GERİ DÖNÜŞ: BOOMERANG ÇALIŞAN OLMANIN ARTILARI VE EKSİLERİ

Öz

Esneklik ve hareketlilik ile karakterize edilen çağdaş işgücü piyasalarında, bireylerin bir kuruluştan ayrılıp daha sonra geri döndüğü bumerang istihdam olgusu giderek daha belirgin hale gelmiştir. Bir zamanlar nadir görülen bir durum olarak kabul edilen boomerang istihdamı, yüksek personel devri ve beceri eksikliği yaşayan kuruluşların eski çalışanları yeniden işe almaya daha açık olması nedeniyle artık yetenek yönetiminin stratejik bir boyutu olarak görülmektedir. Önceki araştırmalar ağırlıklı olarak performans sonuçlarına, elde tutma oranlarına ve yeniden işe alım öngörücülerine odaklanarak nicel bir bakış açısı benimserken, geri dönenlerin kendi deneyimlerine sınırlı dikkat gösterilmiştir. Bu çalışma, bumerang çalışanlarının geri dönüş kararlarını nasıl anlamlandırdıklarını, profesyonel ve örgütsel kimliklerini nasıl yeniden inşa ettiklerini ve yeniden girişin hem fırsatlarını hem de zorluklarını nasıl aştıklarını inceleyerek bu boşluğu ele almaktadır. Nitel, keşifsel bir tasarım benimseyen çalışma, imalat, bilgi teknolojisi, eğitim, finans, sağlık ve profesyonel hizmetler dahil olmak üzere çeşitli sektörlerden 17 geri dönüş yapanla yapılan yarı yapılandırılmış görüşmelere dayanmaktadır. Amaçlı örnekleme kullanılarak, katılımcılar en az altı ay süreyle işverenlerinden gönüllü olarak ayrılmış, daha sonra geri dönmüş ve yeniden işe alındıktan sonra en az üç ay çalışmış olmaları kriterine göre seçilmiştir. Creswell ve Poth (2018) tarafından yönlendirilen yorumlayıcı tematik analiz, tekrarlayan örüntüleri belirlemek için kullanılmıştır. Bulgular, dönüş motivasyonlarının kariyer gelişimi fırsatları, örgütsel değişiklikler ve iş yeri aşinalığını içerdiğini ortaya koymaktadır. Dönenler daha hızlı uyum, gelişmiş kariyer sermayesi ve daha güçlü aidiyet gibi faydalar bildirdi, ancak damgalanma, çözülmemiş yapısal sorunlar ve içeriden-dışarıdan gerginlikleri gibi zorluklarla da karşılaştılar. Çalışma, örgütsel davranış ve kariyer gelişimi literatürüne katkıda bulunarak, eski çalışanlar için yeniden katılım stratejilerini yöneten İK profesyonellerine pratik içgörüler sunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Boomerang çalışanlar
• motivasyon
• çalışan kimliği
• psikolojik sözleşme teorisi
• kimlik yeniden yapılandırması

THE JOURNEY BACK: EXPLORING THE PROS AND CONS OF BEING A BOOMERANG EMPLOYEE

Öz

The phenomenon of boomerang employment—where individuals leave an organization and later return—has become increasingly salient in contemporary labor markets characterized by flexibility, mobility, and nonlinearity. Once considered rare, boomerang employment is now regarded as a strategic dimension of talent management, as organizations facing high turnover and skill shortages are more open to rehiring former employees. While prior research has primarily taken a quantitative lens, focusing on performance outcomes, retention rates, and predictors of rehire, limited attention has been paid to the lived experiences of returnees themselves. This study addresses this gap by examining how boomerang employees make sense of their decision to return, reconstruct their professional and organizational identity, and navigate both the opportunities and challenges of re-entry. Adopting a qualitative, exploratory design, the study draws on semi-structured interviews with 17 returnees across diverse sectors, including manufacturing, information technology, education, finance, healthcare, and professional services. Using purposive sampling, participants were selected on the basis of having voluntarily left their employer for at least six months, subsequently returned, and worked a minimum of three months in the re-employed role. Interpretive thematic analysis, guided by Creswell and Poth (2018), was used to identify recurring patterns. Findings reveal that motives for return included career development opportunities, organizational changes, and workplace familiarity. Returnees reported benefits such as faster adjustment, enhanced career capital, and stronger belonging, but also faced challenges including stigma, unresolved structural issues, and insider–outsider tensions. The study contributes to organizational behavior and career development literature, offering practical insights for HR professionals managing re-engagement strategies for former employees.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Boomerang employees
• motivation
• employee identity
• psychological contract theory
• identity reconstruction

Etik Beyan

Bu çalışma, İzmir Ekonomi Üniversitesi Sosyal ve Beşeri Bilimler Etik Kurulu onayı almıştır.

