Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

SOSYAL KİMLİK TEORİSİ PERSPEKTİFİYLE KRALİÇE ARI SENDROMU

Year 2018, Volume: 8 Issue: 16, 159 - 176, 31.12.2018

Abstract




















Geleneksel olarak iş ortamında erkeğin gölgesinde mücadele
etmeye çalışan kadın çalışanlar, değişen şartlar ve talepkar yapıları sonucu
üst kademelere çıkma şansını elde etmeye başladılar. Ancak bu mücadele ile, kadınların
konumlarını koruma amaçlı şaşırtıcı savunma mekanizmaları ile gündeme gelmeye
başladıkları görülmüştür. Bu çalışmada da günümüz modern organizasyonlarında
yönetici konumunda çalışan bazı kadınlarda görülen hemcinslerinden uzak durma
ve onları desteklememe eğilimi yani Kraliçe
Arı Sendromunun
sebepleri ve arka planı detaylı bir şekilde incelenecektir.
Çalışmada kraliçe arı sendromunu anlamlandırmada, sosyal kimlik teorisi çerçeve
olarak kabul edilmiştir. Kadın yöneticilerin, kendilerine cinsiyetlerinden dolayı
erkek çalışanlar tarafından yaşatılan yetersizlik ve dışlanmışlık hislerini
bastırmak için mensup oldukları sosyal grup, yani diğer kadın çalışanlardan
özellikle kaçtıkları, onlardan uzak durmayı ve onları desteklememeyi tercih
ettikleri savunulmuştur. Böylece de hemcinslerinden oluşan sosyal grubun
sıradan bir üyesi değil, söz konusu grubun özelliklerini taşımayan istisnai bir
üye oldukları algısını uyandırmaya çalıştıkları gözler önüne serilmiştir.
Çalışma kavramsal bir değerlendirme olup, çalışmada söz konusu sendrom iş
ortamındaki kadın yöneticilerin kadın astlarına olan tavırları ile sınırlı
tutulmuştur.

References

  • Aktaş, G. (2013). Feminist söylemler bağlamında kadın kimliği: Erkek egemen bir toplumda kadın olmak. Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 30(1).
  • Brass, D.J. (1985), “Men’s and women’s networks: a study of interaction patterns and influence in an organization”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 327-43.
  • Cevher, E., & Öztürk, U. C. (2015). İş Yaşamında Kadınların Kadınlara Yaptığı Mobbing Üzerine Bir Araştırma. İnsan ve Toplum Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4(4), 860-876.
  • Cohen, G. L., Garcia, J., Apfel, N., & Master, A. (2006). Reducing the racial achievement gap: A social-psychological intervention. Science, 313(5791), 1307–1310. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1128317.

  • Demirtaş, H. A. (2003). Sosyal kimlik kuramı, temel kavram ve varsayımlar. İletişim Araştırmaları, 1(1), 123-144.
  • Derks, B., Ellemers, N., Van Laar, C., & De Groot, K. (2011). Do sexist organizational cultures create the Queen Bee? British Journal of Social Psychology, 50, 519-535.
  • Derks, B., Van Laar, C., & Ellemers, N. (2009). Working for the self or working for the group: How self- versus group affirmation affects collective behavior in low-status groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(1), 183. doi:10.1037/a0013068.
  • Duguid, M. (2011). Female tokens in high-prestige work groups: Catalysts or inhibitors of group diversification? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 116, 104–115. doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.05.009.
  • Eguchi, S. (2009). Negotiating hegemonic masculinity: The rhetorical strategy of “straight-acting” among gay men. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 38, 193–209. doi: 10.1080/17475759.2009.508892.
  • Ellemers, N. (1993). The influence of socio-structural variables on identity management strategies. European review of social psychology, 4(1), 27-57.
  • Ellemers, N. (2014). Women at work: How organizational features impact career development. Policy insights from the behavioral and brain sciences, 1(1), 46-54.
  • Ellemers, N., & Barreto, M. (2009). Collective action in modern times: How modern expressions of prejudice prevent collective action. Journal of Social Issues, 65, 749–768. doi: 10.1111/j.1540- 4560.2009.01621.x.
  • Ellemers, N., Rink, F., Derks, B., & Ryan, M. K. (2012). Women in high places: When and why promoting women into top positions can harm them individually or as a group (and how to prevent this). In A. P. Brief, & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior: An annual series of analytical essays and critical reviews, Vol 32. (pp. 163–187) Vol. 32. doi: 10.1016/j.riob.2012.10.003.
  • Ellemers, N., Spears, R., & Doosje, B. (1997). Sticking together of falling apart: In-group identifica- tion as a psychological determinant of group commitment versus individual mobility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(3), 617–626. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.72.3.617.
  • Faniko, K., Ellemers, N., & Derks, B. (2016). Queen Bees and Alpha Males: Are successful women more competitive than successful men?. European Journal of Social Psychology, 46(7), 903-913.
  • Gini, A. (2001), My Job My Self: Work and the Creation of the Modern Individual, Routledge, London.
  • Greer, G. (2000), The Whole Woman, Anchor, London.
  • Hogg, M. A. ve Vaughan, G. M. (1995). Social psychology: An introduction. London: Prentice Hail.
  • Rindfleish, J. (2000), “Senior management women in Australia: diverse perspectives”, Women in Management Review, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 172-80.
  • Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), The psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall.
  • Turner, J. C. (1991). Social influence. Buckingham: Open University Press.
  • Van Laar, C., Bleeker, D., Ellemers, N., & Meijer, E. (2014). Ingroup and outgroup support for upward mobility: Divergent responses to ingroup identification in low status groups. European Journal of Social Psychology, 44, 563–577. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2046.
  • Van Laar, C., Bleeker, D., Ellemers, N., & Meijer, E. (2014). Ingroup and outgroup support for upward mobility: Divergent responses to ingroup identification in low status groups. European Journal of Social Psychology, 44, 563–577. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2046.
  • Wright, S. C., & Taylor, D. M. (1999). Success under tokenism: Co-option of the newcomer and the prevention of collective protest. British Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 369–396. http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/014466699164220.


