Yıl 2019, Cilt 18 , Sayı 71, Sayfalar 1176 - 1194 2019-07-15

YÖNETİCİ KARARLARI VE BİLİŞSEL ESNEKLİĞİ: YÖNETİCİLER NASIL KARAR ALIYOR? NÖROBİLİM NE DİYOR?
MANAGERIAL DECISIONS AND COGNITIVE FLEXIBILITY: HOW DO MANAGERS MAKE DECISIONS? WHAT DOES NEUROSCIENCE SAY ABOUT?

MANAGERIAL DECISIONS AND COGNITIVE FLEXIBILITY: HOW DO MANAGERS MAKE DECISIONS? WHAT DOES NEUROSCIENCE SAY ABOUT?

Okan YAŞAR [1]


Bu çalışmadaki amaç yöneticilerin karar süreçlerini anlamak ve nörobilimin ortaya koyduğu veriler ışığında yönetici karar süreçlerini sorgulamaktır. Bu kapsamda İstanbul ilinde farklı sektörlerden 27 yönetici ile görüşme tekniği ile veri toplanmıştır. Görüşmelerde yöneticilerin karar süreçlerinde rasyonellik, sezgisellik ve bilişsel esneklik kavramlarını nasıl kullandıkları sorgulanmıştır. Alınan yanıtların analizi neticesinde sekiz adet davranış kalıbı bulunmuştur. Ayrıca yöneticiler Hodgkinson ve Clarke (2007)’in bilişsel stili tanımladığı dört boyutlu perspektifte değerlendirilmiş, 27 yöneticinin tamamının kendilerini, “detay” 12 yöneticinin “yüksek analitik-yüksek sezgisel”, altı yöneticinin “düşük analitik-yüksek sezgisel” alanda tanımladıkları görülmüştür. Bu davranış kalıpları nörobilim bulgularıyla karşılaştırılarak tartışması yapılmış, örgütler, yönetim, eğitim ve insan kaynakları alanlarına önerilerde bulunulmuştur.0000-0002-5455-4274
Yönetici Karar Verme, Rasyonellik, Sezgisellik, Bilişsel Esneklik, Nörobilim
  • Agor, W. H. (1984). Intuitive management: Integrating left and right brain management skills. Prentice Hall.
  • Bakeman, R., and Gottman, J. M. (1997) Observing interaction: introduction to sequential analysis (2nrl Ed.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Anderson, V., Northam, E., & Wrennall, J. (2017). Developmental neuropsychology: A clinical approach. Routledge.
  • Bechara, A. (2004). The role of emotion in decision-making: evidence from neurological patients with orbitofrontal damage. Brain and cognition, 55(1), 30-40.
  • Beck, A., T., Rush, A., Shaw, B., & Emery, G. (1979). Cognitive therapy of depression. New York: Guilford Pres.
  • Beck, A., T. (1963), Thinking and and depression I. idiosyncratic content and cognitive distortions. Archives of General Psychiatry, 9(4), 324-333.
  • Bechara, A. (2004). The role of emotion in decision-making: evidence from neurological patients with orbitofrontal damage. Brain and cognition, 55(1), 30-40.
  • Beer, J. S., Knight, R. T., & D'Esposito, M. (2006). Controlling the integration of emotion and cognition: the role of frontal cortex in distinguishing helpful from hurtful emotional information. Psychological Science, 17(5), 448-453.
  • Behling, O., & Eckel, N. L. (1991). Making sense out of intuition. Academy of Management Perspectives, 5(1), 46-54.
  • Bell, D. E., Raiffa, H., & Tversky, A. (1988). Descriptive, normative, and prescriptive interactions in decision making. Decision making: Descriptive, normative, and prescriptive interactions, 1, 9-32.
  • Burke, L. A., & Miller, M. K. (1999). Taking the mystery out of intuitive decision making. Academy of Management Perspectives, 13(4), 91-99.
