Öz Yeterliğin İş Doyumu, Örgütsel Bağlılık, Motivasyon ve İşe Sargınlıktaki Rolü

Öz

Problem Durumu: Örgütler; ekonomi ile ilişkili sermayeye ve her türlü ham maddeye ve teknolojiye sahip olsalar da pozitif tutum ve davranışları olan, nitelikli çalışanlara sahip olmadıkça pek çok zorlukla karşılaşırlar. Yaşayan ve rekabet eden bir örgüt, öz yeterlik inançları olan çalışanlarla oluşturulabilir. Öz yeterlik inançları yüksek düzeyde olan öğretmenler, işlerini yaparken kapasitelerini tam olarak kullanabilir ve zorlu görevleri başarabilir. Bu kişilerin öz yeterlik algılarının yüksek düzeyde olması, işe karşı geliştirdikleri tutum ve davranışlarını da olumlu etkiler. Eğitim örgütlerinde, kritik değişkenlerle ilişkili olduğu bilinen öz yeterlik algısına ilişkin sınırlı sayıda araştırma bulunmaktadır. Ayrıca eğitim örgütlerinde iş doyumu, örgütsel bağlılık, motivasyon ve işe sargınlık değişkenlerinin öz yeterlikle bir arada işlendiği bir araştırmaya rastlanılmamıştır. Bu araştırma alternatif modeller üretilmesine ve kavramlar arasındaki ilişkilerin daha iyi anlaşılmasına olanak sağlamaktadır. Araştırmanın Amacı: Bu çalışmada; öğretmenlerin öz yeterlik inançları ile iş doyumu, örgütsel bağlılık, motivasyon ve işe sargınlık düzeyleri arasındaki ilişkinin açığa çıkarılması amaçlanmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Öz yeterlik
• tutumsal çıktılar
• aracılık etkisi
• performans
• verimlilik

The Role of Self-Efficacy in Job Satisfaction, Organizational Commitment, Motivation and Job Involvement

Öz

Purpose: Self-efficacy belief procures teachers to root for each other’s development in some issues such as ameliorating new methods to conduct much more effective teaching. A school with a high level of self-efficacy teachers makes a great contribution in order to corroborate self-efficacy perceptions of students. When examining it on a model with many attitudinal variables, self-efficacy belief, an important concept in terms of education quality, has been deemed significant so as to propound the effects of self-efficacy more clearly. This study aimed to determine the relationship between self-efficacy and job satisfaction, organizational commitment, motivation and job involvement. Research Method: 321 teachers from 33 schools that were selected randomly with the cluster sampling method from the middle schools in the province of Hatay city center in the 2017-2018 academic year have composed the sampling of this study. Findings: The more teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs increased, the more their job satisfaction, organizational commitment, motivation and job involvement increased. Both job satisfaction and organizational commitment partially mediated the relationship between teachers’ sense of self-efficacy and motivation. Self-efficacy beliefs positively affected teachers’ job involvement through the full mediation effect of job satisfaction and motivation. Organizational commitment and motivation fully mediated the relationship between teachers’ self-efficacy and job involvement. Implications for Research and Practice: It is crucial for school administrators to contribute to amend and strengthen self-efficacy perceptions of teachers if they hope teachers to take positive attitudes towards their work much more frequently and to take the edge off negative attitudes.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• self-efficacy
• attitudinal outputs
• mediation effect
• performance
• productivity

