Kadın Çalışanlarda Cam Tavan Sendromu İle Sessiz İstifa Arasındaki İlişkide Örgütsel Adaletin Rolü: Bir Alan Araştırması

Öz

Çalışma yaşamında kadın çalışanların kariyer ilerlemesini etkileyen görünmez engeller ile örgütsel süreçlere ilişkin algılar, işten ayrılma niyetleri ve sessiz istifa eğilimleri üzerinde belirleyici bir rol oynamaktadır. Bu çerçevede, Balıkesir ilinde faaliyet gösteren özel bankalarda çalışan kadın personelin cam tavan algılarının sessiz istifa davranışları üzerindeki etkisinde örgütsel adaletin aracı rolü incelenmiştir. Bu amaç doğrultusunda, farklı özel bankalarda görev yapan toplam 548 kadın çalışan üzerinde anket uygulaması gerçekleştirilmiştir. Verilerin analizinde IBM AMOS, IBM SPSS ve SPSS Process Macro paket programları kullanılmıştır. Değişkenler arasındaki ilişkilere bakıldığında, cam tavan algısı ile sessiz istifa arasında pozitif ve anlamlı; cam tavan algısı ile örgütsel adalet arasında negatif ve anlamlı; örgütsel adalet ile sessiz istifa arasında ise negatif ve anlamlı ilişkiler tespit edilmiştir. Hipotezlerin testi sonucunda, cam tavan algısının sessiz istifa üzerinde anlamlı bir etkisinin bulunduğu, cam tavan algısının örgütsel adaleti anlamlı biçimde azalttığı ve örgütsel adaletin sessiz istifa üzerinde anlamlı düzeyde negatif bir etki oluşturduğu belirlenmiştir. Ayrıca Process Macro aracılık analizi sonucunda, cam tavan algısının sessiz istifa üzerindeki etkisinde örgütsel adaletin kısmi aracı rol üstlendiği ortaya konulmuştur. Araştırma, bankacılık sektöründe kadın çalışanların kariyer engelleri ve örgütsel adalet algılarının sessiz istifa davranışlarını nasıl şekillendirdiğine yönelik literatüre katkılar sunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Cam tavan sendromu
• Örgütsel adalet
• Sessiz İstifa
• Kadın banka çalışanları

The Role of Organizatıonal Justice In The Relationshıp Between The Glass Ceiling Syndrome And Silent Resignation Among Female Employees: A Field Study

Öz

Invisible barriers that hinder women’s career advancement and their perceptions of organizational processes play a decisive role in shaping turnover intentions and tendencies toward quiet quitting. Within this context, the mediating role of organizational justice in the relationship between glass ceiling perceptions and quiet quitting behavior among female employees working in private banks in the province of Balıkesir was examined. For this purpose, a survey was administered to a total of 548 women employed across various private banking institutions. IBM AMOS, IBM SPSS, and the SPSS Process Macro packages were utilized for data analysis. The results indicated a positive and significant relationship between glass ceiling perception and quiet quitting, a negative and significant relationship between glass ceiling perception and organizational justice, and a negative and significant relationship between organizational justice and quiet quitting. Hypothesis testing further revealed that glass ceiling perception significantly increases quiet quitting, significantly reduces organizational justice, and that organizational justice exerts a significant negative effect on quiet quitting. Additionally, the Process Macro mediation analysis demonstrated that organizational justice partially mediates the effect of glass ceiling perception on quiet quitting. Overall, the study contributes to the literature by elucidating how career barriers and perceptions of organizational justice shape quiet quitting behaviors among women working in the banking sector.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Glass ceiling syndrome
• Organizational justice
• Quiet quitting
• Female bank employees

Kaynakça

1. Akgül, A. ve Çevik, O. (2005). İstatiksel analiz teknikleri SPSS’te işletme yönetimi uygulamaları. Ankara: Emek Ofset.
2. Akinola, D. A. ve Naidoo, P. (2024). Breaking the glass ceiling: An examination of gendered barriers in school leadership progression in South Africa. Cogent Social Sciences, 10(1), 1–19.
3. Alain, C., Rostin, M. M., Joël, K. N., Hypolite, M., Donatien, K., Koffi, T. ve diğerleri (2021). Development and validation of a customer satisfaction measuring instrument with laboratory services at the University Hospital of Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). American Journal of Industrial and Business Management, 11, 481-498.
4. Alias, M. ve Rasdi, R. M. (2015). Organizational predictors of workplace deviance among support staff. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 172, 126-133.
5. Anand, A., Doll, J. ve Ray, P. (2024). Drowning in silence: a scale development and validation of quiet quitting and quit firing. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 32(4), 721-743.
6. Arar, T., Çetiner, N. ve Yurdakul, G. (2023). Quiet quitting: Building a comprehensive theoretical framework. Akademik Araştırmalar ve Çalışmalar Dergisi (AKAD), 15(28), 122-138.
7. Babic, A. ve Hansez, I. (2021). The glass ceiling for women managers: Antecedents and consequences for work-family interface and well-being at work. Frontiers in psychology, 12, 618250.
8. Barreto, M., Ryan, M. ve Schmitt, M. (2009). The glass ceiling in the 21st century: Understanding barriers to gender equality. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

