İŞ TATMİNİ PSİKOLOJİK SAHİPLENME İLİŞKİSİNDE LİDER ÜYE ETKİLEŞİMİNİN DÜZENLEYİCİLİK ETKİSİ

Yıl 2019, Cilt: 21 Sayı: 4, 1119 - 1145, 19.12.2019

Metin Işık , Zeki Uçar

https://doi.org/10.16953/deusosbil.506797

Cited By: 6

Öz

Liderin astlarıyla olan etkileşimine ve
bu etkileşimin kalitesine vurgu yapan lider üye etkileşimi (LEÜ)
teorisi, liderlik araştırmaları için geleneksel liderlik teorilerinden
faklı bir perspektif sunarken, örgüt ve yönetim araştırmalarına sıklıkla konu
olmaktadır. Özellikle de liderin astlarıyla olan etkileşim kalitesinin olumlu
pek çok işgören tutum ve davranışlarını pozitif yönde etkilediği literatür
incelemesinden anlaşılmaktadır. Ancak, LÜE’nin olumlu bilişsel, duygusal,
tutumsal ya da davranışsal faktörleri ne şekilde etkilediği, bu etkilerin
direkt mi? Dolaylı mı? Yoksa farklı bağlamların ilişkileri üzerindeki
düzenleyicilik etkisinden mi(?) kaynaklandığının araştırılması gerekmektedir.
Bu çalışmada, LÜE’in iş tatmini ve psikolojik sahiplik ilişkisi üzerindeki
düzenleyicilik etkisinin araştırılması amaçlanmıştır. Araştırma verileri Bitlis
faaliyet gösteren dört farklı tekstil işletmesi çalışanlarından elde
edilmiştir. Veriler üzerinde güvenilirlik, geçerlilik, faktör ve hiyerarşik
regresyon analizleri yapılmıştır. Araştırmada düzenleyicilik etkisinin düşük,
orta ve yüksek olduğu durumlar Process Makrosu ile analiz edilmiştir. Analizler
sonucunda; iş tatminin psikolojik sahiplenmeyi olumlu yönde yüksek düzeyde
etkilediği ve LÜE’in iş tatmini ve psikolojik sahiplik ilişkisi üzerinde etkisi
olduğu ve bu ilişkiyi kuvvetlendirdiği bulgulanmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

İş Tatmini, Psikolojik Sahiplenme, Lider Üye Etkileşimi, Düzenleyicilik

THE MODERATING EFFECT OF LEADERSHIP MEMBER EXCHANGE ON THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN JOB SATISFACTION AND PSYCHOLOGICAL OWNERSHIP

Öz

Leader-Member
exchange (LMX) theory, which emphasizes the interaction between leader and its
subordinates and the quality of this interaction, while it offers a different perspective
from traditional leadership theories for leadership research, it is often the
subject of organizational and management research. Especially, the
positive effects of the quality of the leader’s interaction with the
subordinates on employee attitudes
and behaviours were determined in the literature review. However,
how and in which direction LMX directly, indirectly or moderately influences
the positive cognitive, affective, attitudinal or behavioural factors still
needs a further explanation. The aim of this study is to investigate the
moderator effect of LMX on the relationship between job satisfaction and
psychological ownership. Data were obtained from four different textile
companies operating in Bitlis, Turkey. Reliability, validity,
exploratory factor and hierarchical regression analyzes were performed on the
data. In the study, the low, medium and high moderator effects were analyzed by
Process Macro. As a result of the analysis; it was found that job satisfaction
had a high positive effect on psychological ownership and LMX had a moderator
effect on job satisfaction and psychological ownership relationship.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Job Satisfaction, Psychological Ownership, Leader-Member Exchange, Moderationg Role

