Akademisyenlerin Örgütsel Yapı, Bireysel Performans ve İşten Ayrılma Niyeti Algılarına Yönelik Bir Model

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı; bir eğitim örgütü olan üniversitelerdeki mevcut örgüt yapısıyla birlikte bazı değişkenlerin akademisyenlerin bireysel performansı ve işten ayrılma niyeti algıları arasındaki ilişkiye yönelik bir model geliştirmektir. Araştırmanın evrenini, Türkiye’de eğitim öğretim faaliyetlerini yürüten tüm üniversiteler, örneklemini ise belirli kriterlerin dikkate alındığı kota örnekleme yöntemi ile seçilen toplamda 37 üniversite oluşturmaktadır. Bu üniversitelerde görev yapan toplam 1242 akademisyenden elde edilen veriler üzerinde analizler yapılmıştır. Yapılan analizler sonucunda; kolaylaştırıcı örgüt yapısı ile akademisyenlerin bireysel performans ve diğer olumlu değişkenlere dair algıları arasında pozitif yönlü bir etkileşim olduğu, engelleyici örgüt yapısı ile akademisyenlerin işten ayrılma niyeti ve diğer olumsuz değişkenlere dair algıları arasında pozitif yönlü bir etkileşim olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Ayrıca engelleyici örgüt yapısının işten ayrılma niyeti ve diğer olumsuz değişkenler ile pozitif yönlü ilişkisinin, kolaylaştırıcı örgüt yapısının negatif yönlü ilişkisinden daha güçlü olduğu belirlenmiştir. Bu sonuçlara dayalı olarak, akademisyenlerin olumlu duygu, tutum ve davranışlarının artırılabilmesi için örgüt yapısının kolaylaştırıcı olmasının gerekli olduğu ama yeterli olmadığı sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Akademisyen
• Örgüt Yapısı
• Bireysel Performans
• İşten Ayrılma Niyeti
• Model

A Model for Academics' Perceptions of Organizational Structure, Individual Performance and Turnover Intention

Öz

The study aims to develop a model for the relationship between the current organizational structure, along with some variables, in universities, which are an educational organization, and the perceptions of academics' individual performance and turnover intention. While the population of research is composed of all universities carrying out educational activities in Turkey, the sample of research consists of a total of 37 universities selected by quota sampling method by taking into account certain criteria. Analyses were performed on the data obtained from a total of 1242 academics working at these universities. Following the analyses, it was determined that there was a positive interaction between the enabling organizational structure and the academics' perceptions of individual performance and other positive variables, and that a positive interaction existed between the coercive organizational structure and the academics' perceptions of the turnover intention and other negative variables. Moreover, it was found that the positive relationship of the coercive organizational structure with the turnover intention and other negative variables was stronger than the negative relationship of the enabling organizational structure. Based on these results, it was concluded that it is necessary, but not sufficient, to have an enabling organizational structure in order to increase the positive feelings, attitudes and behaviours of academics.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Academician
• Organizational Structure
• Individual Performance
• Turnover Intention
• model

Kaynakça

1. Adler, P. & Borys, B. (1996). Two Types Of Bureaucracy: Enabling And Coercive. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 61-89.
2. Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P., (1996). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: An examination of construct validity. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 49: 252-276.
3. Alparslan, A.M. (2010). The Interaction Between Organizational Silence Climate and Employee Silence Behaviors: A Research on Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Faculty Members. (Unpublished Master Thesis). Süleymen Demirel University Institute of Social Sciences, Isparta.
4. Altıntaş, E. (2003). Stress management. Istanbul: Alfa Publications.
5. Antalyalı, L. Ö. (2008). Areas of Turkey University Organizational Effectiveness: A Research on Teaching. (Unpublished Doctorate Thesis) Süleyman Demirel University Institute of Social Sciences, Isparta.
6. Astin, A. W., & Scherrei, R. (1984). Maximizing leadership effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
7. Aumann, K. A. (2007). Being A Stranger in a Strange Land: The Relationship Between Person-Organizastion Fit on Work Related and Broad Cultural Value Dimensions and Outcomes Related to Expatriastes' Success, Columbia University, PreQuest Information and Learning Company
8. Avcı, N. (2008). Analysis of the Relationship Between Organizational Learning, Business Attitudes and Organizational Deviation in Hospitality Business. (Unpublished Doctorate) Dokuz Eylül University, Institute of Social Sciences.

