Academic alienation and marketization of scientific production: A study on business and management discipline

Öz

Academic area, which is the place of scientific production, and academics, which are the subjects of academic production, is more and more involved in the process of alienation from day to day. Capitalist relations of production continue to dominate in the academic field as well as in every field. Accordingly, scientific production, which has started to become marketed, is the most influential factor in the alienation process of academicians. In addition, the specialization in the academic field also damages the ability of academics to assess phenomena. In the subjects discussed, academicians, who made their evaluations according to only their disciplines, in which they were stuck, came to a state of being disinterested about social problems when they came together with marketed academic production. In this study, academic alienation and as the processes of this, the marketization of intellectual labor, the power relations in the working environment of academics and the division of labor are emphasized. Academic promotion and appointment, which is a reality of academic life, has also been briefly examined. The current literature about the issue was examined. Then Turkey's fundamental problems in business life were identified. Finally, how much space these problems found in the publications of faculty members who continue to work in the business disciplines was detected. For this purpose, Management and Organization Congress, National Business Congress and Organizational Behavior Congress, which has an important place in the discipline of business and management, were included in the study. The findings showed that academics were apathetic about social problems and they did not give any place to social problems in their researches.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Academic Alienation,Scientific Production,Business and Management Discipline

Kaynakça

1. Alakavuklar O.N., Dickson A.G., & Stablein R. (2017). The alienation of scholarship in modern business schools: From Marxist material relations to the Lacanian subject. Academy of Management Learning & Education Journal, 16(3), 454-468.
2. Cemaloğlu, N. (2018). Sulandırılan akademik teşvik. http://www.kamudanhaber.net/sulandirilan-akademik-tesvik-makale,3565.html Access date: 16.03.2019
3. Dunne, S., Harney, S., & Parker, M. (2008). Speaking out: The responsibilities of management intellectuals: A survey. Organization, 15(2), 271–282.
4. Durkheim E. (1984). The division of labour in society. International edition: The Macmillan Press.
5. Eurostat (2019). https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&plugin=1&pcode=sdg_08_60&language=en Access date: 05.03.2019
6. Foucault, M. (1976). The political function of the intellectual. Radical Philosophy, 17(13), 126-133.
7. Gerth, H.H., & Wright, M.C. (1946). From Max Weber: Essays in sociology. New York: Oxford University Press.
8. Güler M. A. (2015). Ulusal istihdam stratejisi bağlamında Türkiye’de güvencesiz çalışma. Çalışma ve Toplum, 46(3), 155-190.

