Örgüt Kültürünün Sıkılık/Esneklik Boyutunun Girişimcilik Yönelimine Etkisi: Borsa İstanbul Şirketlerinde Bir Uygulama

Yıl 2022, , 184 - 213, 27.03.2022

Filiz Bozagaç , Mert Aktaş

https://doi.org/10.53306/klujfeas.1014376

Cited By: 2

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, örgütün kültürel sıkılık/esneklik boyutunun girişimcilik yönelimine etkisinin belirlenmesidir. Kültür yazınında sıkılık/esneklik boyutunun örgütsel seviyede girişimcilik ve yenilikçilik gibi değişkenlerle kuramsal olarak anlamlı olumlu ilişkileri gösterilmiştir. Örgüt kültürünün sıklık ve esneklik boyutunun örgüt çalışanlarının girişimcilik yönelimini olumlu/olumsuz etkilediği birçok çalışmada araştırılmıştır. Ancak, Türkiye’ de örgüt kültürü yazınında tekrar detaylandırılarak araştırılmasının konunun güncellenmesine ve örgütsel süreçlerde yön göstermesine katkı sağlayacağı düşünülmektedir. Çalışma kapsamında örgütün sıkılık eğilimi ve girişimcilik yönelimi eğilimleri incelenmiştir. Bu kapsamda oluşturulan modelde sıkılık eğilimi ve girişimcilik yönelimi eğilimlerinin Türkiye’ deki örgütlerin kültürel perspektif temelindeki yapısına etkisinin her bir boyut düzeyinde araştırılması gerçekleştirilmiştir. Örneklemini Borsa İstanbul’ da işlem gören firmaların oluşturduğu bu çalışmada; Ölçek güvenirlik analizleri SPSS 23 analiz programı kullanılarak yapılmıştır. Araştırmada kullanılan ölçeklerin yapısını test etmek için AMOS 24 programında Yapısal Eşitlik Modeli kullanılarak doğrulayıcı faktör analizleri yapılmıştır. Son olarak, Yapısal Eşitlik Modeli yol analizi kapsamında AMOS 24 programında teorik model testi ve regresyon analizi yapılmıştır. Sonuç olarak, sıkılık esneklik ile girişimcilik yöneliminin yenilikçilik boyutu arasında pozitif anlamlı ilişki bulunmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Kültür, Örgütsel Sıkılık Esneklik, Girişimcilik Yönelimi

Destekleyen Kurum

Bu makale çalışması Toros Üniversitesi Lisansüstü Eğitim Enstitüsünden Filiz Bozagaç’ ın “ Örgüt Kültürünün Sıkılık-Esneklik Boyutu, Finansal Performans ve Girişimcilik Yönelimi İlişkisi: Borsa İstanbul Şirketlerinde Bir Uygulama” isimli Doktora tezi için Toros Üniversitesi Bilimsel Araştırma Projeleri (BAP) Komisyonunca kabul edilen 2020-LEE-MA-1 no.lu proje kapsamında desteklenmiştir.

Proje Numarası

2020-LEE-MA-1

Teşekkür

Toros Üniversitesi Bilimsel Araştırma Projeleri (BAP) Komisyonuna teşekkür ederiz.

The Effect Of Tightness/Looseness Dimension Of Organizational Culture On Entrepreneural Orientation: An Application In Borsa Istanbul Companies

Öz

The main purpose of this research is to determine the effect of the cultural tightness/looseness dimension of the organization on the entrepreneurial orientation. positive relationships have been demonstrated with variables such as entrepreneurship and innovation at the organizational level of the tightness/looseness dimension, which is in the literatüre. It has been investigated that the tightness/looseness dimension of the organizational culture positively / negatively affects the entrepreneurial orientation of the employees. However, it is thought that researching it in detail will contribute to updating the subject and guide the organizational processes. In this model, the relationship between the tendency of tightness and entrepreneurship orientation with the structure of organizations in Turkey has been investigated at each dimension level. In this study, the sample of which is formed by companies traded on Borsa Istanbul; Scale reliability analyzes were performed. Confirmatory factor analyzes were made using the SEM in the AMOS 24 program. Finally, the theoretical model test and regression analysis were performed in the AMOS 24 program, within the scope of SEM path analysis. In the results a positive significant relationship has been found between tightness, looseness and the innovativeness dimension of entrepreneurial orientation.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Culture, Organizational tightness looseness, Entrepreneural orientation