QUEEN BEE SYNDROME IN THE LIGHT OF SOCIAL IDENTITY THEORY

Year 2018, Volume: 8 Issue: 16, 159 - 176, 31.12.2018

Abstract

Traditionally,
female employees, struggling to fight in the business environment in the shadow
of men, have begun to get a chance to rise to the upper echelons due to the
changing circumstances and their own demanding natures. However, with this
struggle, it has been seen that women are beginning to come to mind with
amazing defense mechanisms aimed at protecting their position. This study will
examine in details the causes and background of Queen Bee Syndrome, the
tendency of female managers to stay away from and support the females in
contemporary organizations. In the study, the theory of social identity was
accepted as a framework in order to understand queen bee syndrome. It has been
argued that female managers prefer to stay away other female coworkers sharing
the social group with them and they avoid supporting them,  to suppress the feelings of inadequacy and
exclusion imposed by male workers because of their gender. Thus, it is evident
that they are trying to awaken the perception that they are not ordinary
members of the social group of their in group members, but an exception. The
study is a conceptual assessment, and in the study, the queen bee syndrome is
confined to the attitudes of female managers in the work environment to female
subordinates.

References

  • Aktaş, G. (2013). Feminist söylemler bağlamında kadın kimliği: Erkek egemen bir toplumda kadın olmak. Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 30(1).
  • Brass, D.J. (1985), “Men’s and women’s networks: a study of interaction patterns and influence in an organization”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 327-43.
  • Cevher, E., & Öztürk, U. C. (2015). İş Yaşamında Kadınların Kadınlara Yaptığı Mobbing Üzerine Bir Araştırma. İnsan ve Toplum Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4(4), 860-876.
  • Cohen, G. L., Garcia, J., Apfel, N., & Master, A. (2006). Reducing the racial achievement gap: A social-psychological intervention. Science, 313(5791), 1307–1310. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1128317.