Kaynakça

1. Akbolat, M., & Isik, O. (2012). Saglik calisanlarinin duygusal zeka duzeylerinin motivasyonlarina etkisi [Effects of emotional intelligence levels' health employees on their motivation]. Dpujss, 32(1), 109-124.
2. Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 1-18.
3. Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1996). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: An examination of construct validity. Journal of Vocational Behavior 49, 252–276.
4. Arbuckle, J. (2009). Amos 18 user's guide. Armonk, NY: IBM/SPSS Incorporated.
5. Bandura, A. (2002). Social cognitive theory in cultural context. Journal of Applied Psychology: An International Review, 51, 269–290.
6. Battistelli, A., Galletta, M., Portoghese, I., & Vanderberghe, C. (2013). Mindsets of commitment and motivation: Interrelationships and contribution to work outcomes. The Journal of Psychology, 147(1), 17–48.
7. Bayram, N. (2013). Yapısal esitlik modellemesine giris, AMOS uygulamalari [Introduction to structural equation modeling, AMOS applications]. Bursa: Ezgi Kitabevi.
8. Betoret, F. G., & Artiga, A. G. (2010). Barriers perceived by teachers at work, coping strategies, self-efficacy and burnout. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 13(2), 637-654.

9. Brown, S. P. (1996). A meta-analysis and review of organizational research on job involvement. Psychological Bulletin, 120(2), 235-255.
10. Busch, T., Fallan, L., & Pettersen, A. (1998) Disciplinary differences in job satisfaction, self‐efficacy, goal commitment and organisational commitment among faculty employees in norwegian colleges: An empirical assessment of indicators of performance. Quality in Higher Education, 4(2), 137-157. DOI: 10.1080/1353832980040204
11. Buyukozturk, S. (2012). Sosyal bilimler icin veri analizi el kitabi [Handbook of data analysis for social sciences]. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayincilik.
12. Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS. New York: Routledge.
13. Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Steca, P., & Malone, P. S. (2006). Teachers' self-efficacy beliefs as determinants of job satisfaction and students' academic achievement: A study at the school level. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 473–490.
14. Cetin, F., & Basim, H. N. (2014). Orgutte bireysel farkliliklar, kisilik ve degerler. In U. SIGRI and S. GURBUZ (ed.). Orgutsel davranis (pp.94-123). Istanbul: Beta Yayinlari.
15. Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. W. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment Research & Evaluation, 10(7), 1-9.
16. Demir, S. (2018a). Okul yoneticilerinin motivasyonel dili ile ogretmen oz yeterligi arasindaki iliski üzerine bir calisma [A study on the relationship between school adminisrators’ motivational language and teacher self-efficacy]. Anemon Mus Alparslan Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 6(2), 177-183. DOI: 10.18506/anemon.384848
17. Demir, S. (2018b). The relationship between psychological capital and stress, anxiety, burnout, job satisfaction and job involvement. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 75, 137-154. DOI: 10.14689/ejer.2018.75.8
18. Donmez, B. (2013). Motivasyon [Motivation]. In Servet Ozdemir (ed.). Egitim yonetiminde kuram ve uygulama (pp.185-229). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
19. Gagné, M., Forest, J., Gilbert, M., Aubé, C., Morin, E., & Angela, M. (2010). The motivation at work scale: Validation evidence in two languages. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 70(4), 628-646.
20. Gkolia, A., Belias, D., & Koustelios, A. (2014). Teacher’s job satisfaction and self-efficacy: A review. European Scientific Journal, 10(22), 321-342.
21. Griffin, M. L., Hogan, N. L., Lambert, E. G., Tucker-Gail, K. A., & Baker, D. N. (2010). Job involvement, job stress, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment and the burnout of correctional staff. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 37, 239-255.
22. Guney, S. (2012). Orgutsel davranis [Organizational behaviour]. Istanbul: Nobel Yayincilik.
23. Han, J., & Yin, H. (2016). Teacher motivation: Definition, research development and implications for teachers. Cogent Education, 3, 1-18. DOI: 10.1080/2331186X.2016.1217819