Proje Numarası

2020-LEE-MA-1

Kaynakça

• Agrawal, S. (1993). Influence of Formalization on Role stress, Organizational Commitment, and Work Alienation of Salespersons: A Cross-National Comparative Study. Journal of International Business Studies, 24(4), 715-39.
• Aktaş, M., Gelfand, M. ve Hanges, P. (2016). Cultural Tightness–Looseness and Perceptions of Effective Leadership, Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1 –16.
• Antoncic, B. Ve Hisrich, R. D. (2001). Intrapreneurship: Construct Refinement and Cross-Cultural Validation. Journal of Business Venturing, 16(5), 495-527.
• Bentler, P. M. ve Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance Tests and Goodness of Fit in the Analysis of Covariance Structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588.
• Bergmann, H., Hundt, C. ve Sternberg, R. (2016). What Makes Student Entrepreneurs? On the Relevance (and Irrelevance) of the University and the Regional Context for Student Start-ups. Small Business Economics, 47(1), 53-76.
• Berry, J. W. (1967). Independence and Conformity in Subsistence-Level Societies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 7(4p1), 415.
• Blakh, R. R. ve Mouton, J. S. (1964). The Manugerd Grid. Houston: Gulf Publ.
• Boldt, E. D. (1978b). Structural Tightness and Cross-Cultural Research. J. of Cross-Cultural Research, 9, 151-165.
• Boldt, E. D. (1978a). Structural Tightness, Autonomy and Observability: An Analysis of Hutterite Conformity and Orderliness. Canadian J. of Sociology, 3, 349-363.
• Bollen, K. A. (1989). A New Incremental Fit Index for General Structural Equation Models. Sociological Methods & Research, 17(3), 303-316.
• Bosma, N. S. ve Levie, J. (2010). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2009 Executive Report.
• Bozagaç, F. (2021). Örgüt Kültürünün Sıkılık/Esneklik Boyutu, Finansal Performans ve Girişimcilik Yönelimi İlişkisi: Borsa İstanbul Şirketlerinde Bir Uygulama (Doktora Tezi) Toros Üniversitesi, Lisansüstü Eğitim Enstitüsü, İşletme Anabilim Dalı, Mersin.
• Brown, A. D. (1998). Organizational Culture. (2th Ed.). Great Britain: Prentice Hall.
• Browne M. W., Gudeck R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. (KA Bollen, JS Long, Der.), Testing structure equation models. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 136–162.
• Burns, T. ve Stalker, G. (1994). The Management of Innovation. Ch (8) Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press. Burt, R.S. (2000). The Network Entrepreneur. In: Swedberg, R. (Ed.), Entrepreneurship—The Social Science View. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 281–307.
• Cameron, K. S. ve Quinn, R. E. (1999). Diagnosing and Changing Organizational Culture: Based On The Competing Values Framework, Addison-Wesley, Reading: MA. Chua, R. Y., Roth, Y. ve Lemoine, J. F. (2015). The Impact of Culture on Creativity: How Cultural Tightness and Cultural Distance Affect Global Innovation Crowdsourcing Work. Administrative Science Quarterly, 60(2), 189-227. Covin, J. G. ve Slevin D. P. (1989). Strategic Management of Small Firms in Hostile and Benign Environments. Strategic Management Journal, 10(1), 75–87.
• Covin J.G. ve Covin, T.J. (1990). Competitive Aggressiveness, Environmental Context and Small Firm Performance. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 14(4), 35-50.
• Covin, J.G. ve Slevin, D.P. (1991). A conceptual Model of Entrepreneurship as Firm Behavior. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 16(1), 7-25.
• Covin, J. G., Green, K. M. ve Slevin, D. P. (2006). Strategic Process Effects on the Entrepreneurial Orientation–Sales Growth Rate Relationship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(1), 57-81.
• Denison, D. R. ve Mishra, A K. (1995). Towards A Theory of Organizational Culture and Effectiveness. Organization Science, 6(2), 204-223.