  • Cabantous Laure, “Strategic Decision Making as a “Performative Praxis: Constructing Rationality in Organizations” www.iae-toulouse.fr/files/Cabantous--Gond.pdf. (Son Erişim: 26 Mart 2009).
  • Camerer, C., Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. (2005). Neuroeconomics: How neuroscience can inform economics. Journal of economic Literature, 43(1), 9-64.
  • Cañas, A. J., & Novak, J. D. (2006). Re-examining the foundations for effective use of concept maps. In Concept maps: Theory, methodology, technology. Proceedings of the second international conference on concept mapping (Vol. 1, pp. 494-502).
  • Clarke, I., & Mackaness, W. (2001). Management ‘intuition’: An interpretative account of structure and content of decision schemas using cognitive maps. Journal of Management Studies, 38(2), 147-172.
  • Combe, I. A., Rudd, J. M., Leeflang, P. S., & Greenley, G. E. (2012). Antecedents to strategic flexibility: Management cognition, firm resources and strategic options. European Journal of Marketing, 46(10), 1320-1339.
  • Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods design.
  • Creswell, J. (2016). W.(1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions, 2.
  • Damasio, A.R.(2000).A second chance for emotion.Cognitive neuroscience of emotion,12-23.
  • Deak, G. O. (2003). The development of cognitive flexibility and language abilities. Advances in child development and behavior, 31, 273-328.
  • Dennis, J. P., & Vander Wal, J. S. (2010). The cognitive flexibility inventory: Instrument development and estimates of reliability and validity. Cognitive therapy and research, 34(3), 241-253.
  • Eisenhardt, K. M., & Zbaracki, M. J. (1992). Strategic decision making. Strategic management journal, 13(S2), 17-37.
  • Frederick, S. (2002). Cognitive reflection and decision making. Journal of Economic perspectives, 19(4), 25-42.
  • Ghadiri, A., Habermacher, A., & Peters, T. (2013). Neuroleadership: A journey through the brain for business leaders. Springer Science & Business Media.
  • Georgsdottir, A. S., & Getz, I. (2004). How flexibility facilitates innovation and ways to manage it in organizations. Creativity and innovation management, 13(3), 166-175.
  • Glaser, B., G., and Strauss, A., L. (1967). The discovery of grounded ttieory: Strategies for qualitative research: New York:
  • Gore Julie, Adrian Banks, Lynne Millward ve Kyriakidou Olivia, “Naturalistic Decision Making and Organizations: Reviewing Pragmatic Science”, 27(7):925-942, Organization Studies, 2006.
  • Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Sage.
  • Hambrick, Donald C., ve Mason Phyllis “Upper Echolons: The Organization as A Reflection of Its Top Managers” Academy of Management Review 9: 193-206, 1984.
  • Hastie, R., & Dawes, R. M. (2010). Rational choice in an uncertain world: The psychology of judgment and decision making. Sage.
  • Hodgkinson, G. P., & Clarke, I. (2007). Conceptual note: Exploring the cognitive significance of organizational strategizing: A dual-process framework and research agenda. Human Relations, 60(1), 243-255.
  • Isen, A. M. (2001). An influence of positive affect on decision making in complex situations: Theoretical issues with practical implications. Journal of consumer psychology, 11(2), 75-85.
  • Isenberg, D. J. (1986). Thinking and managing: A verbal protocol analysis of managerial problem solving. Academy of management Journal, 29(4), 775-788.
  • Ionescu, T. (2011), Exploring the nature of cognitive flexibility. New Ideas in Psychology. (30) 2, 190-200
  • Kahneman D., Paul S., ve Tversky A., “Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases” Newyork, Cambridge University Press, 1982
  • Klein, G. A. (1993). A recognition-primed decision (RPD) model of rapid decision making (pp. 138-147). New York: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
  • Keeves, J. P. Ve Sowden, S. (1994). Descriptive data, analysis of. T. Husen, ve N.Postlethwaite (Ed .). The i nternational Encyclopaedia of Education (s. 14641475) Londra: Pergamon.