Kaynakça

1. Arthur, M. B., and Rousseau, D. M. (1996). The boundaryless career: A new employment principle for a new organizational era. Oxford University Press.
2. Ashforth, B. (2000). Role transitions in organizational life: An identity-based perspective. Routledge.
3. Bal, P. M., De Lange, A. H., Jansen, P. G. W., and Van der Velde, M. E. G. (2008). Psychological contract breach and job attitudes: A meta-analysis of age as a moderator. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 72(1), 143–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2007.10.005
4. Baruch, Y., & Rousseau, D. M. (2019). Integrating psychological contracts and ecosystems in career studies and management. Academy of Management Annals, 13(1), 84–111. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2016.0103
5. Boyle, K. A. (2022). Career identities and Millennials’ response to the graduate transition to work: Lessons learned. Journal of Education and Work, 35(1), 78-91. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080.2021.2009782
6. Briscoe, J. P., and Hall, D. T. (2006). The interplay of boundaryless and protean careers: Combinations and implications. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 69(1), 4–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2005.09.002
7. Brown, A. D. (2015). Identities and identity work in organizations. International Journal of Management Reviews, 17(1), 20-40. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12035
8. Conway, N., and Briner, R. B. (2005). Understanding psychological contracts at work: A critical evaluation of theory and research. Oxford University Press.