9. Aypay, A. (2001). The relationship between organizational structures and faculty roles at colleges and universities. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Vanderbillt University: Nashville, TN, USA.
10. Aypay, A. (2003). The relationship between State and higher education: The case of Mulkiye college in Turkey. Mediterranean Journal of Educational Studies. 8(2), 109-135.
11. Aypay, A. (2006). The relationship between academic activity and organizational behavior in universities. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice,12(2), 175-198.
12. Bailey, K. (1994). Methods of social research (4th Ed.). New York, NY: The Free Press.
13. Balcı, A. (2003). Organizational Socialization Theory, Strategy and Tactics, Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.
14. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-Efficacy: The Exercise Of Control. New York: W. H.Freeman And Company.
15. Basım, H.N., & Şeşen, H. (2009). “The Mediating Role of Job Satisfaction in the Relationship Between Perception of Organizational Justice and Organizational Citizenship Behavior ”, 17. Management and Organization Congress Proceedings, Eskişehir, 21-23 May.
16. Başol, G., & Yalçın, B. (2009). The validity and reliability study of Meyer and Allen Three Dimensional Organizational Commitment Scale in educational organizations. International Balkan Educational and Science Congress Full Text Book, 2, 497- 507
17. Bayram, N. (2010). Introduction to Structural Equation Modeling. Bursa: Ezgi Publishing House.
18. Bergquist, W. H. (1992). The four cultures of the academy. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
19. Bess, J.L. (1984). College and University Organization: Insights from the Behavioral Sciences. New York: NYU Press.
20. Bhuian, S. N., Menguc, B., & Borsboom, R. (2005). Stressors and job outcomes in sales: A triphasic model versus a linear-quadratic-interactive model. Journal of Business Research, 58(2), 141-150.
21. Birnbaum, R. (1988). How colleges work: the cybernetics of academic organization. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
22. Blau, P. M. (1973). The organization of academic work. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
23. Breukelen J.W.M. Van. (1988). Job Turnover: A Review And A Model (İn Dutch). Gedrag & Organisati E 1 (6), 37-65.
24. Brinsfield, C., T. (2009). Employee Silence: Investigation of Dimensionality, Development of Measures, and Examination of Related Factors, Dissertation, Ohio State University, USA.
25. Buluç, B. (2009). The Relationship Between Bureaucratic School Structure and Leadership Styles of School Principals in Primary Schools. Education and Science, 34(152), 71-86.
26. Cerit, Y. (2013). The Relationship Between Bureaucratic Structure of School and Professional Behaviors of Classroom Teachers. Educational Administration in Theory and Practice, 18(4), 497-521.
27. Childers, M. E. (1981). What is political about bureaucratic-collegial decision making? Review of Education, 5(1), 25-45.
28. Christensen, L. B., Johnson, B., & Turner, L. A. (2015). Research methods, design, and analysis.(Çev. A.Aypay). Ankara. (Eserin aslının yayın tarihi 2011).
29. Cochran, W. G. (1977). Sampling techniques (3rd ed.), New York: John Wiley& Sons. Cole, J. C., Rabin, A. S., Smith, T. L., & Kaufman, A. S. (2004). Development and validation of a Rasch-derived CES-D short form. Psychological assessment, 16(4), 360.
30. Cüceloğlu, D. (1994). Human and Behavior. Basic Concepts of Psychology. Istanbul: Remzi Bookstore.
31. Çakır, Ö. (2001). Work Commitment and Affecting Factors, Seçkin Yayıncılık, Ankara.
32. Çetin, F. (2011). The Role of Organizational Commitment, Job Satisfaction, Personality and Organizational Culture in Explaining Organizational Citizenship Behaviors. (Unpublished Doctorate Thesis) Ankara University, Institute of Social Sciences.
33. Daft, R. L.,&Marcic, D. (2009). Understandingmanagement (6th ed.). Mason, OH: South-Western College.
34. Deal, T.E., & Bolman, L.G. (1987). Reframing Organizations, SanFrancisco: Jossey Bass.
35. Dean, J. W., Brandes, P. ve Rahi, D. (1998). Organizational cyncism. The Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 341-352.
36. Donders J. A. (1997). Short form of the WISC-III for clinical use. Psychol Assess, 9: 15-20.
