağlanabileceği irdelenmeye çalışılmıştır.
Araştırma ilişkisel tarama modeline göre yapılmıştır. Araştırmanın çalışma
grubu, amaçlı örnekleme yöntemi ile seçilen ve Kayseri’de bulunan beş
ortaokulda çalışan toplam 142 öğretmenden oluşmaktadır. Örgütsel sinizmi
belirleyebilmek için, Örgütsel Sinizm Ölçeği, okul yöneticilerinin liderlik
stillerini belirlemek amacıyla Çok Faktörlü Liderlik Anketi (MLQ 5x-short)
kullanılmıştır. Değişkenler arasındaki ilişki için korelasyon katsayıları
hesaplanmış, değişkenlerin birbirlerini etkileyip etkilemediğini ve açıklama
gücünün ne olduğu ise çoklu regresyon analizi ile ortaya konmuştur. Araştırma
bulgularına göre, okul yöneticileri çoğunlukla dönüşümcü liderlik
davranışlarını sergilemektedir. Dönüşümsel liderlik boyutu ile örgütsel
sinizmin, bilişsel ve davranışsal boyutları arasında ters yönlü anlamlı bir
ilişki bulunmaktadır. Yapılan regresyon analizi sonucunda, dönüşümcü liderliğin
örgütsel sinizmin bilişsel ve davranışsal boyutları üzerinde etkisi anlamlıdır. 