• Detert, J. R., Schroeder, R. G. ve Mauriel, J. J. (2000). A Framework for Linking Culture and Improvement Initiatives in Organizations. Academy of management Review, 25(4), 850-863.
• Fiş, A. M. ve Wasti, S. A. (2009). Örgüt Kültürü ve Girişimcilik Yönelimi İlişkisi. METU Studies In Development (Muhan Soysal Special Issue), 35, 127-164.
• Gardner, B. D. (1985). Information, Incentives and Property Rights: The Emergence of an Alternative Paradigm. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 67(5), 1039-1043.
• Gelfand, M. J., Higgins, M., Nishii, L. H., Raver, J. L., Dominguez, A., Murakami, F., ... ve Toyama, M. (2002). Culture and Egocentric Perceptions of Fairness in Conflict and Negotiation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(5), 833.
• Gelfand M. J., Nishii L. H. ve Raver, J. L. (2006). On the Nature and Importance of Cultural Tightness and Looseness. J Appl Psychol, 91, 1225–1244.
• Gelfand, M. J., Raver, J. L., Nishii, L., Leslie, L. M., Lun, J., Lim, B. C., ... ve Yamaguchi, S. (2011). Differences Between Tight and Loose Cultures: A 33-Nation Study. Science, 332(6033), 1100-1104.
• Gerhart, B. (2008). Cross Cultural Management Research: Assumptions, Evidence and Suggested Directions. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 8(3), 259-274.
• Guth, W.D. ve Ginsberg, A. (1990). Guest Editors’ Introduction: Corporate Entrepreneurship. Strategic Management Journal, Summer, 11, 5-15.
• Hall, E.T. (1976). Beyond Culture. Garden City NJ: Anchor Books.
• Handy, C. (1999). Understanding Organizations, Penguin Books, London.
• Harrington, J. R. ve Gelfand, M. J. (2014). Tightness-Looseness Across the 50 United States. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America . PNAS , 111(22): 7990–7995.
• Harrison, R. (1970). Nonverbal Communication: Explorations into Time, Space, Action and Object. In J. Campbell & H. Helper (Eds.). Dimensions in Communication (pp. 110-146). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
• Herman, S. N. (1970). Israelis and Jews: The Continuity of an Identity. New York: Random House, 1970.
• Hisrich, R. D. (1990). Entrepreneurship/Intrapreneurship. American Psychologist, 45(2), 209.
• Hofstede, G. ve Bond, M. (1988). The Confucius Connection: From Cultural Roots to Economic Growth. Organizational Dynamics, 15(1), 4–21.
• Hofstede G., Neujen B., Ohavy D. D. ve Sanders G. (1990). Measuring Organizational Cultures. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 2, 286-316.
• Hornsby, J. S., Kuratko, D. F. ve Zahra, S. A. (2002). Middle Managers' Perception of the Internal Environment for Corporate Entrepreneurship: Assessing a Measurement Scale. Journal of Business Venturing, 17(3), 253-273.
• Hu, L. T. ve Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff Criteria for Fit Indexes in Covariance Structure Analysis: Conventional Criteria Versus New Alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55.
• Ireland, R. D., Covin, J. G. ve Kuratko, D. F. (2009). Conceptualizing Corporate Entrepreneurship Strategy. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(1), 19-46.
• Jansen, J. J., Van Den Bosch, F. A. ve Volberda, H. W. (2006). Exploratory Innovation, Exploitative Innovation and Performance: Effects of Organizational Antecedents and environmental moderators. Management science, 52(11), 1661-1674.
• Johannisson, B. (1990). Community Entrepreneurship-Cases and Conceptualization. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development 2, 71–88.
• Johnson, G., Scholes, K. ve Whittington, R. (1999). Corporate Strategy. Europe: London Prentice Hall . Kamm, J.B., Shuman, J.C., Seeger, J.A. ve Nurick, A.J. (1990). Entrepreneurial Teams in New Venture Creation: A Research Agenda. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice Summer, 7–17.
• Katz, J. ve Gartner, W. B. (1988). Properties of Emerging Organizations. Academy of Management Review, 13(3), 429-441.
• Khandwalla, P. N. (1977). The Design of Organizations. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 428.