  • Demirtaş, H. A. (2003). Sosyal kimlik kuramı, temel kavram ve varsayımlar. İletişim Araştırmaları, 1(1), 123-144.
  • Derks, B., Ellemers, N., Van Laar, C., & De Groot, K. (2011). Do sexist organizational cultures create the Queen Bee? British Journal of Social Psychology, 50, 519-535.
  • Derks, B., Van Laar, C., & Ellemers, N. (2009). Working for the self or working for the group: How self- versus group affirmation affects collective behavior in low-status groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(1), 183. doi:10.1037/a0013068.
  • Duguid, M. (2011). Female tokens in high-prestige work groups: Catalysts or inhibitors of group diversification? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 116, 104–115. doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.05.009.
  • Eguchi, S. (2009). Negotiating hegemonic masculinity: The rhetorical strategy of “straight-acting” among gay men. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 38, 193–209. doi: 10.1080/17475759.2009.508892.
  • Ellemers, N. (1993). The influence of socio-structural variables on identity management strategies. European review of social psychology, 4(1), 27-57.
  • Ellemers, N. (2014). Women at work: How organizational features impact career development. Policy insights from the behavioral and brain sciences, 1(1), 46-54.
  • Ellemers, N., & Barreto, M. (2009). Collective action in modern times: How modern expressions of prejudice prevent collective action. Journal of Social Issues, 65, 749–768. doi: 10.1111/j.1540- 4560.2009.01621.x.
  • Ellemers, N., Rink, F., Derks, B., & Ryan, M. K. (2012). Women in high places: When and why promoting women into top positions can harm them individually or as a group (and how to prevent this). In A. P. Brief, & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior: An annual series of analytical essays and critical reviews, Vol 32. (pp. 163–187) Vol. 32. doi: 10.1016/j.riob.2012.10.003.
  • Ellemers, N., Spears, R., & Doosje, B. (1997). Sticking together of falling apart: In-group identifica- tion as a psychological determinant of group commitment versus individual mobility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(3), 617–626. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.72.3.617.
  • Faniko, K., Ellemers, N., & Derks, B. (2016). Queen Bees and Alpha Males: Are successful women more competitive than successful men?. European Journal of Social Psychology, 46(7), 903-913.
  • Gini, A. (2001), My Job My Self: Work and the Creation of the Modern Individual, Routledge, London.
  • Greer, G. (2000), The Whole Woman, Anchor, London.
  • Hogg, M. A. ve Vaughan, G. M. (1995). Social psychology: An introduction. London: Prentice Hail.
  • Rindfleish, J. (2000), “Senior management women in Australia: diverse perspectives”, Women in Management Review, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 172-80.
  • Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), The psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall.
  • Turner, J. C. (1991). Social influence. Buckingham: Open University Press.
  • Van Laar, C., Bleeker, D., Ellemers, N., & Meijer, E. (2014). Ingroup and outgroup support for upward mobility: Divergent responses to ingroup identification in low status groups. European Journal of Social Psychology, 44, 563–577. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2046.
  • Van Laar, C., Bleeker, D., Ellemers, N., & Meijer, E. (2014). Ingroup and outgroup support for upward mobility: Divergent responses to ingroup identification in low status groups. European Journal of Social Psychology, 44, 563–577. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2046.
  • Wright, S. C., & Taylor, D. M. (1999). Success under tokenism: Co-option of the newcomer and the prevention of collective protest. British Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 369–396. http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/014466699164220.

There are 24 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Makaleler
Authors

Elif Baykal Narcıkara 0000-0002-4966-8074

Publication Date December 31, 2018
Submission Date November 21, 2017
Published in Issue Year 2018 Volume: 8 Issue: 16

Cite

APA Baykal Narcıkara, E. (2018). SOSYAL KİMLİK TEORİSİ PERSPEKTİFİYLE KRALİÇE ARI SENDROMU. Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 8(16), 159-176.
AMA Baykal Narcıkara E. SOSYAL KİMLİK TEORİSİ PERSPEKTİFİYLE KRALİÇE ARI SENDROMU. KTUJSS. December 2018;8(16):159-176.
Chicago Baykal Narcıkara, Elif. “SOSYAL KİMLİK TEORİSİ PERSPEKTİFİYLE KRALİÇE ARI SENDROMU”. Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 8, no. 16 (December 2018): 159-76.
EndNote Baykal Narcıkara E (December 1, 2018) SOSYAL KİMLİK TEORİSİ PERSPEKTİFİYLE KRALİÇE ARI SENDROMU. Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 8 16 159–176.
IEEE E. Baykal Narcıkara, “SOSYAL KİMLİK TEORİSİ PERSPEKTİFİYLE KRALİÇE ARI SENDROMU”, KTUJSS, vol. 8, no. 16, pp. 159–176, 2018.
ISNAD Baykal Narcıkara, Elif. “SOSYAL KİMLİK TEORİSİ PERSPEKTİFİYLE KRALİÇE ARI SENDROMU”. Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 8/16 (December 2018), 159-176.
JAMA Baykal Narcıkara E. SOSYAL KİMLİK TEORİSİ PERSPEKTİFİYLE KRALİÇE ARI SENDROMU. KTUJSS. 2018;8:159–176.
MLA Baykal Narcıkara, Elif. “SOSYAL KİMLİK TEORİSİ PERSPEKTİFİYLE KRALİÇE ARI SENDROMU”. Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, vol. 8, no. 16, 2018, pp. 159-76.
Vancouver Baykal Narcıkara E. SOSYAL KİMLİK TEORİSİ PERSPEKTİFİYLE KRALİÇE ARI SENDROMU. KTUJSS. 2018;8(16):159-76.

KTÜSBD

KTUJSS

Creative Commons Lisansı
Bu eser Creative Commons Atıf 4.0 Uluslararası Lisansı ile lisanslanmıştır.