Kaynakça

• Ağırbaş, İ., Çelik, Y., & Büyükkayıkçı, H. (2005). Motivasyon araçları ve iş tatmini: sosyal sigortalar kurumu başkanlığı hastane başhekim yardımcıları üzerinde bir araştırma. Hacettepe Sağlık İdaresi Dergisi, 8(3), 326-349.
• Aiken, L. S., West, S. G., & Reno, R. R. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions, California: Sage.
• Alegre, I., Mas-Machuca, M., & Berbegal-Mirabent, J. (2016). Antecedents of employee job satisfaction: Do they matter?. Journal of Business Research, 69(4), 1390-1395.
• Asatryan, V. S. & Oh, H. (2008). Psychological ownership theory: An exploratory application in the restaurant industry, Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 32, 363-386.
• Avcı, U. & Turunç, Ö. (2012). Dönüşümcü liderlik ve örgüte güvenin kariyer memnuniyetine etkisi: lider-üye etkileşiminin aracılık rolü. Journal of Alanya Faculty of Business/Uluslararası Alanya İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi, 4(2), 45-55.
• Avey, J. B., Avolio, B. J., Crossley, C. D., & Luthans, F (2009). Psychologicalownership: Theoretical extensions, measurement and relation to work outcomes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30(2), 173-191.
• Babin, B. J. & Boles, J. S. (1996). The effects of perceived co-worker involvement and supervisor support on service provider role stress, performance and job satisfaction. Journal of Retailing, 72(1), 57-75.
• Baş, Türker., Keskin, N., & Mert, İ. S. (2010). Lider üye etkileşimi (LMX) modeli ve ölçme aracının Türkçe’de geçerlik ve güvenilirlik analizi. Ege Akademik Bakış Dergisi, 10(3), 1013-1039.
• Batıgün, A. D. & Şahin, N. H. (2006). İş stresi ve sağlık psikolojisi araştırmaları için iki ölçek: A-tipi kişilik ve iş doyumu. Türk Psikiyatri Dergisi, 17(1), 32-45.
• Bernhard, F. & O’driscoll, M. P. (2011). Psychological ownership in small family-owned businesses: leadership style and nonfamily-employees’ work attitudes and behaviors, Group & Organization Management, 36(3), 345-384.
• Bettencourt, L. A. & Brown, S. W. (1997). Contact employees: Relationships among workplace fairness, job satisfaction and prosocial service behaviors. Journal of Retailing, 73(1), 39-61.
• Boies, K. & Howell, J. M. (2006). Leader–member exchange in teams: An examination of the interaction between relationship differentiation and mean LMX in explaining team-level outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(3), 246-257.
• Bolat, O. İ. (2011). Lider-üye etkileşimi ve tükenmişlik ilişkisi. ISGUC The Journal of Industrial Relations and Human Resources, 13(2), 63-80.
• Bolat, O. İ. (2011). Öz yeterlilik ve tükenmişlik ilişkisi: lider-üye etkileşiminin aracılık etkisi. Ege Akademik Bakış, 11(2), 255-266.
• Brown, G., Lawrence, T. B., & Robinson, S. L. (2005). Territoriality in Organizations, Academy of Management Review, 30(3), 577-594.
• Bulgurcu Gürel, E. (2016). Lider-üye etkileşiminin çalışanların tutumları üzerindeki etkisi: Ampirik bir araştırma. Journal of International Social Research, 9(43), 1736-1743.
• Cevrioğlu, E. (2007). Lider-üye etkileşimi ile bireysel ve örgütsel sonuçlar arasındaki ilişki: Görgül bir inceleme. (Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi), Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Afyonkarahisar.
• Craney, T. A. & Surles, J. G. 2002. Model-dependent variance inflation factor cutoff values. Quality Engineering, 14(3), 391-403.
• Çekmecelioğlu, H. G. & Ülker, F. (2014). Lider-üye etkileşimi ve çalışan tutumları üzerindeki etkisi: eğitim sektöründe bir araştırma. Kocaeli Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 28, 35-58.
• Çiçek, B. & Deniz, M. (2017). Liderlere ve organizasyonlara değer temelli yaklaşım: değer merkezli liderlik ve etik iklim ilişkisi üzerine bir araştırma. İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi, 9(2), 150-168