• Khandwalla, P. N. (1987). Generators of Pioneering-Innovative Management: Some Indian Evidence. Organization Studies, 8(1), 39-59.
• Kluckhohn, C. 1962 (1952) Universal Categories of Culture. In Anthropology Today. S. Tax , ed. Chicago IL : Chicago Press.
• Lee, Y. ve Kramer, A. (2016). The Role of Purposeful Diversity and Inclusion Strategy (PDIS) Cultural Tightness/Looseness in the Relationship between National Culture and organizational culture. Human Resource Management Review, 26(3), 198-208.
• Lumpkin, G.T. ve Dess, G.G. (1996). Clarifying the Entrepreneurial Orientation Construct and Linking it to Performance. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 135-172.
• Martins, E. C. ve Terblanche, F. (2003). Building Organisational Culture that Stimulates Creativity and Innovation. European Journal of Innovation Management.
• McMullen, J. S. (2011). Delineating the Domain of Development Entrepreneurship: A Market–Based Approach to Facilitating Inclusive Economic Growth. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(1), 185-215.
• Miller,D. ve Friesen, P.H. (1982). “Innovation in Conservative and Entrepreneurial Firms: Two Models of Strategic Momentum,” Strategic Management Journal, 3, Jan-Mar, 1-25
• Miller, D. (1983). The Correlates of Entrepreneurship in Three Types of Firms. Management Science, 29(7), 770–791.
• Miller, D. ve Friesen, P. H. (1984). Organizations: A Quantum View. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
• Mintzberg, H. ve Waters, J. A. (1985). Of Strategies, Deliberate and Emergent. Strategic Management Jjournal, 6(3), 257-272.
• Morris, M. W. ve Leung, K. (2010). Creativity East and West: Perspectives and Parallels. Management and Organization Review, 6(3), 313-327.
• Mueller, S.L. ve Thomas, A.S. (2000). Culture and Entrepreneurial Potential: A Nine Country Study of Locus of Control and Innovativeness. Journal of Business Venturing 16, 51–75.
• Oke, A. (2007). Innovation Types and Innovation Management Practices in Service Companies. International Journal of Operations & Production Management.
• Parsons, T. ve Shils, E. (1962). Values, Motives and system of Action. In T. Parsons & E. Shils (Eds.), Toward a General Theory of Action, Cambridge: Harvard Univeristy Press, 47–233.
• Pelto, P. J. (1968). The Differences between “Tight” and “Loose” Societies. Trans-action, 5(5), 37-40.
• Peters, T. J. ve Waterman, R. H., Jr. (1982). In Search of Excellence: New York: Harper and Row.
• Peterson, R. A. ve Berger, D. G. (1971). Entrepreneurship in Organizations: Evidence from the Popular Music Industry. Administrative Scince Quarterly, 97-106.
• Rasmussen, E. A. ve Sørheim, R. (2006). Action-Based Entrepreneurship Education. Technovation, 26(2), 185-194.
• Rezaei, J., Ortt, R. ve Scholten, V. (2013). An Improved Fuzzy Preference Programming to Evaluate Entrepreneurship Orientation. Applied Soft Computing, 13(5), 2749-2758.
• Shane, S., Venkataraman, S. ve MacMillan, I. (1995). Cultural Differences in Innovation Championing Strategies. Journal of Management, 21(5), 931-952.
• Schumpeter, J.A. (1934). The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest and the Business Cycle. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
• Triandis, H. C. (1989). The Self and Social Behavior in Differing Cultural Contexts. Psychological review, 96(3), 506.
• Van der Post, W. Z., De Coning, T. J. ve Smit, E. (1998). The Relationship between Organisational Culture and Financial Performance: Some South African evidence. South African Journal of Business Management, 29(1), 30-40.
• Voss, Z. G., Voss, G. B. ve Moorman, C. (2005). An Empirical Examination of the Complex Relationships between Entrepreneurial Orientation and Stakeholder Support. European journal of Marketing.
• Wasti, A. S. ve Fiş, A. M. (2010). Örgüt Kültüründe Sıkılık-Esneklik Boyutu ve Kurumsal Girişimciliğe Etkisi. Yönetim Araştırmaları Dergisi.