Factors Effecting the Decision-Making Processes of School Managers: Ethical Values and Illegitimate Tasks

Year 2023, Volume: 4 Issue: 4, 532 - 557, 28.12.2023

Server Sevil Akyurek , Recep Gündoğan

https://doi.org/10.54733/smar.1369539

Cited By: 1

Abstract

Illegitimate Tasks (ILT), which negatively affect the well-being and professional identity of employees, have never been researched in the context of managers' decision-making processes and ethical values. In this qualitative study, data was collected from 26 school managers working at schools in Turkey through semi-structured interviews. The results are not only for teachers but also for school managers repeatedly experiencing ILT due to the tasks they demanded from the National Education Ministry, the Ministry of Family, the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Youth and Sports, etc. ILT demands from school managers include tasks such as being an investigator, inspecting rehabilitation centers, service inspections, and management tasks. ILT demanded from teachers; vaccination, home visits, service inspections, Project tasks of the Ministry of Youth and Sports, etc. The main reason why ministries demand tasks from the Ministry of National Education is the lack of staff. School administrators try to reduce relational conflicts based on ILT by making decisions to reduce ILT processes. ILT negatively affects decision-making processes and results, and education-training processes by creating an ethical dilemma. The findings and results expanded the ILT literature and educational Leadership literature. Among the Suggestions to reduce MOG; Interviewees explain that the insufficient number of staff at ministries should be increased and all stakeholders in the education process such as teachers, school managers, education policy-makers, students, and parents should receive ethical values training. The results can be generalized by collecting data from managers of different sectors.

Keywords

illegitimate tasks, decision-making, ethical dilemma, school managers

Okul Yöneticilerinin Karar Verme Süreçlerini Etkileyen Faktörler: Etik Değerler ve Meşru Olmayan Görevler

Abstract

Bu araştırmanın amacı Meşru Olmayan Görevlerin (MOG) yöneticilerin karar alma süreçlerine etkilerini ve etik değerler ile bağlantısını anlamaktır. MOG’un çalışanların esenliklerini, mesleki kimliklerini olumsuz etkilediği ortaya çıkarılsa da yöneticilerin karar alma süreçleri ve etik değerler bağlamında hiç araştırılmamıştır. Bu nitel çalışmada yarı-yapılandırılmış mülakat yoluyla Türkiye’deki devlet okullarında çalışan 26 okul müdüründen veri toplanmıştır. Sonuçlar sadece öğretmenlerin değil, okul müdürlerinin de Aile Bakanlığı, Sağlık Bakanlığı, Gençlik ve Spor Bakanlığı vb. diğer devlet kurumlarının MEB’den talep ettikleri görevler nedeniyle silsile yoluyla ve mütemadiyen MOG deneyimledikleri keşfedilmiştir. Okul müdürlerinden talep edilen MOG arasında soruşturmacılık görevi, rehabilitasyon merkezlerini denetleme, servis denetimleri, işletmecilik görevleri gibi görevler bulunmaktadır. Öğretmenlerden talep edilen MOG; aşılama, ev ziyaretleri, servis denetimleri, Gençlik ve Spor Bakanlığı’nın proje görevleri vb.dir. Diğer bakanlıkların MEB’den başlıca görev talep etme nedeni kadro yetersizliğidir. Okul yöneticileri MOG süreçlerini azaltma yönünde aldıkları kararlarla, MOG’a dayalı ilişkisel çatışmaları azaltmaya çalışmaktadırlar. MOG etik ikilem yaratarak yöneticilerin karar verme süreçlerini ve sonuçlarını ve eğitim-öğretim süreçlerini ve çıktılarını olumsuz etkilemektedir. Sonuçlar, MOG yazınını ve eğitim liderliği yazınını genişletmiştir. MOG’un azaltılması için katılımcıların belirttikleri öneriler arasında temel olarak bakanlıklardaki yetersiz kadro sayısının artırılması ve eğitim sürecindeki bütün paydaşların etik değerler eğitimi alması gerektiği vurgulanmaktadır. Farklı sektörlerin yöneticilerinden de veriler toplanarak sonuçlar genelleştirilebilir.