  • Khatri, N., & Ng, H. A. (2000). The role of intuition in strategic decision making. Human relations, 53(1), 57-86.
  • Kirkpatrick, L. A., & Epstein, S. (1992). Cognitive-experiential self-theory and subjective probability: Further evidence for two conceptual systems. Journal of personality and social psychology, 63(4), 534.
  • Köroğlu E. (2008). Bilişsel davranışçı psikoterapiler. Ankara: Hekimler Yayın Birliği.
  • Kvale, S. (1989). To validate is to question. S. Kvale (Ed.) Issues of validitv in qualitative research (73-91).
  • Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative researcti interviewing. Thousaiid oaks: sage
  • Louis, M. R., & Sutton, R. I. (1991). Switching cognitive gears: From habits of mind to active thinking. Human relations, 44(1), 55-76.
  • Leavitt, H. J.(1975).Beyond the analytic manager.California Management Review,17(3),5-12.
  • Leedy, P., & Ormrod, J. (2001). Research and strategic communication.
  • Lewin, K. Field theory in social science. New York: Harper Brothers, 1961.
  • Martin, M. M., Anderson, C. M., & Thweatt, K. S. (1998). Individuals' perceptions of their communication behaviors: a validity study of the relationship between the cognitive flexibility scale and the communication flexibility scale with aggressive communication traits. Journal of social behavior and personality, 13, 531-540.
  • Lieberman, M. D., Gaunt, R., Gilbert, D. T., & Trope, Y. (2002). Reflexion and reflection: A social cognitive neuroscience approach to attributional inference. In Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 34, pp. 199-249). Academic Press.
  • Mintzberg, H., Raisinghani, D., & Theoret, A. (1976). The structure of" unstructured" decision processes. Administrative science quarterly, 246-275.
  • Pfeffer, J. (1994). Managing with power: Politics and influence in organizations. Harvard Business Press.
  • Sezgin, O. B., & Ucar, Z. (2015). Nörobilimin Örgütsel Davranisa Yansimasi: Örgütsel Nörobilim/Reflection of Neuroscience on Organizational Behaviour: Orgazational Neuroscience. Ege Akademik Bakis, 15(3), 353.
  • Shiffrin, R. M., & Schneider, W. (1984). Automatic and controlled processing revisited.
  • Silverman, B. W., & Green, P. J. (1993). Nonparametric regression and generalized linear models: A roughness penalty approach.
  • Sinclair, M., & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2005). Intuition: Myth or a decision-making tool?. Management learning, 36(3), 353-370.
  • Stanton, S. J., Sinnott-Armstrong, W., & Huettel, S. A. (2017). Neuromarketing: Ethical implications of its use and potential misuse. Journal of Business Ethics, 144(4), 799-811.
  • Manen, M. V. (1997). From meaning to method. Qualitative health research, 7(3), 345-369.
  • Martin, M. M., & Rubin, R. B. (1995). A new measure of cognitive flexibility. Psychological reports, 76(2), 623-626.
  • Maxwell, J. A. (2012). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (Vol. 41). Sage publications.
  • McFall, J. P. (2015). Rational, normative, descriptive, prescriptive, or choice behavior? The search for integrative metatheory of decision making. Behavioral Development Bulletin, 20(1), 45.
  • Miles, B., M. & Huberiiian, A., M. (1984). Drawing valid meaning from qualitative data : Towarda a shared cratt. Eeducational Researcher, 1984 (May), 20-30.
  • Miller, E. K., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function. Annual review of neuroscience, 24(1), 167-202.
  • Mintzberg, H. (2000). The rise and fall of strategic planning. Pearson Education.
  • Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Sage.
  • Parikh, J., Neubauer, F. F., & Lank, A. G. (1994). Intuition: The new frontier of management. Blackwell.
