Örgütsel Muhalefet Davranışları Ölçeği: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı muhalefet davranışlarının ölçülmesini sağlayacak geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçme aracı geliştirmektir. Bu amacı gerçekleştirmek üzere 2020-2021 yılı eğitim öğretim döneminde bahar yarıyılında öğretim elemanlarından veri toplamıştır. Ölçeğin yapı geçerliği için açımlayıcı ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizleri gerçekleştirilmiştir. Açımlayıcı faktör analizi sonucu dört faktörlü bir yapı ortaya çıkmıştır. Seslilik, Muhalif Eylemler, Pasif Tepkiler ve Politik Taktikler olarak ölçeğin boyutları isimlendirilmiştir. Ortaya çıkan dört faktörlü yapı toplam varyansın %56.29’unu açıklamaktadır. Ölçekte yer alan 23 madde 1-Hiçbir zaman ve 5-Her zaman aralığında puanlanmaktadır. Ölçeğin sadece ilk maddesi terstir. Ölçeğin bir boyutundan ya da ölçekten alınan toplam puanın artması, muhalefet davranışının arttığı anlamına gelmektedir. Ölçeğin 23 maddelik ve dört faktörlü yapısı doğrulayıcı faktör analizi ile de test edilmiştir. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizinde χ2/sd oranı 1.97 (433.57/ 219) ve diğer uyum iyiliği değerleri RMSEA=.05, NFI=.85, NNFI=.90, CFI=.91, IFI=.92, GFI=.88, RMR=.08, SRMR=0.07. olarak bulunmuştur. Ölçeğin güvenirliğine ilişkin, madde toplam korelasyonları, Cronbach’s Alpha güvenirlik katsayısı, alt ve üst %27’lik grupların madde toplam korelasyonları incelenmiştir. Sonuç olarak, öğretim elemanlarının örgütsel muhalefet davranışlarını ölçmeye yönelik psikometrik olarak yeterli, geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçme aracı geliştirilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• örgütsel muhalefet
• sahnelenen muhalefet
• sahne arkası muhalefet
• öğretim elemanları.

Organizational Dissent Behaviors Scale: Validity and Reliability Study

Öz

In this study, it is aimed at developing a valid and reliable tool to measure dissent behaviors. Research data were collected from academic staff in 2020-2021. Explanatory and confirmatory factor analyzes were performed to determine the construct validity of the scale. As a result of the exploratory factor analysis, a structure consisting of 4 factors and explaining 56.29% of the total variance emerged. The factors corresponding to the onstage dissent behaviors were named as Voice and Dissident Actions, and the factors corresponding to the backstage dissent behaviors were named as Passive Responses and Political Tactics. Scale items are scored between never and always. An increase in the score obtained from one or all of the dimensions of the scale indicates that the dissent behavior increases. Confirmatory factor analysis was performed with a structure consisting of 23 items and 4 factors, and goodness of fit values were found to be appropriate. Item-total correlations regarding the reliability of the scale, Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficient, and item-total correlations of the lower and upper 27% groups were examined. As a result, a psychometrically sufficient, valid, and reliable measurement tool has been developed to measure the organizational opposition behaviors of the instructors.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• organizational dissent behaviors
• onstage dissent behaviors
• backstage dissent behaviors
• academic staff