• Dansereau Jr, F., Graen, G., & Haga, W. J. (1975). A vertical dyad linkage approach to leadership within formal organizations: A Longitudinal investigation of the role making process. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 13(1), 46-78.
• Deluga, R. J. & Perry, J. T. (1994). The role of subordinate performance and ingratiation in leader-member exchanges. Group & Organization Management, 19(1), 67-86.
• Dienesch, R. M. & Liden, R. C. (1986). Leader-member exchange model of leadership: a critique and further development. Academy of Management Review, 11(3), 618-634.
• Dionne, L. (2000). Leader-member exchange (LMX): level of negotiating latitude and job satisfaction. Universite de Moncton, Shippagan, NB.
• Erdogan, B., & Enders, J. (2007). Support from the top: Supervisors' perceived organizational support as a moderator of leader-member exchange to satisfaction and performance relationships. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(2), 321-330.
• Erdogan, B., Liden, R. C., & Kraimer, M. L. (2006). Justice and leader-member exchange: The moderating role of organizational culture. Academy of Management Journal, 49(2), 395-406.
• Etzioni, A. (1991). The socio-economics of property. F. W. Rudmin (Ed.), İçinde “To Have Possessions: A Hand Book on Ownership and Property”, Special Issue, Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 6(6), 465-468.
• Fisk, G. M. & Friesen, J. P. (2012). Perceptions of leader emotion regulation and LMX as predictors of followers' job satisfaction and organizational citizenship behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(1), 1-12.
• Freeman, R. B. (1977). Job satisfaction as an economic variable, Natıonal Bureau Of Economıc Research, (1737 Cambridge Street Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138) 1-14.
• Gerstner, C. R. & Day, D. V. (1997). Meta-analytic review of leader–member exchange theory: Correlates and construct issues Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(6), 827-844.
• Ghafoor, A., Qureshi, T. M., Khan, M. A., & Hijazi, S. T. (2011). Transformational leadership, employee engagement and performance: Mediating effect of psychological ownership. African Journal of Business Management, 5(17), 7391-7403.
• Giri, V. N. & Kumar, B. P. (2010). Assessing the impact of organizational communication on job satisfaction and job performance. Psychological Studies, 55(2), 137-143.
• Golden, T. D., & Veiga, J. F. (2008). The impact of superior–subordinate relationships on the commitment, job satisfaction, and performance of virtual workers. Leadership Quarterly, 19, 77–88.
• Göksel, A. & Aydıntan, B. (2012). Lider-üye etkileşimi düzeyinin örgütsel bağlılık üzerine etkisi: Görgül bir araştırma. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(2), 247-271.
• Graen, G.B., Uhl-Bien, M., (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective, Published in Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), 219-247.
• Green, S. G., Anderson, S. E., & Shivers, S. L. 1996. Demographic and organizational influences on leader-member exchange and related work attitudes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 66, 203–214.
• Gürbüz, S. & Ayhan, Ö. (2017). Lidere yakın olmanın dayanılmaz hafifliği: lider-üye etkileşimi, görev performansı, tecrübe ve terfi edebilirlik arasındaki ilişkilerin testi. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 32(80), 1-19.
• Hagedorn, L. S. (1996). Wage equity and female faculty job satisfaction: The role of wage differentials in a job satisfaction causal model. Research in Higher Education, 37(5), 569-598.
• Hayes, A. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling. In: University of Kansas, KS.
• Hoppock, R. H., (1935). Job Satisfaction. New York: Harper and Brothers.