Keywords

meşru olmayan görevler, karar verme, etik ikilem, okul müdürleri

References

• Akyürek, S. S. (2022). Meşru olmayan görevlerin mesleki prestij algısı üzerindeki olumsuz etkileri ve LÜE’nin ılımlaştırıcı etkisi: Türkiye’de çalışan öğretmenler örneği. Öneri Dergisi, 17(57), 268-294. https://doi.org/10.14783/maruoneri.943346
• Akyürek, S. S., & Can, Ö. (2021a). Güncel bir kavram olarak meşru olmayan görevler: Bir yazın incelemesi. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 42, 238-260. https://doi.org/10.30794/pausbed.740233
• Akyurek, S. S., & Can, O. (2021b). Illegitimate tasks and occupational outcomes: The impact of vertical collectivism. Evidence-based HRM, 10(2), 155-173. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBHRM-02-2021-0025
• Amalia, K., Komariah, A., Sumarto, S., & Asri, K. H. (2020). Leadership in Education: Decision-Making in Education. In 3rd International Conference on Research of Educational Administration and Management (ICREAM 2019) (pp. 134-137). Atlantis Press.
• Atkinson, M. (2013). Educational leadership and management in an international school context. Grin Verlag GmbH.
• Berges-Puyó, J. (2022). Ethical leadership in education: A uniting view through ethics of care, justice, critique, and heartful education. Journal of Culture and Values in Education, 5(2), 140-151. https://doi.org/10.46303/jcve.2022.24
• Cao, H., & Chen, Z. (2019). The driving effect of internal and external environment on green innovation strategy-The moderating role of top management’s environmental awareness. Nankai Business Review International, 10(3), 342-361. https://doi.org/10.1108/NBRI-05-2018-0028
• Chabon, S., Morris, J., & Lemoncello, R. (2011). Ethical Deliberation: A Foundation for Evidence-Based Practice. Seminars in Speech and Language, 32(4), 298-308. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0031-1292755
• Chiptin, S. (2021). Understanding decision-making in educational contexts: A case study approach. Emerald Publishing Limited Howard House.
• Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research Design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method approaches. Sage Publications.
• Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage.
• Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage.
• Daft, R. L. (1991). Management. Dryden Publishing.
• Dannals, J. E., Eliran Halali, E., Kopelman, S., & NirHalevy, N. (2022). Power, constraint, and cooperation in groups: The role of communication. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 100, 104283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2022.104283
• DeRue, D. S., & Ashford, S. J. (2010). Who will lead and who will follow? A social process of leadership identity construction in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 35(4), 627-647. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.35.4.zok627
• Eatough, E. M., Meier, L. L., Igic, I., Elfering, A., Spector, P. E., & Semmer, N. K. (2016). You want me to do what? Two daily diary studies of illegitimate tasks and employee well-being. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37(1), 108-127. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2032
• Faupel, S., Otto, K., Krug, H., & Kottwitz, M. U. (2016). Stress at school? A qualitative study on illegitimate tasks during teacher training. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1410. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01410
• Fiedler, F. (1978). The contingency model and the dynamics of the leadership process. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 59-112). Academic Press.
• Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of a leader member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years - Applying a multi-level multi domain perspective. Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), 219-247. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/1048-9843(95)90036-5
• Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1982). Epistemological and methodological bases of naturalistic inquiry. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 30, 233-252. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02765185
• Hitt, M. A., & Collins, J. D. (2007). Business ethics, strategic decision-making, and firm performance. Business Horizons, 50(5), 353-357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2007.04.004
• Homans, G. C. (1961). Social behaviour: Its elementary forms. Harcourt Brace & World, Inc.
• Kıranlı, S., & İlğan, A. (2007). Eğitim örgütlerinde karar verme sürecinde etik. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 8(14), 150-162.
• Kozioł-Nadolna, K., & Beyer, K. (2021). Determinants of the decision-making process in organizations. Procedia Computer Science, 192, 2375-2384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2021.09.006
• Kuruppuge, R. H., & Gregar, A. (2020). Strategic, tactical and operational decisions in family businesses: A qualitative case study. The Qualitative Report, 25(6), 1599-1618. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2020.2945
