CONSTRUCTION OF A MANAGERIAL PRACTICE IN TURKEY CONTEXT: CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Yıl 2015, Cilt: 4 Sayı: 8, 10 - 25, 14.01.2016

Ertuğrul Karoğlu , Onur Çapkulaç

Öz

The aim of this study is to assert the discourse about construction of corporate governance practices in Turkey.
In accordance with this purpose, TÜSİAD (Turkish Industry & Business Association) and TKYD’s (Corporate
Governance Association of Turkey) discourses about corporate governance which are presentated between
2002-2015 are analized with Aristoteles’s rhetorical strategies: “Ethos, Pathos, Logos”. Examining the
reconstruction of corporate governance in Turkey, we have found that Pathos and Logos justifications are
relatively come to the forefront. Even if Ethos justifications have lesser degree then the others, when examining
thoughtfully it is seen that Ethos justifications and Pathos justifications rates are not far from eachother.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Corporate Governance, Discourse, Rhetoric, Construction of Management Practices

BİR YÖNETİM UYGULAMASININ TÜRKİYE BAĞLAMINDA YENİDEN İNŞASI: KURUMSAL YÖNETİM

Öz

Araştırmanın amacı Türkiye’deki kurumsal yönetim uygulamalarının inşa edilmesinde kullanılan söylemi ortaya koymaktır. Bu amaç doğrultusunda TÜSİAD’ın (Türk Sanayicileri ve İşadamları Derneği) ve TKYD’nin (Türkiye Kurumsal Yönetim Derneği) 2002 ile 2015 yılları arasındaki kurumsal yönetim ile ilgili söylemleri Aristo’nun Ethos, Pathos ve Logos retorik stratejilerine göre analiz edilmiştir. TÜSİAD ve TKYD’nin kurumsal yönetimin inşası noktasındaki söylemlerinin analizi sonucunda elde edilmiş olan bulgulara göre Pathos ve Logos gerekçelendirmelerinin göreceli olarak ağır bastığını görülmektedir. Ethos gerekçelendirmesi her ne kadar en düşük oranda çıkan gerekçelendirme olsa da bulgular dikkatli incelendiğinde Ethos gerekçelendirmesi ile Pathos gerekçelendirmesi oranlarının birbirine çok da uzak olmadığı görülmektedir. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

