İşkoliklik ve Örgütsel Sağlığın İş Performansıyla İlişkilerinin İncelenmesi ve Telekomünikasyon Çalışanlarına Yönelik Bir Araştırma

Öz

Piyasaların küreselleşmesi, kurumsal yeniden yapılanma, kalite, esneklik ve teknoloji odaklılığın artması iş örgütlerinin dinamiklerinin değişmesine yol açmaktadır. Günümüzün bu rekabet ortamında iş örgütlerinin dünya çapındaki başarısı iş örgütlerinin çalışanlarının katkısı ile gerçekleşmektedir. İş örgütlerini uzun vadede sosyo-ekonomik açıdan gelişmesinin bireylerin iş performansı ve sağlıklı bir çalışma ortamı bağlamında başarılı olmasıyla ilişkili olduğu söylenebilir. Bu bağlamda telekomünikasyon sektöründe faaliyet gösteren iş örgütleri üzerinde yapılan bu çalışmanın amacı işkolikliğin ve örgütsel sağlığın iş performansıyla ilişkilerini ortaya çıkarmaktır. Çalışmanın sonucunda, örgütsel sağlık ve işkolikliğin, iş performansıyla olumlu yönde ilişkili olmasına karşılık, örgütsel sağlık ve işkoliklik arasında herhangi anlamlı bir ilişki bulunamamıştır. Bu kapsamda yapılan bu araştırmadan elde edilen bulgular literatürde yer alan işkolikliğin iş performansını arttırdığına ilişkin araştırmaları destekler nitelikte olup ortaya koyduğu bulguları ile ilgili yazına önemli katkılar sunacağı düşünülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• İşkoliklik, örgütsel sağlık, iş performansı, telekomünikasyon, sektör.

The Relations between Job Performance, Workaholism and Organizational Health: A Researchon Telecommunication Sector Employees

Öz

Globalization of markets, institutional restructuring, increasing quality, flexibility and technology focus lead to the change in the dynamics of business organizations and competition among business organizations is increasing. In today's competitive environment, the success of business organizations worldwide is achieved through the contribution of employees of business organizations. It can be said that the socio-economic development of long-term business organizations is related to the success of individuals in the context of work performance and a healthy work environment. In this context, this study on the business organizations operating in the telecommunication sector aims to reveal the relations between workaholism, organizational health and job performance. As a result of the study, there was no significant relations between organizational health and workaholism, whereas organizational health and workaholism were positively related to job performance. Findings from this research made, in this context in the literature it supports research on the improvement of the job performance of workaholism it is thought that it will provide some contributions in the literature about the findings it reveals.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Workaholism, organizational health, job performance, telecomunication, sector.

Kaynakça

1. Burke, R. J. (2001). Workaholism in Organizations: The Role of Organi- zational Values. Personnel Review, 30(6), 637-645.
2. Burke, R.J. (2002). Do Workaholics Prefer Demanding, Aggressive, and Results‐Oriented Organizational Cultures?. Career Development In- ternational, 7(4), 211-217.
3. Cross, R. ve Cummings, J. N. (2004). Ties and Network Correlates of İndividual Performance in Knowledgeintensive Work. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 928 –937.
4. Çöl, G. (2008). Algılanan Güçlendirmenin İşgören Performansı Üzerine Etkileri, Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 9(1), 35-46.
5. Doğan, T. ve Tel, F. D. (2011), “Duwas İşkoliklik Ölçeği Türkçe For- munun (Duwas-Tr) Geçerlik ve Güvenirliğinin İncelenmesi”. Aİ- BÜ, Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(1), 61-69.
6. Fried, Y. ve Ferris, G. R. (1987). The Validity of The Job Characteristics Model: A Review and Meta-Analysis, Personnel Psychology, (40), 287-323.
7. Griffin, M. A., Neal A. ve Parker S. K. (2007). A New Model of Work Role Performance: Positive Behavior in Uncertain and Interde- pendent Contexts. Academy of Management Journal, 50(2), 327–347.
8. Hackman, J. R., ve Oldham, G. R. (1980). Work Redesign. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Lee, J. (1997). The Motivation Of Women Entrepreneurs In Singapore. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour, Amp, 3(2), 93-110.