9. Bhatti, K. O. (2024). Examining the multifaceted nature of organizational justice: An integrated analysis using factor analysis and artificial neural networks. bmij, 12(1), 198–217. https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v12i1.2367
10. Blau, P. M. (1964). Justice in social exchange. Sociological inquiry, 34(2).
11. Bouguerra, N. E. H. (2024). The Impact of Glass Ceiling Determinants on Organizational Justice in the Public Sector A Case Study of Several Public Institutions in the Wilaya of Ghardaia in Algeria. Review of Economic and Business Studies (REBS), (34), 53-71.
12. Cashion, H. (2024). The Struggle for Work-Life Balance: Quiet Quitting as a Hyper-Individualized Tool of Neoliberal Resistance, Master's thesis, University of Arkansas.
13. Ceyhan Bor, S. ve Özbağış, A. (2023). Cam tavan sendromunun işten ayrılma niyeti üzerinde örgütsel bağlılığın aracı rolü: Bir alan çalışması. Biga İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 4(1), 1–19.
14. Chen, S., Chen, Y. ve Jebran, K. (2023). Beyond the glass ceiling: Informal gender-based status hierarchy and corporate misconduct. Journal of Business Research, 169, 114141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.114141
15. Choi, E. ve Yoon, S. (2014). A study on the impact of perceived glass ceiling, organizational justice and job satisfaction among female airline employees. In 4th International Conference on Tourism Research, In Conference Proceedings,Vol. 2, pp. 51-57.
16. Çokluk, Ö. S., Şekercioğlu, G. ve Büyüköztürk, S. (2016). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik: SPSS ve LİSREL Uygulamaları. Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
17. Colquitt, J. A. (2001). On the dimensionality of organizational justice: a construct validation of a measure. Journal of applied psychology, 86(3), 386.
18. Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O. ve Ng, K. Y. (2001). Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 425-445.
19. Cook, I. (2021). Who is driving the great resignation. Harvard Business Review, 15, 56-57.
20. Cotter, D. A., Hermsen, J. M., Ovadia, S. ve Vanneman, R. (2001). The glass ceiling effect. Social Forces, 80(2), 655–681.
21. Cropanzano, R., Bowen, D. E., & Gilliland, S. W. (2007). The management of organizational justice. Academy of Management Perspectives, 21(4), 34–48.
22. Deniz, V. (2025). Örgütsel adalet ve sessiz istifa: göreli yoksunluk teorisine dayalı bir aracılık modeli. Dicle Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 15(29), 446-474.
23. Eagly, A. H. ve Carli, L. L. (2007). Women and the labyrinth of leadership. Harvard Business Review, 85(9), 62–71.
24. Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383.
25. Emerson, R. M. (1962). Power-dependence relations. American Sociological Review, 27(1), 31-41.
26. Emerson, R. M. (1972). Exchange theory, part I: A psychological basis for social exchange. In J. Berger, M. Zelditch Jr. ve B. Anderson (Ed.), Sociological Theories in Progress (Vol. 2, pp. 38-57). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
27. Fontinelle, A. (2022). The great resignation. Investopedia. Erişim adresi: https://www.investopedia.com/the-great-resignation-5199074
28. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 382–388. doi: org/10.2307/3150980
29. Greenberg, J. (1987). A taxonomy of organizational justice theories. Academy of Management Review, 12(1), 9–22.
30. Greenberg, J. (1990). Organizational justice: Yesterday, today and tomorrow. Journal of Management, 16(2), 399–432.
31. Gürbüz, S. ve Şahin, F. (2017). Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
32. Hair Jr. F. J., Black C. W., Babin J. B., Anderson E. R. ve Tatham L.R. (2006). Multivariate data analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall Inc.
33. Hair Jr., J. F., Hult, G. M., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., Danks, N. P. ve Ray, S. (2021). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) using R: A workbook. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80519-7