  • Patton, Q.., M. (1990). Qualitative evaiuation an research methods (2nd Edt.) London: Sage Pub.
  • Peterson, R. L., Feyyat, C., & Feyyat, H. (2012). Aklın para üzerindeki gücü: karar anı. Scala Yayıncılık.
  • Polkinghorne, D. E. (1989). Phenomenological research methods. In Existential-phenomenological perspectives in psychology (pp. 41-60). Springer, Boston, MA.
  • Prietula, M. J., & Simon, H. A. (1989). The experts in your midst. Harvard business review, 67(1), 120-124.
  • Sadler-Smith, E., & Shefy, E. (2004). The intuitive executive: Understanding and applying ‘gut feel’in decision-making. Academy of Management Perspectives, 18(4), 76-91.
  • Schofield, J. W. (1990). Increasing the generalizability of qualtitative research. W. W. Eisner ve A. Peshkin (Ed.). Qualtiative inquirv in education: The continuing debate (s.201-232).New York: Teachers College Press
  • Suri, R. E., & Schultz, W. (2001). Temporal difference model reproduces anticipatory neural activity. Neural computation, 13(4), 841-862.
  • Rilling, J. K., & Sanfey, A. G. (2011). The neuroscience of social decision-making. Annual review of psychology, 62, 23-48.
  • Robson, C. (1993). Real world research. Oxford: Blackwell Publisliers Ltd.
  • Scott, S. G., & Bruce, R. A. (1995). Decision-making style: The development and assessment of a new measure. Educational and psychological measurement, 55(5), 818-831.
  • Sadler-Smith, E. (2002, August). The Role of Cognitive Style In Management Education. In Academy of Management Proceedings (Vol. 2002, No. 1, pp. C1-C6). Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510: Academy of Management.
  • Silveriiian, D. 1993). Interprting qualitative data: Methods for analvsing talk, text and interaction. London: Sage Publications
  • Smith, J. A. (2017). A bridge to neuroeducation: A Qualitative study of perceptions of educators of adult learners (Doctoral dissertation, Capella University).
  • Simon, H. A. (1987). Making management decisions: The role of intuition and emotion. Academy of Management Perspectives, 1(1), 57-64.
  • Sinclair, M., & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2005). Intuition: Myth or a decision-making tool?. Management learning, 36(3), 353-370.
  • Spiro, R. J. (1988). Cognitive Flexibility Theory: Advanced Knowledge Acquisition in Ill-Structured Domains. Technical Report No. 441.
  • Spiro, R. J., Vispoel, W. P., Schmitz, J. G., Samarapungavan, A., Boerger, A. E., & Britton, B. K. (1987). Cognitive flexibility and transfer in complex content domains. Executive control processes in reading, 177-199.
  • Taggart, W., & Valenzi, E. (1990). Assessing rational and intuitive styles: A human information processing metaphor. Journal of Management Studies, 27(2), 149-172.
  • Tallis, R. (2011). Aping mankind: Neuromania, Darwinitis and the misrepresentation of humanity. Durham, UK: Acumen
  • Torrance, E. P. (1968). A longitudinal examination of the fourth grade slump in creativity. Gifted Child Quarterly, 12(4), 195-199.
  • Turner, J. R., & Müller, R. (2003). On the nature of the project as a temporary organization. International journal of project management, 21(1), 1-8.
  • Vidal, F. (2002). “Brains, bodies, selves, and science: Anthropologies of identity and the resurrection of the body.” Critical Inquiry 28 (4):930–74.
  • Yaşar, O. (2016). “Davranışsal Karar Verme, Düşünme, Problem Çözme” Detay Yayıncılık, Ankara.
  • Zajonc, R. B. (1980). Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences. American psychologist, 35(2), 151.
