İlişkisel Sosyal Sermayenin Yenilikçi Davranışa Etkisinde Örtülü Bilgi Paylaşımı Davranışının Aracılık Rolü

Yıl 2014, Cilt: 7 Sayı: 1, 146 - 160, 01.04.2014

Ercan Turgut Memduh Begenirbaş

Öz

The most important resources of businesses are humans. If bussinesses can use this human source effectively, then they can have competitive advantage comparing to others. In this study, the effects of relational social capital to innovative behavior and covered information sharing behavior are examined, and also the mediating role of covered informatio sharing on these effects are also observed. For this purpose, data are obtained and analyzed from 111 private service employees’ who are working at a leader factory in porcelain industry in Kütahya. The relations and effects between variables are presented by correlation and regression analyses. The validity of scales are measured with structural equation model. According to the findings, it is seen that relational social capital have significant effects on innovative behavior and covered information sharing behavior. And also, coming through that covered information sharing has partial mediating role between relational social capital and innovative behavior. Furthermore depend on findings, some suggestions are made to the human resource executives of in questin sector.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Relational Social Capital, Innovative Behavior, Tacit Knowledge Sharing Intention

İLİŞKİSEL SOSYAL SERMAYENİN YENİLİKÇİ DAVRANIŞA ETKİSİNDE ÖRTÜLÜ BİLGİ PAYLAŞIMI DAVRANIŞININ ARACILIK ROLÜ

Öz

İşletmelerin önemli kaynaklardan birisi belki de en önemlisi insan kaynağıdır. Bu kaynaktan en iyi şekilde yararlanabilen işletmeler diğer kaynakları benzer olan işletmelere göre daha avantajlı bir konuma sahip olurlar. Bu çalışmada ilişkisel sosyal sermayenin yenilikçi davranışa ve örtülü bilgi paylaşımı davranışına etkisi ve örtülü bilgi paylaşımı davranışının aracılık rolü araştırılmıştır. Bu maksatla teknoloji ve yenilik anlamında ülkemizde lider konumda olan bir porselen firmasının Kütahya ilindeki fabrikasının 111 çalışanına uygulanan anket verileri analiz edilmiştir. Çalışmada değişkenler arası ilişkiler ve etkileri korelâsyon ve regresyon analizleri ile ortaya konurken, değişkenlere ait ölçeklerin doğrulanması esnasında yapısal eşitlik modelinden istifade edilmiştir. Elde edilen bulgular incelendiğinde, ilişkisel sosyal sermaye örtülü bilgi paylaşımı ve yenilikçi davranışı anlamlı ve olumlu etkilemektedir. Ayrıca örtülü bilgi paylaşımı davranışının kısmi aracılık rolü de tespit edilmiştir. Çalışmanın bulgularıyla ilintili olarak, çalışanların yenilikçi davranış sergilemelerine yönelik söz konusu sektörün insan kaynakları bölümleri yöneticilerine de konu ile ilgili önerilerde bulunulmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

