Opinions of School Administrators on Gossip and Gossip Management

Year 2019, Volume: 10 Issue: 17, 787 - 814, 31.03.2019

Faruk Levent , Gözde Türkmenoğlu

https://doi.org/10.26466/opus.518272

Cited By: 5

Abstract

The purpose of
this study was to examine the opinions of school administrators on gossip and
gossip management in schools. This research was designed with phenomenology,
which is one of the qualitative research methods. In order to determine the
study group of the research, maximum variation sampling method, which is one of
the purposeful sampling methods, was used. The study group of the research was
composed of 23 school administrators who work in public schools in the province
of Çorlu, Tekirdağ, Turkey. A semi-structured interview form was developed to
collect data from school administrators in the study group. The data obtained
from the research were analyzed by content analysis technique. According to the
findings, most of the participants explained gossip as negative talk behind
someone’s back and stated that student-teacher relations, weekly course
schedule and professional competences were mostly subject of gossip. In
addition, with respect to gossip management, the participants pointed out the
importance of giving to gossiper a warning, transparency in management and
openness to criticism and communication.

Keywords

School administrator, gossip, gossip management, rumor

Okul Yöneticilerinin Dedikodu ve Dedikodu Yönetimine İlişkin Görüşleri

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, okul
yöneticilerinin okullardaki dedikodu ve dedikodu yönetimine ilişkin görüşlerini
incelemektir. Nitel araştırma yöntemlerinden biri olan olgu bilim
(fenomenoloji) ile desenlenen bu araştırmanın çalışma grubunu belirlemek üzere
amaçlı örnekleme yöntemlerinden maksimum çeşitlilik örneklemesi yöntemi
kullanılmıştır. Araştırmanın çalışma grubunu, Tekirdağ ili Çorlu ilçesinde
bulunan ve devlet okullarında görev yapan 23 okul yöneticisi oluşturmaktadır.
Çalışma grubunda yer alan okul yöneticilerinden görüşme yoluyla veri
toplanabilmesi için yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme formu geliştirilmiştir.
Araştırmada elde edilen veriler içerik analizi tekniği ile çözümlenmiştir. Elde
edilen bulgulara göre katılımcıların çoğu, dedikoduyu kişinin arkasından
olumsuz konuşma olarak tanımlamıştır ve okulda en fazla öğrenci-öğretmen
ilişkileri, haftalık ders programı ve mesleki yeterliliklerin dedikodu konusu
yapıldığını belirtmiştir. Ayrıca katılımcılar, dedikodu yönetimine ilişkin
dedikodu yapanların ikaz edilmesinin, yönetimde şeffaflığın, eleştiriye açıklığın
ve etkili iletişimin önemine dikkat çekmişlerdir.

