Havacılık İşletmelerinde Örgütsel Öğrenme ve Dinamik Kabiliyetler Arasındaki İlişki

Yıl 2022, Cilt: 7 Sayı: 2, 591 - 598, 30.12.2022

Sezer Ayaz , Semiha Karademir

Öz

Araştırmanın amacı, havacılık sektöründe dinamik kabiliyetler ve örgütsel öğrenme ilişkisini ortaya koymaktır. Ulusal ve uluslararası literatür incelendiğinde, dinamik kabiliyetler ve örgütsel öğrenme kavramlarının ayrı ayrı araştırıldığı ancak bu kavramların ilişkisi üzerine yeterli araştırmanın yapılmadığı görülmektedir. Çalışma, havacılık işletmelerindeki çalışanlara uygulanmıştır. Veriler anket formu yoluyla elde edilmiştir. Verilerin çözümlenmesi için betimleyici istatistik, bağımsız örneklem t-testi, tek yönlü varyans analizi (ANOVA), basit doğrusal regresyon modeli ve Pearson korelasyon analizi yapılmıştır. Verilerin normal dağılım gösterdiği araştırmada tecrübe değişkeninin grupları arasında farklılık olduğu görülmüştür. Değişkenlere uygulanan korelasyon analiziyle, aralarındaki ilişkinin p<0.01 düzeyinde pozitif yönlü ve çok güçlü olduğu saptanmıştır. Bu araştırmanın sonuçlarının, havacılık sektöründe dinamik kabiliyetler ve örgütsel öğrenme kavramları hakkında farkındalık uyandırması ve gelecek bilimsel çalışmalar için önemli bir kaynak olması beklenmektedir. Ayrıca çalışmanın farklı örneklem gruplarına uygulanarak sonuçlarının karşılaştırılmasının literatüre katkı sağlayacağı düşünülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Örgütsel öğrenme, Dinamik kabiliyetler, Yönetim ve strateji, Havacılık sektörü

Relationship between Organizational Learning and Dynamic Capabilities in Aviation Companies

Öz

The aim of the research is to reveal the relationship between dynamic capabilities and organizational learning in the aviation industry. Regarding the national and international literature, it is seen that the concepts of dynamic capabilities and organizational learning are investigated separately, but there is not enough research on the relationship between these concepts. The research was applied to employees in aviation institutions. The data were obtained through a questionnaire form. Descriptive statistics, independent sample t-test, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), simple linear regression model, and Pearson correlation analysis were used to analyze the data. In the research, where the data were normally distributed, it was observed that there was a difference between the groups of the experience variable. With the correlation analysis applied to the variables, it was determined that the relationship between them was positive and very strong at the p<0.01 level. It is expected that the results of this research will raise awareness about dynamic capabilities and organizational learning concepts in the aviation industry and will be an important resource for future scientific studies. In addition, it is thought that comparing the results of the research by applying them to different sample groups will contribute to the literature.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Organizational learning, Dynamic capabilities, Management and strategy, Aviation sector