• House, R. J. & Javidan, M. 2004. Overview of Globe. R. J. House, P. J. Hanges, M. Javidan, P. W. Dorfman, & V. Gupta (Eds.), İçinde Culture, leadership, and organizations: The Globe study of 62 societies: 9-28. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Işık, M. (2016). Kurumsal itibar algısının iş tatminine etkisinde örgütsel özdeşleşmenin aracı rolü ve bir araştırma. (Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi) Dicle Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Diyarbakır.
• İşcan, Ö. F. & Timuroğlu, M. K. (2007). Örgüt kültürünün iş tatmini üzerindeki etkisi ve bir uygulama. Atatürk Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 21(1), 119-135.
• Janssen, O. & Van Yperen, N. W. (2004). Employees’ goal orientations, the quality of leader-member exchange, and the outcomes of job performance and job satisfaction. Academy of Management Journal, 47(3), 368-384.
• Kanbur, A, & Kanbur, E. (2015). Lider-üye etkileşiminin örgütsel sinizme etkisi: algılanan içsellik statüsünün aracılık rolü. Zeitschrift für die Welt der Türken/Journal of World of Turks, 7(2), 193-216.
• Lambert, E. G., Minor, K. I., Wells, J. B., & Hogan, N. L. (2016). Social support’s relationship to correctional staff job stress, job involvement, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment. The Social Science Journal, 53(1), 22-32.
• Lee, E. K. & Ji, E. J. (2018). The moderating role of leader–member exchange in the relationships between emotional labor and burnout in clinical nurses. Asian Nursing Research, 12(1), 56-61.
• Lee, J. A. & Lee, G. J. (2016). The relationship among leader-member exchange (lmx), empowerment, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and customer orientation: focused on the jeju-air. Journal of the Korean Society for Quality Management, 44(4), 983-997.
• Liao, C., Wayne, S. J., Liden, R. C., & Meuser, J. D. (2017). Idiosyncratic deals and individual effectiveness: The moderating role of leader-member exchange differentiation. The Leadership Quarterly, 28(3), 438-450.
• Liden, R. C. & Maslyn, J. M. (1998). Multidimensionafity of leader-member exchange: An empirical assessment through scale development. Journal of Management, 24(1), 43-72.
• Liden, R. C., Sparrowe, R. T., & Wayne, S. J. (1997). Leader-member exchange theory: the past and potential for the future. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 15, 47-120.
• Liu, J., Wang, H., Hui, C., ve Lee, C. (2012). Psychological ownership: How having control matters. Journal of Management Studies, 49(5), 869-895.
• Locke, E. A., (1976). The Nature and Causes of Job Satisfaction, in MarvinDunnette, Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Chicago: Rand McNally.
• Lu, H., While, A. E., & Barriball, K. L. (2005). Job satisfaction among nurses: a literature review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 42(2), 211-227.
• Major, D. A., Kozlowski, S. W. J., Chao, G. T., & Gardner, P. D. (1995). A longitudinal investigation of newcomer expectations, early socialization outcomes, and the moderating effects of role development factors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 418–431.
• Mayhew, M. G., Ashkanasy, N. M., Bramble, T., & Gardner, J. (2007). A study of the antecedents and consequences of psychological ownership in organizational settings, TheJournal of Social Psychology, 147(5), 477- 500.
• Md-Sidin, S., Sambasivan, M., & Muniandy, N. (2010). Impact of psychological ownership on the performance of business school lecturers. Journal of Education for Business, 85(1), 50-56.
• Miles, E.W., Patrick, S. ve King, W.C. (1996). Job level as a systemic variable in predicting the relationship between supervisory communication and satisfaction. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 69, 277-292.
• Mitchell, T.R., Larson JR., J.R. (1987). People in organizations: An Introduction to Organizational Behavior. Third edition, Singapore: McGrawHill.
• Nahrgang, J. D., Morgeson, F. P., & Ilies, R. (2009). The development of leader– member exchanges: Exploring how personality and performance influence leader and member relationships over time. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 108, 256–266.