37. Dyne, L. V., Ang, S., & Botero, I. C. (2003). Conceptualizing employee silence and employee voice as multidimensional constructs. Journal of management studies, 40(6), 1359-1392.
38. Ergin, C. (1992). Application of burnout and Maslach burnout inventory in doctors and nurses. Scientific Studies of the 7th National Psychology Congress, Ankara.
39. Goddard, R. D., Hoy, W K., & Hoy, A. W (2004). Collective Efficacy: Theoretical Development, Empirical Evidence, And Future Directions. Educational Researcher, 33 (3), 3-13.
40. Güven, O. (2002). A study to examine and analyze the effects of organizational attitudes on employee behavior. (Unpublished Doctorate Thesis) Institute of Social Sciences, Istanbul University.
41. Hoy, W. K. (2003). An Analysis Of Enabling And Mindful School Structures. Some Theoretical, Research And Practical Considerations. Journal Of Educational Adrninistration, 41(1), 87-108.
42. Hoy, W. K., & Sweetland, S. R. (2001). Designing Better Schools: The Meaning And Nature Of Enabling School Structure. Educational Administration Quarterly, 37, 296-321.
43. Hoy, W. & Sweetland, S. (2000). School Bureaucracies That Work: Enabling, Not Coercive. Journal Of School Leadership, 10(6), 525-541.
44. Işıkhan, V. (2004). Stress and ways of coping in working life. Ankara: Sandal Publications.
45. Kalağan, G. & Güzeller, C. O. (2010). Investigation of Teachers' Organizational Cynicism Levels, Pamukkale University Journal of Education Faculty, 27, 23-97.
46. Kanungo, R. N. (1982). Measurement of job and work involvement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67 (3). 341-349.
47. Karakuş, M. (2013). Emotional intelligence and negativefeelings: a gender specific moderated mediation model, Educational Studies, 39(1), 68-82.
48. Karakuş, M. & Çankaya, İ., H. (2012). Testing a Model Regarding Psychological Violence Subjected by Teachers. Hacettepe University Journal of Education Faculty 42, 225-237
49. Karasar, N. (2005). Scientific research method. Ankara: Nobel Publication Distribution.
50. Karip, E. (2005). Globalization and Lisbon Education 2010 Targets. Educational Administration in Theory and Practice, 42, 195 209.
51. Kılıç, T. (2013). A Model Proposal Regarding the Individual and Collective Competence Process, Its Determinants and Results. (Unpublished Doctorate Thesis) Balıkesir University Institute of Social Sciences. Balikesir
52. Kirkman, B.L., & Rosen, B. (1999). “Beyond Self-Management: Antecedents And Consequences Of Team Empowerment”, Academy Of Management Journal, 42, 58-74.
53. Kraımer, M, L. (1997). Organizational Goals and Values: A Socialization Model. Human Resource Management Review, 7 (4), 425-447.
54. Krıstof, A. L. (1996). Person-Organization Fit: An Integrative Review Of Lt Conceptualizations, Measurement, And Implications, Personnel Psychology, March, 49(1):1-49.
55. Manion, J. (2005). From Management toLeadership: practical strategies for health care leaders. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
56. Maslach, C. & Jackson, S. E.(1981). “TheMeasurement of ExperiencedBurnout”, Journal of Occupational Behavior, 2, 99-113
57. Mathis, R. L.,& Jackson, J. H. (2008). Human Resource Management (12th edition). Mason, OH: Thomson South-Western.
58. Mcguigan, L., & Hoy, W. K. (2006). Principal Leadership: Creating A Culture Of Academic Optimism To İmprove Achievement For All Students. Leadership And Policy İn Schools, 5(3), 203-229.
59. Meyer, J. P. & Allen, N.J (1991). "A Three-Component Conceptualization Of Organizational Commitment", Human Resource Management Review, 1 (1), S. 61.
60. Meyer, J.P.,& Allen, N.J. (1997).Commitment in the workplace. theory, research andapplication. London: Sage Publications
61. Morrison, E.W. & Milliken, F.J. (2003). Speaking Up, Remaining Silent: The Dynamics of Voice and Silence in Organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 40 (6), 1353-1358.
62. Mumpower DL. (1964). The fallacy of the short form. J Clin Psychol, 20: 111-113.
63. Naus, F. (2007). Organizational Cynicism On The Nature, Antecedents, And Consequences Of Employee Cynicism Toward The Employing Organization. Universiteit Maastricht, Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, Maastricht.
64. Oldham, G, R. & Hackman J. R. (1981). "Relationship Between Organizations Strtucture And Employee Reactions: Comparing Alternative Frameworks", Administrative Science Quarterly, 26(1), 66-83.