9. Hall, R. (2018). On the alienation of academic labour and the possibilities for mass intellectuality. Triple C: Communication, Capitalism & Critique Journal, 16(1), 97-113.
10. Hancıoğlu Y. & Tekin E. (2017). Ulusal işletmecilik ile ulusal yönetim ve organizasyon kongrelerinde yayımlanan araştırmaların bibliyometrik profili: Stratejik yönetim yazını üzerine bir inceleme. Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi, 10(16. UİK Özel Sayısı), 87-100.
11. İçduygu A., & Diker E. (2017). Labor market integration of Syrian refugees in Turkey: From refugees to settlers. The Journal of Migration Studies, 3(1), 12-35.
12. Jankowski N., & Provezis S. (2012). Neoliberal ideologies, governmentality and the academy: An examination of accountability through assessment and transparency. Educational Philosophy and Theory Journal, 46(5), 475-487.
13. Kalfa, S., Wilkinson, A., & Gollan, P.J. (2018). The academic game: Compliance and resistance in universities. Work, Employment and Society, 32(2), 274–291.
14. Karadağ, E., & Yücel, C. (2018). Devlet üniversiteleri ve fakülteleri sıralaması [DÜS] 2018. Eskişehir: Üniversite Araştırmaları Laboratuvarı Yayınları.
15. Karataş Acer, E., & Güçlü, N. (2017). Türkiye’de yükseköğretimin genişlemesi: Gerekçeler ve ortaya çıkan sorunlar. Yükseköğretim Dergisi, 7(1), 28–38.
16. Knights, D., & Clarke, C.A. (2013). It’s a Bittersweet Symphony, this life: Fragile academic selves and insecure identities at work. Organization Studies, 35(3), 335–357.
17. Krishnan, A. (2009). What are Academic Disciplines? Some observations on the Disciplinarity vs. Interdisciplinarity debate. NCRM Working Paper Series, ESRC National Centre for Research Methods. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.467.3004&rep=rep1&type=pdf Access date: 05.03.2019
18. Marx K. (2013). Yabancılaşma [Translated by K. Somer, A. Kardam, S. Belli, A. Gelen, Y. Fincancı, & A. Bilgi]. Ankara: Sol Yayınları.
19. Mingers, J., & Willmott, H. (2013). Taylorizing business school research: On the ‘one best way’ performative effects of journal ranking lists. Human Relations, 66(8), 1051–1073.
20. Nair N., & Vohra N. (2010). An exploration of factors predicting work alienation of knowledge workers. Management Decision, 48(4), 600-615
21. Okumuş, K., & Yurdakal, İ.H. (2017). Akademisyenlerin akademik teşviğe ilişkin görüş ve düşünceleri. Journal of Academic Social Science Studies, (58), 145-156.
22. Oleksiyenko A. (2018). Zones of alienation in global higher education: corporate abuse and leadership failure. Tertiary Education and Management Journal, 24(3), 193-205.
23. Öztürk, A. (2019, 10 February). Akademik teşvik, bilim ve yabancılaşma. https://www.birgun.net/haber-detay/akademik-tesvik-bilim-ve-yabancilasma.html Access date: 16.03.2019
24. Report of the Gulbenkian Commission on the Restructuring of the Social Sciences (1996). Open The Social Sciences. I. Wallerstein (Ed.), California: Stanford University Press.
25. Şahin, F., Tabak, B.Y., & Tabak, H. (2017). Motivasyon Kuramları Bağlamında Akademik Teşvik Ödeneği Uygulamasının Değerlendirilmesi. Journal of Higher Education & Science/Yüksekögretim ve Bilim Dergisi, 7(2), 403-410.
26. Scott P. (2007). From professor to ‘knowledge worker’: Profiles of the academic profession. Minerva, 45(2), 205-215.
27. SGK (2019). Kayıtdışı istihdam oranları. http://www.sgk.gov.tr/wps/portal/sgk/tr/calisan/kayitdisi_istihdam/kayitdisi_istihdam_oranlari/kayitdisi_istihdam_orani Acess date: 05.03.2019
28. Tradingeconomics (2019). https://tradingeconomics.com/germany/employed-persons Access date: 05.03.2019
29. TUIK (2019a). Unuployment rates 2014-2018. http://www.tuik.gov.tr Access date: 05.03.2019
30. TUIK (2019b). Unuployment rates 2013-2018. http://www.tuik.gov.tr Access date: 05.03.2019
31. Turhan, M., & Erol, Y.C. (2017). Academicians’ opinions about academic incentive allowance. Inonu University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 18(3), 281-296.
32. URAP (2016). http://tr.urapcenter.org/2016/ Access date: 05.03.2019
33. Worthington, F., & Hodgson, J. (2005). Academic labour and the politics of quality in higher education: A critical evaluation of the conditions of possibility of resistance. Critical Quarterly, 47(1-2), 96-110.
34. Yeşildal H. (2012). Dünya sistemi kuramı: Immanuel Wallerstein. S. Suğur, & A.G. Baran (Eds.), In Çağdaş Sosyoloji Kuramları (pp. 174-196), Eskişehir: Anadolu Üniversitesi Yayınları.
35. YOK (2019), Yayın Istatistikleri. https://www.yok.gov.tr/Sayfalar/Yayinlar/Yayin-Istatistikleri.aspx Access date: 16.03.2019