Kaynakça

• Ambrosini, V., & Bowman, C. (2009). What are dynamic capabilities and are they a useful construct in strategic management?. International journal of management reviews, 11(1), 29-49.
• Argyris, C., & Schon, D. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
• Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of management, 17(1), 99-120.
• Barreto, I. (2010). Dynamic capabilities: A review of past research and an agenda for the future. Journal of management, 36(1), 256-280.
• Bustinza Sánchez, Ó. F., Molina Fernández, L. M., & Arias Aranda, D. (2010). Organizational learning and performance: Relationship between the dynamic and the operational capabilities of the firm. African Journal of Business Management, 4(18), 4067- 4078.
• Collis, D. J., & Montgomery, C. A. (2008). Competing on resources. Harvard business review, 86(7/8), 140.
• Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C. G. (2014). Organization development and change. Cengage learning.
• Danneels, E. (2012). Second‐order competences and Schumpeterian rents. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 6(1), 42-58.
• Easterby‐Smith, M., & Prieto, I. M. (2008). Dynamic capabilities and knowledge management: an integrative role for learning?. British journal of management, 19(3), 235-249.
• Edmondson, A., & Moingeon, B. (1998). From organizational learning to the learning organization. Management learning, 29(1), 5-20.
• Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: what are they?. Strategic management journal, 21(10‐11), 1105-1121.
• Ferdinand, J., Graca, M., Antonacopoulou, E., & Easterby-Smith, M. (2004, April). Dynamic capability: tracking the development of a concept. In fifth European Conference on Organizational Knowledge, Learning and Capabilities, Innsbruck (Austria) (pp. 2-4).
• Ferguson-Amores, M. C., García-Rodríguez, M., & Ruiz-Navarro, J. (2005). Strategies of renewal: the transition from ‘total quality management’to the ‘learning organization’. Management learning, 36(2), 149-180.
• Fugate, B. S., Stank, T. P., & Mentzer, J. T. (2009). Linking improved knowledge management to operational and organizational performance. Journal of Operations Management, 27(3), 247-264.
• Garvin, D.A. (1993) Building a Learning Organization. Harvard Business Review, 71(4), 78-91.
• George, G. (2005). Slack resources and the performance of privately held firms. Academy of management Journal, 48(4), 661-676.
• Giniuniene, J., & Jurksiene, L. (2015). Dynamic capabilities, innovation and organizational learning: Interrelations and impact on firm performance. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 213, 985-991.
• Grohmann, A., & Kauffeld, S. (2013). Evaluating training programs: development and correlates of the Questionnaire for P rofessional T raining E valuation. International Journal of Training and Development, 17(2), 135-155.
• Güttel, W. H., & Konlechner, S. W. (2009). Continuously hanging by a thread: Managing contextually ambidextrous organizations. Schmalenbach Business Review, 61(2), 150-172.
• Hamel, G., & Prahalad, C. K. (1990). Strategic intent. Mckinsey quarterly, (1), 36-61.
• Helfat, C. E., Finkelstein, S., Mitchell, W., Peteraf, M., Singh, H., Teece, D., & Winter, S. G. (2009). Dynamic capabilities: Understanding strategic change in organizations. John Wiley & Sons.
• Kale, P., Singh, H., & Perlmutter, H. (2000). Learning and protection of proprietary assets in strategic alliances: Building relational capital. Strategic management journal, 21(3), 217-237.
• March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1975). The uncertainty of the past: Organizational learning under ambiguity. European journal of political research, 3(2), 147-171.
• Mintzberg, H., Lampel, J., Quinn, J. B. & Ghoshal, S. (2003). The Strategy Process: Concepts Contexts Cases (4th Edition). New Jersey: Pearson Education.
• Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York, NY.
• Pavlou, P. A., & El Sawy, O. A. (2006). From IT leveraging competence to competitive advantage in turbulent environments: The case of new product development. Information systems research, 17(3), 198-227.
• Protogerou, A., Caloghirou, Y., & Lioukas, S. (2012). Dynamic capabilities and their indirect impact on firm performance. Industrial and corporate change, 21(3), 615-647.
• Rahmatollah, G., Gholamreza, J., & Seyed, A. A. H. (2010). Explanation of knowledge management enabler as a latent variable: A case study of SMEs in Iran. African Journal of Business Management, 4(9), 1863-1872.
• Revans, R.W. (1998), ABC of Action Learning, Lemos & Crane, London
• Salvato, C. (2003). The role of micro‐strategies in the engineering of firm evolution. Journal of management studies, 40(1), 83-108.
• Sanchez, R., & Mahoney, J. T. (1996). Modularity, flexibility, and knowledge management in product and organization design. Strategic management journal, 17(S2), 63-76.
• Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2013). Edisi 6. Research Methods for Business.
• Singh, B., & Rao, M. K. (2016). Effect of intellectual capital on dynamic capabilities. Journal of Organizational Change Management. 29(2), 129-149.
• Sinkula, J. M. (1994). Market information processing and organizational learning. Journal of marketing, 58(1), 35-45.
• Slater, S. F., & Narver, J. C. (1995). Market orientation and the learning organization. Journal of marketing, 59(3), 63-74.
• Tabachnick, B., & Fidell, L. (2013). Using Multivariate Statistics (6th ed.). Pearson.
• Takahashi, A. R. W., Bulgacov, S., Giacomini, M. M., & Santos, C. B. D. (2016). Dynamic capabilities, political external relationship, educational technology capability and firm performance. International Business Management, 10(5): 652-658.
• Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic management journal, 28(13), 1319-1350.
• Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic management journal, 18(7), 509-533.
• Verona, G., & Ravasi, D. (2003). Unbundling dynamic capabilities: an exploratory study of continuous product innovation. Industrial and corporate change, 12(3), 577-606.
• Wilden, R., Gudergan, S. P., Nielsen, B. B., & Lings, I. (2013). Dynamic capabilities and performance: strategy, structure and environment. Long range planning, 46(1-2), 72-96.
• Zahra, S. A., Sapienza, H. J., & Davidsson, P. (2006). Entrepreneurship and dynamic capabilities: A review, model and research agenda. Journal of Management studies, 43(4), 917-955.
• Zahra, S. A., & George, G. (2002). Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension. Academy of management review, 27(2), 185-203.
• Zollo, M., & Winter, S. G. (2002). Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organization science, 13(3), 339-351.