24. Hefferon, K., & Boniwell, I. (2011). Positive psychology: Theory, research and applications (1th edition). New York: Mc Graw-Hill Open International Publishing Ltd.
25. International Personality Item Pool (2012). A scientific collaboratory for the development of advanced measures of personality traits and other individual differences. http://ipip.ori.org/
26. Karakus, M., & Aslan, B. (2009). Teachers’ commitment focuses: A Three dimensioned view. Journal of Management Development, 28(5), 425–438.
27. Karakus, M., Ersozlu, A., Demir, S., Usak, M., & Wildy, H. (2019). A model of attitudinal outcomes of teachers' psychological capital. Psihologija, 52(4), 363–378. Doi: https://doi.org/10.2298/PSI181114008K.
28. Kinichi, A. J., McKee-Ryan, F. M., Schriesheim, C. A., & Carson, K. P. (2002). Assessing the construct validity of the job descriptive index: A review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(1), 14-32.
29. Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: The Guilford Press.
30. Knoop, R. (1995). Relationships among job involvement, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment for nurses. The Journal of Psychology, 129(6), 643-649.
31. Kreitner, R., & Kinichi, A. (2009). Organizational behaviour. New York: Mc Graw-Hill International Edition, Ninth edition.
32. Lunenburg, F. C., & Ornstein, A. C. (2012). Educational administration: Concepts and practices (6th Edition). Boston: Wadsworth Cengage Learning Publishing.
33. Luszczynska, A., Scholz, U., & Schwarzer, R. (2005). The general self-efficacy scale: Multicultural validation studies. The journal of Psychology, 139(5), 439-457.
34. Meydan, C. H., & Sesen, H. (2015). Yapisal esitlik modellemesi, Amos uygulamalari [Structural equation modeling, AMOS applications]. Ankara: Detay Yayincilik.
35. Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human Research Management Review, 1(1), 61-89.
36. Mulvaney, M. A. (2014). Leave programs/time off and work-stress family employee benefits programs, organizational commitment, and self-efficacy among municipal employees. Public Personnel Management, 43(4), 459-489.
37. Murray, K. (2014). Communicate to inspire a guide for leaders. London: Kogan page.
38. Ozkalp, E., & Kirel, C. (2010). Orgutsel davranis [Organizational behaviour]. Bursa: Ekin Basim Yayin Dagitim.
39. Robbins, S. P., Decenzo, D. A., & Coulter, M. (2013). Fundamentals of management: Essential concepts and applications (8th Edition). New Jersey: Pearson Education.
40. Rosario, P., Blas, R., & Valle, A. (2009). Teachers' self-efficacy, motivation and teaching strategies. Escritos de Psicología, 3(1), 1-7.
41. Saygin, O., & Saygin, E. (2016). Liderlik [Leadership]. Istanbul: Karma Kitaplar Yayincilik.
42. Schmitz, G. S., & Schwarzer, R. (2000). Selbstwirksamkeitserwartung von Lehrern: Langsschnitt befunde mit einem neuen Instrument. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 14(1), 12-25.
43. Schermerhorn, J. R., Hunt, J. G., Osborn, R. N., & Uhl-Bien, M. (2011). Organizational behavior. Asia: John Wiley & Sons (Asia) Pte Ltd.
44. Tsai, M., Tsai, C., & Wang, Y. (2011). A study on the relationship between leadership style, emotional intelligence, self-efficacy and organizational commitment: A case study of the Banking Industry in Taiwan. African Journal of Business Management 5(13), 5319-5329. DOI: 10.5897/AJBM10.932
45. Tschannen-Moran, M., Woolfolk Hoy, A., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68, 202-248.
46. Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive concept. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 783−805.
47. Woolfolk, A. E., & Hoy, W. K. (1990). Prospective teachers' sense of efficacy and beliefs about control. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 81−91.
48. Yang, H. L., Kao, Y. H., & Huang, Y. C. (2006). The job self-efficacy and job involvement of clinical nursing teachers. Journal of Nursing Research, 14(3), 237-249.
49. Yilmaz, M., Koseoglu, P., Gercek, C., & Soran, H. (2004). Yabanci dilde hazirlanan bir ogretmen oz-yeterlik olceginin Turkceye uyarlanmasi [Adaptation of a teacher self-efficacy scale to Turkish]. Hacettepe Universitesi Egitim Fakultesi Dergisi, 27, 260-267.