• Nikolić, M., Vukonjanski, J., Nedeljković, M., Hadžić, O., & Terek, E. (2013). The impact of internal communication satisfaction dimensions on job satisfaction dimensions and the moderating role of LMX. Public Relations Review, 39(5), 563-565.
• Northouse, P.G. (2007). Leadership: theory and practice. Third edition, California: Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications.
• Ötken, A. B. (2015). Algılanan örgütsel destek ve psikolojik sahiplenme arasındaki ilişki ve bu ilişkide örgütsel adaletin rolü, Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi Ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 33(2), 113-140.
• Özler, H., Yılmaz, A. & Özler, D. (2008). Psychological ownership: an empirical study on its antecedents and impacts upon organizational behaviors, Problems and Perspectives in Management, 6(3), 38-47.
• Pagán, R. (2013). Job satisfaction and domains of job satisfaction for older workers with disabilities in Europe. Journal of Happiness Studies, 14(3), 861-891.
• Pierce, J. L. & Furo, C. A. (1991). Employee ownership: implications for management, Organizational Dynamics, 18(3): 32-43.
• Pierce, J. L. & Rodgers, L. (2004). The psychology of ownership and worker-owner productivity, Group & Organization Management, 29(5), 588-613.
• Pierce, J. L., Kostova, T., & Dirks, K. T. (2003). The state of psychological ownership: integrating and extending a century of research, Review of General Psychology, 7(1), 84.
• Pierce, J. L., Kostova, T., & Dirks, K. T. (2001). Toward a theory of psychological ownership in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 26(2), 298-310.
• Seo, G. D. & Lee, J. E. (2014). The influence of empowerment, LMX, psychological ownership & psychological capital, customer orientation on hotel employees behavior. Journal of Tourism & Leisure Research, 26(9), 5-24.
• Sieger, P., Bernhard, F., & Frey, U. (2011). Affective commitment and job satisfaction among non-family employees: Investigating the roles of justice perceptions and psychological ownership. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 2(2), 78-89.
• Sparrowe, R. T. & Liden, R. C. (1997). Process and structure in leader-member exchange. Academy of Management Review, 22(2), 522-552.
• Spector, P. (1996). Industrial and organizational psychology: Research and practice. New York: John Wiley.
• Spector, P. E. (1997). Job satisfaction: Application, assessment, causes, and consequences. London: Sage.
• Stander, M. W. & Coxen, L. (2017). A Review of the Relationship Between Positive Leadership Styles and Psychological Ownership. In Theoretical Orientations and Practical Applications of Psychological Ownership (ss. 37-60). Cham: Springer.
• Steiner, D. D. (1988). Value perceptions in leader-member Exchange. The Journal of Social Psychology, 128(5), 611-618.
• Stepina, L. P., Perrewe, P. L., Hassell, B. L., & Harris, J. R. (1991). A comparative test of the independent effects of interpersonal, task, and reward domains on personal and organizational outcomes. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality, 6, 93–104.
• Sunal, A. B., Sunal, O., & Yasin, F. (2011). A comparison of workers employed in hazardous jobs in terms of job satisfaction, perceived job risk and stress: Turkish jean sandblasting workers, dock workers, factory workers and miners. Social Indicators Research, 102(2), 265-273.
• Süral Özer, P., Topaloğlu, T. ve Timurcanday Özmen, Ö. N. (2013). Destekleyici örgüt ikliminin, psikolojik sermaye ile iş doyumu ilişkisinde düzenleyici etkisi. Ege Academic Review, 13(4), 437-447.
• Şahin, F. (2011). Lider-üye etkileşimi ile işten ayrılma niyeti arasındaki ilişki üzerinde cinsiyetin etkisi. Ege Akademik Bakış, 11(2), 277-288.
• Uğurluoğlu, Ö., Şantaş, F., & Demirgil, B. (2013). Lider-üye etkileşimi ve tükenmişlik ilişkisi: Hastanelerde bir uygulama. Hacettepe Sağlık İdaresi Dergisi, 16(1), 1-21.