Kaynakça

1. Agalday, B., Ozgan, H. & Arslan, M. C. (2014). The perceptions of the administrators working in primary and secondary schools related to the organizational dissent. Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction, 4(3), 35-50. https://doi.org/10.14527/pegegog.2014.015
2. Akada, T. & Beycioglu, K. (2019). Investigation of secondary school teachers’ perceptions regarding their organizational dissent behaviors in terms of several variables. Elementary Education Online, 18(3), 1113-1130. https://doi.org/10.17051/ilkonline.2019.610798
3. Aksel, S. F. (2013). Relationship between workplace democracy and organizational dissent (Dissertation Number. 336247) [Master Dissertation, Marmara University]. YOK Ulusal Tez Merkezi.
4. Allen, R. W. Madison, D. L. Porter, L. W. Renwick, P. A. & Mayes, B. T. (1979). Organizational politics: Tactics and characteristics of its actors. California Management Review, 22(1), 77-83. https://doi.org/10.2307/41164852
5. Althusser, L. (2016). Filozof olmayanlar icin felsefeye giris (Birkan, I. Cev.). Can.
6. Altinkurt, Y. & Iliman Puskulluoglu, E. (2017). Orgutsel muhalefet olceginin Turkceye uyarlanmasi: Gecerlik ve guvenirlik calismasi. Dumlupınar Universitesi Egitim Bilimleri Enstitusu Dergisi, 1(1), 75-85.
7. Ashforth, B. E. & Mael, F. A. (1998). The power of resistance, sustaining valued identities. In R. M. Kramer & M. A. Neale (Eds.), Power and influence in organizations (pp. 89-120). Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781483345291
8. Balandier, G. (2021). Sahnelenen iktidar (O. Karakas Cev.). Is Bankasi Kultur Yayinlari.