Kurumsal Yönetim, Söylem, Retorik, Yönetim Uygulamasının İnşası

Kaynakça

• ABRAHAMSON, Eric (1996), “Management Fashion”, Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 254-285.
• ABRAHAMSON, Eric (1997), “The Emergence and Prevalence of Employee Management Rhetorics: The Effects of Long Waves, Labor Unions and Turnover, 1875 tı 1992”, Academy of Management Journal, 40(3), 491-533.
• ABRAHAMSON, Eric ve FAIRCHILD, Gregory (1999), “Management Fashion: Lifecycles, Triggers, and Collective Learning Processes”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(4), 708-740.
• BOJE, M. David, OSWICK, Cliff ve FORD, D. Jeffery (2004), ”Language and Organization: The Doing of Discourse”, Academy of Management Review, 29(4), 571-577.
• BUĞRA, Ayşe (2005), “Devlet ve İşadamları”, 4. Baskı, İstanbul, İletişim Yayınları
• CARSON, P. Paula, LANIER, A. Patricia, CARSON, K., D. GUIRDY, N. Brandi. (2000), “Clearing A Path Through The Management Fashion Jungle: Some Preliminary Trailblazing”, Academy of Management Journal, 43(8), 1143-1158
• DEMİRDÖĞEN, Ülkü (2010), ”The Roots of Research in (Political) Persuasion: Ethos, Pathos, Logos and The Yale Studies of Persuasive Communications”, International Journal of Social Inquiry, 3(1), 189-201.
• EDWARDS, Tony (2004), “Corporate Governance, Industrial Relations and Trends in Company-Level Restructuring in Europe: Covergence Towards The Anglo-American Model?”, Industrial Realtions Journal, 35(6), 518-535.
• ELSBACH, D. Kimberly (1994), “Managing Organizational Legitimacy in the California Cattle Industry: The Construction and Effectiveness of Verbal Accounts”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(1), 57-88.
• ERDÖNMEZ, A. Pelin (2003), “Türkiye’de 2001 Yılında Mali Kriz Sonrasında Kurumsal Sektörlerde Yediden Yapılandırma, Bankacılar Dergisi, 47, 38-55
• FAIRCLOUGH, Norman (1995), “Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language”, Birinci Baskı, New York, Longman Publishing.
• FIKIRKOCA, Ali ve KALEMCİ, R. Arzu (2011), “Küreselleşme ve Makro Kurumsal Teori: Bir Literatür Taraması, İş, Güç Endüstri İlişkileri ve İnsan Kaynakları Dergisi, 13(2), 177-198.
• FROST, Michael (1994), “Ethos, Pathos & Legal Audience”, Dickinson Law Review, 99(85), 1-25.
• GILL, Ann ve WHEDBEE, Karen (1997), “Rhetoric”, Teun A. van Dijk (ed.), Discourse as Structure and Process: Discourse Studies A Multidisciplinary Introduction, 157-184, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• GREEN, E. Sandy (2004), “A Rhetorical Theory of Diffusion”, Academy of Management Review, 29(4), 653-669.
• HERACLEOUS, Loizos ve BARRET, Michael (2001), “Organizational Change as Discourse: Communicative Actions and Deep Structures in the Context of Information Technology Implementation”, Academy of Management Journal, 44(4), 755-778.
• KESKİN, Uğur, BÜYÜK, Köksal ve KOÇ, Umut (2013), “Yönetsel ve Örgütsel Açıdan Retorik”, Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 13(1), 27-39.
• KURAN-I KERİM, “Hucurat Suresi”, 11. Ayet.
• KURAN-I KERİM, “Maide Suresi”, 2. Ayet
• LANE, Christel. (2003), “Changes in Corporate Governance of German corporations: Convergence to the Anglo-American Model?, Competition & Change, 7(2-3), 79-100
• MEYER, Michel (2009), Retorik, Çev: İsmail Yergüz, Birinci Baskı, Ankara: Dost Kitabevi Yayınları
• MORRIS, Timothy ve LANCHASTER, Zoe (2006), “Translating Management Ideas”, Organization Studies, 27(2), 207-223.
• OAKES, S. Leslie, TOWNLEY, Barbara ve COOPER, J. David (1998), “Business Planning as Pedogogy: Language and Control in a Changing Institutional Field”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 43(2), 257- 292
• ÖZEN, Şükrü ve BERKMAN, Ümit (2007) “Cross-national Reconstruction of Managerial Practices: TQM in Turkey”, Organization Studies, 28(6), 825-851.
• ÖZEN, Şükrü (2010) “Rhetorical Strategies of Indigenous and Foreign Management Practices: A Center Periphery Comparison”, 26. EGOS Colloquium, Temmuz 1-3, 2010, Lizbon
• PFEFFER, Jeffrey (1981), “Management as Symbolic Action, Research in Organizational Behaviour, 3, 1- 51.
• PHILLIPS, Nelson, LAWRENCE, B. Thomas ve Hardy, Cynthia (2004), “Discourse and Institutions”, Academy of Management Review, 29(4), 635-652
• RIFE, C. Martine (2010), “Ethos, Pathos, Logos, Kairos: Using as Rhetorical Heuristic to Mediate Digital- Survey Recruitment Strategies”, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 53(3), 260-277.
• ROBERTSON, J. Christopher, DİYAB, A. Abdulhamid ve AL-KAHTANI, Ali (2013),”A Cross-national Analysis of Perceptions of Corporate Governance Principles”, International Business Review, 22(1), 315-325.
• SILVERMAN, David (2001), “Interpreting Qualitative Data: Methods for Analyzing Talk, Text and Interaction”, 2. Baskı, London, Sage
• SUDDABY, Roy ve GREENWOOD, Royston (2005),”Rhetorical Strategies of Legitimacy”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(1), 35-67.
• TİRMİZİ, Birr, Bab No:61
• TÜSİAD (2002), “Kurumsal Yönetim En İyi Uygulama Kodu: Yönetim Kurulunun Yapısı ve İşleyişi”, [Erişim Adresi: http://www.tusiad.org.tr/__rsc/shared/file/kurumsalyonetim.pdf, Erişim Tarihi: 20.12.2015].
• ÜSDİKEN, Behlül (1996), “Importing Theories of Management And Organization: The Case of Turkish Acedemia”, International Studies of Management And Organization, 26(3), 33-46
• YOUNG, M., PENG, M., AHLSTROM, D., BRUTON, G., JIANG, Y., (2008) Corporate Governance in Emerging Economies: A Review of Principal – Principal Perspective, Journal of Management Studies, 45(1), 196-211
• WHITLEY, Richard (1994), “Dominant Forms of Economic Organization in Market Economies”, Organization Studies, 15(2), 153-182.
• WILLIG, Carla (2013), “Introduction Qualitative Research In Phychology”, 3. Baskı, Open Univerty Press McGraw Hill Education, New York
• ZBARACKI, J. Mark (1998), “Rhetoric and Reality of Total Quality Management”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 43(3), 602-636.
• www. marmara.academia.edu/HalilEksi/Papers/1531350/SOYLEM_ANALIZI (12.03.2012)