İlişkisel Sosyal Sermaye, Yenilikçi Davranış, Örtülü Bilgi Paylaşımı Davranışı

Kaynakça

• AJZEN, I. (1991), “The Theory of Planned Behavior,” Organizational Behavior and Human DecisionProcesses, 50, 179-211.
• ARDTS, J.C.A., Van Der Velde, M.E.G. ve Maurer, T.J., (2010) “The Influence Of Perceived Characteristics Of Management Development Programs On Employee Outcomes”. Human Resource Development Quarterly. 21(2):411–434, BARON, R.M. ve Kenny D.A., (1986). “The Moderator Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6):117311
• BOCK, G.W., R.W. Zmud.,Y.G.Kim ve J.N. Lee. (2005), “Behavioral Intention Formation In Knowledge Sharing: Examining The Roles of Extrinsic Motivators, Social– Psychological Forces And Organizational Climate”, MIS Quarterly. 29(1): 1-26. BOLAT, S. (2009), “Örtülü Bilgi Kaynaklarının Keşfi ve Somutlaştırılması: Şirince Örneği”, Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 34:.339-359
• CARMELI, A., Meitar, R. ve Weisberg, J. (2006), “Self-Leadership Skills And Innovative Behavior At Work”, International Journal of Manpower, 27, 75–90.
• CHANG, H.H. ve S.S.Chuang, (2011) “Social Capital And İndividual Motivations On Knowledge Sharing: Participant İnvolvement As A Moderator”, Information & Management, 48(1):9-18.
• CHANG, C.W., H.C. Huang, C.Y. Chiang, C.P. Hsu ve C.C. Chang, (2012, “Social Capital and Knowledge Sharing: Effects On Patient Safety”, Journal of Advanced Nursing, 68(8):1793-1803
• CHEN, C.J. ve J.W. Huang, (2007), “How Organizational Climate and Structure Affect Knowledge Management:The Social İnteraction Perspective”, International Journal of Information Management,27:104-118.
• CHIU, C., M.H. Hsu ve E.T.G. Wang, (2006), “Understanding Kowledge Sharing In Virtual Communities: An Integration Of Social Capital and Social Cognitive Theories”, Decision Support Systems, 42:1872-1888
• CHOI, B. ve Lee, H., (2003), “An Empirical Investigation of KM Styles and Their Effect on Corporate Performance”, Information & Management, 40: 403-417.
• CHUA, A., (2002), “The Influence of Social İnteraction on Knowledge Creation”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, 3(4): 375–392.
• COLEMAN, J. (1990), “Foundations of Social Theory”, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• ÇALIŞKAN, A., İ. Akkoç ve Ö. Turunç, (2011), “Örgütsel Performansın Artırılmasında Motivasyonel Davranışların Rolü: Yenilikçilik ve Girişimciliğin Aracılık Rolü”, Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İBF Dergisi, 16(3):363-401.
• DAFT, R.L. (1978), “A Dual-Core Model of Organizational Innovation”, Academy of Management Review, 21, 193-210.
• DAMANPOUR, F. (1996). “Organizational Complexity and Innovation: Developing and Testing Multiple Contingency Models”, Management Science, 42(5): 693-716.
• DOĞAN, H. (2006), “Ahilik ve Örtülü Bilgi”, Ekin Kitabevi, Bursa, 210s.
• FOOS, T., G. Schum ve S. Rothenburg. (2006), ‘‘Tacit Knowledge Transfer and The Knowledge Disconnect’’, Journal of Knowledge Management, 10(1):6-18.
• GEBERT D, Boerner S ve Kearney E. (2006), “Cross Functionality and Innovation In New Product Development Teams: A Dilemmatic Structure and Its Consequences For The Management Of Diversity”, Eur J Work Organ Psychol, 15:431–458
• GOULDNER, A. (1960). “The Norm Of Reciprocity: A Preliminary Statement”, American Sociological Review, 25, 161–178.
• GÖKSEL, A., B. Aydıntan ve D. Bingöl. (2010). “Örgütlerde Bilgi Paylaşım Davranışı: Sosyal Sermaye Boyutundan Bir Bakış”, Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi. 65(4):87-109.
• HOOFF, B. ve M. Huysman. (2009), “Managing Knowledge Sharing: Emergent And Engineering Approaches”, Information & Management. 46:1–8.
• HOLSTE, J.S. ve Fields, D. (2010), “Trust and Tacit Knowledge Sharing and Use”, Journal of Knowledge Management, 14(1):128-140.
• HUYSMAN M., ve De Wit, D., (2004), “Practices of Managing Knowledge Sharing: Towards A Second Wave Of Knowledge Management”, Knowledge and Process Management, 11(2):81–92.
• KÖHLER, T., Janßen, C., Plath, S.C., Reese, J.P., Lay, J., Steinhausen, S., Gloede, T., Kowalski C., Schulz-Nieswandt F. ve Pfaff, H., (2010), “Communication, Social Capital and Workplace Health Management as Determinants of The Innovative Climate in GERMAN Banks”, Int J Public Health, 55(6): 561–570.
• LEVINSON, H. (1965). “Reciprocation: The relationship between man and organization”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 9, 370–390.
• IPE, M., (2003), “Knowledge Sharing on Organizations: A Conceptual Framework”, Human Resource Development Review, 2(4): 337-359.