65. Öcal, H. & Aydın, O. (2009). Relationships Between Collective Efficacy, Self-Efficacy and Confusion Perceptions and Perceptions of Success and Expectations in Sports Teams. Journal of the Faculty of Letters, 26(2).
66. Öz, M. (2015). A Field Study on Increasing the Efficiency of Internal Audit in Universities. (Unpublished Master Thesis) Selçuk University, Institute of Social Sciences, Konya.
67. Özer, N. & Dönmez, B. (2013). Reassesıng the Psychometrıc Propertıes of the Turkısh Versıon of Enablıng School Structure Scale. Pegem Journal of Education & Instruction, 3(4), 2013, 57-68.
68. Piasentin, K. A.( 2007). How do Employees Conceptualize Fit? Development of a Multidimensional Measure of Subjective Person-Organization Fit, University of Calgary, A Thesis Submitted to The Faculty of Graduate Studies in Partial Fulfillment of The Requirements For The Degree of Dosctor of Philosophy, Department of Psychology, Calgary, Alberta, Library and Archives Canada, Published Heritage Branch, Ottawa, Canada.
69. Raykov, T. (1997). Scale reliability, Cronbach's Coefficient Alpha, and violations of essential tau-equivalence with fixed congeneric components. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 32, 329-353.
70. Riggs, M.L. Warka, J. Babasa,B., Betancourt, R. & Hooker, S. (1994). Development And Validation Of Self-Efficacy And Outcome Expectancy Scales For Job-Related Applications. Educational And Psychological Measurement, 54, 793-802.
71. Rusbelt, C. A., Farrell, D. & Rogers, M. (1988). “Impact Of Exchange Variables On Exit, Voice, Loyalty And Neglect: An Integrative Model Of Responses To Decline Job Satisfaction”, Academy Of Management Journal, 31(3), 599-627. Sabuncuoğlu, E. T. (2007). Examining the Relationships Between Education, Organizational Commitment and the Intention to Leave, Ege Academic Perspective, 7(2), 621-636
72. Schyns, B. Torka, N. & Gössling, T. (2007). Turnover İntention And Preparedness For Change. Career Development International, 12(7), 660-679.
73. Smith, K.B. & Meier, K.J. (1994). Politics, Bureaucrats And Schools, Public Administration Review, 54(4), P.551-558
74. Smith GT, & McCarthy DM, Anderson KG. (2000). On the sins of short-form development. Psychol Assess, 12, 102-111.
75. Spector, P. E. (1997). JobSatisfaction: Application, Assessment, Causes, and Consequences, Sage, London.
76. Sulu, S. (2010). The Role of Business Attitudes in the Relationship Between Organizational Injustice and Business Behavior, (Unpublished Doctorate Thesis), Gebze Institute of Technology Institute of Social Sciences.
77. Sümer, N. (2000). Structural equation models: Basic concepts and sample applications. Turkish Psychology Articles, 3(6) 49-74.
78. Taşkıran, E. (2011). Interaction between leadership and organizational silence - The role of organizational justice. Beta publications, Istanbul.
79. Ulutaş, M., Kalkan, A. & Bozkurt, Çetinkaya, Ö. (2015). The Effect of Individual-Organization Fit on Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment. Business, Power Industrial Relations and Human Resources Magazine, 17(1), 141-160
80. Vance, R.J., Brooks, S.M. & Tesluk P.E.( 1995). Organizational Cynicism, cycinal cultures and organizational change efforts. Paper presented 10th Annual Conference of the Society for Industr, al and Organizational Psychology, Orlando, FL. Vilela, B. B., Gonzalez, J. A. V. & Ferrin, P. F. (2008). Person- Organization Fit, OCB and Performance Appraisal: Evidence from Matched Supervisor-Salesperson Data Set in Spanish Context, Industrial Marketing Management.
81. Wasti, S. A. (2000). Meyer ve Allen üç boyutlu örgütsel bağlılık ölçeğinin geçerlilik ve güvenirlilik analizi. 8. Ulusal Yönetim ve Organizasyon Kongresi Bildirileri, 401-410.
82. Yahyagil, Y. M. (2005). Birey ve Organizasyon Uyumu ve Çalışanların İş Tutumlarına Etkisi. Öneri Journal, 6(24), 137-149.
83. Yücel, C. (1999). Bureaucracy And Teachers' Sense Of Power. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Lnstitute And State University-Virginia. [Umı Number: 3147768].
84. Zeynel, H. & Çarıkçı, H.(2015). The Effect of Professional Motivation on Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment: An Empirical Study on Academicians. Journal of Süleyman Demirel University Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 20(3), 217-248.