34. Hamad, D. A. A. (2024). The role of conscious leadership in reducing quiet quitting: An exploratory study of the opinions of a sample of employees in the General Directorate of Education in Salah Al-Din Governorate. South Asian Research Journal of Business and Management, 6(6), 377–387. https://doi.org/10.36346/sarjbm.2024.v06i06.004
35. Hamouche, S., Koritos, C. ve Papastathopoulos, A. (2023). Quiet quitting: Relationship with other concepts and implications for tourism and hospitality. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 35(12), 4297–4312.
36. Haşıloğlu, S. B., Baran, T., & Aydın, O. (2015). Pazarlama araştırmalarındaki potansiyel problemlere yönelik bir araştırma: Kolayda örnekleme ve sıklık ifadeli ölçek maddeleri. Pamukkale İşletme ve Bilişim Yönetimi Dergisi, 2(1), 19-28.
37. Hayes, A. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling.
38. Hayes, A. F. (2022). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (3rd ed.). Guilford Press.
39. Herzberg, F. (1966). Work and the nature of man. Cleveland, OH: World Publishing.
40. Hymowitz, C. ve Schellhardt, T. D. (1986). The glass ceiling: Why women can’t seem to break the invisible barrier that blocks them from the top jobs. The Wall Street Journal, 24 Mart, 1–16.
41. İyigün, N. Ö. (2012). Örgütsel adalet: Kuramsal bir yaklaşım. İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 11(21), 49–64.
42. Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 692–724.
43. Karthick, K. K., Yadav, M. J., Radadiya, V. A., Munjal, V., Joseph, C. ve Janaswamy, V. (2024). The role of organizational justice in enhancing employee engagement and well-being. Journal of Informatics Education and Research, 4(3), 3936–3947.
44. Kausar, S., Arshad, R. ve Munir, I. (2024). Remote work and employee engagement in the post COVID-19 era: A qualitative study. Bulletin of Business and Economics, 13(2), 1059–1064. https://doi.org/10.61506/01.00449
45. Kekeç, H. N. (2025). Örgütsel adaletin sessiz istifa üzerindeki etkisi: Üniversite hastanesi örneği, Yüksek lisans tezi, Marmara Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, YÖK Ulusal Tez Merkezi Veri Tabanı.
46. Keough, S. M. (2006). A social exchange perspective of intention to quit, Doctoral dissertation, Mississippi State University.
47. Kim, H. Y. (2013). Statistical notes for clinical researchers: assessing normal distribution (2) using skewness and kurtosis. Restorative dentistry & endodontics, 38(1), 52-54.
48. Klotz, A. C. ve Bolino, M. C. (2022, Eylül 15). When quiet quitting is worse than the real thing. Harvard Business Review. Erişim adresi: https://hbr.org/2022/09/when-quiet-quitting-is-worse-than-the-real-thing
49. Kniffin, K. M., Narayanan, J., Anseel, F., Antonakis, J., Ashford, S. P., Bakker, A. B., … Vugt, M. van. (2021). COVID-19 and the workplace: Implications, issues, and insights for future research and action. American Psychologist, 76(1), 63–77.
50. Kolev, G. (2022, Ağustos 16). What is “quiet quitting” (and should you join the trend). Officetopics.com. Erişim adresi: https://officetopics.com/what-is-quiet-quitting/
51. Lawless, B. (2023). Performative enactments of resistance to academic neoliberalization: Quiet quitting as educational transgression and sustainability. Communication Education, 72(3), 316–319. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2023.2207144
52. Margaretha, C. ve Panggabean, H. (2025). The Impact of Job Satisfaction on Quiet Quitting with Organizational Justice as a Mediator among Generation Z Employees. Psikologika: Jurnal Pemikiran dan Penelitian Psikologi, 30(2), 303-314.
53. Masood, R. ve Erdoğdu, A. (2024). Gender discrimination, glass ceiling and other obstacles faced by women in society. Journal of Life Economics, 11(1), 1–12.
54. Meydan, C. H., ve Şeşen, H. (2011). Yapısal eşitlik modellemesi AMOS uygulamaları. Detay Yayıncılık.
55. Meyer, J. P. ve Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1(1), 61–89.
56. Niehoff, B. P. ve Moorman, R. H. (1993). Justice as a mediator of the relationship between methods of monitoring and organizational citizenship behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 36(3), 527-556.
57. Özçatal, E. Ö. (2025). Quiet quitting and the glass ceiling: Organisational reflections on gender-based discrimination. In Proceedings of the 15th International Baskent Congress on Social, Humanities, Administrative, and Educational Sciences (pp. 2055–2068). Başkent Congress.