9. Buyukozturk, S. (2013). Sosyal bilimler icin veri analizi el kitabi, istatistik, arastirma deseni ve SPSS uygulamaları. Pegem A.
10. Byrne, B. M. (1998). Structural equation modelling with LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203774762
11. Celik, H. E. & Yilmaz, V. (2013). LISREL 9.1 ile yapisal esitlik modellemesi, temel kavramlar, uygulamalar, programlama. Anı.
12. Cokluk, O., Sekercioglu, G. & Buyukozturk, S. (2016). Sosyal bilimler için cok degiskenli istatistik, SPSS ve LISREL uygulamalari. Pegem Akademi. https://doi.org/10.14527/ 9786055885670
13. Dagli, A. (2015). Adaptation of organizational dissent scale into Turkish language: The study of validity and reliability. Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 14(53), 198-218. https://doi.org/10.17755/esosder.45359
14. Demir, E., Saatcioglu, O., & Imrol, F. (2016). Examination of educational researches published in international journals in terms of normality assumptions. Current Research in Education, 2(3), 130-148.
15. DeVellis, R. F. (2012). Scale development, theory, and applications (3rd ed.). Sage.
16. Ergun, H. & Celik, K. (2018). Turkish adaptation of organizational dissent scale. Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of Education Faculty, 48, 398-414. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/555254
17. Erkus, A. (2016). Psikolojide olcme ve olcek gelistirme-1, temel kavramlar ve islemler. Pegem Akademi. https://doi.org/10.14527/9786053643111
18. Farrell, D. (1983). Exit, voice, loyalty, and neglect as responses to job dissatisfaction: A multidimensional scaling study. Academy of Management Journal, 26, 596-606. https://doi.org/10.2307/255909
19. Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics, using SPSS: and sex and drugs and rock’n’roll. Sage Publications
20. Foucault, M. (1978). The history of sexuality, an introduction (Trans. by R. Hurley). Pantheon Books.
21. Garner, J. T. (2009). When things go wrong at work: An exploration of organizational dissent messages. Communication Studies, 60(2), 197-218. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510970902834916
22. Giroux, H. (2018). Toplumsalligin alacakaranligi (Yolsal, U. H. Cev.). Dost.
23. Goffman, E. (2014). Gunluk yasamda benligin sunumu (3. bs.) (Cezar, B. Cev.). Metis.
24. Gorden, W. I. (1988). Range of employee voice. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 1(4), 283-299. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01556937
25. Graham, J. W. (1986). Principled organizational dissent: A theoretical essay. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.) Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 8, pp, 1-52). JAI Press.
26. Hirschman, A. O. (1970). Exit, voice and loyalty, responses to decline in firms, organizations and states. Harvard University Press.
27. Hoy, W. K. & Miskel, C. G. (2010). Egitim yonetimi: Teori, arastirma ve uygulama (Turan, S. Çev. Ed.). Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
28. Iliman Puskulluoglu, E. (2023). The analysis of organizational dissent behaviours of academic staff. (Dissertation Number: 10542286). [Doctoral Dissertation, Mugla Sitki Kocman University]. YOK Ulusal Tez Merkezi.
29. Iliman Puskulluoglu, E. & Altinkurt, Y. (2018). The relationship between teachers’ critical thinking dispositions and organizational dissent behaviors. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 33(4), 897-914. https://doi.org/10.16986/HUJE.2018037422
30. Iliman Puskulluoglu, E. & Ekinci, C. E. (2021). Orgutsel direnis. Icinde H. B. Memduhoğlu ve K. Yılmaz (Ed.), Psiko-sosyal yonleriyle yonetim (ss. 473-493). Pegem Akademi.
31. Kadi, A. & Beytekin, O. F. (2015). A research on the partial mediating effect of professional values in the relationship between organizational dissent behaviors and school culture. Kalem International Journal of Education and Human Sciences, 5(1), 71-97.http://kalemacademy.com/Cms_Data/Sites/KalemAcademy/Files/KalemAcademyRepository/sayilar/Sayi8_03OkulKulturuveOrgutsel.pdf
32. Kassing, J. W. (1997). Articulating, antagonizing, and displacing: A model of employee dissent. The Electronic Journal of Communication, 8(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510979709368510
33. Kassing, J. W. (1998). Development and validation of organizational dissent scale. Management Communication Quarterly, 12(2), 183-229. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318998122002
34. Kassing, J. W. (2002). Speaking up: Identifying employees’ upward dissent strategies. Management Communication Quarterly, 16, 187–209. https://doi.org/10.1177/089331802237234
35. Kassing, J. W. (2011). Dissent in organizations. Polity Press.
36. Kaya, C. (2016). A research on the relationship between locus of control and organizational dissent. Marmara Universitesi Oneri Dergisi, 12(46), 81-96. https://doi.org/10.14783/od.v12i46.1000010005
37. Kipnis, D. Schmidt, M. S. & Wilkinson, I. (1980). Intraorganizational influence tactics: explorations in getting one's way. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 440-452. https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/intraorganizational-influence-tactics/docview/213938515/se-2?accountid=16595
38. Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modelling (3rd ed.). The Guilford Press.
39. Korucuoglu, T. (2016). The relationship between organizational political games and organizational dissent. (Dissertation Number. 435993) [Master Dissertation, Osmangazi University]. YOK Ulusal Tez Merkezi.
40. McKillup, S. (2005). Statistics explained, an introductory guide for life scientists. Cambridge University Press.
41. Merriam Webster Dictionary, dissent retrieved on 24.09.2018 from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dissent
42. Mumby, D. K. (1997). The problem of hegemony: Rereading Gramsci for organizational communication studies. Western Journal of Communication, 61(4), 343-375. https://doi.org/10.1080/10570319709374585
43. Otken, A. B. & Cenkci, T. (2013). A study on the relationship between the big five personality model and organizational dissent. Oneri Dergisi, 10(39), 41-51. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/maruoneri/issue/17900/187801
44. Ozdamar, K. (2015). Paket programlar ile istatistiksel veri analizi. Nisan.
45. Ozdemir, M. (2010). The opinions of administrators and teachers working in public high schools in Ankara province on organizational dissent (Dissertation Number. 279917) [Doctoral Dissertation, Ankara University]. YOK Ulusal Tez Merkezi.
46. Scott, J. C. (1995). Tahakkum ve direnis sanatlari, gizli senaryolar (Turker, A. Cev). Ayrinti.
47. Secer, İ. (2015). SPSS ve LISREL ile pratik veri analizi, analiz ve raporlastirma. Ani.
48. Stewart, L. P. (1980). Whistle blowing: Implications for organizational communication scholar. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the International Communication Association. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED192392
49. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (Fifth edition). Pearson.
50. Timur, T. (2000). Toplumsal degisme ve universiteler. İmge Kitabevi.
51. Turk Dil Kurumu, muhalefet, retrieved on 24.09.2018 from http://tdk.gov.tr/index.php?option=com_gts&arama=gts&guid=TDK.GTS.5ba87b61ef1ef9.25037236
52. Waldron, V. R. (1999). Communication practices of followers, members, and protégés: The case of upward influence tactics. Annals of the International Communication Association, 22(1), 251-299. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.1999.11678964