9. Creswell, J. W., and Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Sage.
10. Cropanzano, R., and Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31(6), 874–900. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206305279602
11. Çaylak, P. Ç., Ekşili, N., and Tufan, C. (2023). Turizm sektöründe bumerang yöneticiler: Neden gittiler? Neden döndüler? Journal of Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Economics and Administrative Sciences Faculty, 10(1), 670-687. https://doi.org/10.30798/makuiibf.1220201
12. DeFillippi, R. J., and Arthur, M. B. (1994). The boundaryless career: A competency-based perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15(4), 307–324. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030150403
13. Denyer, K., and Rowson, T. S. (2024). “I’ve finally got my expression”: The anchoring role of identity in changing from an organisation-based career to a protean career path. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 52(3), 367-377. https://doi.org/10.1080/03069885.2022.2045570
14. Dlouhy, K., Froidevaux, A., and Akkermans, J. (2025). Navigating the boomerang mobility process: A conceptual framework and agenda for future research. Applied Psychology, 74(2), e70012. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.70012
15. Gleissner, D. (2025). Protean and boundaryless careers under constraint: The case of European self-initiated expatriates in Japan. Journal of Global Mobility, 1-29.
16. Grohsjean, T., Dokko, G., and Yang, P. (2025). Can you go home again? Performance assistance between boomerangs and incumbent employees. Organization Science, 36(2), 918-939.
17. Guest, D. E. (2004). The psychology of the employment relationship: An analysis based on the psychological contract. Applied Psychology, 53(4), 541-555. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2004.00187.x
18. Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations. Sage.
19. Hom, P. W., Lee, T. W., Shaw, J. D., and Hausknecht, J. P. (2017). One hundred years of employee turnover theory and research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(3), 530–545. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000103
20. Hom, P. W., and Kiazad, K. (2025). New directions for theories for why employees stay or leave. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 12, 185-213.
21. Hall, D. T. (2004). The protean career: A quarter-century journey. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2003.10.006
22. Ibarra, H. (1999). Provisional selves: Experimenting with image and identity in professional adaptation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(4), 764-791. https://doi.org/10.2307/2667055
23. Karadeniz, S., and Şentürk, B. (2023). How welcoming boomerang employees affects employees' perception of organizational justice: An analysis on air transport personnel in Turkey. Journal of HRM, 26(2).
24. Karakuş, Ö. Ü. G., Doğan, D., and Çolak, Ö. G. S. (2024). İş gücünün geri dönüşü: Bumerang çalışanların organizasyonlara katkıları ve zorlukları. Genişletilmiş Bildiri Özetleri Kitabı, 116.
25. Kiazad, K., Restubog, S. L. D., Hom, P. W., Capezio, A., Holtom, B., and Lee, T. (2024). STEMming the tide: New perspectives on careers and turnover. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 45(3), 335-343.
26. Krippendorff, K. (2018). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (4th ed.). Sage.
27. Küçük, H. D. (2019). İşletmelerin bumerang çalışanlara ilişkin işe alım politikalarının mevcut çalışanların bağlılık düzeyine etkisi: İstanbul ve Kocaeli illerinde görgül bir araştırma [Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Marmara Üniversitesi].
28. Laker, B. (2022). The benefits and risks of rehiring a boomerang employee. MIT Sloan Management Review, February 21.
29. Maertz, C. P., and Campion, M. A. (2004). Profiles in quitting: Integrating process and content turnover theory. Academy of Management Journal, 47(4), 566–582. https://doi.org/10.5465/20159602
30. March, J. G., and Simon, H. A. (1958). Organizations. Wiley.
31. Mobley, W. H. (1977). Intermediate linkages in the relationship between job satisfaction and employee turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62(2), 237–240. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.62.2.237
32. Molloy, J. C., and Barney, J. B. (2015). Who captures the value created with human capital? A market-based view. Academy of Management Perspectives, 29(3), 309–325. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2014.0152
33. Phan, A. N. Q., Nguyen, H. H., and Nguyen, T. T. (2025). Vietnamese millennial teachers’ career identity during and after the transition to work. Learning: Research and Practice, 11(2), 225-243. https://doi.org/10.1080/23735082.2025.2451959
34. Pratt, M. G., Rockmann, K. W., and Kaufmann, J. B. (2006). Constructing professional identity: The role of work and identity learning cycles in the customization of identity among medical residents. Academy of Management Journal, 49(2), 235-262. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2006.20786060
35. Richardson, J., and McKenna, S. (2020). An exploration of career sustainability in and after professional sport. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 117, 103314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2019.06.002
36. Robinson, S. L., and Rousseau, D. M. (1994). Violating the psychological contract: Not the exception but the norm. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15(3), 245–259. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030150306
37. Rousseau, D. M. (1995). Psychological contracts in organizations: Understanding written and unwritten agreements. Sage.
38. Rousseau, D. M. (2001). Schema, promise and mutuality: The building blocks of the psychological contract. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74(4), 511–541. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317901167505
39. Saksida, T., Maffie, M., Mihelič, K. K., Culiberg, B., and Merkuž, A. (2026). Casually cynical or trapped? Exploring gig workers’ reactions to psychological contract violation. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 41(2), 165-189. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-10-2023-0624
40. Schalk, R., and Roe, R. E. (2007). Towards a dynamic model of the psychological contract. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 37(2), 167-182. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5914.2007.00330.x
41. Schreier, M. (2012). Qualitative content analysis in practice. Sage.
42. Shipp, A. J., Furst-Holloway, S., Harris, T. B., and Rosen, B. (2014). Gone today but here tomorrow: Extending the unfolding model of turnover to include boomerang employees. Academy of Management Journal, 57(2), 436–457. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12039
43. Snyder, D. G., Stewart, V. R., and Shea, C. T. (2021). Hello again: Managing talent with boomerang employees. Human Resource Management, 60(2), 295-312. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.22051
44. Swider, B. W., Liu, J. T., Harris, T. B., and Gardner, W. L. (2017). Employees on the rebound: Extending the careers literature to include boomerang employment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(6), 890–909. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000200
45. Thomas, D. C., Elron, E., Stahl, G., Ekelund, B. Z., Ravlin, E. C., Cerdin, J. L., Poelmans, S., Brislin, R., Pekerti, A., Aycan, Z., and Maznevski, M. (2010). Cultural intelligence: Domain and assessment. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 10(1), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470595808091787
46. Tomprou, M., Rousseau, D. M., and Hansen, S. D. (2015). The psychological contracts of violation victims: A post-violation model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(4), 561-581. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1997
47. Vantilborgh, T., Bidee, J., Pepermans, R., Willems, J., Huybrechts, G., and Jegers, M. (2014). Effects of ideological and relational psychological contract breach and fulfilment on volunteers’ work effort. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 23(2), 217-230. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2012.740170
48. Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Sage.
49. Zhao, H., Wayne, S. J., Glibkowski, B. C., and Bravo, J. (2007). The impact of psychological contract breach on work-related outcomes: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 60(3), 647–680. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2007.00087.x