• Van Dyne, L. & Pierce, J. L. (2004). Psychological ownership and feelings of possession: Three field studies predicting employee attitudes and organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 439-459.
• Vandewalle, D., Van Dyne, L., & Kostova, T. (1995). Psychological ownership: An empirical examination of its consequences, Group & Organization Management, 20(2), 210-226.
• Volmer, J., Niessen, C., Spurk, D., Linz, A., & Abele, A. E. (2011). Reciprocal relationships between leader–member exchange (LMX) and job satisfaction: A cross‐lagged analysis. Applied Psychology, 60(4), 522-545.
• Volmer, J., Spurk, D., & Niessen, C. (2012). Leader–member exchange (LMX), job autonomy, and creative work involvement. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(3), 456-465.
• Wayne, S. J., Shore, L. M., & Liden, R. C. (1997). Perceived organizational support and leader-member exchange: A social exchange perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 40(1), 82-111.
• Wen, X., Gu, L., & Wen, S. (2018). Job satisfaction and job engagement: Empirical evidence from food safety regulators in Guangdong, China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 208(2019), 999-1008.
• Yıldız, B. & Yıldız H. (2015). The effect of servant leadership on psychological ownership: The moderator role of perceived organizational support. Journal Of Global Strategıc Management, Sayı: 9, 65-77.
• Yıldız, B., Alpkan L., Ateş H., Sezen B. (2015). Determinants of constructive deviance: the mediator role of psychological ownership. Internatıonal Busıness Research, 8, 107-121.
• Brimhall, K. C., Lizano, E. L., & Barak, M. E. M. (2014). The mediating role of inclusion: A longitudinal study of the effects of leader–member exchange and diversity climate on job satisfaction and intention to leave among child welfare workers. Children and Youth Services Review, 40, 79-88.
• Çalışkan, S. C. (2009). Turizm işletmelerinde liderlik tarzları ve lider-üye etkileşimi kalitesi (LÜE) üzerine bir çalışma. Trakya Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 11(2), 219-241.
• Çiçek, B. & Almalı, V. (2017). E-Devlet Uygulamalarının lider üye etkileşimi üzerindeki etkisi. Route Educational and Social Science Journal, 4(8), 455-467.
• Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., & Tatham, R.L. 2006. Multivariate data analysis (6 ed.). NJ: Upper Saddle River, Pearson Prentice Hall.
• Harris, K. J., Wheeler, A. R., & Kacmar, K. M. (2011). The mediating role of organizational job embeddedness in the LMX–outcomes relationships. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(2), 271-281.
• Liden, R. C. Erdogan, B., Wayne, S. J., & Sparrowe, R. T. (2006). Leader‐member exchange, differentiation, and task interdependence: implications for individual and group performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 27(6), 723-746.
• Pierce, J. L., O’driscoll, M. P., & Coghlan, A. M. (2004). Work environment structure and psychological ownership: the mediating effects of control. The Journal of Social Psychology, 144(5): 507-534.
• Uçar, Z. (2015). Kontrol algısı-psikolojik sahiplenme ilişkisi üzerinde algılanan aşırı vasıflılığın düzenleyicilik etkisi. International Journal of Applied Business and Management Studies, 1(1), 40-58.
• Yoon, J. & Thye, S. R. (2002). A dual process model of organizational commitment: Job satisfaction and organizational support. Work and Occupations, 29(1), 97-124.
• Yuen, K. F., Loh, H. S., Zhou, Q., & Wong, Y. D. (2018). Determinants of job satisfaction and performance of seafarers. Transportation Research Part A: Policy And Practice, 110, 1-12.
• Zeynel, E. (2018). Lider üye etkileşiminin iş tatmini üzerindeki etkilerinin incelenmesine yönelik bir araştırma. 17. Uluslararası Katılımlı İşletmecilik Kongresi Bildiri Kitapçığı, ss-119-133, 17. Uluslararası Katılımlı İşletmecilik Kongresi, İzmir.