Keywords

Okul Yöneticisi, dedikodu, dedikodu yönetimi, söylenti

References

• Akande, A., ve Odewale, F. (1994). One more time: How to stop company rumours. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 15(4), 27-30.
• Anderson, B. (1995). Less gossip, better schools. The Education Digest, 61(4), 19-22.
• Aydın, M. (2007). Eğitim yönetimi. Ankara: Hatiboğlu Yayıncılık.
• Ball, S. J., ve Vincent, C. (1998). I heard it on the grapevine: Hot knowledge and school choice. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 19(3), 377-400.
• Başaran, İ. E. (2004). Yönetimde insan ilişkileri: Yönetsel davranış. Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.
• Ben-Ze'ev, A. (1994). The vindication of gossip. In R. F. Goodman, and A. Ben-Ze'ev (Eds) Good gossip (pp.11-24). Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.
• Bowditch, J. L., ve Buono, A. F. (2005). A primer on organizational behavior (6th ed.). New York: Wiley.
• Brock, B. L., ve Grady, M. L. (2009). From difficult teachers to dynamic teams. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
• Burke, L. A., ve Wise, J. M. (2003). The effective care, handling, and pruning of the office grapevine. Business Horizons, 46, 71-76.
• Christensen, L. B., Johnson, R. B., ve Turner, L. A. (2015). Araştırma yöntemleri desen ve analiz. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
• Crampton, S. M., Hodge, J. W., ve Mishra, J. M. (1998). The informal communication network: Factors influencing grapevine activity. Public Personnel Management, 27(4), 569-585.
• Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Coleman, M. (2012). Interviews. In Coleman, M., Briggs, A. R. J. and Morrison, M. (eds.) Research methods in educational leadership and management, (pp. 250-266). London: Sage.
• Çalık, T. (2003). Performans yönetimi: Tanımlar, kavramlar, ilkeler. Ankara: Gündüz Eğitim ve Yayıncılık.
• DiFonzo, N., ve Bordia, P. (1998). A tale of two corporations: Managing uncertainty during organizational change. Human Resource Management, 37, 295-303.
• DiFonzo, N., ve Bordia, P. (2000). How top PR professionals handle hearsay: Corporate rumors, their effects, and strategies to manage them. Public Relations Review, 26(2), 173-190.
• DiFonzo, N., ve Bordia, P. (2006). Rumor in organizational contexts. In Donald A. Hantula (Ed) Advances in theory and methodology in social and organizational psychology. Mahwah, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum Publisher.
• DiFonzo, N., ve Bordia, P. (2007). Rumor psychology: Social and organizational approaches. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
• Dijkstra, M., Beersma, B., ve van Leeuwen, J. (2014). Gossiping as a response to conflict with the boss: alternative conflict management behavior? International Journal of Conflict Management, 25(4), 431-454.
• Drisko, J. W., ve Maschi, T. (2016). Content analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Dunbar, R. I. M. (2004). Gossip in evolutionary perspective. Review of General Psychology, 8(2), 100-110.
• Ellwardt, L., Labianca, G., ve Wittek, R. (2012). Who are the objects of positive and negative gossip at work? A social network perspective on workplace gossip. Social Networks, 34, 193-205.
• Elma, C., ve Demir, K. (2003). Yönetimde çağdaş yaklaşımlar. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
• Erdoğan, İ. (2000). Okul yönetimi ve öğretim liderliği. İstanbul: Sistem Yayıncılık.
• Evans, T. (2000). Understanding gossip in the workplace: A case study (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). California State University Dominguez Hills, Carson.
• Foster, E. K. (2004). Research on gossip: Taxonomy, methods, and future directions. Review of General Psychology, 8(2), 78-99.
• Gabriels, K., ve De Backer, C. J. S. (2016). Virtual gossip: How gossip regulates moral life in virtual worlds. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 683-693.
• Gholipour, A., Kozekanan, S. F., ve Zehtabi, M. (2011). Utilizing gossip as a strategy to construct organizational reality. Business Strategy Series, 12(2), 56-62.
• Gliner, J. A., Morgan, G. A., ve Leech, N. L. (2015). Uygulamada araştırma yöntemleri: Desen ve analizi bütünleştiren yaklaşım. Ankara: Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
• Gillis, T. L. (2006). The IABC handbook of organizational communication: A guide to internal communication, public relations, marketing, and leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
• Granecki, J. W. (2014). Did you hear? Gossip as a manifestation of trait aggression (Unpublished master’s thesis). East Carolina University, Greenville, SC.
• Hernandez, J. R. (2015). How do managers handle organizational rumors effectively, and does emotional intelligence help? A qualitative inquiry. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Capella University, Minneapolis.
• Kakar, U. M. (2013). Workplace gossip as a way of coping with occupational stress (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University at Albany, New York.
• Karasar, N. (2015). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
• Karip, E. (2015). Çatışma yönetimi (6. Baskı). Ankara: PegemA Yayıncılık.
• Kartch, F. (2009). An ethnographic examination of gossip in a small organization: Coalitions and conflict escalation (Unpublished master’s thesis). Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, Illinois.
• Kimmel, A. J. (2004). Rumors and rumor control: A manager's guide to understanding and combatting rumors. Mahwah, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum Publisher.
• Kumar, V. B., ve Gopinadhan, S. (2009). Psychology of human behavior at work. Mumbai: Himalaya Publishing House.
• Kurland, N. B., ve Pelled, L. H. (2000). Passing the word: Toward a model of gossip and power in the workplace. The Academy of Management Review, 25(2), 428-438.
• Levin, J., ve Arluke, A. (1987). Gossip: The inside scoop. New York: Plenum Press.
• Levin, J., Mody-Desbareau, A., ve Arluke, A. (1988). The gossip tabloid as agent of social control. Journalism Quarterly, 65(2), 514-517.
• Litman, J. A., ve Pezzo, M. V. (2005). Individual differences in attitudes towards gossip. Personality and Individual Differences, 38(4), 963-980.
• Merriam, S. B. (2013). Nitel araştırma desen ve uygulama için bir rehber. Ankara: Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
• Mertens, D. M. (2010). Research and evaluation in education and psychology: Integrating diversity with quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Michelson, G., ve Mouly, V. S. (2004). Do loose lips sink ships? Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 9(3), 189-201.
• Noon, M., ve Delbridge, R. (1993). News from behind my hand: Gossip in organizations. Organization Studies, 14(1), 23-36.
• Özden, Y. (2008). Eğitimde yeni değerler. Eğitimde dönüşüm. Ankara: PegemA Yayıncılık.
• Peters, K., ve Kashima, Y. (2015). Bad habit or social good? How perceptions of gossiper morality are related to gossip content. European Journal of Social Psychology, 45(6), 784-798.
• Pezzo, M. V., ve Beckstand, J. W. (2006). A multilevel analysis of rumor transmission: Effects of anxiety and belief in two field experiments. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 28(1), 91-100.
• Poppen, W. A. (1968). Communication problems in the schools: Myths and realities. Peabody Journal of Education, 45(4), 220-224.
• Rai, U., ve Rai, S. M. (2008). Effective communication. Mumbai: Himalaya Publishing House.
• Rayudu, C. S. (2009). Communication. Mumbai: Himalaya Publishing House.
• Robbins, S. P., ve Judge, T. A. (2014). Essentials of organizational behavior (Twelfth Edition). New Jersey: Pearson.
• Rutten, W., Blaas-Franken, J. ve Martin, H. (2016). The impact of (low) trust on knowledge sharing. Journal of Knowledge Management, 20(2), 199-214.
• Saffery, M. (2004). Corporate rumors: Causes, formation, and refutation (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
• Ting-Toomey, S. (1979). Gossip as a communication construct. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED224069 (05.03.2017).
• Turcotte, D. (2012). Gossip and the group: a self-categorization perspective (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, CA.
• Turner, M. M., Mazur, M. A., Wendel, N., ve Winslow, R. (2003). Relational ruin of social glue? The joint effect of relationship type and gossip valence on liking, trust, and expertise. Com-munication Mo- nographs, 70(2), 129-141.
• Türk Dil Kurumu. (2018). Güncel Türkçe sözlük. http://www.tdk.gov.tr adresinden 5 Mart 2017’de elde edilmiştir.
• Walker, K., Kutsyuruba, B., ve Noonan, B. (2011). The fragility of trust in the world of school principals. Journal of Educational Administration, 49(5), 471-494.
• Wert, S. R., ve Salovey, P. (2004). A social comparison account of gossip. Review of General Psychology, 8, 122-137.
• Wittek, R., ve Wielers, R. (1998). Gossip in organizations. Computational ve Mathematical Organization Theory, 4(2), 189-204.
• Yıldırım, A., ve Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.