Keywords

Liderlik stilleri, örgütsel sinizm, okul yöneticisi, öğretmen

References

• Andersson, L. (1996). Employee cynicism: An examination using a contract violation framework. Human Relations, 49, 1395-1418.
• Başaran, E. (1991). Turkey education system. Ankara: Gül.
• Bass, B. M. (1997). Personal selling and transactional/ transformational leadership. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 17(3), 19-28.
• Bass, B. M. & Avolio, B. J. (1990). Developing transformational leadership:1992 and beyond. Journal of European Industrıal Training, 14(5), 21-27.
• Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1995). MLQ-Multifactor leadership questionnairre. California: Mind Garden.
• Bommer, W. H., Rich, G. A. & Rubin, R. S. (2005). Changing attitudes about change:Longitudinal effects of transformational leader behavior on employee cynicism about organizational change. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(7), 733-753.
• Brandes, P., Dharwadkar, R. & Dean, J. W. (1999). Does organizational cynicism matter? Employee and supervisor perspectives on work outcomes. Eastern Academy of Management Proceedings, 150-153. Outstanding Empirical Paper Award.
• Buluç, B. (2009). The relationships between organizational commitment and leadership styles of principals based on elementary school teacher’s perceptions. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 15(57), 5-34.
• Cemaloğlu, N. (2007). The relationship between the leadership styles of school administrators and mobbing. Journal of Hacettepe Univer-sity Education Faculty, 33, 77-87.
• Çakıcı, A. & Doğan, S. (2014). The impact of organizational cynicism on business performance: A research in vocational colleges. Journal of Doğuş University, 15(1), 79-89.
• Çetin, Ş., Korkmaz, M. & Çakmakçı, C. (2012). Effects of transformational and transactional leadership and leader-member exchange on teachers’ organizational citizenship behaviors, Educational Administration: Theory and Practice,18(1), 7-36.
• Çınar, A. & Bozgeyikli, H. (2015). Perceptions of distributed leadership in the secondary school institutions. OPUS - International Journal of Society Researches, 5(9), 42-60.
• Dawis, W. D. & Gardner, W. L. (2004). Perceptions of politics and or-ganizational cyncism: An attributional and leader-member exchange perspective. The Leadership Quarterly, 15, 439-465.
• Dean Jr, J. W., Brandes, P. & Dharwadkar, R. (1998). Organizational cynicism. The Academy of Management Review, 2(23), 341-352.
• DeCelles, K. A., Tesluk, P. E. & Taxman, F. S. (2013). A field investigation of multilevel cynicism toward change. Organization Science, 24(1), 154–171.
• Hoy, W. K. & Miskel, C. G. (2012). Education management theory, research and application (Trs. S.Turan). Ankara: Nobel.
• Howell, J. M. & Avolio, B. J. (1993). Transformational leadership, transactional leadership, locus of control and support for innovation: Key predictors of consolidated business-unit performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 891-902.
• Jung, D. I., Chow, C. & Wu, A. (2003). The role transformational lea-dership in enhancing organizational innovation: Hypotheses and some preliminary findings. The Leadership Quarterly, 14, 525-544.
• Johnson, J. L. & O'Leary-Kelly, A. M. (2003). The effects of psychological contract breach and organizational cynicism: Not all social exchange violations are created equal. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(5), 627-647.
• Kabataş, A. (2010). An examination of the relationship between organizatio-nal cynicism and organizational citizenship behavior and a research. (Unpublished master’s thesis). Kocaeli University, Institute of Social Science, Kocaeli, Turkey.
• Kalağan, G. (2009). The relationship between researh assistants’ perceived organizational support and organizational cynicism (Unpublished master’s thesis). Akdeniz University, Institute of Social Science, Antalya, Turkey.
• Kalağan, G. & Güzeller, C. O. (2010). The organizational cynicism le-vels of the teachers. Pamukkale University Journal of Education, 27, 83-97.
• Karadağ, E., Kılıçoğlu, G. & Yılmaz, D. (2014). Organizational cynicism, school culture, and academic achievement: The study of struc-tural equation modeling. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 14(1), 89-113.
• Karasar, N. (2007). Scientific research method. Ankara: Nobel.
• Karip, E. (1998). Transformational leadership. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 16, 443-465.
• Korkmaz, M. (2005). Effects of leadership styles and emotions on teac-hers’ performance. Educational Administration: Theory and Practi-ce, 43, 401-422.
• Kokmaz, M. (2006). The relationship between the personality characters of school managers and their leadership styles. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 46, 199-226.
• Kokmaz, M. (2007). Effects of leadership styles on organizational health. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 49, 57-91.
• Kokmaz, M. (2008). A study of relationship between leadership styles on the characterictics of learning organizations in Turkish public schools. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 53, 75-98.
• Neves, P. (2012). Organizational cynicism: Spillover effects on supervi-sor–subordinate relationships and performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(5), 965–976.
• Nourthouse, P. G. (2010). Leadership: Theory and practice. NY: Sage.
• OED. (2014). Oxford English Dictionary. Retrieved from http://www.oed.com/,
• Özgan, H., Külekçi, E. & Özkan, M. (2012). Analyzing of the relations-hips between organizational cynicism and organizational commitment of teaching staff. International Online Journal of Educati-onal Sciences, 4(1), 196-205.
• Özgener, Ş., Öğüt, A. & Kaplan, M. (2008). A new paradigm in occupational-employer relations: Organizational cynicism, selected to-pics in organizational behavior. Mahmut Özdevecioğlu ve Himmet Kaplan (Ed.), Ankara: İlke.
• Peng, Z. & Zhou, F. (2009). The moderating effect of supervisory conscientiousness on the relationship between employee’s social cynicism and perceived interpersonal justice. Social Behavior and Personality, 37(6), 863-864.
• Pelit, E. & Pelit, N. (2014). Two primary cancer-causing factors in orga-nizations: Mobbing and organizational cynicism. Ankara: Detay.
• Polatcan, M. & Titrek, O. (2014). The relationship between leadership behaviors of school principals and their organizational cynicism attitudes. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 141, 1291 – 1303.
• Robbins, S. & Judge, T. A. (2013). Organizational behavior. (Trs. İ. Er-dem). Ankara: Nobel.
• Sashkin, M. (1986). Participative management remains an ethical imperative. Organizational Dynamics, 14(4), 62–75
• Schriesheim, C. A., Neider , L. L. & Scandura, T. A. (1998). Delegation and leader-member exchange: Main effects, moderators, and measurement issues. The Academy of Management Journal, 41(3), 298-318.
• Schein, E. H. (2004). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco, 3th Edition, Jossey-Bass.
• TDK. (2013). Turkish Language Institute Current Turkish Dictionary. Retrieved from www.tdk.gov.tr,
• Üçok, D. & Torun, A. (2014). The effects of negatıve attıtudes and expectatıonson burnout: a study on cynıcal attıtudes and perceived psychological contract breach. Atatürk University Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 28(1), 231-250.
• Vigoda-Gadot, E. (2006). Leadership style, organizational politics, and employees performance: An empirical examination of two competing models. Personnel Review, 36(5), 661-683.
• Wayne, S. J., Shore, L. M. & Liden, R. C. (1997). Perceived organizational support and leader-member exchange: A social exchange perspective. The Academy of Management Journal, 40(1), 82-111.
• Wu, C., Neubert, M. J. & Yi, X. (2007). Transformational leadership, cohesion perceptions, and employee cynicism about organizational change the mediating role of justice perceptions. The Jour-nal of Applied Behavioral Sciences, 43(3), 327-351.
• Yukl, G. (1989). Managerial leadership: A review of theory and research. Journal of Management, 15(2), 251-289.