• Lesinger, F.Y., Altinay, F., Altinay, Z., & Dagli, G. (2017). Examining the role of leadership, trust for school culture and policy. Quality & Quantity, 52, 983-1006. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-017-0553-0
• Liden, R. C., & Maslyn, J. M. (1998). Multidimensionality of leader member exchange: An empirical assessment through scale development. Journal of Management, 24(1), 43-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2063(99)80053-1
• Mihelič, K. K., Zupan, N., & Merkuž, A. (2023). I feel the need – the need for speed! Unreasonable tasks, work pace, psychological detachment and emotional exhaustion. Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance, Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOEPP-07-2021-0185
• Minei, E. M., Eatough, E. M., & Cohen-Charash, Y. (2018). Managing illegitimate task requests through explanation and acknowledgment: A siscursive leadership approach. Management Communication Quarterly, 32(3), 374-397. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318918755506
• Mombourquette, C. (2017). The role of vision in effective school leadership. International Studies in Educational Administration, 45(1), 19-36.
• Muntz, J., Dormann, C., & Kronenwett, M. (2019). Supervisors’ relational transparency moderates effects among employees’ illegitimate tasks and job dissatisfaction: A four-wave panel study. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 28(4), 485-497. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2019.1625888
• Özan, M. B., Polat, H., Gündüzalp, S., & Yaraş, Z. (2017). Etik kodlara ilişkin okul yöneticilerinin görüşleri ve etik kod önerileri. Fırat Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 27(1), 43-52. https://doi.org/10.18069/firatsbed.346429
• Özkalp, E., & Kırel, Ç. (2004). Örgütsel davranış. Anadolu Üniversitesi Yayınları.
• Öztürk, N. A., & Duygulu, E. (2023). Meşru olmayan görevler yazınına dair sistematik bir derleme ve kavramsal model önerisi. Sosyal Mucit Academic Review, 4(2), 133-163. https://doi.org/10.54733/smar.1316552
• Öztürk, S. (2009). Eğitim yöneticisinin karar verme sürecini etkileyen faktörler ve eğitim kurumlarında bir uygulama [Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi] Beykent Üniversitesi.
• Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Sage Publications.
• Pindek, S., Demircioğlu, E., Howard, D. J., Eatough, E. M., & Spector, P. E. (2019). Illegitimate tasks are not created equal: Examining the effects of attributions on unreasonable and unnecessary tasks. Work & Stress, 33(3), 231-246. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2018.1496160
• Semmer, N. E. (2015). Illegitimate tasks as a source of work stress. Work and Stress, 29(1), 32-56. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2014.1003996
• Semmer, N. K., Jacobshagen, N., Meier, L. L., & Elfering, A. (2007). Occupational stress research: The "stress as offense to self" perspective. In J. Houdmont, & S. McIntyre (Eds.), Occupational health psychology: European perspectives on research. Education and practice (pp. 43-60). Castelo da Maia.
• Semmer, N. K., Tschan, F., Meier, L. L., Facchin, S., & Jacobshagen, N. (2010). Illegitimate tasks and counterproductive work behavior. Applied Psychology, 59(1), 70-96. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2009.00416.x
• Shapiro, J. P., & Stefkovic, J. A. (2016). Ethical leadership and decision-making in education: Applying theoretical perspectives to complex dilemmas. Routledge.
• Shapiro, J. P., & Stefkovich, J. A. (2021). Ethical leadership and decision-making in education. Routledge.
• Simon, H. A. (1990). Bounded rationality. In Eatwell, J., Milgate, M., & Newman, P. (Eds.), Utility and probability (pp. 35-47). Palgrave Macmillan.
• Sinnaiah, T., Adam, S., & Mahadi, B. (2023). A strategic management process: The role of decision-making style and organisational performance. Journal of Work-Applied Management, 15(1), 37-50. https://doi.org/10.1108/JWAM-10-2022-0074
• Tajfel, H., & Turner, H. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G Austin, & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7-24), CA: Brooks/Cole.
• Thun, S., Halsteinli, V., & Løvseth, L. (2018). A study of unreasonable illegitimate tasks, administrative tasks, and sickness presenteeism amongst Norwegian physicians: An everyday struggle?. BMC Health Services Research, 18, 407. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3229-0
• Timsal, A., & Awais, M. (2016). Flexibility or ethical dilemma: An overview of the work from home policies in modern organizations around the world. Human Resource Management International Digest, 24(7), 12-15. https://doi.org/10.1108/HRMID-03-2016-0027
• Trevino, L. K. (1986). Ethical decision-making in organizations: A person-situation interactionist model. Academy of Management Review, 11(3), 601-617. https://doi.org/10.2307/258313
• Vargas-Hernández, J. G. (2018). Bounded rationality in decision-making. International Journal of Research in Business Studies and Management, 5(10), 48-57.
• Zeng, X., Huang, Y., Zhao, S., & Zeng, L. (2021). Illegitimate tasks and employees’ turnover intention: A serial mediation model. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 739593. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.739593