Birincil Dil tr
Konular İşletme
Yayımlanma Tarihi Yaz
Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Orcid: 0000-0002-5455-4274
Yazar: Okan YAŞAR (Sorumlu Yazar)
Kurum: BEYKENT ÜNİVERSİTESİ
Ülke: Turkey


Tarihler

Yayımlanma Tarihi : 15 Temmuz 2019

Bibtex @araştırma makalesi { esosder491522, journal = {Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi}, issn = {1304-0278}, address = {}, publisher = {Özel Akademi}, year = {2019}, volume = {18}, pages = {1176 - 1194}, doi = {10.17755/esosder.491522}, title = {YÖNETİCİ KARARLARI VE BİLİŞSEL ESNEKLİĞİ: YÖNETİCİLER NASIL KARAR ALIYOR? NÖROBİLİM NE DİYOR?}, key = {cite}, author = {YAŞAR, Okan} }
APA YAŞAR, O . (2019). YÖNETİCİ KARARLARI VE BİLİŞSEL ESNEKLİĞİ: YÖNETİCİLER NASIL KARAR ALIYOR? NÖROBİLİM NE DİYOR?. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi , 18 (71) , 1176-1194 . DOI: 10.17755/esosder.491522
MLA YAŞAR, O . "YÖNETİCİ KARARLARI VE BİLİŞSEL ESNEKLİĞİ: YÖNETİCİLER NASIL KARAR ALIYOR? NÖROBİLİM NE DİYOR?". Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 18 (2019 ): 1176-1194 <https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/esosder/issue/46916/491522>
Chicago YAŞAR, O . "YÖNETİCİ KARARLARI VE BİLİŞSEL ESNEKLİĞİ: YÖNETİCİLER NASIL KARAR ALIYOR? NÖROBİLİM NE DİYOR?". Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 18 (2019 ): 1176-1194
RIS TY - JOUR T1 - YÖNETİCİ KARARLARI VE BİLİŞSEL ESNEKLİĞİ: YÖNETİCİLER NASIL KARAR ALIYOR? NÖROBİLİM NE DİYOR? AU - Okan YAŞAR Y1 - 2019 PY - 2019 N1 - doi: 10.17755/esosder.491522 DO - 10.17755/esosder.491522 T2 - Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi JF - Journal JO - JOR SP - 1176 EP - 1194 VL - 18 IS - 71 SN - 1304-0278- M3 - doi: 10.17755/esosder.491522 UR - https://doi.org/10.17755/esosder.491522 Y2 - 2019 ER -
EndNote %0 Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi YÖNETİCİ KARARLARI VE BİLİŞSEL ESNEKLİĞİ: YÖNETİCİLER NASIL KARAR ALIYOR? NÖROBİLİM NE DİYOR? %A Okan YAŞAR %T YÖNETİCİ KARARLARI VE BİLİŞSEL ESNEKLİĞİ: YÖNETİCİLER NASIL KARAR ALIYOR? NÖROBİLİM NE DİYOR? %D 2019 %J Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi %P 1304-0278- %V 18 %N 71 %R doi: 10.17755/esosder.491522 %U 10.17755/esosder.491522
ISNAD YAŞAR, Okan . "YÖNETİCİ KARARLARI VE BİLİŞSEL ESNEKLİĞİ: YÖNETİCİLER NASIL KARAR ALIYOR? NÖROBİLİM NE DİYOR?". Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 18 / 71 (Temmuz 2019): 1176-1194 . https://doi.org/10.17755/esosder.491522
AMA YAŞAR O . YÖNETİCİ KARARLARI VE BİLİŞSEL ESNEKLİĞİ: YÖNETİCİLER NASIL KARAR ALIYOR? NÖROBİLİM NE DİYOR?. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. 2019; 18(71): 1176-1194.
Vancouver YAŞAR O . YÖNETİCİ KARARLARI VE BİLİŞSEL ESNEKLİĞİ: YÖNETİCİLER NASIL KARAR ALIYOR? NÖROBİLİM NE DİYOR?. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. 2019; 18(71): 1194-1176.