9. Harpaz, I. ve Snir, R. (2003). Workaholism: Its Definition and Nature, Human Relations, 56(3), 291–319.
10. Jones, F., Burke R. J. ve Westman M. (2006). Work-Life Balance: A Psychological Perspective. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 44, (4), 816-818.
11. Kağıtçıbaşı, Ç. (1999). Yeni İnsan ve İnsanlar (10. baskı). İstanbul: Evrim Yayınevi.
12. Kalaycı, Ş. (2008). Spss Uygulamalı Çok Değişkenli İstatistik Teknikleri. Ankara: Asil Yayınları.
13. Killinger, B. (1991). Workaholics: The Respectable Addicts. New York: Simon ve Schuster.
14. Kirkman, B. L. ve Rosen, B. (1999). Beyond Self-Management: Antece- dents and Consequences of Team Empowerment. The Academy of Management Journal, 42(1), 58-74.
15. Korn, E.R., Pratt, G.J. ve Lambrou, P.T. (1987). Hyper-Performance; The A.I.M Strategy for Relasing Your Business Potential, New York: John Wiley.
16. Kosevic, A. ve Loh, J. (2015). For Love: The Mediating Role of Self Efficacy on Workaholism, Job Satisfaction and Burnout, Internati- onal Journal of Arts and Sciences, 8(2), 493-505.
17. Lawler, E. E. III ve Finegold, D. (2000). Individualizing The Organiza- tion: Past, Present, and Future. Organizational Dynamics, 29(1), 1- 15.
18. Lyden, J. A. ve W. E. Klingele (2000), “Supervising Organizational Health”, Super Vision, 61(12), 3-5.
19. Machlowitz, M. (1980). Workaholics: Living with Them, Working with Them. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
20. McHugh, M., Humphreys, P. ve Mclvor, R. (2003). Buyer-Supplier Relationships and Organizational Health. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 39. (2): 15-25.
21. Mehra, A., Kilduff, M. ve Brass, D. J. (2001). The Social Networks of High and Low Selfmonitors: Implications for Workplace Perfor- mance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46, 121-146.
22. Murphy, P. R. ve Jackson, S. E. (1999). Managing Work-Role Perfor- mance: Challenges for 21st Century Organizations and Emplo- yees. Ilgen, D. R. ve Pulakos, E. D. (Ed.), The Changing Nature of Work Performance İçinde. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 325–365.
23. Naktiyok, A., Karacabey, C.N. (2005). İşkoliklik ve Tükenmişlik Send- romu, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 19(2), 179-198.
24. Ng, T. W. H., Sorensen, K. L. ve Feldman, D. C. (2007). Dimensions, Antecedents, and Consequences of Workaholism: A Conceptual İntegration and Extension. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28, 111–136.
25. Nunnally, J. C. ve Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychological Theory. New York, NY: MacGraw-Hill.
26. Nunnally, J. C. ve Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric Theory (3. Basım). New York: McGraw-Hill.
27. Oates, W. (1971). Confessions of A Workaholic: The Facts About Work Addiction. New York: World Publishing Company.
28. Oates, W. E. (1968). On Being A “Workaholic”. Pastoral Psychology, 19, 16-20.
29. Ölçer, F. (2005). İşkoliklik Üzerine Bir Araştırma, Selçuk Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Sosyal ve Ekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi, Sayı 9, 123-144.
30. Parker, S.K., Wall T. D. ve Corderry. L. (2001). Future Work Design Research and Practice: Toward An Elaborated Model of Work De- sign. Journel of Occupational Psychology. 74, 413-440.
31. Podsakoff, P. M., Mackenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y. ve Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common Method Biases in Behavioral Research: A Critical Re- view of The Literature and Recommended Remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879.
32. Schaef, A.W. ve Fassel, D. (1988). The Addictive Organization. San Fran- cisco: Harper Row.
33. Schaufeli, W.B., Taris, T.W. ve Bakker, A. (2006). Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hide: On The Differences Between Work Engagement and Wor- kaholism. R. Burke (Ed.), Research Companion to Working Time and Work Addiction İçinde (193-217). Edward Elgar: Northampton.
34. Scott, K.S., Moore, K.S. ve Miceli, M.P. (1997) An Exploration of The Meaning and Consequences of Workaholism. Human Relations, 50, 287-314.
35. Sigler, T.H. ve Pearson, C.M. (2000). Creating an Empowering Culture: Examining The Relationship Between Organizational Culture and Perceptions of Empowerment. Journal of Quality Management, 5(1), 27-52.
36. Sparrowe, T.R., Liden C.R., Wayne S. J. ve Kraimer M.L. (2001). Social Networks and the Performance of Individuals and Groups, The Academy of Management Journal, 44 (2), 316-325.
37. Spence, J. ve Robbins A. (1992). Workaholism: Definition, Measure- ment and Preliminary Results. Journal of Personality Assessment. 58 (1), 160-179.
38. Sprankle, J.K. ve Ebel, H. (1987). The Workaholic Syndrom. New York: Walker Publishing.
39. Sullıvan, S. E. (1999). The Changing Nature of Careers: A Review and Research Agenda. Journal of Management, 25(3), 457-484.
40. Sykes, T. A. ve Venkatesh, V. (2017). Explaining Post-Implementatıon Employee System Use and Job Performance: Impacts of The Con- tent and Source of Social Network Ties, MIS Quarterly, 41 (3), 917- 936.
41. Tett, R. P. ve Burnett, D. D. (2003). A Personality Trait-Based Interacti- onist Model of Job Performance, Journal of Applied Psychology. 88(3), 500–517.