• JANSSEN, O. (2000). “Job Demands, Perceptions of Effort-Reward Fairness and Innovative Work Behaviour”, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73, 287-302.
• MANN, P. (2001). “Tacit Knowledge in an Age of Reform.”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 12(1): 76-90.
• MAKELA, K. ve C. Brewster, (2012). “Interunit Interacton Contexts, Interpersonal Social Capital, and The Differing Levels Of Knowledge Sharing”, Human Resource Management, 48(4):591- 613.
• MORAN, P., ve S. Ghoshal. (1996). “Value Creation By Firms”, J. B. Keys ve L. N. Dosier (Ed.). Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings.
• MURA, M., E. Lettieri, N. Spiller, ve G. Radaelli, (2012). “Intellectual Capital and Innovative Work Behaviour: Opening the Black Box.” International Journal of Engineering Business Management, 39(4):1-10.
• NAHAPIET, J., ve S. Ghoshal. (1998). “Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and The Organizational Advantage”, Academy of Management Review, 23(2): 242-266. NONAKA, I. ve Takeuchi, T.H., (1995), “The Knowledge-Creating Company”, New York, Oxford University Press
• O’REILLY, C., ve Chatman, J. (1986). “Organizational Commitment and Psychological Attachment: The Effects of Compliance, Identification, and Internalization on Prosocial Behaviour”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(3): 492–499.
• OLDHAM, G.R.ve Cummings, A. (1996), “Employee Creativity: Personal and Contextual Factors at Work”, The Academy of Management Journal, 39(3):607-634.
• POLANYI, M., (1958), “Personal Knowledge”, Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
• ROBERTS, J. (2000), ‘‘From Know-how to Show-how? Questioning The Role of Information and Communication Technologies in Knowledge Transfer’’, Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 12(4):429-443.
• ROBBINS, S.P ve Judge, T.A. (2012), “Örgütsel Davranış”, Çev. Ed. İnci Erdem, Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık, Ankara.
• ROTHE, F. ve Schüler, D. (2006), “Trust and Economic Growth: A Panel Analysis”, Ratio Working Papers, No.102.
• SCOTT, S. G., ve Bruce, R. A. (1994), “Determinants of Innovative Behavior: A Path Model of Individual Innovation in The Workplace”, Academy of Management Journal, 37, 580–607.
• SPIEGELAERE, S.D., Gyes G.V., Vandekerckhove S.ve Hootegem G.V. (2012), “Job Design and Innovative Work Behavior Enabling Innovation Through Active or Low-Strain Jobs?”, HIVA - K.U. Leuven, CeSO, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.
• STYHRE, A. (2004). “Rethinking Knowledge: A Bergsonian Critique of The Notion of Tacit Knowledge.”, British Journal of Management, 15(2):177-188.
• TAGGAR, S. (2002). “A Multi-Level Model Of Creativity In Intact Workgroups”, Academy of Management Journal, 45: 315-331.
• TAJFEL, H. (1978), “Social Categorization, Social Identity and Social Comparison”, Differantiation Between Social Groups: Studies in the Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations, ed. H. Tajfel, London, Academic Press, ss. 61-76.
• TSAI, W., ve S. Ghoshal. (1998), “Social Capital and Value Creation: The Role of Intrafirm Networks”, Academy of Management Journal, 41(4):464–476.
• TURGUT, E. (2013a), “Sosyal Sermaye ve Bilgi Paylaşımı Davranışının Yenilikçilik İklimine Etkisi, Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Ankara: Gazi Üniversitesi SBE.
• TURGUT, E. (2013b), “Sosyal Sermaye ve Yenilikçi İklimin Yenilikçi Davranışa Etkisi: Sağlık Sektöründe Bir Araştırma”, 21. Ulusal Yönetim ve Organizasyon Kongresi, Kütahya: Dumlupınar Üniversitesi, 472-475.
• XERRI, M. ve Y. Brunetto. (2011), “Fostering the Innovative Behaviour of SME Employees: A Social Capital Perspective”, Research and Practice in Human Resource Management, 19(2), 43-59.
• VAN Knippenberg D, De Dreu C.K.W., Homan A.C. (2004), “Work Group Diversity and Group Performance: An Integrative Model And Research Agenda”, Jornal of Appllied Psychology, 89:1008–1022.
• WEGNER, D.M.,(1987), “Transactive Memory: A Contemporary Analysis Of The Group Mind” Theories Of Group Behaviour, Der. Brain Mullen ve George R. Goethals, New York.
• Wu, W., (2008). “Dimensions of Social Capital and Firm Competitiveness Improvement: The Mediating Role of Information Sharing”, Journal of Management Studies, 45(1): 122-146
• YANG, S.C. ve C.K. Farn, (2009), “Social Capital, Behavioural Control, and Tacit Knowledge Sharing: A Multi-informant Design”, International Journal of Information Management, 29:210-218.