58. Pallant, J. (2020). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using IBM SPSS. Routledge.
59. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y. ve Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of applied psychology, 88(5), 879.
60. Preacher, K. J., ve Kelley, K. (2011). Effect size measures for mediation models: quantitative strategies for communicating indirect effects. Psychological methods, 16(2), 93.
61. Priya, P. ve Sreejith, S. S. (2025). Are workplace gender microaggressions a quiet contributor to quiet quitting? A conceptual framework. International Journal of Organizational Analysis. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-07-2024-4645
62. Rama, R. (2025). The role of remote work flexibility, organizational justice, and psychological safety on discretionary work behavior. International Journal of Business, Law, and Education, 6(1), 810–822. https://doi.org/10.56442/ijble.v6i1.1104
63. Ridgeway, C. L. (2011). Framed by gender: How gender inequality persists in the modern world. New York: Oxford University Press.
64. Ryan, M. K. ve Haslam, S. A. (2005). The glass cliff: Evidence that women are over-represented in precarious leadership positions. British Journal of Management, 16(2), 81–90.
65. Sağır, M. (2020). Cam tavan sendromunun bankacılık sektöründe çalışan kadınlarda işten ayrılma niyetine etkileri. Strategic Public Management Journal, 6(11), 91-102.
66. Sarıoğlu, Z. B. (2018). Cam tavan sendromu: Ölçek uyarlama çalışması ve demografik değişkenler açısından bir analiz, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Bahçeşehir Üniversitesi, YÖK Ulusal Tez Merkezi Veri Tabanı.
67. Schaufeli, W. B. (2017). Applying the job demands–resources model: A ‘how to’ guide to measuring and tackling work engagement and burnout. Organizational Dynamics, 46(2), 120–132.
68. Şen, E. ve Candan, H. (2021). Kamu çalışanlarındaki cam tavan sendromunun örgütsel adalet algıları üzerindeki etkisi: Beyşehir ilçesi örneği. International Journal of Disciplines Economics & Administrative Sciences Studies, 7(35), 896–911
69. Smith, P., Crittenden, N. ve Caputi, P. (2012). Measuring women's beliefs about glass ceilings: development of the Career Pathways Survey. Gender in Management: An International Journal, 27(2), 68-80.
70. Sökmen, A. ve Şahingöz, S. A. (2017). Kadın çalışanlarda cam tavan yansıtıcılarından kurum ikliminin, iş tatmini ve işten ayrılma niyetine etkisi: otel işletmelerinde bir araştırma. İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi, 9(1), 113-133.
71. Tunç, S. ve Özmen, A. (2016). Kadın çalışanların cam tavan engelleri ile algılanan örgütsel adalet arasındaki ilişki: Eskişehir bankacılık sektöründe uygulama. Çankırı Karatekin Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 7(2), 97-119.
72. Türkiye Bankalar Birliği. (2025). 2024 yılı bankacılık sektörü raporu. https://www.tbb.org.tr/sites/default/files/raporlar/54434/ekler/bankalarimiz-2024.pdf
73. United States. Federal Glass Ceiling Commission. (1995). Glass ceiling commission: Final report / final recommendations (Final report issued November 1995).
74. Watanabe, K. S. ve Kwarteng, A. H. (2024). Unveiling the glass ceiling phenomenon and mitigating strategies through organizational justice: a conceptual paper. Cogent Business & Management, 11(1), 2331981.
75. Wicker, S. ve VanHein, J. (2023). Justice perceptions, quiet quitting & personality. Poster presented at the RCIO 2023 Conference, Middle Tennessee State University, USA.
76. Yıldırım, F. (2007). İş doyumu ile örgütsel adalet ilişkisi. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 62(1),253-278.
77. Yıldız, A., Ekingen, E., Gün, İ. ve Yıldırım, M. (2024). Validity and reliability study of the Turkish version of the quiet quitting scale in healthcare workers. BMC psychology, 12(1), 730.
78. Yılmaz, Y. (2024). Örgütlerde sessiz istifa: Kavramsal bir çözümleme ve Türkiye’de yapılan araştırmaların değerlendirilmesi. Manas Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 13(4), 1395–1410. https://doi.org/10.33206/mjss.1491850